cook to serve on the federal reserve board of governors. if approved she would be the first black woman to have a seat on the fed. and tomorrow, senators will vote on whether to begin debate on abortion access bill and now live to the floor of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. savior, lead us today as a shepherd guides sheep. direct our lives. inspire our hearts. may the talents here on capitol hill help bring unity and healing to our nation and world.

lord, strengthen our lawmakers as they deal with unsolved problems and urgent global needs. prepare them for the challenges yet to come. make our senators eager to lift burdens and ready to respond in service to humanity. help us all to feel a bit of the responsibility for the challenges that hang heavy over our nation and world. we pray in your powerful name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag.

i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., may 10, 2022. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael g. warnock, a senator from the state of georgia to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved.

>> equipment that can run every you to plant the a crop andt and other imports. it's important we do everything we can in terms of the department of agriculture and as well as in the energy patch to address these issues. i know you're working hard on it and we need to continue to do that. of course we're making significant investments here in this appropriations committee to make sure you're able to do that on behalf of our farmers.

just in recent years in fiscal 22 usda programs actually received an increase of 6.2% over fy '21 levels. and that included funding increase of 6.5% for research which has been amazing in terms of what is done for our farmers and ranchers and our ability to raise crops and animals across this nation. i seen in my own state. i know you're seen in yours. it's truly remarkable also the resources are incredibly important to help get our farmers through drought, through floods, through tough weather. top prices in some cases trade agreements that are not fair. fha has a major role to play in keeping our farmers going. i want to be sure that our commitment to support rural america is a strong as ever. i know you share that.

i know you've got some ideas on how did that. we will talk about those this morning. also i want to make sure the funding that we have put in place for things like the livestock emergency relief program, with plus for our farmers, that those funds get out to our farmers. you and i talked about that. we'll talk about it this morning. i know you're coming up with some ideas to expedite that. i appreciate that and look forward to working with you on it. thanks again for being a jury. appreciate it very much. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you. we are going to now begin rounds of five-minute questions, and i will begin. real america has historically lagged behind urban regions in educational attainment, poverty levels and overall well-being.

and data shows rural america has recovered from the great recession at a slower pace than urban america. which also has major implications for rural america's ability to adapt to the current economic and deflationary trends. so i was excited to see usda formally launch the real partnership network which would provide find initial funding for in the fiscal year 2022 appropriations act. so can you provide an update on how the rule partners network is being implemented and how it will target funding to distressed communities? additionally, talk about the fiscal year '23 budget proposal of 39 million for this initiative and what additional resources will these funds provide. and lastly, it's a three-part

question, what agencies at usda and other departments play a role in implementation of this initiative? >> madam chair this is i think a pretty significant question your past. the rural partnership network is really designed to provide intensive care and direction and focus on communities that have been persistently poor. communities that have had a poverty rate of an excess of 20% for more than 20 or 30 years. they require folks on the ground living, working, raising their own families in these communities, and helping community leaders and organizations access the variety of programs that are available. we started this in five states, georgia, kentucky, mississippi, new mexico and arizona. we have targeted communities within each of those five states where we are in process of hiring staff today who actually live in communities within those states that we have selected

through a process of data process, data-driven process. those individuals will begin to identify programs and challenges and projects that folks are interested in, and then they will work collaboratively with 13 federal agencies and three commissions who will have what are called real desk officers in each of those agencies. so this is transportation, hhs, education, et cetera. those world desk officers will be responsible for working collaboratively with the folks on the ground in the five states in those communities to identify the programs and to short-circuit if you will the process for applying for successfully resources. our belief is that by providing this intensive care and by providing and all of government approach we will be in a position to provide a meaningful progress that folks will be able to see in that they will actually learn if you will how to participate in federal programs and they will see a

federal government that is working elaborately with the state and local governments to make life better. our goal and hope is we are able to expand the program significantly which is why we have asked for an additional $39 million. this isn't going to essentially pay for individuals will be living in those communities and working those committees as for state directors overseeing those operations. it will also provide additional training. we know there's a significant amount of training that's required for community leaders to understand the processes they have to go through in applying for various grants. these resources will allow us to expand the program. we have designated additional five states hopefully to be able to select by the end of this year this fiscal year and with his additional resources we would be able to significantly expand this effort across the united states in places where he just has that poverty that just hasn't gone away. >> thank you.

have you identify these five additional states or are you still in a process of that data collection effort? >> we have identified those five additional states and i'm sorry, i know a few of them but i can't -- >> you can follow up. >> i think wisconsin happens to be one of them. north carolina happens to be one of them. and i can't -- i'm sorry i can't remember the others. >> please follow up afterwards. that's totally fine. next, i'm going to recognize senator hoeven for your questions, first round of questions. >> thank you, madam chairman. mr. secretary, and the end of september we authorize funding both for whip+ and for livestock assistance. that was about $10 billion to 750 million for what referred to as the livestock relief program and then 10.2 -- 9.23 billion is

actually available for whip+. we have talked about both, not only with you but with zach. we appreciate the working relationship. the emergency livestock relief assistance is out there for the livestock producers, about 560 million of the remaining part i know you're working on, we will work with you on that. we appreciate that. that's underway by what ask you about whip+. where are we with whip+ and getting it out to our farmers? >> appreciate reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the tiled of the -- the title of the bill for a second time. the clerk: s. 4164, a bill to prohibit the expenditure of federal funds for the establishment or operation of the disinformation governance board in the department of homeland security. mr. schumer: in order to place the bill on the calendar understand the provisions of -- under the provisions of rule 14, i would objective to further proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will

now be placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: thank you. so, mr. president, tomorrow, the united states senate will vote to protect one of the most fundamental freedoms that women have in this country, the freedom to choose whether or not to have an abortion. few decisions are more personal. few decisions are more private than decisions women make regarding their own pregnancies. few should be more out of bounds to elected politicians and to the whims of government. but sadly, few rights are in as much peril right now as the fundamental right to choose. if this abominable decision becomes law, women will lose their freedom in so many ways. a giant step backward in the united states, where expanding freedom has always been our goal and our aspiration. tomorrow's vote will be one of the most important votes we take in this chamber in decades, because for the first time in 50

years a conservative majority, an extreme conservative majority, on the supreme court is on the brink of declaring that women do not have the right to an abortion, they do not have the right to control their own bodies, they do not have the right to health care in the ways that they believe they need. if that happens, tens of millions of women will see their freedoms contract in the blink of an eye. our children will grow up in a world where they have fewer rights than their parents and grandparents had. america will take a painful and damaging step backward. the american people will be watching the senate closely tomorrow, and they will not forget how their elected senators voted. i ask my colleagues to think carefully about their vote, to grapple with the impact of a world without roe, because all of us will have to answer for

this vote for the rest of our time in public office. now, it's worth saying over and over again -- last week's draft decision didn't come out of nowhere. it didn't materialize in a vacuum. on the contrary. it is precisely the outcome that extreme republicans have been working towards for years. leader mcconnell himself has admitted that this was their plan all along. they have worked for years to confirm radical judges, plucked right out of the federalist society playbook, with the express goal to pick away at roe v. wade. that's their quote. the radicals on the hard right have passed wave after wave of draconian restrictions at the state level, making abortion nearly impossible to access. win of those -- one of those laws is about to be upheld by the supreme court of the united states. and these radicals have taken on what were once outlandish ideas,

like prison time for women and doctors, and abortion bans without exception for rape and incest, and brought them to the forefront of ideas that were radical and out of hand, they're now talking about freely. and should roe ultimately be overturned, many of us fear it would be just the start. over the weekend, leader mcconnell acknowledged where this is ultimately going. without roe, proposals for a nationwide ban on abortions are now possible, if republicans retake the senate. that's what leader mcconnell said this weekend. that's right, a national ban on abortion. not very long ago, the idea seemed to be long -- to belong on the extreme of the extremes. now the republican leader himself acknowledges this is on the table. just a glaring indication of how radicalized the republican party

has become in recent decades, as the maiga wing -- the maga wing has all but completed its cancerous takeover. all the times that republicans disguised their hostility to roe as a matter of states' rights have been exposed for what they are, hypocrisy, a smoke screen hiding the real objective. it's one of the oldest most sincere arguments rblesd have used for decades -- republicans have used for decades. for maga republicans it has never been about states' rights. it's all been about getting rid of abortion altogether. the hypocrisies run keeper -- deerp still. it's worth noting that the very same party that spent years opposing health care, by saying quote, the american people want health care decisions left up to families and doctors, that's what they said as they opposed a.c.a. year after year, they said again the american people want health care decisions left up to their families and doctors when it came to a.c.a., are now

the very same radicals telling americans no, it's not up to your family and your doctor. it's your body, our choice. the radical right's choice. a choice of five men on the supreme court who are extreme. and now, many on the other side can't even bring themselves to own the horrors they've unleashed. they're trying to convince people they are not extreme, but the truth is that the maga wing of the republican party is running the show, and their actions prove how extreme they are. senate republicans have spent a full week trying to change the subject to anything but roe, because they know how toxic this issue has become for them. the republican leader tried to say in vain that the real story of the draft decision was not the end of roe, but the source of the leak draft? tell that to 100 million americans who will lose their most personal of rights. i'm sure they don't care as much about the leaked draft as about

how they can control their own bodies. the chair of the republican campaign arm, senator scott, released laughable talking points, saying republicans, of course, don't want to imprison doctors. even though his allies, his fellow maga republicans are pushing for exactly that at the state level. it would be -- it would all be farcical if it wasn't so bone chilling, and the consequences were not so serious. senate republicans can try and run from their role in securing roe's extinction, but sooner or later the truth wins out. without the actions they have taken for years, reproductive rights wouldn't be staring straight into a doomsday scenario. so tomorrow the vote to protect abortion rights will shine like a flood light on every mcof this -- every member of this chamber. republicans who pretended

disingenuously as if this moment couldn't possibly happen will have to answer to the women of america whose rights are about to be turned back by decades. tomorrow there will be no more hiding. there will be no more distracting, no more obfuscating, where every member in this chamber stands. senate republicans will face a choice -- either vote to protect the rights of women to exercise freedom over their own bodies or stand with the supreme court as 50 years of women's rights are reduced to rubble before our very eyes. the vote tomorrow will tell. now, on ukraine, the house later today, the house is set to vote on nearly $40 billion in emergency aid to help ukraine. as the ukrainians continue to fight back, quite successfully, against russian aggression. this is a large package, but the

need is great and time is of the essence. after the house passes the legislation, it is my intention for the senate to act on it as soon as we can. the president has called on both chambers of congress to act quickly on the ukrainian aid package, so act quickly we must. the ukrainian ambassador will be visiting us at our caucus lunch this afternoon to discuss the upcoming package. and she will let us know how important it is to quickly approve it. quickly approving this emergency funding is essential to helping the people of ukraine in their fight against the vicious putin. it will mean more funding to provide javelins, stingers, howitzers, switchblade unmanned aerial munitions, more food and supplies and shelter for the millions of ukrainian refugees who are in the midst of the largest refugee crisis since the

second world war. we have a moral obligation to stand with our friends in ukraine. the fight they are in is a struggle between democracy and authoritarianism itself. we dare not relent swift action to help our friends in need. make no mistake, the senate will move swiftly to get an emergency funding package passed and sent to the president's desk.

discovered the milk being produced by his cattle contained some of the highest levels of reported from a pfas contaminant. since that time these forever chemicals have been found in feed, in soil, in water, in crops, in livestock on farms all across maine. so this is obviously devastating for these farmers and their livelihoods and their families.

they are facing extreme financial hardship and we've learned that the usda's dairy payment program -- indemnity payment program only covers fluid milk so it does not begin to cover all of the problems for these dairy farmers in particular. in october of last year i sent you a letter and asked you to provide me with an update on what usda could do to assist these farmers. i received no response. then in march i again sent you a letter that was signed by all the members of maine's all-democratic government has managed a unique kind of economic turnaround. they took an economy that was

ready to soar, turned it around and drove it into the ground. american families are being crushed by 8.5% inflation. democrats' policies have unleashed the worst inflation in more than 40 years. last march the senate democratic leader said, i do not think the dangers of inflation are very real. at that time, the most recent inflation figure was 1.7%. inflation has more than quadrupled since leader schumer said he wasn't worried. now remember, the same democrats predicted the republicans' 2017 tax reform bill would harm the economy and hurt working people. instead, what it produced is the

best economic moment for american workers in modern history. falling unemployment, low inflation, and wages grew faster for the bottom 25% of earners than for the top. so democrats' world view has been proven absolutely wrong. but, of course, last year they put it into action anyway. democrats dumped $2 trillion on a recovering economy and paid people a bonus to stay home from work, even after vaccines were available. and the american people are hurting as a result. american workers' real average weekly earnings declined 3.6% over the last year. inflation has more than wiped out the average workers' wage gains. president biden has handed the

average american a big pay cut -- pay cut. the cost of the essentials that families need have been skyrocketing. gas prices are now the highest they have ever been in american history. ever. americans are now paying roughly $4.40 per gallon. that's up about two whole dollars from when president biden put his hand on the bible. grocery prices have shot up 10% over the past year. housing costs are up more than 6%. clothing is up nearly 7%. each category is the worst it's been since at least the early 1980's. even when the inflation rate begins to gradually slow, that does not mean all of these sky-high prices for goods and services will actually fall back down. in many cases this painful and

preventable inflation will be baked into prices going forward. these democratic price hikes will likely be american families' new normal at the checkout counter. a permanent, permanent direct result of their failed policies. now, on a different matter, this week our democratic colleagues want a second run at some controversial nominees who stalled out last month. today senate democrats will try again to confirm professor lisa cook to the federal reserve board. professor cook has no proven expertise in modern economics at all, much less fighting inflation. one of her main supposed qualifications for this position

is that she sits is on the regional fed board in chicago. the problem is, she was literally appointed to that position a few days before she was nominated for this one. professor cook is a proven partisan who has promoted left-wing conspiracy theories and called for a fellow academic to be fired because that person did not support defunding the police. the american people deserve an independent, nonpartisan inflation fighter for this important post. likewise, the federal trade commission is an important agency that gets wide latitude to oversee our private sector. the american people need its commissioners to be levelheaded experts who will put aside ideological axe grinding. the two current commissioners who were appointed by a republican president were so qualified and uncontroversial, the senate approved each of them on a voice vote. but to serve as their newest

colleague, president biden has picked a radical partisan named alvaro bedoya. he is such a poor fit that the first time leader schumer tried to shut down debate on this nomination, he lacked the votes to call it off. but democrats want this hard-core partisan confirmed very badly, society here we are once again. mr. bedoya has publicly attacked police and law enforcement and demanded that our country not enforce -- not enforce -- our immigration laws. he's called for states to essentially is nullify federal immigration law saying, quote, maryland police have no business working with i.c.e., and i any it's high time that -- and i think it's high time that state legislatures understand that they can do something about this. he has volunteered statements that align with defund the police, demanding that none of the democrats' trillions in

stimulus waste should go to provide for law enforcement. mr. bedoya's social media feeds have read like the antics -- he's embraced socialized medicine, critical race theory and cracking down on citizens' second amendment rights. he's launched political attacks on current senators and called the national republican party convention a, quote, listen to this, white supremacist rally. a white supremacistal rally, the republican national convention. the rabid partnership is not just an extracurricular activity. we know he would apply it specifically to the work of the f.t.c. he's already on the record calling for the elimination of long-standing, bipartisan f.t.c. policy statements. he supports excluding

minority-party commissioners for investigations. this nominee would not fit to neutrally oversee major economic decisions, no matter what the makeup of the senate was. but he is essentially -- an essentially foolish choice, foolish, when the american people handed this administration a 50-50 senate. i would urge my colleagues on both sides to stop this awful nomination so the president can reconsider and send us somebody suitable. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of transportation,

ann claire phillips of viver to be an administrator of the maritime administration. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

more projects across nine mississippi counties. that provision became law with the enactment of the consolidated appropriations act 2022, and i think chair baldwin and ranking member hoeven for supporting my request throughout that conference process but i along with my staff and the constituents we have great respect and don't know what we would do without nrcs and we appreciate the services that they provide.

but mr. secretary, what is the status of the watershed funding provided in the fy 20202 omnibus? and i'm looking for some feel good news that is being put to very good use. appreciate any updates that you may have asked about the funds provided by nrcs in mississippi are or will soon be to help landowners addressing floodwater in these issues that i just articulated. >> specifically the $8.4 million the nrcs folks are working with a local sponsors of the projects that were identified to basically work through the implementation plan so that process is in place. in addition the state of mississippi was the recipient of $47.8 million of additional resources under the bipartisan infrastructure law. the 500 billion allocated under

that law for watershed prevention operations, mississippi receiving $47.8 million of additional resources. so nrcs is working on a variety of projects in mississippi. my staff will be able to give you the list of the projects that were identified in the 47.8 million. we are working on, for example, a big project with madison county on a streambank erosion issue. we know that a lot of the sediment issues in mississippi are not a result of you losing your topsail. it's a result of the banks basically eroding over time creating some challenges. so i think you're going to see significant activity in this space in mississippi because of the money and resources that have been provided to the appropriations process and to the infrastructure. >> wonderful. appreciate that answer. and i've got a few seconds left. rural community across u.s. we will always be faced with these

weather-related challenges and i was pleased the fy 2023 budget request for usda included the debbie fpo funding in it as well. well. should congress provide funny to address project are watershed specific challenges through that in fy '23? how confident are you the nrcs can put those funds to good use? >> i'm confident they can as long as we continue to increase the staffing levels. i think the key is not just increasing the resources but making sure you're the step on the ground that can implement these resources in a proper way. >> thank you, madam chairman. >> thank you. senator feinstein. >> thanks very much, madam chairman. i just want to say you have a very tough job to start with. my understanding is that the west has become a real problem for fire. since 2017 wildfire has burned

10 million acres in my state, california, killed nearly 200 people and destroyed more than 32,000 homes. even as we speak i understand that large wildfires are burning in new mexico and arizona. so what do we do? the agencies have been chronically understaffed. many federal wildland fires are moved to state jobs particularly in my state because the pay is better. so mr. secretary, i want to know what you think would help most. is it that rise in pay? what is it? because we've got to hire enough people to handle what's going to happen with global warming, and that particularly goes to my state and a very concerned. >> thanks for the question. i think it is important for us to do two things, actually three

things. one, transition some of our part-time people to full-time status which would provide them additional pay and benefits, and were doing that. we're literally transitioning hundreds of firefighters. two, a new classification system for wildland firefighter. where in the process as a directed by congress and the president, we are in in the s of working with the department of interior and the office of personnel management to develop a new classification that will create a more competitive salary to scale from wildfire, fighters. then three, we are going to continue to permit the additional resources provided under the infrastructure law to provide additional paid this year that will allow us to be able to do a better job of recruiting and retaining our workforce. so those three things are in the process of being done and think you you are going to see more firefighters on the ground which is going to be absolutely necessary because we are not going to see an abatement of these wildfires for some time.

>> well, in your recently released tenure strategy to address this crisis, you indicated your focus will be in communities most at risk, and this is especially important for more rural communities in california at the wildland-urban interface. it's my understanding that your fire said map identified that many at risk communities in california are not near federal lands, which means they won't be eligible for most forest service funding from wildfire mitigatio mitigation. how is the department going to . the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, for more than seven days now, the ukrainian people have endured. and more than endured. they have fought back. they stood up to their invaders. and have achieved amazing things against a interior force, --

superior force, superior at least on paper. many fear would russia would crush ukraine in days. instead ukraine has not only withstood russian aggression but has inflicted humiliating defeats on russia. 12, 12 russian generals have reportedly been killed. russia's lost thousands of its troops as well as hundreds of tanks and scores of aircraft. one estimate from british intelligence suggests that russia may have lost more than a quarter of its ground combat strength. ukrainians successfully push russia out of the kiev suburbs, have retaken territory outside of kiev, and still, still maintain a defiant hold on the steel plant in mariupol despite being encircled by russian troops. but at the same time we recognize ukraine's successes and the fierce determination that has made them possible. it's also important to remember the devastation this war has inflicted. thousands of ukrainian civilians

have been killed. somewhere around 12 million ukrainians have fled their homes. and the list of russian atrocities gets longer every day. schools and hospitals intentionally bombed. executions and mass graves, torture, rape. the deliberate targeting of civilians. apparent war crimes. in a few short weeks russia has brought unimaginable devas devastation. the port city of mariupol once home to more than 400,000 people has been reduced to rubble. the city essentially no longer exists. across ukraine an untold number of homes and buildings have been destroyed. it will take years to rebuild or remove the imprint of russian aggression from the landscape. and some things cannot be entirely recovered. just last night russia intentionally struck civilian

centers in odessa, bombing a shopping mall in a consumer warehouse without regard for innocent human life. mr. president, the ukrainian people have displayed an incredible gallantry and resolve. they embraced this fight in the cause of their country's freedom. and they've not spent any time waiting around for anyone else to come and save them. in fact, a recent new story highlighted the fact that the ukrainians not only continue to oppose the russians, they've actually started rebuilding in places, even as the war continues to rage. but it's also important to remember that the ukrainian people nts sustain this war without military support from the united states and other free countries. the weapons and military resources we have supplied are playing a crucial role in enabling ukraine to continue standing up to russian aggression. and it's essential that we continue that support for as long as the ukrainian people need it. at the end of april the president sent congress a

request for $33 billion in emergency supplemental funding for critical security and economic assistance to ukraine. negotiations are ongoing about how we iron out a few matters in the top line numbers may change, but i hope that congress can act quickly to get ukraine the military equipment it needs as well as humanitarian support to help the million, of ukrainians who have been displaced. we also need to make sure our european partners are making similar contributions to help put president zelenskyy in the strongest possible position to bring this war to an end. it would be a tragedy for ukraine to have brought -- to have bought all this time with our help only to lose the initiative now. so i hope that we can get this funding out the door as quickly as possible and that democrats will not slow things down by attaching extraneous funding requests or unrelated policy riders. $33 billion is a substantial sum

of money. but as the news reports show ukrainian highways dotted with bombed out russian tanks attest, ukraine is putting our military aid to good use. the cost of inaction on our part of allowing vladimir putin to destroy ukraine and threaten nato would be much greater. we should not be so naive as to think nuclear power's campaign of -- of putin's campaign of soviet expansion will end with ukraine. there are rightful concerns he will seek to escalate in former soviet countries in eastern europe or further. he's hinted at a willingness to use nuclear weapons and is certainly okay with the use of chemical weapons. i hope defenders of the iran nuclear deal are making note of what nuclear power looks like in the hands of a nation with a malign agenda. we cannot allow putin to think that he can pursue his expansionist dreams on a --

unopposed and the united states and all nato members must remain committed to our shared defense and supporting ukraine and its fight for freedom. nato countries should also preserve our open door poll -- policy to nations that are seeking to contribute to the collective security of the alliance. there can never be through many allies in the quest to preserve peace and maintain a strong defense against tyranny. and we should welcome any nation that seeks to help further those goals. mr. president, currently russia's main areas of control span from east of are a keeve through previously contested parts of the donbas and now along the coast of the sea. in past crimea in an attempt to fully block ukraine's access to the black sea. russia's failed to capture kiev or break the resolve of ukrainian people. so now putin wants to close

ukraine off from the world which will harm not only ukrainians but also ukraine's trading partners that rely on ukraine's substantial agricultural capacity. ukraine is a major exporter of wheat, corn, and sunflower oil. and if ukraine's ability to produce and export these products is compromised which is already happening, we're likely to see not only price hikes but very serious food shortages as a result. the world food programme reports that an additional 47 million people around the world could be facing acute hunger if the war in ukraine continues. in a world which hunger persists and famine looms, putin's war of aggression in ukraine threatens to cause casualties far beyond ukraine's borders. which brings us back once again to the importance of supporting the ukrainian people in their fight. mr. president, as president zelenskyy said the other day in reference to the united states

and ukraine, we defend common values, democracy and freedom. we do indeed, mr. president. we do indeed. the ukrainian people are currently giving their all to secure a future of democracy and freedom in ukraine. let's continue to make it clear that they are not alone in that fight. and let's make sure that they have the tools that they need to win this war. and secure ukraine's freedom permanently. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. ms. duckworth: mr. president, my older daughter abigail named for abigail adams who urged her husband to remember the ladies is seven. she's generous, silly, and so,

so smart. she calls herself a maker kid and dreams of being an engineer or an army nurse but definitely not a helicopter pilot. my younger daughter milah just turned four. early on in the pandemic she proved she was truly her mother's daughter by starting to pull prarvegs including granning my phone, hanging up on whoever was on the line when i was trying to conduct a zoom meeting or reviewing legislation instead of playing with her. but they might not be here today if it weren't for the basic reproductive rights americans have relied on for nearly 50 years. when roe was decided in 1973, it changed the lives of so many women. it saved the lives of 14-yards who were the victims of rape or incest who otherwise would have had to turn to back alleys and back rooms. it changed the lives of women who desperately wanted to be moms but who found out that their pregnancies weren't

viable, that they'd have to go through the pain and suffering of a trauma of a full term only to stillborn at the end of nine months. and personally for me, it gave me my chance to be a mom. i never would have had my creative silly, drive my crazy yet love them infinitely two daughters if roe hadn't paved the way for women to make their own health care decisions as i was only able to get pregnant through i.v.f., a fertility process that roe lays the foundation for. because of i.v.f., i got to experience all the joys of motherhood because reproductive rights my husband and i aren't just tammy and brian. we're mommy and daddy. because of roe and the rights and laws it protects, we are a family. yet last week we learned that the supreme court could be just weeks away from overturning roe v. wade and planned parenthood v. casey, a decision that if made final would strip away

reproductive rights for millions of women forcing them to potentially live through the horrors and indignities that their grandmothers bore if they needed reproductive care. and this would just be the start. for while the antichoice movement has been working for years, decades, to get to this moment, overturning roe is not their end goal. they want a national ban op abortion, something the republican senate leader said was a possibility just last week. they want to undermine access to contraception. in some states, legislation has already been introduced that would make i.v.f. a crime. in oklahoma, one woman was even convicted of manslaughter for having a miscarriage. a miscarriage. criminalized for having a miscairng -- a miscarriage. i've had a miscarriage, and there are no words to describe what mothers feel in that moment. for me, i was overcome with the rawest, most painful emotion i'd ever experienced.

in that moment, losing my baby felt more searing than anything i'd ever felt in my entire life. yet, if the g.o.p. had its way, women may now live -- may now have to live in fear that that worst moments of their lives may also send them to prison. and if extremists get what they're seeking, doctors who perform procedures such as dilation and cutterrage to help grieving families who have lost a family might be at risk of going to jail too. doctors like the one who, after my own miscarriage, conducted the d. & c. to clear out my uterus, that allowed me to immediately continue the dream of having a baseball via i. -- having a baseball via i.v.f., my beautiful rainbow baby, miley. let's be honest. what's happening is not about protecting life. if the antichoice movement truly wanted to protect life, they'd stop trying to strip away

americans' health care. they would be putting all of their efforts into addressing the growing mat ernlt mort -- maternal crisis that has taken a number of black mothers' lives. they would support parents, like affordable child care and paid parental leave. if republicans actually cared about being pro-life they'd do something, anything, to stand up to the national rifle association. so, no, this isn't about saving lives. this isn't about looking out for families. it's about getting a slap on the back from their base and exerting even more control over women's bodies. it's about deepening divides between the haves and the have notes. it's about making it even harder to undo centuries of harm unleashed by systemic racism and economic injustice, systems under which which of color have suffered the most. look, i know that a lot of us are tired from the seemingly

endless fight to protect our most basic human rights, but we can do more. we have to do more. we must. congress it itself has the power. we have the ability to vote tomorrow to pass the women's health protection act, which would codify roe v. wade once and for all. because, let me be clear, women seeking care should not be ashamed. the people who should feel shame are those forcing these women to live through unnecessary pain and suffering. the people who should feel shame are those who claim to be pro-life, yet would let a mother die in childbirth for an unviable pregnancy, who refuse to expand medicaid, who believe guns should beeasy to get but basic health care impossible to find. these are the people who should be shamed. these are the people who have no shame. and i'd be damned if i'd let my daughters grow up in a country that gives them fewer rights than their mom had. here i am today, fighting for tomorrow that doesn't look like our yesterday, because in that

yesterday those of us with uteruses were treated as second-class citizens, and i didn't learn to fly blackhawk helicopters, go to we're for this nation, nearly lose my life fighting for the rights enshrined in the constitution i protected, only to come home and have those same rights stripped away from the next generation of girls who simply want to follow their own dreams. like i did mine. to me, it comes down to this -- women should be allowed to make their health care decisions without mitch mcconnell's voice or bret carve gnaw's face -- brett kavanaugh's face haunting them at the ob-gyn appointments. shame on those who don't dare regulate guns, but want to regulate our uteruses. i will fight with everything i've got to keep us out of those back alleys, because it is the least the women who came before us and fought for these rights deserve, and the least our own daughters need of enough with

the hypocrisy. enough with the misogyny. enough that some men in hallowed halls in d.c. arguing they know better than women in illinois, arizona, or missouri. we can, we must do better. that means providing -- proving we care about women every day of the year, not just on one sunday in may. that means codifying roe now. let's vote. i yield the floor. mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: over the last several days, the radical left has taken the debate about abortion to dangerous ends. last week, a liberal group launched an intimidation campaign against six members of the supreme court. it posted a map online with their home addresses and encouraged protestors to take their complaints straight to the justices' door steps.

no surprise, swarms of protest ors heeded their call. they showed up at some of the justices' homes this weekend. even though this plan was in the works for several days, the white house remained silent and refused to condemn this clear-cut example of doxing. it wasn't until yesterday morning, once the weekend's protests had conclude ared, that the white house press secretary said the justices should be able to do their jobs without fearing for their personal safety or the safety of their families. and that wasn't the only alarming update from the weekend. a pro-life group in wisconsin was vandalized and set on fire on sunday morning. the person or persons responsible smashed windows and attempted to use a molotov cocktail. they left graffiti on the exterior wall of the building,

that read, if abortions aren't safe, then you aren't either. threats of violence are never acceptable. it doesn't matter who's making the threat or who is on the receiving end. there's a world of difference between legitimate public discourse, protected under the first amendment to the united states constitution, and threats or acts of violence, which are not. every single person in this chamber, especially our democratic colleagues, should affirm that any demonstrations about this heeded -- heated issue cannot threaten the safety of anyone, supreme court justices, pro-life advocates, or otherwise. this past weekend's events have highlighted the need to better protects the justices and their families. they deserve the protection that, at this moment, the supreme court police are not able to provide.

last week, senator coons, the senator from delaware, and i introduced a bill to increase protection for all nine justices and their families. this basically would be the same sort of authorities given to the capitol police in protecting members of congress. the events of this weekend have underscored just how important this is. this legislation was at the request of the chief justice, who wants to ensure that members of the court and their families have the security and protection they need, especially at this tense time when justices are facing enhanced threats. we currently have two justices with school-age children, and in the coming months that number will increase to three, once judge jackson takes her place on the supreme court bench. i'm glad this bill passed the senate last night, and i hope our colleagues in the house will take it up and pass it in the

coming days. this week the issue at the center of this turmoil will be a topic of debate here in the united states senate. the democratic leader has promised that the senate will vote on a radical abortion bill that goes far, far beyond codifying roe v. wade. this radical proabortion bill that senator schumer has set for a vote on tomorrow allows for abortions at any point during a woman's pregnancy. up until the time of delivery. it does this by prohibiting states from protecting an unborn child's right to life, as long as one health care provider signs off that a pregnancy would pose a risk to the woman's physical or mental health.

it isn't hard to see that this is a blank check for abortion providers, like emmett gosnell. you may remember that dr. gosnell was a physician in philadelphia, pennsylvania, who ran something called the woman's medical society clinic, but which was dubbed a house of horrors during his subsequent trial. he was also a prolific prescriber of oxycontin, but in 2011 dr. gosnell and his wife, pearl, and eight employees were charged with a total of 32 felonies and 227 misdemeanors in connection with the deaths, illegal medical services, and regulatory violations a the his abortion clinic. pearl and the eight employees pleaded guilty to various charges in 2011, while dr. gosnell pleaded north not gy

and sought a jury trial. after that trial dr. gosnell was convicted of first-degree murder in the deaths of three infants and involuntary manslaughter in the deaths of carnamaya munga, an abullet paying following -- adult patient. he was also convicted of 21 felony counts of illegal late-term abortions and 211 counts of violating pennsylvania's 24-hour informed consent law. after his cop -- his conviction, he waived his right to appeal in exchange for an appeal from prosecutors not to seek the death penalty. he was sentenced to life in prison without parole. not only does the radical abortion bill that senator schumer has teed up a vote on tomorrow usurp the

constitutional role reserved to the states, it would allow a child born after 21 weeks of gestation to be aborted. next month, a baby who was born at 21 weeks and 2 days will celebrate his second birthday. this extreme legislation would invalidate all state laws that limit abortions after 20 weeks of gestation. this wouldn't just impact pro-life red states. this change is so radical that it would invalidate existing laws in blue states as well. in massachusetts and nevada, for example, abortions are restricted after 24 weeks. in california, washington, and illinois abortions are restricted after viability. if this legislation were to become law those laws would be

pre-empted under the supremacy clause of the federal constitution. now, this sort of radical lurch and knee-jerk reaction to a draft opinion illegally leaked by somebody at the supreme court, this reaction is way out of step with the views of most americans when it comes to the sensitive and emotional issue of atboorgs -- abortion. a poll ras summer found -- a poll last summer found 65% of americans believe abortion should be illegal in the second trimester. opposition to third trimester abortion is even stronger. an overwhelming 80% of americans are opposed to late third trimester term abortions. but under this legislation, states would have no power to stop the radical procedure known as partial-birth abortion, as long as one provider signed off

that the mother's mental health might be affected. what that is is not defined and is left to the imagine imagination. but just -- left to the imagination. just when you think it's bad, it gets worse. this bill would also invalidate laws that prevent abortion from being used as a method of; selection -- a plefd of sex selection. this allows a parent hoping for a son to abort a baby girl. this is a type of practice that sadly became common in china during the era of the one-child policy. it's not something that should happen in america. not only that, this bill undermines state efforts to protect unborn babies with disabilities, like down syndrome. unborn children being killed based solely on gender or

disabilities is a devastating problem in other countries. we cannot allow such grotesque practices to become mainstream here in america. america is better than that. this bill that the majority leader has teed up a vote on tomorrow would also invalidate conscience laws which protect health care providers who have deeply held objections to abortion. conscience laws are extremely common in 46 states, allowing individual health care providers to refuse to provide abortion services. this law that we'll be voting on tomorrow would wipe away all of those existing state laws. any health care provider who had a deeply held religious or moral objection to abortion would be required by federal law to provide them anyway. any health care provider who

refused to do so could find themselves on the receiving end of a lawsuit. this radical pro-abortion legislation removes a list of protections that exist in states across the country. it does away with state laws that limit the performance of abortions to licensed physicians and it provides no protection for babies who survive a botched abortion. it invalidates informed consent laws which require health care providers to share information about the baby with the mother, such as whether the child is capable of feeling pain. and it gives the attorney general of the united states sweeping authority to block state laws protecting the right to life. this legislation would overturn existing laws and allow abortions on a scale our country

has never seen before. it's a sad commentary that the conscience of america -- on the conscience of america when all but a handful of our democratic colleagues are fighting to implement these radical policies. as it stands today, the united states is only one of a handful of countries that allows elective abortions after 20 weeks. other countries on that list of seven include the people's republic of china ruled by the chinese communist party and north korea. this should be a massive red flag for our colleagues across the aisle that our compassion for the unborn ranks right up there with the people's republic of china and north korea but, unfortunately, they don't see the inherent humanity of these lost innocent lives.

the extent to which the democratic party continues to embrace such radical policies never ceases to amaze me. as shocking as this legislation is, it's not entirely new. it already failed to pass the senate once this year. it couldn't even earn the support of all 50 democratic senators. it failed on a 46-48 line vote. democrats haven't made any changes that will move the need until their direction on this bill that we'll vote on tomorrow. i simply do not agree that the american people want abortion laws in our country that put us on par with the chinese communist party and north korea, two of the world's most aggressive human rights abusers. america cannot be its best if we do not value the lives of our most vulnerable. i believe babies, fellow human beings with heartbeats,

fingerprints, just like the rest of us, deserve to have protection under the law, under state laws that would, if in the event roe were overturned, be the ultimate arbiter of what the laws would be in those individual states. the declaration of independence itself guarantees the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. and i believe that right to life extends to the unborn, just as it does to every other american. i've always believed in defending the right of the unborn to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and i'll to infight this bill no matter how many times the majority leader brings it to the floor. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the

majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, last week americans woke up to the news that was perhaps not unexpected but still stunning. it appears that in a matter of weeks we may soon live in a country where women have fewer constitutional rights than their parents or grandparents. in one bold move, the ultra conservative, activist majority on the supreme court appears poised to erase the constitutional right to choose whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term. i want to be clear, the leak of the majority draft opinion in dobbs v. jackson women's health organization is an unprecedent the breach of the court's confidential deliberations. it may harm the trust the justices have in one another as well as the public's trust in the court.

still, one must wonder -- why is it that our republican colleagues have been focused so exclusively on the leak of the draft opinion rather than the substance of the opinion itself, and why do we hear in the last few days a continuing reference to the security of supreme court justices without a real discussion of where the proposed opinion would take us? let's make it clear, unequivocally clear, in a bipartisan fashion -- violence is never acceptable. violence is never acceptable. -- against supreme court justices, their families, their staff, or anyone associated with that branch of government. nor is violence acceptable on january 6, 2021, in this chamber when the mob, the insurrectionist mob leaving a trump rally came here and tried to stop the business of the united states senate and the

house of representatives, and we left as fast as we could move out the back door to try to escape them. that was violence which led to five deaths and the assault on 150 members of law enforcement. that violence was unscenarioable as well, and i -- was unacceptable as well, and i hope my colleagues who vetoed investigating the violence of january will step up now and say they were wrong. violence against a supreme court justice, violence against a member of the house and a member of the senate, none of those are acceptable, period. unequivocally, period. i'm in favor of protecting the justices, of course. i've been party to efforts in my home state of illinois, after a tragic incident over ten years ago when a disgruntled client ended up killing a federal judge's mother and husband in

their home. since then i've called for more security, and i'm glad to add my name to this effort now to provide security to this court and all the members of the court, their families and the staff who are involved. it is unacceptable -- violence hereto in this building orb across the street -- or across the street is unacceptable. but i'd like to speak as well to the substance of the statement just made by the senator from texas. he recalled the case of kermit gosnell, a case where a doctor in philadelphia was convicted, virtually of infanticide, repeated cases of infanticide, and he was sentenced ultimately to life in prison where he still spends his time serving that out with no chance of parole -- nor should he ever have a chance at parole. i struggle to get the connection between the crime of infanticide and the debate we're having

because there's nothing in the bill coming to the floor by the democrats which is going to change that basic finding in the case in pennsylvania. that dr., now removed from his -- that doctor, now removed from his profession and serving time -- was charged of a crime and the bill on the floor of the senate will not change that reality at all. i don't know if that was the inference, but i took it to mean that. i hope i was wrong. a critical constitutional right may be removed by the supreme court. i am a he an amateur -- i'm an amateur historian. i can't think of another time when a constitutionally guaranteed right by supreme court opinion of over 50 years has been removed by the court, but that's what we face now. on the right of american's to make the most basic decisions about their health, their lives

and their future. sadly, many republicans are desperately trying to deflect from this ruling and what it means for every single american. if the legal reason and the court's draft opinion becomes final that decision in dobbs will end a half-century guarantee that the right to abortion is protected in our constitution. republicans know that overturning roe v. wade and eliminating access to women's health care is extremely unpopular. when asked pointblank whether we should do it, knoll 28% of americans say they should -- only 28% of americans say they agree. americans the senate is not in order only be -- americans would not only be denied health care they're entitled to, it is possible that some have be prosecuted. far-right lawmakers have been feverishly anticipating this moment. over the past week, some of these same officials have introduced legislation around the country designed to punish

women for making the basic decisions about reproductive health. state legislators in louisiana introduced a bill to allow prosecutors to bring murder charges against a woman who undergoes or anyone who provides an abortion. the same louisiana bill would seemingly call into question the legality of in vitro fertilization as as well as i.u.d.'s, the morning business-after pill and other forms of contraception. i'm glad he was -- i'm glad it was on the floor a moment ago. senator duckworth spoke about her two little kids. i remember those kids. when i was driving to an event in bloomington, the phone rang and it was tammy duckworth. she was going to be my colleague in the united states senate. she was a member of the united states house of representatives.

and she told me she was going to have a baby. i couldn't believe it. tammy and i had known each other since a few weeks after her fatal crash -- i should say, her terrible crash of the helicopter in iraq. and i had known what she had gone three, the surgeries and and recovery and i was the one who encouraged hadder to run for -- encouraged her to run for office. i'm glad she did. she has become one of the most powerful voices in the united states senate. when she told the story about those two little girls born through the process of in vitro fertilization, it struck home. i'm fortunate as a grandfather to have two in vitro grandbabies. i love them to babies and thank goodness that there was a science achievement available to help my daughter deliver these beautiful kids. a republican lawmaker in idaho says he's open to banning

certain forms of birth control if this decision goes forward in the supreme court. plan b emergency contraception and i.u.d.'s. think about that. state by state, legislator by legislator will decide what's acceptable when it comes to contraception. some people are going to think, durbin, you're exaggerating. democrats are at it again, exaggerating. but i'm old enough to remember before griswold the regulation of contraception in those days when is it was virtually in many states to even buy a condom. so you think i'm exaggerating? we lived at that time. it wasn't until griswold v. connecticut that established a right of privacy under you are constitution which then led to roe v. wade. that was america, it was an america which sadly many republican lawmakers long for. a lawmaker in missouri introduced a bill that deputizes

bounty hunters. i wanted to remind my colleague who spoke before me, it was the texas bounty hunters law that started this conversation in earnest. in texas, they decided that there would be a civil penalty that could be charged against those who were engaged in hasn't abortion and that a person could claim that penalty if they disclosed that to the public. just a few days ago, incidentally hurricanes the republican leader in this body, senator mcconnell of kentucky, said that a national ban abortion could be, quote, possible, close quote. a national ban if roe is overturned and the republicans take control of the senate. leaving it up to each state to decide a woman's reproductive rights is to create a patchwork quilt of uncertainty. their constitutional rights -- your constitutional rights would depend on your zip code but that's exactly the future we're

facing. to be sure, democratic state legislatures will continue to protect access to abortion unless republicans in congress enact the national ban that senator mcconnell said it was possible. in the absence of a national ban, if you can afford to travel, you will be able to access reproductive care in states like illinois and connecticut. but what about anyone else? if the right to have an abortion depends on where you live or how much money you make, millions of women, many from historically marginalized communes will face greater hurdles in obtaining an abortion. america has the worst mortality rates in the developed world. drastically prohibiting abortion will make those rates worse. republicans and anti-choice activists are trying to minimize the impact that erasing roe would have. they talk about other times the supreme court has overturned precedent and they argue,

disingenuously, i think, that this is how the court has always worked. they claimed overturning roe is no different than the supreme court overturning plessy v. ferguson, the ruling that gave us the odious fiction of separate but equal and later overturned by brown v. board of education. but there is a profound difference. it appears never before in the history of america has a supreme court decision abandoned settled law that made americans less free. never. in the past, when the court has taken the serious step of overturning settled law, it has done so to expand freedom, expand opportunity, not eliminate it. what the activist anti-choice majority on this court would do is unprecedented, radical, and dangerous. here is another fact that republican lawmakers are hoping you won't notice. it's not just the right to abortion that is in jeopardy. justice alito's draft opinion in the dobbs case questions the

very existence of the right to privacy. it argues that enumerated rightt explicitly mentioned in the constitution, unenumerated rights not explicitly mentioned in the constitution -- must be deeply rooted in u.s. history and tradition in order to be recognized as a constitutional right. who decides what is deeply rooted in history and tradition? the courts' obergefell v. hodges decision established marriage equality only seven years ago. will the court reactionary majority put that next on the chopping block? what about the right to contraception, established by griswold v. connecticut 11 years before roe, a republican member of this body recently criticized that decision establishing the privacy right of every individual to choose the contraception right for their family. he described this as, quote, constitutionally unsound. rather than settling the demand on abortion, the draft dobbs

opinion would further divide our fractious nation, set the stage for a radical majority on the court to erase even more constitutional rights. it would give government the power to dictate your rights and dictate your future. that's why we must take action to produce -- we must take action to protect women's productive rights. tomorrow the senate will vote on the women's health protection act. this bill will codify the right to provide -- obtain an abortion free from medically unnecessary restrictions. the american people deserve to know where their senators stand. i will not stop fighting for the right of every american, especially the women of america, to have these rights as established for over 50 years. for years the republicans have claimed they are a party for families, the party of familiar values, yet they spent decades ignoring the needs of working families. republicans are willing to force women to carry unwanted or

unexpected or even dangerous pregnancies to term but they are not willing to help them raise the children. there are aspects of the voting pattern in the senate that make it clear that when it comes to helping families with basics such as tax credits for children, making sure that families have paid medical leave for their newborns or other family members, all of these things are family-friendly and family values. unfortunately they're not supported by many if any republicans. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. durbin: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

farmers now feel they just don't know if they're ever going to have the workforce and their scared . they're really concerned about >> that's where the merit-based aspects comes and

that's very important. but again our guys aren't concerned about getting these folks through the system. people who are eligiblenow . >> i'm happy to help and i would hope you would help me get 59 other senators to vote for the ag modernization act. >> we've had an opportunity to work together as governors eight years during the obama administration so i do appreciate your help on these things and thank you for being here today and to your crew. i know you've got a lot of folks out there working hard for our farmers and ranchers and so on so i express my appreciation for that. >> and mister secretary i want to add my words of thank you to both you and mister rapp for being here today. i think we have a great discussion and i look forward to working with you as we

begin this appropriations process for fiscal year 23. questions for the record, i fr do by 2020... >>

energy's main scientific focus. on may 9 -- a may 9, 2001, op-ed in the "wall street journal" by a physicist whose expertise is theoretical physics noted ms. berhe's research on soil chemistry is relevant to climate change policy. but her research expertise isn't in any, any of the office of science's major programs. and she has no experience as a scientific administrator and minimal experience with the

energy department itself. so not that there's anything wrong with her underlying experience to do other things, but for this specific position, the qualifications just aren't there. dr. berhe is clearly not the right choice to lead the office of science. certain positions dr. berhe has taken or endorsed are also concerning. in february 28, 2021, she retweeted this statement, quote, i'm just going to propose that a nation that can land an s.u.v.-sized rover on an ancient lake on another planet can build an electric grid that is not f-ing useless. this is her retweeting, not f-ing useless, because of slavish devotion to the free market. apparently we're devoted to the

free market, and she doesn't like it. on may 7 of 2015, she wrote in "science" that the practice of farming is to blame for climate change. the practice of farming is to blame for climate change. mr. president, dr. berhe is not the right person to serve as the director of the office of science. i rise in opposition of her nomination and urge my colleagues to join me in voting against this nominee. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: without objection. the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 75. the nays are 22. and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the nomination to reconsider is considered made and 4r5eud upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 844, lisa denell cook of michigan to be a member of the board of governors of the federal reserve system signed by 17 senators.

do hereby move to bring to close debate on 773, asmeret asefaw berhe of california to be director of the office of science, department of energy. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of asmeret asefaw berhe of california to be the director of the office of science, department of energy shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 53, the nays are 45. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: department of energy, asmeret asefaw berhe of california to be director of the office of science.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate >> will take questions from te

committee members. the counterterrorism coordinator nominee for the statedepartment will also testify live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3, online at c-span.org or watchful coverage on c-span now, our free video app . >> tomorrow the senate will vote on whether to begin

debate on a bill to protect a women's right to have an abortion and make it federal law . 60 votes will be needed. earlier today majority leader chuck schumer spoke from the senate floor about tomorrow's boat calling it one of the most important votes we've taken in this chamber in decades. democratic senators tammy duckworth and dick durbin chair of the senate judiciary committee spoke in support of the legislation and texas republican senatorjohn cornyn opposing it . >> mister president, tomorrow the united states senate will vote to protect one of the most fundamental freedoms that women have in this country. the freedom to choose whether or not to have an abortion. few decisions are more personal, a few decisions or more private than decisions women make regarding their ownpregnancies . few should be more out of bounds to elected politicians than to the winds of government. but sadly, few rights are in