vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change his or her vote? if not, the yeas are 49, the nays are 46, and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the

motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's 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 651, henry christopher frey, of north carolina, to be an assistant administrator of the environmental protection agency, signed by 17 senators. 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 henry christopher frey of north carolina to be an assistant administrator of the environmental protection agency shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule, and the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change his or her vote?

if not, the yeas are 15,the nays are 43. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, environmental protection agency. henry christopher frey of north carolina to be an assistant administrator. mr. tester: madam president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from montana. mr. tester: is this the proper forum to do a unanimous consent request? the presiding officer: it is. mr. tester: thank you. madam president, the department of veterans affairs needs a steady hand to guide the veterans' health administration. this nation's largest integrated health care system that delivers quality care and timely care to our veterans if they have -- i rise today because dr. sharif elderhall is that person. he has an impressive record of

leading health care systems and health agencies. most recently, the doctor served is at the university of new jersey and previously as new jersey's 21st mettle commissioner. but, more importantly, he is committed to caring for the more than nine million veterans in v.a. care. a commitment he has carried out as assistant deputy under secretary for health and quality, safety, and value at the department. it is no secret that v.h.a. and health care providersalitily are going through a challenging time. v.a. is continuing to battle the impact of covid-19 pandemic with veterans cases, hospitalizationed, and death on the rise again. and v.a. staff are dealing with burnout and increasing turnover

in our v.a. system. so i'm going to tell you, if the people of this body want to help -- want to help veterans, holding this nominee is not the way to help veterans. i'll tell you what. they're actually doing a disservice to veterans and their families by playing political games. in the past, this body has been able to rise above politics to install qualified individuals at the v.a. responsible for getting vets the health care and the benefits that they not only need but they have earned. and today we must do that again. we must act without delay to confirm dr. elnahal as the v.a.'s next under secretary for health. so with that, madam president, i

would ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, the senate consider the following nomination -- calendar number 902, shereef m. elnahal to be under secretary for health of the department of veterans affairs, that the senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, that any statement related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: is there 0 objection sno. mr. scott: madam president? the presiding officer: the junior senator from florida. mr. scott: reserving the right to object, throughout his presidency, the administration has failed to the nominate qualified people. americans have been left with no faith in president biden's ability to lead or appoint qualified individuals to nerve his important roles. and this nominee who will be in

charge of critical health care programs at the department of veterans affairs is no different. i cannot and will not consent to allowing this nominee to move forward in an expedited manner. we should take a vote so every senator can get on the record with their support or opposition to this nominee. therefore, i object. mr.test. mr. tester: madam president? the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. tester: madam president? the presiding officer: the senior senator from montana. mr. tester: this individual has been president and c.e.o. of university hospital of new newa, new jersey. he's been a health commissioner. why do you think the senator from florida, through the chair, why do you think that makes him unqualified? would the senator from florida like to respond? mr. scott: i think we should do this -- i think we shouldn't do this in an expedited manner. mr. tester: i couldn't hear you. mr. scott: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from l ifful. mr. scott: i don't -- i don't

think we should do this in an expedited manner. mr. tester: i would really appreciate it, madam chair, if the senator from l ifful would the a least stay -- from florida would at least stay here rather than walk out the door turning his backs on the american veterans. the people who have served this country, the people who have fought. we're coming up to memorial day. i -- i hope, madam chair, the senator from florida doesn't walk in to memorial day services and talk about what a great friend he is to veterans, because he is not. all i'm asking for is to give the v.a. the tools they need to be able to provide our veterans with the health care that they have earned. this isn't the first time i've been on the floor for unanimous

consent with the senator from florida, but this is an excuse that doesn't hold water. i didn't see the senator from florida at the committee hearing, even though he's not a member of the v.a. committee. if he was so concerned about this person, why wasn't he at the committee hearing to hear the responses that dr. elnahal gave? i'm going to tell you what this is, madam chair, with all due respect to the senator from florida, this is obstruction at the worst because this obstruction stops our veterans from getting the health care that they need. you want to talk about why the american people think the united states senate is dysfunctional? the senator from florida can look in the mirror. thank you, madam chair. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: at the end of april i had the honor of traveling to germany, poland and lithuania to meet with american servicemembers and hear from high-level government officials on the state of democracy in europe as russia wages war against ukraine. i returned to the united states

with the reassurance that the commitment of our partners and allies to defending freedom and defeating tyranny has only grown stronger. i also returned with three important take-aways that i believe must be central in america's response to russia's murderous invasion of ukraine. we must define our commitment to supporting our nailt -- nato allies. first america and freedom-loving partners across the world must renew our commitment to never again. never again support the massive human tyranny efforts underway to aid ukrainian refugees and those helping them and forcibly condemn the genocide occur to them at the hands of vladimir putin and the ukraine. let me say that again, first america and freedom loving partners across the world must renew our commitment to never again support the massive humanitarian efforts underway to aid ukrainian refuges and those who are helping them and

forcibly condemn the genocide occurring by vladimir putin and the ukraine. in 2005 my family and i visited the authorization witnesses museum -- auschwitz museum in poland. anyone will tell you how overwhelming it is to confront the horrors that occurred there. it is out of these dark places that the phrase never again was born. following liberation of the nazi concentration camps the world pledged to never again allow genocide to take the lives of innocent people, but today putin is choosing that path. when i returned to poland last month, i had the solemn honor of participating in a holocaust memorial ceremony alongside the u.s. ambassador to poland. what was formerly the war saw ghetto. i also visited a refugee center serving ukrainians forced by their homes and welcomed with

open arms by the polish people. as i walked through the refugee center my thoughts turned to the atrocious attacks at mariupol, the leveling of the city in bucha cannot be ignored. these are crimes against humanity. children are dying. families are dying precisely because they are ukrainian and won't do what the dictator putin wants them to do. this is genocide. world leaders promised never again, but they are failing. i thank god for the incredible hospitality of the polish people to welcome these ukrainian families. i'm grateful too for what other european countries are doing to help them. we must do everything in our power, using our voices, actions and resources to support these humanitarian missions and forcibly condemn putin's genocide in ukraine. second, we must continue to show full support to ukraine and do everything in our power to help it win in this war.

that includes approving delivery of the mig 29 fighter jets that president zelenskyy has been requesting for months. president biden's blockade of these aircraft is an act of weakness and makes no sense. if we want to prevent putting american men and women on the battlefield, we need to give ukraine every military and intelligence resource it needs to fight and win this war. most of our nato allies agree with this, but joe biden insists on standing in the way and is actively helping putin maintain dominance in the skies. vladimir putin is a murderous thug, his unjust war intentionally targets civilians and has taken thousands of innocent lives. this is genocide. the ukrainians have shown that they are willing and able to fight this war themselves and can defeat putin. we need to let them do it. when the war is over, accountability must be demanded and secured. putin and his thugs in russia and belarus must be tried for their crimes in a war tribunal. they should never see another day of freedom as long as they

live. third and finally, we must recognize the importance of energy and industrial independence from tyrannical and genocidal regimes like russia and which i have -- and communi. in march i appealed directly to american business leaders and urged them in an open letter to begin the process of cutting ties with communist china and our depends -- dependence on its supply chain. russia's unprovoked invasion of ukraine shows why decublg -- decoupling from tyranny regimes is so important. we should applaud nations like lithuania, estonia and poland which have taken aggressive action to end their reliance on russian energy. lithuania has also boldly stood

up to communist china and supported taiwan. their bravery is exemplary and deserves our support. these nations are the exception to the rule in europe but their leadership in forming partnership with democratic neighbors like norway has proven critical to freeing them from the threat of withholding resources to protect democracy from the effect of evil leaders like putin and xi we must permit to committing to do business with fellow democratic governments. that's why i've been demanding that biden take steps to put america back on the path to energy independence, stop his appeasement with the world's dictators and other evil regimes. i recently secured a commitment from energy secretary granholm that the united states would not import any oil from venezuela or iran. she said so in an open and public hearing in the senate armed services committee. president biden needs to publicly reaffirm that

commitment. our attitude should always be america first, but it can't -- if it can't be made in america, it must be made by a democratic partner or at the very least one who seeks mutual benefit with us instead of our downl fall. decoupling from china and other tyrannical regimes will not be easy for other governments, america included. this move won't occur overnight but is necessary as despots continue to carry out assault on europe and asia. as long as maduro and the castro regimes -- if america and our freedom-loving partners are going to truly stand for democracy we cannot do so while lining the pockets of those who seek to destroy liberty. we need to recognize the evil in our world. it exists in governments like communist china, iran,

venezuela, nicarauga and russia. they want a different world, one where the enemies of democracy, human rights and sovereign nations issue the owners and the united states and our allies do what they are told. they would crush anyone in the way if they are not allowed. i will not accept this. out of this terrible conflict, america has an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the security and independence of democratic nations, strengthen our energy and industrial independence and partnerships with fellow democracies and stop genocide, renewing the promise of never again. we cannot allow this moment to pass without creating this needed change. the survival of democracy and the united states depends on it. mr. president, i yield the floor.

there were black and they were in a grocery store. that is the reason they were shot. an 18-year-old with an ar-15 and then yesterday, ten days after buffalo the plague struck again uvalde texas where 19 innocent children and two teachers were gunned down at rob elementary in the middle of the school day just before the start of summer when these kids were looking forward to having a wonderful time with their family and friends on. they are gone. the shooter trashed truck at the

school, overpowered the police already at the scene and reportedly began shooting inside a fourth grade classroom. nineteen kids, two teachers forever gone, the blink of an eye. america's gun epidemic is unmatched by. nations in the world. no america is safe from it and american people are sick and tired of it but we also have a big problem here in the united states senate. big problem in the united states senate, the problem in the senate is simple. too many members on the other side of the aisle are disconnected on the suffering of the american people, too many members care more about the nra than they do about families who grieve victims of gun violence.

as i said, the american people are sick and tired of mass shootings. sick and tired about active shooter alerts. they are sick and tired of children, children, 9-year-old, ten -year-olds, 11 -year-olds being shot, gunned down in their schools. when i read the news of yesterday's shooting i ate for the families and then thought what if it was one of my children? i imagined what i would feel if this happened to one of them. a mere thought, just thinking about was a gut punch in my stomach. fear sent ripples down my spine. my republican colleagues, imagine if it happened to you. imagine if this was your kid or your grandkid, how would you feel? could you ever forgive yourself? not supporting a simple walk

that would make mass shootings less likely? please, please, please put yourself in the shoes of these parents for once. maybe that thought, putting their shoes in these parents might let you wriggle free from the vice like grip the nra, it might free you to act on even a simple measure for the psaki of these children, these nine and ten -year-olds, 11 -year-olds, these beautiful children, please think if it was your child or grandchild. madam president, it wasn't always this way in congress, 30 years ago i was proud to be the author of the brady bill and leader of the assault weapons ban. these were major legislative accomplish this and worked because they were good common sense laws and they passed

because both sides of the aisle work together and because they became law, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands perhaps lives were saved, children, elderly people, people of color, you name it. people walking the streets who might have been dead had we not passed these laws but today the nra has made it all but impossible for even the bare minimums to move forward in congress and the other side is all too ready to talk to the nra and serve their whims. madam president, these types of shootings used to be rare, so rare that each occurrence stood apart as a singular event but now shootings happen so frequently the nation can barely keep up, barely born ten people shot in the grocery store in

buffalo before being robbed to our collective core by the slaughter of 19 elementary school children predominantly latino community of uvalde texas. these shootings happen everywhere, movie theaters, churches, synagogues, concerts, nightclubs, grocery stores, college campuses, high schools, elementary schools. elementary schools. beautiful children ready to move out into the prime of life. honestly, i thought sandy hook ten years ago would be the breaking points. i thought that would be the tragedy that forced republicans to examine their conscience and think oh god, we can't allow schoolchildren to be slaughtered. i was wrong. the slaughter of 20 elementary school children in sandy hook didn't move them. we heard about their thoughts and prayers but no action. then came aurora and the navy

yard. then after charleston, i thought maybe this, maybe this is the moment, nine americans shot in a church during bible study? is has to move the republicans here in the senate. note, it didn't. they gave a few more thoughts, a few more players, no real effort to solve the problem. so it continues on and on and on. san bernardino, orlando, las vegas, sutherland springs, marjory stoneman douglas high school, thousand oaks, pittsburgh center road, oak also walmart, dayton, virginia beach, buffalo and now uvalde. when will the end? not thoughts and prayers,

action. after the shootings in el paso and dayton, three years ago, republican leader promised the red flag background checks would be front and center in the senate debate. he was then majority leader, then republicans did nothing. they ensured there was no debate just as they wanted. in indeed, we hear from -- all we hear from republicans are thoughts, prayers and now there is a new phrase. some of my rebellions colleagues want to stop the community. it sounds heartening but it does absolutely nothing. the next family from having to grieve their loss. in will to a single thing to prevent another life from being taken, it won't do a single thing to prevent another child from being shot at school, a nine or 10-year-old, 11-year-old, beautiful children. madam president, you may have

noticed when they aren't offering thoughts and prayers to distract from their inaction, many of my republican colleagues focus on the motives of the shooters instead of focusing on obvious common denominator. they talk about mental illness and say nothing of the fact that we are a nation suffocated by firearm. rates of mental illness are more or less the same across the developed world, u.s. is not an outlier on mental illness but we are an outlier in the sheer number of guns available in this country, that's why we have so many shootings in other western countries don't. if mental illness were the simple cause, cutesy mass shootings all over the developed world but you don't. what you do see here in america are enough guns to give every man, woman and child a firearm and still have 70 million guns left over. what you do see is it's far too

easy for people to access weapons in this country and then use them to slaughter people, slaughter children by the dozens, by the dozens. again, america doesn't stand out when it comes to mental illness but we are unique among the world's developed nation and today, the leading cause of death among children is no longer a car accident, no longer malnourishment, the leading cause of death among children is a firearm, leading cause of death of children. do you hear my republicans colleagues? a firearm. clearly many of these shooters have different motives but at the end of the day does emotive matter to the family with an empty seat at the dinner table? children are parents don't just care whether the shooter was

mentally ill, they care the shooter had ready access to a gun. those who lost their partners don't care shooter had an agenda or an agreement, they care that the shooter had ready access to a gun. parishioners, losing fellow worshipers, they don't just care whether the shooter wrote a manifesto, they care the shooter had ready access to a gun. they care that their loved ones were taken from them by someone who had access to a gun. taken from them while some members of his body refused to do what it takes to prevent those losses, refused to focus on the denominator to every single one of the shootings, refused to do the mayor mental,

the wretched nra. what we do about it? if slaughtered schoolchildren can't convince republicans to buck the nra, what can we do? some want this body to quickly vote on sensible gun safety legislation, legislation supported by vast majority of americans, democrats, republicans and independents alike. they want to see this body but quickly so the american people can know which side each senator is on. i am sympathetic to that and i believe accountability votes are important. sadly, it is in the case of the america people not knowing where senators stand. they know because my republican colleagues are perfectly clear on this, crystal clear. republicans don't pretend they

support sensible gun safety legislation, they don't pretend to be moved by the fact that 90% of americans, regardless of party support something as common sense as background checks, the vast majority of gun owners support the background checks. they don't pretend they want to keep guns out of the hands of those who might use weapons to shoot concertgoers or mover waters or worshipers or shoppers or children. they don't pretend that all. just listen to them when they show up to the nra, at the nra's convention used in the same state credit. then they will go back to their smoke-filled rooms and a short nra gun manufacturers that nothing will change, but they've got the nra's back.

no, mr. president, madam president, this isn't the case of republicans hiding their position, they probably tell the american people which side they are on and america is much worse off. if nothing doesn't change, we are condemned to find ourselves right here once again very, very soon as i was reading the reports of the tragedy in texas, i saw a man and a young woman mesmerized the nation after president biden's inauguration treated. the truth is, one nation under guns. that's simply heartbreaking. heartbreaking tor. think this is the legacy -- uorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. kaine: we're not. thank you. i rise to share candid emotions about yesterday's tragic shooting of school children two

days away from the end of the school year, the death of 19 students and two teachers. and this is rough. i don't have any notes because i'm really emotional about it. these shootings give me ptsd, i've got to admit. i was the mayor of richmond and our city had the second highest homicide rate in the u.s. i found myself going to too many funerals and too many wakes and maybe the most memorable crime scenes and then also homicide victims' families, support group meetings in church basements in my city. then i got to be governor of virginia. in april of 2007, my wife and i landed in japan leading a trade mission and went to a hotel and immediately got a phone call saying that there was a shooting under way on the campus of virginia tech university.

i should turn on cnn which i did in japan. as i saw the events unfold, i said take us right back to the airport. we'd flown 14 hours. we were in a hotel for about an hour and went right back to the airport and flew all the way back home to what was the worst day of my life, trying to comfort 32 family members who had lost kids or their spouses who were faculty members. and that process went on for years. in the days right after the horrible tragedy but then commissioning a study about what went wrong and then trying to find an appropriate settlement with these families that would honor their loved ones. i had to deal with state police officers and others hardened, hardened law enforcement veterans who when they walked into the classrooms at virginia tech to find carnage and on each body a cell phone ringing

because a parent had seen it on television and wanted to call to make sure it wasn't one of their children who had been killed. and my law enforcement officers talked about how those rings that would never be answered just haunted them, haunted them. and so when there are these shootings at a school, at a nightclub, at a concert, in a grocery store, in a church, in a synagogue, i just -- i feel like i'm back in april of 2007 experiencing those emotions for the first time. and i was an losing my own e-- analyzing my own emotions last night. why haven't i been able to reach a point of more -- i don't know -- emotional equilibrium after 15 years. i realized that the reason was

that my emotional reaction that's kind of a ptsd thing is not just because of the shootings, not just because of the deaths, not just because of the promising lives cut short. it is compounded by a realization that here in this body we've done nothing. it would be bad enough to experience the violence and be reminded of that most painful time in my life but to experience it as a u.s. senator, as a member of a body, and to say well, what have we done? we didn't do anything at the federal level after virginia tech. and we didn't do anything after pulse. and we didn't do anything after las vegas. and we didn't do anything after sandy hook. and we didn't do anything after one tragedy after the next. and that compounds in some ways, that is the thing that makes the emotional reaction a reaction

that is as fresh today as it was in april of 2007. it's a wound that can't heal until we do something to heal the injury, to heal the problem. i was thinking about this last night. and i was trying to -- what's some wisdom i can derive to make me feel less down and less december upon dent -- despondent. i thought of two things i wanted to share. one is a spiritual insight and then the other is a practical reason not to lose hope. so a spiritual insight. a few years ago pope francis was kicking off a year-long effort to -- not the life of the big universal church but life of parishes. and he challenged parishes but this challenge could go for

people and certainly could go for political leaders. he challenged parishes to be owe owe. [speaking non-english]. islands of mercy in the middle of a sea of indifference. and i thought what an interesting challenge. and the thing about that challenge that i thought was so beautiful and a little bit unexpected is he didn't counterpose mercy to evil or mercy to cruelty or mercy to hatred. he contrasted mercy with indifference, with indifference. there's evil in the world and there's hatred in the world and there's cruelty in the world and yet usually those forces are not strong enough to succeed for very long unless, unless there's widespread indifference.

we're challenged not to be indifferent. and if we assess why the senate, this great deliberative body has been unwilling to act for 15 years, i don't think it's cruelty or evil. it's indifference. it's the very thing that pope francis was warning us to avoid. we should be merciful. we should not be indifferent. evil doesn't thrive for very long absent indifference and yet despite what we often say after tragedies like this, our thoughts and our prayers and our sincere emotions, if we don't demonstrate by more than just words that we are touched by these tragedies, then we are committing the sin of indifference. and i hope very much that the

tragedy of these little children's death may push us out of the indifference that we've been sunk in, at least on this issue. i really hope that it will. and then finally a practical reason why i'm not going to give up hope that it will. i mentioned that i was the mayor of richmond dealing with a homicide problem. and i was the governor during what was at the time the worst mass shooting in the history of the united states. sadly it's been eclipsed. it's no longer -- the virginia tech shooting is no longer the last -- the most tragic shooting in the history. others have eclipsed it in terms of the numbers of those killed. but i felt that same despair then and i threw myself into trying to make changes. i made changes in the virginia laws that i could make as a governor by executive action. but there were things i couldn't do by executive action. i needed the support of my legislature to do comprehensive background check bill. because in the case of the

virginia tech sho shooting, the disturbed 19-year-old who committed that crime was legally barred from owning a weapon but weaknesses in the background check system didn't catch that and he was able to get the weapons that led to that carnage. but i couldn't get my legislature even in the aftermath of the worst shooting in the history of the united states to be willing to take action. but we never gave up. we kept pushing. we kept pushing in virginia. the head quarters state of the national rifle association, we kept pushing and pushing and pushing. and 2019, 12 years after the tragedy at virginia tech, my legislature passed the set of commonsense gun safety rules, one handgun a month, ban on certain kinds of weapons that nobody needs, comprehensive background check, mental health support, a series of initi initiatives.

my legislature did pass it in 2019, and my state is safer as a result. 12 years was a long time to wait. there were a lot of tragedies that happened between 2007 and 2019. but thank god for the virginia tech family members and the other advocates who said we'll wait. we're not going away. we're patient. we're discouraged. each loss we feel afresh, but we are not stopping until we make that happen. my first months in the senate, mr. president, we voted on the floor on a comprehensive background check bill. i think that was the last time we had a meaningful debate about gun safety policy on the floor of this body. nine years ago. it's like there's a gag rule here. it used to be in congress you were not allowed to have debate or vote about issues dealing with slavery during the 1830's. it's like we have a gag rule

about debating gun safety on the floor of this body. but i remember voting that day. and it was on the anniversary of the shooting at virginia tech that we voted on a bipartisan background check bill in this body in 2013. and the family members of sandy hook families were sitting in the gallery. many of the virginia tech families had come up to join them to offer them support. i was reminded of the scripture in the letter of paul to the hebrews being surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses. and here we are on the floor trying to respond to this tragedy and do something to ease their grief and we fell a couple votes short. we couldn't get to 60. i think we had 57 votes that day for a background check bill. that was painful. it was painful, especially paipainful to fall short in the view of all these grieving

family members. but i draw hope from this. if we can make progress on this issue in virginia, headquarters of the n.r.a., we can make it in the united states senate. it may not happen as quick as i want. it may not happen while i'm still here to see it, but there's no reason to give up. if we can do this in virginia, we can do this in the united states senate. and we ought to because the -- there's nothing we can do to bring back the lives of these young people. but if we can act to decrease the chance that this would ever happen again, they will at least have the ability to grab on and say our advocacy made a difference, and kids who go to school will be safer in the future. last thing i'll say and i'll sit down. i was walking around the building this morning and because i'm fluent in spanish

and people around here know it, a lot of the capital staffers are lat -- capitol staffers are latinos and they talk to me in span yirk. i passed by a long-time capitol staffer who said in spanish, senator, what's going on, what's going on with this country? i said i know what you're asking about and it's such a tragedy. and she said this to me. she's from el salvador. she said my country is a mess. and the violence is awful. and the homicide rate is unacceptable. but no children in schools feel unsafe. no people going to church services feel unsafe. what's going on, senator? i didn't have a good answer for her. i didn't have a good answer for her. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. ms. duckworth: mr. president, last night as i was doom scromming as they say one does at 2:00 in the morning when you can't sleep, what i was looking up were places to buy ballistic protective backpacks for my daughters who are 4 and 7. places to buy ballistic

protective white boards that could be donated to my girls' school that would act as a shield should an -- should a shooter come to their school. and it's bad enough that i had felt that i had to do that, but the fact of the matter is those pages were already bookmarked because it's not the first time that i've had to look them up. ten days, 240 hours, less than two weeks, that's all it took. it took just ten days from the racially motivated domestic terrorism attack in buffalo before we had to mourn the loss of yet more americans, this time 19 babies and two teachers. to a senseless, horrific and importantly preventable mass shooting in uvalde, texas.

children gunned down at their school. their small bodies mangled, utterly destroyed by lethal weapons of war designed to quickly kill adults. last night when i got home, i held on to my two babies so tightly. i didn't know why, but i wasn't going to let them go. just so grateful that they came home from school. today there are at least 19 more families in our country that will never be able to forget the horrific sight of what happens to a baby's body, to a child's body when shot at close range with an ar-15 or similarly styled rifle meant for battlefields and not schools. i come to the floor today because as a mother, i am beyond angry. i am furious, heartbroken and

fed up. i am sick to my stomach thinking about what those parents are feeling right now. they sent off their babies to school yesterday morning just like i did. they packed a lunch, like i did. they argued with their babies about hurry up, the bus is coming, you're going to miss the bus. no, you really do have to wear a sweater. i know that you don't think it's cold, but you have to wear a sweater. or today is p.e. day, you have to wear your tennis shoes. but unlike my daughters, those babies never came home again. theywill never laugh their beaul laughs again, never smile their wild, silly, gorgeous smiles again. that is a hell on earth i wouldn't wish my worst enemy. as a senator, i ask my colleagues how many more children will you allow to be murdered on your watch? how many more? how many more tiny bodies have to be ripped apart by weapons of

war before you will stand up to the gun lobby and the n.r.a.? how many more children will you allow to go to school each day traumatized, fearing for their lives, children terrified of being gunned down in their classrooms, practicing active shooter drills instead of studying the abc's and 1, 2, 3's. when will it be enough for you to do something, anything, to simply do your jobs? when will children's lives matter more than your check from the gun lobby? when? last night my colleague from connecticut, senator murphy, came to the floor to ask our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, quote, what are we doing? but my republican colleagues know exactly what they're doing. they know exactly what they're risking, whose lives they are

endangering when they refuse to lift a finger in the wake of yet another mass shooting. when the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire, the number of mass shooting deaths tripled tripled, tripled. we know that the ban works, and we need to reinstate it. republicans are yet again pushing for nothing to be done, falling back on the old line that only one thing stops a bad guy with a gun, and that is a good guy with a gun, knowing full well that there were good guys with guns at both uvalde and buffalo, and here we are mourning dozens of lives anyway. i even heard some of those say let's equip the teachers with guns. i would rather equip teachers with more pieces of chalk and more learning tools than guns. because even if those theerches had had -- teachers had a gun

in the classroom, they didn't have a chance to react, to go grab that gun, and they're dead today. to pretend like all we can do is send thoughts and prayers, or they say it's too soon to talk about politics, but they know that we don't have any time to wait, this time we didn't even have ten days to wait from buffalo. it is their job to do more than send thoughts and prayers. it is their job, our job to prove that we care even the least little bit about those little bodies and the giant heartbreaks they leave behind. we know how to stop these attacks from happening as often as they do. heck, the entire rest of the world has figured it out. we all know there will be another and another and another attack in the weeks and months ahead if we do nothing. more innocent lives will undoubtedly be lost. so if you're not willing to act, if you're not willing to do the most basic part of your

job, to prevent the senseless loss of innocent life, then again i ask -- why are you here? the senate should immediately at a 50-vote threshold vote on the commonsense safety reforms that the american people have demanded for so long. and don't tell me this is about the filibuster, because we have time and again voted that the 50-vote threshold on things that matter like raising the debt ceiling or the defense budget. and yet, the lives of our babies, the right of our babies to not be torn apart by weapons meant for war is not worthy of that? we're talking about universal background checks. we're talking about the kind of reforms that widespread majorities of americans support. and in the face of yet another moment of unimaginable,

unbearable, unfathomable grief, let's show the nation that we value children's lives more than an arcane senate procedure rule. let's do what adults are supposed to do. let's protect our kids, the most vulnerable, the most innocent. let's do our jobs. let's do what we were sent here to do, what our children are depending on us to do. we owe it to each victim of this tragedy and every tragedy before it, and their loved ones to finally act. enough was enough a very long time ago. may those babies rest in peace, those little angels now in heaven. i yield the floor.

only yesterday. reports from authorities, it appears a deranged young man

tried to murder his own grandmother and crashed his car and ran into an elementary school and began killing. at least 19 young children and two teachers were murdered. murdered for no apparent reason at all. these innocent kids were simply going to school. they put on their backpacks, said goodbye to their parents and headed off for another day of learning and friendship. there were only two days left before summer break. because of this maniac, at least 19 of these kids never made it home. one of the victims was a 10-year-old girl whose father described her as full of life, a jokester, always smiling. a 10-year-old boy who loves sports and art and received his

honorable certificate a few hours earlier. his mother says he was thrilled about moving up in two middle school. it is sickening, sickening to consider innocent young lives stolen by this pointless senseless brutality to consider the families who sat waiting at the civic center waiting to hear, waiting to be either reunited with their son or their daughter for to learn they never would be. the investigation is underway, authorities will continue to learn exactly what happened and how. in the meantime we are praying for border patrol officer who according to reports was wounded after he responded to the scene

and all law enforcement paramedics and first responders whose dedication yesterday saved lives. most of all, the entire nation hearts are broken for the victims and for their families. words simply fail. yesterday the uvalde school superintendent said quote we are a small community, we need your prayers to get us through this. we pray fervently but in the midst of this nightmare of grief, our heavenly father will make manifest to those families whose promise in psalm 34 the lord is near to the brokenhearted. >> i had originally, before yesterday planned to speak today at length about the fact that in

36 days children across the country are going to lose healthy meals they've been getting the summer as well as meals during the school year and schools are going to be in a difficult situation, one third of the schools may not be able to offer school meals at all so that was my intent coming to the floor but after what happened, the horrible situation in texas, 19 more children, a teacher, a grandma died. i wonder how many more kids will be killed in the next 36 days. we don't have to live like this. we don't have to live like this where we are begging for eight more republicans to join us, 52 of us who want to make sure kids get healthy meals.

we don't have to live in a situation where parents are afraid, people are afraid to go to their place of worship for the grocery store, afraid to live because of a random shooting by somebody who got a hold of us, a gun, military assault weapon for didn't have to go through a background check with the gun show or whatever it is, whatever it is causing carnage in our country related to guns and mass shootings. it's not happening in other countries, not happening in other countries. they have as many challenges as we do but in other countries, it may be somebody going into school with a knife and kids get hurt but they live. here it's assault weapons. it's shooting children

indiscriminately, in an elementary school. we don't have to live like this. we don't have to live like this. the question is, how many republicans would join us to save children's lives from gun violence? how many? can we just get started? leader schumer put two bills on the calendar related to background checks. bipartisan background checks act closing the gun show loophole, requiring checks for private unlicensed leaders and enhanced background check to provide national background check system enough time to thoroughly review gun sales. these are not controversial. these are children by the way. these are not controversial, 90% of the public says the, of

course. the folks who don't want us to are the folks who make the guns. make a lot of money, pit us against each other, they put all kinds of crazy theories, their funding, republican colleagues to stop anything from happening because god for bid the profits of the gun manufacturers would go down because maybe there were few less guns on the street. it's not rocket science, we know what to do. i grew up in a northern michigan community surrounded by legal gun ownership, my own family, my friends, my relatives. you know when the assault weapons ban went in for ten years? no one in my family stopped hunting. nobody in my family had to say well, we can't do what we want to because military assault

weapons aren't available. that was put in by democrats. it was repealed by republicans and we saw violent shootings that had gone down suddenly went up. there was a lot of different things we could do. will we come together on any of them? will we start with comprehensive background checks? that is the question, will we have republicans joining us? every action we take or in action relates to our values and to our will to do it. we can do anything if we want to. last week we came together to address baby formula, we did it together, great.

one of the fastest ones i've ever seen move through here and i appreciate that. i appreciate you joining me in that but why can't we extend that? possible making sure the summer kids get healthy food that they start using and 36 days and during the school year we are supporting schools to provide healthy meals for our children in a time of supply chain breakdown, costs going up and what happens when we hear in the fall from the schools that have to stop school meals somehow we couldn't come together and prioritize feeding children. on top of that, i hate to say feeding children, all of this is important but lives, we can't even come together around basic

common sense measures to begin to address what is happening with random shootings and killings of our babies of our children. we can do better than this, we have to do better than this. we have to do better. the healthy kids on in, give kids healthy meals. only ten republicans to join us. background checks. closing the gun show loophole. folks can run and stand, what's become incredibly extreme and ra

dangerous positions, at least need ten. ten people to stand up and go this is too much, it's gone too far, we can do better than this because if not now, what is the number? i like to ask you know, what is the number? how many children will he describe sympathy will he show for dead children on the floor of the u.s. senate before it's enough? how many? one hundred more? 200 more x1000 more? too many children have been killed. when is it enough? past enough right now. we can do better than this for our kids and i hope this is the

moment republicans in the united states senate will step up and join us. thank you, madam president. >> thank you. i rise to speak about yesterday's horrific tragedy in texas and i won't be long, i wanted to start by expressing both grief and outrage we see across the country. across the country. we need to go madam president i intend to object to that request and it want to explain to my

colleagues. senator whitehouse has been delayed in getting to the senate floor so i'm going to outline my objections prior to his making his request time that i have served in the united states senate, i don't ever recall coming to the senate floor to object to a unanimous consent request. i say that because it demonstrates how unusual it is for me to be standing here objecting to one of my colleague's unanimous consent requests. indeed, as i said, i don't believe i have ever done this in all of the time i have served in the senate. so let me give the presiding

officer and my colleagues some background. on may 1, despite the objections of the entire maine congressional delegation and its democratic governor, the national oceanic and atmospheric administration, better known as noaa, imposed onerous new regulations on maine's lobster industry. now, madam president, if i asked you what is the first thing you think of when i say the state of maine, you probably would say lobster, our iconic industry. we have more than 4,500 lobster

men and women, each of whom is self-employed. they have been good stewards always of the lobster resource. they have taken care over the decades to make sure that the lobsters are large enough, for example, to keep. they throw back egg-bearing lobsters. there are all sorts of rules and regulations that the lobster industry has worked with the state of maine over decades to preserve the precious resource. but now in comes noaa. noaa is imposing onerous, possibly impossible new regulations that do not reflect the reality in the gulf of maine

with regard to the right whale. the final rule imposed on may 1 does not even come close to reflecting the reality of the maine fishing and lobstering industry and the endangered wright whale. noaa's focus on the united states lobster industry is flawed and unfair. in fact, madam president, the agency's own data show that there has never -- never been a wright whale entangherlinilement death --t -- entaglement death.

noaa has not even allowed the delay for just two months, until july 1. the entire delegation, and our governor, asked for this delay -- this two-month delay because our lobstermen cannot find enough of the gear, the new gear that is being mandated by noaa. just a two-month delay would have helped to prevent huge losses to these small business owners. now, this isn't the first request that noaa has refused. we have worked over the -- over more than a year with noaa to try to prevent these regulations from going into effect in the

first place because they are not relevant to preserving the wright whale. nobody wants to see the population of wright whales decimated. but if you look at the data, here's what's happening, madam president. it is ship strikes that have been responsible for the death of wright whales. they have occurred in the st. lawrence seaway in canada, not even in the state of maine. in addition, there is evidence that there is some gear that is used for the canadian snow crab that has been found to entangle the wright whale. that is different from our

lobster gear. and as i said, there has never been a wright whale entanglement death contributed by the maine lobster industry. these rules make no sense in the first place, but at least in response to a plea from the lobster industry, from the maine department of marine resources, from the democratic governor of maine, from the entire maine delegation, at least noaa could have answered our plea to delay these onerous regulations for two months -- two months during which time maybe this brand-new very expensive gear would have become more available, but, no. once again noaa refused.

this really is outrageous and the industry is expected to lose out on $7 million due to loss fishing time during these two months. now perhaps the senator from rhode island and others do not -- do not believe what the maine delegation, the democratic governor of maine, the maine department of marine resources, and many experts are saying about the impact of these regulations and the lack of availability of this new gear and the fact that the data show that we are not the problem in the state of maine. as i said, it's fish strikes and due to warming waters, which i

know is of great concern to the senator from rhode island, as it is to me. the right whale are actually moving and following their food supply into canadian waters. in fact, i've talked to many lobster men and women who have never seen a right whale, never, in all the time that they have been lobstering. but, as i said, maybe you just think maybe -- maybe noaa just thinks, rather, we're just automatic advocates for an iconic industry despite the extraordinary record of stewardship by the lobster industry. so let me give you another source. denying this two-month extension conflicted with the

recommendations of the united states small business administration's office of advocacy, an independent voice for small business within the federal government. the office of advocacy asserted that noaa was putting lobster men and women in, quote, an impossible scenario, end quote. and went on to say, quote, if they are not granted a short delay of the compliance deadline, they may stand to lose significant amounts of revenue or in some instances their entire business, end quote. this isn't just the main delegation. it isn't just our governor. it isn't just the main department of marine resources. this is another government

agency. it's the small business administration's office of advocacy, which is saying this. so maine harvesters are just identifiably -- are justifiably worried about what they are going to do. and i don't know what more the maine delegation can do. we have had countless meetings with the department of commerce, with noaa. i met with the fisheries administrator in noaa. i asked his help. he promised to work with us. instead things have gotten only worse. and now our lobster industry worries that noaa will continue to steadily whittle away at

their livelihoods while ignoring not only their on-the-water expertise, the expertise of the state of maine, but the impartial advice of the federal government's small small busins advocate as well. madam president, the entire agency, all of noaa needs to recognize that the practice of implementing management decisions based on incomplete, imprecise, inaccurate data, especially when those decisions have a harmful effect on a fishery that is known for its conservation methods and on the communities that this fishery

has supported forever in the state of maine cannot continue. so that's the situation in which we find ourselves, and that is why i believe for the first time in all the years that i've served in the senate i have come to the floor to object when the unanimous consent request is made. thank you, madam president. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: i do not want to keep the distinguished senator from maine on the floor any longer than we have to so i'm going to move rapidly to the unanimous consent motion. but i do want to tell the senator that i'm actually rather sympathetic to her concerns. in rhode island we have issues regarding the black sea bass which noaa scientists have known for more than a decade.

we're moving up into our waters. and yet the fisheries regulation and the allotments have not moved accordingly. we have problems with eastbound necessary sent species that replicate more rapidly than the regulatory regime can keep up. so the information is really nonsense. and we have an urgent need to enhance electronic monitoring on our boat so that human monitors don't have to be taken out on the boat. yes, we have frustrations with noaa about its pace in a lot of these areas, but i simply think that an understaffed noaa is not the solution to those problems. and so if i may, i would now ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule 22, the senate consider the following nomination, calendar number 768, janeey kumar, that the senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate,

the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. the presiding officer: is there objection? sa senator: i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: let me just say i hope we can find a way to move forward. she's needed to fill a very important position. those in the coastal states know tit's profound. the debt take jowl being the unit of heat by which we measure energy, the zettajoule is a joule with very big numbers. it's twice the complete full energy production and use of the human species on the planet. all of our energy, our cars, our trucks, or homes, our factories, everything is half a zettajoule.

and for the price of that, we had 14 zettajoules of heat into the ocean every single year. every single year. it's the equivalent of three or four hiroshima size atomic bombs being set off in the ocean every second and the ocean having to absorb that heat energy as the senator from maine knows, the gulf of maine is one of the fastest heating bodies of water on the planet. and she sees it as her fisheries and her lobster fishery in particularly moves northwards. so i'm eager to find a way to make sure ms. bavishi can get in place. she's a leading climate expert who has worked in the new york mayor's office of climate resiliency and before that in the c.e.q. in the white house. so i respect the concerns that the senator from maifn has -- from maine has indicated. as i said i have my own. i just have a different view as to whether stopping the

assistant secretary for oceans and administration position from being filled is conducive to getting those concerns met. so with that i would yield back the floor. ms. collins: madam president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: will the senator withdraw her request. ms. collins: i will withdraw the request. mr. lee: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: madam president, i rise in support of the bipartisan state antitrust enforcement venue act. madam president, this is an overwhelmingly bipartisan bill. in fact, 99 senators support passing this bill. only one oddly the lead cosponsor of this bill has objected. now, the nature of the objection was that passing this bill would

somehow reduce the chances of passing that senator's own wholly unrelated bill, a different bill, a bill not touching the subject matter of this bill. but the idea that it must be all or nothing is silly and it highlights one of the more vexing problems facing congress. the idea that unless congress will pass all of what a particular senator wants, that no one else can pass anything is something that is the cause of great dismay and frustration. making it easier for state attorneys general to enforce the antitrust laws is good policy, but it's of course not a silver bullet. now, i agree we still need meaningful reform at the federal level. passing this bill would in no way, shape, or form set back that project. it would just allow state attorneys general to bring

antitrust suits now rather than worrying that big tech companies will be able to slow them down by requesting that courts combine them with private litigation. this you see is precisely what happened in the texas v. google case. in fact, unanimously passing this bill will only strengthen momentum in congress for meaningful, much needed antitrust reform. it will be a proof of concept of sorts, one that we can -- one that indicates that we can set aside our egos and partisan differences in order to share -- to achieve a shared goal, in this case a goal i believe shared by all 100 members of this body. standing in the way of that achievement accomplishes nothing. in fact, it only plays into the hands of big tech. madam president, big tech would love nothing more than to see antitrust reform suffocate and

die on the senate floor. yet another victim of this all or nothing mind set, this mind-set that would suggest unless we pass all of what i want know, you can't pass anything, even something that i support. so it's important that we pass this bill. all 100 senators support it. there's only one who's been objecting on the basis of that objection has nothing to do with the merits of the legislation. it has only to do with the misguided and ultimately incorrect assumption that that was somehow -- that would somehow interfere with that senator's wholly unrelated bill. to that, madam president, as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 261, s. 1787. i further ask that the lee amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, that the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made

and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there an objection? mr. durbin: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: as chairman of the appropriate juries dixal committee and on behalf of senator klobuchar of minnesota, i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. lee: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: madam president, i appreciate the long-standing friendship that i have with my friend and distinguished colleague, the senator from illinois. i know he's got no objection to passing this bill in this fashion. in fact, it was after a long negotiation process culminating with an agreement between me and the senator from illinois that we've made modifications to this legislation, modifications i didn't want to make but that i made in order to get this passed. it was represented to me in good faith by the senator from illinois that it would pass the hot line. we could pass by unanimous

consent if that happened. now, it all -- had it all gone according to how we had every reason to believe and how the senator from illinois had every reason to believe at the time this would have been passed by now. what we didn't participate was that the lead cosponsor of this legislation who had herself been a part of these negotiations, been a part of the conversations about how we were going to get it passed and had been a part of the conversations about the very modification that might be necessary in order to get it passed by unanimous consent. then suddenly decided to object. again, this is based not on a substantive objection to the bill which -- of which she is the lead cosponsor. it's based solely on her assessment that this might somehow jeopardize her chances of passing another antitrust bill, an antitrust bill that does not contain any provision like this one, an antitrust bill that does not preclude consideration of this one nor would this preclude

consideration of that one. it is in short folly to say the least to object to this under these circumstances. it's also bad faith, i believe, to object at the very last minute after many, many months of negotiation on this issue as the lead cosponsor of the legislation. so it's unfortunate that she's unwilling to agree to that. it's unfortunate that she's not willing to be here to raise the objection on her own but insisting on doing so through a third party, through no fault of his own, is here at her request. being a good colleague as he is, doing as she had requested. this is unnecessary. this is petty. we're better than this. we need to pass this bill. i will be back. i'm not going to quit until this thing is passed because the fact is, madam president, all 100

senators agree that this is good legislation, including the objecting absent party. we should never get to the point where egos get in the way, and egos alone prevent us from passing legislation that all 100 senators agree would make things better. and i can tell you, there's no one who would be happier about this than big tech. so if the objecting senator who is absent today wishes to make sure that big tech is held accountable, then she should allow this to pass forthwith without her objection. if on the other hand she wants to make it easier for big tech, then this objection would be the way to go. thank you, madam president. mr. durbin: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: as a cosponsor of both pieces of legislation that are being debated here, i would say to the senator from utah,

keep the faith. the day will come. this legislation will see the light of day, and i believe it should become law, along with senator klobuchar's bill. i believe both are good pieces of legislation. this is not the appropriate moment, but that moment will come. madam president, i can't imagine what it was like last night in texas in the homes of the 19 or 20 children who lost hear lives in that robb elementary school gun massacre. those are the longest, loneliest nights for parent when you've lost your child. a child sent off to school nearing the end of the school year, probably happily anticipating summer camp, visits

are relatives, a family vacation, whose life was taken away in an instant. the freedom and joy of youth was ripped from every single one of those 19 children and two of the heroic teachers who sought to protect them when they were murdered in cold blood by this gunman. today instead of thinking about vacation and summer, the parents are sadly making funeral arrangements for their babies. others are sitting down with their children and trying to explain why their playmates are not at school. it's not even june, and this year alone there have been more than 200 mass shootings in the united states. my colleague, chris murphy of connecticut, said last night there have been more mass shootings than days in this last year. now families across america are stepping forward to offer their

condolences, donate to the families who lost these precious children, and to demand that this senate act to preventing is, do something to prevent the appalling acts a of mass murder that we see way too often. the members of the senate have to make a choice -- will we thereon the american people in their overwhelming numbers -- will we listen to the american people in their overwhelming numbers calling on us to set politics aside or will we cower in front of the gun industry? the lives of countless children, and i might add grandchildren, depending on our answer to that question. madam president, it was 21 years ago -- hard to imagine -- but 21 years ago this september when we lived through 9/11. that morning i was in this

building down the hall at a meeting at 9:00 in the morning called by senate majority leader tom daschle. we just heard that a plane had crashed into a skyscraper in new york and we didn't know much more. we quickly turned on the television to see another plane crashed into an adjoining building. it was obvious something horrible had happened, and it wasn't long after that that we looked out the window and looked west down the mall to see black smoke billowing in. we heard it came from the pentagon where another plane it crashed into that i woulding about. that was a day none of us will -- crashed into that building. that was a day none of us will forget, nor should we. it was a day that america changed in so many ways. that was the beginning of t.s.a. security checks at airports, things that have become commonplace in our life were initiated because of 9/11.

and did we ever mount an effort to stop international terrorism against the united states. we were serious. it was a deadly serious issue. 3,000 innocent people losing their lives on 9/11. we were bound and determined, so determined that this senate declared war on al qaeda and called for the invasion of afghanistan. i voted for that because i felt then -- and feel now -- no one should attack the united states with impunity. there is a price to pay. and so we made a decision which for 20 years guided our foreign policy in afghanistan and other decisions by the scores around the world. -- that really fought international terrorism. we learned something, madam president, recently. last year we had the director of the f.b.i. come before us, and i asked him about domestic terrorism. what about the terrorists in

america itself that are i will canning innocent people? his report to us was sobering. he said it's a real threat, and it's a threat that is metastasizing. we know that horrible word from the disease of cancer. it means that the cancer itself is advancing in a deadly way. that's the way of the f.b.i. -- that's the way the f.b.i. director described domestic terrorism. as we mourn yesterday's mass shooting in uvalde, texas, we have a bill coming before the senate tomorrow that responds to the mass shooting that took place in buffalo just 11 days ago in which a gunman killed 10 black americans in a racist act of violence. tomorrow we will vote on my bill, the domestic terrorism prevention act. i first introduced it in the year 2017, and that passed the house on a bipartisan basis last

week. this legislation will help law enforcement combat the serious and leagual threat of domestic -- lethal threat of domestic terrorism. it will authorize offices in the f.b.i. and department of homeland security and f.b.i. that are squarely focused on this threat and these offices will be required to regularly assess domestic terrorism risk and provide training and resources to state, local, and tribal law enforcement. the bill will also establish an interagency task force to combat white supremacist infiltration of the uniformed services in federal law enforcement. like gun safety reform, the domestic terrorism prevention act is long overdue. i first held a hearing on domestic terrorism 10 years ago, after a white supremacist marched into a sikh in wisconsin opening fire and killing seven

people. in the ten years since, violent white supremacists have killed americans with their sickening attacks. 2015, nine black wore shippers were killed at the a.m.e. church in charleston, south carolina. at the time it was the deadliest attack in a place of worship in recent american history, a horrifying record that was sadly surpassed just a few years later. in 201, an anti-semitic terrorist killed people at the tree of life synagogue in pittsburgh. there are members of that synagogue who actually survived the holocaust in world war ii only to be targeted by the same hate nearly 80 years later in america. a year after that, a far-right extremist killed 23 people at the walmart in el paso, texas, targeting immigrants and members of the hispanic community. some of these gunmen subscribe

to the same racist conspiracy theory as the shootert in buffalo a few days ago, the so-called great replacement theory. it has become the great rallying cry for white supremacists. each of these acts of hate-fueled mass murder has torn apart a community, traumatized a nation and left unimaginable grief and pain in its wake. and so it was over a year ago that the nye director christopher wray testified to domestic terrorism metastasizing and growing in the united states. i think it is time we particular action to stop this threat. time and again the senate has failed to take any meaningful steps to prevent violent extremism. when exactly did stopping mass murder become a partisan issue? it wasn't like this after 9/11. 20 years ago republicans and democrats joined in common cause in confronting international terrorism threatening america. after that horrific act of mass murder on 9/11, we worked

together on a bipartisan basis to reconfigure our entire national security apparatus. created a new agency, the department of homeland security, designed to prevent the next 9/11. to be sure, there were moments when we went off in the wrong direction. over the years we worked to rein in legislation like the patriot act and protect the civil liberties of the american people. our responsibility is to enact sensible solutions that save lives while also protecting our constitution. that's exactly what the domestic terrorism prevention act is all about. it will improve data collection on incidents of domestic terrorism and strengthen federal coordination to combat it. that's why it makes no sense to me that there are republicans who oppose it. the same republicans who once took bold steps to prevent terrorism on an international basis now won't even allow us to debate a bill to prevent terrorism at home.

there are actually republican members of the house who are cosponsors of my bill, the domestic terrorism prevention act, who just last week voted against it. cosponsors. what exactly is the reason for this republican opposition? well, one senate republican claimed that the domestic terrorism prevention act would be, quote, the patriot act for american citizens. that is phony and wrong. first of all, as i just mentioned, the patriot act was flawed. it was an excessive policy response it a nation in panic. i should know because i voted for it and then led the effort to change it. here's why the domestic terrorism prevention act is different. unlike the patriot act, it will not provide any new law enforcement or surveillance power to the government. it also does not establish a single new criminal offense. let me repeat this. the bill that comes before us on

domestic terrorism does not create any new federal crime, period. this is a modest goal -- bill with a simple goal to ensure that the federal government devotes resources is and authorities to what's been identified by the f.b.i. as the most significant domestic terrorism threats. who supports this bill? the leadership conference on civil and human rights, asian americans advancing justice, the arab american institute, the naacp. all of them and more support the domestic terrorism prevention act. i hope our republican colleagues will join us in a bipartisan effort to keep america safe. last week i spoke of the courage and sacrifice of aaron salter, a retired police officer who was working as a security guard in that buffalo grocery store at the time of the attack. when the shooter entered the store, officer salter jumped into action. he fired multiple shots at the attacker, but his skill and

courage were not enough. he was outgunned. he had a pistol. the shooter had assault rival and a tactical vest. it is a scenario that, sadly is becoming too common. we saw it yesterday in texas. the attacker in yesterday's school shooting in uvalde was also carrying an assault rival, wearing a tactical vest. it reportedly shot two officers before entering the school and wounded a federal law enforcement official. can the members of of this senate say in good conscience that we have done enough to protect the lives of police officers and the children in the communities like uvalde? of course not. they were killed by people who never should have had a gun in the first place. with the domestic terrorism prevention act, this senate can take the first step of many steps needed to save lives and reject hate. the next step is finally closing the loophole that allows guns to fall into the wrong hands.

ten years ago, after 26 little children, god bless them, were murdered by a disturbed gunman at sandy hook elementary school, we voted to close gaps in the gun background check system. and we fell short. when we finally closed -- will we finally close those gaps now after another school filled with little babies and children that was targeted in a mass shooting? the c.d.c. reported last week that for the first time in more than 60 years car accidents are no longer the leading cause of death for teens. as of 2020, the leading cause of death of children and adolescents in america is guns, guns. guns are the number-one threat to our children. when will we finally find the courage and the spine to pass commonsense changes to our gun laws that the vast majority of americans support? well, this friday, the national rifle association is holding its

annual meetings in, of all places a, texas. i hope and pray that they find the courage to stop cowering before the gun lobby and take action to save our children's lives. let me address one last misconception about this bill. a number of my colleagues will said, why did you have to use the words white supremacist or neo-nazi in the bill? why did you want to focus 0en that? met me make it clear. -- let me make it clear. we were focusing on domestic terrorism. that is why we mention white president obama six. the bill requires reports to congress on all domestic terrorism activity with a breakdown by specific category. the bill requires that white supremacist terrorism be one of those specific categories. we include in requirement because during the trump presidential administration, the f.b.i. was ordered to stop

tracking white supremacist attacks as a separate category of domestic terrorism. remarkably, the f.b.i. stopped tracking white supremacist attacks in the middle of a spate of white supremacist violence, including the lethal attack at the 2017 charlottesville unite the right rally and the tree of life synagogue shooting. this decision also came after an unclassified may 2017 joint intelligence bulletin from the f.b.i. and the department of homeland security that found, quote, white supremacist extremism poses a persistent threat of lethal violence and that white supremacists were responsible for 49 homicides and 26 ha tax deduction in 2016. more than any other domestic extremist movement. i'm not making this up. people are dying because of these extremists.

we are asking the f.b.i. and other agencies to identify the incidents of violence so that we can track them, find if they're growing or receding, train local law enforcement to recognize them. this bill does not recommend collective of data on first amendment protected speech at all no matter how vile that speech may be. it only requires the f.b.i. to provide a trotter to congress on violent domestic trivment activity that the -- terrorist activity that the f.b.i. is already investigating. this bill does not establish any new criminal offenses. this morning there is an outrage over the violence that took place in texas. the question is can we channel this outrage into an active, productive effort to pass legislation to make america safer? we know what the problem is. we know what the challenge is with domestic terrorism. the question is can we gather the information to put an end to it? isn't that our responsibility?

what comes to our responsibility as senators and as citizens in this country? in the u.s. senate, let's start with this this bill. domestic terrorism is for real. we saw a form of it in buffalo, new york, and we're going to see it again, i'm afraid, unless we take it very seriously. fighting terrorism used to be a bipartisan effort. i hope it will once again. madam president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the mac i wanted to start by expressing both my grief and the outraged we see all across the country and yet again not just another tragedy, in this case the death of 19 children and two adults, at least that's the latest reporting but also indicating that the deaths took place because an armed gunman came into a school with body armor protecting him from the response from any law enforcement. so we have had another example in barely less than a week where i into a setting in a grocery store in buffalo new york and now into his piraters, third-graders and 4th-graders were killed and with a

high-powered weapon on protected from any law enforcement or any other response. we are supposed to just get used to this i guess. that seems to be the response here in washington. this is not a problem of congress more broadly or the executive branch of our government, this is a problem of a failure to address this problem even to pass something as simple as background check legislation. this is a problem in the senate on one side. we have 50 united states senators who are republicans who have refused for years to pass anything remotely resembling common sense gun measures. i would support a whole series of bills that we could talk about and we don't have time today. at least the united states

senate should be able to pass a background check will supported by 90% of the american people and we ask why is that? it's not simply that we have so many republicans that are beholden to the gun lobby. that's obvious. that's right in front of us. the other problem is and they think it's related to the question of the power of the gun lobby and one party is you have the whole party that wants to surrender to this problem and throw up their hands and say there's nothing the most powerful nation in the world can do, nothing at all the most powerful nation in the world can do to stop the killing over and over again of americans and especially in the context of the horror, the unspeakable horror yesterday at second, third and 4th-graders being gunned down in a manner that is so that they

couldn't be identified because of the power of the weapon and the number of bullets that can be used to discharge in a manner of seconds. law enforcement gives fairness and confronting body armor, law enforcement, no law enforcement is fast enough to get to a scene in seconds to prevent our mass shooting. so we are supposed to us -- except the fact is americans that we should surrender this problem. the most powerful nation in the world can't stop second, third and 4th-graders from being murdered in schools the most powerful country in the world can't prevent the shooting ficert objection. ficert mrs. murray: i ask unanimous consent the following senators be permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each prior to the scheduled votes -- murray, wyden, brown.

the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. murray: thank you, madam president. i come to the floor today to support the nomination of lisa m. gomez as the assistant secretary for the department of labor employee benefit insurance administration or eps. -- ef p -- epsa. it oversees millions of retirement plans. we need a strong leader at epsa who will protect families' savings and futures and make sure people get the benefits they deserve under federal law. we need someone like lisa gomez. she is a hiem highly respected individual who has represented health plans, retirement plans and more and i'm confident as assistant secretary she will

fight to hold employers accountable to the law, ensure workers get the benefits they are owed and protect families' financial security. and i strongly urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting to confirm her. madam president, i can't leave the floor of the senate today without talking about the heartbreaking shooting that took place at robb elementary school in texas yesterday. 19 children, 2 teachers at an elementary school. these were kids who were excited for summer, play dates with their friends, murdered by weapons of war. this carnage is happening right here in america in fourth grade classrooms. my heart breaks for the family and loved ones of these kids and their teachers, not to mention the kids and educators who will carry the trauma of that day with them for the rest of their lives. but i am also furious. a lot of people have

characterized this tragedy as unthinkable, but at this point this kind of tragedy is not unthinkable. parents in washington state and every where else in america think about this all the time. they be about it every day when they drop off their kids at school. how can you not? they thought about it after the shooting in buffalo at a grocery store ten days earlier. they think about it every time there is another mass shooting, which is far, far too often. 3,865 times since the sandy hook school shooting ten years ago, to be exact. what is unthinkable is that every time this happens, nothing changes. every time republicans stand in the way of meaningful action. that's not just unthinkable. it is unacceptable. but we don't have to live like this. this is a solvable problem.

republicans need to have the courage, the decency, the basic concern for the lives of our kids to work with democrats on commonsense gun safety reforms. they need to decide should school be a place where our kids and teachers feel safe, where they can talk about homework and class projects, where they can be kids and laugh about whatever happened during lunchl or art class? or will they continue to be a place where school shooter drills are as routine as recess or algebra for our kids? i want my colleagues to consider that. what message are you sending to parents and kids, to teachers and students if you won't even allow a debate on commonsense measures like universal background checks? i've heard republican lawmakers talk about the need to have police officers at every school. i wish it were that simple, but

we know it's not. we saw yesterday that having an armed officer on site at schools will not solve this crisis despite the best efforts of law enforcement. some republicans have suggested arming teachers. are you kidding? can you hear yourself? teachers did not sign up to be soldiers, and guns have no place in our classroom. some republicans will say, well, this is a mental health issue. so let me be clear, america is facing a mental health and substance use disorder crisis. it is serious. it requires urgency, and i'm actively working on bipartisan legislation to expand access to prevention and treatment and recovery services. but i want to make this plain, the majority of people with mental illness do not commit violence against others. treating gun violence as a mental health issue rather than

a gun issue will never get us to the root cause of these horrific shootings. if we want to really get at the heart of stopping gun violence i beg my colleagues to pull their heads out of the sand and talk about what can stop gun violence, common sense, gun safety legislation and there is no getting around it, universal background checks, an assaults weapon ban. i'm ready to work with any republican to make any kind of progress here. states like mine have made good progress on gun safety measures to keep our communities safe. we cannot rely on a patchwork state laws where it works in one state. we need to get something done. to my constituents in washington state and the american people, i

know and understand it can be disheartening to parents around the country to see the continued republican obstruction on gun safety in congress. change is not easy. but let me be clear. doing nothing and letting it this continue to happen is the most extreme option on the table. i've come to the floor of the senate countless times to call for action to keep our kids and our families safe from gun violence just to have republicans block our efforts again and again. it is frustrating. it is infuriating, but i will keep pushing for gun safety laws that the majority of americans do support because we cannot give up. that's what the n.r.a. and other extremists want us to do. the vast majority of americans have made clear they want an end to gun violence. and i refuse to let republicans get away with this yet again, to dance around the real issue, to

distract us with conversations about arming teachers or tripwires outside elementary schools. enough. enough. we need to force republicans to bear witness to the tragic consequences of their inaction. we need people and families across the country to do the same. no one gets to look away. no one gets to change the subject. i promise all of the students and parents, grandparents, teachers, everyone in washington state that despite the obstruction and silence from my republican colleagues, i will not stay quiet and i will keep pushing for change and i really hope the american people will do the same. using our voices and our votes, we can change things. we can hold republicans accountable and we can make progress to end gun violence. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

mr. wyden: mr. president -- the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: it seems they appropriate that senator murray, she and i, i'm chairman of the finance committee, we work together on many issues, and we have seen how damaging the last 24 hours have been to our country. i will speak in a few minutes about a health and human services nomination. but i want to pick up where senator murray left off about guns and specifically talk about the atrocity that took place yesterday in texas. the senators can barely begin to imagine the passion that families in texas are feeling at this moment. they're living every parent pea worst nightmare. this morning around the country

millions and millions of parents dropped kids off at school and they were fearful. in the country that we all believe is and must continue to be the greatest country on earth, parents drop their kids off at school in fear that a gunman would walk into their classrooms and murder them. let's think about that. and it has been going on for decades -- decades in our country. we can remember the sinking, empty feeling after sandy hook. for a few days there was a glimmer of hope that the senate would do something on a bipartisan basis, but then the other side caved to the gun lobby.

congress has done nothing. in response to all this carnage in our schools, in our grocery stores, in our churches. mr. president, atrocity after atrocity after atrocity, and yet people still live in fear that their kids are next. they live with hopelessness due to the fact that their elected officials are unwilling to act. mr. president, there are no excuses left. this happened in a state that's flooded with guns. there was armed security at the school and still 19 kids and two teachers are dead. still, their families are broken. no excuses. perhaps that's why i've heard

multiple republicans say today, there's nothing you can do to stop the shootings. that they're just going to happen. that's the way it is. they're going to happen regardless. i just believe with all my being that's just nonsense and it's ridiculous coming from so many senators who haven't lifted a finger to do anything about the violence. my wife always says i'm a glass halfful guy. i try to be positive trying to bring two sides together, but on this issue i don't know what else to say. the truth is that if we act, then maybe -- maybe it will be possible to prevent another massacre in another school. that should be enough. that should be enough, mr. president.

the 100 of us here in the senate are the ones with the power to act, not anybody else. it's about us. so senators, we've got a choice. either we can choose to act on moral courage or just let the fear and hopelessness win out. as far as i'm concerned, if you don't have the moral courage to act here on the senate floor, or at least try to prevent more of these massacres, then you ought to hang it up, go home, let somebody else have the job. let me turn now to the nomination we'll be voting on in a few moments, samuel bagestos.

he's an experienced public servant and accomplished lawyer and educator, he currently serves as general counsel to the office of management and budget. he previously served as principal deputy attorney general on workers' rights. he's argued cases before the supreme court. he's a highly respected law professor on leave from the university of michigan. he's got the experience to serve as h.h.s. general counsel and the right outlook on what public service and the law is all about. i'm particularly pleased that he's been a crusader for the rights of americans with disabilities. he's argued cases before the court on the subject. he really wrote the book, the most prominent law school casebook on disabilities rights laws. during the finance committee nomination hearing, he talked about how that will help guide

his work at the department if he's confirmed. i'm sure pleased to see somebody like this attracted to public service, protecting vulnerable people, people who fall between the cracks all too often -- all too often. that's the key to improving the health and well-being of all americans. this nominee, mr. baggen stos is the right choice, highly qualified, deserving of broad support. we'll be voting on his nomination in a few minutes. mr. president, i urge all senators to support this nominee and i yield the floor. mr. brown: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. i always enjoy following my friend from oregon who has done such important work on tax and trade law and medicare and medicaid and everything since his career began as a young gray

panther. i urge my colleagues, mr. president, to support todd harper's nomination. he came out of my and senator smith's and senator ossoff's committee. he is an experienced regulator and he has the background, knowledge to safeguard the credit union system and protect credit union members. we know that credit unions and they look out for the little guy and regular people and people that are, you know, are mostly solidly middle class or aspire to the middle class. a career public servant with midwestern roots, todd harper understands the vital role that credit unions play in communities. being the first openly gay leader of any financial regulator agency, the first

career staff member to serve on the nuca board, he brings a vitally important perspective. we know that prior -- prior to this president taig over and my -- taking over and my becoming chair of the banking, housing and urban affairs committee, most regulators look like me and wall street. throughout his career as an unca board member and chair, he's worked with both parties and industries to fight for consumers. in 2019, the senate confirmed mr. harper by voice vote in 2021, president biden designated him as chair, as chair of the nuca, he was worked to advance bipartisan efforts on important issues facing credit unions and their members like digital assets and emergency capital investment. prior to serving on the board he was the director of public and congressional affairs and chief

policy advisor to deborah mats. he previously served as a staffer in the house of representatives, if confirmed, he will continue to work collaboratively. it's what we asked thim to do to -- him to do, to represent all taxpayers, to ensure that our credit union system is safe, sound and works for all its members. mr. president, i encourage my colleagues to support the nomination of todd harper. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is 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 51, the nays are 45, and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's 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 670, lisa m. gomez of new jersey to be an assistant secretary of labor, signed by 17 senators. 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 lisa gomez, of new jersey, to be assistant secretary of labor 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: the yeas are 47, the nays are 46. the motion is agreed to.

mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the clerk will report the nomination. mr. schumer: excuse me. the clerk: nomination, department of labor, lisa m. gomez of new jersey to be an assistant secretary. mr. schumer: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate now vote on the motions to invoke cloture on the jacobs, young, and loyd nominations. if clotured is invoked, all postcloture time be considered expired on these and the gomez nomination, the senate vote on the nomination each at a time to be determined by the majority leader or his designee following consultation with the republican leader. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. 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 652, chavonda j. jacobs-young of georgia to be under secretary of agriculture for research, education, and economics, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of shah john did a j. jacobs-young of georgia to be undersecretary of agriculture for research, education, and economics shall be brought to the a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 89, the nays are 36789 the motion is agreed to o the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of agriculture, chavonda j. jacobs-young of georgia to be under secretary of agriculture for research, education, and economics. mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote on wayne nomination be brawn and the confirmation vote be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the republican leader. mr. schumer: it is a unique moment. i fully support senator paul in

his motion. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. paul: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent that the rest of the votes for this evening be ten-minute votes. mr. schumer: i agree with my colleague from the great commonwealth of kentucky. the presiding officer: is there objection? 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 669, amy loyd of new mexico to be assistant secretary for career, technical, and adult education, dependent of education, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of amy loyd of new mexico to be assistant secretary for career, technical, and adult

education, department of education, shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 54, the nays are 40.

and the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: may we have a little order in the senate. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. schumer: for some good news. there's been a good agreement. senator paul, senator stabenow, myself, senator murphy, senator brown. and so here's what -- we're only going to have one more vote, because we're vitiating, i think it is six, cloture moats. listen, one -- cloture votes. it is good news. i ask unanimous consent to withdraw the cloture motion on the harper, bagenstos, huey, baker and hartley nominations and the senate vote on confirmation at a time to be determined by the majority leader or his designee, following consultation with the republican leader. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection. mr. schumer: as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the

finance committee be discharged from further consideration and the senate proceed to s. res. 134. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 134, expressing the sense of the senate that the president should work with the government of the united kingdom to conclude goaxes for a comprehensive -- goations for a exree helps ever i -- comprehensive trade agreement between the united states appedz united kingdom. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the committee is discharged. the senate will proceed. the presiding officer: i ask unanimous consent that the lee substitute amendment to the resolution be considered and agreed to. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. schumer: i know of no further debate on the resolution as amended. the presiding officer: is there further debate? hearing none, the question is on adoption of the resolution. as amended. all in favor say aye. opposed nay. the eyes have it -- the ayes

have it. the resolution as amended is agreed to. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the lee amendment to the preamble be considered and agreed to, the preamble as amended be agreed to, the lee amendment to the title be considered and agreed to, the title as amended be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate consider the following nomination, calendar 923, jane hartley to be ambassador of the united states of america to the united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, that the senate vote on the nomination without interveepg action or debate, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, any additional statements be printed in the record, and the president will be immediately notified on the senate's actions. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of state, jane

hartley of new york to be ambassador to the united kingdom of great britain and northern northern ireland. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the nomination. all in favor say aye. all opposed nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask that the senate now vote on the confirmation of executive calendar 717, the nomination of cathy ann harris as provided under the previous order. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. under the previous order the senate will resume consideration of the harris nomination. which the clerk will now report. the clerk: nomination, merit systems protection board, cathy ann harris, of maryland, to be a member. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the nomination. mr. schumer: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote: