sojourner truth, harriet tubman, idab. wells and my personal late friend, the reverend willie barrow, a block woman minister from chicago who worked alongside dr. martin luther king. this moment was about them too, she said. and this moment was possible because of judge jackson and who she is. her qualifications, her dignity -- integrity and record of splens. excellence. that is why it is important several members on the judiciary committee did not approach judge jackson's hearing with that same level of fairness and respect as their colleagues. thankfully there are members of the senate who are willing to rise above the partisan fray. i want to particularly commend senator susan collins of maine, senator lisa murkowski of alaska and senator mitt romney for

their political courage and their willingness to support her to the supreme court. when senator romney announced his support for judge jackson's confirmation, i couldn't help but remember his father, the late george romney who served as governor of michigan in the 1960's during the height of the civil rights movement. governor george romney knew a thing or two about political courage. as a proud republican governor in 1963, he marched alongside of the naacp detroit president edward turner in support of civil rights. that same year when dr. martin luther king organized a march in detroit, governor george romney declared the occasion freedom day in michigan. to my colleague senator mitt romney, you are your father's son. this week marks 54 years since the shot rang out in memphis, tennessee claim be the life of dr. martin laoser king, an american who spoke with greater moral clarity than any other in our history. the night before he died, dr. king spoke at a rally in

support of the city striking sanitation workers. there was tension in the air. from the moment he set foot in memphis, he'd received a barrage of death threats. as dr. king spoke to the crowd at the mason temple, death was on his mind. he said like anybody i'd like to live a long life. longevity has its place, but i'm not concerned about that now. i just want to do god's will. and he's allowed me to go up to the mountain. his next words proved prophetic. dr. king said i've looked over and i've seen the promise land. i may not get there with you, but i want you to know tonight that we as a people will get to the promise land. ricky jones said that she thought about dr. king's prophecy when she realized the judiciary committee was voting on judge jackson's nomination on the anniversary of dr. king's death. it felt like the prophecy had come to pass. dr. king didn't make it to the

promise land, but judge jackson's ascension to the supreme court brings us closer to that longed for place. i'd like to close with one last personal plea to my senate colleagues. i hope you'll think about this. in the years to come, long after we've left the senate, one of our grandchildren may ask where we were on this historic day, april 7, 2022, when america broke down what seemed like an impossible racial barrier and voted to send the first african american woman to serve on our highest court. i will be proud to say i was on the senate floor standing at my desk and casting my vote with pride for the next associate justice of the supreme court of the united states, justice ketanji brown jackson. i hope my colleagues will join me in sharing this historic moment, and i yield the floor.

i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. we are in a quorum call. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: president biden

was elected on the promise that he would govern as a moderate and unite the country. he insisted the radical left would not be calling the shots -- the presiding officer: order, please. the senator will commence. mr. mcconnell: he insisted the radical left would not be calling the shots on his watch. but when it came to one of the most consequential decisions a president can make, a lifetime appointment to our highest court, the biden administration let the radicals run the show. with washington democrats in power, the far left got the reckless inflationary spending they wanted. the far left has gotten the insecure border they wanted. and today the far left will get the supreme court justice they wanted. the fringe activists who demand

partisan court-packing, attack the justices, and describe our constitution as trash made up their minds from the start of this administration. if a supreme court vacancy should arise, they wanted one nominee and one nominee only, judge jackson. they spent dark money to promote this person specifically. they pushed her for the d.c. circuit. then they badgered justice breyer to quit. in february one of these groups announced judge jackson would be the nominee before president biden actually did make the announcement. so think about that for a moment. the senate has examined judge jackson's qualifications with the seriousness and vigor that a lifetime appointment deserves.

unlike when the party's positions are reversed, the country was not subjected to uncorroborated smear campaigns, committee boycotts, stunts with cardboard cutouts, or mobs chasing senators around the capitol. now a few of our democratic colleagues seem to have decided in advance they would claim that judge jackson was treated shabbily. i've heard that script recited. even though it didn't happen, didn't happen. let's be clear. no nominee before the senate for any position deserves a cakewalk or a coronation. tough questions about a federal judge's own rulings and statements are the definition of fair game. my republican colleagues

vigorously inquired, shed important new light on a frequently disturbing judicial record. so i applaud any colleagues for focusing on substance and not following the democrats' recent precedence into the gutter. unfortunately what the senate's process turned up was disturbing. first the nominee would not follow the ginsburg-breyer precedent and denounced the insane concept of partisan court-packing. second, her judicial record is full of cases where judge jackson ruled like a policymaker implementing personal biases instead of a judge following the text wherever it led. and third, her aggressive judicial activism frequently focused on treating convicted criminals as gently as possible. in literally case after case from deadly fentanyl to open borders to child exploitation,

judge jackson tilted the scales of justice away from public safety and innocent victims in favor of her career-long passion for softening up criminal sentencing. in judge jackson's courtroom, plain legal text and clear congressional intent were no match for what the judge admits are her personal policy disagreements. even as a violent crime wave sweeps america, democrats are pursuing a nationwide campaign to make the justice system softer on crime. they're stacking the deck with far-left prosecutors, woke warriors at the department of justice, and federal judges who believe criminals deserve lighter treatment. this project is terrible for innocent american families, and every piece of evidence suggests

democrats view judge jackson as its crown jewel. so i'll close with this. these debates about judicial philosophy are not just academic. the change -- the charged political atmosphere around confirmations, the outsize role that unelected judges play in our national life, these are direct consequences of liberal judicial activism. their -- they're direct results of issues from federal courts as a progressive legislature that voters can't kick out. a republic of self-serving citizens should not spend every june watching with baited breath to see if five or six lawyers will hand down sweeping policy changes with zero basis in the written constitution. and the solution is not to make the court even more of a super legislature like liberals want.

delegitimizing death spiral that would destroy the rule of law is only one solution. the senate should only confirm justices who will follow the text of our laws and our constitution wherever it leads. who will lead subjective policy judgments on this side of the street where they belong. that's how we lower the temperature. that's how we shore up the courts. that's how we protect the rule of law. staff the judiciary with brilliant men and women who understand and embrace this limited role. no other road leads anywhere good for our great nation.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: mr. president, this is a wonderful day, a joyous day, an inspiring day for the senate, for the supreme court, and for the united states of america. today we are here to vote to confirm ketanji brown jackson as the 116th justice of the united states supreme court. now, a few days ago i spoke with

a group of eighth graders from cheek would ga -- cheekwaga, new york. many were students of color. it was amazing. when i mentioned this week we were confirming the judge, you could see them light up, the unmistakable look in their eyes. one day each young lady thought to herself, i can do it, too. you know, it's been a dark two years with covid. people getting sick and dying, many of whom we knew. stores closing, schools shutting their doors. but even in the darkest times there are bright lights. today is one of the brightest lights and let us hope it's a metaphor, an indication of many more bright lights to come. as i've said over and over again, there are three words that i think best fit judge jackson. brilliant, beloved, belongs.

judge jackson is in every sense and by all measures a brilliant jurist. she is indeed a brilliant person. by the judge's own telling, she first discovered her calling to the law not in a classroom or by reading a book or by talking to lawyers but by sitting at the kitchen table next to her dad filling out her coloring book while her dad poured through case law. years from now other parents and other daughters will do the same, and it will be justice jackson's opinions that will lay open on the table. the judge's parents, her entire family should beam with pride that this day has come. at every step of her upbringing and career, ketanji brown jackson rankinged among the highest of achievers. and, look, we should take a moment to note that judge

jackson will be the first and only justice with experience as a public defender. we're proud of that, and america is proud of that. it will enhance the court's ability to preserve a basic truth in our country -- that all deserve equal justice under the lawsuit, from the privileged to the impoverished. in an imperfect world, the judge considered so many hurdles -- the judge concurred so many hurdles and today stands as one of the most experienced individuals ever nominated to the supreme court. for this reason, the judge is also beloved by individuals and organizations across the political spectrum. i went through her record carefully and never did i find one instance of a peer or colleague or associate say one nextgen -- negative word about her. you often find a bad word about

an individual but not with judge jackson. and lest we forget, the judge is popular in the minds of the american people. a gallup poll showed nearly 60% of the public supports her confirmation, ten points above the historical norm. and there is no question here, the country by and large wants the senate to confirm judge jackson. police chiefs want to confirm judge jackson. conservative and moderate and liberal judges all want us to confirm judge jackson. and i thank my colleagues in this chamber who worked in good faith to make sure the senate can finish its work today. finally, as i've said many times, the judge belongs on the supreme court. by that i mean something very specific. in our nation's history, 115 individuals have been confirmed

by this body to serve on the supreme court of the united states. of those, 108 have been white men. only four have been women. only two have been african american. but ketanji brown jackson will be the first african american woman ever to hold the title of justice. think about the impact that will have on our democracy. untold millions of kids will open textbooks and see pictures of justice jackson among the highest ranks of our public figures. how many kids in generations past could have benefited from such a role model? how many business people, judges, doctors, have been lost to history precisely because their history books had few, if any, role models that they could

relate to? we certainly have a long way to go on the road to true justice, but by confirming judge jackson today, we are taking a bold step forward towards reaching the full realization of our country's promise. we will make it far more likely that girls across america will feel precisely what judge jackson felt herself when she was a kid -- nobody can stop me. i can do this, too. i am brilliant, too. i belong, too. for all these reasons, increasing the diversity of the court has been one of my highest priorities and one of the highest priorities of our senate democratic majority, of whom i am so proud. justice jackson is the most important example, but we've been working on this for over a year. of the 58 senate-confirmed federal judges since we took the majority, three-quarters have been women, two-thirds have been

people of color, and it's not just racial and gender diversity that matters. we have strived to lift up judges that bring diversity through their experience. more public defenders in our courts, more civil rights lawyers, more election lawyers. when americans of all walks of life come before the court, they should have confidence that those who donn the robes have the ability to walk in their own shoes, to see and understand their side of the story, and then apply the law properly according to the facts. one judge at a time, one judge at a time, this majority is expanding the possibility of who merits consideration to the bench. and i would be remiss if i didn't acknowledge my republican colleagues who joined us on this occasion over the year to achieve this goal. in closing, i want to thank chairman durbin for the beautiful -- for beautifully

executing this nomination process. it was equal parts fair, thorough, and expeditious. no easy feat in this modern senate. i want to thank all of my democratic colleagues on the judiciary committee. you were just fabulous, every one of you, for your respectful and insightful of the judge's record. and i warrant to thank my colleagues, no matter which side you voted on. the president sent us an impressive nominee. she merited a robust and thoughtful and lively examination. i thank the members who did precisely that. in short, madam president, this is one of the great moments of american history. at the time of our constitution's ratification, in most states you had to be a white male protestant landowner

to be considered part of american society. so from the get-go, generations of americans have sought to establish the united states as a full democracy. we fought a bloody civil war to end slavery. women organized and reached for the ballot. the civil rights movement brought an end to the vicious segregation of the mid-20th century. and today we are taking a giant, bold, and important step on the well-trodden path to fulfilling our country's founding promise. this is a great moment for judge jackson, but it is an even greater moment for america, as we rise to a more perfect union. i thank my colleagues for their work, and i yield the floor. the vice president: under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired.

the question occurs on the nomination of ketanji brown jackson of the district of columbia to be an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states. mr. schumer: subsidy for the yeas and nays. the vice president: is there a sufficient second? there is. and there certainly appears to be a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the vice president: on this vote the yeas are 53, the nays are 47, and this nomination is confirmed.

the vice president: under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will immediately be notified of the senate's action. mr. schumer: madam president,

very happily i note the absence of a quorum. the vice president: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

today each member of the senate will have the opportunity to cast a vote on the nomination of judge ketanji brown jackson to be an associate justice of the united states supreme court. i say historic because throughout our nation's history only 115 people have searched on the supreme court. only five of the supreme court justices have been women. only two of the justices have been black. and none has been a black woman. so history indeed is long overdue. but i'm not going to cast my vote in support of judge jackson's confirmation because she is a woman or because she is

black. i will cast that vote because she is eminently qualified to serve in the position to which she's been nominated. her nomination shouldn't just be welcomed. it should be celebrated. it's a major step forward for our democracy. it's further widening the lens out to make our nation more inclusive and more representative with each passing generation. she is one of the most qualified nominees to the supreme court that i've ever considered in my 48 years here. graduate of harvard and harvard law school, a judicial clerk at the district circuit and supreme court level, a federal appellate judge, a federal district court judge, a member of u.s. sentencing commission, an attorney in private practice. and she will be the first ever justice who has served as a public defender, bringing that much-needed perspective to the

court. no one, no one can argue that judge jackson is not objectively qualified to be confirmed. and the manufactured accusations by some in our committee during our hearings not only fell flat but a been refuted and debunked by serious voices across the political spectrum. they serve only to showcase the vitriol and the contempt with some members of his body approach their sacred constitutional role of advice and consent. i said during the hearings and i will say it again, it's distressing. it's disheartening, and it is asher as dean of the senate it is saddening. yet i find hope in the fact that judge jackson's confirmation to our highest court will have bipartisan support it deserves,

it commands. i commend the republican senators who have -- qualifications and stake their support of her nomination. judge jackson has earned the president's nomination and she has earned confirmation from the senate ident. i'm here today to speak in support of the nomination and confirmation of christopher lowman to be -- loweman to be secretary of defense. we are in a fight for the free world and that means having a robust military presence with our allies and including and especially nato countries. every country needs a strong logistic chain, that means to be able to move medical supplies, fuel, tents, anything throughout the world at any given time.

this is no longer an abstraction. we have seen what happens when it isn't in place. we're seeing it in realtime with russia's equipment problems and training problems in ukraine and that's why we have a assistant secretary of defense on sustainment as we watch the ukrainians bravely push back this unprovoked russian war. part of the reason they're having some success is the russian logistic chain is absolutely broken. we, in the united states, and our armed forces, take logistics extraordinarily seriously. but we don't have the person in charge of that confirmed to lead the department on logistics. this position is left unfilled because josh hawley is blocking

mr. loman's nomination. he disagrees with the biden administration's policy on afghanistan and so he's punishing our service members and nato allies while a war in europe is raging. it's worth repeating. senator hawley is mad about what happened six months ago in a different part of the world and in response he's harming the department of defense and our national security. it is completely ridiculous. i will not yield. mr. lowman is well qualified for this job and no one is disputing that. he's a marine corps veteran who spent nearly four decades working for the army. he has the experience to support our logistic chain and help to make sure that our military remains the best fighting force on the planet and it's time for senator hawley to release this hold and move this nomination forward. this is preposterous.

you can do a hold. the members can do a hold, the presiding officer did a hold, i had a hold and i voted against policy when i dis agreed with it, but holding the department of defense is inschiewsable. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate consider the following nomination, calendar number 777, christopher joseph lowman, to be assistant secretary of defense and that the senate vote on the nomination, that the motion to reconsider be considered and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. hawley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. hawley: the senator asked a

question do you agree with this question, do you agree to deny migs to the ukrainians? mr. schatz: is there an objection? the presiding officer: the senator doesn't want to interrogate any questions. mr. schatz: is there an objection? does he object or not? the presiding officer: the regular order has been called. is there objection? mr. hawley: i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the senator from missouri is recognized. mr. hawley: thank you, mr. president. thank you for finally giving me an option to speak. it's interesting the senator will come to the floor but he doesn't want to engage in a colloquy or answer questions. but let's talk about the disastrous foreign policy that is he supporting. this is the white house's latest talking points that their

failure in ukraine is due to a logistics problem at the department of defense and they're not responsible for it. they're not responsible for anything, they're not responsible for what happened in afghanistan, their policy, they're not responsible for what happened in ukrainian, their policy. let's talk about the policy. schatz -- mr. schatz: mr. president, will the senator yield for a question? mr. hawley: what has president zelenskyy been asking for? he said, send us planes. what has this administration done? they said, nope. first they said yes, then maybe, and now no. today the secretary of defense testified before the armed services committee under oath that even though this congress has appropriated $3 billion in military lethal aid to the people of ukraine, the defense

department so far has given them less than a third of it. why? because of policy. his comment was we are giving them what we think they need. mr. president, i would just point out that that's not what the ukrainians think. if you listen to president zelenskyy, if you listen to the ukrainian parliamentarians, who have been here, if you talk to them, they will say they need more military aid. they need more help. this administration won't give it to them. not because of logistics, but because of policy. we don't have a logistics problem. we have a joe biden problem and we've had that problem in ukrainian from day one. this administration's policy was to deter a russian invasion of ukrainian. it failed. why did it fail? it's not hard to see. president biden came to office. what did he do? when ukrainian asked for

military assistance. mr. schatz: will the senator yield? mr. hawley: can we have order, mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri has the floor. mr. hawley: when joe biden came to office, the people of ukraine asked for military assistance a year ago -- a year ago. did he give it to them? no. he denied them military assistance. they denied them lethal aid. what did he do for vladimir putin? when he came to office, he green lighted vladimir putin's pipeline. he turned their pipeline on and ours off. his first actions in office were to, among other things, cancel the keystone xl pipeline, halt the leasing program in anwr, issue a hawt halt to new to oil and gas leases, impose tougher regulations on oil and gas and methane emissions and a host of

other energy productions and that had a desired effect. russian energy production, up, russian revenues, up. what happened since the invasion of ukraine? it's been one gaffe after another. he won't send planes. the secretary of defense confirmed that this administration has not been sharing intelligence with the ukrainians. today the secretary of defense had to admit that the administration was going to be forced to change policy -- his words -- change policy in ukraine because in fact we had not been sharing all the sphwrens we might have -- intelligence we might have despite the ukrainians's request. who did that? joe biden. it's his policy. he did have this to say. for god's sake, this man cannot remain in power. so now joe biden doesn't appear to know whether we're struggling to help the ukrainians defend

themselves or whether we're launching a war of regime change in russia itself. you know, mr. president, the bottom line is this. on one issue after another when it comes to ukrainian, this -- ukraine this president has been wronged. on every aspect of policy that mattered, he has been wrong. is it any wund ukrainians are -- wonder ukrainians are saying, change policy. send us what we requested. the white house shouldn't point fingers and shift the blame. we have a joe biden problem. that's the nub of the issue here. then there was joe biden's comment that we're going to send ground troops. he said to u.s. service members, when you go there and some of you have been there, you will see women, young people standing in front of a damn tank saying, i'm not leaving.

i'm shoalding my ground -- i'm holding my ground. it's a disaster from beginning to end and let's not forget where the foreign policy disaster really kicked off in a big way. yeah, it was in afghanistan. am i concerned about afghanistan? you're darn right i am. 16 soldiers were killed at abby gait, one from my home state. i will never forget talking to one father, the official notice of his son's death had been released and his father asked me to do everything in my power to hold this administration accountable and that's exactly what i will do. has anyone been held accountable for afghanistan, has somebody been fired or relieved of command? nope. has somebody been shown the door? has there been a change of policy?

no. we stumble from one crisis to another. why? because we have a joe biden problem. this administration is doing what their commander in chief wants them to do and it is wrong again and again and again and again. so, plan, -- so, mr. president, until we see some change from policy in this administration, until this senate gets serious about its oversight responsibilities at the department of defense, i'm going to ask for senior defense leaders, we at least have regular order. i can't block a nomination or halt it, but i can ask that regular order be followed and that's exactly what i'm going to ask with regard to nomination and other senior leaders until there is accountability, until we have a change in policy and until this administration admits that on issue after issue in virtually every aspect of its foreign policy, it is dead wrong. i yield. the presiding officer: the

senator from hawaii is recognized. mr. schatz: what senator hawley wants is to go through the litany of criticisms about the biden administration and every senator has that right without blocking the logistics guy from the department of defense. he could have brought his floor charts out here and given a withering speech about all of the things he thought went wrong, but he's doing a very specific thing. he's damaging the department of defense. we have senior d.o.d. leaders, we have the armed services committee coming to us and saying, i don't know what to tell him. i don't know how to satisfy him, but he is blocking the staffing of the senior leadership at the department of defense. and this comes from a guy who raised his first in solidarity with the invehiclessists -- insurrectionists, and this comes from a guy who before the russian invasion suggested that maybe it would be wise for zelenskyy to make a few

concessions about ukraine and their willingness to join nato. this comes from a guy who about a month ago voted against ukraine aid. he said it's going too slow. he voted no on ukraine aid and now he has the gall to say it's going too slow. and this final insult is that until, what, secretary austin resigns? that's not a serious request. people used to come to me during the trump administration all the time, do you think trump should resign. i think all the people i disagree should quit and be replaced with people i love. i think they should all resign. that's not how the world works. that is not a reasonable request from a united states senator that until the secretary of defense quits his job, i'm going to block all of his nominees. that's prepost yourus --

preposterous, and that's coming from who exonerated trump who helped to with hold lethal aid. they withheld aid unless they would release smears against joe biden's son and they voted to exonerate. this man's record is exactly the opposite. i yield the floor.

>> today, is a historic day. today each member of the senate will have the opportunity to cast a vote on the nomination of

judge ketanji brown jackson to be an associate justice of the united states supreme court. i say historic because throughout our nation's history only 115 people have served on the supreme court. up till now only k as if in morn. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i just want to make some comments regarding what the junior senator from missouri just was talking about on the floor. and i know that my colleague from hawaii was providing commentary as well. it's hard to comprehend how any member of congress, house or senate, could come to the floor and make the criticism of the biden administration regarding its ukraine policy, especially

with regard to the military assistance provided by this administration and that same senator along with a long list of republican senators voted against all the money for ukraine just a couple of weeks ago, $13.6 billion. but unfortunately it's entirely consistent with what those same 31 senators have been doing for the last couple of weeks. they voted against all the money in march and then they criticize president biden. in fact, the day of president zelenskyy's speech to the congress, that inspiring speech that so many of us were moved by, people in both parties, both houses, all across the country, in fact across the world were moved by what he said. and frankly, challenged by what

he said. we have to do more even in my judgment than the $13.6 billion. but as the junior senator from missouri should know, i hope he knows this, that since the beginning of this adding -- this administration, just on the military assistance, we provided $2.6 billion. so more than $2.5 billion just on military assistance. but the bulk of that is in that spending bill that we passed a couple of weeks ago that had the $13.6 billion. here's what "the washington post" says and i'll read the headline and the date and then ask consent to enter it into the record. here's the headline, quote, more than two dozen senate republicans demand biden do more for ukraine after voting against $13.6 billion for ukraine. dated march 17, 2022, a story by

mariano uforo and eugene scott. i would ask consent that this article be made by the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. casey: here's the subheadline. 31 senate republicans voted last week against the $1.5 trillion spending bill to fund the government, increase u.s. defense spending and provide humanitarian and military assistance to ukraine. in recent days many of them have clamored for more weapons and aid. it goes on from there. i'm not going to read all of it, obviously. but it chronicles the hypocrisy that we just heard here today and that we've heard for days now and weeks now. criticizing the president when they voted against all the money. so all the money from the $13.6 billion that will go to pay for the javelin missiles that are taking out russian tanks every day and have for weeks, every

penny of that out of the $13.6 billion, you could probably cut is in half in terms of what the military assistance will be. so let's say for sake of argument probably half of that $6 billion or $7 billion. whatever the exact number is, that many will help pay for more javelin missiles that have been so expectative. the stinger systems, the antiaircraft systems, they're all going to be paid for. the ammunition and the body arm ear and all of the other assistance that we're providing is going to be made possible because most of the senate, 50 democrats and just 19 republicans but we're grateful for their support, voted for the money. so if you have a criticism about the administration's policy, you're certainly entitled to criticize the administration.

but i think you lose your right to criticize the administration on military assistance and what we're doing or not doing on military assistance when you just voted against all the mo money, all the money. and yet they do it over and over again as if no one is watching. i think the american people get it. and i think they know the difference between someone who can justifiably criticize any administration on foreign policy or defense policy or anything else. but i think you should admit on the record that you didn't vote for the money. don't throw sand in the eyes of the people. admit on the record that you didn't vote for the money and then lodge your criticism. but of course he didn't do that and so many who voted the wrong

way. now, "the washington post" also notes in this article that obviously it was a spending bill that will allow us to fund the government. we can talk about that whether or not you support funding the government. but here's a point that was made in the article that i think a lot of people may have missed. is that this funding bill also paid for a pay increase for our troops, u.s. servicemembers got a pay increase in this bill. and yet you would never know that by listening to some of the folks who voted the wrong way on the bill. you would think that that wasn't part of this legislation. so i think a lot of americans probably expect that when you're making an argument against an administration, you have the

right to do that, but i think it would be a lot more truthful if you were clear about where you voted on the biggest ukraine spending measure in recent history. maybe the -- probably -- likely not just the biggest ever for ukraine, the biggest ever for a lot of countries that we help. so i hope that people across this chamber and across the country will make note of that contradiction. because when you voted against those dollars for ukraine, you were voting against not only the people of ukraine and their ability to fight this war and obviously the soldiers in the field, but you're voting against that humanitarian support as well that will provide food and medical care and so much else. now, i am in no way satisfied that we've done enough. we've got to do a lot more.

we've got to provide in my judgment a river,en ever -- an ever rushing stream of weapons, as many weapons it takes to defeat vladimir putin. so we're going to have more debates, and senators will have more opportunities to vote the right way when it comes to supporting the people of ukraine. but i think it would be better for the debate if folks would mention how they voted, that they voted against the ukraine money, that they voted against a pay raise for the troops, and they voted against a lot of other provisions. but to come on to the senate floor and to criticize the president on military assistance, that's the height of hypocrisy. mr. president, i would yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa is is recognized. mr. graham: the senator -- the

majority leader is going to come to the floor and i'd yield the floor for him when he comes here. but i'd like to yield the floor without losing the right to the floor. i would like to. mr. grassley: i would like to thank my staff who worked on this nomination. first i would like to recognize the contributions of colin davis, who was assisted by my chief council for nominations. the staff and the nomination unit also worked incredibly hard on this nomination. they include lauren maylor, area monk. the permanent nomination team received some reinforcements for this supreme court nomination-and-, anne crosslow joined my staff to join the team

in assisting the nomination. that team included anita boon, kyl cole, isaac fong, jana a leronz and luke zaro. this team scoured judge jackson's record. they spent countless hours receiving her opinions, her speeches, and pulling filings and transcripts for her cases. their exhaustive review helped the republicans on the committee prepare for the confirmation process. i also want to thank the communications director, taylor foye, as well as deputy communications director george hartman, aaron brit, annie richardson, jennifer heinz, megan barons also contributed to the communicationsest.

other staff also helped review and prepare for the nomination including davis lewin, lauren stimper, rachel wright, aaron creigen, and chesney mallory, as well as law clerks luke bunting and noel daniels. i want to thank the rest of my judiciary committee staff for their continued work during this process and also thank my deputy staff director, rita lara for her advice and leadership. the trouble is, i got the next -- the next speech is a long speech, i'd just soon not interrupt it.

mr. schumer: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i proceed -- i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 808. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, federal reserve system.

lael brainard of the district of columbia to be vice chairman of the board of governor. the presiding officer: i send a 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 nomination of executive calendar number 808, lael brainard to be vice chairman of the board of governors of the federal reserve system. mr. schumer: i ask consent that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 844. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the

nomination. the clerk: nomination, federal reserve system, lisa dee nell cook of michigan to be a member of the board of governors. 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 nomination of executive calendar number 844, lisa dee necessarily cook of cook to be a member of the board governors of the federal reserve system. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar 848. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to.

the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, federal trade commission, alvar very m. bedoya of maryland for a federal trade commissioner. the presiding officer: i send the 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 nomination of executive calendar number 848, slvaro m. bedoya of maryland to be a federal trade commissioner. 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 calls forbe the cloture motions filed today be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum -- no. sorry. i yield the floor to my colleague and friend from the state of -- the great state of iowa. the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: lots of pundits are trying to get into president

putin's head and looking for some so-called off ramp. now, i'm not a pundit and i do not pretend to be able to read putin's mind. however, i do listen carefully to those closest to russia who have better insights than the american pundits, academics, and foreign policy theorists. i happen to be cochair of the senate baltic freedom caucus, so i interact regularly with estonians, latvians, and lithuanians. three countries that in 1940 the soviet union absorbed into it and then since about 1990, they've been independent of russia. so you can see these countries are historically western in

every sense, except geography. but they have had a long and often painful exposure to russian-soviet-k.g.b. way of thinking. our baltic friends can help others in the west who cannot seem to fathom what is going through putin's mind. the fact that we cannot understand putin's mind-set is because he doesn't think like modern western leaders. now, this is an important insight from my baltic contacts. putin is stuck in the 17th and 18th centuries. you know i like history, so this is something that i can understand. putin thinks like a czar

expanding his empire. he regrets the collapse of the soviet union, not because of communist ideology but because it reconstituted the russian empire. in foreign policy, it's easy to assume other countries are just like us. experts don't know what to make of an 18th century imperialist. some observers have speculated that putin has gone crazy because he does not seem to be acting rationally. but from the standpoint of someone who thinks ukraine is not a real country, as putin has said for decades, and who greets the collapse of the evil empire,

he is -- and who regrets the collapse of the evil empire, he is acting rationally. our baltics allies have been warning the west that putin is an aggressor since well before the current invasion of ukraine, before the 2014 invasion of neutral ukraine, before the disastrous obama administration reset of relations with russia, and before the 2008 invasion of georgia. the baltics have often been dismissed as hysterical or russo-phobic or at least exaggerate when they warn about russia. well, the world has awakened to the fact that the baltics were right all along.

we should have armed ukraine to the teeth years ago. putin only understands strength. what lessons should have been learned from putin's pattern of aggression over the years? putin only understands strength and weaknesses is provocative. during the hungarian uprising of 1956 when the hungarian people were protesting to break free of soviet control, the eisenhower administration in this country paid lip service to the aspirations for freedom. but was secretly obsessed with not provoking the soviets. eisenhower's secretary of state

dulles made his speech in dallas, texas, where he said this -- quote, the united states has no ulterior purpose in desiring the independence of the satellite countries -- end quote but further, quote, we do not look upon these nations as potential military allies. so you can see expansion of nato today proves how wrong dulles was at that time. however, after the dulles speech he then cabled the u.s. embassy in moscow, instructing that this be brought to the attention of the highest soviet authorities. any wonder why hungary wasn't freed at that time? theston estonian -- the estonian

history -- this historian of estonia and also its former prime minister, martin lerr, maintains that this message from dulles was interpreted by moscow as a carte blanche to intervene, and the americans would not stand in the way. that's why he titled the relevant chapter in his book on the rise and fall of communism in the renal -- in the region, quote-unquote, the lost opportunity of 1956. so, what do our baltic friends advise right now? in the face of putin's threats to escalate if we supply ukraine with fighter jets or other advanced weapons? believe it or not, their advice is to relax.

in other words, do not overreact to putin's threats. we have a nuclear deterrent, and putin knows that. the more we show we are scared by his threats, the harder he will push. and we absolutely need to stop declaring what we will not do in regard to russia's invasion of ukraine. that just seems to embolden putin to push harder. the failure to push back to previous russian aggressions, and that's just not a biden problem, that's problems of both republicans -- republican and democrat presidents before, also the failure to enforce previous red lines in syria, and the

perception of weakness from afghanistan pullout debacle. those three things are at least part of the reason what's going on in ukraine is going on. i hope president biden has picked up on this as well. now is the time to redouble our efforts to reinforce ukraine. putin appears to have accepted he cannot conquer all of ukraine, but he's very definitely repositioning his forces to take as big of a chunk of the country as he can. ukraine must win this war. on to victory. anything short of a ukraine victory is an invitation for

further russian aggression elsewhere. and who knows, maybe even encouraging china. we've got to stop the finger-pointing. we've got to stop the excuses. and we've got to get ukraine air defenses, drones, and anything else to shift the balance. to date, the united states and our allies have supplied the heroic ukrainian military with the kinds of weapons that have allowed them to hang on while their cities are shelled and civilians are massacred. the battle for kiev may have been won, but the battle for the east is only going to intensify. unless we tip the balance, this

could go on for a long, long time. we've seen how brutal the russian occupation has been in just one month. imagine months and months of this in eastern ukraine. i have a bill with my friend, senator durbin, to guarantee that the united states will backfill certain critical weapons transferred to ukraine by our eastern flank of nato allies. many nato countries have been very generous in handing over their weapons to ukraine. this is leaving a security gap in those very countries, but they know that if putin isn't stopped in ukraine then those countries are at greater risk.

as estonian prime minister kaila kalas says, putin cannot even think he's won, or his appetite will only grow. some of our nato allies also have air defense systems or drones that could make a big difference in ukraine. there are rumors of negotiations to supply items needed in ukraine, provided there is agreement to acquire american replacements. my big with durbin would provide that assurance up front without the red tape that seems to be involved in almost everything we do to help ukraine. putin has talked constantly about what he calls demilitarization and de-nazification as his justification for launching this

brutal invasion of ukraine. that phrase does not make much sense on its face. but again, which have to keep in mind that putin has an imperial mindset. no military analyst looking at ukraine and russia could possibly think that ukraine owes any military threat to russia. the russian military dwarfs the ukrainian one in manpower as well as equipment. in fact, it is clear that putin and his military leaders underestimated the fighting ability of the ukrainians. the same is frankly true of nato's military power along russia's borders. what putin means by -- to

demilitarize is to shrink ukraine's military to the point that that country is indefensible. he wants ukraine totally susceptible to russian threats, meaning back within russia's sphere of influence. now, what about the term de-nazification? ever since world war ii, those in the soviet union who expressed incorporated pens -- ind pebs were fascist or nazi. it's pretty clear that putin's initial goal was to eliminate ukraine's current government, starting with president zelenskyy. so, despite being descended from

holocaust survivors, de-nazification starts from putin's point of view by eliminating a jewish president, zelenskyy. in a recent article in a russian state-run publication, r.i. novosky confirmed that de-nazification means the elected government must be eliminated as well as the ukrainian military, but this article goes on to say, quote, however, in addition to the top, a significant part of the masses , who are passive nazis, accomplices of naziism, are also guilty. they supported and indulged nazi power. de-nazification will eventually be de-ukrainianization.

end of quote. this ought to be very chilling to all of us, especially in light of the massacre at bucha that you saw on television this week, and other ukrainian cities . that statement reminds me of this quote from catherine the great, after she completed her takeover of an independent ukrainian state just ten years before our own declaration of independence. quote, catherine the great, every effort should be made to eradicate them and their age from memory. them meaning the ukrainians. stalin killed millions of ukrainians by intentionally starving them to death with the same goal, in the early 1930's.

now, you know putin has praised stalin and is now imitating stalin. the u.n. genocide convention defined genocide to mean, quote, any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy , in whole or in part -- a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such, a., killing members of the group, b., causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, c., deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction, in whole or in part, d., imposing measures

intended to prevent growth within the group. e., forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. end of quote. that sure seems to fit with what we know about putin and his occupation of ukraine. there's one last lesson that we can learn from our baltic friends. despite the murder and deportations to siberia of masses of estonians, latvians and lithuanians to suppress their national identity, there were ten years of active guerilla warfare by bands of what they called forest brothers. in fact, resistance never really

ended until the baltic countries threw off soviet rule. i will leave you with the first few lines of the ukrainian national anthem -- the glory and freedom of ukraine has not yet perished. luck will still smile on us, brother ukrainians. our enemies will die as the dew does in the sunshine, and we too, brothers, will live happily in our land. end of quote. i yield the floor. suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: confirm judgeketanji brown

jackson to the united states supreme court .what a great day it is for the united states ofamerica . for our system of government. and the ground march for the

fulfillment of the sacred covenants we have with one another as americanpeople, e pluribus unum , outof many . one. ketanji brown jackson's improbable journey to the nation's highest court is a reflection of our own journey . through fits and starts towards the nations highest ideals. she embodies the art of our history. a very fine product of public schools, both her parents attended segregated primary schools. before graduating from historically black colleges and universities , she is a two-time graduate ofharvard . a former clerk to supreme court justice breyer to the

nation owes anenormous thanks for his decades of public service . of former federal public defender who would be the first of her kind to serve on the supreme court . a jurist who has gone before the senate on three separate occasions and each time has garnered strong bipartisan support. a judge who has heard cases both in the us district court and our federal court of appeals. a judge who has a strong endorsement of critical stakeholders from across our justice system . from the american bar association to those who advocate for civil rights, those who advocate for civil rights. two organizations representing our nation's brave law enforcement

officers, all of them respect ketanji brown jackson. she's a wife and a workingmom . she is america at its best. i believe in my heart after meeting with her in my office, talking to folks who know her and hearing her testimony before the senate judiciary committee, under intense questioning before the committee, much of it appropriate and necessary, some of it outrageous and beyond the pale. she demonstrated her legal acumen, sharp intellect and the kind of temperament we need on the bench especially at a time likethis . if there were any doubts about her character, she more than proved her poise, her skill, composure and the

depth of herpatriotism . in the process. amazing grace. under pressure. as a voice for georgians in the senate i said from the beginning people in my state what someone on the court who is they are, eminently qualified and has a record of protecting the constitutional rights and freedoms of georgians and americans. that's why my office has received thousands of emails and phone calls from georgians in every corner of our state.

justice ketanji brown jackson as an example of the great heights that they too can achieve. for the very first time in our nation's history, the senate

has confirmed a black woman to the supreme court of the united states. for only the sixth time we confirmed a woman to the supreme court. and for the fourth time we confirmed a working mother. it's also the first time in 50 years that the senate has confirmed a justice with public defense experience. now this nomination represents progress, and i'm heartened that it was a bipartisan majority of senators that came together to make history today. but i also know that this progress would not be possible without that someone who would, who was brave enough to step ahead on her own. without someone willing to work twice as hard in order to be the first. without someone able to persevere, no matter how

challenging, how difficult, or how full of doubt her path ahead may sometimes be. madam president, it shouldn't have been this hard. as you know, i'm a member of the judiciary committee, so i can attest that when then-judge jackson came before the committee with an outstanding judicial record, with bipartisan acclaim and historic qualifications, she came prepared, and she did answer a whole range of important questions, and she was forthcoming, she was clear, and gracious. many senators took the opportunity to engage deeply on issues that will shape the future of our nation, issues like the role of technology and innovation, voting rights, tribal sovereignty, and much,

much, more. but sadly, as has been referenced, some of our colleagues chose to fill their time with hostility, bad faith, and misleading smears. they chose to hold judge jackson to a different standard than other supreme court nominees that they themselves had previously supported. and in the same breath, they tried to praise judge jackson's qualifications, they denigrated her motives, they questioned her impartiality and made up excuse after excuse for why they couldn't support her nomination. it was painful to watch, not just for me but for people across the country. judge jackson was in the spotlight for days, but she

continuously met disrespect with calm, composure. it's an experience that's all too common for those with the audacity to break new ground. judge jackson was unfairly tested, but she persevered. madam president, i believe that judge jackson deserved better than the treatment she received during the confirmation process. when you see senators cast aside their good faith in questioning nominees, the threat to the integrity of our justice system is very real. the cynicism it breeds for our institutions is real. and these are the issues that this senate, that each senator

must confront. but today i want to and i choose to celebrate this historic achievement, the historic achievement of this confirmation. over the last few weeks i received thousands of letters and e-mails and other messages, including on social media, from californians who support justice jackson's confirmation. the messages came from people of all backgrounds and from every corner of my home state. i've heard from californians who add -- admire the tenacity, the grace, and the integrity that justice jackson showed in committee. and i got messages from so many californians, young californians who see themselves in justice jackson's story. and from californians who say

that the court and our country will be better because of her service. as we cast our historic votes, i celebrate the better america that we are building, where our courts better reflect and understand the diverse country that it serves. and i celebrate the joy that judge jackson has brought to people across not just california, but across the nation. i celebrate the commitment to equal rights and equal justice that she will bring to the supreme court. and i celebrate the inspiration that she provides to young people, especially young people of color who will write the next chapter of our american story. when judge jackson introduced herself to the american people in the course of the confirmation hearing in

judiciary committee, she said that she stood on the shoulders of the civil rights icon and her personal hero, judge constance baker motley. for many in the next generation, their hero will be justice ketanji brown jackson. madam president, i shared with others and i want to share again today, this confirmation represents one more step towards making our institutions and our courts more inclusive for all americans. and so it is in that spirit that i request unanimous consent to make a few additional remarks in spanish. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. padilla: gracias.

[speaking in spanish]

madam president, judge, now justice jackson has earned her place on the supreme court. and i will end by acknowledging that while one person alone sitting on a court of nine equals can't single-handedly crate faith in the institution, i have every confidence that justice jackson will strengthen the supreme court and help our country progress forward. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. madam president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> soon will be voting on

judge jackson's nomination and i'd like to explain why i'm voting against her appointment to the supreme court. since the white house announced judge jackson's nomination, i have emphasized the need for a thorough and fair process. unfortunately, the majority party were concerned about the rigorous examination of her record. the white house and majority party have shielded important information. we don't have any nonpublic documents from her time at the sentencing commission and the obama white house held back more than

coming future the president will be swearing in judge, now justice jackson and i'm certain she will be a credit to our nation. she's already proven that in her lifetime of service. many members of the senate, of course, were excited and happy about it. i was one of them. i want to thank my colleagues for their kind words. but i also want to acknowledge the obvious. all of the hard work that led up to this successful vote happened a lot behind the scenes. there were members of our staff who worked long hours, 20-hour days to prepare for this and to be ready to handle the important judiciary committee hearings. i'd like to acknowledge the staff members on both sides of the aisle who worked tirelessly on judge jackson's nomination. i've got quite a team on my side. i'm very proud of them.

i want to recognize the following individuals who played an important part in this historic process. pat souter is my chief of staff, joe zogby, my senate judiciary committee staff director, dan swanson, general counsel. stephanie trafon, salary brown shackly, my deputy chief of staff, malik simmons and mayory ann wheatly, floor staff sitting in the back of this chamber. claire and riley, my schedulers, my press staff including emily, my communications director, jenny, matty carlos, teresa and laura keller and many others on my judiciary team including fill breast, any chief nominations counsel, he worked so hard on this and is so good, sarah barr who was right by his side working every minute. and gabe cater as well.

joe sharleigh, maggie hopkins, anna shepherd, david odelia, eric chung, eliza, david mccollum, matty reno, katy, raysha martinez, doug miller, comasty burns, nicole walton, and many, many others. i also would like to recognize some members of senator grassley's staff. now, he for those who wouldn't know is the -- my republican counterpart. i chair the committee evenly divided 11 to 11 and senator grassley is in charge of the republican side. and we have developed a strong friendship and trust over the years that really meant a lot during this process. i want to recognize senator grassley's staff members, in particular colon davis, his

staff director of many years. brennan chestnut, his chief nominations counsel, and lauren malar, senior counselor for nominations. our two staffs worked very well together in this process, and i really appreciate that. i want to thank senator grassley again for it. i want to thank the committee's nondesignated staff including heather, michele, brian, kara, shannon, chuck, and others. i want to also express my gratitude to the larger senate community that played a part in judge jackson's nomination process. the staff of the architect of the capitol, sergeant at arms and of course the men and women of the u.s. capitol police force who were critical to the success of the hearing and markups for judge jackson's nomination. more than a thousand people occupied the chairs in the back of the committee room in the four days of hearings. it was the largest gathering, largest crowd short of the state of the union address in modern memory on the senate. and today's gallery attendance

again was something -- a welcome change from the forlorn empty chambers we've become used to. i also want to add the names of the senate staff who were instrumental in supporting the proceedings and ask unanimous consent that this list be entered into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you, madam president, and with that i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: voting on judge jackson's

nomination and i'd like to explain why i'm voting against her appointment to the supremecourt . since the white house announced judge jackson's nomination, i have emphasized the need for a thorough and fair process. unfortunately, the majority party weren't concerned about the rigorous examination of

her record. the white house and majority party have shielded important information. we don't have any nonpublic documents from her time at the sentencing commission, and the obama white house held back more than 48,000 pages. judge jackson also gave the white house confidential nonpublic probation recommendations for some of her cases, but when we asked about a probation document file on the hawkins case, judge jackson claimed she was not able to access records for her old cases because that was allegedly because she was no longer on the district court and we now know that she sits on the dc

circuit court . if that's true, there are many unanswered questions about how information, the white house was helpful was so easily obtained. so we should take into account that all the helpful information has already been leaked. that brings me to the merits of judge jackson's nomination . her judicial nominees, their philosophy up to decide how to decide cases up to be a primary consideration. part of having a judicial philosophy is having an understanding of the fundamental principlesof our constitution . natural rights are a part of that system. judge jackson explains to us that she does not hold a position on whether

individual possess natural rights. now, that not to be very shocking. natural rights are basic to our constitutional system and principles of limited government. because we all know our country was founded on the belief that's expressed in the declaration of independence. all men are created equal and they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. among these are the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness . and that was further nailed down in the constitution of the united states. our constitution that's the three branches of government with very limited power. all powers, all other powers

not given to the federal government are reserved to the states and to the people thereof. the principle of limited government is what makes america an exceptional nation and sets our constitution apart . judges must have a proper understanding of those basic principles and the way judge jackson answered those questions, particularly the answers she gave to senator cruz show she likes that foundation.

rocksolid evidence against a dangerous drug. judge jackson was displeased the government pursued mandatory minimum sentence. she misused a motion for compassionate release to that person, to ascend, she thought deserved. as lead author of the first step act, i know that's not what we roll for statute today. the act was supposed to allow elderly inmates and those suffering from terminal illness to petition with court for a sentence reduction. the statute also allows for reduction if they find extraordinary compelling reason

judges should use great discretion, judges should weigh against the charge, but dangerous to society and risk of recidivism. judge jackson said she based her extraordinary compelling finding on the non- retroactive changes to the law. this radical interpretation terrible and dangerous. congress chose which provisions first step act one apply retroactively. the senate is currently considering legislation i cosponsored with chairman durbin that makes some of the first step act provisions retroactive. but that's converses with role, not judge jackson's role. senator durbin and i would not have been able to broker a

compromise on that legislation if senators thought the judges would rewrite the law and insert their own views from the bench. decisions like this will make bipartisan work particularly on criminal justice reform harder to do. that case by the name of young is just one example of judge jackson's lenient approach to criminal law and sentencing. she also inclined to apply a number of sentencing enhancement congress put into the sentencing guidelines. a case in new york versus mclean is another case that shows how judge jackson used her methodology to reach a result that contradicts the plain text

of the law. congress gave the secretary of homeland security, these are the words from the law. unreviewable discretion to decide whether illegal immigrants could be subject to expedited removal within two years. judge jackson reviewed the agency's decision anyway and it seems clear why. she went out of her lane to comment on the policy. in her words, a terrible proposal. she claims that the government, attorney made an argument it reeks of bad faith, her words. in fact, her decision and rhetoric are unfounded. that why her decision earned strong rebuke from the panel of

liberal conservative judges when she was reversed by the d.c. circuit. obama appointee put it this way in the opinion. there could hardly be a more definitive expression of congressional intent than sole and unreviewable discretion. these are just a few examples of judge jackson's judicial activism because her record clearly shows she does not believe in or act within limited and proper role of a judge. so i will vote against her confirmation. i yelled to the floor. >> mr. president, this capitol building served as the backdrop for the most notable moments in

history. this building, peace treaters signed and march to progress will be either move forward or stopped in its tracks. today members of this senate have the opportunity to take a monumental step forward. we will vote to confirm once in a generation legal challenge, a jurist with outstanding credentials and lifetime of experience. and first ever african-american woman to serve as justice of the supreme court. judge ketanji brown jackson. judge jackson's confirmation will be a glass shattering achievement for america. consider this moment in history when the supreme court first met in this building in february of 1801, there were 1 million

slaves in this nation, a nation of 5 million people, this very building was built with the labor of enslaved people. at the time the court met, either black americans nor white women had a constitutionally guaranteed right to vote. women had no place in the supreme court chamber black women were only enter to clean it in the dark of night. we know what followed. america's battle in slavery so a buddy civil war, decades of efforts to break down racial barriers and efforts continue to this day. i've struggled to enfranchise and empower women did not end with the 19th amendment 102 years ago, it continues to this day as well we strive to give

our daughters the same opportunities we give our sons. this confirmation of the first black woman to the supreme court honors history cuts company for an honors the struggles of the past month the men and women who waged it. this confirmation draws america one step closer, one step to healing our nation. one step closer to a more perfect union. nearly a century after our founding, we guarantee the rights of citizenship to every american including for the first time, those born into product with ratification of the 14th amendment. it took a long century later for us to expand liberty again. we in short that our government can protect the right to vote, the most fundamental of rights with the passage of voting rights act in 1967. one victory for progress beget the next. two years after the voting rights act we confirm the first black american to serve on the

supreme court, justice marshall. i'd like to remind you that was 50 years ago. with the passage of that time, we are beginning to write another chapter in our nation's quest for equal justice under the law. that begins with three letters. kate bj. with judge ketanji brown jackson's confirmation to the highest court in the land, we not only making history, we are carrying on the great american tradition elevating one of our nations best and brightest legal minds to honor position of service. there's no one more deserving of this high honor as we've learned over the past month, she's the best of us. she's devoted her life to serving our country. she's done so at every level of the federal judiciary and every turn she's distinguished

herself. when i hear critics say she's soft on crime, i wonder how they explain that she was endorsed by the largest law enforcement agency organization in america, eternal order of police as well as international chiefs of police as well as army of federal prosecutors who have appeared in her courts. she is dedicated to protecting judicial independence, to advancing freedom of liberty, deciding every case she says from a neutral posture, that's exactly what you'll find in evaluating ten years of service on the bench. i hear senator succumb to the floor and say there's one opinion i disagree with. for goodness sakes, she's issued almost 600 written opinions in ten years on the bench in the district court. she's been reversed a small percentage of the time. her work speaks for itself.

when you evaluate it, you'll find her thoughtful and evenhanded. the american people saw during last months hearing what judge jackson has the right judicial temperament. calm, collected and answered every question even when the questions were hostile and confrontational. she answered dignity and grace and stood by for more than 24 hours of questioning. she's proven consensus builder, she's been confirmed by the senate on the bipartisan basis more than three times. three times i should say. soon we hope she will be confirmed again by a bipartisan majority. she's earned support from leaders across the political ideological spectrum, civil rights leaders, leaders of law enforcement, former federal judges appointed by democrat publicans. all of them lined up probably to endorse. perhaps most importantly, she will help instruct the law works for the people the people

understand workings of the court. for many americans, what happens in the courtroom can be cold and impersonal. judge jackson made a habit of making it real. she looks people in the eye, walks them through her decision-making with patients and empathy and reaches every one of her decisions by following the facts and law wherever they lead. she said her opinions can run long, that's by design because she wants america to rest assured whether she writes in the majority of descent, they don't where she stands on the most important issues. serving as chair of the senate judiciary committee during judge jackson's confirmation, it's been one of the highest honors of my experience. our to give special thanks to the man before me, chuck grassley of iowa. his friendship and fairness have guided our relationship throughout this historic

process. in the weeks since president biden announced her nomination judge jackson has lifted the spirit of countless americans inspiring a new generation of aspiring public servants. millions of americans see themselves in judge jackson, black americans, members of law enforcement families, working moms, public high school graduates like the panthers in florida. everywhere i've gone the last few weeks when i go home from visiting law schools and bring to the grocery store, i've been approached by people following this nomination closely. they tell me how deeply impressed they are with judge jackson even under fire from critics. hannah is one of those people, a law student in illinois, a city on the shores of lake michigan. in a letter to my office, hannah wrote and i quote her insane, if you can see it, you can beget. i'm excited to see america's

first black female justice. reverend krista, a baptist minister in the city of chicago comes from a long line of baptist ministers, she calls them the civil rights baby, the year before lbj signed the civil rights act. ricky jones is also from chicago working for civil rights nearly 60 years since she was a teen. late last month, reverend and missus jones with four other people drove 11 hours from chicago to attend an hour of judge jackson's hearing. reverend said she was moved by the judges courage, grace, integrity and wisdom. she imagined what it will be like years from now to tell her future grandchildren what it was like to be in that room for the historic moment. ricky jones said she'd never even expected to hear about a black woman being nominated to the supreme court let alone be in the room for her hearing. she said as she watched judge

jackson, felt the fulfillment of everything i've worked for in my whole life. she thought of all the strong black women who came before her and make the movement possible. harriet tubman, ida b wells and my personal late friend, reverend billy farrell, a black woman minister from chicago who worked alongside doctor martin luther king. this was about them, too, she said. this moment is possible because of judge jackson and who she is, her qualifications, her integrity, her record of excellence. she's earned her seat on the supreme court. that's why it's so unfortunate several republicans on the judiciary committee did not approach judge jackson's hearing with that same level of fairness and respect as their colleagues. thankfully, thankfully there are members of the senate willing to rise above the partisan, i want

to commend senator susan collins of maine, senator lisa murkowski of alaska and senator mitt romney of utah for their political courage and willingness to support singularly qualified historic nominee to the supreme court. when senator ronnie announced support for judge jackson's confirmation, i couldn't help but remember his father, the late george romney who served as governor of michigan in the 1960s during the height of the civil rights movement. governor george romney knew a thing or two about political courage. as a proud republican governor in 1963, he marched alongside naacp detroit president, i returned in support of civil rights. that same year when doctor martin luther king organized a mark in detroit, governor george romney declared day freedom date in michigan. mitt romney, you are your father's son. this week marks 54 years shots rang out in memphis tennessee

claiming the life of doctor martin luther king. an american who spoke with clarity more than nearly any other in our history. the night before he died, he spoke at a rally in support of the city striking sanitation workers. there was tension in the air. the moment he stepped in memphis, he received a barrage of death threats and isaac doctor king spoke to the crowd at the temple, death was on his mind. he said like anybody, i'd like to live a long life, longevity has its place but are not concerned about that now, i just want to do god's will and he has allowed me to go up to the mountain. his next words proved prophetic. doctor king says i've looked over and i've seen the promised land. i may not get there with you that i want you to know tonight we as a people will get to the promised land. ricky jones said she thought

about doctor king's prophecy when she realized the judiciary committee was voting on judge jackson's nomination on the anniversary of doctor king's death. it felt like a prophecy come to pass. doctor king didn't make it to the promised land but judge jackson's extension to the supreme court brings us closer to that place. i'd like to close with one last personal plea to my senate colleagues. i hope you will think about this. in the years to come from a long after we've left the senate, one of our grandchildren may ask where we were this historic day, april 7, 2022 when america broke down what seemed like impossible racial barrier and voted first african american woman to serve on our highest court. i will be proud to say i was on the senate floor standing at my desk casting my vote pride for the next associate justice of the supreme court of the united

states, justice ketanji brown jackson. i hope my colleagues will join me in sharing this historic moment and i yield the floor. >> i ask we suspend the court. i listened to the republican leader speaking about the supreme court nominee, judge ketanji brown jackson coming before the senate today or tomorrow, we hope for our confirmation --

he insisted the radical left would not call the shots --

>> please. >> the senator will commence. >> users of the radical left would not call shots on his watch. when it came to one of the most consequential decisions a president can make from a lifetime appointment to our highest court, the biden administration let the radicals run the show. with election democrat power, before i left got the reckless inflationary spending they wanted from the far left has gone the insecure border they wanted today the far left get the supreme court justice they wanted. activists who demand partisan court packing and the justices and our constitution described as trash, made up their minds from the start of this

administration, they should arise, they wanted one nominee and one nominee only, judge jackson. they spent dark money to promote this person specifically, they pushed her for the d.c. circuit and badgered justice breyer to quit in february wanted the groups announced judge jackson would be the nominee before president biden did make that announcement. think about that for a moment. the senate examined judge jackson's qualifications with seriousness and figure and lifetime appointment deserves. i like when the parties positions were reversed, the country was not subjected to uncorroborated smear campaigns, committee boycotts, sons with

cardboard cutouts or mobs chasing senators around the capitol. now a few of our democratic colleagues have decided in advance -- the presiding officer: we are. mr. murphy: i'd ask that we dispense with the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i'm one of the few parents of young children in the senate, but almost every one of us here is a parent. you know that one of the most spectacular things your kid can do is to write you a letter. sometimes, frankly most of the times when i've gotten a letter is because my kid wants to protest something i've done. i've gotten a few of those where my kids are so upset about a rule or decision we've made as parents that they sit down and they catalog their grievances on paper. maybe if you're lucky, you get a nice letter. my in-laws have one still

plastered on their wall from their youngest daughter who wrote them a nice list when she was young about the things she appreciated. but those dear mommy or dear daddy letters, that's one of the rare joys of parenthood. on march 6, 2018, patricia verbeka woke to find one of those letters left for her left by her child eric. it was laying on the pillows of his bed. she picked it up and she red it to herself. dear mommy, her child wrote, maybe her eyes twinkled thinking of what sweet or funny thoughts might come next. but this is what the letter saiy to do this to you, but i have killed myself by jumping off the top floor, the 12th floor of

your building at the nearest stair exit to the elevators on that floor. i felt i could no longer live my life as a lie, living as a boy instead of the girl i know i could become. i'm sorry i lied to you. i was losing hope in the world and could not see my way out of the wrong body, and i decided it was time for my life to end. as you might imagine, patricia didn't get beyond that first line. upon reading it, she dropped the letter and she ran straight to her balcony and below she saw the vague outline of a body and police officers surrounding it. i follow president trump's family members on social media. i do it because i know how

influential they are. i know how many americans, good, decent americans admire them and listen to what they say. and lately the posts from trump's family members have just been of one theme -- america should fear transgender children. the trump family and their network of supporters and sycophants have decided that eric verbrek and other kids like them are the number-one problem facing america today. and over the past year this crowd has orchestrated a relentless and unceasing campaign to marginalize, demonize and bully kids whose gender identity is different from their biological sex. mr. president, this year alone

republican state legislators across the country have introduced 150 bills to deny rights to transgender americans. today the alabama legislature introduced legislation that is fast-tracked, from what i understand to become law that makes it a felony -- a felony for a doctor to provide health care to a transgender child. in texas, the governor directed his child welfare agency to investigate parents like patricia who are simply determined to support their children if they help them secure the gender-affirming treatment that they need, criminalizing parents of transgender children is just around the corner in some states. in congress, trump's allies spent more time talking about transgender kids than they spend time talking about health care or taxes or education. congresswoman marjorie taylor green, perhaps trump's best

ally in the house had a sign outside her office calling the experience of trans people a fiction just to bully her hallway neighbor, representative marie newman, who has a transgender daughter. and in the supreme court hearings here last month, at least one senator used their time on the national stage to suggest that the entire idea of being transgender is a left-wing hoax. all across america republicans -- not all republicans, but the trump wing of the republican party, has declared a war against transgender kids. and these children have noticed. a recent survey of transer -- transgender youth, half of them,

52% contemplated suicide over the last year. think about that for a second, colleagues. of all the children transgender come to the conclusion at some point in their young lives that they would be better off dead than live in a world that believes they are threats to be marginalized or expunged. that's a national crisis and we need to talk honestly and candidly about what led us to this moment. we need to start this conversation that is long overdue. this die blog transgender kids -- this dialogue about transgender kid isn't new. now there is space between parents and kids to be open about who they truly are. we are all born with a

biological sex and controlled context of what a man should be and what a man should act like and what a woman should be and what a woman should act like, they sorted human beings into professional profiles based on that gender. but there are many of us, and this is the case of human history, who don't associate with the gender that biological chance ascribed us. there are people who are assigned male at birth who feel in their bones they are female. that's what eric felt and knew. there are people assigned female at birth but they just know they're male. and there's nothing wrong with that. that process of figuring out which gender you identify with, it poses no threat to anyone,

but, mr. president, we do have to acknowledge how hard it is given those centuries of gender identities and stereotypes to understand what a kid like eric was going through. for americans, for instance, were born a male and feel like a male and surrounded by associate and friends and they -- identity -- identify that. a girl becoming a boy or a boy becoming a girl can be difficult to understand. but i also know this discomfort will pass as more americans learn what i've learned. transgender and nonbinary children aren't any different than any other kids. you might not know a transgender

or nonbinary kid, but trust me, you do. you know what these kids are like because they are no different than any other children. my son has trabs gender and nonbinary friends. he has nontransgender friends. but when they're all sitting around our kitchen after school, there's no difference between them in terms of how they act, how they talk, what they like, what they don't like. they are kids. they are just kids. and so here's my message to the adults with power who have decided to spend their days bullying these kids. stop it. grow up. so you're not ready to accept transgender people, fine.

i hope you come around some day, but these kids threaten no one. they are hurting no one. and while there are important conversations we need to have about how we include transgender kids fully in sports, i could walk into a room of 1,000 people and have them say who lost a sporting ee stroant a transgendered -- event to a transgendered girl, not one raises their hand. trump and marjorie taylor greene have made bullying kids their top priority. it's their top priority because they know that hate and fear of something that people don't understand has a way of selling to some people. there is always going to be a constituency in america that will listen to an argument why

black people, or muslims or gay people or transgender people are ruining america. it's not true. it's never been true. demagogues and their movements tend not to have actual ideas, things they are for. demagogues normally just focus on what they hate. let me say it again. half of all transgender children in this country have thought to themselves, at some point that they would be better off dead than live in a world where so many people fear them. that is heartbreaking to know that we're doing that to these kids. being a teenager today, i know, i have one, with the social media and the pandemic, it is hard enough, but imagine being a teenager who wakes up every day knowing they aren't the gender they were assigned by biology at

birth. imagine keeping that secret for years, worried about what your parents or friends might say. imagine the anguish of a 12-year-old or 14-year-old awake in bed for hours trying to process that alone with no help. imagine the courage it takes nor that kid to have that first conversation with a parent or friend and layer on top of that some of the most powerful people in the world deciding to use their power, not to cure disease or end poverty or hunger, but instead to use their power to target those very scared desperate kids and to use their powers to harass and bully and shame them. imagine how small, how insecure, how weak a person must be to have all that power and to use it to bully children.

seth walsh, who was gay, not transgender, but his experience was not much different than eric's. students at his school were systemic in their -- systematic in terms of targeting him, they kicked him down the stairs, screamed at him, called him names. they no doubt took inspiration from adults who paved the way to endorse this kind of hateful behavior. one day after one of these incidents a frightened seth called his mom and he said, mom, you have to come get me right now. his mom could feel -- hear the fear in his voice and so he grabbed seth's little brother, they got in the car and rushed to pick him up. his mom was so supportive that afternoon they sat and they talked. seth took a shower to calm

himself down and afterward he asked his mom for pa pen and told her -- for a pen and told her he was going to go outside and play with the dogs. his mother went outside to continue this conversation with her son, but it was too late. seth had hung himself from a tree. the pen he asked for was for the suicide note. i tell thank you these stories because they are consequences of adults' behavior. donald trump and marjorie taylor green, their hateful words and the misery that nonbinary and transgender kids going through today, i'm also here to tell you trump and taylor green, others like them, they are not

majority. i want to make sure i finish by sending a message to transgender children and adults, that these hateful people, this movement that is growing out there to try to target you, it's not going to win. we are going to build a community of love and protection for you. no matter how bad things may seem right now, they're going to get better. the world is going to get kinder. adults are going to learn their lessons. and if you don't have it now, as you are struggling with your identity, you will find a support structure that will nurture and support you. it's out there for you. you should be who you are. don't feel like you need to hide your true self just because of

these idiot adults who feel bigby bullying people -- big by bullying people who are different from them. be who you are and know that there are a whole lot of us who are going to work our tails off to support you, love you, and to make sure that you get a chance to thrive. because in the long run, the bullies never win. they never do. i yield the floor.

mr. murphy: mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: mr. president, i would first ask unanimous consent that the appointment at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the injunction of secrecy be removed from the following treaty transmitted to the senate on april 7, 2022, by the president of the united states, the extradition treaty with the republic of albania. i ask that the treaty be considered read as the first time, referred with accompanying papers with the committee on foreign relations and the president's letter be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the senate consider the following nominations en bloc, calendar numbers 646, 790, 863, 864, that the motions to

reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, the question occurs on the nominations en bloc. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. murphy: mr. president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate with the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. murphy: i ask that the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to committee, conferences or interparliamentary conferences

by conference of the two houses or order of the senate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i ask that the senate immediately proceed to calendar number 304 s. 2827. the clerk: s. 2687, a bill to provide the inspector general of the department of veterans' affairs testimonial authority. the presiding officer: is there toks to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i'd ask unanimous consent that the tester substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i know of no further debate on the bill, as amended. the presiding officer: is there further debate? if not, the question is on passage of the bill, as amended. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill, as amended, is pass. mr. murphy: i would ask that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection u. mr. murphy: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the veterans' affairs committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 1875 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 1875, a bill to amend title 38, united states code to provide a deadline of 180 days for the filing of claims for payments to veterans and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the round substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, the bill as, as amended,ed be considered read a third time and and pass and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed

to the consideration of calendar number 323, senate resolution 053. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 503 expressing the sense of the senate that the government of the people's republic of china should immediately guarantee the safety and freedom of tennis star peng shuai. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment to be agreed to. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. murphy: i know of no further debate, mr. president, on the resolution, as amended. the presiding officer: is there further debate? if not, all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolution, as amended, is agreed to. mr. murphy: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment to the preamble be agreed to, the preamble, as amended, be agreed

to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: mr. president, i'd ask unanimous consent that the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 3823 and that the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 38, if a bail to amend title 11, united states code to modify the eligibility requirements for a debtor under chapter 13 and for other pups. -- other purposes. the presiding officer: there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i would ask now unanimous consent that the grassley substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i would ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 3417, s. 3785. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number

3417 is s. 3785, a bill to to eliminate the restriction on veterans concurrently serving in the offices of administrator and deputy administrator of the federal aviation administration. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 0470 introduced earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 4070, a bill to designate the national air grant fellowship program as the samuel rose air grant fellowship program. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i would ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion

to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i'd now ask the chair to lay before the senate the message to accompany s. 658. the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate the following message from the house. the clerk: resolve that the bill from the senate entitled an act to authorize the secretary of homeland security to work with cybersecurity consortia for training ander to other purposes do pass with an amendment of. mr. murphy: i would move to concur in the house amendment and ask that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. murphy: i would now ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 592 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 592 designating april 6, 2022 as national assistive technology

awareness day. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. murphy: i would ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i would now ask unanimous consent that at senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 593 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 593, relating to the death of kinester hodges, jr., former senator for the state of arkansas. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: i now ask unanimous consent that the committee on armed services be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. is reserve 533.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 533 celebrating the centennial of navy aircraft carriers. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate -- the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed. mr. murphy: i would ask unanimous consent now that the resolution be agreed to, the kaine amendment to the preamble be agreed, the preamble, as amended, be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. murphy: mr. president, i would ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc --

calendar number 776, 765, 766, 767 and 760. the senate vote on the nominations en bloc without with no intervening action or debate, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, any statemented related to the nominations be printed in the record, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's action and that the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the question is on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor, say aye. those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. murphy: finally, i would ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it are ajourney to then convene for pro forma sessions only with no business being conducted on the following dates and times and -- following each pro forma serks session, the senate adjourn until the

next pro forma session. those dates would be monday, april 8 -- excuse me, monday, april 11 at 119:30 a.m., thursday, april 14 at 11:00 a.m., monday, april 18, at 4:00 p.m., and thursday, april 21, at 12:00 noon. i further ask that when the senate adjourns on thursday, april 21, it next convene at 3:00 p.m. monday, april, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deem expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the brainard nomination. further, that the cloture motions filed during todayst session ripen at 5:30 p.m. on monday, april 25. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. murphy: mr. president, if there is no further business to

come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the provision s. is reserve 593 following the remarks of senator cornyn. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, watching the wrap-up by our friend from connecticut and the presiding officer, i don't know anybody that could argue that the senate is incapable of getting a lot done in a short period of time, given the will. that was pretty remarkable. mr. president, nearly ten months after the senate passed bipartisan legislation to fund the chips act, we're final lay inching closer to the finish line. the house and the senate are moving forward to a formal conference process to supply the chips program with $52 billion and make other investments in our competitiveness. yesterday afternoon members of the senate and the house heard from administration officials

will how important this legislation is. commerce secretary gina raimondo spoke about the economic risks of a weak semiconductor supply chamber. i might pause here for a a minute in case people are wondering why semiconductors are so important. semiconductors are essential to run everything from your cell phone to the most advanced stealth fighters made by the united states government, the f-35, and everything in between. and during the pandemic and the mitigation efforts that we undertook with kids studying remotely on their laptops, that would not be possible, nor would the wifi connections, be possible without access to semiconductors. so these microcircuits have become absolutely essential to our way of life. over the last couple of years, manufacturers had had to halt

production of the various products that they make, shift their offerings or even lay off workers because of a shortage of these semiconductors, these microcircuit chips. now, at the micro level, this disruption is having a big impact on consumers. empty car lots, back-ordered electronics, higher prices on home appliances, but at the 30,000-foot level, the macro- level, this is terribly damaging to our national economy. the semiconductor shortage has shaved an estimated $240 billion off of our gross domestic product last year. $240 billion lost because of an inadequate access to these semiconductors, these microcircuits. based on the way that things are trending, the strain is only going to get greater. global demand for these semiconductor chips is expect --

is equitied is to increase by 56% over the next decade. if you think about it our dependency on technology is going to do nothing but get greater and greater and greater and, hence, the demand and the need for these semiconductors and the demand that will go up by 56% its estimated in the next decade. it's absolutely critical that we start investing in domestic, made-in-america semiconductors now to ensure that we have the capacity to meet that need in the future. and it's not just our economy. this has a very clear connection with our national security. not only will the chips program, as it's called, introduced originally by the senior senator from virginia, senator warner, and myself -- this program will help us pave the way for new jobs and big investments in cities all across our country.

if you want an idea, a glimpse of just what those benefits would look like, my state is an example of one place that will change dramatically as a result of this demand for these microcircuits. last fall i joined leaders from samsung, a south korean company that has a large presence in austin, texas, and they announced a $17 billion investment in a new chip fab -- that's what the manufacturing facilities are called, a fab, fabrication unit -- in taylor, texas, which is just outside of austin. this facility is expected to directly create 2,000 high-tech jobs as well as thousands of related jobs once its operational. and each of these fabrication manufacturing facilities will create a whole ecosystem of suppliers that will grow up around it. so the $17 billion spent by

samsung for just this one fabrication facility will be multiplied by many times in terms of the economic benefits and the jobs created. this is great news, not just for my state -- for texas -- but also for the national economy and for our global competitiveness. our friends and allies are going to need a reliable chip supply too and i hope we can soon send advanced semiconductors made in america to countries around the world. once this chips program is funded, i expect more announcements like the one i mentioned from samsung to follow both in texas and other states across the country. we've already seen taiwan semiconductor in the process of building a new fab or manufacturing facility in arizona. you've seen new investments announced by intel in ohio along with the one in, by samsung in texas.

and i believe there are more to come. this legislation would open up about $3 billion for each new or expanded semiconductor fabrication facility, providing a huge incentive for companies to make this level of investment right here in america. the potential economic benefits speak for themselves, but the biggest reason to pass this legislation is to protect our national security. chips are critical components of far more than just the cell phones and washing machines i mentioned. advanced fighters, quantum computers, missile defense systems, you name it, 5g, all of those rely on semiconductors. a single rocket interceptor like the one used in iron dome in israel knocking down rockets coming from gaza, each of those interceptors alone uses 750 of

these microcircuits. and overreliance on other countries to produce these key components of our most vital defenses is a huge, huge risk. yesterday, in addition to secretary raimondo, we heard from deputy defense secretary kathleen hicks, who talked about the immense national security risk that the failure to produce these most advanced semiconductors in america has opened up. just to be clear, we produce zero of these most advanced semiconductors that we depend upon for the most complex technology, including our national security. our military superiority really hinges on state-of-the-art technology. that's the one thing that we do better than any other country in the world. if we can't produce these products because of a lack of chips, well, the risk is obvious. and when you look at who is producing the lion's share of the world's chips, you can see

the danger to which we are very clearly exposed. i blame covid for exposing these vulnerable supply chains whether p.p.e. or chips. now it's as plain as the nose on your face that we need to do something about it. so here are the facts -- the vast majority of semiconductors are made in asia, with 63% of the most advanced semiconductors in the world made in one place, and that's taiwan. even more concerning is the 92% of the world's most advanced semiconductors that come, as i said, from asia. but if that supply chain both from asia and taiwan, in particular, were cut off, it would lead to disastrous consequences. unfortunately this prospect is not some far-fetched conspiracy

theory. xi jinping made no secret of his desire to invade and unify taiwan with the people's republic of china, even saying he wants to be ready to do so by the year 2027, five years from now. we can't depend on his stated timetable because he could do it any time he wanted to start that invasion and jeopardize our access to these chips. we don't want to be in a position, we can't be in a position where the belligerence of one nation impacts our most critical supply chains. the war in ukraine has made that clear. put simply, we need to bolster domestic semiconductor manufacturing, and we have not a moment to waste. chip making is a very big deven. a number of our colleagues and i traveled to taiwan a few months back to taiwan semiconductor's facility there where they make

the world's leading-edge semiconductors. it's a big operation and it's highly automated and very complex and expensive. in order to build one chip, you need very expensive, highly advanced equipment, and you need skilled workers, and you need a lot of time. it can take literally months to build a single chip, and that's assuming you have the facility and the equipment ready to go. so it's clear in light of this vulnerability that we have in this essential supply chain that we have squandered enough time already. after the senate passed our version of this legislation, it took eight months to get it back from the house of representatives. even then, their bill fell short in nearly every regard. rather than mirror the bipartisan process here in the senate, the democrats in the house negotiated a bill just among their fellow democrats. in other words, it was a

partisan bill. that type of legislating does not lead to good and sustainable results here in congress. the house-passed bill sends a whopping $8 billion to a u.n. climate slush fund which has provided more than $100 million to china. this entire purpose of this effort to counter threats from china, not to bolster china's economy with taxpayer dollars. so it defies all logic to send billions of dollars to an unaccountable fund that could end up helping our chief competitor, the people's republic of china. the house competes act also added provisions related to immigration, from creating new types of visas to removing green card caps. i'm fine with having a discussion and debate and votes on immigration issues, but they do not belong in this legislation, certainly not in a partisan fashion. in true fashion, our colleagues

in the house who are in the majority party added a range of handouts to their political base, especially organized labor, for massive slush funds to burdensome new labor requirements, the unions won big in this bill. as i said, unfortunately the house decided to undertake this effort in a purely partisan fashion, which leaves us with very little common ground to work with. i'm frustrated, and i know that i'm not the only one. there are democratic senators who have joined me in expressing their frustration over how slow it takes to get this process moving. but it's more important to get it done right away so we can get the job done as thoroughly as necessary. well, there's broad bipartisan

support for this effort. i have a hard time explaining to my friends and constituents that when the white house is in favor of something, when democrats are in favor of something, republicans are in favor of something, the house is in favor of it and the senate is in favor of it, we still can't seem to get it done. but i hope that we will take advantage of this opportunity now that conferees have been appointed by the house and the white house to get the conference committee to work, to do our job, and to get this bill on the president's desk as soon as we can. i fully expect the final version to look very much like the bipartisan bill that passed the senate rather than the partisan bill that came from the house. i expressed to the senator from washington, senator cantwell, that i hope we can work efficiently and reach a final agreement as soon as possible. it's critical that we get a strong bill to the president's desk and finally back this chips

program with funding and protect ourselves from this really almost existential economic threat and threat to our national security. the bill has undergone a number of name changes over the years. it started out as the endless frontier act. then it became the u.s. innovation and competition act. then the house called it the america competes act. and then we gave it a new name -- the made in america act. but now we have a new name, and hopefully the final name called the bipartisan innovation act. i hope we can work together to craft a truly good bill that lives up to that title -- the bipartisan innovation act -- and delivers economic and national security benefits for all of the american people. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order and pursuant to senate res. 593, the senate

stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on april 25, 2022, and do sos -- the presiding officer: under the previous order and pursuant to s. res. 593, the senate stands adjourned until 11:30 a.m. on april 11, 2022, and does so as a further mark of respect to the late canister hodges, former

late canister hodges, former