>> thank you so much. >> ladies and gentlemen please remain in your seats untilthe official delegations have departed . >>

mr. sullivan: mr. president. the presiding officer: senator from alaska is recognized. mr. sullivan: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be vissated. -- vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: i call up my amendment 6503, and i ask that it be reported by number. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senator from alaska, mr. sullivan, for himself and

mr. cotton, proposes amendment number 6503. mr. sullivan: mr. president, nobody wants a strike right now in our country. we've had challenges with supply chains. we've had challenges with finding enough workers with regard to our businesses. nobody wants a strike. my amendment would certainly focus on not having a strike, but making sure that the sides in this disagreement between management and labor get back to work to resolve the problems at hand. it's a simple amendment. it says we need a cooling-off period for 60 more days. mr. president, congress finds itself in another last-minute

emergency, being rushed to the floor of the senate. we got the details of this about 24 hours ago on a very complicated subject. since 2019 negotiations have been going on between labor unions representing railway employees and the railway industry over employee pay, hours of service, benefits, sick leave, complicated negotiations. now that the negotiations have met an impasse we've been asked to endorse a proposal that the presidential emergency board has endorsed, and that the union members have rejected. complicated. barring additional action, as i mentioned, there could be a strike that would harm our economy and workers and families and other businesses.

again, we don't want that. but mr. president, here's the other issue -- we also don't want congress to become the de facto end game for all future negotiations, private contract negotiations. enacting the agreement reached at the bargaining table or having congress then dictate the terms of minutia in these contracts, with regard to sick leave or other things. now, i know senator sanders has a provisions on this. it might be a great idea. it might not be a good idea. i don't know. but we got this 24 hours ago. no hearings. no discussion. so, all i'm asking for, mr. president, is a 60-day cooling-off period so the sides

can get back to the bargaining table, so the president of the united states, the secretary of labor, sacramento -- secretary walsh, can get involved and do their jobs. that's it. a cooling-off period for 60 days, handing this negotiation back to the parties involved to resolve. now, some people say, well, that's just kicking the can down the road. well, mr. president, there's precedents for this course of action by congress. the legislation covering these kind of labor agreements contemplate congress asking for additional cooling-off periods. we've done this many times before, including in 1986 where it actually worked. 60-day cooling-off period, the sides went back to the bargaining table and they revolved their -- resolved their

issues on their own, without the congress of the united states having to come and dictate terms. as i mention, less than 36 hours ago we were asked to decide on issues that are complicated, that are important, without necessary deliberations, without congressional hearings to gain knowledge and expertise required to make informed decisions. my amendment would certainly avoid a strike. we all agree on that. it will give negotiators more time to get to an agreement, and it will not make congress the entity of last resort in these kind of negotiations where the knowledge of the issues that are very complicated have not been thoroughly studied and have not

received the due diligence that i believe every american, every union member wants us to have. it's worked before, exactly this kind of amendment has worked before in this kind of situation. it can work again. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on my amendment. i yield the floor. mr. sanders: i ask unanimous consent to have an additional ten minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. se.mr. sanders: thank you.

mr. president, we are soon to be voting on the situation with the rail industry, which is an enormously important issue, not only for the 125,000 rail workers involved but for the entire country, because rail plays an enormous role in transporting very, very basic and important goods that all of us depend upon it. it becomes a health issue, etc., etc. but i want to take a half a moment to put this rail issue into a broader context, and then get back to the rail situation. and that is what polls are telling us, and what i think each and every member of the senate seize and hears from

his -- sees and hears from his or her constituents, is people in this country are increasingly disgusted with the kind of selfishness and corporate greed that we are seeing. now, we don't talk about it much, the media doesn't talk about it much, but there is more income and wealth inequality in america today than we have seen in at least 100 years. and the gap between the very, very rich and the middle class and everybody else is growing wider andwiser. today, in the -- wider and wider. today, in the midst of this inflationary period, when so many workers are struggling to put food on the table, when they're falling behind economically, the billionaire class has literally never had it so good. these guys don't know what to do with their money. they don't know how many mansions they can own, how many islands they can have. some of them are building spaceships to take them to mars. they don't know what to do with

their many billions of dollars. and yet, as we speak, 85 million americans can't afford health insurance. 60,000 a year die because they don't get to a doctor on time. 45 million people are dealing with student debt. families can't afford child care for their kids. we have 600 ,000 people who are homeless in america, including people a few blocks away from the united states capital. rich are getting much richer, middle class continues to shrink. and if you want to talk about the excesses of corporate greed, then you got to talk about the rail industry and what's going on here right now. now, everybody understands that businesses sometimes have trouble. they lose money. they're in trouble. they go to their workers, hey, things are tough, we all got to cut back.

we understand that. that is not the case today with the rail industry. for the rail industry business has never been better, record-breaking profits. this year alone, for the first three-quarters, their profits are up by over $21 billion. they have so much money that they are able to give over $25 billion in stock buybacks and in dividends. that's what's going on with the rail industry. ceo's, one of the ceo's in the rail industry makes $20 million a year. another guy makes $14 million a year. they are doing phenomenally well. but what's also going on in the rail industry, that over the last six years they have cut back on their workforce by 30%,

which means that workers in the rail industry are asked to do more with less support. so for 3 1/2 years there have been negotiations between the industry and the 12 rail unions, and the end result of this is that the workers received a 24% increase in their wages. sounds like a lot of money. that's for a five-year period. they have not received a pay increase in the last three years. and if you average it out, that pay increase is less than inflation to date. so it's not a great wage increase. not terrible, but it is not a great wage increase. i've heard talk about health care. i know they wanted health care. they didn't win on health care. what the industry unbelievably wanted to do, despite record-breaking profits, is ask workers to pay more for the

health insurance. that was beaten back. so they remain at status quo. not a victory, but not a defeat. but most egregiously, if you talk to the workers as i have, what is their issue? not wages. not benefits. their issue is paid sick leave. they are one of the few industries in america today that have zero sick paid leave. unbelievably. if a worker today on the rail industry gets sick, that worker gets a mark for missing work and can, and in some cases will, be fired. can you imagine that? here in congress, when we all conservatives, progressives, we have staff, all of us have staff, you know, people get sick. of course, they take time off. you don't fire them. you don't give them marks. you don't punish them because they got sick.

this is america, 2022. you don't treat people, especially people in the rail industry, who are doing dangerous, difficult work. now, i have to be honest. i know that the secretary of labor, the secretary of transportation have worked really hard on this issue, but i need to hear from them their willingness, which i think there will be, to demand that the industry do what has to be done, and that is to provide paid sick leave for their workers. so, mr. president, i will have an amendment. i assume that's coming up in a few moments. this is not a radical idea. it's a very conservative idea. and it says if you work in the rail industry, you will get seven paid sick days. and i would hope that we would have strong support and the 60

votes that we need to pass this very, very important amendment that is wanted by every one of the rail unions, and i think is overwhelmingly supported by the american people. and with that, i yield all time back and ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: without objection. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 26, the nays are 69. under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this amendment, the amendment is not agreed to. under the previous order, the senate will now proceed to consideration of h. con. res. 119, which the clerk will report. the clerk: h. con. res. 119, concurrent resolution providing for a correction in the enrollment of h.j. res. 100. a senator: mr. president. partnership the senator from vermont is recognized.

mr. sanders: mr. president, the american people are increasingly disgusted at the level of corporate greed that we see today. we have more income and wealth ineect in america -- inequality in america that we've had in 100 years, working people getting further and further behind. there is no clearer example of corporate greed than what we see in the rail industry today. in the last year that industry earned $21 billion in profit, record-breaking, provided $25 billion in stock buybacks and dividends to their wealthy shareholders. and yet, today workers who do difficult and dangerous work have zero paid sick days. zero. you get sick, you've got a mark against you. a couple of marks, you get fired. this cannot and must not happen in america in 2022. this amendment simply says seven

paid sick days for workers in the rail industry. and i hope we can win it. i yield back. i ask for the yeas and nays. i yield back all remaining time on both sides. the presiding officer: without objection, all time is yielded back. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 52. the nays are 43 president under the previous order, requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this concurrent resolution, the concurrent resolution is not agreed to. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of house joint resolution 100. under the previous order, the joint resolution is considered read a third time. the question occurs on passage of the joint resolution. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 80, the nays are 15. one senator responded present. under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the passage of this joint resolution, the joint resolution is passed.

the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: madam president, we are not in a quorum call, are we? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. cornyn: thank you, madam president. madam president, earlier this week, i did something i haven't done in a number of years, which is attend a session of the u.s. supreme court, their oral arguments. of course, as you know, during the covid pandemic, even the supreme court had to change the way it operated but now the court's back in the supreme court building meeting together and listening to oral arguments and deciding some of the most important cases that are confounding the country and our legal system. but the case that i listened to

oral arguments in hit very close to home because the style of the case was united states v. texas. and it centers on a memo issued by the department of homeland and security -- homeland security. he provided direction to our border patrol agents that they would no longer have any hard and fast rules when it comes to ruling illegal entry into the united states, particularly by those who commit a serious crime. rather than a mandatory rule, secretary mayorkas said you have to weigh the various factors to see if somebody guilty of serious crimes should be removed from the united states. under this memorandum, officers

with the immigrations and customs enforcement department were discouraged from arresting or removing illegal immigrants unless they posed a threat to national security, border security. that is reasonable but it is a little more vague than specifically people who committed aggravated felonies. the member dumb says that -- memorandum goes on to say that it will go to people who are a current threat to safety. the guideline states that it is not determined according to brightline or categories. if you're a law enforcement officer like the border patrol, what do you want? you warrant bright lines, you want categories, you don't want a woke statement where on one hand you have to consider these

factors, on another hand, you have to consider these matters. they want a brightline. what secretary mayorkas said in the memorandum that there is no clear guidance, no clear definition in the border patrol in terms of people they need to detain or remove from the united states because they are a public safety threat. i would hope that crimes like murder, rape, and aggravated assault would meet a balancing test by secretary mayorkas. but this memo does not offer any specifics. it's on this hand you've got to consider these factors and on the other hand, you have to consider these without any real guidance. we know it is unfair to our law enforcement officials to not provide them with better guidance because they have to make difficult decisions, sometimes split-second

decisions, sometimes life and death decisions and to have somebody come back and say you didn't properly balance the considerations as opposed to having a brightline rule which provides more clarity and certainty, i think it is a disservice to them as well. well, what about domestic violence, what about child important pornography, what about money laundering and embezzlement. you can look at the memorandum and you won't find any answers. just a balance test, on one hand think about these things, on other hand, think about those. the administration offered vague guidance with the term public threat to public safety, close quote, that different i.c.e. officers may reach different conclusions. the memo outlines mitigating

factors, so not only do you consider these factors and these factors and balance them, you need to look at mitigating factors and whether to enforce the law or walk away. this includes the age of the migrant as well as how long they've been living in the united states. as if a migrant entering the country illegally somehow would require some equity or invested interest because they've been here longer than somebody else. it makes no sense at all. the memorandum also said that the law enforcement officer must also include consideration of the mental health or physical condition of the person. and how the removal of somebody illegally in the united states would impact other people in their family.

just to be clear, these are not mandates from congress, this is a product of a madeup memorandum secretary of homeland security. congress has given the department the authority to exercise some prosecutorial decision, but there's a difference between prioritizing certain offenses for removal and effectively exempting entire categories for enforcement. i think one of the problems that secretary mayorkas has is he thinks he has the authority to pick and choose which laws to enforce. he has no such authority. now, he does have authority in terms of prioritizing them, but basically he said that somebody who is in the country illegally because they violated our immigration laws is the lowest of priorities for detention and

removal. that's what gets you several million people over the last couple of years. that's what gets you a border crisis which allows for the importation -- illegal importation of the drugs that killed 108,000 americans last year. that sort of wokeness and lawlessness. now, we have seen previous administrations prioritize the removal of terrorists, transnational criminals or people who oppose a threat to public safety or national security, and that's fine. i think we can all agree that law enforcement should use its limited resources to address the biggest threats, but not in the process exempt other people who violated the law from any potential consequences. it defies all common sense to instruct a law enforcement officer to turn a blind eye when

they encounter individuals who came here illegally and committed other crimes just because those crimes aren't in the opinion of secretary mayorkas serious enough or because of the age of the individual or how long they have actually resided here in the united states. now, the lower court, the district court for the southern district of texas found that secretary mayorkas's memorandum guidance doesn't just defy common sense, they found that it breaks the law. congress has provided the requirement and said that the secretary shall take into custody noncitizens who commit certain crimes. shall. the question chief justice roberts kept asking is, does shall mean shall or does shall mean may? because the law says that

congress has passed, signed by the president of the united states, said that you shall take into custody illegal immigrants who commit certain crimes and you shall remove those individuals once they are released from criminal custody. so the word shall is -- is mandatory. it's not discretionary. congress's law that we passed isn't just a polite suggestion, it's an instruction. it's a direction. it's a requirement, it's a mandate. the reality of this situation, however inconvenient it may be for some of our colleagues, is that by entering the united states illegally, these individuals have, by definition, broken the law. the secretary of homeland security doesn't have the authority to determine whether those individuals should face the legal consequences that congress has mandated. that's our job and the decision

was made long before president biden or secretary mayorkas took office. now, the state of texas that is disproportionately affected because we have a 1,200 common border with mexico, and we're seeing the bulk of this wave of humanity and the drugs coming across the border and it's imposed a significant burden on our border communities and on our state. but i believe that the state provided a strong case that the justices should vacate this dangerous and illegal memo once and for all. if you think about it in a minute, by saying, well, you have to weigh these factors against these factors and, oh, by the way, if somebody is of a certain age or been here a while, you know, then you

seclude them entirely, what this memorandum did and does is send a clear message to the world that if you come to the united states illegally, you will be able to stay as long as you don't get caught committing a murder or some other heinous crime. but if you commit other crimes, you still might be released by the department of homeland security because there is no bright line rule requiring removal under those circumstances. this turns on its head what the obligation of the secretary of homeland security should be. he takes an oath, similar to the one we take to uphold the law and the constitution of the united states, and i believe it's a clear violation of his oath and his responsibility to try to provide this watered-down

memorandum which is completely completely -- it is completely -- well, it's impossible for an individual customs and border protection officer to know how they can strike the balance. it's going to be second-guessed. and as i said earlier, two border patrol agents looking at the same individual may weigh these factors differently. so it is a completely -- well, it's contributing to the biden border crisis that we've seen raging for the last two years. the united states, as we like to say, is a nation of laws, not men and women. in other words, it doesn't depend on who you are, it depends on what the law is and we all have the same obligation to follow the law. the secretary just -- simply

doesn't have the authority to cherry pick which laws he wants to enforce and which ones he doesn't. congress writes the laws and the executive branch is charged with enforcing those laws as written, not as how you wish they would be. nothing more and nothing less. but unfortunately we've seen time and time again, not for days, not for weeks, but for months and even now years, the biden administration has simply failed to clear this very low bar, enforce the law. it's discouraged, i.c.e. personnel, again, i.c.e. is immigration and customs enforcement, from enforcing our immigration laws. you he remember a couple of years ago, some of the more radical members of our colleague's political party said you should abolish i.c.e. you shouldn't enforce any of our

laws. but the consequences are pretty clear now. it's failed to secure the border or supply front line law enforcement officers and agents with the resources they need in order to do their job. these can sometimes be very dangerous jobs. what's more, the administration has actually sanctioned vil niezing border patrol and i.c.e. personnel to do the very job that we asked them to do, enforcing our immigration laws. frequently if you talk to border patrol agents, they'll talk about the push factors that encourage people to leave their home country, like poverty, violence, and then they talk about the pull factors or what they can expect to encounter at the border as discouraging them from coming or encouraging them.

there's been no attempt by the biden administration to address the pull factor that encourages people to make the dangerous trek from their homes and come to the united states illegally. that would be something called deterrence, discouraging somebody from illegally coming to the country in the first place. and the asylum program which has now resulted in millions of cases on the backlog of the immigration courts, there's been no effort made to try to fix the broken asylum process, no attempt to strengthen law enforcement and to actually remove people who have no legal right to be here in the united states. if you go to the border now, as i've been many times, and you talk to the border patrol agents, they will tell you that they routinely detain people from as many as 150 different

countries. this isn't just people coming from mexico or central america. these are literally people coming from around the world. you'll find ukrainians. you'll find russians. you'll find people from the middle east. you'll find people from iran, north korea, china. the fact of the matter is that if you have enough money, if you're willing to pay these -- the price that these human smugglers require, you can make your way into the united states and through our southern border illegally. so what's an abdication of duty and a complete embarrassment to our law-abiding society. i think many americans watch what's happening at the border and they wonder is this the same country i grew up in or did i miss something because they feel

like something has gone terribly awry with this sort of lawlessness and chaos. the biden administration's lassez-faire attitude toward our nation's immigration laws is absolutely disgraceful and there must be consequences. the american people deserve better than this, and i hope to see more accountability next congress once republicans take control of the house. that means that we'll have new chairmen of the various committees and they will call people like secretary mayorkas before those committees and hold them accountable. but until that happens, i don't expect things to get much better because if the biden administration hasn't been motivated to get off the dime and actually do something about this chaos and lawlessness at the border, i don't know what it will take to change their minds. but sometimes when public

officials don't do what they're supposed to do and you can't change their mind, sometimes you need to change who those public officials are. unfortunately, we may have to wait until the next election to do that. immigration enforcement is a bigger job today than it was a few years ago, and i'm afraid it's getting ready to become even more challenging. just last month the d.c. district court judge vacated the center for disease control's title 42 order, and the judge granted a five-week stay which will expire here in less than three weeks. title 42, just to remind everybody, is a pandemic-related order designed to protect public health. it's not really an immigration order, but it's a public health order. so when people are coming across the border untested and

unvaccinated, we recognize that's a potential to spread even more of the coronavirus. so border patrol has told me as long ago as about a year ago that they have been able to expel some people, particularly adult males, from coming across the border using the title 42 authority. but that's getting ready to go away in five weeks. or less than three weeks now. and we have not heard any plan out of the biden administration for how they're going to do the job without that authority because they simply refuse to use any other authorities like expedited removal in order to discourage people from illegally entering the country. back when i sat down with in of the leaders of the customs and border protection, the border

patrol about a year ago now, they told me that once title 42 goes away, unless there's another alternative plan for controlling people's access to the border, they will lose control completely. at this point title 42 is one of the few remaining tools we have to prevent even more chaos at the border. of the more than 230,000 encounters at the southern border in october, 230,000 migrants came to the border, more than 78,000 were removed under title 42. you might ask what happened to the rest of them. well, they were ushered into the country, perhaps never to be heard from again. based on weak asylum claims or other refusals by the biden administration simply to enforce our immigration laws.

but 78,000 is not inconsequential. that's 78,000 people the border patrol didn't have to process, feed, or house, or take care of. once title 42 is gone, that will all change and the consequences will be dire. it will two weeks since the federal judge struck down title 42 and i have yet to hear a peep out of the biden administration what they will do to address these consequences. a few weeks ago president biden held a post-election press conference and was asked what he intends to do differently over the next two years given the fact that 75% of the voters say the country is headed in the wrong direction. he said nothing. intends to do nothing

differently. three out of the -- out of four americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction and the president of the united states of america says i am not going to change the direction. the senate majority leader shared the same sentiment calling the election results a vindication for democrats. given their recent comments, president biden and senator schumer don't seem to recognize there's a problem at all. in fact, they seem happy with the way things are going. and they've assured us that democrats are just going to keep moving in the same direction. so if you think this is bad and two-thirds of the voters believe we are headed in the wrong direction, just get ready because it's about to get worse. i yield the floor and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the

it was great to see you all today. we've spent some time together private dinner last night with our lives in came to tell you that we are leaving. it's wonderful to have him here. we've had great conversations and appreciate opportunities to share ideas. i enjoy the time jill and i had last night, first time gone to a

private tutor in a long time to have the production of the french government. [laughter] all kidding aside grants is one of our strongest partners historically, the most capable ally and he's also become a friend. we share the same values and remain core, agenda, we face all challenges together and occasionally we have slight differences but never in a fundamental way thus far as far as i've been in washington, more than a couple of years. we affirm france and united states together with nato allies in european unions stand as strong as ever against russia's google work is ukraine.

we talked a lot about the and we continue support in ukraine as they defend their homes and families and sovereignty and integrity against russian aggression which is incredibly brutal. i knew russia was but it anticipate as brutal as they often have been. today we reaffirm we are going to stand together against brutality and continue strong support ukrainian people to defend their homes and families, hospitals and integrity against russian aggression and i want to thank you for welcoming the people of france giving 100,000 ukrainian refugees, it's a mark of who you are.

putin thinks he can crush the will of those ambitions but talking civilian infrastructure in ukraine choking off energy to europe to drive up prices exasperating food prices, is hurting vulnerable people around the world. he's not going to succeed, president macron and i resolved that we will continue to work together to hold people accountable for their actions and mitigate the impacts of putin's war on the rest of the world. united states is helping europe diversify against natural gas and while accelerating clean energy transition we will continue working in partnership with europe as we move forward. the progress we've made in these issues through the task force on energy security and today we

continue between france and united states on civil nuclear energy through bilateral clean energy partnership. around the world france and the united states are working to strengthen stability and security and share the vision of the indo pacific. prosperous and secure and we will continue to strengthen cooperation and defend core international principles including freedom of imagination. we are working together to support the middle east more integrated, peaceful and prosperous want to thank resident macron for efforts to bring about this historic maritime boundaries between israel and lebanon and the people of iran in french and united states are working together to hold accountable

those responsible for the human rights abuses to counter support for russia's war and to ensure iran does not require nuclear weapons. as we look forward to hosting the upcoming u.s. african leaders summit president macron and i understand the influence and importance he has much to add we will deepen engagement working with african partners and ranking governance and security and economic opportunities across the continent to tackle global challenges of our time. our partnership extends to cooperate in outer space from coordinating defenses -- defense of space activity to strengthening scientific efforts to monitor is changing planet. we had a detailed discussion of the reduction act.

the united states and new york share goals of bold investment in clean energy and meet the challenge of climate crisis and build industries of the future including letters and practical steps to coordinate and align approaches to strengthen and secure supply chains, manufacturing and innovation on both sides of the atlantic we ask teams to follow up on this is ongoing u.s. consultation continues and work out the differences. france and the united states are leading efforts to strengthen the global health secure. president macron visit falls on the world is day in the want to highlight joint efforts to reach our goal of ending the age

epidemic by 2030, a goal we set and will accomplish and a goal we are sticking with. to do it, we need all the tools we need, we just have to make finishing the fight top priority for all patients and that's why i'm proud to take the baton from you, president macron and host the seventh replenishment conference this year building on the strong record of leadership. we phrased 15.7 billion in the united states and france as the largest contributor and funds and it will save millions of lives. if i listed all areas where cooperation between france and the u.s. were delivering meaningful progress, we'd be here until dinnertime so let me close by highlighting our long-term investment to deepening ties between people

particularly u.s. programs that celebrate the 75th anniversary and facilitated thousands of exchanges between students and educators over the last decade, critical to our relationship. a key part in ensuring the future of this alliance remains strong and vibrant for generations to come. thank you again for all our nations are doing together and cooperation, my administration has foreign policy around strength of alliances and france is the heart of that commitment. i look forward to continuing to work with you and as i used to say in the united states senate, the floor is yours. >> thank you, mr. president.

[inaudible] let me tell you how honored and moved we are to be here on the occasions by your administration and you just said it again. i would like to say that over centuries, every time there's something vital at stake with her one for the other about

hesitation and it is this that is prevailing in the current and i do not repeat what he describes and we clearly condemn these and lead all action to condemn war crimes by russia on the ukrainian side support the ukrainian army resisting and please allow me to think united states of america for all that is provided because the war is impacting european soil you have chosen on these efforts.

to confirm initiatives will take again in the coming weeks for the ukrainian troops and enable them to resist and continue to work together to support ukrainians, people to help them resist because we can see the russian for civilian infrastructure bringing them more violence to make ukrainian people desperate and impossible for them in the reason on the 13th of december two support ukraine like to thank you for that event. we are working with president zelenskyy based on his plan

proposed not like to take the opportunity to commend president zelenskyy to find a way, a path to peace while leading the heroic resistance organizing for attempt month. hope ukraine forces never give up to present this conflict and make sure when the time comes on the basis of condition to help build peace the opposition being so clear, it is important to us because we are working for peace. we also talked about the consequences including food and security and energy security for the entire planet. the g20, g7 in that direction

and all we are doing to try to help all countries on their economy. we also had a discussion on the ira and pieces of legislation by the american administration and we agreed to synchronize in order to invest in the emergent semiconductors, everything because we share the same vision and wait. president biden wishes to create more industrial jobs for his country and build a strong history and secure supplies and

this is why we taught our teams to continue this work with coordination to find solutions on the topics we identified and the europeans and with you to have the agenda to bring more jobs, industry jobs in the united states as well as europe and the strength of resilience of the supply chain and with strong integration. the european work is also one we want to deliver. what would like to do is work on a number of topics yesterday had working sessions and teams have been working so we could approve an agenda of hope for the future, and the space industry

research and exploration and here are some common research projects in this technique because on behalf of both of us i can say the industry report of this mix and will not only bring jobs but enable us to have a secure supply and meet the climate objective. innovations and delegations the work taking place. last, we have a commit from the international challenges and beating on this relationship as

well and will tell you once again we are pleased with your choices and your campaign commitment. the fact that your back and climate, it really is the new deal and resisting for a number of years and now we are able to engage with you and we continue to work by 2030 no like to say by both our countries, there's a global fund deal with eradicating aid for the benefit of the population in the same in the relationship, doing

everything we can to deal with diversity. we want more innovation and listen but also acknowledge the state visit and financing means for countries to support them on those developments and it will play a key role to organize and build new partners in the north and south and it's the lines of providing more resources to these countries and as well as performing the main international institutions with the world bank and existing tools.

regarding biodiversity we had a lunch yesterday and we see these, a willingness to have an agenda in particular we will work together to prepare for the summit and the next semester and the heart of the one that will cover with them, the countries coming to washington in a few days. it is this convergence and last, we welcome to fight terrorism and peace in my thoughts go middle east and africa the last few years to fight for security of these regions of the world in these countries and thank you

for allowing me to say we have committed to the middle east to military acts and we will continue to do so because the fight is not over yet and it's important to remind allies and partners we need to continue to work to fight in the middle east and i would like to thank you for your valuable support over the last two years including an africa can have great results including the past few weeks and will continue to do the work. i could carry on all afternoon and we could talk about the way in particular we organize our presence.

dear joe, you eloquently thanked france for the role played in the historical agreement between israel and lebanon, we need to finalize the record with them work was yours to be honest so the work of the utmost importance and they needed this in the context of everything on the agenda in the coming weeks and months. thank president biden because what he said, you're not just a leader with whom we share many battles, your someone with -- pe time on the blackwell and pryor

nominations be considered expired, that the vote on the blackwell nomination be determined by the majority leader following consultation with the republican leader and the vote on the pryor nomination occur at 5:30 p.m. on monday, december 5. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motions is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 1149. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motions is agreed to. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, frances kay behm, of michigan, to be united states district judge for the eastern

district of michigan. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 1185, -- of executive numbered 1149, frances kay behm, of michigan, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of michigan. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed, no. the ayes have it, the ayes do have it the motions is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 1184. the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed, no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motions is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, kelley brings bonn hodge, of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania. the presiding officer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 1184, kelley business bonn hodge, of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania, signed by 18 senators. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motions is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to move to

calendar number 1186. the presiding officer: all in favor say aye. all posed, say nay. the ayes appear to have it, the motions is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, mia robert perez of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania. the presiding officer: i sends a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on do hereby move to bring to a close the nomination of calendar number 1186mia roberts perez, of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania. mr. schumer: i ask the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed, say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the motions is agreed to. mr. schumer: i move to executive

session to consider calendar number 1187. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed, say nay. the motions is agreed to, the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, kai n. scott of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 1187, kai n. scott, of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question on the motions. all in favor say aye. all posed say know. the ayes appear to have it. the motions is agreed to.

mr. schumer: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 1185. the presiding officer: the question is on the motions. the ayes sap to have it, the motions is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, john frank murphy, of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 1185, john frank murphy, of pennsylvania, to be united states district judge for the eastern district of pennsylvania, signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: finally, i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, december 1, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. schumer: i yield the floor. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

first issue at hand in terms of spending for fiscal year 2023 and the spending bill that occurred the short-term measure that ends december 16. how concerned are you congressmen for the government running out of money? >> guest: well i'm fairly confident that some of it will get done prior to that time. the bill for next year i would be happy with the continuing resolution. i think the thing to focus on is congress reining in spending which is the underlying problem with inflation. during the obama years largely because of john boehner we have something called sequester in what we call here the spending affected by the appropriations

bill and not mandatory spending. discretionary spending. we had an increase of one or 2% here which is the candidate to the question is are we going to get back to that or going to eight or 9% a year which would keep inflation going. we had a real budget problem as interest rates have gone up so this will be a real test. a lot of republicans want to spend more money as well. we'll have to see what happens. >> host: in terms of the 119th congress have you think you will approach particularly that discretionary spending and what sort of things and republicans do to make a dent in reducing that spending? >> guest: it's almost across-the-board. historically in the past what has happened as the defense goes up non-defense goes up so it will have to go up and down together. now historically congress. >> money on military picture meant that the military didn't necessary want.

a powerful congressman in the district you never know what other influences or what other ability contractors have two influence congress. usually defense and non-defense formally agreed to go together and you will just have to look at every line about budgeting go down to zero or 1% increase. >> host: you said -- so does the ranking member in the committee, subcommittee on national defense with the house oversight. when you look at the proposals made by the administration for aid to ukraine for example $38 billion, is that too much? >> guest: the dollar amount doesn't concern me as much as what the administration is doing to wrap things up. the $38 billion ukrainian war to end tomorrow but it would be

money well. the chance that the united states could be pulled into this war. my big problem with the biden administration is i don't think they are trying to end this war. every war has to end eventually but the longer the war goes on the it is for the economy and more likely particularly for a powerful country like russia that europe gets more into this or we get into it. now china is beginning to get involved which is kind of scary and somehow the biden administration if they can negotiate this directly we should have the french are or the or the israelis or somebody else negotiated away to to get out of here and for whatever reason biden doesn't want to do that. people are dying and it's very costly and we risk of global catastrophe here. it's very frustrating.

right after that is when i talked with people this is what they think. they would be perfectly satisfied if this forward go on for another two or three years which would be a disaster for the world and result in a war of proportions. when i decide what i'm going to vote for more not this time it's not based on the dollar amount as the biden administration using that additional money to leverage towards ending the war or are they satisfied to have this thing go on forever which i'm a little bit afraid of. >> host: represented growth minutes with us. we welcome your phonecalls and questions. legislative session - the presiding officer: we'reon - in a quorum call. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. thank you. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in

a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. king: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the appointments at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i ask the chair -- i ask the chair to lay before the senate the message to accompany s. 3662. the presiding officer: the chair lays before the senate the message from the house. the clerk: resolve that the bill from the senate s. 3662 entitled an act to temporarily increase the cost-share authority for acquiesce film forming foam, input-based testing equipment and for other purposes due pass with an amendment. mr. king: i move to concur on the house amendment and ask unanimous consent that the motion be agreed to, that the

motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. king i ask unanimous consent that the committee on commerce, science, and transportation be discharged from further consideration and the senate now proceed to s. res. 786. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 786 recognizing the history of women's professional baseball in indiana. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 857 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 857 congratulating the los angeles

football club for winning the 2022 major league soccer cup. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to immediate consideration of calendar number 442, s. 4052. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 442, s. 4052, a bill to reauthorize a program for early detection, diagnosis, and treatment regarding death and hard of hearing newborns, infants and young children and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be considered and agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i know of no further debate. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, the question is on passage of the bill as eamgded. -- amended. all in all those in favor say eye. all opposed say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill as amended and passed. mr. king: i ask that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 443, h.r. 1193. the presiding officer: the presiding officer: rp. the clerk: calendar number 443, h.r. 1193, an act to amend title

4 of the public health service act and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be withdrawn, the mcconnell substitute amendment at at desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and the motion, to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3:00 p.m. on monday, december 5 and that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the

bahem nomination. if any nominations are confirmed during monday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. king: if there's no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until senate stands adjourned until

dr. anthony fauci has served as a public health official for more than 50 years. he reflected on the u.s. response to the covid-19 pandemic. his