follow it all live on the c-span networks and c-span now, our free mobile video app or anytime on demand, at c-span.org. today the senate's working on legislation to protect same-sex and interracial marriages, would require states to recognize interracial and same-sex marriage if a state that doesn't recognize it. and 1996, defines marriage as one man and one woman under law. we take you to the senate floor here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain will lead the

senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. spirit of life who soars upon the wings of the wind, breathe your grace in us. remind us to be thankful for the people who bless our lives. thank you for the people who lie exemplary lives and show us what productive living should be. thank you for the people who inspire us to strive for noble things. thank you for the people who comfort us, who help ease life's hurts.

thank you for the people who strengthen us, who give us courage to tackle the difficult. thank you for the people who enlighten us through the written word. lord, thank you for our senators who strive to protect and defend our freedom. we pray in your great name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c, november 17, 2022. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable jacky rosen, a senator from the state of nevada, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to h.r. 8404, which the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to consider h.r. 8404 an act to repeal the defense of marriage act and ensure respect for state regulation of marriage and for other purposes.

>> i want to begin by thanking and recognizing the house judiciary chairman jerry nadler and the entire house equality

bill and start up this effort. this legislation passed the house of representatives with a strong bipartisan vote of 267-157 come with all democrats and 47 republicans supporting the bill. i also want to extend my heartfelt appreciation for my senate colleagues who have worked tirelessly to get us up to this point. i want to thank the lead sponsor of the bill, senator feinstein, and also thank and recognize the hard work and effort of senator collins, senator portman, senator sinema, and senator tillis for their steadfast commitment. we couldn't be where we are right now without their efforts.

i also want to fake thank f of all of these offices for the hard work that went into this legislation, including my own counsel back of brown him and my chief of staff ken reedy creek and lastly i want to thank all of the advocates who have fought for marriage equality for decades. we are on the cusp of an historic vote in the senate because of everybody's, everybody's efforts. and i decided in speaking about what it wanted to share today that i wanted to put a face on this debate and actually more accurately three phases. let me introduce you to -- all right, my dear friends,

margaret, denise and the daughter maria. and just tell you a little bit about them but how this underlying issue impacts them. the marriage and long partnership that my dear friends denise and margaret share began in oklahoma in 1981. they were organizers working to pass equal rights amendment in that state. they were organizing support for the era so that we might add a few simple words to the united states constitution, specifically equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the united states or by any state on account of sex. that they met one another during a struggle for social justice surprised no one who knew either denise or margaret, for really the pursuit of equality and

equity and justice has defined each of them as individuals as well as life partners. their professional and personal lives in the movement for women's rights, lgbtq rights, educational equity, affordable housing, economic justice, they are all inextricably linked. their first date occurred in december of 1981 over coffee in oklahoma city. and as that era campaign came to an unsuccessful close in 1982, they chose to move together to madison, wisconsin. and i vividly recall meeting them shortly thereafter in the autumn of 1984. now, denise hailed from milwaukee, wisconsin. margaret from webster city iowa.

and they were incredibly and are incredibly committed to one another, but they also, as they got a little older that something was missing. actually i want to say someone was missing. and denise and margaret's journey to find that someone was arduous, yet they never gave up. in 2003 after working with an adoption agency for many years, denise received a video of their daughter, this lovely brown eyed maria. and the family that you now see here, this is actually several years old, maria is not a

sophomore at the university of wisconsin madison campus. so little bit dated. but i wanted to put a face or a series of faces on this because it's such an all-american family and an all-american story. but as everyone knows about the debate were about to enter is that marriage was not an option for margaret and denise until after the obergefell decision. and the things that most married people take for granted are things that couples like margaret and denise had to think about and had to figure out how to do protect one another, how do they protect their family. we often think when we think about marriage of the wedding and the ceremony and the celebration, but we don't often

think about the hundreds upon hundreds of rights and responsibilities that civil marriage confers upon couples. you know, margaret entities were telling me about their recollection of when the city of madison passed a domestic partnership ordinance allowing them to register, and when that happened, for for the first time they could be on one another's health insurance. that's something married couples can it take for granted, that they can have one another on their health insurance. they had to think a lot about what they would do in an emergency situation where one might be in the hospital. because without marriage you are technically legal strangers, and literally if margaret were in the hospital after an accident, for example, denise, without

having the appropriate papers to help pay for with the power of attorney be viewed as a strange and would be potentially denied access. adoption is something that is, has made many a family and the united states. and yet prior to marriage rights, denise and margaret had to make the choice that only one would have the official adoption, but then they had to go through a whole bunch of legal rigor more -- rigmarole, if you will, that margaret if need be to go to a parent-teacher conference or to pick maria up at school, had some documentation at the school that she, too, was a parent.

estate planning, you have to think about that. you have to think about that intently prior to marriage rights being conferred. i wanted to get a quick chance to meet margaret and denise and maria, because they reflect experiences of literally tens of millions of people in the united states. and it is why the obergefell decision was silky. now, i want -- was so keep your, to focus on why it is so critical that we adopt the respect for marriage act. because obergefell right now is the law of the land, but there

is great concern that that legal precedent could be in jeopardy. some of my colleagues have questioned the urgency and maybe even the necessity of passing the respect for marriage act. some have asserted that there is no threat to these rights in america. some have said that there's no case currently making its way up to the united states supreme court challenging these rights, so there's nothing really to worry about. others have suggested that proponents of the respect for marriage act are raising the issue just to drive further divisions for americans, among americans. i believe that there is an urgency to pass the respect for marriage act floor yesterday was nothing short of the senate working at its very best.

the senate took a bold step towards securing greater justice for millions of americans by advancing the respect for marriage act with a resounding bipartisan vote. standing here on the floor yesterday, you could feel the sense of relief, of joy within the chamber. after the vote, i got on the phone with my daughter and daughter-in-law and told them the good news, that marriage equality is now on the march towards final passage. thank goodness. passing the respect for marriage act is no longer a matter of if, but only of when. later this afternoon, the senate will take the next step in the process, by formally adopting the motion to proceed. after that, both sides will have to work together to reach an agreement for voting on final passage as soon as we can. yesterday's vote was a vindication that it was well worth the wait. while nothing was inevitable about the result, i never lost faith that deep down enough of our colleagues would understand

how important it was to get this bill done. i'm glad that that faith has now been justified. while some may want to delay passage -- while some may want to delay this process, make no mistake, there's no stopping this bill from final passage. as i said a moment ago, the question of passage is not about if, but when. i hope my republican colleagues will work with us to move forward with this bill sooner, rather than later. i want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who spearheaded this legislation. senators sinema, baldwin, collins, portman, and tillis. they did terrific work. we wouldn't be here without them. finally, i hope this bipartisan legislation, and all others we have passed this congress, will continue to show how the senate can function in the upcoming 118th congress. i've always said i've had a

hierarchy -- first, try to get things done in a bipartisan way whenever possible. it's far better to get things done for the american people than hold show votes that bring political reckoning, but have no hopes of passing. our job, after all, is to get things passed, make lives better here in the senate. when the new congress begins next year, that will continue to be my guiding star and number one focus. now, on maga, madam president, last week's midterm elections revealed a basic but often underappreciated truth about politics -- when elected leaders prioritize getting things done, getting things done, and when candidates can run on accomplishments, the american people respond positively. that shouldn't be some remarkable insight. but unfortunately, too many seem to forget it. indeed, too many of my

republican colleagues seem to have forgotten it over the last couple of years. look what happened on tuesday. the republican side ran many flawed candidates who embraced maga radicalism, and they lost. they spread the big lie, sowed doubt, division, and nastiness, and they ignored the issues that mattered most to american. as a result, voters ran in the other direction. but don't take my word for it. here's what leader mcconnell himself said earlier this week, and i want to quote him in full, quote, this is leader mcconnell, we underperformed among independents and moderates because their impression of many of the people in our party and leadership roles is that they're engulfed in chaos, negativity, and excess attacks, and it frightened independent and moderate republican voters. listen to that part again -- it frightened independent and moderate republican voters.

that's exactly what i've been saying, madam president. maga republicans did, in fact, scare a lot of americans, who might otherwise have given the gop a closer look. all that talk about stolen elections, threatening poll workers, it frightened people, and thank god. americans said this is not for us. americans believe deeply in democracy, despite right wing radical maga news media throwing all kinds of lies and incendiary statements at them every day. the roots of democracy are deep, and a shield against that kind of activity. now, republicans have a choice to make when the 118th congress begins next year. if they continue embracing the maga approach of chaos and gridlock and division, they're going to keep losing. i earnestly hope that republicans realize it's better for them, and of course for the country, to cure themselves of this maga sickness as quickly as

they can. i know that it won't happen overnight, and i know that some on the other side would prefer to double down on maga, but it is critical for our nation's health, and in fact their party's health, that they learn this lesson. americans don't want government to be an endless circus of maga insanity. they want leaders who take their jobs seriously and work across the aisle to solve our nation's problems. they know we're not going to succeed at everything, but they want good, earnest efforts at trying, and when both sides try in good faith we often get a lot done, as this past congress has shown. if republicans fail to accept this wisdom, they will only invite further defeat in the future. i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call:

>> i want to begin by thanking and recognizing the house judiciary chairman, jerry nadler, and the entire house equality caucus for introducing the house bill and started up

this effort. this legislation passed the house of representatives with a strong bipartisan vote of 267-157, with all democrats, and 47 republicans supporting the bill. i also want to extend my heartfelt appreciation for my senate colleagues who have worked tirelessly to get us up to this point. i want to thank the lead sponsor of the bill, store feinstein, and also thank and recognize the hard work and effort of senator collins, senator portman, senator sinema and senator tillis, for the steadfast commitment. we couldn't be where we are right now without their efforts. i also want to thank the staff of all these offices for the

hard work that went into this legislation, including my own counsel, becca, and my chief of staff ken here and lastly, i want to thank all the advocates who have fought for marriage equality for decades. we are on the cusp of and the stork vote in the senate. because of everybody's efforts. i decided it think about what i wanted to share today that i wanted to put a face on this debate, and actually more accurately, three phases. let me entered issue my dear friends, margaret, denise, and their daughter maria. they just tell you a little bit about them but then how this underlying issue impacts them.

the marriage and long partnership that my dear friends, denise and margaret, share began in oklahoma in 1981. they were as organizers working to vast equal rights amendment in that state. they were organizing support for the era so it might add a few simple words to the united states constitution. specifically, equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the united states or by any state on account of sex. that they met one another during a struggle for social justice surprised no one who knew either denise or margaret. for really the pursuit of equality and equity and justice has defined each of them as individuals, as well as, as life

partners. their professional and personal lives and the movement for women's rights, lgbtq rights, educational equity, affordable housing, economic justice, they are all inextricably linked. their first date occurred in december of 1981 over coffee in oklahoma city. and as that era campaign came to an unsuccessful close in 1982, they chose to move together to madison, wisconsin. and i vividly recall meeting them shortly thereafter in the autumn of 1984. denise hailed from milwaukee, wisconsin. this is denise. margaret from webster city, iowa. and they were incredibly and are

incredibly committed to one another, but they also determined as they got a little older that something was missing actually i want to say someone was missing. and denise and margaret's journey to find that someone was rus, yet they never gave up -- argue us. in 2003 after working with an adoption agency for many years, denise received a video of their daughter. this lovely brown eyed maria. and the family that you now see here, this is actually several years old, maria senator ossoff were at the university of wisconsin madison campus, so little bit dated. but i wanted to put a face or a

series of faces on this because it's such an all-american family and an all-american story but as everyone knows about the debate were about to enter is that marriage was not an option for mark and denise and tell after the obergefell decision. mr. mcconnell: madam president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: yesterday the republican conference met to select its leadership team for the # 18th -- 118th congress. i'm deeply relieved that my

colleagues decided to rehire me for another term as republican leader. i'm proud of senators thune, capito and daines who are taking on new rules. we have impressive new senators elect. our conference is brimming with energy, ideas and enthusiasm to fight with the millions and millions of americans who elected republican senators to be their champions and their voice in this chamber. republicans are a big party that unites around commonsense principles and policies to make our nation stronger and make american families lives better. we stand for fiscal sanity instead of reckless liberal spending that create jaw-dropping inflation. we stand for the pro-worker, pro-family, pro-growth ideas

that built the best economy for working people in a generation before covid-19. republican policies have fueled low inflation, low unemployment and robust growth, all at the very same time. we stand for a strong, modern military that can deter and it defeat america's enemies and competent american leadership in the world instead of this administration's deeply botched retreat from afghanistan and desperate cozying up to the murderous regime in tehran. we stand for energy dominance instead of cutting off our own supplies while begging foreign dictators to produce more. we stand for real energy independence, not making china rich by buying solar panel components that make american energy more expensive and less reliable. we stand for safer streets and we understand that real compassion means ensuring safety

and security for innocent people, not giving shorter sentences to the violent convicts who hurt them. we stand for securing our border and enforcing our laws instead of letting unvetted people and illegal drugs pour into our country 24/7. we stand for putting parents' rights and parents' involvement back into our schools and getting radical indoctrination out. we stand for the quaint negotiation that our -- notion that our judges need to follow the rules as written, not as a third legislative branch that our citizens can't vote out. we stand are for free speech, and the freedom of worship. this is where we stand, madam president, and it just so happens the american people stand with us. last week's exit polls show that

republicans are more trusted on kitchen table issues that keep american families awake at night. when the american people looked at our nonmuddle view of our approach to the issues, they liked what they saw. we have members on this side of the aisle that prove that. it is an honor of a lifetime to serve with my distinguished colleagues and serve our conference in this leadership role. now on a related matter. yesterday evening brought confirmation of some great news. the republicans have secured the majority of the house of representatives for the next two years. it will be a great pleasure to serve alongside the new republican house. i want to congratulate the soon to be speaker mccarthy and all of the new and returning members of congress across the capitol

whose elections will return the house from a reckless rubber-stamp to a shorely needed -- sorely needed house. radical far-left policies is not limited to red or purple states. new republican congressmen and women have been hired by their neighbors even in deep blue states like new york and california. even further evidence that when the american people get an unmuddled look at our commonsense conservative view of the issues, they like what they see. i look forward to working with our house republican colleagues new and returning in the years to come. now on a related matter. the capitol may be preparing for the next congress, but hardworking americans are still be hurt by the radical party line spending that democrats

rammed through during this congress. since president biden took office, his all democratic government fired up the printing presses, our nation has been hit with 13.9% inflation. in the state of georgia, inflation's even worse. it's closer to 15% since january of 2021. families are having to pay hundreds of dollars every -- extra every month just to maintain their standard of living from before the democrats got power, let alone trying to get ahead. the many georgia families who cannot afford it are falling farther and farther behind. housing inflation alone is costing the average georgia

household an extra $137 a month. overall energy costs are up over 9% in the atlanta area just in the last 12 months alone. as we head into winter, nearly four in ten households in georgia use natural gas as their main heating fuel. residential natural gas prices have skyrocketed more than 200% on president biden's watch. the state's natural gas prices are way, way higher than the national average and that's before you get to the brand-new national gas tax that both georgia senators voted to pass into law a few months ago. the democrats have passed radical policy on top of radical policy and it has brought the people of georgia pain on top of pain. but washington democrats still aren't finished. a month ago the biden administration decided to insult

working americans by issuing another reckless giveaway that would actually transfer even more wealth toward highly educated people who already tend to be more well off. as one study found upper income households account for the disproportionate share of the student loan debt. that makes sense, they borrowed money that will push up people's salaries in the future. but president biden decided that working people who worked their way through college or paid off the debt or found another way to avoid student loans, president biden said all those people will pick up the tab for doctors and lawyers' graduate studies. by the way, our colleague from west virginia, senator manchin has himself admitted this one reckless move would more than eclipse the supposed deficit reduction that democrats claimed with their so-called inflation reduction act. even according to the generous estimates of that bill's savings

that democrats actually like, this student loan socialism can bill ices it all -- cannibalizes it all, all of the savings that the senior senator from west virginia is gone. apparently he had planned the bait and switch all along. now president biden's attempt to circumvent congress has caused legal trouble. it was speaker pelosi who admitted before the administration rolled out the plan that they lacked the proper legal authority to do what they did. earlier this week a panel of the eighth circuit issued a junction preventing the biden administration from going forward with its plan, but reportedly president biden's team are so desperate to make inflationary even -- naition even -- inflation even worse, they plan to extend the endless

moratorium on payments. washington democrats' top priority is making sure that california doctors and manhattan lawyers don't have to pay their debts while working people in georgia keep getting burned.

mr. thune: madam president. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: thank you, madam president. on sunday i had the privilege of attending the welcome home ceremony for the 235th military police company for the south dakota national guard after their deployment to guantanamo bay. it was a fitting activity for veterans day weekend. the ceremonies are always joyful occasions, madam president. seeing couples and families reunited and celebrating together after a long absence. welcoming soldiers back to the familiarity of home. but in the midst of the joy and celebration, these ceremonies are also a powerful reminder of all that our servicemembers and their families give up to serve our country. the joy of reunification points

to the months of loneliness in which spouses and loved ones have had to live without their husband or wife, mom or dad, son or daughter. it highlights the long months in which moms and dads have had to shoulder all the burden of child rearing alone. the soccer games, the football games, the doctors visits, the emergency car repairs, the visit from the plumber, all the daily challenges and responsibilities that couples usually share fall solely on the shoulders of the spouse holding down the for fort at home. on top of the responsibility is the anxiety, the constant worry about the loved one halfway around the world and maybe in danger. these moments of joyful reunion also point to all that our military men and women sacrifice while stationed far from their families and loved ones. the months of separation from spouses and children with zooms and phone calls and e-mails

being a poor substitute for bedtime stories read together on the couch and holding hands on an after-dinner walk. the loneliness, the worry about a pregnant wife or an ailing parent or a child having a tough year in school ail while far away from the comforts of home that the rest of us take for granted. and of course while reunions are joyful, the challenges don't end after deployment. it takes time for the stress of a tough posting to dissipate, for soldiers to get reacclimated to the civilian world or to their state side base, for families to readjust to living together and not apart, only to have to do it all over again when the next deployment comes around. some servicemembers bear the invisible wounds of war for the long term, not to mention those who are wounded in combat sometimes requiring loved ones to become caretakers. and yet despite all of the hardships and the challenges,

men and women still rise up and answer the call. for families to readjust to living together and not apart only to have to do it all over again when their deployment comes around. servicemembers and their families spend years and decades serving our country. they willingly shoulder the burdens and the challenges of this life, animated by love of country and of their fellow man, they choose a life that asks them to fret their own needs -- forget their own needs and focus only on what they can do for others. that asks them to forego comfort and sacrifice up to and including the sacrifice of their own lives. their sacrifice, their willingness to serve and what enables us to go about our lives in peace and freedom. we owe our men and women in uniform and the families who support them a debt we can never repay. but we can at least, at the very least, remember as we go

about our daily business, as we travel to our jobs in security and come home again at night the same way, we can remember that we live in peace and safety because of the sacrifice of the men and women of the united states military who stand on watch for us. i am profoundly grateful for the honor of representing some of the men and women of the united states military here in the united states senate as well as our many south dakota veterans. and i will continue to do everything i can to ensure that our military and our veterans have the resources they need and the resources that they are owed. i have successfully fought for over a decade to prevent closures of service -- or service reductions, i should say, at v.a. facilitiesing in south dakota to ensure that veterans can continue receiving the health care they need close to home. and i will continue to work to make sure our state's v.a. facilities remain open and available to our veterans and that community care is equally

accessible if they so choose. i will continue to work to ensure that our military members have everything that they need to deter threats and to protect america. and as always, ellsworth air force base is at the top of my priority list. i'm working to ensure that we continue to make neapedded investments -- needed investments in facilities and other infrastructure that ellsworth will need to host the b-21 bomber mission as well as to ensure the influx of military families that will move to the area to have adequate school capacity and housing access. madam president, as we celebrate veterans and military families month, i want to express my gratitude to the citizen-soldiers of the south dakota national guard, the airmen at ellsworth air force base and our south dakota veterans and their families. may god bless you all and all of

your brothers and sisters in arms, and may god continue to bless america. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the mr. tuberville: madam president, i'd like to echo the words of our senator from south dakota about veterans day. we weren't here. in my state of alabama, we have 400,000 veterans that have served our country and served our country well. a lot of them put their life on the line. we have a lot of injuries. i just want to thank them for what they've done, being that we had, weren't here in the chamber on veterans day. i want to, again, thank them for their service and hopefully in the future we can talk more

about our veterans here in this chamber because there's not a more special group than that. i also want to start today by taking time to honor my departing chief of staff, stephen boyd, and thank him for his service to the state of alabama and to our country. for the past two years, stephen has been at the center of every decision and every action we've taken on behalf of the state of alabama in my office. and after nearly two decades of public service, we say goodbye to this integral part of our team. when you run for congress, you learn that people are quick to give you advice, especially when used a lifelong career in something outside of politics. one tip i heard over and over was hire a great chief of staff. but when i thought about what would make a good chief of staff, i decided i needed

someone with three main qualifications. one, someone who knew the federal government. two, someone who knew the great state of alabama. and, number three, someone who would lead with integrity, and that someone was stephen boyd. stephen brought a wealth of knowledge to my office from his time working in the house, in the senate, and as a senate-confirmed assistant attorney general for the office of legislative affairs. stephen has been quietly working in the background to help improve the lives of the people in alabama, and i have no doubt he will continue with that sense of service and succeed in his next endeavors. so, stephen, thank you for your service to our office, thank you to your service to the great state of alabama, and

thank you for your continued long service to the great country that we live in. meanwhile, our work here in washington continues. moving forward, congress has a lot to do to get our country back on track with a lot of division. last week millions and millions of americans across the country took part in one of the most sacred traditions that we have here. it's called voting. the right to vote in free and fair elections is the cornerstone of our democracy. i was proud to see so many alabamians exercise that right, and also people across our country. voting is the best way for the american people to tell the government how they feel about our performance. that's how we're evaluated. as expected, the people used

that opportunity last week to send a message to us up here in d.c. no more one-party rule in this building. for too long this congress has been controlled by the democrats and have ignored a lot of issues facing the american people as inflation has skyrocketed, our democratic colleagues continue to spend trillions of dollars on partisan bills that has made the problem worse. our democratic colleagues passed the so-called inflation reduction act a few months ago. you know, the name of the bill which was intentionally misleading, has really nothing to do with the contents. there's a lot of contents in that bill, a lot of money being spent, a lot of money going to so-called climate change. is that going to help inflation? is that going to help the american people as we speak? no, it has not.

my democratic colleagues need to know that the legislation will do nothing, absolutely nothing, and has not done nothing at the present time to help inflation. but it does spend nearly $750 billion, with a b, more dollars on radical, left-wing priorities, many of them focused on green energy policies that have accelerated our economy's slide toward recession. you know, we are all environmentalists. we all love our environment. we also love the people in this country from top to bottom. and the people come first, the lives of the people in this country come first. so as gas prices hit record highs and home utility bills are expected to go through the roof this winter -- and they've already started -- this

administration has done nothing, absolutely nothing to ease the pain. and our president last week said after the election, what do you plan on doing to help in the future to the american citizens? what do you want to change? he said nothing. so we can take him for his word. this looming energy crisis has been obvious, very obvious to all of us for months. yet, president biden and his allies have nothing to stop it from happening. prices will continue to go up. we have no answers, and that's why we're here. we're here to have answers for the american people. in fact, this administration has done the opposite. siding with climate activists and begging foreign adversaries

for oil instead of promoting and unleashing energy production right here at home. just a couple of weeks ago president biden promised a group of climate protesters that there would be no new drilling while speaking at a campaign rally. there's no answers in that statement for the american people, who we represent. in addition to inflation and painful high gas prices, leadership in d.c. has done nothing to address the rising crime ravaging our communities. the wide open borders, it's a magnet for cartels and deadly, deadly, deadly drugs. i've recently visited the southern border to see the madness taking place just a few weeks ago and what it's costing the american taxpayers.

i visited eagle pass, texas. at eagle pass, which is the del rio sector, they control 200 miles of the border. that's basically just a third of the border on our southern tip of the united states. only one-third. we are spending $15 million a month just processing the illegal immigrants coming across the border. that's only the cost of processing that come across, and they're released into our country no less than 72 hours after they're brought across our border, and they go to no telling where, all over our country. it is a taxpayer's nightmare. we're talking about $14 million to $15 million per month for just 200 miles.

you can imagine what the rest of the border is having to pay out of the taxpayers' pocket. one thing i want everybody to understand, i keep hearing about how our border is secure. folks, our border is not secure. i was almost run over by the herd of people coming across the line early one morning, standing there. and people are excited about being in the united states of america. but we know not who they are. most can tell us where they're coming from. but they have no identification. as of today, we've taken people from 180 different countries. a lot of them are here doing no good. and i will tell you this, this talking to the border patrol, we have a lot of people coming across, maybe for a better life. but the ones coming across that are running from our border patrol, which we do not catch, a lot of them we do not see, which

is 15% to 20%, when you're running from the border patrol at the border, when we're letting you come across, no matter who you are, and come into our country, if you're running from the border patrol, you got something to hide. and that something to hide usually is not going to be very good for our country. in addition to the tens of millions of illegal immigrants already in the united states, we've already had five million come across that we know of. you can probably add, as the border patrol said, another million to that list. another million people here that include people selling drugs, human trafficking, terrorists. it's a scary situation. we will pay the price in the near future for this. right now, the american taxpayer is paying a financial price. but in the near future, bewill pay a price that we -- we will pay a price we will have to overcome.

we don't know what it is yet, but we will pay the price. the fact that this administration have ignored the border is difficult reality for me to accept, and it should be a difficult reality for all of us to accept. we love people in this country. we are a immigrant country. we're all come from immigrants. when you're born in this country, you hit the lottery. we live in, no doubt, the best country on the face of the earth. we're very fortunate. a lot of people weren't born in this country. but we take a lot of people into our country, from all different places. but they should come in the right way, the proper way, where we can recognize them, identify them, and understand that they're coming here for the reasons of having a better life, where we can help them. but right now, our border is overrun, and we better get control of this because it's

going to be a sad day when something happens in our country, and we're going to be on this floor apologizing to the american people of something terrible happening again. i'm going to continue to push back on the radical spending in these next two years, in this congress, our open borders, counterproductive energy proposals, and the policies that take place and we make our criminals victims in this country. we have to stop that. we have to make sure we put criminals in jail and don't make them the victim. and when my new republican colleagues come to washington in january, our party will be united. we've had our problems. we worked out our problems. and we hope to be more united than ever before. we want to deliver lower costs, safer communities, and a secure

border. we need to continue to talk about that. i'd love to hear my democrat colleagues get up and talk about what they see when they go to the border, because it is one of the most important things that's ever happened in this country. one of the most important. and we have to have an answer to that. we can do this by cutting spending and unnecessary regulations. we can help the american people. people ask, what's the republicans going to do? we want to cut spending. we want to cut regulations. and we want to lower taxes. put more money into american people's pockets where they can live a better life. our federal government, the fed now is raising interest rates. their job is to try to keep inflation down. i understand that. why do they do that? they raise interest rates to slow down housing. folks, we have ruined housing in this country in the last three months. we have achieved our goal. we have achieved our goal of people not building homes.

we have gone to almost zero in the state of alabama. we have put thousands of people out of jobs. we've accomplished our goal of putting housing on the back burner. i'm for slowing down interest rate increases. let's see what has happened in the fed. let's make sure they're working. we tend to raise them every couple of months now. let's see what's happening. let's help the american people. let's don't keep kicking them to the back burner. we have slowed housing down. let's put people back to work now. let's put them back to work, give them an opportunity to live a better life. we're in a tough time. it's going to get tougher. we will see a deep recession in 2023. it's coming. there's no way around it. so we they'd to start making -- so we need to start making plans to help the american people overcome this recession that's going to hit us all right

between the eyes in the next few months. we live if had a great country, and this body needs to help the people that live in this great country. thank you, mr. president. mrs. feinstein: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. feinstein: thank you very much, mr. president. i rise to speak about the respect for marriage act. i was proud to introduce this bill earlier this summer with senators baldwin, collins, and portman, and i'm greatly encouraged by yesterday's bipartisan vote of 62-37 to advance the bill and continue moving this important legislation forward. the respect for marriage act would guarantee legal protections for millions of marriages in the united states

by repealing the discriminatory defense of marriage act and ensuring that marriages entered into legally are given full faith and credit by every state and the federal government. simply put, americans should be free to marry the person they love, regardless of sexual orientation or race, without fear of discrimination or fear that their marriages will be invalidated. this is a straightforward bill. it merely codifies the existing requirement that the federal government and every state recognize legal marriages. in 2015, the supreme court ruled in obergefell v. hodges that the u.s. constitution guarantees the right to marry for same-sex

couples, and 55 years ago, in loving v. virginia, the supreme court ruled, and i quote, the freedom to marry a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the state, end quote. these decisions also reflect the will of the american people. over the past few decades public support for same-sex marriage and interracial marriage has grown exponentially. in fact, recent polls have found that 71% of americans support same-sex marriage and 94% approve of interracial marriages. this bill has been endorsed by hundreds of organizations, including nonprofits,

corporations, and religious organizations that span the ideological spectrum. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that a list of endorsing organizations be added to the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. feinstein: thank you, mr. president. i'd like to applaud the house for passing the respect for mairming act with significant bipartisan support earlier this summer. it is now the time for the senate to do the same. i'd like to take a moment to speak to my republican colleagues who have said marriage equality is, quote, a nonissue, end quote, right now. some of my senate colleagues have said things like, quote, it's the law of the land, so passing legislation is not a good use of congress' time, end quote.

but as we saw this summer, with the supreme court's decision to overturn roe v. wade, hard-fought rights are still always vulnerable to repeal. we must also remember that a concurring opinion to the roe v. wade repeal, one supreme court justice explicitly called for the court to reconsider and overturn obergefell. we must act now so that no matter what happens the cou courts -- married, same-sex and interracial couples are protected. overturning obergefell and loving would return the country to a patchwork of state laws, where couples could be subject to state-sanctioned discrimination. many states still have bans on

same-sex marriages on the books that would immediately take effect if marriage equality were overturned. i'd also like to touch on how far-reaching the legal ramifications of overturning obergefell and loving would be. without the respect for marriage act, if a married, same-sex or interracial couple lived in the state that decided to ban their union, their marriage could be invalidated. even if a couple lived in a state that permitted same-sex or interracial marriage, that marriage could be deemed invalid. , if they were able to travel to a state that did not have marriage equality. invalidating marriages would also give rise to a host of

legal concerns for couples who relied on the ability to marry when making major life and family planning decisions. for example, spouses may no longer be able to make important health care decisions or even visit their partners in the hospital. nonbirthing parents may no longer have parental rights over their children. this would be some serious confusion about federal and state tax filings, and tax laws could be arbitrarily and discriminatorially applied. the respect for marriage act will ensure that all legally married couples are afforded the same protections, regardless of where they liver, providing security and peace of mind to

millions of families. mr. president, i've spent decades advocating for equality. as a supervisor and mayor of san francisco, during the height of the gay rights movement, i witnessed the terrible pain and trauma that resulted from hateful discrimination. i watched firsthand as the lgbt community fought for legal recommendation of their lives, their relationships, and their personal dignity. we cannot return to a system that allows bigotry and hate. bigotry and discrimination have no place in this society. no one should have to live not knowing whether their marriage will suddenly become invalid. this bill will give families the

peace of mind and security that comes with knowing that their valid marriages will remain legally protected under federal law. i want to thank senators collins, portman, sinema, and tillis for their leadership on this important issue, and i encourage the rest of my colleagues to please join us in supporting the passage of the bill. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield the floor. mrs. feinstein: i recognize the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. tester: mr. president, i would ask at this moment in time that the quorum call be eviscerated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. tester: i would also ask unanimous consent that floor privileges be granted to lauren shargon during the pend densey of the 117th congress. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection. mr. tester: just wait a second. mr. tester: mr. president. the presiding officer: the

senator from montana. mr. tester: i come to the floor today to ask unanimous consent for the confirmation of a highly qualified nominee standing to lead the greater military the world has ever known. as we speak it is no secret that vladimir putin's unprovoked and deadly war is raging in ukraine. russia along with china, iran, north korea and other adversaries are actively working to erode our national security and undermine democratic principles across the world. just last month i had the opportunity to visit our troops stationed in eastern europe. i could not have been prouder of these brave american servicemembers who are at the tip of the spear protecting our democracy. they have literally dedicated their lives to defending our freedoms and the freedoms of our ally. these men and women need our support and they're depending on us to do our part. and confirm quality candidates to serve in strategic leadership roles. with that in mind, i would ask

to confirm rheannea. this nominee's years of service at the intelligence agency as a senior staff on the select committee on intelligence and special assistance to the secretary of defense make her immensely qualified to serve in this position. our national security is critically important. it is a fundamental responsibility of this body. and we must take action to make sure we have the best people in the positions to defend our democracy and national security. i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination. calendar number 993, 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 the president be immediately notified of the senate's action, the senate resume legislative session.

the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of defense, rheanne wirkkala of maryland to be assistant secretary of defense. the presiding officer: the question is on the nomination. all in all those in favor say eye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. mr. tester: thank you, mr. president. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

same-sex marriage is a legally valid even if taking place in another state that doesn't recognize those unions. it would repeal the defense of marriage act which was signed in 1996 which defined marriage as between one man and one one man -- woman under federal law. lawmakers are looking to improve fema wildfire preparedness and response efforts and simplify the fema process for seeking assistance following a major does after. you can watch live coverage of the house on c-span and our free c-span now apps. on the senate floor waiting for senator remarks.

live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2.

majority support for same-sex marriage across all age groups, religious affiliations and political parties. last year polling shows 55% of republican support the legal recognition of same-sex marriage. there - what we are about to vote on doesn't go that far. it simply says you get married in one state another state has to honor it. why are we here? given this brought american consensus? wise the senate debating this today as to when we recognize

the support? current federal law does not reflect the will or beliefs of the american people in this regard, the statute allows state and federal government to recognize same-sex marriages. this law is not enforceable i would argue because of supreme court rulings it still represent congress's last word on the subject. it is important to clarify that, to get the old legislation off the books. likewise, federal law is silent on interracial marriage, that needs to be addressed. given this disconnect between the american people and current legislation it is time for the senate to settle the issue and pass the respect for marriage act as the house of representatives has done, overwhelming vote in the house, 46 republicans supporting it. this bill allows interracial or same-sex couples -- mr. cornyn: mr. president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes, we

are. mr. cornyn: i'd ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, since the real president, president biden, was elected to office, the southern border, which my state shares a 1,200 common border with mexico, that border has been absolutely overwhelmed by the number of migrants entering the united states. the united states is the most generous country in the world when it comes to legal immigration. we naturalize almost a million people a year, which is i think part of the secret to our economic success. we see the best and the brightest from all around the world want to come to america, with aens to enjoy the kind -- want to enjoy the kind of prosperity that people enjoy and the opportunity to pursue their

dreams. so legal immigration i think has been part of the secret sauce that has helped make our country great, and we need to protect that. illegal immigration is a disaster. what is happening now on the border and has happened the last two years under the biden administration has been nothing short of a humanitarian and public safety crisis. it's a little bit of -- it's more than a little bit of a disappoint when president biden campaigned on the promises of policies that were sure to lead to this exact situation. but on the one hand he said i want to be a unite area, i want to work together to solve our nation's problems. but then to see him completely abdicate the federal government's responsibility to control uncontrolled migration across the border is inexcusable.

once president biden took office, his administration continued to send a clear message to the cartels, to the human smugglers, and to the migrants that our border was open. oh, and don't forget the drug cartels who depend on an open border to sell their poison all across our country, taking the lives last year of 108,000 americans alone. and some people have said, well, apparently every state is now a border state -- and i think that's true, particularly when you see the epidemic of fentanyl so pervasive in all of our communities. we're losing students in our high schools on a regular basis who think they're taking something like a -- let's say a xanax or a percocet or something else but it's laced with fentanyl and it kills them, because only a very small piece

of fentanyl can take your life. it's that powerful. unfortunately, the administration is now trying to play catch-up to its failures and abdication to provide security across our southern border. last fiscal year for the first time on record, annual border encounters reached nearly 2.4 million. when i say border encounters, that does not count the so-called getaways, which is what the border patrol calls them, hundreds of thousands of people who don't turn themselves in, claiming asylum. these are people who want to evade law enforcement, very likely involve either criminal activity, having a criminal record themselves, or perhaps just smuggling drugs into the united states. those are the getaways. so the 2.4 million is a low

number for the number of people that's come across the border in the last two years, and there's no indication that things are slowing down. i know that vice president harris, who was named the border czar for president biden's administration, when she talks about immigration, she says, well, would end to get back to the root causes. and she talks to the president of guatemala or honduras or el salvador and says, well, we need to make life better for people there so they don't come here. which is totally ignoring the scope and the gravity of the human smuggling networks that operate internationally. i mentioned this morning in the judiciary committee where the presiding officer was, too, that border patrol regularly encounter people from at many as 150 different countries. so the fact is, the criminal

organizations that make money on human smuggling will smuggle you from anywhere in the world, including countries of particular concern to us when it comes to terrorism for a price. so where if if you're coming from central america or mexico, it may cost you $5,000 or $10,000. if you're coming from pakistan, iraq, iran, it may cost you $15,000, and it goes on and on and on. so, vice president harris apparently doesn't understand what we're up against when she talks about root causes. people want to come here and they'll pay to come here and to evade a lawful system of controlled legal immigration, which as i said has been a good thing for our country, in favor

of transnational criminal organizations getting richer by the day smugging people from all around the world along with the drugs that i mentioned earlier that took the lives of 108,000 americans last year alone. in fiscal year 2018 we saw an average of 43,000 migrants at the border every month. that's 2018, four years ago -- 43,000. fiscal year 2022, fast-forward four years, the monthly total has skyrocketed from 43,000 to 198,000 a month. we're seeing four and a half times more people coming every single month, and not surprisingly, the border patrol can't keep up. and this is part of the strategy of these transnational criminal

organizations. they will send children unaccompanied to the border knowing that the border patrol, as they should, are going to try to take care of these children, as they process the asylum system. but what that means is they're not on the border when they're back filling out paperwork or changing diapers, and that's when the drug cartels come through. and it's like a four-lane highway into the united states, and it doesn't stop, mr. president -- it doesn't stop in texas. it goes to new jersey, it goes to illinois, it goes to all -- all across our country. not to mention that the border patrol doesn't have the space to house this many people, so they simply let them go. in many instances with a notice to appear for a future court

hearing, if somebody invokes asylum laws. but they don't have the personnel to control this humanitarian crisis, this flood of humanity coming across the border. and, as i said, the people coming across are a hodgepodge. some economic migrants, and we can understand people fleeing poverty or violence. we're human beings, too. we understand that. but it also creates the opportunity for criminals and drug smuggling and other nefarious actors to come across. there are so many of them, they've overwhelmed our capacity to monitor and hundreds of thousands are simply the got-aways. so we don't have enough people to do the jobs patrolling the front lines and arresting people who need to be arrested and interdicting the drugs that need to be interdicted.

i know chairman durbin, our friend and colleague from illinois, mentioned this morning in the judiciary committee hearing the fact that the customs and border protection have interdicted tons of drugs, and that's a good thing. but nobody is under any illusion that they've gotten anywhere near all, much less the majority of the drugs that come across the border. they haven't. so this is, unfortunately, another manifestation of the broken policies of the biden administration and the biden border crisis. we don't have enough immigration courts to keep up with the backlog, as people are released by the millions into the united states and told to appear for a court hearing. the last figures i saw showed that about half of the people didn't show up for their court hearing. but there's no effort to follow

up by immigration and customs enforcement to repatriate these people who don't comply with their notice to a but, honestly, there's millions of calls in the backlog -- millions of cases in the backlog and the cartels know that, too, and this is another way for them to game the system. and this is another incentive for people to come. you know, the border patrol talks about the push factors -- violence, poverty, things that cause people to want to leave their home to go somewhere else -- but they also talk about the pull factors, the perception that the border is open and there's no impediment to people coming here outside of our legal immigration system. that's another reason why the numbers are so huge because there's simply no deterrence. and as i said is this isn't just a problem in texas and other border states.

my border communities don't have the resources to help each and every migrant who arrives penniless, malnourished and maybe without anyplace to really go. so the truth is, the entire system is buckling under the weight of this border crisis. but if you think things are bad now, they're about to get worse. earlier this week a d.c. district court judge discriminated the center for disease control title 42 order. you'll r -- you'll remember title 421 a public safety order which powered the border patrol to turn back people coming across the border into the united states because infectious diseases can spread when people who haven't been vaccinated, who aren't tested or released into the interior of the united states. so this is a public health order that enabled the border patrol at least to use that tool to try

to modulate the flow of humanity coming across the border. but a district judge here has vacated title 42 now. the judge has granted a five-week stay giving the department of homeland security until midnight on december 21 to come up with a new plan. but this isn't a time to start scrambling and come up with a plan. it should have been happening years ago. i still remember meeting with the border patrol leadership and customs and border protection. they said when title 42 goes away, if we are denied that tool to be able to control the flow of illegal immigration, we will lose control. there will be no disincentive for people not to come across the border into the united states illegally. title 42 has been one of the few

remaining tools that have been used to prevent even greater chaos than what i've described. and now with it potentially likely going away, even that tool will be lost. but of course the administration has jettisoned almost every policy we had in place to secure the border and discourage migrants from undertaking the dangerous journey to our southern border. title 42 has given the department of homeland security the ability to quickly expel some migrants, usually adult males, and to prevent our border facilities and local communities from becoming even more overwhelmed than they already are. once this authority goes out the window, and that appears to be imminent, the situation is going to get much, much worse. of the more than 230 encounters

at the southern border last month, more than 78,000 were removed under title 42. 230,000 encounters, 78,000 removed using title 42. but if title 42 goes away, that's 78,000 more people each month who are likely then to make their way into the united states. title 42 also provided some means to control the need to process, house, and feed migrants coming across the border. but now with all of the restraints of title 42 off, it's going to get much and much worse. and the consequences will be dire indeed. well, as i said, the biden

border crisis is entirely predictable. and it's a result of the biden administration dismantling what few tools that were available to border patrol and to the u.s. government to control unrestricted access to the united states. and it seems to me the only consistent policy of the biden administration has been whatever the previous administration did, whether it's build infrastructure, provide more technology, more boots on the ground, whatever the policy of the previous administration was, we're going to do the opposite not because it makes sense, just because the previous administration did it. they're going to undo it. and of course those people who do claim asylum are met with a

two million-case backlog. on average it takes about two years for the case to be adjudicated. but migrants know this. they plan on this. this is part of the sales pitch of the human smugglers. so just go to the border and claim asylum, and then you'll be put in a queue of two million people and wait for your case to be called. of course more than half of the people don't show up. that's part of the plan. and those who do show up, we know that 90% of those cases fail to meet the legal standard for asylum. in the meantime, those migrants who -- if they had their case add jiewt cadeed would find they had no basis to stay in the united states. they are able to work and live here for years. in the meantime, i mention the

the notice that many migrants are given to appear for a court date. but because of the volume of people coming across, at one point the border patrol and customs and border protection didn't even issue those notices to appear for a date certain for a court setting. and they gave migrants a notice to report. so these are people who evaded the legal process to make their way into the united states, and we give them a slip of paper that say oh, when you get to where you're going, whether it's chicago or new york or washington, d.c., go turn yourself in to immigrations and customs enforcement, i.c.e. i just don't know how stupid the biden administration thinks the american people are because the

american people are not stupid. they understand that this notice to report is another means for people to make their way illegally into the united states and to stay here. and it's an incentive for more and more people to come. law enforcement is not just enforcing the law. it's actually sending a message of deterrence. don't do that. and we've lost all message of deterrence because migrants who make their way in the united states, they call back home. they say i made it. they watch tv. they see the migrants flowing across the border unrestricted. they say well, i guess if they can do it, i can do it, too. given the massive influx of people coming across the border

every day, the border patrol facilities are completely under water. rather than stand up new facilities or hire more personnel to make the expedited removal process function properly, the biden administration has just continued to release more and more people into the interior of the country. in many cases these people are released without any real information about who they are, where they're going, and what they're going to do when they get there. senator lankford and i have asked the government accountability office to evaluate the impact of these practices and the results are pretty shocking. the g.a.o. reported -- g -- reported that some had been scheduled for august 20e 24. two years from now. nearly two years from now. and that was just the

appointment to receive the notice to appear which begins -- begins the proceedings in immigration court. tack on the average of a two-year process for a single case to be adjudicated by an imdwraition judge, -- immigration judge and you're looking at a four-year-plus waiting period. if the administration doesn't come up with a plan to fix these problems before title 42 is lifted, we'll be looking at a pull factor to end all pull factors. here's why. earlier this year secretary mayorkas said that customs and border protection detention facilities could hold approximately 18,000 people. now that sounds like a big number, but those beds fill up quickly. and once title 42 goes away, every single person who crosses the border will have to be processed by the border patrol.

the administration previously said we could see as many as 18,000 migrants every day of title 42 -- if title 42 was lifted. that's a day. all 18,000 of those beds could fill up as a result of a single day's migration. and the question comes, what do we do to the rest? when the only detention facilities we have are full? so when these facilities are filled to capacity, agents are left with no other choice. the migrants are released, which is again part of the business model of the human smugglers and transnational criminal organizations that operate these illegal smuggling networks. they realize that they have overwhelmed the capacity of the border patrol and united states policy to keep people who should not come into the country out.

they may be given a notice to appear, but that is a document that tells asylum seekers when and where to present their claims in court. they may be paroled into the country and enrolled in the so-called alternatives to detention program. years are likely to pass before that long awaited court date arrives, and when it does, maybe the person will show up. maybe they won't. but either way, one thing is certain. when word gets out as it always does, that migrants are being released from custody, more illegal immigration will follow. this creates a huge public safety risk, not because of the migrants themselves but because of the chaos that mass migration creates. when thousands of people are crossing the border every day completely overwhelms the border

patrol as i said. if agents are caring for unaccompanying children, they can't patrol the front lines. if they're knee deep in paperwork, they can't stop dangerous criminals, people with criminal records from slipping across the border. the chaos at our southern border provides an excellent disguise for dangerous individuals. gangs, cartels, criminal organizations are paying close attention to the state of our border. they see the gaps and they know how to exploit them. every day cartel and gang members attempt to sneak across the border. the dedicated men and women of the border patrol arrest a number of them. last fiscal year agents apprehended more than 750 gang members. but as we know, law enforcement

is overwhelmed and that means countless oashes have been unde-- others have been undetected and slipped through the cracks. mr. president, no one is suggesting that title 42 is a permanent solution or a partial solution to our border security problems. far from it. but the administration should have been planning years ago for the day that title 42 would be lifted because once title 42 is lifted, unless other policies that are put in place for expedited removal of people who cannot legally enter the country, for example, we're going to lose control of the border entirely. but the administration has shown zero interest in working with congress to craft real change. that needs to change. before title 42 goes away, the

administration must implement a serious plan quickly and efficiently and, yes, fairly, to enforce our immigration laws at the border and deter further illegal immigration. they need to ensure that border patrol facilities are equipped with the resources and the personnel needed to manage the massive influx of migrants. but the fact of the matter is, those overwhelmed border patrol agents, those overwhelmed facilities, those overwhelmed border communities need policies that can only be passed by congress and signed into law by the president of the united states. but so far our democratic colleagues have shown zero interest, turned a blind eye really to any of these concerns about unrestricted flow of

humanity across our border. again, of course, with the drugs that the cartels sell here in the united states. the administration needs to change their approach. i saw the forced resignation of the head of customs and border protection, a former police chief, i believe, in arizona. but this is just scapegoating. they're firing him hoping people won't realize that what's really failing is not the officials heading up these government agencies. it's the administration. it's the policies of the biden administration itself and the failure of our democratic colleagues to work with us to try to come up with solutions. and i'm not just here

complaining. i'm here offering constructive proposals. more than a year ago, senator sinema, who happens to represent a border state of arizona, a democrat, henry cuellar from laredo, texas, a texas democrat, and tony gonzales, a republican congressman, we came up with a bipartisan border solutions act, something that would not solve all the problems, but it would be a modest first step in the right direction. but what we are told by our democratic colleagues is they're not interested in that, or at least they're not interested in any solutions until and unless you provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of people here in the country without proper documentation; in other words, illegal migrants,

people who have broken our laws. they want a mass amnesty. and they still don't want to change the policies that are creating this influx of humanity across the border. our democratic colleagues have had the white house, they've had majorities in the house and the senate, they've chaired -- they have democratic colleagues who are chairing the committees in the house and the senate who can actually mark up and pass legislation to deal with this crisis. and maybe you can't do it all in one piece of legislation. maybe you can just do it one step at a time. but they have done none of that. zero, zip, nada. and the only conclusion you can

reach in the face of this failure to respond to this acknowledged crisis is that they don't care. well, i can guarantee you, the american people care. the parents who lose children as a result of fentanyl overdoses because of the unrestricted flow of illegal drugs across the border, they care. our major cities and rural areas of the country that have experienced a spike in the prevalence of drug distribution and violent crime, they care. because the distribution network for the drugs that come across the border is all across the united states, mainly operated by criminal gangs. who are responsible for a lot of other criminal conduct and a lot of the gun violence and deaths

you see every weekend, for example, in cities like chicago. those are criminal gangs fueled by the broken border and the biden border crisis. something has got to change, mr. president. i don't know what it is. i don't know what it's going to take for the democratic leadership at the white house or the senate or the house to say, enough is enough. ultimately, i know that power lies with the american people. they can change or they can change their elected representatives in the next election. so something is going to give. the status quo is not

sustainable. the country -- the border is on fire. people are dying, and we're straining the whole legal system that is designed to expedite the entry of people through a legal process and turning the reins over to the transnational criminal organizations and international drug networks that profit hugely by the failure of congress and the failure of the white house to act. mr. president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. durbin: mr. president, i listeninged to the statement of my colleague and friend from texas, senator cornyn, on the

issue of immigration. and it would seem that we're miles apart, democrats and republicans, on this issue. let me state from my own personal point of view, speaking just for myself, what i think we're facing and what we should do to address it. here are the basics, as far as i'm concerned. we need an orderly process for immigration in america, both at the border and off the border. that means laws and rules, numbers that work for both the immigrants as well as the economy of america. number two, we should never knowingly allow anyone dangerous to come into this country, or if they're here in immigrant status and pose a danger to our country, they have no right to stay, stars i'm concerned. number three, it's a great compliment that so many people

around the world are desperate to come to our country. if the opposite were true and people were fleeing out of the united states, it would be a sad commentary. but america has always been a magnet of opportunity. so the fact that people want to come here is a compliment, in a way. the reality is this -- we cannot absorb everyone who wants to come into america from all over the world in a limited period of time. it can only be considered in an orderly fashion over a longer period of time. number four, we haven't touched this immigration set of laws in 30 years. so to blame joe biden for this is to ignore the obvious. there wasn't much, if anything, done under the trump administration that was helpful. and going back years and years before, very little if anything to show for it. the only time we finally did a bipartisan bill and brought to the floor of the united states senate, i was part of the gang

of eight. we brought it to the floor, we debated it at length in the committee and on the floor, and it passed with a vote, i believe, of 65 year in the united states senate, a bipartisan vote, sent over to the house of representatives, which was under republican control with speaker ryan. they never raised the issue. so that was the end of the effort. so to argue that we haven't tried, we have. on various individual bills like the dream act, which i introduced 21 years ago, i brought it to the floor of the senate five times, got a majority vote all five times. but that's not enough for the senate. didn't get 60 votes, and so we lost the bill to a filibuster each and every time. so to argue that the effort has not been undertaken is not quite accurate. the question is, where do we go from here? title 48 was basically a public

health announcement that we could deny access to the united states to people based on public health considerations. this week a d.c. judge, federal judge, concluded that whatever úti. if it was for covid-19 or public health, he found reason to question whether or not in today's circumstances it still applied. why is this important? 40% to 50% of those who come to the border are turned ad way under title 48 -- turned away under title 48. so the border patrol is saying to us, what's going to happen after this expires? we'll have even more people seeking entrance into the united states and no basis for turning them away. so it is a situation which is a real and challenging situation, and i think it argues more than ever that we have to do something and do it soon so that the situation at the border

doesn't get worse. why is it so bad? there are a variety of circumstances that have given rises to this situation. not the least of which is the countries that are sending the most people to the united states include venezuela, where millions have fled venezuela and the dictator that's running that country to neighboring countries and now are coming to the united states. venezuela is not a government -- does not have a government that we are in regular communication with, and so it's not a matter of working out our differences to slow down this flow of immigration. wu'er state department -- our state department notifies american citizens not to travel to venezuela because it is too dangerous. so when venezuelans come to our border and say we're fleeing danger from our country, we recognize that from our state department directives. i have a general feeling about how dangerous it is. so the situation is not easily

resolved. let me say to the senator from texas, he said he's ready to sit down. i am, too. we need to sit down. he, a republican, myself as a democrat, and find some common ground. there are some things which we can come to agreement on. first when it comes to fentanyl and drugs, overwhelmingly by a margin of 6-1, drugs are flowing into the united states in regular ports of entry. it isn't a young person coming across the border in the middle of the night so much as it is drugloads coming through -- truckloads coming through the border. it is not just a republican platform. it is a democratic platform as well. we're suffering from a drug crisis in my state of illinois just as much as the state of texas, maybe more in some circumstances.

so count me in for more security. do you believe that it's too long before a person arriving in the united states and giving -- being given a court date before they finally do appear? i'm four changing that -- i'm four changing that, too. we need more immigration courts, more judges in those courts. i'll vote to see that happen. what are we going to do in terms of people who come into this country? are they needed? well, at the aides prattly needed. just recently -- well, they're desperately needed. just recently the governors of arizona and -- texas and florida decided to pull a political stunt. i call it a stunt, of sending people who just crossed the border on buses to communities around the united states. these people got on the buses believing that at the end of the path, the end of their trip, they would be taken care of, jobs and houses, all sorts is of things were promised to them. none of it was true. they were misled into getting on those buses. how do i know that?

because i sat down with them. in chicago 4,000 or more have already arrived. and i heard her stories. when i listen to their stories, you understand the fundamentals of this decision. carlos came with his wife and his 5-year-old daughter and his little baby infant his wife was nursing. he left venezuela on may 5. it took him five months to make it to our border. about he got there, he was in a circumstance where -- when he got there, he was in a circumstance where everything had happened to him. he had been robbed, beaten, cell phone taken away. he thought he was going to die under the circumstances. shows desperate to come to the -- he was so desperate to come to the united states and escape, he trekked on. that kind of determination belies the argument that these people are trying to swindle our system. they are as desperate as many of our parents and grandparents to come and find freedom and

opportunity. it's a natural human instinct. it says to me that they are being exploited, i'm sure, by smugglers and others and coyotes who try to bring them to the border who charge exorbitant amounts of money and often abandon them in flight. the bush factor is dramatic and we've got to deal with it. what the administration said is they are going to allow a certain number of venezuelans to legally enter the united states as long as they have sponsors in our country. 24,000 is the number that they gave. i think that's the beginning of talking about the legitimate needs of america for workers. many of these people coming off the buses in chicago are offered jobs right on the spot. we have so many vacancies in employment right now. but we've got to do this in an orderly fashion. that's one of the points that i made earlier. i'd like it to say a word about the dream act that i see my other colleagues on the floor who are seeking recognition. yesterday we had a rally for

people who are protected by daca. i introduced the dream act 21 years ago when we couldn't pass it because of the filibuster on the floor of the senate. i appealed to president obama, who created daca, which allowed people, young people brought here as children and infants to apply for two years of protection so they could work and not be deported in the united states, called daca. well, there's 600,000 to 800,000 who have qualified for that. they have frozen their numbers over the last several years, but those are the ones who were in place at the time. they showed up, a lot of them yesterday. one woman said to me, i'm daca, and i'm also 40 years old. senator, is this ever going to be resolved? it's a legitimate question. so many of them are teachers and nurses and doctors and members of our military who are doing their best at essential work occupations, they deserve an opportunity to be in this country, and there is a feeling that some court could pull the

rug out from under them in a matter of hours or days. so we need to act on that quickly. i'm going to submit for the record the statement that i was going to make on the ukraine situation. but i rose to respond to my friend from texas. i accept his challenge. let's sit down on a bipartisan basis, on a timely bipartisan basis, the monday we return from thanksgiving, and start the conversation. i'm willing to talk honestly about border security, and i'm sure he is willing to talk honestly about daca and dreamers and the critical needs of people who are coming into the united states. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. hagerty: mr. president, earlier this week a federal judge in washington, d.c. outlawed the continued use of title 42, pandemic-related authority for the expedited removal of aliens who enter our country illegally. the judge found that the policy should be updated because the covid-19 pandemic has changed

since 2020. i agree. the pandemic is over, but the border crisis is not over. in fact, it's worse than ever. that's why i've introduced legislation that provides a far stronger reason for invoking title 42 authority. the deadly drug smuggling crisis at our southern border that's killing a record number of americans. the biden administration dismantled our nation's most effective border security policies. when i led a group of tennessee sheriffs and mayors to the border, i was told the protection protocols known as mpp or remain in mexico, are a painful i will descraition of -- illustration of the border tools. mpp requires that migrants seeking asylum in the united states remain in mexico until it

is determined they are entitled to it. when mpp was implemented in 2019, the agents said it was like flipping a switch because people stopped coming when they learned they couldn't get in. once the biden administration halted this policy, illegal immigration catapulted to record numbers. in fiscal year 2021, more than 1.7 million known illegal border crossings occurred. a new record. that record was short lived, however, because in fiscal year 2022, that just ended in september, nearly 2.4 million illegal crossings were documented, exceeding the 21 record by 37%. that doesn't take into account the gotaways. last month set a new record for october with more than 230,000 illegal aliens. these figures are just the crossings that the agents see and document. when i traveled to the border in

april, border patrol agents told me title 42 was the last tool they had to partially stem the tide of illegal border crossings. if we allow a d.c. judge to remove it border patrol agents will have no tool to stem the massive increase in illegal immigration that is certain to follow. that's why given this recent court ruling, passing my legislation today is imperative. to illustrate border patrol currentlily has the capacity to process 5,000 illegal immigrants per day. right now they're processing nearly 8,000 per day. predictions are that without title 42 authority this number would likely double to between 15,000 and 18,000 per day. this would overwhelm processing capability and the border would effectively cease to exist. such a surrender of american security and sovereignty is

intolerable. the department of homeland security said in response to this week's court decision, quote, we will prepare for an orderly transition to new policies at the border. we know smugglers will lie to try to take advantage of vulnerable migrants, putting lives at risk. yes, it's true that we need policies to replace title 42 and it's true that smugglers will use this court ruling to entice thousands more migrants per day to cross the border illegally, which will risk lives and will magnify the humanitarian crisis at our southern border in a variety of ways. if swift removal of border 42 is a -- possibility, would be crossers might not. the drug cartels send migrants across strategic points to bog down bomber agents with paperwork processing. the time frame is five times longer without title 42.

do the math. removing title 42 will collapse what is left of our border patrol's capacity. with border patrol bogged down further, the cartels would use the resulting enforcement gaps to move their fentanyl which they produce with the help of the chinese communist party across our southern border. we cannot allow more enforcement gaps for deadly drug smuggling. that's why i've introduced legislation to add drug smuggles as an additional basis for title 42 authority. it's called the stop fentanyl border crossings act. overdoses have become an epidemic in america. this legislation would allow the secretary of the health and human services to use title 42 to combat is substantial drug trafficking. it would give them a necessary tool to help them on focusing stopping this. according to cdc drug overdose deaths reached another high last year. many died from fentanyl and

other synthetic opioids coming across this southern border. we desperately need title 42 to aid in the fight against this drug epidemic. without this authority, the record breaking border crisis and the deadly drug overdose crisis that it fuels will become unimagineably worse. therefore, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the committee on health, education, labor and pensions be discharged from further consideration of s. 3959 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from washington. mrs. murray: mr. president, reserving the right to object. let me just say at the start, title 42 is a public health tool, and how it is used should be guided by public health experts. looking at data, looking at science, not politicians looking to score political points. and let's be clear, drug

trafficking is a serious problem and one we do have law enforcement agencies responsible for. we should leave that work to them and support their efforts. but instead of proposing real legislative solutions to address drug trafficking based on what will keep people safe, republicans want to use title 42 now as a means to keep out anyone seeking asylum and create a political talking point. and while i welcome the opportunity to work with my republican colleague on serious bipartisan solutions to address drug trafficking, i object to this at this time. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. hagerty: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. hagerty: mr. president, my democratic colleague is objecting to legislation that simply gives the secretary of health and human services the authority to limit border crossings when necessary to combat substantial, dangerous illicit drug smuggling. it doesn't provide authority to stop all asylum claims.

it only applies where substantial illicit drug smuggling is endangering public health. more than 100,000 americans are dying annually of drug offenders, many -- combroafer combroafer -- overdoses. the legislation isn't a mandate. it's a tool to help save american lives whenever that's possible. everyone acknowledges that an already record-breaking crisis will get far worse without title 42. american lives and communities hang in the balance. yet my colleagues across the aisle are categorically opposed to a commonsense policy to address this glaring problem. it begs the question, what do democrats propose that we do in response to this title 42 ruling? refuse to deal with the problem? hope this crisis won't spiral further out of control? these are not acceptable answers. more broadly, is any volume of illegal immigration or drug overdose deaths adequate to get

this administration to secure the border? how much longer will we allow our broken border policies to be manipulated by criminal alliance between the china communists and the billion-dollar mexican drug cartels that are shipping huge quantities of deadly illegal drugs into the united states across our southern border? mr. president, i yield the floor.

round round mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. rounds round thank you, mr. president. i would ask -- mr. rounds: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the following fellows in my office be granted the privilege of the floor for the remainder of the congress, robert watson fagan

and benjamin. thank you, mr. president. i rise to discuss bipartisan legislation i introduced with senator lujan, which would grant a federal charter to the national american indian veterans incorporated, known as naiv. the naiv was chartered in 2004 with headquarters located on the cheyenne river sioux tribal reservation in south dakota. the naiv was originally established as a result of a request by former senators akaka, inouye and night horse-campbell in 2004. at that time, no native american veterans organization had ever received a congressional charter. sadly, that remains the case today, nearly 20 years later, but that omission would be fixed by this legislation. the naiv is a nonprofit,

nonpartisan operation that operates solely for the charitable, literary, educational, scientific, patriotic and civil improvement purposes. it provides a voice to native american veterans whose unique needs are not always represented adequately by other organizations. mr. president, native americans are the highest serving race per capita in the u.s. armed forces, often serving at a rate five times over the national average, and have served with distinction in every u.s. conflict over the last 200 years. they also have some of the highest concentration of women servicemembers. according to a 2020 v.a. statistics report, there are over 140,000 native american veterans across the nation today. discussions with tribal leaders would indicate that this number is most likely an undercount,

and the true number likely approaches 200,000. the naiv serves the interests and needs of native veterans in all 50 states. it conducts activities in collaboration with its national leadership and its 14 regional offices. tribes rotate to host regional and state naiv meetings. this is all done in a decentralized manner, respecting the independence and sovereignty of all tribal nations. naiv often has been the only national native american veterans organization invited to testify before congress on issues facing native veterans nationwide. naiv works to make sure that our native american veterans receive the benefits, compensation, and resources that they have earned. among its activities, naiv

provided critical support for construct of an american indian veterans memorial at the riverside national cemetery in california. in addition, covid-19 had a significant impact on tribal reservations, and the naiv secured over five million masks, thousands of gallons of hand sanitizer and personal protective equipment to respond to the pandemic. it distributed these critical resources to over 375 tribes in 30 states at no cost to our veterans or their tribes. naiv also serves on the disaster response and recovery working group of the sec broadband deployment advisory committee, and has been a tireless advocate of providing broad band access to tribal communities throughout the nation. mr. president, last week we celebrated veterans day, an opportunity to honor our veterans for their service. also, last week we finally saw

the dedication of the national native american veterans memorial on the national mall, here in d.c. while the native mesh veterans -- native american veterans memorial opened in 2020, due to covid the dedication did not occur until this year. i believe we have the opportunity today to address another overdue recognition of our native american veterans by finally approves the federal charter for the national american indian veterans incorporated to recognize all the work the organization does on behalf of our native american veterans. mr. president, notwithstanding rule 22, if i ask unanimous consent -- i ask unanimous consent that the jewish -- that thejudiciary committeee

discharged from further srgs of s. 1725 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? ms. hirono: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. ms. hirono: reserving the right to object. senator rounds, i do not objects to the substance of your bill. as a member of the veterans committee, i am very much aware of the contributions made to our country by native americans and certainly native american veterans. however, for a long time i've been trying to get a very simple technical fix to the violence against women act that would allow native hawaiian organizations to serve native hawaiian women. as we all know, vawa provides support to survivors of domestic

violence, sexual assault, sex trafficking, dating violence, and stalking. tragically, native women across the country, that would be native -- alaska natives, native hawaiian, american indian women, experience disproportionately higher levels of sexual violence, which is why vawa includes stop grants to provide funding for eligible native organizations, nonprofits, including native hawaiian organizations to serve native women. however, in spite of the fact that native hawaiian women are represented among the disproportionately high number of survivors of gender-based violence and sex trafficking, and despite the fact that native hawaiian organizations are eligible for these grants, because of a drafting oversight these native hawaiian organizations election deniers yibl for -- eligible for these

grants cannot serve the native hawaiian community. it would likely shock many of my colleagues to learn about the gender-based violence and sex trafficking numbers in hawaii, and of sex trafficking survivors in hawaii, over 70% are native hawaiian women and girls. but yet, native hawaiian organizations cannot actually serve native hawaiian women through these grants. by passing this simple technical fix, we can ensure that native hawaiian women can access the benefits and support included in this critical violence against women act. and i am very glad that my colleague from hawaii is presiding as we have this debate. so, now, i would ask would the senate modify, would the senator, sorry, modify your request so that immediately

following the disposition of s. 1725 the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 27, introduced -- of s. 7, introduced earlier today, further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate? the presiding officer: is there objection to the modification? without objection. is there an objection to the request as modified? without objection. so ordered. roundsmr. rounds:mr. president. i wanted to say how pleased i am to finally see this bill pass the united states senate. i want to underscore again the significance of recognizing the important work done by the naiv to benefit our native american

veterans. i particularly want to recognize the work done by mr. don loudner, of mitchell, south dakota, who has led the naiv since its inception in 2004. don has served as an army officer and as a combat veteran of the korean war. he served with my father in the national guard in south dakota as well. he also served in the bureau of indian affairs and census bureau and spent decades supporting our native american veterans. i want to thank him for his 70 years of service to our nation. thank you, mr. president. ms. hirono: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. ms. hirono: i would like to commend my colleague for his work with the native american veterans and for working with me to pass s. 7, which is a very necessary bill for native hawaiian women. aloha.

the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. rounds: i would also like to thank senator hirono for the open communication we've received in coordinating and successfully passing these pieces of legislation. thank you. and i would at this time yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. young: last week, indiana lost a legend and america lost a true original. rex early died friday at age 88 after a long battle with illness. now, rex was a lot of things in life. he was a united states marine. he was chairman of the indiana republican party. he was a candidate for governor of the state of indiana. he's one of the few people in indiana you had to go see if you wanted to run for public office.

but rex will be remembered mostly for his sense of humor, his way with words. many of his stories and rexisms can be found in his book. "it's a mighty thin pancake that don't have two sides." after being stationed in japan in the marine corps, rex went to indiana university on the g.i. bill. he married his sweetheart, barbara, and they moved to indianapolis. now, rex said when he first went to register to vote in indianapolis, the ward chairman said, you want to be a precinct committeeman? the last guy went to jail. of course rex responded quickly, sure, and that's how he got involved in local politics, or so rex told us. rex said one of the highlights of his professional career came during ronald reagan's campaign.

rex said he was considering hanging a plaque that read on may 4, 1980, ronald reagan used this bathroom. but as reagan left his house that day, governor reagan told rex, all those people were wrong, rex. and rex said, what people? governor reagan said, all the people who said you had no class. so rex decided not to hang that plaque in his booth room. the republican party in -- bathroom. the republican party in indiana hags had a long period of governing success with one of the best run and fiscally sound in the nation and you can trace that success directly back to work rex early put in this the earl early -- in the early 1990's. one of his rules of politics, you might be important, but the number of people dee dee tain

your -- who go to your funeral will be dictated by the weather. i don't understand what he was saying. don't think too highly of yourself. don't become as he would say a suffitucff. rex's weather was well attended, and not because of the weather, but because he made an indelible impression on everyone he met. semper fi, marine. i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a quorum. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. ms. ernst: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent to use a prompter in my remarks. the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. ms. ernst: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. ernst: i ask unanimous

consent to use a prompter in my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. ernst: mr. president, thanksgiving is just a week away and, of course, we will have turkey, or so we thought. and in these difficult times as americans, we all have a lot to be thankful for. i'm so proud of my daughter liberty and grateful for my brand-new son-in-law andrew. i am thankful for being selected by my fellow iowans for the privilege of representing each of them in the united states senate. and i know i speak on behalf of all iowans when i express the most heartfelt gratitude for every one of the brave men and women who served in the armed forces of our great nation

risking everything to protect -- protect what we hold dear. this is a time to express our dwrat gratitude to express all of our -- delicious sides like cranberry sides, one of my favorites, sweet potatoes, green beans, mash potatoes and gravy and stuffing all come to mind. but this year, as a result of bidenomics, thanksgiving has more to do with what is being cut from the menu due to rising prices. with the cost of thanksgiving dinner up 20% since last year, nine out of ten americans are planning to eliminate at least one dish from their menu.

some are even skipping the turkey all together and serving cheaper alternatives like pizza. most are also planning to invite fewer guests. and one in four plan to pass on thanksgiving dinner all together to save money. hardworking americans shouldn't have to trim the guest list or side dishes from thanksgiving dinner, but with the out of control inflation being caused by the democrats' failed economic policies gobbling up our families' budgets, that is exactly what is happening. so let's talk turkey. turkey costs 21% more this thanksgiving than last. as a matter of fact, the chairman of the democrats' congressional campaign committee said families struggling with

these rising prices should eat chef boy rde. if that is the democrats solution, boy, are we cooked? chef boyrde. no. chef do we cook. what did others thing of this? they canned him. washington needs to set up real solutions to cut the causes of climbing costs. beginning on his very first day in office, president biden made it a priority to turn off american energy. this has been a recipe for

disaster with energy prices increasing nearly 18% just this last year. according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office, the democrats' so-called inflation reduction act will even further increase the cost of natural gas, which will have a direct impact on food prices because natural gas is a key component for producing fertilizer, which is already costing our farmers two to four times more today than just two years ago. the biden administration is also bringing out leftover land-use rules from the obama era that will impose costly and bureaucratic regulations on farmers that will also impact

food costs. this certainly is no way to show gratitude towards those who grow the food we rely upon to feed our families on thanksgiving and every other day. folks, let's bring down costs by sticking a fork in these inflation-causing laws and burdensome regulations that the democrats keep dishing out. bidenomics will be the real turkey at this year's gathering. but i sure hope the bigger bite it's taking out of your budget doesn't put you in a foul mood when we have so many other things to be thankful for. happy thanksgiving. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor and would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> there is no greater honor

than to stand on this floor and to speak for thepeople of san francisco . this i will continue to do as a member of the house, speaking for the people of san francisco, serving the great state of california and defending our constitution. and with great confidence in our caucus i will not seek reelection to democratic leadership in the next congress. for maybe our system for a new generation to leave the caucus that i deeply respect and i am grateful that so many are ready and willing to shoulder this awesome responsibility. madam speaker, standing here today i'm grateful for all of life's blessings. for my democratic colleagues whose courage and commitment to the support of your family have made many of these accomplishments possible and that could not have been done without you.

for my dear husband paul who's been my beloved partner in life, thank you. we are grateful for all the prayers and well wishesas he continues his recovery . iq so much. [applause] for our darling children, christine, paul and

alexandra and our grandchildren alexandra and edwin , liam sean and ryan, ella and octavio, they are the joys of our lives and we are so very very proud of them at this time. and for my brilliant, dedicated and patriotic staff under the leadership of mccullough working together the finest group of public servants that house has ever known, thank you all so much .

and again, those who sent me here for the people of san francisco for entrusting me with the high honor of being therevoice in congress , and this continued work i will strive to honor the call of the patron saint of our city, st. francis. lord, make me an instrument.

>> i want to begin my thinking and recognizing the house judiciary chairman jerry nadler and the entire house the quality caucus for introducing the house bill and starting up this effort. this legislation passed by house of representatives with strong bipartisan votes of 267 to 157 with all democrats and 47 republicans supporting the bill. i also want to extend my heartfelt appreciation for my

senate colleagues who have worked tirelessly to get us up to this point. i want to thank the lead sponsor of the bill , senator feinstein and also thank and recognize the hard work and effort of senator collins, senator portman, senator sinema and tillis for their commitment. we couldn't be where we are right nowwithout their efforts . i also want to thank the staff of all these offices for the long hours and hard work that went into this legislation including my own counsel becca branam and my chief of staff can leaving. and lastly i want to thank all of the advocates who have fought for marriage equality for decades. we are on the cusp of a historic vote in the senate. because of everybody's

efforts. and i decided in thinking about what i wanted to share today that i wanted to put a face on this debate. and actually more accurately three faces. let me introduce you to my dear friend margaret, denise and ana maria. and just tell you a bit about them but then how this underlying issue impacts them . the marriage and long partnerships that my dear friend denise and margaret share began in oklahoma in 1981. they were there as organizers working to pass the equal rights amendment in that state. they were organizing support for the era so they might add

a few simple words to the unitedstates constitution . specifically equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the united states or by any state on account of sex. that they met one another during a struggle for social justice surprised no one who knew either denise or margaret for really, the pursuit of equality and equity and justice has defined each of them as individuals as well as life partners. their professional and personal lives and the movements for women's lives, lgbtq rights, affordable housing, economic justice are all inextricably linked. their first date occurred in december 1981 over coffee oklahoma city and as that era

campaign came to an unsuccessful close in 1982, they chose to move together to madison wisconsin. i vividly recall meeting them shortly thereafter in the autumn of 1984. denise hailed from milwaukee wisconsin. margaret from webster city iowa and they were incredibly and are incredibly committed to one another but they also determined as they got a little older that something was missing. actually i want to say someone was missing. and denise and margaret's journey to find that someone was arduous yet they never gave up. in 2003 after working with an adoption agency for many

years, denise received a video of their daughter. this lovely, brown eyed lydia . and the family that you now see here, this is actually several years old. she is not a sophomore at the university of wisconsin madison campus so a little bit dated but i wanted to put a face or a series of faces on this. because it's such an all-american family and an all-american story . but as everyone knows about the debate where about to enter it's that marriage was not an option for margaret and denise until after the

obergefeld decision. the things most people take for granted are things like couples like margaret and denise had to think about and figure out how do they protect the mother, how do they protect their family. we often think when we think about marriage as the ceremony and celebration but we don't often think about the hundreds upon hundreds of rights and responsibilities that civil marriage confers uponcouples . you know, margaret and denise were telling me about their recollection of when the city of madison has a domestic partnership ordinance allowing them to register. and when that happened for the first time they could be on one another's translation

direction in anticorruption measures. and there's identifiable issues,

independent judiciary dealing with antibribery statutes, dealing with public disclosure type requirements. there's things that are pretty well identified internationally as necessary in fighting corruption. yesterday i was in a hearing of the senate foreign relations committee. one of our closest allies, georgia. their judiciary is no longer independent. presenting real problems for our national security interest. so i've worked on a bipartisan manner with colleagues on the republican and democratic side to develop a system whereby we would be able to determine which countries in the world need our attention in our bilateral relations and the tools we have available to help them deal in creating an anticorruption system in their own governments. and we've worked together to figure out how we can do this in a manner that would implement the type of results we need from

our state department. so the legislation that we crafted would have the state department rank countries in the world as to whether they're in tier one, two, or three. tier three would be the countries of concern. these are the countries that are not taking steps to deal with systemic corruption that they have in their system that does not comply with international standards. tier to are countries that have not met the international standards but are taking the right courses and tier one are the countries that have mept the international standards. this is not unique. we've done similar types of work in our state department identifying problems with trafficking, trafficking in humans. we have similar types of work at our state department to identify religious tolerance and freedom. we have similar efforts to deal with basic human rights. this is a system that we've worked in the past but it goes even further than that. the legislation gives the capacity in the state department

in the missions in those countries is that are in tier three to have a point person to help deal with the country to make the corrections that are necessary. to assist them. this is an effort to try to get countries on the right path to fight corruption. because, you see, many countries are trying to become democratic states. but if they don't have the tools in place to protect them against corruption, they're going to find that they're not going to succeed in their efforts. so this is really an important step forward in order to build more democratic states around the world. it gives the right capacity to the safety department in its missions. i'm pleased with the support i've gotten from many diplomats around the world, from many people in the -- in both branches of government. this bill is bipartisan. it's been -- we've had markups in our committees. we've passed it in our committees. and i'm hopeful that we can get a unanimous consent today to

move it through the senate so to hopefully we can catch up with the work that's being done in the house. we can reconcile any differences that may exist, but we'll at least have this bill ready to move to fight corruption. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 88, s. 14. i further ask that the committee-reported substitute be withdrawn, the cardin substitute be considered and agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, and the title amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for pennsylvania. mr. toomey: mr. president, so i -- i'm going to reserve the right to object and let me say i'm doing this somewhat reluctantly because i fully acknowledge the senator from maryland is correct, that

corruption is a scourge. there are many countries going the wrong direction. it is fully in the national interest of the united states to combat the corruption that we see. and he has proposed a completely good faith, thoughtful approach to dealing with some aspects of the corruption that we find. but i have concerns about the particular way in which he does this, and i would like to work with him and see if we can find common ground on this. let me explain my concern. the bill would task the state department to annually ranking every country in the world, including our partners, allies, friends and maybe even countries that aren't necessarily so friendly but at the moment maybe they're working with us. it requires that this ranking of countries based on how corrupt they are be then made public, and that's for good intentions,

but i'm concerned that in the process of naming and shaming countries that are deemed to be in the wrong place, it could complicate efforts that we're making, whether it is our treasury or our state department, but very legitimate objectives that we have that are unrelated to the corruption problem that the country faces. so, for instance, depending on the country, maybe we want them to be more cooperative in the global coalition against russia to defend ukraine. let's be honest. there are corruption problems in ukraine also, bus we're defending ukraine, quite rightly. maybe it's about joining the administration's indo-pacific economic framework, which is really important for a variety of reasons, but maybe there are corruption problems. and to have this -- this seems like a bit of a blunt tool that requires this labeling and naming appeared shaming and it doesn't provide the discretion to the administration to say,

you know, maybe right now isn't the right time to rub their nose in one of their problems because we need them for something else. so i guess what i would say is, look, fighting corruption is absolutely important. the senator from maryland has been consistent and thoughtful on this. but it's not outer only and sometimes -- but it's not our only and sometimes it is not our most important objective with a country. so i would like to continue to work with the senator from maryland, and i would be very happy to devote the time and energy to get to a common ground here before the end of the year. but at this moment, i can't support this, so i object. mr. cardin: mr. president? the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. cardin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: well, i'm disappointed that there is an objection, but i appreciate my friend from pennsylvania's willingness to sit down and continue to work this out. we have worked with several members who have some similar concerns, and i thought we had

resolved most of those issues. but i am fully prepared to continue towork with the -- to work with the senator from pennsylvania and hopefully we can find a common spot. i would point out that we have strategic partnerships with so many countries around the world that our state department is very clear that we are not going to abandon our core principles in that relationship. so they might -- we might need their help on a security issue, but if their human rights do not meet international standards, that will be raised. we know that many of the bilateral meeting that we hold as senators, or the administration holds with heads of state on important subjects, but they mention human rights because it is an important value that we have in our relationship. we do the same in trafficking in persons. we do the same for religious freedom. we do the same in several different areas. corruption is a growing problem

globally. we need to elevate the importance of that in our bilaterals. about i understand the gentleman's concern. i will take you a up on your offer. i will try not to bother you on thanksgiving itself, but perhaps we can work together and find a way that we can move this forward. ment with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> these will hold the

dignity and respect that they need and that they deserve. for my dear friends margaret and denise and their daughter maria, passing this legislation will remove the weight of the world from their backs. will they worry just like the rest of us about cost-of-living and staying healthy and saving for retirement, passing this bill will take away a worry that someday their marriage might be on the chopping block at no fault of their own. finally i think i failed to mention this but i was so honored that in december 2018 to be a co-preside or their

wedding. their wedding took place 37 years after they had first met and became a couple and it happened on maria's sweet 16 birthday.but for the millions of other americans in same-sex and interracial marriages, this shows that the american government and people see them, respect them. that i encourage all of my colleagues to vote yes on the motion to proceed to the respect for marriage act and to help come together and move our country forwardand with that high-yield . >> metal president.

madame president, i rise today to express my strong support for the respect for marriage act. bipartisan bill that senator baldwin and i have introduced with our colleagues senator feinstein, senator portman, senator sinema and senator tillis. madame president, this bill denies his the unique and extraordinary importance of marriage on an individual and societal level. it would help promote equality, prevent discrimination and protect the rights of americans in same-sex and interracial marriages. it would accomplish these goals by maintaining and indeed strengthening important religious liberty

and conscience protections. i'm proud to be the lead republican sponsor of this distillation and i'm grateful that a similar bill passed the house with strong bipartisan support. madame president, as the senate considers and prepares to vote on this historic legislation, i would be remiss if i did not begin by recognizing the tremendous progress that lgbtq individuals in this country in our country have made in recent times in achieving equal rights. it was not long ago that patriotic americans could not be honest about their sexual

orientation, while fighting to protect our country, our freedom and the arms. i led the fight with former senator joe lieberman of connecticut to repeal the discriminatory don't ask don't tell law. it was not long ago in america that a person could be fired merely for being gay . i strongly supported the employment nondiscrimination act known as an.which passed the senate in 2013 and would have prohibited such discrimination. seven years later, the supreme court and held that the civil rights act protects employees from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. and it was not long ago in

america that the individuals could not marry the person whom they loved. if that person were of the same sex. the supreme court hallmarked decision in obergefell found the fundamental right to marry isguaranteed by our constitution . madame president, let us remember that we are talking about our family members, our friends, our coworkers, our neighbors. i'm proud to have stood with them and would continue to stand with them in efforts to protect and secure their rights while at the same time steadfastly protecting and respecting religious liberty.

the respect for marriage act would accomplish 2 primary goals. first, it would guarantee that balanced marriage between two individuals in one state is given full faith and credit by other states meaning states must recognize marriage for purposes of public act, judicial proceedings and rights arising from our marriage regardless of that couples sex, race, ethnicity or national origin. that means that same-sex and interracial couples can rest assured that their marriage will be recognized regardless of the state in which they live. we need to remove the cloud that is now over these couples that is causing them such consternation as my

colleague from wisconsin has mentioned. second, it would require the federal government to recognize the marriage between two individuals if the marriage were valid in the state where it was performed. it would do so by getting rid of the law that is on the books known as the defense of marriage act which has been invalidated by the supreme court's ruling and yet remains on the books.with these changes federal law will provide all married couples are entitled to the rights and responsibilities of marriage. this includes for example making medical decisions for a spouse and receiving spousal benefits from programs like social security and medicare as well as those

benefits earned from service in our armed forces. to remove any ambiguity about the intent and scope of this bill, i have worked with my senate colleagues on both sides of the isle as well as with a coalition of religious organizations to develop an amendment designed to clarify the language and address concerns that have been raised with the house version of our bill. first and foremost, this legislation would not diminish or abrogate any religious liberty or conscious protections according to individuals and organizations under the united states constitution and federal law including the first amendment and the religious freedom restoration

act. through our amended, this fact is now stated explicitly in our bill. the amendment also makes clear this bill only applies to valid marriages between 2 individuals. in other words, it does not authorize or require recognition of polygamist marriages. they are already prohibited in all 50 states. this really was a strong argument but we've made it clear nonetheless in our amendment that in no way with the federal government or other states be required or authorized in any way to recognize polygamist

marriages. moreover, the amendment clarifies the bill could not be used to deny or alter the tax exempt status or any other status, tax treatment, grants, contract agreements, guarantees, educational funding, loans, scholarships, rights and certifications, accreditations, benefits, claim or defense not arising from a marriage for any otherwise eligible person. in other words, no church, no synagogue, no mosque, no temple, no religious education institution would have to worry that somehow their tax exempt status would be in jeopardy if they do not perform same sex marriages

that are contrary to their religious beliefs. so let me repeat that because this has been comingup time and again . for the first time and consistent with the first amendment and laws of many states, this legislation would make clear in federal law that nonprofit religious organizations and religious educational institutions cannot be compelled quto participate in or support the solemnization or celebration of marriages that are contrary to theirreligious beliefs . and madame president, i would ask that an excellent analysis by the first amendment partnership be included on this issue in the

record at the end of my statement without objection. >> madame president, some have said that this bill is unnecessary because there is little risk that the right to have same-sex or interracial marriage recognized by the government will be overturned by the supreme court. regardless of one's views on that possibility, there is still value in ensuring that our federal laws reflect that same-sex and interracial couples have the right to have their marriages recognized regardless of where they live in this country. i strongly believe that passing this bill is the

right thing to do. and the american people agree , indeed more than 70 percent of americans support marriage equality including a majority of democrats, republicans and independents. as i wrote in the washington post op-ed with my colleague senator baldwin, millions of american families have come to rely on the promise of marriage equality and the freedom to rights and responsibilities that come with making the commitment of marrying the one you love. individuals in same-sex and interracial marriages need and should have the confidence that their marriages are legal. simultaneously we must also recognize people of good conscience may disagree on

issues related to marriage. for many americans, marriage is more than just a legal union. it is the religious institution grounded in their faith. as justice kennedy writing for the majority of the supreme court explained in the obergefell decision ...

very, very soon and we'll get that done in december, but equally important is the kind of leaders we have in our military. we have to have capable leaders. otherwise things won't happen as congress intends them to do. and when these positions are left open, the military has their hands tied behind their back, and i might add, this is the biggest budget, by far, in

the united states of america. i had a visit with senator lee, and he's going to raise some important points today, and i am -- i understand where he's coming from. i also got notification today that the secretary of defense is going to meet with senator lee on november 23. i intend to hold him to that so the -- so that senator lee can bring up the challenges that he sees and hopefully there will be good faith involved on both sides and a solution can be found if there is a solution to be found. i can't emphasize enough how if we want to hold people accountable to spend the money right that we appropriate, if we want to hold people accountable for doing the job of protecting

this country and defending democracy and our freedoms, we have to have people in these critical positions. and for that reason we have a nominee before us today as deputy under secretary of defense for security and intelligence. let me say it again. deputy under secretary of defense for security and intelligence. this is a very, very important position when it comes to our security. ms. harris is her name. she has an incredible resume within the intelligence community. she has a proven leadership within the dod. there is no doubt in my mind that she will make the world a safer place and that is why it is critically important today to confirm this nominee. i'm a united states senator, just like the good senator from

utah, and i can tell you when we ask questions, we want answers, we want solutions, i will commit to the senator from utah that i will work with you to find those solutions, but we really need to get this nominee in front. with that in mind, i want to ask unanimous consent as if in executive session that the senate consider the following nomination, calendar number 1153, malance harris to be under secretary of defense, that the senate vote on the nomination without any intervening action or debate, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the senate be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. lee: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: i have been in contact with the department of defense with the nominee.

i have made a simple request to the department in connection with her nomination. for these reasons, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the presiding officer: mr. president -- mr. tester: we are two years into this administration and i hear every day folks from the other side of the aisle get up and rail on the biden administration for not doing this and not doing that. that is patently unfair if we can't get people confirmed to the positions that need to be confirmed two years after he was sworn into the presidency. >> i hope the senate will

consider this legislation, i think it's good for our country. marriage is important in our society, is a sacred bond to people make for each other. it represents alifetime of commitment and love and care enzymes good and bad . it's also thefoundational unit upon which our entire

society is built .i've witnessed this the past 36 years with my wife jane and our amazing family. i was fortunate enough to have a upbringing with parents together for five decades. the recognition and protection of this bond makes the couple, family and our country stronger. that's why there's a constitutional right to marry . same-sex marriage has also had a constitutional right since 2015. today there are about 1 million same-sex households, 60 percent of the married and in the minds of most americans the validity of these marriages is a settled question. and the overwhelming majority of americans want this question to be settled. according to gallup 71 percent of americans believe same-sex marriage should be recognized as valid by law. majority support for same-sex marriages is acrossall religious affiliations and even political parties . pulling from last year shows

55 percent of republicans support the legal recognition of same sex marriage. a respect for marriage act doesn't go that far. it simply says you get married in one state to another state, so why are we here given this broad american consensus, why is the senate debating this today as to whether we should recognize dumping the vast majority of americans already recognize and support? the answer is current federal law does not reflect the will of the american people in this regard. the statute allows state and federal governments who refuse to allow same-sex marriages . while this law is not enforceable i would argue because of supreme court rulings it still represents congresses last word on the subject. it's important to clarify that to get the old legislation off the books. likewise current federal law is silent on the question of interracial marriage believe it or not . that needs to be addressed.

given this disconnect between the american people and our legislation it's time for the senate to settle the issue and pass a respect for marriage act. with 46 republicans supported . this bill allows same-sex couples married under the laws of one state to allow their marriage will be recognized by established supreme court precedent. that's why we have to do this . secondly in our recent supreme court law there was this notion that maybe this would be revisited, this issue of same-sex marriages so it's important we resolve the issue both those reasons and people who are in same-sex marriages are understandably very interested in something that resolves. they've made financial arrangements, maybe adoptions and so on and want to make sure thatmarriage can

continue to be honored . so i think in short there are two main effects of this bill and both are within the constitutional authority of the congress to address . first that the marriage is recognized as valid in other states regardless of sex or race. this is a straightforward application of the full faith and creditclause of the constitution . under this clause states are required to recognize public records. this will simply clarify marriage is one of those things that must be recognized across state lines and secondly this bill specifies the federal government will recognize a marriage talent in the state where it was performed. this portion of the bill to the federal government out of the business of defining marriages to something on my side of the aisle that is important because that leaves the decision to the states where it properly belongs. i also want to take a moment to address what this bill does not do because i've had a lot of conversations with my colleagues over the last

week or so about this and in some cases they're talking about things this bill simply doesn't do. it does not require any state to perform name text marriages if he chooses not to. in the event the current supreme court case is overturned, it doesn't do that. it does not require anything not already requiredby precedent . this is a point raised by some of my colleagues. is illegal in every jurisdiction in the still does nothing to change that allows the other explicitly. it is not in a private capacity and that's important . as you can see that is now is constitutional and it does not infringe onstate sovereignty . it's about the insurance as a matter matter of statutory law that same-sex marriages that were legal in the state will be recognized .

this amendment contains robust religious liberties protections. the amendment would be between us. i see tammy baldwin, thom tillis, kyrsten sinema. by losing the feedback and working extensively with many of our senate colleagues with faith-based groups on the outside and also other stakeholders. the first criticism i've heard is this does not protect people of faith. i believe religious freedom is a fundamental pillar of our constitutional order and i'm confident nothing in this bill will diminish the religion and conscience protections that exist under the first amendment or any other federal laws. to further advance and protect our religious freedoms are

amendment contains four important provisions. first, and acknowledges a decent and honorable people oppose diversity views about the role of gender in marriage and such people and their beliefs are due respect. this is very important. too many other religious organizations were dealt with or our strongly supporting this legislation. to make the point people at different points of view and will respect that. but also has a very important application to the lawsuits that people are concerned about that might come up in the bob tell his case as an example there was a notion that was different with regard to interracial marriage. in this case with regard to same-sex marriage again we respect people at different points of view. it's important to lay that out. secondly it explicitly protects all existing religious liberty and conscience protection under the first amendment, any other constitutional provisions and federal law explicitly. i would argue i think it's important to make it explicit. third it guarantees this bill

cannot be used to target or denied benefits, including tax exempt status which is very important to a lot of pre-religious organizations. also grants contracts, educational funding licenses many others. so religious organizations help but the things in place to ensure this bill cannot be used for that purpose. for it insures nonprofit religious organizations including churches, mosque, synagogues, religious schools cannot be required to provide facilities goods or services for married ceremonies or celebrations against their will. these provisions are very significant. so constitutional scholars by the way and advocate for religious liberty led by professor douglas of the university of virginia law school have carefully analyze this bill and since the letter concluding that overall this legislation is and i quote an advance for religious liberty end quote. these are advocates, the

professor himself has taken case to the supreme court representing religious schools and he is saying that this bill on net, this bill actually increases religious liberty. numerous other important faith groups agree. the reverend walter tim president of the national association of evangelicals describe this amendment if it passes as quote the first significant bipartisan legislation in many years advancing religious freedom for all including those who hold traditional views on marriage. in other words, he's saying this legislation, forgetting the parts of same-sex marriage which are very important but with regard to religious liberty, and moves the ball forward in his view. as a present national association of evangelicals. another criticism is it will be used to tour religious organizations by revoking the tax exempt status under federal law. idol said this would be possible without even having an amendment but we want to clarify that. this bill does not require

anything that is not required by the supreme court. however penalizing or targeting private organization because it's sincere views and same-sex marriage would be a clear first amendment violation. i'm confident the court would not tolerate it but to ensure that this bill cannot be used to target or deny benefits religious organizations are amendment explicitly forbids it. the amendment specifies as legislation and not be used to deny or alter quote any benefit status or right unrelated to marriage, period. this gives assurances to people and organizations of faith that the tactic of status context to become educational funding licenses another benefits cannot be affected by this legislation. the third criticism i've heard is this bill could lead to legalize and recognize polygamy. again to address would put an explicit prohibition in place even though no state permits it. so there cannot be a recognition of polygamists marriages, printmaker as you can tell we have worked hard to address the concerns that have been raised and to craft an amendment provides robust affirmative

protections of people of faith without diminishing the rights for couples in same-sex marriages. this is very important. president of the council for christian colleges and universities a group that is endorsing this legislation answer of this amendment and i quote since a strong bipartisan message to congress and the administration and the public that lgbtq rights can coexist with religious freedom protections. and the rights of both groups can be advanced in a way that is prudent and practical, end quote. that's was extraordinary about this bill. these two sometimes competing interests are working together and as she said, , we had shown here through this legislation that these rights can coexist. religious freedom on one hand, lgbtq on the other hand. achieving this kind of compromise could not happen without hardware, , good faith, and bipartisan negotiation. i want to extend specific thanks to the following groups that of

work with my colleagues and me to develop this legislation, including the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints, known as the mormon church, the national association of evangelicals, seventh-day adventist church, the union of orthodox jewish congregations of america, the council for christian colleges and universities, the center for public justice, the and campaign in this edition of religious alliance, and the first amendment partnership. it is my hope that with the changes we have talked about today and we've all now agree to, we can pass this legislation with the same kind of overwhelmed bipartisan majority we saw in the house of representatives. and, therefore, settle this issue once and for all. millions of american couples, including many in ohio, our county other elected representative in congress to recognize and protect their marriage. to give them the peace of mind to know that their marriage is indeed protected and secured. we must not let them down. thank you and i yield the floor.

>> madam president, today the sin has a a chance to live upo its highest ideals by taking up legislation that will protect the rights of all americans regardless of who they choose to marry. in many ways the story of america has been a difficult but an execrable march to its greater equality for all people. throughout our history sometimes we taken every important steps forward. of the times unfortunately we've taken steps backward. but today the senate is taking a truly bold step forward in the march towards greater justice, greater equality by advancing the respect for marriage act. it's a simple narrowly tailored but exceedingly important piece of legislation that will do so much good for so many americans. it will make our country a

better, fairer place to live. passing this bill is as personal as it gets for us in this chamber. myself, madam president, included. my daughter and her wife, my daughter-in-law, are expecting a baby next spring. and i want to do everything possible to make sure the rights are protected under federal law. i want them and everyone in a loving relationship to live without the fear that their rights could one day be stripped away. so there are many of us who are deeply invested in seeing this bill succeed. originally it was our intention to take action on the respect for marriage act back just left the floor of the house for one of the most emotional moments i've had in my career, the valedictory of nancy pelosi, one ever the greatest legislators and greatest people i've ever met. i first met nancy pelosi back in

1987. we had a little -- i was a congressman, and we had a little dinner group that would go out to dinner every tuesday night, and one of the leaders of that group, george miller, congressman from california, came up to me. he said, in a few minutes i'm going to introduce you to a new member of our group. she's the new congresswoman from san francisco, and she's going to become the first woman speaker. that was the first thing i heard about fancy pelosi -- about nancy pelosi, even before i met her. and the moment i met her, i saw what he meant. it was obvious this new member from the west coast of california had it all. nancy d'alessandro pelosi. she's the proud daughter of baltimore's little italy neighborhood. thest imable representative from the state of california. and the first woman ever as speaker of the united states congress. it was amazing.

she did an amazing job, and i wanted to go over to the house floor, where i have served 18 happy years, many as a colleague of speaker pelosi and a friend, to just say thank you for the amazing things she has done for our country. few in american history have been as effect every, as driven, as successful as speaker pelosi. she's transformed practically every corner of american politics, and unquestionably made america a better, stronger nation. you know, i'm known as having a lot of energy, but i have never, ever met anyone with more energy than nancy d'alessandro pelosi. she's always moving in many directions at once, and she knows she has a complete grasp of each direction in which she's moving, even though she's moving at the same time. and she's just an amazing

person. she never forgot why she's in the fight to begin with, as she said, the children. always her north star, helping the children of america. and she did so much. her passion to pass the aca was for the children above all. and for women, where she broke, of course, o one ever the greatt glass ceilings we've had, becoming the first woman speaker. and the american rescue plan and the lilly ledbetter act and the infrastructure bill and vawa, perched relief, climate change, -- pandemic relief, climate change, repealing don't ask, don't tell. she taught me a lot. nancy pelosi paid attention to each of her members. i tried to do the same. and she always taught the members to be unified. her expression she repeated over and over again, which i have repeated to my caucus on so many

occasions, in our unity is our strength. she would tell us, she would tell everyone, if everyone goes in his or her own direction, you get nothing done. if we all come together and everybody gives a little bit, she -- we could get a lot done, and she sure did. i remember the moments that just became available on the tape, web she and i were -- when she and i were at the, quote, secret place, during the attack on this capitol, which so, so struck her. but there she was, cool, calm, and collected, and together we worked to try and get either the national guard or the police on the hill, and we resolved that we were going to come back and actually count the votes. that will be regarded as one of speaker pelosi's greatest moments. and again, she was cool, calm,

collected. she knew exactly what to do and how to do it. so, it's hard to fathom that very soon we'll begin a new congress where she's no longer a member of the party leadership. in my time as democratic leader and as majority leader, she's been the best partner and ally i could ask for. and we've also been friends. she shared the joy of the birth of my children. i shared the joy of so many of the good things that happened in her family. she would always be talking about her family, and always wanted to hear about mine. she was not only a great legislator, she was a great human being. today, particularly i want to wish the very best to her family, especially paul. i cannot imagine how painful and scary it has been for the blowsies in the aftermath of paul's attack. as usual, speaker pelosi carried herself with the same courage, grace, and dignity that she's always been true to.

finally, and maybe most importantly, nancy pelosi made our country a much better place for countryless women and girls from every walk -- for ch womend girls. you can be certain other women will rise up because of what she's accomplished and how she inspired them. i'm going to have more to say in the weeks to come, but for now let me finish with this, to nancy pelosi, my dear, good, and close friend, thank you. thank you for being you. thank you for dedicating your life to public service. thank you for teaching us so much. thank you f for inspiring us al. it's been the honor of a lifetime to work with you. i yield the floor.

one notice to the members who i know want to hear about the schedule. we're working on an agreement on the marriage equality bill, and i hope that we can have a vote on the motion to proceed shortly. if we do not reach agreement, the vote is going to occur at 10:00 p.m. this evening. members should beware and members should stay close. i yield the floor.

the national association of evangelicals, the center for public justice and its institutional religious freedom alliance. madam president, i believe this is a good bill. and bipartisan bill in any environment are difficult. and i think it's why it was so important we came together, had the courage to work together, recognize the viewpoints at either end of the spectrum and come up with a carefully crafted

compromise that i believe is good for all americans. and i look forward to everybody voting in favor of it. we will have some opposition that at the end of the day i think we will prevail and that's a message to so many people out there who want this done. madam president, thank you and i yield the floor. >> madam president? >> senator from arizona. >> thank you, madam president. i rise today as a country takes an important step forward to protect the rights and freedoms of all americans. together with broad bipartisan support the senate will provide certainty to millions of americans in loving marriages and enshrine into law the basic protection afforded all americans while respecting our countries critical principle of religious liberty. this historic milestone builds

off of years of incredible strides we've made advancing freedom and equality including hard-fought victories i've been honored to help lead. nearly two decades ago in 2006 at a time when our country was just beginning to debate marriage, arizona proposed a ballot proposition banning same-sex marriage and our state constitution. this issue is personal to me as any other arizonans. similar ballot provisions have passed states across the country, red and blue states alike, and the stakes were high. the pundits didn't give arizona much of a chance. i knew that in order to buck the trend and when we would need to run a a different kind of camn that expanded the conversation,, cultivated a diverse group of unlikely partners, and moved past that tired partisan talking points. that's why i worked across the aisle and teamed up with my good friends steve may, a republican.

we face some criticism at the time for how we chose to run our campaign. someone asked about a partisan campaign, convinced the divides an acute focus exclusively on the lgbtq community would put us over the top. but but i knew we couldn't dot just by talking amongst people already agreed with our position. the polling showed it. and, frankly, we felt in order to do right by our friends, our neighbors and our fellow members of the community in arizona we had to do more than run a campaign that made our core supporters feel good, but ultimately didn't build the broad-based push arizonans needed to win. that's why we expanded the conversation to include other proposition would harm all unmarried couples across arizona not just those in lgbtq community. people and domestic partnerships, people in common-law marriages. because here's the truth. when we reach the on partisan talking points to find common ground, we expand what's

possible in arizona and in our country. we had open and honest conversations about the hopes and dreams that unite us instead of the superficial differences that divide us. in arizona we value our independence. we are proud of our families and our community, and we work hard to protect them. we have our differences but we share a strong sense of service, hard work, and self-determination. we believe that everyone has the right to define his or her own destiny and that no one should be treated differently under the law. by focusing on these shared values we found success. we defeated that ballot proposition, the first date in the country do so. and i learned lessons that shape my work for arizonans ever since. since 2006 we have seen long-term progress that makes today's important debate in the united states senate possible. this work is ongoing.

but the work can't and shouldn't be attributed to any one politician, any political party, or any piece of legislation. this work happens because people choose to be the most authentic self and live their lives freely. being gay is normal. being yourself is normal. showing up to life every day happy to be who you are is normal. and being authentic with your friends, your family, your colleagues, and your community, that's also normal. that normalcy is what helps us listen to each other, understand each other, and grow in our community together. it's what changes hearts and minds in arizona and around the country. and it's what little by little, piece by piece, delivers sustainable progress. whether at home in arizona or here in the united states senate, in order to deliver real results to the americans we

serve, we need to work together. working to get the means listening with open hearts, bridging divides, shouting out the noise and focusing on our shared goals. i have seen time and time again how this approach helps us overcome tough challenges. a little over six months ago it was thanks to that same approach that i stood here on the senate floor and delivered remarks on the passage of our bipartisan safer communities act, a historical we negotiated and passed with broad bipartisan support that makes our schools and community safer, and saves lives. and before that the same approach helped us passed a landmark legislation, infrastructure investment and jobs act, into law. strengthening america through upgrades and repairs, creating good-paying jobs and expanding economic opportunities across the country. beyond these historic accomplishments our approach a focusing on common goals and

shared ideals has helped us passed in the other lasting solutions, including long awaited and necessary post reform, support for ukraine in its fight against putin, and most recently the passage into law of our bipartisan chips inside, springs job creation and addressing our supply chain challenges. we can all see this approach has proved successful, and right now we need this approach more than ever. this summer arizonans and americans across the country were confused and some were scared following the supreme court decision to overturn roe v. wade. women felt her health and well-being was danger, at her own abilities to make critical decisions about our future for suddenly thrown into question. this fear trickled into other communities including the lgbtq community as leaders with extreme ideologies used about what other challenges could come

next. but sadly in response we sought elected officials on both sides of the aisle exploit this fear and use it to fuel clicks, book cable news appearances and drum up outrage to further their own partisan political agendas. outrage can help repel political stars, but it doesn't solve problems. it doesn't make life better for everyday people. but amidst the noise a few hard-working senators from across our country and across the political spectrum understood there was a need to provide certainty to the american people, and we came to the table to get something done. senator tammy baldwin, , our groundbreaking leader on this issue, partnered with my old friend senator susan collins, rob portman, thom tillis and myself, all of us, no strangers to bipartisan success in a divided senate.

together we senators also seek the same goal come help ensure married same-sex couples across the country are afforded the same protections as all of the married american couples. along the way we overcame obstacles and mates are no language respect religious liberty and we were careful to ensure that in showing up some rights we did not infringe upon others. we made our case to colleagues on both sides of the aisle. we listened to those who disagreed with us. we didn't pick fights. we didn't call names we just kept moving forward. and i'm proud to say that by refusing to demonize each other and by focusing on our shared goals we will deliver real lasting results for the lgbtq community. we will make our country stronger and safer for american families in a way that honors and respects our diverse viewpoints on marriage, on family, and society. i thank the many faith

communities who helped us expand this policy conversation and it sure that our amendment would include robust and common sense religious liberty protection. in particular, i think the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints who provided thoughtful suggestions and contributions. they summarize our holistic outcome when they wrote in their statement, quote, we believe this approach is the way forward. as we work together to preserve the principles and practices of religious freedom together with the rights of lgbtq individuals, much can be accomplished to heal relationships and foster greater understanding, end quote. not every american agrees on marriage. there are lots of other issues and that's okay. honest disagreements don't make us any less honorable, especially if we see that this agreement as an opportunity to learn and grow.

if more of us dedicate ourselves to better understanding one another and are lived experiences, if we strive to see an issue from another persons point of view, and if we all work to practice a bit more patience and grace, i know we can continue finding a path forward together. it may not seem like it in today's partisan world, but there's always been more that unites us as americans than divides us. the bipartisan support we have garnered in the senate today proves this issue isn't a matter of one party being right or the other party being wrong. this issue is bigger than angry tweets and bombastic fundraising e-mails. this, this is not ensuring american families who share the ideals of all marriages, love, devotion and sacrifice, can continue to count on the basic

rights and responsibilities that come with their marriages. it's about protecting the police that unite us as americans. the right to define our own destiny, the understanding that no one should be different in the eyes of the law. the freedom to reach for every opportunity and fulfill our greatest potential. the truth is if we allow our basic values of honoring dasher honor and dignity to become just another political football, we all lose. as i learned back in 2006 in arizona, we have to work together. we have to find real partners in both parties and we must bridge our divides the four they with us apart for good. our work is not done. as a body we must resolve to do the right thing to continue this mission and keep working together to deliver lasting

results. our country deserves it. the american people deserve it, and the stakes are too high to stop our progress now. thank you and i yield the floor.

>> the congresswoman from michigan who is the new republican conference secretary, thanks for joining us here on "washington journal" this morning. >> thank you. >> you got elected this week in leadership elections. what does that mean for you personally? what does it mean in terms of the role you will take on for the gop leadership? >> first and foremost i am humbled, very excited to have earned this position from my colleagues yesterday, or tuesday

when the elections were. so i'm excited. we've got a lot of work to do. i'm excited to get to work. i'm excited to get started. the biggest thing that i want to bring to the table is really the bridge that gap between the conference and the leadership. that i think is going to be critical. we have a very diverse conference. not everybody is in a ruby red district like mine, and i think in order to move america forward, which is exactly the american people are counting and prank on us to do, is we have to be able to listen to all of the members of congress, listen to the ideas, listen to what their constituents are telling them back at home so when we sit at the leadership table we can put forward policies and market those policies to the american

people so that they understand, and we have our letter on the right wall and we're moving in a direction that is best for all of america. >> host: interesting you mention you are in a in a d district in your district north of detroit, well north of detroit and estate that this time around in 2022, led the governor, the democratic governor retained her governorship. the legislature there flipped. so much more of a democratic win in michigan that in prior years. >> guest: yeah. it was extremely unfortunate, and and i think we got a couple of messages wrong and a think we didn't listen closely enough to the people of the great state of michigan. as well as we've got to do a better job of marketing and educating the voters on what the real issues are. and that's what i intend to do

is, prior to come to congress i spent 30 plus years in in business. the number one skill that i learned is you have to surround yourself with people that will tell you the truth. even, even if it's not what you want to hear. that an order to make good decisions for your district, your state or even the country, you have got to listen to the people. and sometimes i think we all confused just a little bit more of our listening skills. >> host: what do you think those messages that the party got wrong in michigan, and do you think those messages some of those messages have national implications or for getting t wrong on a national level as well, at least in the republican conference on the hill? >> guest: i can speak for on the hill. what we have to do moving forward is we have to lay out a vision for the american people. the counter right now is so divided. we have to figure out instead of

what divides us, we have to figure out what can we put forth that the majority of people will agree upon. that's what we have done with the commitment to america. our commitment is to figure out how to move this country forward with an economy that is strong. we have got to get this country back on track. inflation is at a 40 high. the cost of everything is so expensive. we forgot to figure out the labor shortage issues, the price, the pricing issues, supply chain issues. we have a lot of issues that we need to deal with in the economy that affect everyone. the second is a nation that is safe. when we care more about the criminals than you do the victims, that's a problem. we have to get back to law and order and rule of law in this country. listen, we lock our doors at

night. that doesn't mean we don't welcome people into our home but we know who is coming in. we have bedded in. >> host: do you think there's room for you to work with a biden administration on some of those issues? and at the same time hold some of these planned hearings? we are hearing today from representative comber on hearing about hunter biden and the biden family enterprises in the past. >> guest: absolutely. and we will give the president an opportunity to join us. we will put forth good legislation to give them the opportunity to join us on just that, of holding people accountable. that's the other thing we want to hold the government accountable. we still have answers on where covid virus came from. we haven't really had a hearing on it. what's going on at our southern border? the american people deserve answers get i don't think the american people expect us to be perfect but did you expect us to make progress and they do expect

us to be honest and transparent, and let's dive into the issues. because we can't fix any of these problems unless we first admit we have a problem. so rest assured i will absolutely hold the government accountable, as well as share with the american people what is going on, good bad or ugly. they deserve to know. >> host: last question for you. kevin mccarthy won the republican leadership post on that same tuesday election. does he have come with the other 218 votes to become speaker in that january vote or vote later in the year? >> guest: absolutely he will get to 218, no question, question, lisa mcclain congresswoman from michigan is the new conference secretary for the republicans in the house. congratulations and thanks for being with us here on "washington journal" traded thank you. have a great day, tory newmyer

is pols reportedly us this morning to talk about specifically the collapse of the fdx cryptor currency exchange and broadly about the state of the cryptor currency intercede. like we do with a lot of conversations, tori, reminders what cryptor currency is and how it's valued, what is it worth? >> guest: well, it's sort of worth what people will pay for it. cryptor currency was really conceived and launched in the wake of the great financial crisis as a kind of alternative financial system that was hoping to avoid the mistakes of traditional finis negrete some of the conditions that led to that collapse, and its key feature is this a ledger that's distributed across computer networks around the world and allows for this thing, cryptor currencies, to exist without any kind of central intermediary or authority and the idea is that

it returns power to people. that way to take control over their own financial assets and the transactions that they do with them allows them to also operates operate sort of any pseudo-private way beyond the prying eyes of the government or traditional wall street powers. >> host: what is it that has made cryptor currency so popular with investors? >> guest: well, i think it really enjoyed a boom during the pandemic when you saw investors on wall street who had a greater appetite for risk and an easy money and private entrance of the monetary policy. so it sort of inflating the value of the cryptor currency market, inflated alongside riskier stocks like in the tech sector. but there's also this retail boom where people were getting very rich very quickly, and

there was this kind of formal, fear of missing out, affect that took place where people were getting stimulus checks and didn't necessarily have a need for them, opening accounts on some of these exchanges and buying coins and getting very swept up in this kind of get rich quick mentality that drove this boom that sort of crested about a year ago, and over the course of the past year we've seen a tremendous selloff in the overall market where it's gone, it's down about 70% from where it was a year ago. the total value of the market was about $3 trillion a year ago, now it it somewhere about $850 billion. and then on top of that you have all of these failures by high-profile platforms that it kind of had a knock on effect and has shaken customer confidence in the entire ecosystem. >> host: how if at all is cryptor currency regulated by the federal government or by

state entities? >> guest: so there is a kind of patchwork of regulations that apply at the state level. some of these platforms get what are known as money transmitter licenses. a lot of these platforms, cryptor platforms are registered with an office in the treasury department and so you will see people from the industry say it's not true that we are not regulated, look at these licenses that we have. i think the important thing for regular people to understand especially if you're thinking about getting into this is that an come for all important purposes the industry remains unregulated. the things that you think backstop your traditional investments, deposits that you have in the bank, investments that you have in the stock market, those come with a certain expectation that the players you are investing in or getting your money