television companies and more including midco. ♪♪ ♪♪ >> midco supports c-span as a public servic along with these oer television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> the u.s. senate is about to gavel in for the day. senators will be debating and later vote on a resolution designating january as national stalking awareness month. off the floor, leaders are continuing to work to set committee assignments for the 118th congress, a floor vote is needed to approve them. now live to the floor of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. president pro tempore now today's opening prayer will be led by one of the --

the presiding -- who has done an amazing job both at ccc, his church, and throughout new york. the prayer will be led by reverend a.r. bernard from the cultal center, brooklyn, new york. reverend bernard: let's bow our heads. our father and our god, to whom belongs all glory, honor, and praise. we humble ourselves in prayer, seeking your wisdom and guidance as we accept the responsibility to guide, guard, and governor

this great nation. as the frof et jeremiah said, we stand at a cross road. we join our hearts and minds in the simple prayer of the prophets of the hebrew scriptures and the prophet of the new testament. "thy kingdom come." not a future messianic kingdom. that we leave in your care and control. but the power of your presence in the here and now. the power that changes the hearts, minds and lives of people by truth, righteousness, justice and peace. and thus: transforms our nation, its political constructs, our social institutions, their systems, structures, policies and practices, that while elevating some, tend to marginalize others. the power that transforms relations between government and citizens, labor and capital, between neighbors and friends, between the members of a household. let our love of a free market and care for the most vulnerable collaborate towards the common good. help us to clarify our role and

function both domestic and abroad. help us to understand the meaning of our identity, as one nation under god. bring the spirit of renewal to our nation. reawaken passion, fervor and creativity towards purpose. let it begin with the individual and spread to our culture. we understand that this is a big prayer. but you are a big god! so we place our trust in you. help us, o god, and hear our prayer. in your name we pray. amen. the presiding officer: this is the first time i'm sitting in this chair and you know why. he is a great man. 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, january 26, 2023. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable chuck schumer, a senator from the state of new york, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patty murray, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: gillibrand has had the great sense to invite the pastor to give the opening prayer. let me call on her for a brief introduction. mrs. gillibrand: thank you, mr. president. i rise to thank my guest, reverend a.r. bernard for leading us in that beautiful prayer. so heartfelt, so purposeful, the wisdom that you bring us is very

welcomed. through all the challenges that my constituents and senator schumer's constituents in new york has faced, reverend bernard has served his flock through faith and good works. not only does he lead one of new york's largest churches, he is tackling some of the most pressing issues our communities case, food insecurity, justice, ensuring that our children receive high-quality education. i'm proud to welcome as a guest for our summit we are hosting for african american faith leaders. i hope we can learn from his example. i yield the floor. thank you.

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: i wanted to add another word for pastor bernard before he leaves. he is such an extraordinary leader to so many, not just the tens of thousands who are members of his church, christian cultural center, but for the nation. and he has been a great spiritual guidance for me during times of difficulty, we shared our joyce and sor -- joys and sorrows together, but for our country.

he has done such a great chinning, christian cultural center has been a beacon for so many different congregations throughout the country as a way to lead, as a way to combine. i want to thank him for being here, but more importantly thank him for all he is doing. pastor bernard is a blessing. a blessing to ccc, a blessing to brooklyn, our nation, and our world. may god give him strength to continue in our ministry. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. schumer: first, mr. president, before i get -- the presiding officer: we're in a quorum call. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum be dispensed the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, first, before i get to my remarks, some housekeeping. i understand there are three bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the titles of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 81, a bill to provide a moratorium on all federal research grants provided to any institution of higher education or other research institute funding gain of function research. s. 82, a bill to protect social security benefits and military pay and so forth. h.r. 300, an act to amend chapter 3 of title 5 united states code ar for other purposes. mr. schumer: mr. president. in order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding en

bloc. the presiding officer: objections now having been heard, the bills will be placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: mr. president, if the 118th congress is going to do its job, and raise the debt ceiling later this year, there is one very big, very important question that all of us need to answer -- republicans, where is your plan? is it is the first question that must be asked, so let me ask it again -- republicans, where is your plan? for weeks we've heard lots of howling at the moon from house republicans on the maga fringe, about sabotaging the credit of the united states, but little in the way of actual solutions. republicans in the house, especially the maga ones, seem disturbingly at ease with taking our economy hostage in exchange for gutting vital programs.

but when asked to explain to the american people what ciech cuts they want -- what kind of cuts they wants, suddenly these republicans seem stumped. this is reckless. few issues require more bipartisanship, more cooperation, and more serious-mindedness than protecting the full faith and credit of the united states. we've never failed to pay our debts on time, and the debt ceiling has consistently been a bipartisan endeavor. the radical maga crowd running the show in the house seems unable to grasp this truth. so let me try it again -- house republicans, where is your plan? you want to gut federal spending, so show us what that means. show what it means to the average american family, in specific detail. it is your responsibility on such a weighty issue to do just that. speaker mccarthy has an obligation, an obligation to

explain to the american people what republicans actually plan to do about raising the debt ceiling. until we get a clear answer from house republicans about what their plan is, there's no point in speculating about anything else, because if republicans really want to starve the american people of vital services, the american people have a right to know what that will mean for their daily lives. otherwise, the american people will be left with only questions and no answers. republicans say they want cuts. do republicans want to us cut social security and medicare? do republicans want to cut military funding? do they want to to cut aid to veterans? do they want to cut funding to police, firefighters, and first responders? do they want to cut education, public health, science research? saber rattling about the debt, grandiose statements without any specifics is not going to cut it.

they've been doing that for a while. it doesn't work. lay out the plan. show us your plan. republicans need to show us the math. they need to level with the american people. they need to show us their plan. and now, here in the senate some members from the maga faction, particularly senator rick scott, have taken it upon themselves to fill the void that house republicans have created. the bad news is the plan they came up with is about as unhinged as they come. yesterday, the junior senator from florida, the very same senator who thought tax hikes on middle-class families was a winning formula for republicans last november, released a proposal that would put the interests of the chinese communist party before the needs of american families. senator scott calls it the full faith and credit act, but it is legislation that does not even

deserve partial credit. bond holders in beijing would get their money, while floridians, alabamans, wisconsinites and so many other american citizens would be left out to dry. does he want to pay china before he pays schoolteachers? does he want to pay chinese communist party before he pays our police officers? there's no end to the negative impacts of this piece of legislation, and it's no substitute to real action to avoid default. worse yet, reports suggest that speaker mccarthy promised maga radicals in the house that he will hold a vote on a similar proposalle to this one -- proposal to this one. seriously, mr. president, just when we thought we'd seen the limits of maga extremism, senator scott swooped in and reminded us that when it comes to maga insanity, there is no bottom. and who, who is going to pay the price? the american people.

now, on the national sales tax, i mean, you can't make this stuff up, but it goes on and on and on, of these really ludicrous, way out-of-line, way over to the extreme republican plans. they keep coming at us. another one they put out is the national sales tax. while republicans refuse to show what they plan to do about the debt ceiling, they've spent a lot of time talking up one of the worst policy proposals in existence, a 30% national sales tax on all consumer goods. the republicans just seem -- can't -- the house republicans can't seem to get out of their own way. house republicans call it the fair tax act, but let's call it what it really is, a disaster for middle-class families. there's nothing fair about a tax that punishes average families for buying essential goods, while giving the rich another chance to lower their tax

burdens, and that's what's behind most of these republican plans, a desire to help the very wealth yes, and if it comes out -- the very wealthy, and if it comes out on the middle class and most americans, they don't give a hoot. they don't give a hoot. the fair tax act is truly foul stuff. the republican plan, that the republican tax plan, would raise the cost of buying a house by $15,000. -- by $125,000. it would raise the cost of buying a car by $10,000. it would raise your average grocery bill by 3500 dollars a year at a time when people are already worried about the high price of groceries. how can they do this? things like eggs are already too expensive, but republicans want to slap another $1.50 to that price. the plan would make a gallon of milk cost another $1.70 more. the shock waves go way beyond trips to the grocery store, as painful as those would be. the republican tax would erode

the value of retirement plans, social security, pensions, 401-k's by nearly one-third. an insulting way, insulting, to people who spent their entire lives saving up in order to retire with some degree of dignity. in all my years in office, mr. president, in all my years in office, i have rarely seen such an extreme proposal be taken seriously by a governing majority. it's another reminder of how radical, how out of touch, how unserious maga republicans are about governing. all they want to do is help their very ultrarich friends. and the fact that the house leadership is catering to the delusional whims of maga extremism should send a shiver down every one of our spines. finally, on guns, mr. president. it's another tragic week of mass shootings. but gun manufacturers continue to stoop to disfussing and morally bankrupt new lows. i'm talking about a weapon

currently for sale that is actually being marketed by one gunmaker to children, and it has a disgusting, horrified name -- the jr-15. the jr-15. you heard me he right, that's what they call it. it's a spinoff, the jr-15 is, a spinoff, trial-size -- child-sized version of the ar-15, which according to the company marketing it, quote, functions like a modern sporting rifle, but is geared to smaller enthusiasts. unquote. smaller enthusiasts? that's a code for young children. look what just happened a few weeks ago in virginia, where a 6-year-old student shot his teacher at school. we're talking about a kid in the first grade who looked at his teacher and pulled the trigger. when weapons are marketed to children, it makes horrors like what happened in virginia more

likely, even if the weapons are marketed to adults to give to their children it creates these terrible, terrible, terrible situations. so, later today, i and a group of my colleagues, will ask the ftc to investigate the company that makes and advertises the jr-156789 i want to be -- the jr-15. this is not intented to a be cure y'all for gun violence. we must shed more light on the prevalence of guns in our society, and regulators must take stronger steps to keep the guns out of the hands of children. i hope it will pave the way for future action in congress. i can't believe i have to say this, but the last thing we need to be doing -- the last thing we need to be doing is reducing in size deadly weapons of war and marketing them to young children. every parent in america, every citizen in america should be

outraged and demand the ftc take action. yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: the senate is witnessing an issue -- unusual

sight. our colleague from west virginia, senator manchin, is trying to roll back legislation that he himself wrote and passed less than a year ago. reports say the senator now wants congress to delay the new electric vehicle tax credit that he himself hand designed just last summer until he can resolve a fight with his fellow democrats and the administration over what their own law actually says or actually does. it would be comical if this democrat-on-democrat chaos weren't impacting our country. republicans pointed out over and over that democrats' reckless taxing-and-spending spree was unfair as well as unworkable. we said from the start this is a hugely and i have -- hugely

spen sieve with red tape. it raised taxes on american jobs, american families, and american energy. in order to inefficiently send little chunks of the people's money back to them if they plan their lives according to unclear and changing big-government standards. this is the classic tax-and-spend liberal logic. the irs takes more of your money so bureaucrats can take over more of your life. well, it's providing just as tangled and messy -- proving just as tangled and messy for the country as we all predicted last summer. our democratic colleague from west virginia is locked in some battle with the democrats' own treasury department over the sweeping new regulations that need to be written.

he seems to be suggesting that some americans who have already received the e.v. tax credit that he wrote should have to actually pay it back. in the meantime, while democrats keep fighting it out, the senator apparently wants congress to act again to halt or change the implementation of his own policy. so good luck to american families trying to understand what on earth does and does not qualify for big government subsidies. good luck to american businesses trying to figure out how to direct their investments. now this is what happens when democrats make it up as they go along and clumsily try to rewrite, rewire huge parts of our economy on the fly. remember, the senior senator from west virginia has already acknowledged that other biden

policies completely cancel out the supposed deficit savings from the massive climate bill. he's admitted that president biden's student loan socialism wipes out all of their claimed deficit savings from the green new deal and then some. and now on top of all that, the red tape and expensive subsidies are so tangled that the very senator who wrote the law now wants to delay or change it. this has been a terrible deal for the country right from the beginning. nonpartisan experts said the democrats' boondoggle would increase inflation in the short term and do nothing for inflation in the long term. nonpartisan experts said it would shatter president biden's promise not to impact middle-class families with tax hikes. nonpartisan experts said that

none of it would have any, any measurable impact on the global temperature. and now apparently even the author of the bill wants congress to rescue the country from his own handiwork. this is no way to run a country. people need to plan their lives. businesses need to plan their futures and their investments. how can american workers and entrepreneurs do what they do best if washington democrats are micromanaging the economy and changing their mind every five minutes? so to summarize, we have a senator asking congress to delay and modify the signature bill that he himself wrote less than a year ago. we have american families being treated as pawns in a fight between democrats and other democrats. this bill was already an incredibly bad deal for the

country, and the giant mess gets worse and worse every day. on an entirely different matter, some things in life are just constants. the sun rises in the east, water is wet, and democratic administrations look for ways to let terrorists out, out of guantanamo bay. the biden administration has already overseen the largest terrorist jailbreak in modern memory when they abandoned the bagram air base prison in afghanistan. they let the taliban waltz in and free thousands of terrorists. reportedly including the isis-k suicide bomber who killed our 13 american servicemembers in kabul during the biden administration's botched withdrawal.

rumor has it they are considering writing a sequel to that jailbreak by continuing the obama-biden administration's literal obsession by freeing terrorists from our secure and legal detention facility at guantanamo. let's get a few things straight. the american people are safer and more secure because monsters like khalid sheik mohammed are off the battlefield and behind bars where they belong. when the obama administration wanted to bring these terrorists to america, introduce them into the american judicial and prison systems, the congress on an overwhelming, overwhelming bipartisan basis said no. but the progressive leftists in the biden administration don't seem to care. they seem more concerned about the views of european human rights activists than about key

national security concerns and complex legal questions. so new reports suggest that president biden and his team are trying to cut plea deals with these terrorists and war criminals. they want to cut these guys deals. what would the deals look like? no one knows. they won't tell anybody. would they be transferred into our own taxpayer-funded justice system for american citizens? are we going to have hardened terrorists moving through the streets of manhattan with terrorist lawyers getting the rights and access that pertain to defense counsel? mayor adams is already saying new york can't cope with president biden's open southern border and now the nypd could have to baby-sit terrorists as well.

or is the plan military commissions? in which case, what concessions is the president planning to make to these murderers to get their activist lawyers to accept that forum? or does the administration intend to follow the obama administration's model and rely on third parties and other countries to do the dirty work of detention? of course if you're going to send these people to other countries, that requires allies who are reliable and responsible and actually willing to take these terrorists. does president biden plan to

gamble on an iraqi government that's increasingly under the influence of iran? or do they want to double down on detention facilities run by syrian kurdish partners in areas that are not yet under the control of the assad regime? there's already no plan for europe to reabsorb their citizens who fought for isis and are currently detained by sgf. we're going to add to those ranks? there's a huge long list of practical problems the administration needs to consider before they toy with risky plans to shutter perfectly good facility at guantanamo bay for no good reason.

the biden administration has got to rediscover some common sense. now i understand that liberal activists are willing to leave innocent american families in greater danger in exchange for a blit of -- bit of left-wing symbolism, but our commander in chief has a higher duty. mr. durbin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, i have served in the senate for -- . the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to the consideration of senate res. 13 which the clerk will report.

the clerk: senate resolution 13 raising awareness and encouraging the prevention of stalking by designing january -- designating january 2023 as national stalking awareness month. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: mr. president, i served in the house and senate for a number of years. one of the issues that has always been of interest to me is tobacco. i lost my father to lung cancer when i was 14 years old. he was 53. two packs of camels a day and he died of lung cancer. i thought about that a lot throughout my life. when i was elected to the house of representatives, i decided to start asking a few questions about tobacco and government subsidies and government policies. it was not the most popular position i ever took within the house of representatives. there was generally a rule or at least a custom of never raising the issue. i did. it resulted in a decision by the

house of representatives that surprised almost everyone. i introduced an amendment to ban smoking on airplanes. it was opposed by not only my own party leadership, but the leadership of the republican party. and yet we prevailed. it turned out that the members of the house of representatives represented one of the largest frequent flier clubs in america and they were sick and tired of secondhand smoke in airplanes. i called on senator frank lautenberg of new jersey to be my ally on this side of the rotunda, and he was successful in passing the legislation with me, which was signed into law. people started asking obvious questions about secondhand smoke. if it's dangerous in an airplane why is it not dangerous on a train and a bus, at a hospital, at an office building, in a restaurant? to my surprise, this measure to make clean air more prevalent on

airplanes ended up being a tipping point in american history on tobacco policy. everything started changing and fast. lives were saved. people were discouraged from smoking. tobacco companies, which had been untouchable to want point, were not only touchable -- to that point were not only touchable, but they were vulnerable and had to devise a new way to make money. the premise of tobacco was to entice young people to start smoking at an early age, and the chemicals in tobacco like nicotine were addictive. people knew in the tobacco industry that if you could drag kids into smoking at an early age and get them addicted, they might face a lifetime of that addiction and ultimately die from it. but they would have loyal customers. when we raised questions about tobacco, the tobacco companies needed an alternative.

they found it. do you know what it was? e-cigarettes, vaping. the tobacco companies made big investments in these companies, selling them as a new marketable product as if it was safer and though it wasn't and creating addictions among children by advertising and selling fruit-flavored, bubble-gulf of mexico flavored -- bubble gulf of gum devices. visit a junior high school, ask teachers or administrators and what is the prevalance of vaping. you will be shocked to learn that kids think it is harmless, yet they are extremely addictive. and so i contacted the food and drug administration, which has the legal authority to regulate these products and said, what

are you going to do about it? they said they weren't sure what to do about it and that's why i came to the floor to tell you what was just announced. the decade long delay of the food and drug administration to properly regulate e-cigarettes is in a league of its own. you see, under the law known as premarket review, no tobacco product, and vaping is a tobacco product using tobacco chemicals like nicotine, no tobacco product is permitted on store shelves unless the producer, the manufacturer, proves -- listen, proves to the food and drug administration in advance prior to selling the product on the market that it is, quote, appropriate for the protection of public health. for years the food and drug administration, despite this charge under the law, has

ignored it. instead they sat back as millions of e-cigarettes in fruit, mint, and candy flavors were illegally flooding the market and addicting america's children. the food and drug administration watched as this happened. it was so bad that in year 2019, four years ago, a federal judge intervened, ruling that the food and drug administration, quote, decided not to enforce the premarket review provisions at all. in other words, the count found what i have just said to be the fact. the law said, you need approval ahead of time before you can sell this product. the industry, tobacco industry, ee vaping industry -- e vaping industry ignored it, sold this product nationwide and ignored the responsibilities under the

law. inin 2019, this federal court ordered the food and drug administration to enforce the law to review all e-cigarette be a indications -- applications and gave them a deadline. almost two years later, september 29, 2021. that was more than 16 months ago, and still the food and drug administration has not finished its job. in that time, while the fda has dithered, dalyed and delayed, more than one million of america's kids have started vaping. how could our federal regulators be so passive and ineffective. then on tuesday in a stunning filing to the federal judge, the food and drug administration disclosed that it will take another six months -- another six-month delay in fulfilling the public health duty announced

by the court years ago. that the food and drug administration will not finish reviewing applications for the most popular e sig e-cigarettesl the end of 2022, another -- 2023, another outrageous delay. i don't think i've ever heard of a federal agency defying a court order for two years. i'm going to leave it up to the federal court to assess this development. but how can this federal agency knowingly, willingly ignore this court order to protect america's children? how can they ignore the fact that the law requires their approval of a product before it goes on the self, and these products are being sold across america without that approval? to this senator, the food and drug administration's deference to the tobacco industry at the risk of one million more children in the next six months getting addicted to nicotine over the next year is just plain

outrageous and indefensible. the food and drug administration has one choice, three words, follow the law. immediately halt these unauthorized sale of these e-cigarettes on the market. not next year. not next month. immediately, today. otherwise this agency, and the people who guide it, bear responsibility for the result, and that result is the addiction of children to a product which will harm their health. otherwise, the food and drug administration is complicit in endangering the health of america's kids. think about that for a second. an agency created over a century ago to protect american consumers is, in fact, failing to protect the most vulnerable american consumers, our children. the food and drug administration has the authority today, before

the end of this business day, to order vaping products off the market, period. do it. don't wait until some attorney talks you out of it at the food and drug administration. protect america's kids. tell the tobacco industry, sorry. the party's over. you will never prove that what you sell is in the interest of public health and we're going to protect kids first and deal with the lawyers later. end the free pass. follow the law. do not allow these tobacco companies one more day of preying on our children. mr. president, i'd like to ask permission that the next statement be placed in a separate part of the record. are. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you. mr. president, america must never become a save haven for anyone who assaults the values for which this nation stands, values like democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and the sanctity of free and fair

elections. wewe already deny visas to those who are human traffickers, drug traffickers, money launderers, corrupt kleptoaccurates and those who -- kleptoaccurates. we have allowed -- or used children as soldiers in deadly conflict. i've written some of those policies and i certainly agree with them. today i'm introducing legislation to further align our immigration system with our values as a nation. the bill i'm introducing would prevent foreign officials who interfere with democratic elections or prevent the democratic transfer of power in their country from taking refuge in the united states. in recent years autocrats around the world have used a toxic brew of nationalism, authoritarianism

and corruption and social media to weaken and attack the very foundations of democracy. fortunately democracy is winning the battle. much of the world is unified of ukraine against putin's attempt to seize the sovereign democratic nation of ukraine and we have the allies and the nato alliance and others who sphand with us with -- who stand with us with strength and determination to stop putin. in late october, the people of brazil, the largest democracy in latin america, chose a new president to replace the increasingly authoritarian bolsa na aro, after years of lies, polls show that three-fourths of his supporters no longer trust the electoral process in brazil.

sound familiar? after he loss in october's presidential election, his supporters turned to violence. they blocked highways throughout brazil. many called openly for the military to overturn the election. sound familiar? and on january 8, as he took selfies with his supporters in the state of florida, thousands of his far-right supporters violently stormed brazil's presidential palace and supreme court, breaking windows and injuring dozens of police officers. sound familiar? it was a disgrace. it was an assault on democracy not only in brazil, but an assault on democracy everywhere. under the bill i'm introducing, if the secretary of state determines a foreign official has interfered with fair elections or sought to prevent

the peaceful transfer of power, that person cannot flee to the united states. i ask that we hold them accountable. america should never be a safe haven for enemies of democracy. mr. president, i yield the floor. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: madam president, 2023 will be a big year on the

agriculture front as we work to draft the next farm bill. farm bills are always a major priority for me. and i have been gearing up now for the 2023 farm bill since last year when i began a series of round tables from agricultural producers to hear what their priorities are right now and what they need from the 2023 farm bill. i introduced multiple bills last congress that i hope to include in this year's legislation including to strengthen the conservation reserve program and to strengthen producers around the country. livestock production has been a big part of the agricultural. and one of my priorities for this year's farm bills is getting producers' products to the table. there are vulnerabilities in our

food supply chain that had an outsized impact on livestock producers. early in the pandemic, some meat processing plants were temporarily closed and it led to bottlenecks and delays to process livestock. there were supply shortages at the grocery store. not caused by a shortage of livestock, but by a lack of processing capacity to to get mt ready for sale. it has become clear that livestock producers need more processing options. and one way we can reduce this is by expanding smaller meatpackers processing capacity. that's why i'm working why i'l processors work on what's necessary to text panned capacity, as well as direct federal dollars to pro groms to boamser the -- programs to

bolster the workforce and build the neck generation of meat processors be a butchers. my bell also allows more state-inspected processors for farmers and ranchers who ply them. madam president, if there's one thing that can be said for sure about south dakotans, we take our beef seriously. with almost 14,000 beef operations and 3.8 million head of cattle in our state, it's safe to say cattle production is alive and well in south dakota, and helping to fill dinner plates all across america. something i consistently hear from folks around the state it that we need to reform our beef labeling system. south dakotans, like many americans, simply want to know where their food and their beef, in particular, is coming from. that can be pretty hard to do under our current system. under our current system beef neither born nor raised in the united states, but simply

finished here, can be labeled product of the usa, even if the only american thing about the beef is the plastic it's wrapped in. if that. this is unfair to american cattle producers, and misleading to consumers. congress has repeatedly tried to address this issue in the past. the 2002 and 2008 farm bills included mandatory country of origin labeling for beef, but the world trade organization rules against the united states, and congress ultimately repealed this requirement, which i opposed. that doesn't mean we should give up on transparency in labeling. that's why this week i reintroduced my bipartisan american beef labeling act to require the u.s. trade representative to develop a world trade organization compliant means of reinstating mandatory countries of origin labeling for beef. when you see a label on your beef, you should be able to trust that it means what it

says. i plan to get my american beef labeling act included in the 2023 farm bill so the consumers can be confident that any beef labeled product of the usa really came from american cattle producers. madam president, whether it's a farm bill year or not, south dakota farmers and ranchers are always at the top of my mind here in the senate. as a longtime member of the senate agriculture committee, i'm father to have a platform that allows me he to address the needs of south dakota ag producers, and i'm looking forward to working with my colleagues on the ag committee and the senate as a whole to deliver a farm bill that addresses the challenges facing south dakota farmers and ranchers and farmers and ranchers around the country. agriculture is a tough industry, madam president. it's back-breaking work in all weathers, living with the constant risk that a storm or drought or early freeze can wipe out herds or crops, sometimes in

an instant. then add market fluctuations, processing and transportation challenges, and our current inflation crisis. it's not an easy life, but despite its many challenges it is a proud tradition, madam president, and through it all our nation's farmers and ranchers persevere. i am proud to represent south dakota's farmers and ranchers here in the united states senate, and i will do everything i can to ensure this year's farm bill meets their needs and does everything it can to make their life a little easier, so that they can continue to feed our nation and the world. madam president, i yield the floor, and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

>> we are waiting for senator to speak. there debating resolution designating january 2023 to raise awareness and encourage prevention of stocking. off the floor, leaders are working on committee assignments for the 118th congress. in the meantime, house members, to increase oil and gas drilling, before the president releases oil from the strategic petroleum reserve for nonemergency purposes. you can watch live coverage of the house, on c-span2.

>> president biden: as general austin will tell you, has been critical. the united states committed fighting vehicles to date including 500 that we announced last friday. today i am announcing the united states will be sending 31 abram tanks to ukraine, the equivalent of one ukrainian battalion. secretary austin recognized this step because it will enhance ukraine's capacity to defend its territory and achieve its strategic objectives. the most capable tanks in the world, they are also extremely complex to operate and maintain. they are also giving ukraine the parts and equipment necessary to sustain these tanks on the battlefield.

when we begin we will train ukrainian troops on these issues as soon as possible. delivering these tanks will take time that we will use to make sure ukrainians are fully prepared to integrate in their defense. >> host: reaction among republicans varied on a variety of reactions including mike pompeo on twitter saying the fastest way to defeat russia and end wars give ukraine the weapons it needs. this from senator lindsey graham, the sooner putin is defeated the more stable the world will be. from the house foreign affairs cody, mike mccall saying he is glad the german government will agree to the transfer of its tanks, no excuse for the month-long delay here. marjorie taylor green with this

tweet, the congresswoman saying why aren't you calling for tanks at america's southern border while the countries invaded every day and americans are being murdered in record numbers by fentanyl and the cartels, serve the american people who pay for tanks and salaries, not president zelenskyy. one more from the republican of kentucky, we look weaker, as these tanks litter ukrainian fields and they are not coming back so that is 31 fewer tanks to defend the united states. some of the reaction on twitter on republicans, here's one more from republican tom cotton, senator from arkansas on fox news yesterday. >> president biden and germany decided to provide these tanks to ukraine but it is long overdue and continues a pattern since before the war started of president biden being scared of his own shadow, declining

military support the ukrainian army needs first to deter the war from starting in the first place and in the second, in ukrainian territory, to fight back against russia's war of aggression. it is an admission of their own mistakes not, not providing these mistakes months ago. at the same time, time and again for the last year, when the administration explained some kind of weapon system or intelligence would be dangerously escalatory or provocative only to provide it much later, too late to stop other advances or facilitate further ukrainian advances. what we need to do to stop this war from being any more protracted or bloodier is to back ukraine's army to the hilt so they can defend their own territory. >> host: republican senator tom cotton on fox news, that's the reaction among republicans. we will see reaction from democrats on capitol hill and having numbers of congress join us in this first segment of the washington journal from our

cameras on capitol hill. to get their reaction, to talk about the ongoing effort to you a ukraine. we will hear from a for you. you think usaid to ukraine is too much or too little? or is it outright deadline for all those reactions and a line for current and former members of the military. i want you to join this discussion on washington journal. we will start on that line. this is in virginia. good morning. >> caller: good morning. i just retired a year ago from the military. i served in a rack twice, afghanistan once. just looking at the situation, i believe we need to back out of it. something about going, like sibling rivalry. i think we need to stay in our own lane. >> host: on the issue of sending

tanks into this fight, what does that mean? what was your reaction to that? sending heavy tanks? what will that mean on the battlefield from your experience, have you ever encountered those? >> caller: total destruction. total destruction. that is what it means. i really feel bad. as long as it is not the us military there, i don't want to say i don't care but it is not a severe with it. don't send us their. it is not worth it. >> host: michael in silver spring is next. those who say it is too little. >> i was saying to my wife six months ago, i think president biden, i am a democrat, i think

he is a scared, weak, because i was saying 18, 19, 20, 21, 22-year-old american boys are being -- running these tanks in america. yesterday i am watching msnbc, general mccaffrey comes on and says it is a lot of malarkey that this is complex equipment. he said we should be sending a whole division. i looked up the definition of a division and it was 250 tanks in a division, in an armored division. i am saying 18, 19-year-olds, mccaffrey came out and said we

could have these guys being able to drive these tanks within 30 days and i am going oh my god, you know, we should be sending -- we backed south vietnam, we sent over hardware, we backed south korea, we sent over hardware, and we don't have to send men, but we can send hardware, and i think biden is weak and it is so upsetting. all military equipment is one way. it never comes back. after world war ii, my dad says in japan, they were pushing off equipment into the pacific ocean. it is one way. it is part of our industry. the number one industry in america. that stuff is not coming back. >> host: michael in silver spring. 31 tanks and additional support

vehicles in terms of the timing of when they might reach the battlefield. that's not clear. the washington times points out, first abrams tanks could arrive in ukraine months from now. some say the delivery of the 70 ton vehicles could take as much as 12 months. a lot of questions about training of troops to use those vehicles. they will be purchased from manufacturers rather than transferred from existing of a terry stockpiles. the washington post noting it is not immediately clear why the biden administered and decided to pursue purchasing new tanks for ukraine rather than sending the thousands in us monetary inventory. the pentagon assesses they don't have an excess abram, all of them are gainfully employed for our national security defenses, that according to john kirby, the spokesperson for the

national security council. even if there were extras it would take many months to get them in posed vision and provide the necessary training and logistical and maintenance support. when they get there we want to make sure that they do fall -- that was a quote from the washington post about this tank. as to the level of support the united states provided. in san jose, california, good morning. >> caller: i watch your show almost every day but only called a couple times before. i wanted to say i agree with the woman who was your first caller, former military person, because her thoughts, what she said, is exactly my thoughts. that was what i was going to say but she already said it. i agree with her, we've done too much for ukraine.

there are so many billions of dollars over the past 11 months that have been expended from us to them. we can use that money right here in this country. >> host: in terms of how much money has gone to ukraine in the past 11 months, the council for foreign relations trying to total that up and these numbers continue to pick up. these are just for november of last year, it was $48 billion according to the council on foreign relations, 9. $9 billion in humanitarian aid, 15.1 billion in financial aid, $23 billion in military aid and those numbers, $3 billion additional in military aid, that was provided at the beginning of january, bump it up to $26 billion and yesterday, 30 one abrams tanks and support vehicles being sent, so

significantly above $50 billion at this point. back to the line for members of the military, chris from tennessee, good morning. >> good morning. >> host: what are your thoughts on the tank transfer? >> caller: i agree with that last gentleman and the woman that was on first. in the grenada invasion, that was overkill. i believe -- let their blood spill. that is what it seems like happening. war is hell. >> host: was there any level of support you were okay with? where are we at a right level at some point along the line in the last 11 months, or we went too

far? >> caller: say again? >> host: was there any level of support you were okay within the fight happening in ukraine? >> caller: not really. we've got to protect our country, and protect -- something they've got to do. it is a corrupt country, a poor country, and here we are trying to help them. we are he helped them too much. we need to help ourselves before we help any others. >> host: chris in the savannah, tennessee. upper darby, pennsylvania, good morning. >> caller: good morning. i would like to say americans need to wake up. biden is a good president from the president we had set on stage for kill kill kill, january 6th. a military family all my life, i

think he is doing a good job. people better wake up. i'm glad he is sending the military over there because we could be next. when we see putin going to visit china, if they get away with all this murder, women, children and all, we are next. when you have korea, i am glad biden, he is a good president, putting him down, they should have did that with trump. mary trump said something is wrong with him. all these people who are racist, i'm sick of them. nuary is nation trafficking prevention month, and it's a great opportunity to improve awareness about the scourge of human trafficking and to redouble our efforts to end it. throughout my career, i've worked with law enforcement, nonprofits and advocates of all types to try to crack down on human trafficking and strengthen support for human trafficking survivors. these experts have helped me

identify steps that we together can take in congress to end modern slavery, and i'm proud that one of those bills was signed into law earlier this month. the abolish human trafficking reauthorization act which i introduced with senator klobuchar, the senator from minnesota, is officially the law of the land. this law extends critical support to survivors of human trafficking, provides resources for law enforcement, funds prevention research, and promotes increased reporting to prevent human trafficking. it's a step in the right direction in our fight to end modern slavery, and i was glad to discuss the importance of this law with advocates and experts in texas just a couple of weeks ago. on january 11, national human trafficking awareness day, i had the pleasure of sitting down

with some remarkable people in dallas who are leading the fight. we gathered at the letot residential treatment center which provides a full range of services to human trafficking survivors, specifically girls between the age of 13 and 17. letot offers safe shelter, which i've learned is perhaps the most important thing, a safe place for the survivors to actually live. but it also provides education, job training, and mental health care to these young victims to help them find a clear path forward one day at a time. i had visited this same facility a few years ago to learn about the work they do, and i was encouraged to note their continued impact in dallas county, one of our largest counties in texas. i also learned about the dedicated work of new friends, new life, which helps exploited

girls, women, and their children to rebuild their lives and to move forward toward a brighter future. the organization also promotes a men's advocacy group which raises awareness and mobilizes men to take action against sex trafficking and exploitation. in addition to learning more about the impact of these organizations, i was able to hear from local law enforcement, including dallas district attorney john cruzo. john noted that texas is number two in the nation when it comes to human trafficking and added that dallas is a major hot spot because it is at the crossroads of so many interstate free ways. rescuing victims of human trafficking, disrupting trafficking operations and pursuing justice is a major focus for law enforcement.

for sex trafficking in particular, they're working with groups like traffic nn -- traffic 911 to free young people frnl terrible life. i'm blown away by the incredible work being done in north texas to support survivors and ensure justice is served. what i heard from these survivors really underscored how critical these efforts are. one of the women i heard from was dr. tonya stafford, an in inspiring and passionate advocate for survivors of human trafficking. tonya told us that she was only 13 when her mother sold her to a man for drugs. you heard that right. when she was 13 years old, her own mother sold her to a man for drugs. then for ten years she was hidden in plain sight until finally a neighbor intervened.

as tonya put it, she saw something, she said something, and she did something. every single day concerned neighbors and friends call tip lines and help victims like tonya escape from human trafficking. incredible organizations like the letot treatment center and new friends, new life help these victims of human trafficking rebuild their lives. law enforcement and dpriewps like -- and groups like traffic 911 help free victims from human trafficking and the brave survivors is what impressed me most of all. to have these survivors talk about their own personal story with all of the potential for embarrassment that that suggests speaks to me to the courage of these survivors who are willing to use their own personal example to help save others from

the similar fate. it why it's so important for us to continue this fight. that includes everything from awareness and education to legislating here in congress. ad the survivors as well as all of our senate and congressional colleagues who are leading on this fight. madam president, the day after my conversation with, in dallas i traveled to houston, another one of our major metropolitan areas to discuss a new law that will have a big impact on child sexual abuse victims. the seed for this legislation was first planted in september

2021 when the senate judiciary committee held a hearing on the repeated failures of the fbi's investigation into the larry nassar case. usa gymnasts delivered powerful testimony about the fbi's mishandling of their investigation and inspired a bipartisan push to fix the broken process by which, that failed them and countless other victims. again, senator klobuchar and i worked with law enforcement, victims' rights groups and all of our colleagues here in the senate to identify reforms that would actually make a difference. those discussions eventually led to the respect for child survivors act which was signed into law earlier this month. this law mandates the use of multiple disciplinary teams or mdt's and fbi interviews with

child victims. just by way of footnote, most of these kinds of cases are investigated at the local or state level, and, frankly, most local level law enforcement has worked with the child advocacy centers around texas and around the country to try to minimize the repetition of the trauma on these child victims and to help preserve testimony needed to convict their abuser. but the fbi has a much bigger portfolio and generally is not trained in how to deal with these victims of sexual assault, particularly child victims. so now this new law mandates training for the fbi. these mdt's, the multiple disciplinary teams that they will now work with, include mental health and mental health

professionals, medical professionals -- excuse me -- case workers and other individuals who advocate for a child's well-being. the primary goal, of course, is to protect these young victims and ensure that they are not retraumatized during the investigation which is going to be intrusive by its very nature. there's a mountain of evidence, thank goodness, that this approach actually works. during the discussion in houston, i sat down with a full range of experts on this topic at the children's assessment center, which is a pioneer in the successful use of mdt's. for more than 30 years it has cared forcefully abused children and in the process established the gold standard for the right way to protect children of child sexual abuse. the folks i spoke with and listened to stressed the importance of this approach. for example, houston police

department john colburn said the partnership between the law enforcement and the children center makes a tremendous difference. children are able to share their experiences in a more comfortable way and law enforcement can take peace in the knowledge that these incredibly difficult conversations are happening with trauma-informed experts who are equipped to handle them properly. that's why this legislation is important. one of the individuals i would heard from was rebecca whitehurs t, a survivor of the larry nassar episode. she said, it's deeply gratifying to know that you've listened to our voices and listened from our experience to ensure that systems improve and that justice is served. rebecca concluded her comments by saying, children should be totally protected from those who would harm them and those who

would fail them should be held accountable. i couldn't say it better myself. with this new law on the books, i'm confident that the fbi will be better prepared to handle similar investigations in the future with compassion and efficiencicy and ultimately bring perpetrators to justice. this was all possible because of the brave gym nists who testified before the senate judiciary committee a year and a half ago a they showed tremendous courage by speaking out, by talking about personal, intimate matters that were necessarily embarrassing to them, but they overcame that knowing that they could well make a difference for some future gymnast or some other child sexual assault victim in the future. i hope they'll take some comfort in knowing that their stories brought about this change.

we need to ensure that the fbi's mistreatment of these victims and their reports is not repeated in the future and this law will help make sure that goal is accomplished. like so many of us, we learn from our constituents, we learn from men and women who take the time to share their experiences with us, and i'm grateful to those who did so in dallas and houston, and again especially the survivors. that's right a. doing incredible work to route out human trafficking and support survivors and ensure that justice is served. i'm proud of what we were able to accomplish last congress to strengthen their efforts, but there's still more work for us to do. i appreciate all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle and both sides of the capitol who've worked together to -- on these efforts in the past, and i'm eager to accomplish even more this congress.

madam president -- mr. president, excuse me. pardon me. i would yield the floor, and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

ms. stabenow: mr. president, i would ask suspension of the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you very much, mr. president. i rise today to the express concern other colleagues on this side of the aisle have as well, that in the midst of what is the most robust economic turnaround in growth in a generation, with wages up and unemployment down and almost 11 million new jobs created, most of those small businesses -- we love that in michigan; i know you do in maine as well -- with all of the positive indicators and with all of our efforts to bring down costs because that's the big thing for people right now, to bring down their costs right now, and this month the good news is $35 cap on insulin for anyone on medicare.

any senior citizen who is a diabetic, a $35 cap on insulin, and we need to do nor bring down costs. but instead of joining with us, the new house republican majority has decided, well, let's see. when things are turning around for the american people, i know ... let's crash the economy! let's say we're not going to pay our bills. let's cause interest rates to go up. let's cause people to be hurt, maybe jeopardize people getting their social security and medicare, veterans' benefits, paying the military. this makes absolutely no sense. and i know it's difficult this antiquated thing called the debt ceiling, because really it's about whether or not we're going to pay our bills. so we decided as a family we're going to get a mortgage. then two years into it, you know, i think we're going to stop paying the mortgage. and we just stop paying bills.

our country can't just make commitments to families, to veterans, to the military, to seniors, to children, to other countries and say, neh, i think we'll just stop paying our bills. it's outrageous, it's irresponsible, and the consequences, as we know, will literally crash our economy. so what do the republicans say they want to do? in return for not crashing the economy, in return for the united states needing -- meeting its anniversaries and paying its bills, what do they want? well, the first thing they've already done, which is an extension of how their focus is very much on keeping money in the pockets of the wealthy and the well-connected, the very first bill they're talking -- oh, we got so much detect, we got all this ebbet did. the he -- we got all this debt.

the very first thing they do, the very first week, maybe the first day, i'm not sure, after the 15 votes to create a speaker, they turned around and they pass a bill that'll add $114 billion to the national debt. $114 billion to the national debt. why? because they think if you're a wealthy tax cheat, you should be able to continue doing it. and so they want to take away the capacity for the irs, for investigators to go after the tax -- to go after the tax cheats. now, they're okay if you're going after a poor person who is on the earned income tax credit. they're okay with the fact that the most audited county in the united states right now is in mississippi. companies in mississippi, 40% of the residents are poor, black residents and they have the

highest audit rate. they're on the earned income tax credit. that's okay, but don't go after our buddies. oh, no, they're the ones with all the accountants and attorneys, and we've seen it play out with the former president of the united states. do everything you cannot to have to pay your fair share of taxes. now, we as democrats know everybody should have to pay their fair share. and in fact in the inflation reduction act, we made a big step on that point with corporations not paying. but what do they want? okay, protect tax cheats. then they say, well, we've got to cut social security and medicare. we can't afford that anymore. great american success stories, lifted over half the country -- half the country's retirees out of poverty. great american success story. brought to you, predominantly, by democrats, i should say. but they say, let's cut social security and medicare before we

pay our bills. because we have too much debt, even though we can add to the debt for rich people. we need to cut social security and medicare. then the one that is like on top of everything else, when they all ran on how costs were too high in the election, i mean, we're the ones fighting to bring energy costs down, $35 cap on insulin for seniors right now, happening right now, so what do they say we should do to deal with this -- with the debt they're talking about? oh, let's have a 30% sales tax increase. let's crease the cost of an automobile. that's pretty crucial to me coming from michigan. we're proud of making those vehicles. people drive those vehicles. $10,000 increase on somebody, trying to have a car to get kids

to school, get people to work and so on. we don't know what all this is -- food, electric bills, transportation. we don't know what it is, but now we're at at at a point where they want to say we're not paying our bills unless you do what we want. so now the question is, okay, pass the bills. show us what you got. you want this? vote on it. vote on it. pass your agenda. you already voted on step one, adding to the deficit by $114 billion. so you've got all these other ideas that will hurt seniors and children and the majority of americans, hardworking americans. but if that's what you think, if that's really what you think, then pass the bills. pass the bills. so what they really don't want to tell you while they're talking about all of this and talking about how -- that we

have a high national debt, which we do and we need to come together and continue to do things to address that, what they don't tell you, the dirty little secret is that almost 30% of the national debt was accumulated during the four years of president trump, that theyest haved for. and -- that they voted for. and most of that was a huge tax cut to the wealthy and well-connected. now, they were willing to pay the bills, raised the debt ceiling three times during the trump years, because it was about giving their buddies, the wealthy and the well connected a big tax cut. and the truth of the matter is, if there hadn't been that tax cut, if we had truly required wealthy tax creates cheats -- tax cheats to pay their fair share of taxes, we wouldn't have to raise the debt ceiling right now, mr. president.

we wouldn't have to do that. there wouldn't be a need. so they do this shell game here -- so it's tax cuts for the wealthy, don't let the wealthy buddies have to pay for their fair share of taxes and then turn around and argue they're going to crash the economy, not pay our bills, unless we cut social security and medicare and at a 30% sales tax. and a whole range of other things. mr. president, this is not our priorities. we certainly as democrats do not believe that this should be the priority of the american people. and, by the way, when we talk about it -- i forgot to mention the other half of the story is that while they were doing this, in the last two years the deficit fell by $1.4 trillion under president biden.

$1.4 trillion. while we have invested in people, rebuilding the country, bringing jobs home, invested in those things that will create opportunity for everybody to succeed, while we have been investing in people, not the powerful, not focused on profits but people, while we've been doing that, we have also been focused on bringing the deficit down. so i hope our colleagues on the other side of the building, i hope that our colleagues on the other side of the building, other side of the aisle will take a step here from the brink and understand the dangerous situation that they are putting us in. with not being willing to pay the bills, with crashing the economy, all for a radical,

radical maga agenda that will hurt the majority of the american people. they want to debate that agenda separately from crashing the economy. let's pay our bills, and if they want to debate that and they want to pass bills and send them over to us, that's the legislative process. they can do that. and we'll have that debate. and we will send them bills that makes sure wealthy tax cheats pay their share just like we did in the inflation and reduction act with their 15% minimum corporate tax tax and we will continue to put people first, not just the wealthy and the powerful in this country. it's a very different vision. it's a very different view of how you grow the economy. it's a very different view of who we're fighting for, who we're working for. i'm glad to be on this side, mr. president, i'm glad to be on this side with the majority of

people. i would argue what we've done in the last two years, putting people first, bringing jobs home, rebuilding the economy, and investing science and bringing down costs and continuing to focus on that, as well as the deficit, has worked. this is not just rhetoric. it actually has worked. it actually has worked. so i hope our republican colleagues, particularly in the house, will join us and those things that will actually move america forward. thank you, mr. president. i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> we are waiting for a senator to come to the floor to speak. lawmakers are deep in a resolution designating january of 2,023 as national stocking awareness month, to encourage the prevention of stocking. off the floor, leaders are working on committee assignments for the 118th congress. those assignments are needed for final approval by the full senate. in the meantime today, house

members are working on legislation to require the energy department to develop a plan to increase oil and gas drilling on federal land before the president releases oil from the strategic petroleum reserve for nonemergency purposes. you can watch live coverage of the house on c-span. see the senate on c-span2.

>> like old times. appreciate you being here. you may have heard from some of our other members. i am very disappointed with the lack of detail and a timeline on when we are going to get anything dealing with criminality. the department of justice's response billy.

but it is our responsibility to make sure that lee, in the intelligence oversight, to know if there has been any intelligence compromise. there are three points i want to make and then turn to senator rubio. one, is that every member of the committee regardless of democrat or republican, were unanimous in that this position we are left in limbo until somehow a special counsel designates that it is okay for us to get briefed. not going to stand. all things will be on the table to make sure that doesn't happen. number 2, any times i briefed you in the past, special counsel involved there.

our committee, in certain cases, we had the thrust of the intelligence committee, had access to more intelligence that was handled appropriately. our goal is to make that intelligence assessment of whether the nation's security is compromised. 3, senator rubio and i yesterday in responses when it came about with documents now discovered at mike pence -- we had a broken system. we've got to fix this. for all folks leaving government and those in government, how they deal with documents. a lot of members worked on classification. this is a problem that has been bubbling for some time and is playing out real time. our committee will take it up. this needs to be addressed. >> very unsatisfying hearing. every member of the committee,

it cannot be that your answer is we cannot tell you what is discovered until special counsel allows, the information we are asking for would not interfere with a criminal investigation. we are not asking how they move it or what is where, we simply want to know what was this information, what are the materials so we can make an honest assessment of whether or not they've taken the proper mitigation and to say that they will not share after special counsel doesn't allow them to share it is an untenable position. there's a broader question what happens when people leave government service and how they leave sensitive information, they might find themselves in a box somewhere but we have three high profile incidents of high-level material removed from its proper space so that is a topic i know we will be tackling as well but it begins by

understanding what we are talking about. they won't tell us what they have until special counsel allows it. >> there was willingness for preliminary briefing before the special counsel. there was a special counsel involved in the russia investigation and this can be worked literally for years. we've got a job to do and we will do it. >> you previously talked about a damage assessment of national security before the full review concluded. do you know if you will get that? >> that is one of the questions that we need to have resolved. and the notion that that brief, don't know what the contents of it could be, are suddenly not put in limbo because special prosecutor has to give a sign

off just is not a tenable position and i think again, what i think with the director, didn't just hear it from senator rubio. every member of the committee, without exception said this is it. >> to get this information, what does that mean practically? >> let's see how things -- i am saying -- we don't want to get into a question of that. but let me say this. we have a job to do. it is our job to make sure the security of our country is protected and the intelligence our country depends upon is not compromised. the notion we have to wait until a special prosecutor -- will not speak. >> you are asking to see all of it. >> we heard no credible case why

documents, we have access to these documents in our daily course. what we don't know which of the documents, we can call on those documents, which were found, donald trump, president biden or vice president pence's, this is brand-new. if we can see them any other time, but for the fact that they were in trump or biden's possession. >> can i specify that? it's not just curiosity. ultimately the intelligence community has to say we think this is a harm, they were stored in the wrong place and here's what we are doing to mitigate. how can we judge and conduct oversight over whether the assessment is accurate or whether there mitigation efforts are sufficient if we don't know what it is, what the material that was exposed potentially is.

that is the position we find ourselves in. not the same position at has to change. >> what do you see now? >> we heard the terminology, the standard operating procedure when a special prosecutor -- i won't sort through that. i am going to say that we have constitutional responsibility to make an assessment of our intelligence and to make sure there has not been and intelligence\blooge >> how do you expect to talk about classified documents? >> i will not discuss what was said in a classified setting. i will say this. of a administration is stonewalling congress on the classified documents at donald trump's residence and president biden's residence which is totally an acceptable. the members of the intelligence

committee, for that matter, members of congress, have an absolute right to this information so we can make an informed judgment about the rest, if any, these documents have posed to our national security, being improperly handled. in no way interferes with the department of justice investigation, and until the administration stops stonewalling congress, there will be pain as a consequence for them. >> but not a damage assessment? >> congress has an absolute right to review these documents to form our own judgment and to make our own assessment of any potential risk to our national security. no one in congress has received these documents. whether it is blocking nominees or withholding budgetary funds, congress will provide pain until they get these documents. that is coming from both parties.

>> what they are giving you -- >> what i consistently heard, what other senators heard is they cannot provide these documents when special counsel is investigating. which is a phares. i was on the intelligence committee when we reviewed russia's interference in our election process is in the 16. we had access to many sensitive documents related to that investigation. at the same time, bob muller and the special counsel's office was investigating the russia collusion hoax. there's no reason that standard shouldn't apply now to the documents donald trump's residence and president biden's residence. >> are you talking about blocking all nominees? >> i am prepared to refuse, consent or fast-track any nominee for any department or agency and take every step i cannot every commit he on which i serve to impose consequences on the administration until they

provide these documents for congress to make our own informed judgment about the risks to national security, if any, of these documents, being present outside secure facilities. several other senators will take the same view. i suspect the republican majority in the house will as well. there's a simple solution to this. the administration should stop stonewalling the congress and provide these documents. >> what about the former vice president? >> obviously comes from the top. which in no way interferes with an investigation by either special counsel into either president trump or president [inaudible]

>> i'm not going to characterize what the director of national intelligence it or anything else that was discussed in a classified setting. but i will say that congress should have these documents and be able to review them. there's a long-standing precedent for this. it happened under president trump. that happened, for instance, during justice kavanaugh's confirmation process when we reviewed highly sensitized fbi documents. it happened on occasion under president clinton. there's no reason why congress can't review these documents so we can make an assessment about what damage a cause to national security, if any. >> you would want to see those? >> guess. i think those are appropriate as well. again there's a reason congress should not see these documents. we had a legitimate constitutional oversight role to decide what, if any, damage may have occurred, and it is unacceptable for the administration to simply stonewall both the house and

senate democratic and republican members alike who are insisting we perform that responsibility. >> the actual classified documents? would you accept the damage assessment without seeing classified documents? >> no, i would not. i'm confident we are talking about millions and millions of documents here. it is when dash it is an within the capacity of senators and congregant to review these documents and a classified setting or go to the director of national intelligence office and review these documents and for our own assessment. on something so important there's no reason we can't review the underlying evidence for any assessment that the administration may make which by the way i'm not going to see what. >> any of these documents until after they complete the investigation? >> the administration at various times has been vague about that but i believe it's reasonable to assume the position is as long as the special counsel are

investigating either matter the administration will not see any documents. the special counsel's could investigate for months if not years. when we have no idea how sensitive this information could have been. it may frankly have been not sensitive at all. stuff mostly of historic curiosity. it could have been greatly injurious to national security or somewhere in between. have no idea. how can we as senators and representatives in good conscience say that the department of justice handling as well when we have no clue what's in this information? >> do you want to see everything that's been -- >> yes, congress has an absolute right to see every single document or item or photo or box or picture that was at president trump's residence, resident biden's residence and office f that matter president pence residence as well.

>> did the director talk about these at all. >> was i start no clue what was in these documents. i have no clue. i'm not aware of any member of congress that has any clue. i'm not going to address what was discussed and a classified setting. >> is her bipartisan buy-in to block nominees and withhold phonic. >> you have to ask democrats about that and the democrats in the senate in particular have the simplest leverage chuck schumer could say you're going to produce these documents for the senate to review in a classified controlled study or we're not going to process any more nominees. i bet we would get those documents. that's what he should do. that's what i would recommend you do. >> when did you start making requests for these documents? >> so obviously the longer standing matter relates to president trump if the committee has been asking since last summer. it's been stonewalled since then. obviously information that president biden's only couple weeks old and president pence is only a day or two old. [inaudible]

>> again is something essential as is i don't think, i personally don't think that the congress should settle for executive branches of assessment, that we should see the underlying, underlying documents to have the evidence to make our own informed judgment. >> can you clarify, all nominees or -- >> i personally don't think, this is such a central matter in such an easy matter. we should not be fast tracking nominees whether they are in the intelligence community for the department of justice or the department of agriculture to with access to these documents. >> and you plan to personally object? >> i don't think i would be the only one. i know plenty of people and i suspect democrats to your question although they may not want to do it publicly will be privately pressuring the administration to relent on stonewalling the congress. >> is it fair to say you're frustrated with how this is play a? >> i'm frustrated the administration continues to

stonewall. i'm not the only one. it's not just republicans. it is bipartisan and it has been for some time that the administration will not sell to provide documents that congress has a right inner oversight responsibilities to review and form are independent judgment about the risk they pose national security. >> did your frustration also come out -- >> i'm not going to characterize what happened in this -- >> your feelings about clearview seemed frustrated but did also -- >> i have strong, well considered judgments. i don't have feelings about this matter. [inaudible] >> it's a much bigger question. right now i'm focused on the damage to national security, if any. maybe there's no damage to national security, that the mishandling of all these documents might've happened. there are some steps we should take to look at how broadly we classify matters that had executive branch handles

documents as well specific we have presidents and former presidents go through a transition. those are broader question. the media question which is a simple one is for the administration to provide the document so we can review them. >> president biden, trump or pence -- >> i doubt, but any reason to believe one way or the other. [inaudible] >> some at a high level. >> this argument from the special counsel is not about documents. the chairman has said publicly -- [inaudible] is it your sense he is prepared to take action at the committee level as chairman of the member of the gang of eight? >> chairman warner is public statements, it's an inadequate answer that congress can have access to this information while there's a special counsel investigation going on. again we're not trying to

conduct investigation but the special counsel's office is investigating about how these documents got president biden office or how they got to mar-a-lago or who transited them and if there authorized. we are soliciting what is the substance of these documents, and could the potential exposure break national security risk in our assessment? >> do you think you'll get the damage assessment anytime soon? >> i don't know. >> have you speak i don't understand why we can't have their assessment and could nevada a long time ago in the case of president trump it happened almost six months ago. again my assumption is that we're not talking about millions and millions of documents. it is a relatively confined universe that are reasonably dutiful senator carper representative could go through in the span of a day. >> is her in the world in which we don't get that damage assessment? >> i think ultimately will get a damage assessment. the real question is in my mind

though is do we have the underlying documents on which that assessment is scored? or are we expected to take on faith what the dni has concluded or what the fbi has concluded? thank you all. >> the question was whether there's any difference in the way the documents are being handled. i would say every circumstance is a little bit different, everyone has been a little different. visit the mar-a-lago search warrant was handled more publicly and a lot more drama than what happened with president biden or vice president pence. but basically everybody who handles classified materials no such are not supposed to take those materials outside of a secure setting. i'm not going to go into what the director of national intelligence briefed us on

because obviously it was a secure setting, but i will say that there was a lot of concern about the director of national intelligence and intelligence authorities deferring to the department of justice about who gets access to the documents that have been recovered. and obviously the intelligence community has responsibility to do oversight. typically, in a criminal investigation or in a law enforcement investigation you wouldn't want to talk about that to protect the integrity of the investigation and the right of the person being investigated. but here the larger concerns public safety concerns, national security concerns that i think make this an exceptional case. and so it's not acceptable for the director of national intelligence or for the

administration to say we are deferring to the department of justice about what it is we can see what even congress can see. we have a constitutional responsibility, and that looms much larger than a specific investigation on who took classified documents outside of a secure setting. i think you'll be hearing more about that. >> just to clarify, you are saying dni have to defer to doj to view the document? >> yes. >> so is this your impression he actually refuted the document? >> no. the dni? >> correct. >> my understanding is the director of national intelligence position is that the dni, excuse me, doj, attorney general, says this is an ongoing investigation and you cannot get access to those documents but they will stand down. >> dni is doing --

[inaudible] i'm sorry can one question. >> dni is committed to doing a risk assessment, correct? so without seeing the stock with how could they make that assessment? >> that's a good question. >> your reaction from the shooting in california? the shootings in california with the assault weapons ban. do you think that will go anywhere? >> well, i'm going to try. it worked before. produced a number. these weapons are too easy to obtain. they are too powerful for domestic use. it doesn't make any sense to me to have a weapon like this. if you want a weapon for protection jenga when it doesn't do the amount of harm some of these other weapons do. >> your decision -- when will you make a decision by 24? >> probably in a couple of months.

[inaudible] i wanted to get through it. he had cancer and that's always hard, so i think i will just take -- >> what do you make of people who already announcing like katie porter? >> i think it's fun. i think people should if they run, run. for me, i just did a little bit more time. >> were you satisfied with what you heard from the director of national intelligence admiral haynes? >> i can't comment on the session. >> what do you make as a but intelligence committee what you make of all of these politicians having classified documents when they shouldn't? >> while, we shouldn't. there's no question about that and there's no excuse for it. but sometimes it turns up in ohio dash and a pile. it's inadvertent. somebody takes one or two and i guess that's the nature of the institution and human nature. but we know --

[inaudible] >> should there be some type of legislative fix or do you think congress has a role to play? >> i don't think so. you mean about -- >> the documents. >> no, i don't think so. people know. it's just that you kind of, people know but you kind of rationalize it, you know, this or that, whatever it is when you pick up a document. but you know not to do it. that's the point. >> were you satisfied with the briefing? >> yes. >> thank you, senator. quorum call:

mr. cardin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: mr. president, i

would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i have two requests for imhes to meet during today's -- 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. cardin: mr. president, tomorrow, january 27, is the 77th anniversary of the liberation of auschwitz, located in german-occupied poland. january 27 has been designated by the united nations as holocaust remembrance day. auschwitz birken you a was the -- birkenau was the most notorious of the atrocities committed during world war ii in concentration, labor, and death camps run by the nazis in germany in world war ii. six million jews were murdered during world war ii. five million others, romos, afro

germans, gay men and women, people with disabilities, and others that were disliked by the nazi regime. 11 million people per punished as a result of these -- perished as a result of these atrocities. our responsibility? to remember. never forget what happened during world war ii. what was committed. and to do everything in our power to make sure that these types of atrocities never happen again. we owe that to support the survivors, so that their heroism is not another gotten, and we need to support holocaust education. i want to thank my colleagues in the appropriation process. we have made funds available to help the survivors of the

holocaust and to provide for holocaust education. never again is what we need to achieve. we have not achieved it to date. we can look back at the atrocities committed in rwanda or take a look at what's happening today, with the uighurs or with the rohingyas. we see atrocities being committed around the world. or what's happening in ukraine, perpetrated by russia, the atrocities and war crimes being committed by the russians. so, mr. president, on this day of remembrance it's important for us to understand where we are and to take steps to protect us against atrocities. i serve on the u.s. holocaust memorial museum board as a senate representative. that's an institution dedicated

to compiling the information about the holocaust, making it available through education and other opportunities for people to understand what happened, and to have a mission to prevent atrocities in the future. i also serve as the senate chair of the u.s. helsinki commission, u.s. hell simpingy commission is best known for its mission to advance human rights globally. i'm proud of the work we have done in holocaust education, in fighting the rise of antisemitism. mr. president, i also serve as the special representative of the organization for security and cooperation in europe's parliamentary assembly on antisemitism, racism, and intolerance. i mention all that because i want to share with you the concerns, the warning bells that have gone off, the rise of hate in our own community and around the world that should be a concern to all of us.

2021 was the the highest numbf instances of antisemitism in the united states in its history. we broke the record in 2021. according to the adl there was a 60% increase in 2021 over 2020 in antisemitic activities. u.s. department of homeland security issued a warning about the heightened potential for violent domestic attacks. these anti-semitic activities are deadly. i need not remind us all the tree of light synagogue in pittsburgh in 2018, where 11 people were murdered with an anti-semitic activity. 25% of the jews that live in america fear from violence caused by antisemitism. mr. president, i've had a chance

to visit a lot of countries as a member of the united states senate, former member of the house. i try to visit synagogues when i travel abroad. it was understood that there would be security in front of the synagogue buildings when i attended the services. but i always felt comfortable in the united states that that would not be necessary. it is now necessary for synagogues to have security here in the united states, and mosques, and other areas that are vulnerable to violence caused by hate. we are also at risk today of our own democratic institutions. antisemitism and hate is fueled by conspiracy theories, the replacement theory, which is based upon the old-age anti-semitic trope. that leads directly to violence.

it's also a threat on our democratic institutions. conspiracy theories about election deniers led up to the january 6 attack on the sacred -- on this sacred building. we fight for the peaceful, we believe in the peaceful transfer of power, and we saw violence trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, which is critically important to our democratic institutions. mr. putin's campaign in part is based upon anti-semitic. he says -- antisemitism. he says he want to de-nazify ukraine. ukraine has a jewish president, i'd like to remind my colleagues. we all have a responsibility to fight antisemitism in any -- and any form of hate in our community. in 2004, i participated in the berlin conference, which was the first major international conference in recent times to coordinate strategies to fight

antisemitism. what came out of that conference was that leaders have responsibilities to lead. our words mean something. when there is violence in our community, we need to speak out against it. if any minority group is unsafe, we're all unsafe. we need to form coalitions to fight all forms of intolerance in our community. on november 29 of last year, i convened a roundtable discussion. i want to thank senator rosen and senator blumenthal for joining me, and congressman veasey from the house of representatives. we brought together representatives from department of homeland security, department of justice, the white house, from the department of state. we had representatives of the anti-defamation league, the american jewish committee, and i want to compliment the second gentleman, doug emhoff, for holding a similar discussion in the white house. what came out of those

discussions that we need a whole-of-government approach in order to stop the tide, the rise of hate and violence in our community. so i was so pleased that president biden, on december 12, established the interagency group, led by the domestic policy council, to increase and better coordinate u.s. government efforts to counter antisemitism, islama phobia, and related forms of fear and discrimination. we need a coordinated strategy. we all need to be part of that coordinated strategy. this is not a one day a year. it's every day, 365 days a year. we all need to be engaged. we all have a responsibility to join together in a coordinated strategy. so never again means never again. so on this day of remembrance, as we acknowledge the liberation of the auschwitz death camps,

let us also rededicate ourselves to do everything in our power so it really -- so we really can say never again. with that, mr. president, i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

>> good morning, everyone. great to see all of you. always good to see you. doesn't mean i'm going to call on you. [laughing] always do. there's a big contrast between house democrats and house republicans, between democratic party and the republican party, between the normal intime

extreme. what team normal is doing, the democrats, led by president biden is to continue to improve the american economy for every day americans. here's the biden track record on the economy. economic growth is up. inflation is down. wages are up, gas prices are down. job creation is up, more than 10 million good-paying jobs created during president biden's first two years, a record in modern american history. and small business startups have grown by the largest number during president biden's first two years in office than at any other point in recorded american

history. the democrats, team normal, delivering for everyday americans. what are the republicans doing, team extreme? the team consisting of extremists who are willing to detonate the american economy, blow up social security and medicare, and impose a 30% sales tax on the hard-working people of america. you can't make this stuff up. that's what they want to do. of 30% sales tax on the american people. what will be the consequence of that? it will be a tax hike on 90% of everyday americans, while at the same time cutting taxes for the

wealthiest 1% in america. that's what they are spending their time doing, team extreme. extreme maga republicans. and by the way the want to lecture us, lecture us, about fiscal responsibility. 25% of the nation's that was incurred during the four years of the trump presidency. we have been around this great country of ours for 247 years. but team extreme, the extreme maga republicans, they want to lecture the country on fiscal responsibility? when 25% of the nation's debt incurred during four years of the trump presidency? what's team normals record? what is the biden administration's record on fiscal responsibility?

cut the deficit by $1.7 trillion in the last two years. another record in american history. questions? >> speaker mccarthy is threatening to have a house vote to remove congressmen over from the foreign affairs committee. are you confident all democrats will oppose that resolution when it comes to the floor? >> we haven't had an internal conversation about it. actually support the nimous conse the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. manchin: first, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the privileges of the floor be granted to the following members of my staff. david rosner, our detailee from ferc and sarah stevenson. as of today and until the end of congress.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. manchin: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to ask unanimous consent to discharge and pass the american veek security act, a bill i introduction -- introduced with senator braun yesterday. china cornered the e.v. supply chain market. 80% of the world's battery materials processing comes from china. 60 pgget of the -- 60% of the cathode production comes from china. 75% of the world's lithium ion battery cell production comes from china. now for the first time in the history of this great country of ours, in a transportation mode that gave inparticipation to the world, whether it be cars, trains and planes did not depend on foreign supply chains. did not in any way depend on it.

now we are moving rapidly into the e.v. markets and i think recklessly as we were going into that. before we were able to supply and be held captive by china literally. so anything that the i.r.a. bill did was saying this, if you're going to get the $7,500 credit, which i had a hard time understanding why the automotive industry needed it so desperately because people were willing to wait a year to get the product and we had supply chains with chips, we fixed that. we had supply chains still with this. they are telling me we can't get there. i said they told us we couldn't get there on a vaccine for covid. it would take five years. we got there in nine months. dowk it if you -- you can do it if you want do it. what we did was we said fine, $3,750 credit you'll be able to earn for the discount on that

vehicle if the critical minerals are sourced from north america or our free trading agreement countries. so we don't have the risk of being held hostage. these are countries that we deal with, and we have relationships and it's a free trade back and forth. china, we don't. russia, we don't. we see what happens to the world when that happens. this was the purpose of it. the other 3,750 is if you manufacture the battery in north america because of our nafta agreement in the usmc we had for a long time, disruptive flow back and forth. that way we're guaranteed we're going to have a manufacturing base and continue the long heritage and the long basically support that we have that we can have control of our own destiny in our transportation mode. that's all. that's all this bill was doing. the bill is being characterized

so many different ways but it's truly an energy security manufacturing bill. and i can assure you, just coming back and talking to the europeans, they are extremely challenged and upset that basically america, the united states with one leap jumped over everybody into first place and so far ahead of doing something and bringing manufacturing back, being self-sufficient and self-dependent. that's what this does. and we fixed that. we fixed all of that. and then the treasury, failing to issue guidance that puts more requirements, and what they're doing, they issued guidance by law. the bill said by december 31. they're in violation. they don't have the guidance ready and they had plenty of time to do it. but they are now continuing to let the $7,500 credit go without any concerns at all about the critical mineral requirements. that's just not what the legislation is about. it's not what we all voted for. every democrat voted for this.

and now all of a sudden we're saying we're not going to pay attention to the rules. regulations don't mean anything. let them do what they want to do. i'm sorry, that's not the way it is and that's not the way it should be. so being the birthplace of henry ford, who put mass production back in, who put the automobile in everyone's affordability range and basically transitioned who we are as a country and how we move around, we are a automotive powerhouse. we've always been an automotive powerhouse. and the sooner that we're able to source our own supplies that we need for our mode of transportation, we'll maintain that powerhouse. that's what the ira has done. that's the intent of the i.r.a. i've asked the irs to follow the law, follow the rule, follow the legislative intent and basically the bill that we passed, and they are defying that. this bill would correct that. that's all we're asking for. and with that, i yield to my

friend from indiana. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from indiana. mr. braun: i rise today -- joe has gone over this, i think, very clearly. i support him in just sticking with the letter of the law. he said china produces 75% of the world's lithium ion batteries. we only 7%. china controls 80% of facilities that convert critical minerals into usable battery parts. making things in america, not just about promoting our own manufacturing, which we need to do better generally. it's also about not funding the human rights abuses by the chinese communist party, and to give them even more of a leg up when you see what they've done trying to fit into the world

economic chain where they still steal intellectual property. they do things that take them out of the norm that we're all familiar with. this is just simply to fix something that was recently passed in a reconciliation bill. i didn't vote for the reconciliation package because of disagreements with it in general. i do that on a lot of things, even when i like components of what's in something, if it doesn't have that fiscal responsibility to go along with it. so whether you agree with me or senator manchin about trying to do things here in america whenever we can and not to end up supporting our main geopolitical enemy in the process, i think you've got to be careful. senator manchin mentioned also we just recently did it and it's clear, and the irs was sleeping

at the wheel. this should not have come down to where we're right here even having to argue about it. it's the letter of the law. i've got in my own home state stelantis, samsung, making a big investment in kokomo, indiana, for this very issue of getting our own foot into this kind of business. what's it going to do? what's the message going to be sending to them? alison transmission is conducting r&d efforts on electrifying their own components. i think it sends a bad message if we are, given the letter of the law, going to make exemptions even when it might not be expedient for other concerns. so i think this is a type of investment that we need to make sure stays here. we recently put it in law to do

so. it may delay a little bit, not give the speed at which some want to move. but when you look at everything we've talked about, the fact that it gives more to the chinese economy when you look at what they're doing on the world stage, it's going to send a bad message to people in our own country about making the investments. and clearly in my own state there's a vested interest. so i'm with senator manchin on this. we ought to stick with what we just passed, not let the irs get by with being delinquent on what they should have done in the first place. and with that, i yield back to the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: i think maybe i can help a little bit clearing it up. everyone thinks that all of a sudden that at the end of the year, the first of the year that the automobile industry in the united states, in order to get any credit at all, had to have 100% of the sourcing done from north america or free trade country agreements such as

australia, chile, different people that have a tremendous amount of resources, that those are going to china now for processing. if they only have the first year is 40%. all we're saying is you ought to at least be able to source 40% the first year from the favored trading countries we have in ourselves to get us into this. then it goes up 10% every year. most reasonable, most reasonable. why the irs did not do their job, i can't tell you unless their intent was never trying to comply with what we passed. they've known all along what this bill was. unless they just basically drugged their feed intentionally. and knowing this, let me tell you the other thing i couldn't tell. or we're going to let it like it was, 7 7500.

no, they like what they did in order to get to the 7500. they used that part of it. they liked the cap of where we said what price of a vehicle would qualify for a sedan $55,000 and under, for a truck $85,000. they picked and choosed. cherry picked. they said we're going to continue to give them 7500. nothing about sourcing the material or jump-starting to be basically self-sufficient in the manufacturing of battery in the united states of america, but also sourcing so we would never run short and held hostage by china or someone else. i'm old enough and most of us in this room were old enough to remember 1974 to get in line to go to work.

thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the finance committee be discharged from further consideration of senate bill 63, for application of certain amendments made with respect to the credit of new clean vehicles, the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? ms. stabenow: reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. first of all, i take a backseat to no one on wanting to get out of china. there's no question about that. i authored the buy america provisions, along with senator braun, we are bringing jobs home and putting michigan and american businesses and workers first, absolutely. i also agree -- i mean senator manchin has -- he and i have

worked together on the clean energy manufacturing tax credits, 48c, which is critical, the advanced battery protection tax credit, that what senator bn was talking about bringing jobs to indiana, and the credits we have done for batteries, solar and wind, were all in that bill which i was proud to help author and to support those efforts and i support when senator manchin said to those and other countries, if you want to benefit from our tax structure, move your plants to america. i said that myself. you know that. and so i'm for that. this -- this particular credit is confusing, it was not well vetted, it is not supported anyone in the industry who believes that they have the capacity immediately, right this minute, to meet the complicated formulas. they'd love love to.

we'd love not to have to rely on lithium from china. there's a free trade agreement with chile, they have lithium deposits that would be helpful to us and i would be supportive of making them a part of the free trade agreement so we can get the lithium from there as well as other parts of the world. but we're not there yet, mr. p. this does not create any path for success for american automobile workers, for american automobile companies, for suppliers, for consumers who are interested in being able to purchase electric vehicles and benefit from a credit, which, by the way, every other country has, including china. they have their own consumer credit. and so this is a situation where we disagree on how this was put together, how it's written, how it -- the effect of it in terms

of the dates and so on. but i have to say on behalf of treasury who was given thousands of regulations to have to write by december 31, that it is not unreasonable that they took the time to listen and be thoughtful about how they did it and that they announced they would be bringing these rules forward in march. that is not an unreasonable thing. it infects a huge -- affects a huge industry. henry ford, he's from michigan. we are proud -- proud to have henry ford from michigan. and, by the way, he and thomas edison first tried to create an electric vehicle. that was the first choice until we decided as a congress to invest in oil and gas subsidies that took them in a different direction. bottom line. it is not unreasonable what treasury is doing, the path they are on. they have been given, i believe,

an incredibly complicated task to try to figure out how in consumer credit will work for consumers and for the companies and workers. i don't disagree with the goals talked about. i don't disagree with anything that's been said except it doesn't relate to what it happening in this credit which doesn't work on a practical level, and i'm for whatever support and flexibility that we can provide to achieve what are the stated goals. so on behalf of the american automobile companies and auto workers and american consumers, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from west virginia. mr. manchin: will the senator yield. the only thing i would say to that is this. the subsidies we were given for e.v.'s had expired for american manufacturers, they all hit

their 200,000 cap. spab spab not all of them. -- ms. stabenow: not all of them. ford didn't hit it. toyota hadn't hit it. mr. manchin: i'm understanding that they did. that was over for them. they got no more. it was over. the only people who had access to our market if we had not done this bill? was all european manufacturers. all the manufacturers in the united states hit their cap. i'm saying it was over. we gave them new life into this and all we're saying is can't we get manufacturing in the united states of america where we're not depending on foreign supply chains, especially china. and they knew newt bill. they didn't like the bill. they built their hoddle around -- you would -- model around, you would think that car manufacturers would go broke if they didn't get a credit from

the united states treasury. i said if you're waiting for a year to get a product because you like it and it's good, i don't think that's the reason you're making the decision. china could have flooded the market. we stopped all of that from happening. we just have a difference. we just have a difference. ms. stabenow: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: china can flood the market because we will not be able to meet the criterion and theres no reason -- there's no reason for them not to be able to flood the market. we have three parts of the stool on supporting on moving forward on a new electric transportation model. one is charging stations, we did in the infrastructure bill, really important, have charging stations. number two, helping create production through the battery

and clean energy tax credits and so on. third is it helping -- third is helping to bring costs down at the beginning until volume comes up. now the reason people are waiting for cars is because of the lack of chips. and we've addressed that as well. but the truth is, what was put in place on this piece was complicated, it doesn't work for several years for american companies. it doesn't stop china, it doesn't stop anybody else from coming into our market, they can still come into our market, but it stops our companies from fully benefiting from a piece of this with consumers that's very important. so, again, mr. president, thank you very much. i object. i ask unanimous consent that the senate recess subject to the call of the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. the senate stands in recess

>> the sin is in recess -- >> this evening a conversation with the director of national intelligence apple haynes at the lbj presidential library in austin, texas. part of the conference on classified information and democracy. live coverage at 7:30 on c-span2. you to watch on a free mobile video app c-span now, or online at c-span.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view