this is a link to the survey, great feedback on how the briefing went. apologies for the late. start it was great to have molly given the circumstances but if you like to take a survey and have a survey about briefing topics or audio or technical issues, let us know, it means a lot when you take a moment or two and share your feedback.fe i think that doesn't. i'm sorry, our videographer, our friend at c-span will broadcast this. look at the webcasting and all the look in to it without them. and i hope everyone has a great

rest of your thursday and will hangout for a few minutes hopefully over a donut and would love to meet you and hear how things are[a going. we will end there. thanks so much. [applause] >> senate lawmakers working on the committee assignments for one 18th congress about the four boat is needed to approve them both are expected 5:30 p.m. eastern expecting lawmakers beaches. live to the floor of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer.

the chaplain: let us pray. lord of life, rescue us from the faults to which we are prone. keep us from saying one thing and doing another; from criticizing others for what we allow in ourselves. keep us from demanding standards from others which we ourselves make no effort to fulfill. lord, keep us from the indecision that cannot say "yes" or "no". keep us from the reluctance to break habits which we know are wrong.

today, keep our senators from anything that prevents them from giving all their loyalty, allegiance, and heart to you. and lord, comfort the loved ones of tyre nichols. we pray in your merciful name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the president pro tempore: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. and under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each.

last week's news literacy week a lot of postings and papers and media outlets including washington d.c. news service and destroy the says public perception and it typically depends on what's happening in the u.s. and white but right now just american media appears to be at a historic low. only 34% of americans seem to trust the news, 10% of those megan's say they have a great deal of trust and confidence in media and 27% would say trust a fair amount and 20% of u.s. adults say they do not have much confidence newspapers, tv and radio and 30% having no conflict at all. that's a poll released last year from october of last year end when it comes to not only taking a look at average americans and

overall opinions on news media and trust in that, they broke down as well with republic and in october of last year, republicans saying when it comes to what they think about media being trusting cobblers, 14% of those things, they had a fair or great deal amount of trust and confidence. if you go to independent viewers, they pull 27% giving their opinion saying they have that level of trust. the democrats polled, 70% saying they have a fair amount of trust and confidence in mass media. that's from october of last year and we will show you more on polling and what it says about levels of trust and portions of an event that took place in washington d.c. by the news literacy project but let us know your thoughts while you're doing that. 2278001 for republicans.

as a form last week journalists discussed accountability issues, one spotted to a question of being asked about the biggest challenge when it comes to earning a rebuilding trust in the media. here is a portion of that from last week. >> one of the downsides is this perceived vision with have. twenty years ago we have because we can stand on a corner in hand these out and say it's important you know the government is doing this and the washington post would come out and people would say it's serious news. the meanings on the corner are not very serious. now anybody can produce professional -looking content. print or video or audio so we lost the edge that people don't necessarily take us more seriously than people out there with the political peace they are used to because of the

technological edge over the. the upside i hope think all of us got into this innocence because i believe the truth is important in the truth long run will count simply as it is a matter of keeping values we have maintaining them and that's why standards are more important now we don't have the technological edge had before but we need to show people we are seriously trusted and we will own up to our mistakes and long run, that's our only hope. >> washington d.c. if you want to see the whole event, go to our website c-span.org for the opinions of the journalists and other experts talking about news media related issues. some of us giving your thoughts on facebook. jackie saying before the technological stuff read

newspapers and sometimes they got the story wrong and then a week or so later they would explain retracting the first article. the new york times washington post only now i read on the phone sometimes they get it wrong but there's a magic box that helps me research quicker and more in depth. which came from facebook saying what's news? adult propaganda for independent news channels now adding real news is dead, no trust at all. jack collins' statement saying i trust news media, not entertainment/another thing done. it's all sensationalism and personal opinions interjected into actual news and companies willing to seek only facts regardless if it's engaging in the levels of trust when it comes to media. ricky in philadelphia, pennsylvania, democrat line

talking about office of trust in the news media. >> thank you for taking my call and good morning. you have to be careful what news you listen to just like fox news with murdoch and roger when they used to give out false statements and unfortunately, believing in that and that but there's propaganda and you know majority stuff, it don't be true, you know. or they could do put out. >> so what news sources -- besides the one you listen to

her personally, what you personally listen to when it comes to news consumption? >> i listen to the washington general because you are bipartisan, democrat or republican and i listen to you all and msnbc and my thing is i read a text saying journalism is dead and whoever wrote the text, it's like anybody on social media can put out some news you know in a majority of doing your own research if it's true or not. >> that's ricky and thought of you. let's hear from jeannie and louisiana, high.

>> good morning, thank you for taking my call. i called -- the last caller talking about the media, he's right to an extent. i started watching happening in washington and rings and -- can you hear me? >> your on, go ahead. >> okay your channel because you have lived senate and hearings and everything so i think what's going on and things that you turn on the news msnbc and they will happen it will things and i stayed up and watched the whole -- when they were electing the speaker, i watched everything i watched the during the hearings and turn around and extrude on msnbc and cnn and

nobody calls them, they push it like that. that's why they don't -- i want to live so i can see it myself. >> what are your thoughts? >> that was it. thank you, appreciate it. have a good day. >> thoughts on trust, your level of trust in news media. christine in west virginia, democrat line. >> last two colors, one the democrats said they watch msnbc and the lady said msnbc and cnn spins the news. if you are republican, you watch fox. democrat, you watch msnbc or cnn and that's not true because i watch all of them. i watched local c-span and a lot of news. to me, i see why we are part of

as a nation, because your inch the different universe. fox gives you what they believe and a lot of it is misinformation. if you look right now with line, murdoch, sean hannity, judge jeanine, all of those people are lying because they had to go -- they lied about the voting and the 2020 election and they know they lied to the viewers but they didn't care, they lied anyway that's giving the misinformation. >> so because you mentioned msnbc, when you watch them, do you believe everything? >> no, i wouldn't say everything is true but if you watch a lot of msnbc, yes. they will try to tell you mostly truth. if you see the news from other

channels like pbs, abc, nbc, they are giving all the same facts and use turn to fox, you getting new information, nothing is the same. why is that? >> let's hear from andrew, go ahead. >> good morning. first of all, i have to think c-span, c-span is one of the few places you get all sides of the story and you give us resources, books and things, a library we can go in and search to find information and do more digging. i trust smaller independent sources and ago on the intranet and things like that and i find smaller sources of media and

places you can get the real story. you get investigative journalism, that's what i'm looking for. what's the true story? the story behind the story. a lot of times the media present certain things but doesn't give us the whole picture. i want to know why. i don't have the whole reason sometimes any reason but that's what i do, i go to independent sources online and i find the true story, the reason behind what's going on. >> is there an example you give of an independent source what you say is the true story? is there an example in recent days you could show? >> yes, i go to your all resources, the people in guess

you have, certain social media sites or online and i'll look up people to find out the big ones, like what's going on with this? lies is occurring? that's what i'll do and that's where you'll find investigative journalism. i want to know someone who really finds what's happening and it gives you what's going on on both sides of the story. >> when you're watching those, why do you fundamentally trust them? >> it really seems like they fill in the gaps. some people call it the media, some call it widespread media. they don't give you both sides of the story, they don't give

you -- there are gaps. if i have to ask why or how, they've not answered or given me a complete picture. that's why i divide my thinking. i trust independent sources and certain people and why i get a complete story. >> this viewer isn't in colorado, they shall about a reporter independently and owned in colorado. kevin from facebook saying emily is best when produced locally so opinions when it comes to levels of trust in media from social media, you could outsource to the mix (202)748-8003. texas 2,027,000. democrats and republicans.

you can text us on your thoughts. this is from carl, democrat line. hello. >> thanks, c-span. i agree with the last caller this is a good source at least of today, you are close to the source of a lot of news and i don't really have insight, i just know pick and choose from media. i used to go to cnn and then i would go to fox and i would ballpark down the middle and it was always like that there was a news from the left, the news from the right and you try to figure it out in the middle and make up my own mind and it's

kind of scary to think that. >> how much do think comes from newspaper or television versus what you are picking up off the phone whether from news sites there were others when it comes to the internet? >> there's not much on the newsprint because they charge you like new york times and stuff, huffington post doesn't, it is tough to get good news because good news will usually charge you and i don't even know if i'm answering your question but usually have to pay to get good news and that's all i have to say. >> axios has a story looking at newspapers, a recent one and two newspapers in the u.s. are closing every week according to a report suggesting by the

pandemic will worsen the coming years. by the fall of local newspapers compared to bigger cities evening, died, average poverty rate in a community without local newspaper in the u.s., 16% compared to 11% national average according to new report from northwestern school of journalism, a crisis for democracy and society infinitely news, a visiting professor adding while the economic decline in many communities was occurring prior to the news desert and the local news organization believe local residents without critical information to begin to address those problems and there is more there, axios has a story if you want to pick up on what's happening locally. newspaper wise, you can put that in we talk about levels of trust in the media. many mentioned pelvis networks and other sources of news as

well. >> good morning. i love your suit today. i think that this of good news happened -- no towns have two newspapers anymore. we used to have are for a client in hartford times. they balanced each other's opinions and stories so you've got a good view of the news. as far as tv, i lost credibility when the made up the story of bush toward regular media. >> that goes back a while.

>> it does go back. i remember your first week on c-span. >> from that story you talked about from then on it is a matter of distrust for you? >> very much so. you don't have to make up the news, it makes it so. >> i am familiar, did the other newspaper close? >> yes, new york times closed their doors and it was money, they were hemorrhaging cast but a great newspaper. >> liberty south carolina, republican line jason, hello. >> good morning.

as far as the media, i've got no faith at all in the mainstream media. that includes fox for all your democratic colors colors. rupert murdoch, it is no surprise. you can see it anywhere. people calling in and they don't trust msnbc and you not telling them you are funded by -- r: i as consent -- first, madam president, we'll do a little housekeeping, then i'll get to my remarks. madam madam president, i understand there is a bill at the desk due for a a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title for the second time. the clerk: s. 123, a bill to protect american small businesses and so forth. mr. schumer: in order to place the bill on the calendar, under

provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on on the calendar. mr. schumer: 2:00 -- thank you, madam president. on friday, the city of femme miss released the brutal, truly sickening footage of the murder of tyre nichols. i am heartbroken, appalled by this heinous murder. this should have just been a routine traffic stop. it never, never should have ended the way it did in unnecessary violence and bloodshed. the repetitiveness of unjust murders like tyre nichols' is a stain on america. the five police officers who betrayed their oath to serve and protect should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. we should remember tyre for who he was and for the life he lived. by all accounts can, he was a beautiful and gentle soul.

he was creative, he was energetic, and he was deeply passionate about the things he loved most -- sunsets, skateboarding, and above all his family. he was a father, a son, a friend, a talented young man with his whole life ahead of him, and he should still, still be alive today. so let us honor his memory by bringing lasting, meaningful change to create a more just and a more fair america. our long, trident path to try to make this country, this beautiful country, a more perfect place and a more perfect nation. on the debt ceiling, madam president, one of congress' top priorities this year is ensuring the united states does not default on its debt for the first time in our history. even approaching a default would be disastrous for american families. the damages will show up on everything from people's credit

card bills, their mortgage rates and when applying for things as basic as a car loan. it risks thousands of dollars lit on fire for millions of americans families. everyone's life in this country will take many steps backward if we default. now, republicans have done a lot of talking about cuts, but when it comes to actually showing us a plan for avoiding default, they're playing a dangerous game. republicans, it is time to come out of hiding, put pen to paper, and show us your plan. republicans, show us your plan. according to some reports, republicans want significant cuts across the board, but from where? is funding our troops safe? we don't know. republicans, show us the plan. is funding for police and firefighters and first responders safe? republicans, show us the plan.

is funding for social security and medicare safe? which some in that party, particularly on the maga wing, said should be cut? we don't know. show us the plan. the silence is unacceptable. because the american people have a right to know whether they're going to see crucial services suddenly dry up, and if republicans don't get their way, americans have a right to know whether or not the hard-right gopers are really prepared to lead the house republican conference to push the u.s. default, and whether the republican house, led by mccarthy, will follow them over that devastating cliff. sending costs spiking on everything from credit cards to auto loans to mortgages. we've seen in real time how dangerous it is for speaker mccarthy to have empowered the most extreme elements of the gop to set the agenda in the house.

the maga wing of the gop, which has set the rules on how the house should run, has left no doubt that under their watch, no form of funding, however necessary, is safe. democrats, meanwhile, have been very clear about our position. when it comes to the debt ceiling, there can be no brinksmanship, no threats, no hostage-taking. this is simply too important. it has to get done. republicans need to show their plan to the american people. the clock is ticking on the debt ceiling every day. we must make sure that a first of ever default -- that a first-ever default doesn't occur and yet republicans are making it more and more likely. now, on gateway, tomorrow. -- tomorrow is a big day for new yorkers as we will we welcome

president biden to celebrate progress on the most important infrastructure project in america shall the new gateway rail tunnel. it has been a decade in the making. the northeast corridor is the busiest passenger railway in the country and the crossing on the hudson is its most important nexus point. but for far too long these two tunnels have been badly in need of repairs. after hurricane sandy devastated new york and the experts say there's limited time in which they will be operable, fix -- operable arc fixing the tunnel became one of my greatest passions. i love new york. and without it, new york's economy would come screeching to a halt. for years i worked hard bringing together public and private partners from new york, new jersey, and amtrak to get everyone on the same page on debate gate way. we met a lot of resistance along the way. when president trump was in office, he tried to freeze

progress on the gateway project altogether going as far as holding it hostage in negotiations over the border wall. still, i was proud that even during the trump administration, i was able to double, triple, quadruple and in one case increase tenfold the spending for the accounts pertaining to gheit way because i knew that one day, one day, president trump would no longer be in office. now thanks to our bipartisan infrastructure bill and with great help from president biden, gateway is moving forward. our infrastructure law -- under our infrastructure law, tens of billions of more dollars have been dedicated to federal accounts which will support gateway and many, many other projects in the country. and this is something i'm very, very proud to celebrate. i'll have more to say in new york tomorrow. but today i want to affirm once again that progress on gateway is a very important example of how our infrastructure bill is making life better for millions of everyday americans.

building two new tunnels and updating the existing tunnels will lead to work with good-paying union jobs, tens of thousands of jobs, and lead to a burst of economic activity for decades to come. i want to thank president biden for making the trip to new york tomorrow and i'm happy to say that after a lot of hard work and a lot of stubborn persistence, our efforts are finally paying off. and on a final note, madam president, last thursday, i announced the slate of committee members for the 118th congress on the democratic side. i want to thank every one of my colleagues for their continued good work and readiness to make life better for the american people. i expect that by the end of this week we'll have a full -- the full slate of all the committees fully locked in, enabling us to move forward on the important work we have before us. we got a good deal, a tremendous amount of bipartisan work done last year, and i'm optimistic

and hopeful that we can likewise continue this year in a productive, bipartisan spirit whenever possible. i look forward to having all committee memberships announced in full real soon. i yield the floor, and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: role roll. -- role role. -- the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the other networks are obviously financed by china. it's obviously.

all of news media. >> when you say it's obvious, how so? >> not one of them was a bad word about the chinese leader. they told a lie. you hear celebrities in china. they come on and apologize, he came on crime to apologize to his master in china. it's the way it is. >> that's marked in california, kevin in michigan. >> thank you for taking my call. hopefully washington general his criticism in the south. when you have guests on, try not to take up guests time talking to the guest. number two, you say we are not

biased. if you look at march 30 of last year, john was holding a show, mr. jason from the bipartisan policy center. out of the 42 minute show, there is not one republican call so to me if you're not going to call republican and 42 minutes, there's little bias there in the reason i think they didn't call any republicans, they were going to ask about what immigration would due to the budget but you never did call republican. >> -- i'm just going to say, are you suggesting the purpose have republican calls for the segment? you base that on? >> that you don't take any call from illinois, massachusetts,

michigan las vegas, georgia, indiana, connecticut and all them were democrats with an independent but to think there was no republican's calling and would be unbelievable. >> i'll just answer saying we don't don't republican calls, who wouldn't from go ahead. >> check it and find out if anyone would call, he got the archives, you can check it and find out that it was true but as far as news, i watch newsmax, or large cradle -- anyway, as far as news, i'm independent, i watched fox either, fox has been compromised, to but what i am upset about is what they are

doing to newsmax themselves from text taking off trying to take away conservative news and i think that's wrong, to. >> okay, let's hear from kelly and north carolina republican line. >> hi, how are you doing? >> i am well. >> me to. i don't watch any cable news at all i don't watch any of the major networks like abc, cbn, nbc, any of that because it's all controlled, they are all controlled. i found out watching c-span, the house and the senate, i try to find things like that, live where you can hear people speaking and i do my own research, i find the documents and read what it actually says

because you will get a spin no matter where you go on these networks so i like to use the people live streaming who are out even if they are just there with their phone because you're watching what's happening and then you go compare it and it's a different thing, they are not telling you the truth and these people out there risking their lives like friday night i watched antifa live actually breaking windows and doing all kinds of things, you can see what's happening and plenty of lifestream as you can see and they are actually there doing the news instead of spinning and telling you what they think and

it's a wonderful thing but make sure you look at documents and read them, go to the websites and read the documents because what you are being told is not the truth, i promise you that and its importance you get the truth. what's happening is totally opposite of what we are being told and it's not good. >> okay, kelly in south carolina. a story stemming from the nichols case was how news organizations were handling airing of video you've probably seen or may have seen over the last couple of days, this is a subject of the story by jeremy bar in the washington post this morning writing that most networks that air the video shortly after being released before they reviewed it themselves and always with copious verbal warnings for viewers in the. reporter: video after barnett said the network determined it is a public important family

police chief all of the world to see the video. brace yourself is what joy read all the please just be warned, the video violent. i've not seen it get. that's just some of the stories were part of the story from the nichols case but as far as media handles certain aspects, flint michigan, david is up next. >> good morning, c-span. i love c-span, i watch it every day. i like to say my favorite cable news, i can't live without msnbc and every now and then i turn on cnn. i never watch fox news and i never watch newsmax because i feel they are a certain

demographic and the demographic is the population, i think it is antiblack and anti- . [inaudible] but i do enjoy msnbc, i think that got the greatest broadcasters and i do believe them, i believe the things they say because i took it out with other sources but i like to watch 360, black news station from my people, a voice from my people and the way we would see stuff. >> and ask about that? what are you looking for when you say -- what you mean as far as the news they present you? >> the mainstream news like the big three or four i told you. i think they give the

perspective of white america and when i turned 360 can see how our people, the feelings i feel inside about stuff that i can't hear on other new stations and i can see how it affects us in our view instead of the overwhelming majority of the people in america. >> flint, michigan giving us sources and his opinion when it comes to news and your level of trust. west palm beach florida, independent line. >> thank you for taking my call. i wanted to commend you, pedro. you are one of the best on the show, i want to commend you. the next thing is the news media, msnbc, washington post, cnn, russia, russia, russia.

it's been proven, nothing happened. $40 million and it does not happen to be true. newsmax, i don't watch fox news anymore. newsmax and fox news have us all through no connection to trump. talk about different story, it is the story. i urge all republicans to stop because newsmax dropped the very sorry about. >> when you said a couple of other people said this, he said fox news was leaning left, what you mean? >> it's not the way they used to be, some -- used to watch fox regularly but now they are anti-

trump, newsmax is one of the best. i watch newsmax on my cell phone. they are right on target used to watch these before, 70s, 80s and 90s. i've never be a democrat, it's marxist now, a communist party. people, don't fall for it. america is changing. >> that's paul there, we got less than 20 minutes if you want to give your level of trust in news media. independent (202)748-8002. an organization known as freedom form, one of the things they do on their website is offer a snapshot, front pages across the united states and the news stories they are talking about to give you a sampling of some of the things from the times of

trenton out of new jersey local story taking a look at a crisis, the idea a prices are skyrocketing, how long will it last? a story they have if you go in california, lawmakers follow a variety of things, the fentanyl crisis specifically there in california and the free press was a story on overdoses. at least from their reporting due to the pandemic, the press out of tennessee, if you go to colorado, they are above the headline looks at a waterpark, you've heard about the western states particularly, the issues they are dealing with when it comes to water. sorry, i apologize for that, viewers. the paper that. the times views of indiana,

america's dirty little secret, thousands of misdemeanor defendants don't get attorney, just samplings of papers across the headline across united states, if you want to pick up on their website freedom.or, your level of trust in louisville, kentucky, republican line, go ahead. >> it's gotten that. i believe if we went back to just eight hours of news reporting when you have 744 because over and over on the same. i think newsmax has been doing a good job, the two msnbc in the end and they just believe.

mark and kevin and paul was on it with all three of them. if they just cut back the news, it's all about ratings. i used to watch fox but it has changed. i listen on my alexis jesse watters and shannon green and laura ingram. sean hanley, he seems like he repeats itself over and over, the one color said doesn't let some people talk he just keeps repeating stuff over and over so i don't miss him but mr. o'reilly was good, to but newsmax is good and i got a friend at church had directv in

the newsmax off and he's upset so he said to figure out a way to get another way to get that that. i dropped cable, cable is getting out of hand pain $150 a month for cable. >> how are you monitoring this program can? >> i got my alexa. >> gotcha. >> i've got fox, too, so i can listen to jesse watters and newsmax and even american news on there. i've been trying to get an alexa, i asked them like what is that?

>> is here from scott in maryland. democrat line. >> so-called cable news network because of the majority of the editorial, they should put that in the network and something i don't see a lot of is one of the critiques as of content on the show, it seems to be the only good source of that. people praise local news but owns a lot of them. they push editorials and a lot of the news stories actually feel like commercials and the difference between the two sides pro owner/employer and liberals are proconsumer/employee so they are pushing a narrative that appeals to one of these sites. the information is more or less true and resources, maybe some of them are less apt to protect themselves because they feel adequate infrastructure like snopes are.

everybody complains about fake news but they have no idea they are being pummeled by spoofs on the internet. >> the daily show, do you treat that as a news program and entertainment, how you treat that? >> all of the above. >> if that's the case, how to make sure what they are talking about -- how do you check up on that? >> is something is interesting or feel there is more to the story than i do the due diligence and look into it more i talk to people but. my mom will watch fox and we will have a discussion. the same thing about daily show, i find humor and entertainment

in the cable news and in c-span. >> we are not without sense of humor when it comes to some things and things we talk about occasionally here on this program. ten minutes there left in the program if you want to give comments. a little bit more from that forum from news literacy week, a journalist talk about trust, when asked about transparency process, especially when bringing people into the news and delivering the news. here is a bit of that discussion. >> i think we are very proud of the process and we know we have to work harder to make it visible our leaders and not assume people understand for example, we had a reporter who knocked on someone's door to come in and was accused of invading privacy and things we take this fundamental in the journalistic process and fairness and reporting can

easily be misunderstood. we've done things like our video team did a series interviewing people and staff how they do their work and it exists. mr. mcconnell: a new republican house of representatives has already done more to protect our nation's strategic petroleum reserve than the single-party democratic government did in the last two years. first, house republicans passed legislation that would ban the federal government from selling energy from this spro to benefit our nation's number-one strategic adversary, the chinese communist party. then last week the house followed on by passing h.r. 21, a bipartisan bill that would require the department of defense to offset any

nonemergency drawdowns of the strategic petroleum reserve by expanding access to america's abundant domestic energy on federal lands. speaker mccarthy and chair kathy mcmorris rogers were right to make american energy security a top priority for their new majority. it's too bad that it's even necessary to protect our nation's emergency energy reserves from our own commander in chief and his party. but unfortunately, the biden administration has proven that it is necessary. last year with his party hurting at the polls, president biden released more than 200 million barrels leaving america's strategic reserve at its lowest level since 1983. to make matters worse, this political gamble didn't just leave america less secure.

it directly benefited china. president biden's department of energy hadn't just sold off critical supplies. they sold some of them -- listen to this -- directly to a chinese refining company. last year senate republicans put every democrat on the record with an amendment to clamp down on selling our strategic reserve to china. senate democrats blocked it. democratic senators from states like west virginia, montana, and ohio voted on party lines to let the biden administration continue to sell our reserves to the ccp. and democrats' recklessness with our energy reserves actually predates this particular administration. remember back when oil prices were historic lows during the early days of the covid pandemic. we republicans tried to refill the spro to the top.

we could have totally replenished our stockpile at bargain-basement prices. but the senate democratic leader blocked it and bragged about blocking it. our colleague crowed that his party had stopped the bailout for big oil. of course what he really blocked was a win-win for national security as well as the american taxpayer. so, madam president, washington democrats have been dead wrong on how to handle our strategic reserve literally for years. this is just one stop of their deep misunderstanding about energy, about importance of american energy dominance and the way to achieve it. across the atlantic, war in ukraine has brought the vulnerabilities of europe's dependence on russian energy into stark and painful relief. half baked green transitions, an allergy to clean and reliable nuclear power, and an addiction

to russian gas sent our allies' energy costs through the roof. with working families and ratepayers actually footing the bills. it could have been a helpful cautionary tale for the united states, but by last year the biden administration was already a year deep into their comprehensive war on abundant and affordable american energy. remember, on day one in office, president biden canceled further work on the keystone xl pipeline with a stroke of a pen. forget safe and efficient energy transport, high-paying american jobs, and lower costs for reliable power, the president put climate activism in the driver's seat of his own energy policy. the biden administration has frozen new oil exploration on public lands, overhauled permitting rules to make it harder, harder to develop

natural gas resources, dragged the united states back into a climate deal that gives the chinese communist party a pass to keep increasing its carbon emissions and balked, balked at a chance to block vladimir putin's latest pipeline to control european consumption. it's an absolutely nonsensical agenda and it hasn't taken long for families across our country to feel the direct effects in the form of soaring prices in their heating and electricity bills, at the gas pump, as well as at the grocery store. fortunately millions of working americans were fed up last november and decided to put an end to democrats' total control here in washington. republicans will stand strong on the side of american energy dominance, on the side of national security, on the side of american workers, american families, and america's future.

i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

-- madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from illinois -- i ask unanimous consent to suspend the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: madam president, as chairman of the senate judiciary committee, i am responsible for legislation in the senate relative to law enforcement, criminal justice. it's an awesome responsibility, and i think about it quite a bit because the first thing all of us want is the safety of our families and our communities. it's the first question asked, how safe is that area of chicago, how safe is that part

of springfield. it's a reality and it's a natural reaction. and i've had during the course of my congressional career the opportunity to meet many of the men and women in law enforcement. let me tell you, there are some outstanding people who literally get up in the morning, put on that badge and risk their lives. they go out for just a routine traffic stop and they could end up dead. that is the reality of police work in a dangerous world, particularly in a world awash with guns as we are in the united states. having said that, acknowledging that reality, i also know that there are cops who are doing terrible things. that was brought home to america vividly over the last several days. you see videotapes and d.n.a. evidence have changed our conversation about law enforcement and justice.

we now know just what happened, not an account of what happened. we know what happened. we see it on videotapes over and over and over again. and we know sometimes that people who have been found guilty of crimes and are serving long sentences, turns out the d.n.a. evidence proves it couldn't possibly have been them responsible. after gross miscarriage of justice for the person who is incarcerated and even worse the fact that the person who is culpable, blameable, should be prosecuted may somewhere be on the loose. video tame and d.n.a. has changed it. many americans are struggling with feelings of grief and disbelief after they watched the videotapes of tyre nicoles being beaten to death by a group of memphis police officers. mr. nichols, a 29-year-old father of a young son, he worked the second shift at fed ex'

facility with his stepfather. he loved skateboarding and photography, and he loved his mother so much, he had her name tattooed on his arm. he had no criminal record. one friend told a reporter mr. nichols was even thinking about being a police officer to try to make the system better from the inside. the videotapes of the deadly assault on mr. nichols by memphis police officers on january 7 are horrific and sickening. they show at least five officers attacking mr. nichols with their fists, boots, batons, tasers, and pepper spray while yelling contradictory orders to him. they continued pummeling mr. nichols even as he screamed in pain, begged them to stop, called out for his mother. one officer kicked him in the head so hard that the officer

was limping afterwards. when the beating was over, another officer propped and apparently unconscience tyre nichols aside a cop car. while others laughed, fist bumped, and tried to justify their awful behavior. it took 20 minutes for an ambulance to arrive, even longer for medical aid to be rendered. tyre nichols died three days later in a memphis hospital. an independent autopsy revealed he had suffered extensive bleeding caused by a severe beating. that's a quote. the killing of tyre nichols follows years of devastating tragedies and needless loss. who can ever forget george floyd? when i saw the videotape of what happened to him and saw that policeman with his knee on his neck stair straight at the camera -- stare straight at the

cam remark i'll never forget that. brianna taylor shot in her amount. in my own home state of illinois, laquon mcdonald, a videotape that was held back from the public for over a year finally was brought to light and people saw that he was shot in the back repeatedly over and over and over again. so many others. for george floyd, he was murdered as he lie on a curb in minneapolis. for tyre nichols, chased down and beaten to death. black americans in particular are forced to live through trauma with every new incident of police violence. i applaud the shelby county district attorney for moving swiftly seeking the indictment of the five police officers. a sixth officer connected to the incident was suspended today. i agree with the attorney for mr. nichols' family, that the response of prosecutors could be

a blueprint for how education should be handled in the future if inevitably there are such cases. we shouldn't wait for months to bring charges. there is no excuse for delayed justice when heinous acts occur and the facts are as clear as videotape. i also want to extend my deepest condolences to mr. nichols' family, especially his mom and stepfather who have responded with dignity and grace to this unimaginable ordeal. before the videotapes were released, they called repeated will i for protests to be peaceful. i'd like to think that i would have the strength to do that having just lost my son and knowing the circumstances, but the nichols family did. and throughout our nation almost without exception, their wishes have been respected. but prosecutions and peaceful protests cannot be the only response to this tragedy. americans, especially black americans are exhausted by the

injustice of officers who abuse their authority. they are tired of the systemic failures that can lead to a young man being beaten to death after a questionable traffic stop. as chair of the senate judiciary committee, i'm committed to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to finally confront these problems with meaningful legislation. we need to have an honest conversation with law enforcement officers about screening, training, inherent bias, use of force and consequence for unjust action. we need to pro hint dead -- prohibit deadly and dishonorable police conduct. we must recruit and train the next generation of law enforcement to protect and serve everyone in america, black, white, brown, and everything in-between. we've made some very modest progress. last december congress enacted, the president signed a bill on

law enforcement de-escalation training. it provides for grants and training for law enforcement de-escalation tactics. it's not enough. we must do more. in the last congress, senator cory booker, of new jersey, led an effort to build bipartisan support for police and reform legislation that national police groups and civil rights advocates could endorse. he worked with tim scott, a republican senator from south carolina. they invited me and senator lindsey graham into their deliberations. they were close to making some progress toward our goals, but even if you look at their goals, which i believe were good, they're not enough. simply to say we're going to ban chokeholds or we're going to deal with warrantless searches in a different way doesn't get to the heart of the issue. what's in the mind of these policemen when they're executing their job, doing their duty? is it the right way to approach

things? these efforts must continue now eney. we owe it -- eney. we owe it to all of the families who have lost loved buns and for -- loved ones, and for families who fear their loved ones could be next,. the vast majority of law enforcement officers are appalled and angered by the deaths of mr. nichols and others. they deserve our thanks and i believe they will support bipartisan efforts to prevent such abuses. as i mentioned, tyre nichols loved photography, he loved foat photographing the world as he saw it. one of the images that appears again and again in his photos is the image of bill, it's time for us to build a bridge and pass a

policing reform so tyre's death is not in vain. madam president, i ask that another statement on the debt dt ceiling be placed in a separate part of the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: madam president, i yield the floor.

>> an update on congress. senate lawmakers working on the floor setting committee assignments for the 118th congress and a floor vote needed to approve them. tomorrow chuck schumer in new york city will president bide and talking about railway infrastructure projects. in the meantime, house lawmakers are working on several financial services and technology related measures and later this week, they'll consider four pandemic related bills. watch live coverage of the house on cspan and the senate on cspan2 and both networks on cspan.org and our free mobile video app, cspan now.

jowski system of articulation this is the -- >> this is the bipartisan policy and debt ceiling and federal spending. thanks for your time. you may not remember but back in september 2001 and talking about essentially the same thing needing debt limits and the like. can you tell me why we come to these while we're still dealing with these issues and bump up against the line in order to deal with the issues? >> yeah, the federal deficit is in law by congress and has a certain dollar figure and for $1 trillion and and many times over to blast 100 or so years for existence and over the last

deck said and where the negotiations and demand about what to attach to a debt limit and extension and extended period for which there's going to take place. because we're in this cycle, we continue to have it we need to sort of exit ramp where we get out of the paradigm we're in. the physical challenge and that is only expected to grow substantially larger over the coming year and coming off the government and it's not an effective tool at helping us manage that but unfortunately we're going to keep running back this cycle of last members of

congress decide to change the process and how things are done. >> we've heard yesterday that house speaker mccarthy expects us to sit down with president bide ton discuss the matters and not only the debt limit deal withs spending going in and what you've feeling about these conversations and and it's going to be the talking point but they've been sharing with the media just because the president and cost for optimism and start talking about the underlying and

reluctant to take that on and do anything about it. and the democrats pass last year meaning modest trying to close that amount. that will have them closing the deficits and needing the two sides to talk to each other for that to happen. and this is the for victims step.

>> let's play a little bit with house speaker talking about his re-spongeses and i like what had you've already kind of eluded to but hear from them directly on the sunday show. jowski if you read our commitment to america and the social security concern and looking at it and the retirement age and kick that to the side. i want to look at them increasing it by 30%, $400 billion in four years. when you look at what they have done, adding $10 trillion in debt for the next ten years in a short time period and did it a month ago and passing the bill through and there's a budget with appropriation bill and there's ways for the end of the

year and allowed two senators that will no longer here to write a $1.7 trillion on the omnibus bill. we both should pass a budget and appropriation bill and see the direction we're going. inflation bringing them problems and we've got goat our spending under control. >> the house speaker takes on upcoming they're supposed to be doing that and far too often they fail with responsibility and that makes it far too difficult from the place to have an outline of what they look like and they have the fiscal

problem and ultimately it's current forward that's not an effective conversation and the conversation which is why we're in the place that we are today. supposed to be the time --

was cohosted by a number of academic institutions in texas and the public interest declassification board, or pidb. most of us had never heard of this group before, but the pidb leads incredible work to help advise the president and the executive branch on ways to modernize the classification and declassification processes, which safeguard our national security but also protect public trust in our institutions. i joined an online conversation with my friend willen bowden from the university of texas at austin. we talked about the circumstances under which classification is important, controlling access to certain sensitive information enables the united states to remain at least one step ahead of our

adversaries. it also protects sources and messages odds -- and methods that allow us to collect clandestined intelligence and protect the lives of those intelligence professionals who are engaged in collecting that information, as well as the avenues into those sources that are important to collecting this intelligence. obviously, we don't want to jeopardize either the individuals involved or dissuade anyone from wanting to work with us in the future. or to allow some of our access to dry up because it then becomes a matter of public knowledge. but we know classification is not always the right answer. there are many circumstances in which declassification safeguards our national security. one example is the way in which the united states government declassified and shared information with our allies in

the run-up to russia's brutal invasion of ukraine. the decision to declassify some important intelligence gave ukraine enough battlefield awareness to push back after the initial attack and save countless lives. it also unified western response, leading to quick condemnation of russia's attack and resources for ukrainian forces. declassification is an important tool with which we share information with our friends and allies and around the world. but it's also another way to show otoamerican people what their government is doing -- to show the american people what their government is doing. it builds trust and transparency. it inspires confidence in the incredible work that our intelligence professionals are doing. and it equips scholars with the information they need to conduct

academic research and inform decision-making. obviously, there's a very delicate balance between transparency, which drives democratic self-governance, and secrecy, which is sometimes necessary to protect sources and methods of information that are important to protect our national security. policymakers and scholars have long debated this balance, but it doesn't often garner much attention in the public square, at least that was the case until recently. over the last several months, law enforcement have uncovered classified documents in insecure locations. for example, documents were discovered at president trump's home in florida. they were uncovered at president trump's home in -- at president biden's home in delaware, there were discovered at his private office in washington, and they

were found at the home of former vice president fence in indiana. all of these discoveries paint a deeply concerning picture because those of us with access to classified information know that the only appropriate place to view classified information is in a secure setting. now, we have no idea, we as congress, no idea what these classified documents contain. we don't know who had access to them. we have no insight into the possible ramifications for national security. so there are a lot of unanswered questions that need answers. this really addresses congress' unique role as a coequal branch of government to provide oversight of the federal government. as elected representatives, we have the duty to our constituents a and to our country to ensure that government is working for them,

and oversight of the intelligence community is a big part of that job, and it's part of the system of checks and balances. now, in most cases, oversight happens out in open at the congressional hearings, but this is obviously a different sort of case. we're talking about classified documents that were never meant for public consumption. that's why we have the senate select committee on intelligence that i serve on and the house committee on intelligence, both of which were created after the church committee made recommendations about oversight that needed to be put in place over the intelligence community. both the police, the community itself, to make sure that those tools were not abused but also to restore public confidence that that oversight was occurring and that abuses were

not occurring at this moment. -- occurring at the same time. the senate intellect is one of the most -- secure on the hill. chairman warner, a democrat from virginia, vice chairman rubio, a republican from florida, operate arm in arm to lead the kind of oversight that i believe helps to instill confidence in the intelligence community and in our intelligence professionals. the committee has a responsibility to examine the facts a of these cases and understand the potential risk it could create for national security. unfortunately in a hearing we had with the director of national intelligence, we seem to have hit a brick wall, at least initially. the despite the high-profile nature of these discoveries, the administration, the biden administration, will not allow

congress to perform its constitutional oversight duties. back in august, senator warner and senator rubio sent a letter to otodirector of national intelligence and the attorney general requesting the classified documents that were seized at mar-a-lago. members of the intelligence committee are accustomed to reviewing, handling and protecting classified information. it's something we do on virtually a daily basis. this document request was not to make this public. this was a request for committee members to review the documents in a classified setting. the administration refused. in the months since, classified documents have been discovered at more locations and again the administration has refused to provide access to this intelligence. the justice department, as we know -- the justice department, as we know, has appointed a

special counsel to oversee two of these probes but yet they refuse to share the documents or any information about them. now, it's one thing in an investigation conducted by law enforcement to say, we're going to protect the person being investigated and we're going to protect the integrity of the investigation by not may being that public. we understand that. but this is something far different. when two current -- when a current and former president of the united states and a former vice president of the united states have classified documents in insecure settings, we need to know who had access to it, what the intelligence reports contain, not because we're curious or we want to interfere with an investigation by the

justice department, but because we have an independent constitutional responsibility to protect the national security of the united states and to protect the intelligence community from unjustified criticism. several years ago the intelligence committee investigated russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 election. this was a case like now where a special counsel wassate pointed, but congress did not have to wait. it wasn't forced to wait for that inquiry to be completed by former fbi director mueller. those investigations happened concurrently. the special counsel's investigation happened at the same time as the senate intelligence committee's investigation occurred. these investigations, both that of the intelligence committees and that of the department of

justice, should happen concurrently now as well. as i said last week, the director of national intelligence, director haynes, test before the intelligence committee. i was eager to learn more in a secure setting protected from public dissemination, what was going on with these documents, what they meant, who produced them. were they stale or were they current intelligence? what sort of access did our adversaries have to them, and what did they learn if they did get access to them that we need to know about and prepare for? i don't think any of our colleagues expected a full analysis of these documents, but i was alarmed by the complete lack of transparency by the director of national intelligence to the oversight committees and congress like the select committee on intelligence. without going into detail, director haynes essentially said

once the department of justice initiated its investigation, her office stood down and inquired, did not inquire any further as to what these documents contain. so far the department of justice refuses to share details of these intelligence products that were discovered at these insecure locations. as i said, we have no idea what's in these documents, who could have seen them or how big of a risk it creates for national security, but we do need the answers to those questions that only a review in a classified setting in a secure facility by the oversight committees, we need the answers that only that sort of inquiry will be reveal. we could have a major national security risk on our hands or it could be a nothing burger. but the department needs to be expedient and fully transparent in sharing this information with

congress and the intelligence community, again, in a classified secure setting, not for public dissemination. and if you worry about leaks, which are rampant here in washington, d.c., i must say the record of the senate select committee on intelligence is pretty darned good when it comes to no leaks. senator rubio and senator warner have been clear that the department of justice will not stonewall congress. this is not a partisan matter. it's not tenable for the position for the department of justice for the biden administration to take that position. as policymakers with an independent constitutional responsibility, we need to know the full details so we can conduct a risk assessment and determine how best to respond. president biden's department of justice cannot stand in the way of congress' constitutional

oversight role. now many in the press have said, well, what sort of things might the senators on the intelligence committee do to compel the cooperation of the department of justice? i hope we don't have to go there. i hope this produces a negotiation that will address the concerns both of the department of justice and of the senate select committee on intelligence. it's well known what sort of tools are available to congress, things like appropriations, things like nominations. but i sincerely hope it doesn't come to that. but we have a job to do and we're going to do it with the cooperation of the biden administration or without their cooperation. so all options are on the table to ensure not that we get to see what we want to see for political or other inappropriate

reasons, but to make sure our national security is not at risk. again, this is a bipartisan desire to see these documents and evaluate the risks they could pose to our security. it's time for the administration to cooperate with us in that effort. madam president, i yield the floor. and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> senate lawmakers working off the floor setting committee aerodynamic signments and chuck schumer will be in new york city tomorrow with president bide and talk about railway infrastructure projects and meantime house lawmakers working on several financial services and technology related measures. later this week they'll consider four pandemic-related bills. watch senate here on cspan2 and watch both networks on cspan.org and with our free mobile video app, cspan now.

>> this is the director of economic policy talking about,s of the debt ceiling and federal spending. thanks for giving us your time. >> good to be with you. >> you may not remember this but you were back in september 2000 and meeting debt limits and the like. can you tell me why we come to this point where we're still dealing with,s and bump up against deadlines in order to deal with the issues? >> yeah, here we are and it's the statute in law by congress that limits the availability of the treasury department and borrow at a certain dollar figure. right now that dollar figure is $31.4 trillion and it's been increased many times over the course of the last 100 or so years that's been in existence and over the last decade,

there's been recurring debt limit battles where there's negotiations or demands about what should be attached to the government increase or extension and a extended period for which there's uncertainty about and how that takes place and ultimately when the debt limit gets extended and last one you use and members in 2021 we're here with the video ahead of 2023 and because we're in this cycle of continuing to be there and the clear path off that road. we need to sort of have an exit ram and keeps happening over and over again. the underlying problem here is there's a very large fiscal challenge, very large debt burden and that's only expected to grow substantially larger over the coming years and the reason we keep running up against the debt limit is because we have the underlying fiscal problem and money back in

the sickle with the last members of congress and how things are done. >> we've heard for yesterday that house speaker how to deal with spending going into it and what you're feeling like a conversation and that sense of optimism and results about it. >> the first step and you have to do that for any sort of negotiation and what a resolution looks like.

>> increase spending were 30%, $400 billion in four years and look at them adding $10 trillion of debt for the next ten years in the short time period. if you look a month ago, they went through and made everythine bill through approach rations in the senate and mr. schumer has been leader and never pass add budget or appropriation bill.

he simply waits till the end of the year and allows two senators who are no longer here to write a $1.7 trillion omnibus bill. >> you want to work with democrats to come to agreement on budget, is that what you're saying? >> yes, i think our first responsibility, we both should have to pass a budget and both should have to pass the appropriate appropriation bill so the country can see the direction we're going. you cannot continue the spending that brought this inflation and economic problems and we've got to get our spending under control. jot house speaker's take on the upcoming conversation and you commented on it a bit but if you want to respond on anything else he said. >> the speaking make as lot of interest points there, some of them i strongly agree with so for example we should have budget resolutions passed in congress and they're supposed to be doings that every year but far too often they fail in that responsibility and that makes it all too difficult to get from a place where we don't even have an outline of what the budget should look like to an agreement

on fixing the fiscal problems. now what i think is ironic is that those parties said they basically don't want to touch medicare and social security in these conversations about fixing our fiscal problem but those are the two biggest problems in the fiscal budget and they're entirely off limits and becomes extremely difficult to make spending and revenue get in line with one another and ultimately we're going to need conversations about the programs hopefully sooner rather than later. unfortunately the debt limit in the counter form is not an effective point at which to have this conversation. it's the only point at which we have this conversation, which is why we're in the place that we are today. there are no other opportunities whereby democrats and republicans get together even though the process is supposed to be the time where they get together and have serious conversation about our fiscal problems. what i think we need is a change in the paradigm where we set up another type of process that hopefully will work better than the one we have today. that's not going to fix all of the challenges but if we replace

the debt limit where is we have a lot of hand raising over $31 trillion and threats over not paying our country's bills, which we should never have and replace that with an actual serious process whereby there's a debate at least over the spending programs and tax programs, that would be a much more constructive conversation for policymakers to have. >> again, shaia cabus joining us. independents (202)748-8002 or text at (202)748-8003. let's hear from john, john in cleveland, ohio, independent line, you're first up, hello. john in cleveland, ohio. >> money is already appropriated and debt ceiling is an option with the resolution and no tax schedule has been compensated in the history of the country, and the other thing is, [inaudible]

they won't touch it. medicare and federal tax for 40 years why are they limiting for billionaires and emergency and the social security payroll tax. the answer is through the lie detector test. >> okay, that's john there in cleveland, ohio. >> yeah, so the caller makes good points where the solutions have been known for quite some time to especially the social security challenge, which is a bit more about math problems than medicare problems that's the growth and the cost of providing healthcare. social security we know what the options are that are on the table. of course there's opportunities to speak those and develop slightly new ones but republicans and democrats need to come to the table and consider the options. some will be tweaking benefits and some will be adjusting

taxes, and we're probably going to need a healthy dose of both in order to get the system more into balance than it is today. .... >> were going to need the wealthy to contribute more than they are but with the audience there will be changes on the benefit side is into for both sides to put out there talking points with any tax increase will kill

the economy or the other side saying benefits, adjustments willthrow millions of seniors into poverty . that's just not the case and the more that both sides continue to use talking points and use the issue as a cudgel the less likely we are to get any progress on it. in a more optimistic like there are serious conversations going on in the senate right now around social security that are needed because that program may trust fund is projected to be insolvent in roughly a decade so in 10 years if congress doesn't take action there will be an across the board can't about 25 percent in everybody's benefits. that is unfathomable. we cannot let that happen in december congress more they will be able to face those changes so i'm encouraged by the fact that the the there are these conversations going on across party lines there will be some sort of package that comes out of the draft this year to advance those

conversations and hopefully the reforms. >> is there a least painful approach of changing these programs to preservetheir solvency ? >> guest: there are reforms that go into effect many years in the future and gradually and are targeted at the people who can't afford the most . all those are things we should welcome the last time social security was recorded in the 1980s isexactly what they did . they put in place retirement age increases that the next going to so those were 30, 40 years baked in. we have time to make sure people are on the program limited or no impacts of the benefits but people who are early in their careers force will see modest changes to how their benefits are calculated so that's what we need to do on the benefit

side and make sure there are enough revenues coming in in order to fund it and that will leave modest tax increases especially groups of people who can afford the most. >> host: if that's the case, why if solutions are i will call them easy but why can't congress come together and impose or atleast enacted ? >> is politically unpopular. it's much easier or it is very logical that the average person hears about benefit cuts and here's about tax increases and says i don't want any of those to impact me but i'd rather see other changes to the federal budget but in reality where going to need changes to this program that will impact a large group of beneficiaries but not in any way that's draconian, in a way that slows the growth of benefits or increases the tax rate so we see that in the american public and what we see from politicians is talking points that tried to leverage those sentiments and it's unproductive if both sides are trying to get a political

win, we're not going to be able to get progress so we're going to need a change in that dynamic in order to have the possibility of legislation. >> host: hears independent line. >> caller: in 1945 we had record debt and for the next 35 years that debt went down through the vietnam war, great society, etc. and then in 1980 with reagan tax cuts that debt has been increasing ever since. there is a slight change when george bush the first raised taxes. if you remember they were talking about what theworld going to do without american debt . why can't we learn from that experience and let that be the way we get out of this debt problem? we did it once before, how come we can't go back and analyze the mechanics of that

time and reapply it today? >> thank you caller. >> guest: that's a good question and i think we should look to history or lessons to solve our current problem. there is dynamics in this situation different from what we had historically even though we have historically elevated levelsof debt . we drew down our forces are spending our military dramatically as well as other programs that were supporting domestically supporting overseas made for a natural opportunity whereby our debt came down. that wasn't the entirety of the solution but made up a lot of the reason why our debt went from well percent of gdp, 100 percent of the size of our two more sustainable levels. today we have a situation where we don't have to larger conflict, it's not anywhere

near the order of magnitude we had since world war ii. you don't have the easy ability to draw them b& forces . and it is the democrats are very different. we have a situation where our older americans are increasing rapidly, people going of the social security and medicare that is outpacing people paying those programs, but working taxpayers into social security and we expect that trends to go on for several decades as well as longer and longer so spending more years collecting those benefits. to change that we will need reforms fundamentally reform the base system because we can't keep paying out more benefits for more and more years last raising taxes is unsustainable.

we do need more revenue trajectories otherwise sustainable. >> host: you talk about history mister akabas, the lion, as long as basic problems when the budget gets past and how wasit as a solution ? >> guest: we've been working on the debt limit for that long, 12 years because the first time in the modern era cable it will and that it was when his work is on extending get on that summer there was a tracking did a going to get this done. ultimately they did pass debt limit expansion but was close to what we call the point at which would not be able to meet all the obligations in full and on time that led to

a credit rating downgrade s&p which hadramifications in the short-term and longer-term . what that agreement did was to put in place caps on discretionary spending, on the offense and defense of appropriated accounts and put in place a seat west or wish was an across the board will go into effect that a supernatant that legislation set up. that committee was on water solutions for the challenges did ultimately fail that sequence. in that sense that congress has ruled that a lot of those restrictions because they weren't. members on both sides of the aisle felt a with those cuts to spending and ultimately there were sequence increases put into effect so most of those cuts were negated. that's what happens when we negotiate up against the law at the deadline not having awful deliberations about how we tackle our fiscal

challenges so i'm hopeful we can get into a place where we are having these conversations well into that deadline, not necessarily the debt limit is not an effective tool to be having these conversations and change that paradigm where there's a process and agreed upon time we do have these conversations about how to face these challenges. >> host: shai akabas, he's their director of economic policy. joe in colorado, independent line. >> no business could be run the way this country has been run lately and when the budget is due, it should be done. it shouldn't be a 4000 page document and i believe i could be wrong that they're not going to go back and do appropriations for each department separately. thus maybe preventing some of the building time or somebody

and one thing apparently we have too little money for too many people and i'd say why aren't we doing something? the answers are simple but no one wants to go there ." more . i heard monday cuts to social security that very same day are present by and said hey, illegal immigrants free healthcare. there is a little bit of, there's ... i don't know. none of it is making sense and if you're paying attention we all know what needs to be done. some in congress are fearful to make that stand. >> host: thank you. >> guest: the immigration issue is an important one for thischallenge .

it affects things in a couple different directions and one is that immigrants, of course and receive benefits in the country so that has a cost to it but the other side of the equation is they do often is made in the workforce and contribute taxes to the other side of the equation, the revenue and to help grow the economy in that fashion so there's really all balance here onand i'm not immigration policy experts . but it's well worth noting that immigration policy does contribute to our fiscal challenge both through calling the economy by welcoming more people into the picture in terms of the benefits you're a in many cases the illegal immigrants who may be accessing all those benefits although there are restrictions on many of the programs thatwe have . >> this is from james, james california, republican line, you're on when ourguest .

>> how are you guys? i was curious about this narrative i hear when it comes to the national debt but this debt to gdp ratio is 1.2 times what our annual income as a country is and that seems to be national debt to the public which government is expensive, we have a lot of costs and i agree that we should debate what we're spending this money on but this perception that this debt is out of control and the republicans keep saying it's 1.2 times thenational debt is a bad thing but yet when it comes to private interest , it's okay to have $275,000 mortgage and still make the $4000 a year so this is crazy . it's crazy talk to talk about

a debt limit when we really like you said need to talk about specific issues and when you talk about the popularity of programs that could really go far towards saving a lot of money for the taxpayers, we had 50 million votes in the republicans in repeal and replace and yet nobody wants to talk about medicare for all and yet we spend $1.5 trillion on private insurance that could go directly towards medical costs and cutting down medicare and medicaid costs directly. >> host: thank you. >> guest: i totally agree that there are a lot of substantive issues we need to be discussing when it comes to our fiscal challenge and the debt limit is not effective format for those conversations. i do think it is important to recognize that we have a serious physical problem and. our fiscal house is not in order. debt to gdp is present, posted i spent in modern history it is unfortunately

added on a very upward trajectory from their . so we would just put in place reforms that would bend that curve, otherwise things like interest will end up eating a larger portion of the tax revenues we are all paying into the federal government. eventually that becomes unsustainable. i don't think we will have a crisis in the next several years but the longer we let this go on before spending will crowd out the important programs we were just talking about so we need to have those conversations about the spending side and tax and the two parties need to be coming together around that. in any advanced democracy we should have the ability to renegotiate or our differences and find a compromise challenge that we all agree with and unfortunately we haven't seen it from our policymakers over the last decade that speaks to the polarization we have

in this country and we need to change that dynamic otherwise we will be in for a lot oftrouble . >> host: this is mark in fort lauderdale asking you if it's true the debt ceiling has reached that among the post- first thing that doesn't get paid is payment on treasury bills. >> guest: so we reached the debt limit right now and what the treasury department is doing is implementing what are called extraordinary measures. these are legal accounting maneuvers there allowed to undertake to give us to congress to address the debt limit. congress often takes these things up to the last minute as we are seeing on many occasions they very well they do so again this time. once we've reached a the government can no longer meet its obligations on time we don't know what would happen. we've never been there before and the modernera where we are voluntarily unable to pay

all our bills , that we're not meeting all our obligations. the us is considered the foundation of the global economic system and default we're not making good on all our promises that could shake that foundation . what we get paid and what would not get paid what is a really open-ended question. we've never been there and it would be up to the treasury department to chart a path forward any course we take to be in play legal challenges, operational challenges because that's not environments they are used to living in their use paying the bills on time so we're in a situation where they have to choose from along millions of bills coming in and out of each month figure out which of them they are going to pay and not pay. that would be in the and would likely have severe applications for financial markets, for the, household likely around the globe. >> host: a similar question in the sense that just how

much is thegovernment managing to pay off the nations debt ? how many billions worth paying off debt? >> right now not of it because our debt continues to grow . we're spending about $6 trillion a year only in roughly $5 trillion a year so there's more trillion dollars in deficit that added each year. what we are paying is our principal interest payments on the debt that's outstanding as our interest rate decreases and our debt grows, that portion of the federal budget is continuing to increase but we haven't paid down our debt since the late 1990s when president clinton was in office republicans controlled congress and they made a deal ultimately along with growth balanced the budget and create a surplus but basically since the 2000 we've been running deficits in many cases very large deficits expected to grow

into the future so are not expected to pay a debt any kind. >> host: john in wisconsin, independent line, go ahead. >> caller: my question is i like to know what percentage of household income, household debt is there to income in comparison to our federal government and with japan having 2 and a half times their gdp currently with debt, why we are overly alarmed at our 1.2 times gdp and what will happen if republican measures to cut the irs are implemented to the interest portion of our debt, thank you for taking my call . >> guest: some good questions there. i don't off and know the ratio of household debt to income but it's an interesting comparison. i will note governance tend

to have a lot from individuals is not a comparison we should draw strong conclusions from but it would be worth exploring that comparison. in terms of japan they on the vast majority of their debt so it's a bit of a different situation than we have here is a fair point that's consistently what i said earlier, we're not going to get a crisis when we get to a slightly lower higher level of debt but that trajectory continues to be sharply upwards so unless we put in place reforms to address the fiscal problems we have, it's highly unlikely they're going to address themselves and that means the sooner we can tackle that letter because we know we have to do it at some point. the last question you raised was around the irs and the reforms put into place as part of the inflation reduction act last year. they were necessary from two perspectives. one of the irs has had

significant operational challenges with server service processing tax returns. those are things we need to make an investment on on the backend so i'm curious that some of the dollars put in go towards helping us through customer service and the operations they have as a whole. on the other side is closing the tax gap that impacting the federal deficit where we are ultimately if we put in place these dollars more on its as far a modern low in recent years so if we get those up to more reasonable levels we will attach and ultimately collect more revenues and that will more than pay for the investments we are making in the irs so that is generally the details matter but that's a good thing because it will both be sure you are paying the taxes they oh and help us close our deficit money is repealed that will increase our deficit so i don't think that would be a good policy and would be helpful for getting

our fiscal health. >> host: the washington post has a story taking a look at ideas that go on the debt limit may ways of meeting at which would play out in congress. they have suggestions such as minting $1 trillion coin to take care of the issue, another would be to declare the debt ceiling incompatible and another one would be to invoke the 14th amendment, what do you think of the proposals put out there dealing with these issues? >> there's a lot of ideas floating around because of how close the ceiling keeps coming. we could be headed there again this time that's why the conversation is reese resurfacing. the polarization continues to worsen and so these ideas are back on the table. my concern about all the i think they're all in a similar category are that we have never been in a situation where we are

testing out these unprecedented tactics and more so than the substance of whatever the treasury does minting $1 trillion .4 making some kind of bond or declaring the debt limit incompatible, all of these are likely to provoke significant reactions from investors and financial markets and perhaps credit rating agencies and once those reactions occur that could be early, we don't know about the ripple effects of broader ramifications for the domestic and global economy once the toothpaste is out of the two weekends put it back in. we don't know what the consequences would be and it would be difficult for the treasury department and congress to get hold of any of that fallout. concern the. he is the address for all you will have your long-term in

terms of our global place in the all the ideas are of you as those policy is ingrained inflorida . >> morning. i'm not at all in this but it seems if you look at it simply as you have more workers paying taxes, then the social security will continue on as an outcome we bring in more immigrants are paying taxes and we have to worry. is it that similar lot?

>> guest: say it's that simple but i do agree with you that is a portion of the solution, you are paying taxes, that will help the social security system science alone unlikely as all the entirety of the fence such a large mismatch in terms of what is in case you will schedules is in taxes and all the russian solutions so we look at other changes on the side of my successor is even my site in a situation changed dramatically because we haven't made any significant program question of floating

out there will be a little days and this year there are numbers looking at serious. >> host: what the center of hall saying is the same house theater is ? >> a surprise seat of political dynamic half today was a democrat. and the office needs ultimately to be on the whole house and brass in order to find solutions so is the minority is where is she some solutions with their own authority, he is the house of representatives square one. mcconnell doesn't want to have a long hole that

wandered in and he the house we will need repairs or as all parties see one in new jersey, in line, we will hear from pat. >> caller: university the structural changes to social security, raising. was and when more and more people older party displaced, will you like that is, infact the ? >> reaching retirement age, there are two retirement ages terminology use is incorrect and misleading. whereupon these cleaning agents, many people claim, with a claim that should be the one and the same.

that's how they should be over this decision for themselves. but when it comes to social security to waste mall retirement age is to call at the age or me is a help people understand this is and he is at its. that age expects will change in before because many people do need to retire earlier ages perhaps accepted he was in his writing on the population seeing increases in life expectancy all age is the area that will impact people already on the program but it will impact people,

30, 30 years away from retiring and we will need in a longer-term financial plan c1 seed in a, in line. you are on c4 always nice to hear from you. is only seven years oldand i receive benefits through social security and medicare . i would not have any objection that speaking of those programs, however was always loves the long way is the government subsidies to farmers, businesses and whoever else. the free money buying two people that really don't need . the tax consequences where the very wealthy and rich people pay their fair share. that's the problem. nobody wants to give up their share of the pie when other people don't think my only suggestion the problem is there should be treating two programs such as social security and medicare straight on cots whether they

be three percent or four percent across-the-board spending should demand therapy tax increases for the rich which i will back my house on that politicians will never agree to. thank you for listening to me . >> host: steve and ellen i see five we need? do you as i said discretionary spending. i'm not sure we need to realize programson much more now that others . but i wholeheartedly agree that there's chat and programs that we can look to reducing an easy targetand resources people need animals . the two on action where it was forgiving that for all student borrowers or is now tied up in the courts. is not of a wholehearted policy.

graduate degrees or higher earnings in the coming years and later in their careers and later in their careers federal government ioto read hazel yet because a large dead.

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the ayes are 84, the nays are 10. the nomination is confirmed. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the appointments at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate it completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m.

tuesday. the journal of proceedings approved to date, time for the two leaders reserved for their use later in the day and the senate be in a period of morning business, with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. further that is correct the -- the senate recess to allow for the republican caucus meeting. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: for the information of the senate, no roll call votes are expected during tuesday's session. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of senator scott of south carolina. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. scott: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, mr. president. yesterday on abc's "this week" senator durbin asked senator booker and i to come back to the table and start talking about policing in america. i never left the table, mr. president, but it was

senator durbin who filibustered my justice act. it was senator durbin who called the effort to make de-escalation training more available a token piece of legislation. it was indeed the senator from illinois who said as aspects of my justice act talked about the importance of the duty to intervene a token piece of legislation. in that legislation, mr. president, we had more resources for more training because we want only the best wearing the badge in every location, in every municipality, in every county, in every state in this great nation. but politics too often gets in the way of doing what every american knows is common sense. here we find ourselves again, mr. president, having the same

conversation with no action having happened so far. mr. president, i don't speak on this floor very often, but this is my tenth speech on policing in america in eight years. the tenth time i've asked for something that will make our officers better and safer and make our communities better and safer. another time i have asked for more resources for recruitment so that we can have only the best wearing the badge. but this legislative body, the greatest deliberate -- deliberative body in the world, didn't act. it was in 2015, shortly after the shooting of walter scott, who was shot in the back in my hometown, charleston, south carolina, that i came to this

floor to ask for more resources for body-worn cameras so that we capture what happens during those vital times. not a single democrat cosponsored that legislation. i came back a year later in 2016 and gave three speeches on the importance of policing in america. 2020, june 17, as i introduced the justice act with more requests for what i believe is common sense. it was 70% of what the house democrats were asking for. we on our side of the aisle said this makes sense. why don't we find common ground in that 70%, make it into a piece of legislation and show the american people that, yes,

their elected officials can at times act with common sense, because my assumption was that common ground leads to common sense. imagine my disappointment, mr. president, when the duty to intervene de-escalation training, more resources, more reporting so that we all have eyes around the country was filibustered in this chamber. not enough votes to even extend the conversation on the important issue of policing in america. and i came back just a week later, on june 24, standing on this floor asking our body to

take seriously our responsibility on the important topic of policing in america. and when i said, mr. president, that day, june 24 of 2020, that is trouble coming, i referred to the good book, the bible, and reflected on ezekiel 33:6, that says that when you see trouble coming and you say nothing, you do nothing, the blood that comes is on your hands. but if you shout from the mountain tops, if you warn the people that trouble is coming, it's not on your hands.

mr. president, our nation is reeling. people, republicans, democrats, independents, nonaffiliates, black folks, white folks, rich folks, poor folks, southerners, northerners, the west coast, and the east coast are sick and tired of politics as usual. we as a nation deserve better. we should be able to build a coalition around the common ground of, yes, we need more training on de-escalation, yes, we need more training and resources on the duty to intervene. yes, we need more grants. and, yes, we need the best wearing the badge. we should have simple

legislation that we can agree upon that has been agreed upon in the past. but too often too many are too concerned with who gets the credit. i know that when a conservative republican starts talking about policing in america, some people seem to just turn the channel. that's wrong. when i came to the floor and talked about my many unnecessary incidents with the police, i came to the floor and talked about the man, walter scott, shot in my city, when i came to this floor on june 17 and talked

about the massacre of mother emanuel church in my hometown, i take the issue of policing in america seriously. i want our body to see it not as an issue of republicans versus democrats, but as good people standing in the gap elected to do a job that we all ran to do. let's do our jobs. we can make a difference in this nation, have the duty to intervene been law of the land on the federal land, it could have made a difference in memphis, tennessee, in wisconsin. more de-escalation training could make a difference.

i hope that when the dust settles and the issue is no longer on the front pages of our newspapers, no longer streaming across our tvs and our ipads and our computers, that we do something that says to the american people, we see your pain. we are willing to put our partisan labels and shirts and uniforms on the side so that we can do what needs to be done. it's what the people deserve, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until

10:00 a.m. tomorrow. today the senate confirmed roger to be a member of the u.s. institute of peace and board of governors. for a four-year term. lawmaker spent most of the giving senate floor speeches including on the death of tyre nichols. off the floor senate leaders are working on setting committee assignments for the 118th congress with a floor vote needed to prove that. that vote is now expected by the end of the week. watch live coverage of the senate here on cspan2. >> and preorder your copy of the congressional directive for the 118th congress. it is your access to federal government with the bio and contact information for every house and senate member. important information congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. scan the code at the right to preoouropy today for early spring del

is $29.95 plus shipping and handling every purchase help support the nonprofit operations at cspanshop.org. text james a comber is a new chair of the house oversight and accountability committee. he spoke recently about government fraud, waste and abuse. he marches, some national press club in washington d.c. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on cspan2. >> the state of the union is strong because you the american people are strong. >> president biden delivers annual state of the union address at letting his priorities to congress on tuesday, february 7. his first state of the union speech since republicans won back control of the house for doing that the republican response and check your phone calls, text, and tweets. watch live coverage of the state of the union beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now free mobile video app or online c-span.org.

♪ see spent in your unfiltered view of government. funded by these television companies and more including cox. >> homework can be hard. but squatting in a diner for internetwork is even harder. that is why we are providing lower income students access to affordable internet so homework can just be homework. cox, connect to compete. >> cox see spent as a public service on these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. majority leader chuck schumer spoke on the senate floor about the death of tyre nichols on friday in memphis. the near democratic senators said he was quote heartbroken, horrified, appalled by this heinous murder. senate judiciary committee dick durbin and republican member john cornyn also spoke on the senate floor about nichols death and policing reform efforts