it's not only reporters that are asking for those files, but it's actually the senate judiciary committee itself now has -- tends to insist on having a fairly detailed record of those people's prior activities. >> adam. >> i was going to give you a little taste of some foia madness 50 years later. and this was from the nsa and this is dated january 21st, 2021, dear adam goldman, this response to your freedom of information act request of february 22, 2016, which was-- and it's even older than this. which was received by this office, blah, blah, blah on february, quote, all serialized intelligence reports, that's nsa speak for intercepted communications, from june 1st, 1972 to october 1st, 1972, referencing the 1972 munich

olympics in munich, germany. your request has been and fine have been found, and they're classified-- >> we'll leave this here to keep our over 40-year commitment for live gavel to gavel coverage of congress. the u.s. senate is coming in now to debate joseph faulk. confirmation vote for 1:45 eastern. lawmakers are expected to vote on an organizational resolution setting committee assignments for the 118th congress. live coverage of the 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. o god, the center of our joy, we find our delight in you. thank you for the gift of prayer, for the opportunity to come confidently and repeatedly to your throne of grace. we praise you for your promise to provide us with grace and mercy to help us in our times of need. lord, bless our lawmakers. give them confidence in you that will free them from fear

of an uncertain future. may they live lives that boldly proclaim that you are at work in our world. we pray in your mighty 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.

mr. warnock: madam president. i suggest the absence of a

quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

thankful for the bipartisan spirit in which the prayer hopefully as we move forward in his 118th congress we can continue to adopt that spirit of collegiality and cooperation, try to find common ground whenever and wherever possible. house democrats remain committed to that very thing. but we of course will also consistently pushed back against the extreme maga republican agenda. whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head. as it is doing once again today on the floor of the house of representatives. extreme maga republicans in the

house have no real agenda when it comes to making life better for everyday americans. their agenda is to cut social security, cut medicare, hold the united states economy hostage, and try and impose a 30% national sales tax on everyday americans, which will dramatically increase costs on 90% of the american people. that is the extreme maga republican agenda here they have no plan. they have no vision. they have no ideas when it comes to making life better for everyday americans. and that is what today's circus on the floor of the house of representatives will once again reveal. we are still waiting for them to put forward a spending plan so we can debate it. show us your plan.

instead, they bring to the floor of the house of representatives today a resolution on socialism. to condemn some dictators that we all condemn. but understand, the goal of this phony, fake, and fraudulent resolution is just to somehow provide cover for extreme maga republicans to try to undermine an agenda that is designed to lift up the health, safety, and well-being of the american people. why do we know this? because going all the way back to the days of fdr, through harry truman, into president kennedy, through president johnson, all the way up until president clinton and president obama and president biden, they have called things like social

security socialism, medicare socialism. extreme maga republicans have called public education socialism. medicaid, socialism. the affordable care act, socialism. the american rescue plan, socialism. the american people should not be fooled by anything that takes place on the floor today with respect to the so-called resolution on socialism. now, the other thing is going to occur today relates to this effort to remove in a partisan fashion representatives ilhan omar from the foreign affairs committee. after house democrats unanimously voted for her to

continue her service on the foreign affairs committee. a refugee elected to the united states congress, duly sent back to the house by our constituents in minnesota. now, representative omar certainly has made mistakes. she has used anti-semitic tropes that were clearly and unequivocally condemned by house democrats. when it took place four years ago. so i just want to briefly explore that timeline. on february ten, 2019, representative omar tweeted, it's all about the benjamins,

maybe. of reference apparently to aipac or pro-israel lobbying group that i and many others have worked closely with and will continue to do so in support of the special relationship between the united states and israel, a relationship that i strongly support. i will support that special relationship today, support the special relationship tomorrow, support that special relationship next week, next month, next year, and into the future because the special relationship between the united states and israel is rooted in shared values, shared strategic interests, and my heartfelt belief that israel has a right to exist as a jewish and democratic state. a homeland for the jewish people who have suffered 2000 plus years of pain, persecution.

but was goingóo to take place on the floor today is not a public policy debate. it's not about accountability. it's about political revenge. that is what it's about. ilhan omar on february 10 put out a statement that was immediately on february 11 condemned unequivocally by the entire house democratic leadership, the speaker, the majority leader, the majority whip, the house democratic caucus chair, , the vice chair d the assistant speaker. and i'm not going to read the entire statement, but i will just read the end of it. congresswoman omar said use of anti-semitic tropes and prejudicial accusations about israel's support is deeply offensive. we condemn these remarks and we

call upon congresswoman omar to merely apologize for these hurtful comments. as democrats and americans the entire congress must be fully engaged in denouncing and rejecting all forms of hatred, racism, prejudice and discrimination whenever they are encountered. that's exactly what we did. and a few days later the entire house unanimously put representative elmar omar that representative elmar omar -- there has been accountability. ilhan omar has apologized. she has indicated that she will learn from her mistakes. it's working to build bridges because we believe in building bridges, not walls. building bridges with the jewish community including the leaders right here in the united states congress. is it a long omar purpa? no, none of us are. we have all fallen short -- perfect.

in the eyes of the lord right here in this capital. the pastor from brooklyn tabernacle said we all need grace and mercy. ilhan omar has been held accountable. this is not about accountability. it's about political revenge. questions? >> thank you mr. peters. i you about police reform. wendy democrats intend to put forth a bill on police reform? such imagery how confident are you it will actually get past in this chamber? >> had the opportunity to sit down and talk with leaders within the congressional caucus, black caucus last evening including chairman stephen moore sword, members of the united states senate, some of the leadership within the cbc here in the house in preparation for the white house meeting will take place today. i'm not going to get out ahead of that meeting but i think as

congressman horse for it has indicated we do need to have a real genuine authentic and bipartisan conversation about dealing with police reform in america and figure out how to strengthen the relationship between the police and the community? i believe it's going to be a productive meeting with president biden. i won't be part of that meeting. it would be led by the congressional black caucus but i will fully support their efforts. >> you talk about some of -- [inaudible] [inaudible question] >> said what had to say about representative omar but what's interesting is why am i not been asked the question, why haven't house republican leaders

denounced any of the things that have been said by their members? in fact, in their members have been rewarded with committee assignments. the same house republican leaders who are bringing a resolution to the floor today to throw ilhan omar off the foreign affairs, when there's been no accountability for their members. and by the way, these are just the highlights. i didn't have enough time to come here and display for the american people every single thing that has been said by the extreme maga republicans that is objectionable, because i would be here to the entire 118th congress. it would be a marathon. but let me just highlight one at this moment. thomas massey tweets out in

september of 2021 directly referencing aipac, which is the organization that was the genesis of the reason why ilhan omar is purportedly being thrown off the committee today, if they can muster the votes. and what does he say in response to criticism of the gentleman from kentucky? this is thomas massey saying this. how is this not for interference in our elections? that's not an anti-semitic trope? that's not playing into dangerous stereotypes about the jewish community here in america, suggesting they have dual loyalty?

aipac is engaging in foreign interference? aipac is an american base organization. to this day not a single house republican leader has said a word, a word about thomas massey. not a word. but he's been rewarded with a seat on the powerful house judiciary committee, and the powerful transportation and infrastructure committee. >> -- in relation to congresswoman omar, cycling a follow-up on police reform,, deeply the president can take more executive action? he doesn't appear there are enough votes in the senate to get the george floyd justice police act passed? >> with respect to speaker mccarthy, our conversations have been generally productive. we agreed to disagree at times without being disagreeable. we strongly disagree with each other on the approach that has

been taken by house republicans with respect to adam schiff, eric swalwell, and ilhan omar. it's a double, triple, quadruple, and beyond, standard when you think about all with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: thank you, mr. president. first a little housekeeping, then we'll get to my remarks. mr. president, i understand that there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the titles of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 214, a bill to allow reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms. s. 219, a bill to provide the members of congress may not receive pay after october 1 of any fiscal year in which congress has not approved a con

curpts resolution on the budget and passed the regular appropriations bills. mr. schumer: mr. president, in order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding en bloc. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the bills will be placed on the calendar. mr. schumer: now, mr. president, in america when it's time to pay the bills, we do so without fail and without delay. that's what families must do. that's what our government must do. it is one of the bedrock principles of this country, one that holds true no matter who is in the white house and which party holds majorities in congress. not even during the trump administration was this solemn duty neglected. even if many maga republicans may feel differently today. when i was minority leader here in the senate, i sat down with president trump to find a path to raise the debt ceiling multiple times. we didn't engage in hostage-taking. we didn't resort to blackmail or brinksmanship.

by no means was it easy, and many on the other side didn't want to go along, but democrats worked constructively with the trump administration to get it done, and it happened three times. the same thing must happen again this year. no brimpingsmanship, no -- brinksmanship, no hostage-taking, no default on the national debt. congress must raise the debt ceiling on a bipartisan basis, without the hostage-taking and brinksmanship. i was very glad to hear president biden reaffirm this truth after his meeting with speaker mccarthy. he reiterated we ought to pass a clean debt ceiling extension. president biden is correct -- the american people expect us to do the right thing in the coming months, because if we default on the debt every american is going to pay the price. now, later this morning, i will join with some of my democratic colleagues to put a spotlight on the consequences of default, because they are not remotely theoretical or abstract.

debt ceiling is not just an abstract exercise somewhere up there in the clouds. if we fail to renew it, it's going to affect every american family's pocketbooks, poy dollars taken away. a default on debt would create a crisis unlike any we've seen in our country. mortgages, car loans, credit card rates, all will go shooting up. american families withed a justable rate mortgages or seeking to buy a house will pay thousands of dollars more each year. what a terrible nightmare when costs are too high in housing and everywhere else. just as terrible as that sounds, this is only the tip of the iceberg. if the u.s. defaults, retirement savings, the money that people have scrapped away, put away so they might live in dignity towards the end of their lives, will be utterly devastated. by one measure, the typical

retirement account could lose $20,000 in value. $20,000. we're talking about people's livelihood, money that people set aside, little by little every month so they could reach a retirement with some degree of dignity. to default would rob americans of that. and the devastation would go on and on and on. social security would suffer. medicare would suffer. over 18 million veterans could lose their hard-earned benefits like disability compensation. america's reputation on the world stage would be permanently stained, and few things would hand the world over to the chinese communist party more than a first-ever default by the united states of america. the bottom line is simple, playing games with the debt ceiling is dangerous, destabilizing, and would spell disaster for every single american.

dangerous, destabilizing, disaster. the last thing we should be doing in congress is using the debt ceiling as a political bargaining chip. instead, we need to come together and make sure the u.s. is able to pay its debts on time, without brinksmanship, without hostage-taking, just as we've done throughout our history. now, on big oil profits, last year, while soaring gas prices stretched the budgets of american families, big oil enjoyed a record, a record year of profits. huge amounts of money made by these companies. earlier this week, exxon reported a $56 billion, billion, dollar net profit in 2022. setting a record high, not just for exxon, but for big oil as an industry. exxon wasn't alone. chevron reported $35. while americans were -- reported $35 billion. while americans were feeling the pain, driving up to the gas station, wondering how high it was going to be, the five top

big oil companies brought in a record nearly $200 billion in total profits in 2022. taking advantage of what they called favorable market conditions. it's nothing short of repugnant for the biggest oil companies in america to celebrate dizzying profit margins that they earned jacking up gas prices on hard-working americans. what did the oil companies do with this tsunami of cash? they could have prioritized it by paying their workers better. they did not. they could have made transformation investments in new clean tech and helped push the frontier in clean energy, which we all know is coming, but they did not. or maybe, best of all, they could have lowered gas prices, but they did not. you know what the oil companies did? this is just as galling, galling, they rewarded shareholders by implementing

stock buybacks at near record levels. buybacks do no good for the economy. they don't help the worker. they don't help the consumer. they don't move us along to green energy. they don't even produce more oil. all they do is line the pockets of the already uber wealthy executives and shareholders. here's one example, exxon plans to spent $35 billion, $35 billion on stock buybacks in the next two years. more than double their plans to invest in clean energy over the next five years. i want to say that again. for anyone who doesn't think corporate america is out of control and does whatever it wants and thumbs its nose at the needs of the workers or the citizens -- exxon announced they plan to spend $35 billion on stock buybacks in the next two years, more than double their plans to invest in clean energy over the next five years.

that's where exxon's priorities are r so big oil executives may claim they are good stewards or that they understand the climate crisis, but when it comes time to put their money where their mouth is, their actions tell a different story. we must continue to take on entrenched oil trump administration, just as we did last year when we passed the inflation reduction act. doing so will have a tremendous benefit for our economy, fora environment is and for american families everywhere. we democrats will continue to make one thing clear -- if oil companies are going to make record profits, they must do it not by manipulating prices to take advantage of hardworking americans. now on chile and the treaty, for more than a decade, congress has been working on an important tax treaty with chile that holds important and long-term consequences for american businesses and american competitiveness on the world stage. right now nations around the

world are racing to source important materials like lithium. lithium is a key ingredient in everything, from iphones to e.v. batteries. chile is one of the most important sources is of these kinds of raw materials, including lithium, and many u.s. companies have spent years building business partnerships with chile. and they have grown their presence in that nation. but these companies face a terrible policy problem -- terrible problem because of current policy. american companies face double taxation due in chile and are at a huge disadvantage compared to other nations like china. we don't want china to get this lithium. we need it. so we have a taxation treaty at the ready that would remove this obstacle. it's very similar to the more than 60 other treaties we already have with nations around the world. this is nothing new. it's widely supported by voices across the political spectrum -- the biden administration on one

hand but the pro-business chamber of commerce on on the other. and here's the amazing thing, mr. president. the u.s.-chile treaty was already reported out of committee last year. it had, i believe -- i'm not certain of this, but i think it was passed a about a voice vote, mean unanimous support. it had overwhelming support. unfortunately, it has to go through committee again because of the new congress. but democrats are 100% ready and eager to get this important treaty moving. republicans in in the past always have long supported moving forward, too. and i imagine most do. but right now this treaty has been delayed yet again because some want to add last-minute changes to the text that risks undermining it altogether. again, there are some who want to introduce last-minute changes to the treaty, even though this was reported by voice vote out of committee last year, was nearly added to the omnibus, and

has been around close to ten years. let me be clear -- these last-minute changes could delay or even end any chance to getting this treaty done. it at least could force us to renegotiate with other governments, and you know what a long, time-consuming, difficult, fraught-with-peril process that is. we should move forward and ratify this treaty with the agreed-upon text without any last-minute changes. the effort has been more than a decade in the works. it's time to finish the job. again, if we want to give china advantage to get our lithium, to get chilean lithium instead of giving it to the united states, at that would be a disgrace and a shame. moving this treaty quickly without any last-minute changes is the way to solve that problem. so, please, let's move forward. both sides should come together to move forward quickly and without any more delay.

it's long enough. and, finally, mr. president, quickly on the strategic petroleum reserve. last month the house passed a bill to prohibit the sale of oil from the nation's strategic petroleum reserve to china. i've seen the proposal, but here's my question -- why stop at china? what about russia? north korea? iran? if we're going to do this, why not do it right and see if we can add a few more countries to the list. it's certainly worth taking a look at. so that's what we're doing. we're going to take a look at this proposal appeared hopefully find ways to -- and hopefully find ways to make it stronger. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. mcconnell: at this time one year ago, the democratic party was in the middle of an hysterical meltdown over a new voting law in the state of georgia. the president of the united states declared the state's modest changes to election procedures were, quote, jim crow 2.0. he said the law was about voter suppression and election subversion. he said citizens should doubt, quote, whether your vote counts at all. the sitting president of the united states said lawmakers' positions on this bill would define -- listen to this -- whether we were on the side of dr. king or george wallace. john lewis or bull connor. abraham lincoln or jefferson davis.

the senate democratic leader said that his fellow united states senators who are republicans were, and i quote, supporting the reenactment of those jim crow laws. my colleague from new york, as the senate majority leader, is supposed to safeguard and steward this institution. instead, he tried to destroy the senate and nuke the 60-vote threshold so that democrats could take over all 50 states' election laws on a partisan basis and, believe it or not, 47 of the other 49 democrats went right along with him. the liberal hysteria spread to the press and the private sector. woke activists started talking about boycotting companies like coca-cola and delta airlines. major league baseball caved and moved the all-star game out of

atlanta, directly harming the local economy all for the sake of symbolism. now, republicans said this was unhinged, phony outrage over a commonsense law that would make it both easy to vote and, of course, hard to cheat. democrats said the new voting rules were evil and racist and that literal death -- and the literal death of democracy. well, mr. president, the facts are now in. we have hard evidence. after the new bill took effect in early 2022, the state of georgia held a primary election. you know what happened? record turnout for a primary. then last november georgia had a general election. what happened? a new record for ballots cast in a midterm. oh, some might say is but that

doesn't tell us anything about the voting conditions. maybe there were terribly long lines. maybe there were sinister roadblocks and voters persevered in spite of them. ah, but alas, except an academic research center at the university of georgia spent weeks -- weeks -- conducting a major survey of georgia voters after the election. so let's take a look at what they found. 72% of all georgia voters and 73% of black voters specifically said their voting experience was, quote, excellent, end quote. 92% of all voters and 92% of black voters specifically said that either voting had gotten easier since the prior election or that there was no difference.

92% of all voters in georgia said voting had either gotten easier or there was no difference between that election and prior elections. more than 60 -- more than 70% of black voters said they waited less than it -- less than ten minutes to cast their ballot. this is all the supposed jim crow in action? voters rating their experience as excellent? here's the icing on the cake. the same democratic party that cheered major league baseball from moving the all-star game out of atlanta -- listen to this -- now has atlanta as -- on the short list for the next democratic national convention.

well, here's what happened. we were right and they were wrong, but it goes beyond that. these people actually lied. they invoked our darkest history and slandered half the country because they wanted more power for themselves. some of the most powerful people in our entire country, including the president of the united states, staked their personal credibility to these claims. president biden screamed from a podium that the bad ol' days of jim crow were back. over this? the majority leader from new york tried to destroy the senate over this? the american people were subjected to months of baseless media haranguing.

over this? and the country is supposed to go on pretending like nothing happened? we're all supposed to take the president and the vice president and the senate democrats seriously the next time they start shouting and waving their arms about the next supposed crisis? i don't think so. i don't think the american people will forget who kept their credibility and who lit theirs on fire. now, on an entirely different matter, today ranking member capito of the environment and public works committee will introduce an important public release on behalf of -- two years an obama era crew crusade to micromanage those who feed, clothe, and power america. literally on president biden's

first day in office, he signed an order that began to tear down the regulatory certainty that americans worked hard to restore for american workers and entrepreneurs. and in december this crusade yielded a new rule from epa that enacted a dizzying new definition of which temporary, tributary, and upland waterways fall under the federal government's authority. mr. president, there's a case before the supreme court on this very subject right now. the court's ruling in saci kv. epa will show how much federal bureaucrats are stretch their powers to meddle in americans' business under the clean water act. but instead of waiting to see whether an expanding of the regulatory state would be legal,

the biden epa went ahead with their new rule. can you imagine, while washington democrats would be in such a rush to get ahead of the law? so what does this latest power grap by washington democrats -- grab mean for people? it means that cattlemen and contractors have now had to put up with three, three major changes with federal regulations on their lands where they do business in just the past eight years. democrats' relentless attempts to is step on state and local authorities has left them chasing moving goalposts. it will be harder for farmers in kentucky to figure out which ditches on their property are subject to the whims of washington bureaucrats.

it will create new headaches for builders in west virginia to ensure they dot every i and cross every t on much-needed development projects. it will mean ranchers out west will discover that every ditch and low-lying puddle that they own is now the business of epa. and as every american who has tried to create jobs or building is knows, red tape doesn't just cost valuable time. legal experts project the biden administration's latest overreach would raise the cost of development and infrastructure projects near waterways by, listen to this, a million dollars an acre. so while president biden takes a victory lap on infrastructure projects made possible by bipartisan work, this latest salvo in washington the war on working americans would devastate the sort of businesses that build those infrastructure

projects. but it isn't going unanswered. 25 governors representing fully half the states in our country have condemned the epa's water of the united states rule. here in the senate, west virginia's own senator capito has led our efforts to cut the overreaching regulatory state back down to size. she sponsored the legislation that would have codified the last administration's commonsense fixes, she spearheaded congress to the supreme court as it considers this issue and today she will introduce other congressional review act resolution to give every one of our colleagues the opportunity to protect the future of transformative infrastructure, energy and agriculture projects in their states. west virginia should be proud that one of their two senators is committed to reforms that get more washington messes out of

their way. i'm proud to support senator koot's -- senator capito's resolution and would urge each of my colleagues to do the same. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, united states institute of peace, joseph lee falk, of maryland, to be a member of the board of directors.

a member of the gg committee, thanks for joining us. >> guest: thanks ravi. >> host: what did you think about this being the very first hearing out of the box with the judiciary committee? >> guest: first of all i i wat to say these are very important issues, or the policy. the problem was we are here in washington to fix problems, and yesterday in a very few short hours we tried to talk about border policy, we tried to talk about drug policy, drug overdose policy, immigration policy, refugee policy. issues that we've had to deal

with for 60, 70 years. and so to do it in one quick shot we've got to take the whole year, maybe two years to address these issues. >> host: among those issues when he comes to your own personal take on border policy how would you rate the biden administration management of that? >> guest: is not the biden administration. it's the last few administrations. border policy. we've invested record numbers of dollars on the border. we have probably one of the mos most, most secure borders in the world in terms of technology, in terms of border walls. in terms of border patrol officers. the challenges we have is a country that has mental health issues. for the last 60 years, heroin, cocaine, crack cocaine, now that know. we have mental health issue in this country. additionally, what we have is a refugee challenge right now at

the southern border. this is not all the americas but it's a worldwide issue. we have lost to address refugees. the challenge we have, pedro, is we're not enforcing them, we are not funding them correctly. yesterday i spent my five minutes talking about ukrainian refugees. they came to the border at tijuana. they were given what is called essentially parole. they were processed, let into the usa. guess what, pedro? today, there are no refugees in the tijuana mexico border. why? because now they can apply for refugee status directly from europe to america. see, that's an example of handling the refugee process correctly, under existing law. what you see right now on the border is a broken come ineffective refugee execution of

the laws. so what we've got to do is come back and remember the laws are there. we just have to effectively enforce them. >> host: you probably see the numbers yourself from border patrol and other sources of the apprehensions that take place at the border. if you see the numbers, three have 1000 was only in december. does that suggest to you if the border is not open its poorest at least as far as those who we had an open border unit having apprehensions. the fact is people being turned back again and again and again tells me they can't get in. the problem isn't just the apprehensions. the problem is we have a challenge in the western hemisphere. not only is a south america, mexicans coming to the united states, now we have russians, ukrainians, haitians, africans. it tells you that there's some serious challenges around the world. and for us to think that we can build a wall across the southern border and fix everything is not

correct here we have got to go in and and vast come work with the south american economies, other economies around the world and say you guys got to get your act together, create jobs and make sure that people can live in their homes without fearing violence, in being able to make a a living, and provide the future for the family. >> host: these go to larger issues to some republicans want to make concluding the possible impeachment of homeless a goodie secretary alejandro mayorkas. what do you think about that effort? you sit on homeland security committee. what you think about his management of border policy? >> guest: bingo, pedro. that's will restart his argument, which is use throughout the next year or two a series of hearings designed essentially to go after an impeachment of a president, going through secretary mayorkas. mayor aukus has done a very good job, given the challenges, it's

very hard to come up with a zero crossing of the border situation. it's very hard to say there is no more fentanyl come into the country. over the last few president we have had, every president has had the same challenge. how do you stop drug overdoses? how to stop drug abuse in the united states? and is the issue at the border. it's an issue of mental health and the united states. mayor cruz, my prediction is, he will be impeached. charges would be brought against him. he will probably not be dismissed from his job because the senate will probably not vote to convict him so to speak but the bottom right is we have to solve problems for the american public. let's focus on the problems. mental health, drugs in our streets, and immigration policy that is good. we have 11 million immigrants in this country. we keep hearing that we won't pass immigration reform until we

continue to enforce the border. we have been enforcing the border for decades. not the money invested in the border is off the charts but there hasn't been any immigration policy for 35 years. bottom line, pedro, let's do it's best for america. let's fix problems for america but let's do it without the rhetoric and that the facts drive the solution. >> host: before let you go a couple of the questions on other issues. today, the perspective vote on removing the minnesota democrat ilhan omar from the foreign affairs committee, for some of what you think of the effort and what you think if she should be on that committee? >> guest: let me say first of all i don't agree on her perspective. i don't agree with what she has said. yet at the same time this is essentially democracy. she's paid, she elected by our constituents to come to washington to represent them.

she doesn't represent my constituents. i represent my constituent. we have the business removing her from these committees, if there's an issue to talk to our constituents. let them decide whether she should be the congresswoman or not. >> host: finally on the debt limit, the president and speaker meeting yesterday to talk with issues that not only raising the debt limit but this idea of talking about ways to tackle spending. what do you think about using the debt limit as a means for a conversation on spending? >> guest: the debt limit is the start of the conversation but it is not the end. we cannot default on social security, on medicare checks, social security checks. we can't put the full faith and credit of the united states in jeopardy. if we want to talk about the debt, about how much money we are as as a country, let's tk about the taxation aspect and the spending side at the same

time. we've got to do both, not just one. and i hope that we as legislators focus on fixing problems for the american public. let's do our job based on the facts. >> host: this is representative lou correa, with the judiciary committee, democrat from california to talk to us this morning. representative, thanks for your type or i hope you'll come back and have a longer conversation with us tricky thank you. i will wait for your phone call.

mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: mr. president, is the senate in a quorum call?

the presiding officer: we're not. mr. thune: oh, okay. mr. president, yesterday, the senate unanimously approved my resolution with senator rounds formally congratulating the south dakota state university football team on their championship season. and what a great season it was for the jackrabbits. they ended the season 14-1 and never lost a game in their conference. they earned the number one seed in the football championship subdivision playoffs, and they brought home the fcs national championship for the first time in program history with a 45-21 win against the north dakota state bison last month in frisco, texas. mr. president, i happened to be on hand for that game. it was an extraordinary game and capped off an extraordinary season. i happened to be there for the semifinal game against montana state, which the jackrabbits won decisively, and in each of those games and the games throughout

the season they demonstrated on the field, not only great skill but just an incredible determination, resilience, and a willingness to play together as a team, which really i think is what distinguished and differentiated their team from many others around the country this year. it was -- it really was an extraordinary team to watch on both sides of the ball, and as someone who has been a fan of sports for a long time, really exciting to see the success they had, not only throughout the course of the season but ultimately capping it off with the national championship. mr. president, that championship win was a fitting capstone to coach john steegle mire's 26-season career leading the jacks. coach stig, as he's affectionately known, is the heart and soul of jackrabbit football. lining many south dakotans he learned his values from his dad. he worked on a family farm in

selby, south dakota. his dad told him if you work hard, be a good person, will you have success. work hard, be a good person, and you will have success. i'd say coach stig has done all three. his determination transformed sdsu's football team into what it is today. sdsu became a division i program under his leadership, and former jacks players have gone on to the nfl. his calm, patience, and caring set the standard for the players and made the team a family. he leaves as the winningest coach in sdsu history, the 2022 fcs coach of the year, and of course with a national title for the team that he's dedicated his career to making great. huge congratulations to the jackrabbits on their phone and to coach stig and we wish you all the best in your retirement.

you've earned it. mr. president, yesterday republicans confirmed their committee assignments for the new congress, and for the 118th congress i'm excited to once again serve south dakotans on the senate agriculture, finance, and commerce committees. if any committee is a good get for a south dakota senator, it's the senate dwrur committee. agriculture is the lifeblood of south dakota, and day in and day out one of my top priorities is addressing the needs of farmers and ranchers. my seat on the senate grand agriculture committee gives knee a particularly valuable platform from which to advocate for south dakota producers. over the years, thanks in part to my position on the committee i've been able to help secure resources for farmers and ranchers whose herds and craps were hit hard by adverse weather. i've been able to strengthen the farm safety net through the agriculture risk coverage program, and establish a, safety net for livestock producers

through the livestock indemnity program and the livestock forage program. i've been able to make the conservation reserve program more effective for producers. and more. and 2023 is a particularly exciting time to be on the ag committee, because it's a farm bill year. during my time in congress i've drafted four farm bills and i'm eager to get to work on my gift. i've been gearing up for the farm bill since last year when i began convening roundtables with farmer and ranchers and ag stakeholders to hear about their top priorities for this year's bill. i've also introduced several pieces of legislation that i will work to get included in this farm bill, including legislation to strengthen and improve the conservation reserve program, increase the information available on the impacts of conservation practices, and address the needs of south dakota livestock producers. in addition to focusing on the farm bill, i'll be monitoring the evolving situation on the

obama-ear oi waters of the united states rule that president biden's environmental protection agency just resurrected, which would give the federal government sweeping jurisdiction over most water features in our state, from ephemeral streams to prairie potholes. this would be a nightmare for south dakota landowners, and particularly farmers and ranchers, and i will do everything i can to keep the heavy hand of the federal government out of the business of regulating landowners' puddles. i'm also proud to continue serving on the commerce economy committee -- commerce committee of which i'm a long-term member. the jurisdiction is broad. it's the senator's plains, trains, and automobiles committee, and its oceans and space. it's the technology committee. our work is inherently forward-looking and is often some of the most interesting and relevant work in the congress.

no surprise the committee offers plenty of opportunity to deliver for south dakotans. with a reliable internet connection being increasingly essential for everyday life, closing the digital divide is more important than ever. as a member of the commerce committee, expanding broadband access has long been a priority. i worked to support broadband expansion, reduce unnecessary obstacles to build be reliable networks and to hold federal agencies accountable to ensure federal funding for rural broadband goes to its intended purpose, which is expanding broadband access to areas that currently lack it. i also believe we need to hold big tech platforms accountable. south dakota yaibs and many americans are -- south dakotans and many americans are frustrated by the lack of transparency. in this congress, i will work to advance my bipartisan legislation to increase transparency and due process for users on internet plarms. platforms.

i'll continue to make sure rural states have a seat at the table when it comes to infrastructure very much. i spent my time on the commerce committee working to increase rural states' transportation needs, especially reliable transportation for livestock and agriculture products. last year, i worked on a bipartisan fix to shipping bottlenecks interrupting exports of south dakota agricultural products and other goods. this years, we will need to reauthorize the federal aviation administration and improvements to south dakota's airport infrastructure and rural air service will be among my priorities. mr. president, my third committee assignment is on the senate finance committee. over at finance, we focus on tax, trade, and health issues. making sure that our tax system is serving our economy and american workers is something i take very seriously. i am deeply committed to making sure that we keep a lid on the amount of money the federal government isic at thatting out of americans -- is taking out of americans' paychecks.

i was proud to be involved in the republican-led tas reform legislation that passed in 2017, allowing americans to keep more of their hard-earned money and helped ensure american businesses can be competitive in the 21st century economy, so that they can offer the best opportunities to american workers. now, one of my priorities right now is making sure that we extend or make permanent expiring provisions of the 2015 legislation, so that -- 2017 legislation so american families and businesses aren't facing tax hikes. another priority at the finance committee is making sure we're opening new markets for american products and services abroad. of course, agricultural producers in particular are at the top of my mind. they've had a tough couple years, between inflation, shipping issues, meat processing bottlenecks and all the usual challenges with an industry where a single storm can wipe out a year's work.

opening up new-market access for opportunities for ag producers to sell their products is one of my biggest finance committee priorities. unfortunately, the biden administration has done very little to advance u.s. trade leadership and create new markets for american products and services. this year, i'll do everything i can to ensure we are advancing trade opportunities that benefit american producers and american workers. mr. president, it's the honor of my life to represent south dakotans in the united states senate, and i am excited about the opportunities that i will have this year at the agriculture, finance, and comer committees to serve the -- and commerce committees to serve the people of south dakota and to help make life better for americans around the country. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> the debt ceiling should not be a bargaining chip because people's lives are at stake. family's incomes are at stake. people jobs are at stake. retirement benefits are at stake. that is why, in the past, under democratic and republican presidents, we have raised the debt ceiling without brinkmanship, without coming up to the line and going over it. no hostages. no brinksmanship. let's get this done. our view, they will show us our plan. they don't believe they have a

pass with republican votes. when they realize how risky this is, we can all come together, pass the debt ceiling as president biden asked 4. now we have senator whitehouse. >> thank you, very well done at explaining the chaos that erupts if they persist in this pursuit. the full faith and credit of the united states of america is a national asset. is a pearl beyond price that withstood wars and depression and today's amaga republicans threaten its destruction and they threaten to raise rates for

homeowners, car buyers, credit cardholders, and people who have insurance policies. they threaten bedlam. why? if they want to negotiate, there is a process for that, the constitution built that process. there are two houses, you have bicameralism, follow the constitution, put your law forward, you state it in the public arena and see how you do. why do they not want to use the public process? why they want this resolved behind closed doors? they want this resolved behind closed doors because they -- a m call? the presiding officer: the senate is in a quorum call. mr. durbin: i ask it be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: by alles can, -- by all accounts, america made a remarkable recovery in the last two years. when president biden took office, we faced the most daunting economic challenge

since the great depression and global upheaval that disrupted every aspect of our lives. two years later, america is coming back. thanks to the work of our democratic majority, the cost of living is finally coming down, but we're not out of the woods yet. if you travel in my state of illinois, which i've been cog over the last several -- i've been doing over the last several weeks, especially in central and southern illinois, you notice the same sign in one business after another, help wanted. i can't help but notice in my hometown of springfield there's a franchise of chicken fingers that's going to be opening soon. there's a sign outside the soon to be completed building saying $15 an hour, please call us to work in fast food. while businesses are reopening their doors and demand for goods and services rebounded, america is still struggling with a shortage of workers. i hear it everywhere.

particularly in the health care sector, where the shortage of professionals really creates a hardship and the center city as well as the urban areas, large cities, small business towns, this shortage of medical professionals is a national emergency which i'll address at another time. in addition to that, we've got to ask ourselves, well, what's the reason for the shortage? make no mistake, the decision of the trump administration to cut down legal immigration to the united states is one of the reasons. we have about -- usually a million immigrants a year, legal immigrants come to work. during the trump years, a total of four years it was one million. so they cut it by three-fourths the number. and we wonder why we're still looking for numbers? let's be honest about it. whether in the city of springfield or chicago, these immigrant workers are willing to take jobs that many americans

are not willing to take. they work harder at them and really do their best to help their families get started in this country. that's the story of america. that's the story that needs to be repeated because immigration labor at this point is crit call, not just in the cities but in the agricultural areas, as the presiding officer knows well from new mexico. we need workers, and we need good ones. at the same time there is a fundamental problem in our come i that we need to be addressing honestly. the work life balance is out of whack. today fewer and fewer americans are willing to work long hours for survival wages, especially when they have urgent personal and family responsibilities at home. like caring for an infirm parent or a newborn. last month i received a letter from one of my constituents in illinois. it speaks to the problems facing parents and caregivers as well as many others. she wrote, and i quote, my husband and i both have good

jobs. we have three kids. the cost of child care accounts forbe over one-fourth of our monthly take-home pay. all of our other bills combined don't even equal it. i can only imagine the burden, she said is on other families. no wonder unemployment is so high. how can people afford to -- or even find child care? this constituent asks if congress has any plans to revive the enhanced child tax credit that we included in the american rescue plan. i wish i could tell her yes, but, sadly, the new republican majority in the house of representatives does not even mention this as a priority in the future. day care and child care and caregivers are a critical part of family life for so many americans, and yet the republicans, at least in the house of representatives, are ignoring the reality. beyond the tax credit, the child tax credit, her letter makes one

thing clear -- our safety net has too many holes in earthquake in. and if a parent working full-time job can still fall through that, then clearly we have work to do. i think about that constituent's story as we approach the 30th anniversary of the family and medical leave act this sunday. back in 1993, this law passed congress with broad bipartisan support. and in the decades since, more than 315 million workers have relied on it to take care of themselves and their family members. it's hard to imagine but in the days before the family and medical leave act america had zero federal job protections for workers with a new baby or a sick family member at home. so this law was a massive victory for working families. but today it is just not enough. the family and medical leave act guarantees 12 weeks of unpaid -- unpaid leave for workers.

how does that help pay for the diapers, the formula, medications? well, it just doesn't. and, worse yet, many full-time workers are conclude excluded from the law's basic protections. in illinois alone, nearly 60% of working adults don't qualify for unpaid leave under family and medical leave act. six out of ten workers. here's the bottom line -- if you want to get america back to work, you need to back them up. the family and medical leave act is a many proking foundation, but it just isn't enough. we need to modernize the american safety net for a new generation of workers. think about this -- over the next decade, adults over the age of 53 are projected to outnumber children in america for the first time in our history. that's going to make life even more challenging for the 53 million americans who are today already serving as caregivers for a family member or partner.

this is particularly challenging for young americans. one in four family caregivers is a millennial who, on average, spends 21 hours a week caring for a loved one at home. that's nearly half of a full work week and they don't see a dollar for it. these americans, many of whom are also balancing a full-time job with full-time responsibilities as a caregiver, really need other help. they deserve it. at least a living wage to start with. but our federal minimum wage is a starvation wage. there is no the a single part of the country where $7.25 an hour is enough. not even close. let's raise it. while we're at it, let's also revive that enhanced child tax credit that reduced child poverty in america by one-third. think about that. kids living in poverty will reduce -- the total was reduced by one-third just from the child tax credit. that's breathing room for a lot of parents to make ends meet.

and if we really want to help americans get back to work, we should start by building on the success of the family and medical leave act. today i'm reintroducing the caring for all families act. it will expand protections of the family and medical leave act and ensure a broader range of relationships with covered. in 2020, the department of labor found that one in six people taking leave to being a as a caregiver were not protected by the family and medical leave act's definition of family. it real arely begs the question, how many of these people decided to drop out of the workforce altogether? how many of them were fired because they missed a shift because their child woke up with a fever or because an elderly relative was rushed to the e.r.? no one should ever have to choose between caring for a loved one or losing their job. the caring for all families act will add domestic partners, in-laws, grandparents and other significant relationships to the

fmla's definition of family and, importantly, this legislation would just be a starting point. while it would expand job protection to millions of workers, it would not resolve one crucial flaw in our safety net -- america is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not have guaranteed paid family leave. i'm going to repeat that. america is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not guarantee paid family leave. that is shameful. and for the millions of work being americans who have or will be caregivers at some point in their life, what are they supposed to do? take on debt, work even more hours? no, we cannot settle for a system that abandons working families about they need it the most. the american people deserve a safety net that prevents this emfrom drowning, a safety net that provides the peace of mind they need to reenter the workforce and offers them the assurance that their government has their back. so let's start.

let's pass the caring for all families act and then get to work to ensure access to paid leave for all american workers. mr. president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> i urge my colleagues. in the house, in congress, to be pragmatic about the implication at the end of the day. these implications for so many across the country who expect us to work together to do the right thing to take action that will harm so many across this country.

>> my colleagues have shown default is so devastating, going up to the line is very risky and dangerous for the american people. at the house for the redline. >> we have been very very clear. we don't want hostagetaking or brinksmanship. we believe the house cannot passé debt ceiling bills away they are talking about. if it is very minor cuts the amaga republicans bill. that is why we say show us your plan. i don't think they can get one together. i think speaker mccarthy says let as have discussions but isn't laying out a plan. next, next, next. >> is this something republicans

want to try? speaker mccarthy's says the republican colleagues proposed legislation that would safeguard social security. why do you think social security is at risk? >> here's what we said, 20 extreme amaga republicans ran the show. there are many of those extreme amaga republicans calling for cuts in social security and/or medicare. it is a great worry. democrats are not going to rest. we will not touch social security, we will not touch medicare. yes? >> do you try to deal with spending cuts, would you is leader of the senate -- >> you heard what i've spoken to the president both before and after the meeting. he had the same position, hakeem jeffries, the house democratic

caucus, the senate them credit congress have the same position which is we should pass the debt ceiling clean. that is where we are. >> about the debt ceiling, in a bigger picture does the country have a debt problem? >> unlike republicans, who passed republican tax cuts on the wealthy and corporations which increase the debt by one. $7 trillion, we democrats have reduced it. it has gone down in the biden years from trump years and in the ira we passed the first major piece of legislation that said for every dollar we spend we are putting a dollar from debt reduction and putting it down $300 billion. the ira is properly named, it was the first time any party passed a bill that reduced the deficit. we believe we can do both. we can reduce the deficit,

answer the phone, my intelligence guy is always in the skiff. when he calls i try to answer it. way in the back. >> do you expect president biden to put tax revenue on the table as part of negotiations? >> as we said, it was about tax reduction of the tramp -- trump tax cut that created this deficit and we didn't share, any republicans even shrugged a shoulder about that so it is our view the debt ceiling because of the danger, because it would be bedlam and do all these things, should be done cleanly. if you want to debate closing tax loopholes, if they want to debate spending cuts, that would be a budget process but shouldn't be tied to the debt ceiling, plain and simple. >> talk about the nature of the

dialogue that you are having with minority leader mcconnell and speaker mccarthy? >> leader mcconnell has been clear, similar to what i have been saying of the president is saying, the house has got to go first and the house has got to decide. it is our view the house will have a difficult time passing anything but from missouri, show us the plan. and pass it. no brinkmanship, no tying things to it. it is a simple, easy plan that united democrats. >> hunter biden's strategy, where he is going after folks involved -- >> i haven't and i won't. thank you, everybody.

[inaudible conversations] quorum call:

>> the democratic party was in the middle of a hysterical meltdown over a new voting law in the state of georgia.

the president of the united states declared the state's modest changes to election procedures were, quote, jim crow 2.0. vulvar is about voter suppression and election subversion. citizens should doubt, quote, whether your vote counts at all. a sitting president of the united states said lawmakers positions on this bill call? the presiding officer: it is. mr. cornyn: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: last week "the new york times" ran a story entitled how a drug company made $114 billion by gaming the u.s. patent system. this is an infuriating account of how a pharmaceutical company maintained a monopoly on a popular drug, and the bact it's had on -- and the impact it's had on patients and taxpayers.

the company is abbe vee, and the drug is humira, one of the most widely prescribed drugs in the world. it's an anti-inflammatory medication that's commonly used to treat arthritis and other conditions. despite the fact that humira has been available for two decades, its first competitor didn't hit the market until earlier this year. that wasn't due to a lack of interest by other companies or an inability to produce the biosimilar that could earn food and drug administration approval. it was because abbe vee used a maze of overlapping patents and an aggressive litigation strategy to stave off any competition. unsurprisingly this led to big earnings for the company, $114 billion in revenue since 2016.

and it's come at a high cost to patients who rely on this drug to maintain their health. the list price for humira is more than $80,000 per year per patient. that's higher than the median household in texas. household income in texas. depending on the patient's insurance, that price could be lowered significantly for the consumer or the patient themselves. a woman in kentucky said her employers health insurance plan kept her payments around $60 a year. but of course we know that if the insurance company is paying retailor some negotiated price that ultimately that price is going to be passed along in terms of higher insurance premium for the consumer. so there's a lot of bait and

switch going on here. once she retired and wriched to medicare -- the cost scriected to $8,000 a year. so her private insurance had her payments at $60 a year but when she changed to medicare it went to $8,000 a year. this is, again, part of the shell game in health care and in pharmaceuticals. i can't imagine anyone living on a fixed income that could afford such an expensive drug. the good news, at least for this specific drug, is it at long last humira's monopoly has come to an end. earlier this week the first biosimilar came to market and more are expected later this year. humira is one of the most egregious examples of patent abuse, but it's far from the only one. other pharmaceutical companies are engaging in this practice

every day, and there's nothing to prevent them from using others from using this same playbook. i hope that will change soon. earlier this week senator blumenthal, the senator from connecticut, and i reintroduced a bill called the affordable prescriptions for patients act to put an end to this anticompetitive practice that keeps drug prices artificially high. there are two practices in particular that this bill will address. one is called patent thicketting, patent thicketting which involves building layers upon layers of patent to prevent competitors from ever hitting the market. that's what abbe vee did with humira. the company has or has had until just now with its monopoly ending, as many as 134 active patents for a single drug.

134 patents. i'm a firm believer in the patent system. i believe we ought to protect investments made in cutting-edge and lifesaving drugs, and we ought to reward those who invent these lifesaving drugs with an exclusive right to sell it for a period of time. that's what the patent law does, and it incentivizes more and more people, more and more scientists and medical researchers to come up with new lifesaving drugs. but getting 134 patents on the same drug should outrage all of us. like i said, this drug has been available for 20 years. abbvie has spent years and exorbitant amounts of money, but apparently they still profited, they spent a lot of money fighting competition in

court all to maintain control of the market on this drug. like i said, patents and exclusivity periods are not inherently bad. discovering new cures is a time, labor, and money intensive process and we don't want to discourage that. before a company spends years and hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars researching a cure, conducting clinical trials and undergoing regulatory review, it needs to know that it can recoup its investment and maybe, just maybe make a profit. and many of the new drugs that are invented and tried do not succeed. so success is certainly not guaranteed. that's why the united states offers robust protections for intellectual property through the patent system. the patent system gives innovators the confidence they need to invest their time and resources into research and

development. once that new innovative drug hits the market, the manufacturer can enjoy a limited time period as the sole supplier before generic versions become available or other competitors. patents are the key behind the incredible medical innovation that occurs here in the united states, and we need to find the right balance between stopping bad actors who will game the system and at the same time encouraging the development of future cures. i believe the bipartisan bill that senator blumenthal and i are reintroducing strikes that balance and places a reasonable limit on the number of patents that a manufacturer can contest. that will deter gamesmanship while preserving the incentives necessary to, for the patent system and for innovation.

the other anticompetitive behavior this bill will address is something called patent hopping. excuse me. product hopping, which occurs when a company develops a reformulation of a product that's about to lose exclusivity and then pulls the original product off the market. this is done not because the new formula is more effective, but because it prevents generic competitors. one example is the drug naminda which is used by patients with alzheimer's, a terrible disease. near the end of the exclusivity period, the manufacturer switched from a twice daily drug to a once daily drug. it didn't change the basic molecule. it just changed the prescribed dosage and taking it instead of twice a day to once a day. that move prevented pharmacists

from being able to switch patients to a lower-cost generic even though it's just as effective, so the company could continue to profit. the affordable prescriptions for patients act puts an end to this practice by expressly prohibiting manufacturers from engaging in product hopping. it also facilitates market entry for generics and biosimilars which lead to more option and lower prices for patients. these reforms are obviously desperately needed. patients in texas and across the country are experiencing sticker shock at the pharmacy counter like never before. many have tried to ration the critical medications, for example, in order to make them last longer. some have even been priced out of their medications entirely. there's a clear need for congress to step in and address the blatant abuse of the patent system, and i'm optimistic that we'll be able to do something

important about it. the judiciary committee will hold a markup next thursday to consider this legislation and other bipartisan proposals to address sky-high drug prices. last congress the affordable prescriptions for patients act passed the judiciary committee with unanimous bipartisan support, and i hope we'll see the same level of support this go round. over the last few years we've held many hearings and advanced many drug pricing bills to the senate floor, but unfortunately progress seems to often end there. we haven't had much success in getting those bills through the house and signed into law. i think i can speak on behalf of colleagues on both sides of the aisle who say i hope this year is different. i've heard from many texans who are frustrated by the lack of lower price generic drugs. given the impact of inflation on

family budgets, that strain has only grown greater over the last few years. so if there's a bipartisan desire to stop the anticompetitive behaviors that i described here today that are costing patients and taxpayers a fortune, and i hope we can make progress this congress and finally put a stop to some of the gamesmanship. senator blumenthal and i are committed to moving our bipartisan bill across the finish line, and we're eager to have other of our colleagues join us by cosponsoring this bill. but more important than that, it's important we actually get it across the finish line, get it through the house, and get it to the president's desk. so i hope this bill will continue to receive broad bipartisan support, and i'm happy to work with anyone who has ideas to help us get there. mr. president, i yield the floor. and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: >> a look at what is ahead in the senate. at one:45 this afternoon,

lawmakers will vote on the nomination of joseph faulk to be on the board of directors, vote on a resolution setting committee assignments for the one hundred eighteenth congress, live coverage of the senate on c-span2. tonight agriculture officials testify on the farm bill which sets agriculture, nutrition, conservation and forestry policy for the next five years, we show the hearing at 8 p.m. pm eastern on c-span2. you can watch on c-span now, our free mobile video apps or find it online, c-span.org. >> the democratic party was in the middle of a hysterical meltdown over a new voting law in the state of georgia. the president of the united states declared the state's modest changes to election procedures were, quote, jim crow

2.0. he said the law is about voter suppression, and election subversion. he said citizens should, quote, doubt whether your vote counts at all. a sitting president of the united states said lawmakers's positions on this bill would define, listen to this, whether we are on the side of doctor king or george wallace. john lewis or bull connor. abraham lincoln or jefferson davis. the senate democratic leader said his fellow united states senators who were republicans were, quote, supporting the reenactment of those jim crow laws. my colleague from new york is supposed to safeguard and steward this institution, he

tried to destroy the senate and new the 60 vote threshold so the democrats could take overall 50 state election laws on a partisan basis and believe it or not, 47 of 49 democrats went along with them. the liberal hysteria spread to the press, and the private sector, woke activists started talking about boycotting companies like coca-cola and delta airlines, major league baseball moved the all-star game out of atlanta directly harming the local economy, all for the sake of symbolism. republicans said this was unhinged, phony outrage over common sense law that would make it both easy to vote and hard to cheetah. democrats said the new voting rules were evil and racist and the literal death of democracy. mr.

president -- rum call. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: thank you. mr. president, last month i received a message that reminded me of just how important the work we do here is for people and families in michigan and all across the country. dianna bloomfield wrote to me about the cost of her prescription medication. diana is diabetic and takes two types of insulin, four injections a day. she is retired and on medicare and with a supplemental policy for sub scritions. diana -- subscriptions. diana said when she usually goes to the pharmacy, she has a cosponsor of $360, for just one of other prescriptions. but the good news is, mr. president, not anymore. thanks to a unified democratic majority last year, people on

medicare now have the cost of their insulin capped at $35 a month. $35 a month for anyone who is on medicare. last month diana went to the pharmacy like usual. the pharmacist told her that her three month supply would now be $105 instead of $650. she says, i paid and walked away with a big smile. she added this. i know that for many seniors the cost of insulin has been difficult or impossible -- impossible to afford if they have a limited income or live on the margins. thank you for your support of this important legislation helping seniors and others by reducing the cost of insulin. mr. president, this $35 cap per

month on insulin is helping millions of people on medicare breathe a little easier, and i know because of your strong yes vote as well as mine this is the reason we get up every day to be able to help people, to be able to reduce costs, to be able to make sure that they can enjoy their life and actually have a life, save their life. insulin is a serious comaition. and -- medication. and so this was a really important accomplishment that we came together on. it was disappointing. we didn't have one republican colleague join us in the house or the senate, but we stood together and were able to get that done. unfortunately, people who need insulin and aren't on medicare are still paying outrageous prices for a medication.

their lives literally depend on. we tried to cap insulin costs per month for everyone, for children -- children with juvenile diabetes, this is incredibly important, we have a wonderful group from michigan to their their stories, talking about what it is for them to manage this every day. their families talking about the cost and we tried to cap their costs at $35 a month as well. but unfortunately because of budget rules, the republicans were able to force that to be a 60-vote margin and they blocked it. shockingly, they blocked it. they blocked $35 insulin cap for children. why?

unfortunately to protect pharma profits. i'm going to repeat that. democrats tried to ensure that families wouldn't have to spend more than $35 a month on insulin that keeps their children alive, republicans blocked it. it was just one more gift to an industry that's received quite a few gifts in recent years from republicans. first let me start with the fact that from 2010 to 2019, american taxpayers contributed more than $230 billion in research funding that helped drug companies develop new medications. i support that. i support public-private partnerships, i support public financing of research. we want that. we want new medications.

but then you turn around and you look at between 2016 and 2020, drug companies spent $577 billion on stock buybacks, ten times more than they spent on research. ten times more than they spent on research. and they also significantly increased executive compensation. now, drug company ceo's can definitely support insulin for their children. we want it for all the children of america. after the trump tax giveaways, some giant profitable drug companies now have an effective tax rate of under 10%. republicans lowered it for all corporations to 21, but some drug companies got an even bigger gift, below 10% for an effective tax rate. that's less than the tax rate a

typical postal worker or a typical preschool teacher pays. and between 2000 and 2018, big pharmaceutical companies raked in $8.6 trillion in gross profit. trillion dollars, t, trillion dollars in profits. here's the cliff note version, pharmaceutical companies employed 1,087 lobbists last year, almost 16 for every one senator many. then republicans provided huge tax cuts for them and blocked legislation that would help families afford medication that keeps their children alive.

it's clear whose side they are on. the wrong side, in my opinion. diane's lucky. she's on medicare and can afford a $35 per month cosponsor for michigan. a lot of michigan families aren't so lucky. consider the lockwoods, three children in the lockwood family have type one diabetes and take insulin. three children. a change to their insurance coverage meant that the family went from paying no copay to paying $600 a month in a copay for insulin for each child, $1,800 a month in a copay for their three children. they couldn't afford it, mr. president. so they began driving to canada,

not that far from michigan, driving across the bridge to canada where the same medication costs $71 because the canadian government negotiates the best price for canadians. then the pandemic closed the border. jim lockwood needed to find a job with better health insurance, and he did in ohio. american parents shouldn't be forced to either drive to canada in order to pay for their children's prescriptions or they shouldn't be forced to uproot their families and move to another state in order to find a job with good insurance so they can afford their children's medicine. it's time for republicans to stop working on behalf of their wealthy buddies and join us in

working on behalf of american families. children with diabetes, people under age 65 need a $35 per month cap on their insulin just like we have been able to do as democrats coming together for seniors, people on medicare. i think that's what we should be focused on here together and invite our republican colleagues to join us. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. and i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> thank you, mr. president. first a little bit of housekeeping, then we will get to my remarks. i understand there are two bills at the desk do for second reading on block. >> clerk will read the titles of the bill for the second time. >> a bill to allow reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms. s 200 one 9, congress may not receive pay after october 1st of

any fiscal year and congress is not approved a concurrent resolution on budget and pass the regular appropriations bill. >> to place the bills on the calendar and provisions of rule 14 i would object to further proceeding on block. >> objection is heard, the bills will be placed on the calendar. >> mister president, in america, when it is time to pay the bills, we do so without fail and without delay. that is what families must do, it is what the government must do. it is one of the bedrock principles of this country. one that holds true no matter who is in the white house, which party holds majorities in congress. not even during the trump administration was this solemn duty neglected even if many amaga republicans may feel guilty today. when i was minority leader in the senate i sat down with donald trump to find a path to raise the debt ceiling multiple times.

we didn't engage in hostagetaking or resort to blackmail or brinksmanship, by no means was it easy, and many on the other side didn't want to go along, but democrats were constructively working with the trump administration to get it done, and it happened three times. the same thing happened again this year. no brinksmanship, no hostagetaking, no default on the national debt. congress must raise the debt ceiling on a bipartisan basis without the hostagetaking, without the brinkmanship. i was very glad to hear president biden reaffirm this truth after meeting with speaker mccarthy. he reiterated we ought to pass a clean debt ceiling extension. president biden is correct. the american people expect us to do the right thing in the coming months, because if we default on the debt, every american will pay the price. later this morning, i will join with my democratic colleagues to put a spotlight on the consequences of default. ..

livelihood, money people set-aside, little by little every month so they could reach a retirement with some degree of dignity. and the devastation would go on and on and on. social security, medicare would suffer. over 18 million veterans could lose their hard-earned benefits like disability compensation. america's reputation on the world's stage would be permanently stained and few things would hand the world over to the chinese communist party more than a first ever default of the united states of america. so the bottom line is simple. playing games with the debt ceiling is dangerous, destabilizing, and would spell disaster for every single american.

dangerous, destabilizing, disaster. the last thing we should be doing in congress is using the debt ceiling as a political bargaining chip. instead, we need to come together and make sure the u.s. is able to pay its debts on time without brinksmanship, without hostagetaking, just as we've done throughout our history. now, and big oil profits. last year while soaring gas prices stretch the budget of american families, , big oil enjoyed a record, a record year of profits. huge amounts of money made by these companies. earlier this week exxon reported a 56 billion, billion dollar net profit in 2022 setting a record a record i've not just for exxon for big oil as an industry. exxon wasn't alone. chevron reported 35 billion. and while americans were feeling the pain at the pump driving the cars up to the gas station and wondering how high it was going to be, a five top big oil

companies brought in a record nearly $200 billion in total profits in 2022. 2022. taking advantage of what they called favorable market conditions. it's nothing short of repugnant for the biggest oil companies in america to celebrate dizzying profit margins that they earned jacking up gas prices on hard-working americans. and what did the oil companies do with this tsunami of cash? they could have prioritized it by paying their workers better. they did not. they could have made transformation investment in new cleantech and help push the frontier in clean energy which we all know is coming. but they did not. or maybe best of all they could of lower gas prices, but they did not. do you know what the oil companies did? this is just as galling, galling. they rewarded shareholders by

incrementing stock buybacks at near record levels. buybacks do no good for the economy. they don't help the worker. it'll help the consumer. they don't move us along to green energy. all they do, they don't even produce more oil. all they do is line the pockets of the already uber wealthy executives and shareholders. here's one example. exxon announced the plan to spend $35 billion, $35 billion, on stock buybacks in the next two years here more than doubled their plans to invest in clean energy over the next five years. i want to say that again. for anyone who doesn't think corporate america is out of control and does whatever it wants and thumbs its nose at the needs of the globe or the workers or the citizens. exxon announced they plan to spend $35 billion on stock buybacks in the next two years, more than double their plans to invest in clean energy over the next five years.

that's were exxon's priorities are. so big oil executives may claim they are good stewards or that they understand the climate crisis, but when it comes time to put their money where their mouth is their actions tell a different story. we must continue to take on entrenched oil interests. just as we did last year when we passed the inflation reduction act. doing so will have tremendous benefit for our economy, for our environment for american families everywhere. we democrats will continue to make one thing clear. if oil companies are going to make record profits, they must do it not by manipulating prices to take advantage of hard-working americans. now on chile and the treaty. for more than a decade congress has been working on an important tax treaty with chile that holds important and long-term consequences for american businesses and american

competitiveness on the world stage. right now nations around the world are racing to source import materials like lithium, lithium is a key ingredient in everything, from iphones tec batteries. chile is one of the most important sources of these kinds of raw materials including lithium and many u.s. companies has spent years building business partnerships with chile, and growing their presence in that nation. but these companies face a terrible policy problem, terrible problem. because of current policy. american companies face double taxation do in chile and are the huge disadvantage compared to other nations like china. we don't want china to get this lithium. we need it. so we have taxation treaty at the ready that would remove this obstacle. it's a very similar to the more than 60 other treaties we already have with nations around the world. this is nothing new. it's widely supported by voices across the political spectrum. the biden administration on one

hand but the pro-business chamber of commerce on the other. and here's the amazing thing, mr. president. the u.s. chile treaty was already reported out of committee last year. it had i believe, not certain of this, but i think it was passed by voice vote, meaning unanimous support. at that overwhelming support. unfortunately has to go through committee again because of the new congress but democrats are 100% ready and eager to get this important treaty moving. republicans in the past always have long supported moving it forward, too. i imagine most do, but right now this treaty has been delayed yet again because some want to add last-minute changes to the text that risks undermining it all together. again, there some want to introduce last-minute changes to the treaty, even though this was reported by voice vote out of committee last year, with nearly

added to the omnibus and has been around for more than close to ten years. let me be clear, these last-minute changes could delay or even end any chance of getting this treaty done. it at least could force us to renegotiate with other governments, and you know what a long time consuming, difficult, perilous process that is. we should move forward and ratify this treaty with the agreed-upon text without last-minute changes. the effort has been more than a decade in the works. it's time to finish the job. again if we want to give china advantage to get our lithium, to get chile and lithium instead of giving it to the united states when we so desperately need it, that would be a disgrace and a shame. moving this treaty quickly without any last-minute changes is a way to solve that problem. so please let's move forward. both sides should come together to move forward quickly and without any more delay.

it's long enough. and finally, mr. president, quickly on the strategic petroleum reserve. last month the house passed a bill to prohibit the sale of oil from the nation strategic petroleum reserve to china. i've seen the proposal but here's my question. why stop at china? what about russia, north korea, iran? if we're going to do this why not do it right and see if we can add a few more countries to the list. it's certainly worth taking a look at. so that's what we're doing. we're going to take a look at this proposal and hopefully find ways to make it stronger. i yield the floor.

doctor, thanks for joining us. >> guest: thanks rodney. >> host: we saw the administration announced and and/or lease of land and emergency declarations coming may 11. can you explain what that means? >> guest: what that means is that the current status we have where the federal government has some major role in dealing with covid-19 of hospital level, at the pharmaceutical level of the vaccine level will start to wind down. covid-19, like other respiratory viruses are headed our current healthcare system meaning commercial market, a regular formats people use with insurance, medicare, medicaid all about will be what will happen with covid-19 going forward. >> host: as far as the date itself what is specific about

may 11? >> guest: there's nothing that there but makes it special other than there was going to be some notice that was going to have to occur before the emergencies ended. because many of these programs that have been put in place to the pandemic need to wind down, need to transition, need to head off to the commercial market or to the regular healthcare apparatus. that takes some time at the one to anticipate hiccups it was always said when his emergency ended there would be plenty of notice, what did you think that the decision itself to end it? >> guest: i agree. when you look at what triggered the decision in the beginning, the invocation of public health emergency it was at a a time n we really worried about our hospitals ability to care for patients, when we worry about the numbers of english we had our icu beds or personal protective equipment when we had no faxing, no boosters, no antivirals, no testing, testing was not anything went thought about. if you think about how far we've come covid-19 is much more

manageable infection. that something that and at its hospitals and more. read the hospital capacity the way we once did. i'll be working in the hospital tomorrow and it's unlikely i see very many covid patience if any. >> host: to clarify then, is the cessation specific looks at the public health emergency, what's the difference between that and the national emergency that was declared traffic the national emergency is more broader in scope and give the federal government more powers. both of these are going to be ended. sometimes you may have public health emergencies without a national emergency and vice versa. it was just covid-19 was such a disruptive force as a whole the both of these emergencies were involved. this will kind of get things back to the norm after may 11 with this transition to make sure things don't fall through the cracks. >> host: our guest with us until a little after 9:00. asking questions about the decision from the biden administration you can call the lines, 202-748-8000 if you live

in east and central time zones. 202-748-8001 if you live in about net pacific time zones. rupture medical profession yourself and what to give input, 202-748-8002. you can text as at 202-748-8003. doctor at the same time the president made his decision we saw in congress an effort to end these emergency provisions immediately. he talked about that transition time the possible hiccups. what do you think but the approaches that ending it with a few months of transition versus what the republicans wanted in a house? >> guest: i think we do need of transitions because this is going to be a lot of things have to happen fairly quickly to make sure we don't of any disruption in the care people get and access to certain medical countermeasures like vaccines boosters antiviral home testing. there needs to be sometimes i don't think the approach of ending it immediately without time for the private sector to be able to absorb all of these tasks makes sense.

you want to do and responsibly so you don't create more havoc and at least need to have this notice. the public health emergency could've ended now but i think we would want to of had noticed several months ago that i was going to happen to you could prepare that process. that process as been ongoing but now it's going to begin in earnest. it's not so much about the date. it's making sure people have noticed is going to occur so they can start to transition these important task. >> host: you talked about those potential hiccups. what if scenarios the possibly could happen in the time of transition? >> guest: ? >> caller: we know hospitals get extra payments for covid-19 pavements. ask when you go is what makes hospitals understand the financial implications and a plan for that. we know people are getting vaccines, boosters come antivirals, through out-of-pocket cost. there needs to be a discussion with insurers and third-party payers and medicare and medicaid about how this could happen how much out-of-pocket cost for

various plans. the same goes for home testing. all of those types of things need to be worked out so the people are not left in limbo or in a state of uncertainty when the public health emergency ends and these things are not exclusively funded with taxpayer funds. >> host: if someone say regarding free testing or free medications in order to counter, potential that could stop? >> guest: yes. eventually it will stop. this will be something people get through the insurer or pay out-of-pocket but that's what will happen. that's what happens with every other respiratory infectious disease we had that there handled by the ordinary apparatus we have. because the old become accustomed to zero out-of-pocket costs, this is something needs to be worked out. how much they're going to pay, how much to reimburse how that will work and that sometimes takes time. fortunately because it is a bureaucratic process. >> host: before we take you to calls what you're thinking s.

res. the current state of covid-19 in the united states? >> guest: we are in a fairly decent place. remember this is a virus that cannot be eradicated, cannot be eliminated. we will always have covid-19 in this country. the key thing was to make it more manageable, to decouple from hospitals in crisis. we are there. if you think about vaccines, boosters come antivirals come home test, immune modulating drugs are people in hospital i think were in a place we are with no other respiratory virus. i don't think it has to destructive effect that it once had at added don't think it requires the public health emergency to be in place. that doesn't mean there's not going to be cases hospitalizations and deaths and it does mean they're still not work to do to get more people vaccinated, get more people boosted and certainly to get more people prescribed access. the still more work to be done by think it's transition from a public health emergency because

of the tools of science and medicine have given us. >> host: dr. adalja of the johns hopkins center for health security that's at the bloomberg school of public health, for scholars from linda, pennsylvania, democrats like you were on. good morning. >> caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i watch often. concerning the public health emergency and dropping certain requirements, how will this, what will happen to the risk of the average person to contract covid if the requirements or the government recommendations go down? i think people might be less likely to be vaccinated and to be boosted. what do you recommend that asphyxiation eight-year-old due to protect herself, if i am in a

crowd? do you have any insight on my concerns? thank you tragic it's important regulars the ending of these emergencies don't change the recommendations of the cdc is put in place or that the state or local health department put in place. what this is about is funding and have vaccines are paid for, how hospitalizations are paid for. this doesn't change any of the recommendations that might be in place for vaccines confer boosters. all of those recommendations did the same. this is about funding and is paying for whether this will be taxpayer-funded or going to go to the private market or the government insurance plans like medicare and medicaid. as a 68-year-old you are covered by medicare so this should be something that would be cancer medicare but again if you're somebody who is high risk you should make sure your up-to-date with your shots, that you should think about when you're crowded places that you may want to wear a mask in the situation because it may decrease your risk of acquiring covid-19. if you do get sick you should have low threshold to test

yourself and a low threshold to call your doctor to ask for prescription. >> host: from alabama democrat's line. good morning. >> caller: hey there. hey, i remember and october of 2019 when johns hopkins -- my first question is who organize that? and then in january of 2000 we were getting propaganda for people dropping dead dead in the street in china from covid. whatever became of that? >> guest: eventual one was a major and an exercise one of many different pandemic exercises that the johns hopkins at her for help has done, been doing exercises since 2001 or even before in the the 1990e started doing pandemic exercises. that was a partnership with johns hopkins, and some other groups to really illustrate how unprepared the world was for a pandemic. we have done similar exercises

and it's a good way to get policymakers engage with some of the decision staff to make during an infectious disease emergency. regarding the people dropping dead in china, i don't know what happened to that. out of how much of that was true or false. clearly we don't have a good picture of what was going on in china at the time and we don't have a good picture was going on in china today. there's a lot of lack of transparency but i don't know what happened to any of those videos or how to if the videos of people dropping dead. certainly covid-19 doesn't cause you to drop that i don't know what that actually referred to. with china we don't have an understanding of what the true impact of that virus has been. in the early stages and even today. >> host: dr. adalja what is the current rate of covid vaccination and the united states and are you comfortable with that great? >> guest: so it's about around 70% or so give or take of the population that is fully vaccinated. what's more concerning is it's not that great but the rate of high risk individuals so people thought above 65 that are pregnant that it

immunocompromised, heart or lung disease that are obese, that group needs to be boosted and they're not boosted to the degree necessary because what we know is in the current era of omicron vaccines are good at preventing hospitalization or death. not in the people of those risk factors are boosted the woman look at the 300-400 people dying every day from covid, they are often people of not been boosted by have a high risk condition. that rate needs to go up higher so i think that's with the work needs to be done is make sure our high risk individuals know that they should be up-to-date with their come know they should be calling their doctor. >> host: what is your sense of hesitancy to get boosted? >> guest: i think hesitancy because people adventure was going on with boosters because there's been four cycles. there's been a message from everyone that everybody needs to be boosted one really the benefit is in high risk population i think people are confused and people in the message has been deleted. the messages everybody needs to

be boosted been a high risk people to recognize their in a special category and need to get boosted today. that was a mistake that we should have targeted boosters to high target individuals. while we recognize boosting low risk people probably doesn't do much but boosting high risk people can be very beneficial at preventing severe disease, hospitalization and death. >> host: we saw fta fda prol process would switch to an annual coronavirus vaccine. it would be similar to the flu model. what you think of that model. >> translator: don't think we should force, 19 into flu model. this is a different virus and very different vaccine. it's not going to be one size fits all. there may be some people who don't need any annual shots with covid. then maybe some that need to a year, maybe one of you. this has been held by using principles of personalized medicine or precision medicine. looking at individual risk factors and then timing the boosters based on when the protection begins to wane.

for young healthy person that may be never for somebody that had a bone marrow transplant or a liver transplant that might be twice the year. i don't think you can telegraph that an adult think just because it's convenient to make it harmonize with the flu exit the right decision. >> host: barbara is in silver spring, maryland. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is, covid was a global pandemic of the decoration of the trinity is look at the united states. covid is still an issue in africa in developing countries in mexico with 10,000 people at our u.s. borders coming to what do you think should be the declaration from a global standpoint either w.h.o. d we as united states view the global pandemic and we're going to end hours but it is still very real and other countries? thank you for taking my call. >> guest: the world isn't synchronized when it comes to covid-19 and there are countries that do more work to do than the united states does. that don't have enough

resiliency in her in they the u.s. does. the world health organization met and they continue to public health emergency of international concern. that's likely to wind down. they said they're at an inflection point and indeed we are in terms of active uptick. it's not a question of vaccine supply globally. it's more about faxing hesitancy, prevent people from getting vaccinated. we are not seeing the same stress and health care all over the world except china. china is one place will be don't quite know it's happening. we know that a surge of cases and may have peaked but i don't think that has to be synchronized. what we need to continue to do is make sure high-risk people wherever they live by getting access to vaccines and boosters, getting access to antivirals, have home tests and other healthcare systems are fortifying themselves because this is an opportunity to prepare for the next infectious disease emergency that we face and we don't many parts of the world are not capable of

responding very well and he think this is something that needs to be done. more coordination more shoring up of critical care beds and lots of these countries that are still in the midst of covid-19. in general globally we're not in a bad place because of the tools as a said the medicine and science have given us. certainly with the exception of china. >> host: you touched on this but can you elaborate more for those who get free coverage under medicare or medicaid what happens after may 11? >> guest: after may 11 medicare and medicaid would be a mechanism for how they would get vaccines, how they would get boosters, how they would get home test here most of that is going to be pretty seamless for medicare. i think when it comes to home test that might be limits the medicare, medicaid will cover for months. that is still being worked out but it would be just the same process use when you get your flu vaccine or when you get your shingles vaccine through medicare and when you get

anything through the systems. it would be similar integrated throughout the apparatus works for other medical conditions, we saw expansion under medicaid. with that change at all? >> guest: yes, it will change. some people that became eligible were removed because of income levels, those individuals would eventually be removed from those roles. it's important people who have gotten their coverage because of medicaid expansion recognize that may not, that's not going to last and the need to think of other ways i may be able to purchase insurance on the private market. >> host: youngstown, ohio, good morning. >> caller: good morning. >> host: go ahead. you are on. >> caller: yes. i'm glad that they are stopping the funds. i think you should of never really started because

everything about covid-19 was blown out of proportion. it was, in my opinion, a way for these drug companies to automatically manufacture all these vaccines that didn't really work and get paid for it, or was away for the hospitals to capitalize on it. it was just, to me and was just, i i caught it at ein kauai probably the sickest person that i know at my age. and i've never been vaccinated and i'm still at home. i refuse to be admitted into a hospital, you know. i kind of just, you know, took care of myself as best i could. i just, i just think it was, if there's more to it, then i'm

glad the money stock. >> host: doctor, go ahead try to there were multiple and myriad mistakes that were made in handling covid-19, primarily the lack of a proactive response in january february and half of march at 2020. the diddly to a massive calamity that a lot of what the caller is thing is simply false, simply not true. hospitals lost money on covid-19. hospitals are in worse shape than before covid-19. you can look at any hospitals balance sheet and see what's happening to rural hospitals because of what covid-19 did to them. the vaccines worked tremendously well. they saved hundreds of thousands of lives in the u.s. alone. while they may not block transmission in the omicron era they are still a key tool to making covid-19 and much more manageable disease. i think if or not for the

pharmaceutical companies that develop these vaccines in record breakneck speed using innovative technologies i think we'd be much, much worse off. just remember over a million people died of covid-19. that's not, and there's been hit to the life lifespan. this was managed horribly i agree with the call and good been much, much better and we would have less disruption but covid-19 was a real calamity for this country and i think we do now have those tools that it made it much more manageable trend what we saw coming out of covid-19 the large debate over the efficacy of masks. in retrospect what do you think? >> guest: i think it's hard to test whether or not masks work. certain healthcare settings bask to prevent healthcare workers from getting infected. just recently there's been some more data published unmasks and the general public and you don't see a very big impact. i think that has to do with the fact it's hard to test asks in randomized controlled trials because people don't wear mask

very well in the real world. they wear them around with her nose hanging out, touching the phase come touching to her eyes a lot that you don't get that same impact. if someone wears a well fitted mask, a good mask lichen in 951495 equivalent they're likely to get the benefit with her credit card to get indoor spaces. i don't think mask mandates made sense. they should been something people decided to base an individual risk tolerance and also think this is not one size fits all. we got into the culture mask shin on both sides. i don't think those productive. it's a tool people can use if they choose to use it and if they use a good fit, there likely would get some benefit but only if they wear that mask correctly. >> host: terry in minnesota ahead. >> caller: hello. i would like to thank you for saying what is obvious, that. [inaudible]

i think what for happened for the medical field they got hurt bad because of state on the vaccines would prevent illness, all the vaccines will prevent -- we just never was accepting. this is a disease that mainly happened to the very vulnerable people. and harm it did by closing schools were not very vulnerable people were located for years. and to say maybe the hospital didn't make my but certainly you're not arguing that big pharma did make money. and with their main show meant dr. fauci the flimflam man of all types. why did i the government work receive benefits from big pharma? i mean, this is going to be investigated and should. when you go down the line what happened, the line about the efficacy and all the other things and the truth of it, because they felt the american public was so stupid they couldn't take it. the other thing, noticing the numbers.

who died of covid and who died of covid related? i think it is i would be interested to see that by but it doesn't come out. >> host: thanks, terry. trade to a couple things i will respond to. i was that somebody who supported the closure of schools. i did not think that makes sense. school should've been the last thing to close and the first thing to open. in the united states was mostly casinos last open the first to open. we have lessons from europe how schools could open and be operated safely. when it comes to the vaccine and prevention of transmission it did transmit soft kiss me till probably around to the end of the delta variant era. the virus mutated away. the ability to stop infections was in contact with once was when we're dealing with the ancestral strain for the alpha very for the delta variant. it became something much more about prevention of severe disease in the omicron era. i don't think dr. fauci got any money from pharmaceutical companies. dr. fauci was head of niaid and

help ordinate but i don't think he was taking money from pharmaceutical companies added don't think that is a major issue even if he did because i think we wouldn't have these vaccines at the was a for pfizer, biotech, moderna, johnson & johnson, astrazeneca. this is it campy being pulled into a thankless task of nobody's saying they did a good job. everybody is criticizing them. but he wants to see them and comes up with conspiracy theories, harasses of the ceos. they could've made more cholesterol drugs or erectile dysfunction drugs are the chosen engage in infectious disease world and they deserve thanks the unhappy to engage in this and it will continue to gauge because that's where the solutions to these problems come from. that something people don't remember or think about. when jonas salk invented the

polio vaccine there were tickertape parades. if jonas looked at the today they would demonizing the robert f. kennedy junior would colonnades and compare him to nazis. that's what happens today. what happened with this pandemic was horrible and there were lots of mistakes that were made but i think one of the success stories is a vaccines. >> , since you ask him is a difference between death related strictly to covid and death related to covid related matters? >> guest: i don't think that i think clearly there's a dip swih talk hospitalizations but when it comes to death its much more black or white, that there's probably less doubts that are occurring with covid then because of covid. because it's something we're pretty clear on when refilling out death certificates to win were getting that data. there may be some discrepancy but i don't think it's as big as people are making it out to be. thickly as a discrepancy what comes to hospitalized for or with, for covid with covid that is clear but death is more starts i don't think there's over accounting of deaths or

covid although they may be some miss classifications that are occurring. it's on the field much more meticulous but wonderfully at a death certificate or come up with cause of death. >> host: let's hear from teeth, evansville, indiana. last call. go ahead. >> caller: yes. i was just wondering if it ever incorporate a way to use -- like maybe put them in your mask where he didn't have to take that vaccine if you did want to because i've got two shots and they did nothing but just make me feel real were out all the time, can't think straight,, aggravated. and just wondered if it would have some kind of possible of working beside drugs. >> host: as you talk about the response pacifica talk about this idea of long covid and what you're hearing about that. >> guest: sure. to answer the question ultraviolet light does work on surface come services. so far services with covid-19 you can disinfect those with

ultraviolet. there hasn't been much strong data on using ultraviolet light in for example, your throat. there were some initial study showed that maybe turns on your immune system in a different way but that's not something that anything but experimental at this time. you vsos or industrial uses to disinfect surfaces. long covid is something we're going to be talking about for quite some time and we're scratching the surface of this condition. we don't have good definition or diagnostic criteria. not a lot of good study because many of the studies of talk about all covid don't have control groups, don't separate people out of an hospitalized or have been in the icu which is causing its own long system such as post hospital syndrome. this will be something that is a priority to understand because there is some subset who don't get back to the baseline and of real problems with activities of daily living after even a mild case. -- mild case.

this would be a priority to understand. maybe this is something that happens with other respiratory viruses we just don't notice it because it off of all agree at the same quantity as covid-19 did. this again is one of the long tails of this pandemic. >> host: doctor, and the time of transition and specifically as far as your medical expertise, what are you watching for as his transition takes place? >> guest: i'm watching to see what happens with people's of testing. other testing more or less? i'm wondering how hospitals are going to think about covid now and the way to change their operations threat this public health emergency, if that changes here i'm going to look and see what happens with vaccine that they can boost uptake have different insurance compass and medicare and medicaid and the v.a., how much of a decide to pay for certain vaccines come how much they pay for certain drugs like paxil in. hum that impacts the use of

that. it will be a lot of insight inside baseball to see how the normal healthcare system absorbs this new disease. >> host: dr. adalja from the johns hopkins center for health secured at the bloomberg school of public health. he's her senior scholar. websites are for health security.org if you want to check out more of the work. thanks for your time today. >> guest: tanks for having me.

>> i'm very excited for that. we'll also -- giving a response in spanish as well. many of you know his story, emigrating to america at age 11, his father drove the bus from tucson, arizona, come to the real true american story as well. well. yesterday i had a meeting with the president.

i can't to see the president again this morning. i like he said it was a good meeting as well to me. no predetermined ideas but we will meet again about the debt ceiling and the ways we can find ways for savings and put yourself on a path to balance. i think that's very important. look him in the latest polls, 74% of americans legaspi a savings. where 120% of gdp meaning our debt is larger than our economy. it's one of the greatest threats we have to this nation. whenever and if you look at just the last 12 years in congress republicans controlled eight years of and democrats controlled four. four. in the last four years when the democrats controlled the means increased discretion bending more than 400 million per grid control, discretion spending during the eight years didn't go up one dollar. they went down 10 billion. i know we can find savings and get our economy stronger.

after republicans win majority, revenue into the government has never been higher. the highest revenue we've ever seen so it's not a revenue problem. it's a spending problem. we'll continue to work on that for a couple interesting things on the floor right now. you at all city come by than of democrats who voted no and voted present the 100 democrat that won't stand up against socialism. that's a real concern debate in america today. it's not just, that wasn't a college, college campus. those vote and u.s. congress that 100 democrats couldn't say socialism was wrong. that's a scary point of view but you also understand why we're into spending problem that they are when they were in the majority and thus we understand the challenges we have here. let me stop and take any questions you might have. >> when you at the white house you said the president was open to about talked about the debt ceiling and a separate discussion of ways to control spending. what do you think about when you

are that, that he want to separate the? >> whichever way they want to talk about it i very clear. we will not pass a clean debt ceiling without some form of spending before. so they're one of the a clean one. i don't know how they want to say, that's fine but at the end of end of the day we're going to get spending reform -- i believe you have to lift the debt ceiling. but you do not lift the debt ceiling that changing your behavior. it's got to be both. >> some of your own members have voted for the omar resolution. a tit-for-tat retribution that you knew authority -- [inaudible] is is a message what to send the voters? >> no. that's the clear part how it's not tit-for-tat. let's put into perspective of what the democrats did and what republicans are doing. the democrats in the last congress removed republican members from all committees. the even judged one republican

member not based upon what she had said as a matter of congress for what she said prior to ever getting there. there in the from all altern not removing people from all committees at a not judging something someone said when they are not a member of congress. the first of two people we did not allow to be on intel. if you got the briefing i got from the fbi i do know you'll personally believe it as well,, simply as an american, you know swallow should not serve of intel. i'd love to take a short pence here. how many believe if you're a a member of congress and the fbi says nothing but the moment your leadership appoints you to the intel committee, the fbi comes knocking on the door and said we have a problem. this person has relationship with the chinese spy. how many believe that person should stay on intel? so yeah, it's not the same and use longer on intel. other a number of other democrats concern. the chairman of intel committee,

adam schiff, actually i helped him pick because when you get to the intel committee he used the position as chairman knowing classified information that others didn't and he conveyed to the american public something that was not true to try to confuse them on a number of times. from the whistleblower, even the "washington post" acknowledge that is true. what he did when he went after devin nunes, even the inspector general said he was lying about that. he turned the intel committee into an impeachment committee. so now he serves on judiciary. that is actually the committee for impeachment. that is where he should serve. some of intel committee would go back to the responsibility to protect the american public. when it comes to congresswoman omar, based upon what should said the anti-semitic comments, it's all about the benjamin, the military and american equal to hamas and the taliban, on a 9/11 something happened that day.

even the former democratic chair of the committee believes her comments were wrong. when a resolution was brought up to deal with this last time, she never apologized. they change the resolution to save anti-semitism is wrong. we are not removing her from other committees. we just do not believe when it comes to foreign affairs, especially the responsibility of the position around the world with the comment that you make, she shouldn't serve there. but this is what -- if it was tit-for-tat we would've picked people took them off all committee said nothing about it. i just had a conversation with the minority leader hakeem jeffries. what a asked him to do was to select a couple members along with himself and mine and i have a couple members come one of them being nancy mace to help and i think what we should do is put into the rules look at there is a code of conduct year but i don't know the definition exactly what all that's going to be. i think it should be clear so if

there is a concern it's not tit-for-tat but i think in moving forward every single member of congress has the responsibility to have a carry themselves. let me finish. and its response upon us to let us do with it is and then what is the due process in a bipartisan way and we can deal with it? i'm going to put a group of democrats and a group of republicans of work to, clarify the rules and pass something for not only does congress but future congress as well. >> there's an acrimony right now being played out in many committee meeting for members are calling each other names spoke with desha with the ackerman between republicans and democrats how can the american people because you will be able to get things done. >> was because this is nothing like the last congress where you remove someone from all committees. this is nothing like the last congress where you have haf the to the they can't even be on committee. this is nothing like the last

congress where they would deny the rights for bill sivan go through committee. this is nothing like the last congress where you never had an open role. let's judge the few weeks we've had now to the last congress. this is a first time in seven years any bill has come to the floor in an open role. almost a a decade since that , come of those come the fore us that an appropriation bill. look at what we've done the first week in a bipartisan way, 146 democrats joined with us when we opened a select committee on china. this is actually a fundamentally different congress to i've had democrats coming up to me telling me we are running an much better especially the time allotment. they like the openness and the working. another example, for inner workings, right? there's times i was going to be given a briefing. i called my noted later take the briefing with me. because there's ways that i look, the way we were treated in the past i don't think was right.

i'm glad you asked this question because this is a much different congress, much more now the public can be here. you can be here. how different is that? the public is going be back in the people's house. we will have state of the union with the public can actually watch it. so yeah i'm excited how this is a different from the last congress. i'm really picking one site. let a come back to you. go ahead. that's unfair. >> on hunter biden and his calls for federal investigation now into the dissemination of the laptop, how is it going to impact your own investigation into him? >> i don't think anyway. i think it is a delay in tactic, an attorney tactics to try to stop them. one thing i will say from that he's acknowledging now it is his laptop. so here's a little slower than the rest of the papers and twitter and the others but now we know it is true. i think the investigations here unique this is you will have republics of democrats and will

get to the bottom of it. >> on secretary mayorkas there's now people calling for articles of impeachment. what about a timeline? wind to see an inquiry happening? >> listen, we will never use impeachment for political reasons. it's just not going to happen. that doesn't mean it's something rises to his love of impeachment we would not do it. what you're finding out committees have been organized. i said early on going down to the border a number of times, fortunately the president find of a dent board after 40 some years, we can't sustain was happening. every community at the border, we are watching the number of my own community a cartel came and killed six people, again baby shot in the head. the fentanyl is just decimating the most productive years of americans between the ages of 18-45. what you find is in the last month even though we said we would have an inquiry, in

december we had the highest number ever. what you'll find is the committee's are together. they're awestruck inquiry and medical wherever it takes them. >> do you think the conference to move forward with an inquiry? >> i think democrats will join with us. nobody wants to see the board of the way it is today. go back your pick. >> i just want to get you to comment on some of the things leader jeffries said at a press covers before you. he had posters of the some of the words members of your coffers have said in the past. will you respond to some democrats who -- >> i was at the press covers so can you tell me an example? >> for example, hit, so marjorie taylor green up. >> a foreign affairs position on intel? i make my case. next question. >> you've been talking about the meeting with the present again calling these discussions. do you have a timeline for your next meeting within an real estate with what are the next steps are you going to bring to members perhaps to meet with him at the white house? are you bring some democrats as well? what's the next step?

>> the next step is very clear. we left it that he will give you a call and a couple of days to set up the next meeting. not to would come come not any of that. the deck at the scene at the prayer conference, pro-breakfast. he sat next to me and he said very good meeting. i thought is comments up at the prayer breakfast that they would treat people with respect false to me and i have respect for the president and want to be very responsible of how we deal with the i was very clear, we should not wait five months. let's not put america through turmoil. i looked at the latest polling, the greatest are people have is -- we have government that is designed, a government that the american public decided to have a check and balance republicans in charge of healthcare democrats endocytic he has the presidency. i believe the most sensible way to do this is we sit together and start talking. yesterday i know before he said he would negotiate be estate was a very nice conversation for more than an hour. did mean we agreed but we state

that different positions and i think at the end of the conversation between both of us without you know what this is worthwhile to continue. we will continue it. >> he's going to come back. >> classified documents -- [inaudible] in order to get that briefing specifics from democrats and republicans on the senate intel committee. does the house have its own plan to apply pressure on the administration order to get the briefing that congress acquired? >> this is, take away what were talking about. the house and senate have a constitutional right to oversee this. these agencies do not have a right to withhold information to members of congress, especially in the intel committee. so you will see members inside the house intelligence committee to join with the senators as well. it's just purely jurisdictional, congress.

>> on immigration what's the tighten line on h.r. 29 -- [inaudible] language about asylum. >> look, when we deal with immigration a lot of maps have a lot of different positions. both of those members from texas have a lot to say. tony represents almost 2/3 of all the border. a lot of great input in there. whatever comes through is going to come through committee. members are working together to find a place to get there. at the end of the day we will try to find it with the very best policy, i think there will be a number of bills. >> when will republicans -- spending cut plan? >> and given to you? [inaudible] >> we have talked to the present many times but i'm not going to negotiate this to the press. you can ask this many times. >> what's the timeline? >> a timeline we have is is when you come back and we'll get back together in a meeting. >> one of the members elevated speed i elevator a lot of

people. we went from a minority to the majority. do you know what happens when you get a lot more slots sailed to put a lot more people in committee. go ahead. >> one of the first thinks marjorie taylor green said was ashley babbitt was murdered. do you think ashley abbott was murdered. >> i think the police officer did his job. >> there's an increasing conversation about -- [inaudible] we know your statements about tyre nichols. should and our republicans look into police reform in the house? are you working on that? >> what happened to tybee nichols is appalling and just unapproachable. we what the justice department to work. we want justice to be given. i've always believed in a situation like this you should gather all the information to i've had a couple conversations with tim scott who's really been a lead on many of these cases. we've also come with jim jordan

and others and will make sure we get all the information back. >> you express willingness in the past to work with democrats to remove or replace some of the -- slavers art. you have a lot of power over the artwork that gets displayed into the leader is a something you -- >> i remember when the democrats brought up removing a couple of statute i thought they should've gone for the because i think they should change the name of their own party. because when you think about it, every statue that came was put on a state budget that was a democrat majority that was sent to congress as a democrat majority. there's not one republican that you had to take them. there's not one republican in the process. remember how are party. our very first president was a brand link under the greatest show ever to our constitution was the civil war. if the democrats are truthful about moving forward on what you want or do they should remove the name of the party as well

because that was the name that they provided and circled around and moved forward. look, i'm very proud, , you come into my office, joseph rainey, first black american ever elected to cogswell republican. i watch with the democrats did by bringing jim crow laws to the south going after black americans getting elected to congress, holding them back so forfeit a precedent that would be proud of the legacy. i wouldn't be proud of the history and i would want to change it. >> the difference between last congress when it voted republicans off the committee and omar is there's a lack of accountability because they say you specific have not condemned marjorie taylor green. what is your reaction? >> they are totally wrong. i can't believe you asked. think what you just asked what they said. the somehow every single democrat voted to remove marjorie green on something she said before she ever came to congress.

i can't believe they would defend the. then live the american public to send omar. i'm not removing any like they did. they cheered when they did that. we simply looked at of foreign affairs and what the rest of the world looks like she gave and submitted moment, even people in her own party. the former chair would have voted with us. the american military was equal to the telegram from member of foreign affairs she said

americans only like israel because it's all about benjamin and three years later she said i didn't know what comes to referring to someone jewish. she said 9/11, on 9/11 as a member of congress as an individual sitting on foreign affairs thing happened. what does that they to other people around the world? what is it say to someone else? i'm sorry this is not right, we were right in our actions can start another committee but it puts america in jeopardy i'm not going to do that under my watch and it fair in the process unlike them. [inaudible] >> i don't have anything scheduled. [inaudible]

[inaudible] >> let me be clear. china is never going to tell me where we can or cannot go i have nothing scheduled right now. last question. >> a group of your colleagues have special order on directv's the platforming -- [inaudible] i wanted to ask you -- [inaudible] >> i had discussions with a couple of members, it's very concerning to me. newsmax is the first one. i think america should have a choice and what they're able to get, i'd hate to see the kickoff

because they provide something conservative but it's a place we should look at especially coming after all the things we saw on social media. now we found out on twitter when they told us it wasn't happening. it's a real concern, it's better to bring some and get the facts and no someone being jeopardized on television because there philosophical beliefs are wrong. it's something to look into. >> i hope you have a great weekend. [inaudible conversations]

quorum call:

i know speaker pelosi has been on tv recently but what we are asking for is what their plan? was the plan that they will put

forward fiscal plan, his budget marched night will layout for the american people how he sees fiscal year 2024 and how sees delivering for the american people so we want to see what they are going to put forward. >> thank you. you have ideas in the release of the guantánamo bay, should we be anticipating -- [inaudible] >> in that piece, i can let you know and confirm that today we transferred mr. onto police after he finished serving his sentence at guantánamo facilities. he had an agreement in which he pledged to cooperate with the u.s. government and since then he's honored his cooperation and

commitment. i would say more broadly as it relates to the guantánamo bay and president's position on that, it remains dedicated, we remain dedicated focus on responsibly reducing the detainee population at guantánamo bay. that's still where we stand, department seeking to identify honorable transfer and negotiate transfer arrangements including appropriate security and humane treatment assurances for remaining eligible detainees. and others reports on more detainees being transported, just don't have anything to share their. >> this weekend democratic national committee is accounted for the 2024 primary and cup canvases and they have their way and i know you cannot specifically discuss politics -- but i am curious if the president himself will ever speak publicly about his calls

and the letters he sent. >> it's not what i say, it's the rule of law and i want to be clear, you just kind of threw it out there and it's a personal decision here. it's the rule of law and we believe rule of law here and follow it. i have not had that conversation with the president. i'm not talked about 2024 it is something we can do from here and i'm sure he will hear a lot more from the president moving forward. >> tomorrow in philly? >> tomorrow is an important moment the president to be in philadelphia as you know vice president there with him as well is and will send out a note this afternoon with additional information as we normally do when it comes to events and when he travels outside of d.c. and

what i can say now is tomorrow the president will highlight progress in water infrastructure because there's that official component and replacing lead pipes things to the bipartisan infrastructure law and this trip is a continuation on implementation and this week alone we went to baltimore and new york city talked about funding to replace civil war era fits in york and announced funding to kickstart early phase of the hudson tunnel project so i'll stay there on the official pieces on anything related to the dnc component. >> on policing karen bass on the lead house advocate for the george floyd bill, they are both no longer in the house so who does the white house see as your best partners in the house and are there republicans the white

house reached out to or otherwise potential partners in the house to make the numbers work? >> there were some republicans in the senate that were incredibly helpful or trying to be helpful in the last session as it relates to george floyd injustice and policing act so i'd refer to you to them and see where they are this time as far as it relates to republicans i can tell you for this meaning i can give you list of attendees will be here so clearly they are involved in this process. this next phase of legislation process. the chair will be here in representative hybrid and jackson lee, senator booker who played a big role in as you know and i'm sure you've heard the vice president mentioned yesterday the early stages of the bill she was involved she'll be in the room as well and we will have reverend warnock in

the meeting as well so i would figure they are going to be very involved in this process. >> on the investigation, can you say how many people the white house counsel office added for the investigation? >> i'd refer you to the white house on any staffing or specifics on how they are moving forward with that. [inaudible] >> as you mentioned he met with abdul the second and his royal highness conference of jordan, they had lunch together -- fiscm call? the presiding officer: we are. mrs. fischer: i would ask it be lifted, please. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. fischer: thank you.

mr. president, when i joined the senate armed services committee in 2013, i encountered a new world of information. along with that information came a new world of security measures. as a member of that committee, i reviewed document after document, apprising me of critical national security developments. i also received strict orders not to share the classified information that i encounter. the american people expect senators tasked with this solemn duty to take our responsibilities seriously. let me illustrate just how restrictive the rules are around these classified documents. when i receive classical information, i have to go to a secured place, known as a scif, to read the documents.

there a security manager, and often a capitol police officer, will perform checks when i enter and when i exit. my background on armed services is one of the many reasons that i am shocked at the news that classified documents dating back to president biden's time in the senate were found sitting haphazardly in his garage this month. the president's personal attorney confirmed that some of those documents came from the senate, and they've apparently been collecting dust next to the president's corvette for years. it's also concerning that the president's documents were found in the first place by personal lawyers, without the necessary clearances to view those

classified materials. we've all learned recently that the executive branch has issues regulating documents. i have refrained from commenting on that issue because i've never been a part of that branch of our government, and so i cannot speak to their regulations. but in the senate we have strict protocols that protect classified information. based on the rigorous security standards of the senate, it's important that we now ask hard questions -- how did classified senate documents make their way from the capitol complex past senate security managers and all the way to the president's house in delaware? i think most people believe that

this demonstrates incompetence at best. if a newly elected nebraska senator in 2013 could figure out how these security procedures work, surely a career politician, like then-senator joe biden, could do so. as chair of the foreign relations committee, former senator biden likely had access to information that could have jeopardized lives, especially those of patriots serving in sensitive roles overseas. president biden should know that leaked information puts people in danger. this affects all americans, including the many nebraskans that are serving abroad. not to he mention that it im--

not to mention that it impedes our national security here at home. of course, we have no idea what's in the senate documents that found their way to wilmington, delaware, because the president and his personal attorneys refuse to share them with congress. the biden administration argues that it cannot brief us on the mishandled documents because of the ongoing special counsel investigation. there is precedent for intelligent briefings coinciding with special counsel investigations. and as my friend senator cornyn said last week, there are public safety and national security concerns that make this an exceptional case. if there was a breakdown in senate protocols to protect

classified information, then we need to know that, and we need to know it immediately. that's the only way that we will know how to rectify the potential problems caused by the president's unsecured senate documents. we at least need to know what the general subject of the documents or the area of the world that they cover. i'm proud of my colleagues on the intelligence committee, both democrats and republicans, for realizing the seriousness of this issue. i hope that we can continue to set aside partisan politics and that we can uncover the truth in this matter. president biden's comment on his handling of documents a couple weeks ago was that he has no regrets.

well, let me tell you, mr. president, if a sitting senator was found to have mishandled classified information, it would be more than just regrettable. it would call into question his or her capacity to serve in this chamber, and it would be a slap in the face to the hardworking men and women of the intelligence committee. by the time we uncover the truth about these documents, i hope that the president will have learned to regret his bad decision. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

good morning. wonderful prayer, breakfast. today they put the president and vice president will work for us, thankful for the bipartisan series in which prayer breakfast was conducted and hopefully as we move forward in this 118 congress we can continue to adopt the spirit of cleve bradley and try to find common ground whenever and wherever possible. democrats remain committed to

that very thing. we will consistently push back against the extreme model republican agenda. whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head as it's doing once again today on the floor of the house of representatives. extreme maga republicans in the house has no real agenda when it comes to making life better for everyday americans rated their agenda is to cut social security, cut medicare, hold the united states accountable and try to impose 30% national sales tax on everyday americans. it will dramatically increase cost on 90% of the american people. that's extreme maga republican agenda. they have no plan, no vision, no

ideas when it comes to making life better for everyday americans and that's what's today on the house of representatives will once again reveal. we are still waiting for them to put forward a spending plan we can debate it, show us your plan. instead, they bring to the floor house of representatives today a resolution on socialism. condemn -- but understand goal of this fake fraudulent resolution is to somehow ride cover for extreme maga republican to try to undermine an agenda designed to lift up the well-being of the american people. why do we know this? going all the way back to the

days of fdr through harry truman, president kennedy, all the way up to president clinton and obama and president biden they call things like social security socialism, medicare, socialism, extreme maga republicans have called public education socialism. medicaid socialism. the affordable care act -- socialism. the american rescue plan -- socialism. the american people should not fooled by anything that takes place on the floor today in respect to this so-called resolution on socialism. the other thing i've heard today

relates to this effort to remove in partisan fashion representative ilhan omar from the foreign affairs committee house democrats unanimously voted for her to continue her service on the foreign affairs committee. the refugee elected to the united states congress duly sent back to the house by the 20 in minnesota. the president of omar certainly has made mistakes. she's used anti-semitic words that were clearly and

unequivocally condemned by house democrats when it took place four years ago -- hampshire. ms. hassan: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hassan: and, mr. president, i ask consent for the scheduled vote to start immediately. the presiding officer: without objection. the question occurs on the nomination. ms. hassan: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: