administration did this, companies in colorado started to say we're going to go out of business. companies in nevada and new mexico said we're going out of business. the capital that was investing in them went away. this isn't hypothetical. this was happening. they were saying to me and i know they were saying to the presiding officer, we are going to go bankrupt as a result of this policy. we are going bruft as a result of this -- bankrupt as a result of this policy. we can't sell enough solar panels here in america. we can't install enough solar panels, we can't hire enough people and now our own country is saying we're going to bring this to an end. and we went to the white house and we said, we can't do this to tend of thousands of people all across our country. we can't do this if you're committed to fighting climate change. we can't do this if you're committed to the union workers that are installing all of this

plant all over the united states. and i remember a phone call with the presiding officer with the white house where i said, this is a matter of days, not months. and to their credit, they came back and they said, you guys were right. we need to put a in of the in place. -- we need to put a moratorium in place. we need to have two years where we can have a transition, you know, to give us the chance to start manufacturing these panels here in america. amazing to have people that strategic in our democracy, to be able to say, you know what? we passed a law, the inflation reduction arctic, that's going to put us in the position of being able to manufacture these solar panels here, which ronald reagan and all those other people should have never sent to china to begin w so we're going to begin them back.

it'll just take a little time. in the meantime, we're going to adopt a set of policies that are going to allow the small businesses that are installing solar all over nevada, all over colorado, all over this country, we're not going to just allow them, we're going to celebrate the fact that they're there. we're going to give them notice. and we're going to act strategically with respect to china. that's what we did. the combination of that moratorium and the flakes reduction act, that's probably the most strategic we've been around here in decades, in decades. and now comes the senator from florida who say, i'm going to blow this up. i'm going to compete with china by destroying the solar industry in the united states. i'm going to compete with china by putting tens of thousands of people that are now working on the unemployment rolls. i'm going to compete with china, the senator from florida says, by putting a $1 billion

retroactive tax on the solar industry in nevada and colorado and all across the united states of america. that doesn't sound like competing with china. it sounds like surrender to me. that sounds like waving the white flag to me. and in all of the history of self-inflicted wounds around here, the -- that's the only -- being just the latest example. don't get me started on that, although i am just say parenthetically, why anybody in this chamber or in that chamber would think this is the moment in american history to raise interest rates on the american people, on home buyers and on people that have car loans and people that are paying their student debt, i don't know. but that's not the topic we're

here for today. but it almost is just nuts, especially when the status quo is going to be so great for america, because the status quo is we're going to spend the next two years continuing to install solar panels. we're going to spend the next two years standing up manufacturing all across the united states of america. i hope a bunch of that is going to be in colorado, so we're building and manufacturing these solar panels here. and so what i would say is, if you are voting with the senator from florida, don't do it because you're competing somehow with the chinese; you're surrendering to the chinese. and if you're doing it because you think that we got taken to the cleaners by the chinese in terms of the manufacturing of solar panels to begin with, i acknowledge that. but that wasn't the biden

administration's fault. they're the ones that are trying to bring it back. they're the ones that are bringing it back. just like we were the ones that brought the semiconductor industry back. and we have an incredible opportunity to go forward here to grow the industry that we have and to lead the world, as i said, in this transition from fossil fuels to clean energy. there is no country in the world that is better situated than the united states of america to lead that transition. because of who we are, because of the natural resources that we have, and because of the bill that the presiding officer and i voted for. and we shouldn't upset that. we shouldn't change that. and so i would encourage every single senator in this chamber, whether democrats or republicans, to vote down this

bill in the name of the competition that we're in with china, to vote down this bill in the name of working people in this country, to vote down this bill in the name of our kids and grandkids who hopefully are going to benefit from our leadership and the strategy that we've been pursuing to make this transition, and let's agree together that we can find much more constructive ways to compete with our adversaries around the world. thank you, madam president. thank you for your leadership on this issue, and thank you for giving me a few minutes to talk today. i yield the floor, and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. carper: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: are we in a quorum call. the presiding officer: we are. mr. carper: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. carper: good afternoon, madam president. met me start by congratulating on your good work on this initiative. our critical work to combat the harmful effects of climate change are at risk. i'm particularly concerned about the effort our colleagues are

undertaking to make even more dire the situation that our planet already faces, make it worse. every day that goes by, we hear about the horrific scenes that are caused by our natural disasters. wildfires in the west and in the northeast, flooding and hurricanes in the south, tornadoes like the ones we had just last month in the southern part of our state that took the life along with countless tornadoes along the midwest and the list goes on and on and on. these disasters are devastating families, not just into my state, not just in your state, but also in states across our country and recognizing -- and wreaking havoc on our economy. over 3.3 million americans were displaced due to natural disasters last year. let meet -- let me say that again. 3.3 million americans were displaced due to natural disasters. on top of that, billions of dollars are spent every year,

billions of dollars spent every year, in the aftermath of these disasters. that is double the number of people in montana and vermont combined. let me say that again. that is double the number of people in montana and vermont combined. we cannot sit idly by, like some of our colleagues today would have us do, or allow for a reversal of the policies that are working to mitigate this devastation. as we all know, the solar industry has been critical in helping us combat the effects of climate change. by transitioning to cleaner energy solutions, we are taking the necessary steps to reduce our impact, the human impact on our warming planet. the solar industry is not just good for our planet, it's good for american workers, a lot of them. hundreds of thousands of jobs have been created right here on our own american soil to build the solar industry and to

strengthen our supply chain. the flakes reduction act -- the inflation reduction act took this one step further, allocating the largest investment in the solar industry ever. the act is already creating more jobs for more americans across our country while expanding our domestic solar manufacturing capacity. with the commitment of the biden administration, we are on track to increase domestic solar panel manufacturing capacity eightfold by the end of next year, generating up to $40 billion in new investments. let me say that again. we can increase our domestic solar panel manufacturing eightfold by the end of next year. why would key get in had the way of that prog? we can only ensure that this out come is possible if we overcome the significant challenge presented here today as you

might remember, lat year the investigation into solar tariffs imposed on companies in southeast asia halted the supply chains of critical materials for american solar deployment. rightfully, the biden administration stepped in and announced the suspension of these tariffs. sanctions saved tens of thousands of jobs, allowing our transition to cleaner energy solutions to continue as demand for solar products continues to increase exponentially. today we are once again facing the same threats to american jobs that we faced a year ago. it's unimaginable, at least to me, that we would be willing to make an unforced error, an unforced error, in our commitment to protecting our planet. we shouldn't be fighting the biden administration's work to preserve the trade balance. we simply can't afford to make the mistake that would halt

solar deployment and cost us a whole ton of american jobs. we are only able to meet one-third of the domestic demand, one third. it's imperative that we protect this industry and the tens of thousands of jobs that it produces. a pause on solar tariffs would be devastating. let's take a walk through what americans would face. first of all, 30,000 good-paying jobs would be eliminated this year, not next year, the year after that; this year, 30,000. of that 30,000, 4,000 are manufacturing jobs stemming from a domestic investment in the solar industry from legislation like the bipartisan infrastructure act and the inflation reduction act. second, co2 emissions would

increase. the same amount of emissions generated by electricity use of eight million homes in a year. this would undermine the progress on so similar deployment and starve the solar market of the critical panels that cannot be obtained in the u.s. at this time. third, strengthening the supply chain by our own manufacturing would be harmed. materials that are currently not available in the u.s. would directly undercut our own efforts and send the supply chain into a downward spiral. fourth, roughly 14% of the industry's anticipated projects would be canceled. i'll say that again. roughly 14% of the industry's anticipated projects would be canceled. significantly setting back our transition to a green energy

economy. we cannot afford to let this happen. we need to do everything in our power to lift up innovators in the solar industry, to boldly cut emissions from our power sector and a tack this climate crisis head-on all while continuing to create good-paying jobs. heaven forbid that the future generations look back and see our own -- our very own hand force this error. i want to thank you, our presiding officer, senator rosen, your wonderful leadership on this issue. i want to urge all of our colleagues to vote no on this resolution, forked good -- for the good of our country, for the good of our planet and for the good of all the people that inhabit this planet. and also for generations to qom, our -- -- and also for generations to come, our kids and grandkids. i want to take just a moment and get some other papers from my

binder, so i would note the absence of a quorum. i will be back in one minute. don't go away. the presiding officer: without objection, the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

mr. carper: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: i believe we're in a quorum. i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. carper: thanches, madam president. madam president, i rise for a second time today, and this time in opposition to senate joint resolution 9, a congressional review act resolution to disapprove of the u.s. fish and wildlife services rural protecting a bird known as the lesser prairie chicken under

the endangered species act. before i explain why my colleagues should reject this resolution, let me first answer two basic questions that some who may be watching this debate could be asking. first, what is a lesser prairie chicken? and second, why do we need to protect it? those are two pretty good questions. native to the southern great pines, the lesser prairie chicken has long been considered an indicator for healthy grasslands and prairies on which hundreds of species depend. if the lesser prairie chicken is in peril, in time other species could be in peril as well. today the lesser prairie chicken can be found in five states -- colorado, kansas, oklahoma, texas, and new mexico. we know that this colorful and some would say charismatic birds distinctive call was once a part

of the prairie sound scape, so much so that it has earned a reputation, ceremonial dancers of native american tribes in communities across its multistate habitat. sadly the population of the lesser prairie chicken has declined by some 97% throughout the last century. 97%. this decline is primarily due to loss of habitat and climate-related drought in the west. in addition to the culture radical -- cultural loss that comes with a declining prairie chicken population there are negative impacts for communities as well. for example, a local prairie chicken festival in new mexico hasn't been held in 2012 because there are no longer enough birds in the area to sustain this tourism. there are no lesser prairie chickens in 45 of our 50 states. there are none.

still we know firsthand the benefits that wildlife tourism can have on local economies. for example, people travel from all across the country, and actually around the world, to come to delaware to see a beloved bird called the red knot that is a familiar face and welcome face in our, and along the shores of delaware. this tiny bird which is now a threatened species due to climate change migrates more than 18,000 miles. it's a tiny, little bird. more than 18,000 miles each year on its round trip from the southern tip of south america to the tundra of the north arctic. along the way floks of red knots stop in delaware. they stop for lunch along our beaches in delaware. they lunch on horseshoe crab eggs, often doubling their weight during this process. it is quite the spectacle.

horseshoe crabs have been around for millions of years, and every year during the, certain parts of the year they lay their eggs and they lay them along the delaware beaches. and the red knots come in and swoop them up and go to town, literally doubling their weight before they head north or head south. people come from all over the world to witness this. when they come from all over the world, they stay in our hotels, they eat in our restaurants. we have no sales tax. they shop with no sales tax. and for us, it's a pretty good thing, and it's an even better deal for the red knots. they benefit, and frankly, so do we and our economy. so while some might suggest that providing endangered species act protections for the lesser prairie chicken would hinder economic development, i have, given our experience in

delaware, i have a different perspective based on our experience with threatened, endangered species in the first state. delaware is not the only state that pays homage to our nation's iconic birds. five national football teams use birds as their mascot including the seattle seahawks, baltimore ray ravens and the philadelphia eagles, go birds. in addition, the great state of louisiana is known as the pelican state. today the distinctive brown pelican is thriving along of louisiana's coast because of the endangered species act. to the west the well loved california condor became extinct in the wild in the year 1987, but with the help of the endangered species act there are now more than 550 condors in the wild. unfortunately endangered species act protections for the lesser prairie chicken have been delayed for decades.

now the species is in serious peril, which is why we should not wait any longer. some of our colleagues who oppose this rule for the lesser prairie chicken have claimed that the fish and wildlife service did not properly account for long-standing voluntary conservation efforts, and that's just not true. while i commend the volunteer actions to conserve the lesser prairie chicken, the science shows that existing efforts are not nearly enough to protect and recover the species. that said, even with the data clearly demonstrating the need for enhanced protection for this extraordinary bird, the fish and wildlife service worked hard to create a flexible rule that would mitigate the negative impacts on impacted industry. specifically, the many years of volunteer conservation actions are not for naught. under the biden rule, those volunteer actions remain the foundation for current habitat

conservation plans to protect lesser prairie chickens while allowing continued industry operations. under the rule, farmers, ranchers and energy producers can generally continue their normal activities as long as they adhere to reasonable conservation plans. that is true even if these activities have a small negative impact on the species. and this flexibility applies to the range for the entire, entire northern population, including all the known habitats in kansas, in colorado, and oklahoma, and about half of the state of texas. what's more, the fish and wildlife service delayed the effective date of this rule for 60 days to allow more time to work with partners and to work with stakeholders. doing so allow impacted industries to create conservation plans and minimize disruption to activity in the region. the service also continues to

collaborate closely with states to ensure that all interested parties have the tools that they need in order to comply with the rule. despite this effort by the fish and wildlife service to ensure a smooth implementation, this cra resolution would take a sledgehammer to the rule, and this cra is indeed a sledgehammer. if enacted, this resolution would not only invalidate the rule issued by the fish and wildlife service, but it could also prevent the service from ever issuing a listing the lesser prairie chicken in the future. to put it simply, enacting this resolution could set this species on a path to continue to decline and eventual extinction. the resolution also undermines the endangered species act. how is that, you might ask. well, this resolution violates the basic premise that the law should be applied based on

science and not politics. in 2019, an intergovernmental panel issued an alarming report. what did that report say? that report found that roughly one million species on our planet are in danger of extinction. let me just say that again. in 2019, four years ago, an intergovernmental panel issued an alarming report. what did it report? they found that roughly one million species, one million species on our planet are in danger of extinction. we know preserving our planet's biodiversity is critical for innovation, critical for human health and critical for our environment. the endangered species act is our best tool, our best tool for protecting species and preserving biodiversity. let me conclude, madam president, this afternoon by offering a reminder of what's at stake here today.

extinction is forever. let me say that again. extinction is forever. and overturning this listing may well mean the permanent loss of an iconic american species that would harm our planet that we pass on to future generations and the communities and cultures that hold lesser prairie chicken in high regard. for all these reasons, madam president, i oppose this resolution. i strongly urge our colleagues to join me and others in voting no. with that, madam president, i yield back the balance of my time. thanks so much. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the junior senator from nevada.

ms. rosen: madam president, as you heard from my colleagues before me, there are serious concerns about the job-killing resolution that we will be voting on this evening and the effects it will have on our solar industry and american workers. for years solar has been growing, has been a growing source of clean, low-cost energy and economic development in states all across our nation, and it is a source of jobs, good-paying union jobs right here in the united states. america's domestic solar industry is made up of more than 10,000 businesses large and small, located in every single state, employing over 250,000 americans. i will repeat that -- employing over 250,000 americans. in fact, my state of nevada has the most solar jobs per capita of any other state in this great

nation. so when we talk about the solar industry, we're talking about an industry that is generating hundreds of thousands of american jobs and supporting american workers while at the same time helping us to transition to clean, renewable energy. and thanks to historic investments we secured in the bipartisan infrastructure law and the inflation reduction act, the american solar industry is experiencing an unprecedented boom. last year a new solar project was installed in the united states every 44 seconds in fact, and the demand is only expected to increase. this is only going to create more jobs and help make us more energy independent. for example, the average solar installer in reno, nevada, they make about $80,000 a year.

it's a good job. and that's a job that lets a family pay their rent, buy groceries, put something away for their kids' college and for their own retirement. that's the kind of jobs we should be creating, and we are thanks to these historic investments. and that's why i've been a champion of our domestic solar industry and fighting back from attacks from colleagues, well, frankly, on both sides of the aisle. it's why i led a bipartisan group of senators last year to push president biden to pause additional retroactive solar tariffs after a commerce department investigation. well, they threatened to destroy our domestic solar industry and kill tens of thousands of american jobs. but at this moment, this moment our american solar workers are at risk. my workers in nevada are at

risk. those $80,000 a year jobs are at risk. all of the progress we've made to transition to clean energy, all the good-paying jobs that we've created, and all of the solar projects that are lowering energy costs for families, well, they're all at risk too. last week the house of representatives passed a congressional review act. this resolution rolls back the two-year pause on these additional solar tariffs. if enacted, this resolution will decimate our american solar industry. so, let me be crystal clear -- enacting additional retroactive tariffs on imported sells will absolutely kill the american solar industry, and it will kill any chance to meet our climate goals, and it will kill the

current american solar jobs. and i know that some of my colleagues have said that supporting this resolution is being pro-worker. well, i'm just going to say that that is wrong. no one can say they're pro-worker while at the same time voting to kill good-paying american jobs, and that's exactly what this resolution will do. i don't even know why this is on the table. are we seriously going to tell that stolear installer he's out of a job? are we going to put his family on unemployment just for politics? i'm going to repeat it. supporting this resolution and killing american jobs, it hurts workers and their families, period. opposing this resolution means being on the side of american workers. it means being on the side of unions, like ibew, the laborers,

the operating engineers, the carpenters union, who are all urging a no vote today. all of us here in this chamber agree that we have to strengthen domestic manufacturing. we all agree we have to be competitive with china. and we all agree that we have to be energy independent. and that's what this current pause on additional tariffs, that's what this current pause helps us to do. because right now, solar panel manufacturers in the united states, we can only meet about 15% of the demand for american solar projects. and so, thanks to the investments made by the inflation reduction act, we're going to greatly ramp up our domestic solar manufacturing, creating jobs, making us energy independent, right here at home, but it's going to take time.

it will take time to ramp up domestic solar manufacturing so it can provide more than 15% of u.s. demand, and our current solar industry, well, their success depends on a steady supply of solar panels to install. so we can't cut off supply of imported solar panels by enacting massive retroactive tariffs that will just kill solar projects, it will kill american jobs, and it will hurt american workers. so, what can we do? well, what we can do is have a bridge that allows us to do both. keep our domestic solar industry alive while we invest and bolster our domestic manufacturing so that we can be competitive with china. and that's exactly what this pause helps us to achieve. enacting retroactive tariffs

will even directly harm u.s. solar panel manufacturing businesses by cutting off their major source of solar cells, a key component in the panels, making it that much harder for them and us to compete with china. that's why i'm leading the ifort to block this -- to block -- leading the effort to block this resolution and keep the pause in place. so madam president, i urge my fellow colleagues to join me and be on the side of workers by protecting good-paying american union jobs. to join me in fighting to meet our climate goals. and to join me in making our nation more competitive with china by voting against this job-killing resolution and saving america's solar future. hundreds of thousands of american solar workers, their families, our communities, well, they're counting on us.

so, thank you, madam president. i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. warnock: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. warnock: madam president, i rise -- the presiding officer: we are in a quorum call. mr. warnock: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. warnock: thank you so much madam president, i rise today in shock and sorrow and in grief

for my home state, and if i am honest i rise really with a deep sense of anger about what is happening in our country in the area of gun violence and death. i stood here in march of 2021, after a gunman went on a rampage across metro atlanta and snatched eight precious souls, people with families and friends who loved them dear. and here i am standing again. this time with the tragedy having occurred in midtown atlanta, right in my own backyard. and while this is still a developing situation, according

to media reports, so far at least five people were shot -- five -- on a random afternoon, and there's been one fatality, the others taken to the hospital. i want to take a moment and thank law enforcement officials for keeping us as safe as they can. i want to thank them for their work trying to apprehend this individual. i'm also thankful for local media, who are keeping all of us informed. and i'm grateful for our first responders, the people in health care, the people on the front lines. we count on them every day to care for those who are injured, to respond to people in peril, and that's what makes this particular shooting ironic and

deeply upsetting, because it underscores the fact that none of us is safe, no matter where we are. this happened in a medical facility, where people are trying to find healing. so i want to underscore that, because there have been so many mass shootings, in fact, about one every day in this country this year, that tragically we act as if this is routine. we behave as if this is normal. it is not normal. it is not right for us to live in a nation where nobody is safe, no matter where they are. we're not safe in our schools. we're not safe in our workplaces. we're not safe at the grocery

store. we're not safe a at movie theaters. we're not safe at spas. we're not safe in our houses of worship. there is no sanctuary in the sanctuary. we're not safe at concerts. we're not safe at banks. we're not safe at parades. we're not safe in our own yards and in our own homes. and now, today, we can add medical facilities to that list. and still we have done so very little in this building to respond. and in the american political square at large. i think there's an unspoken assumption. i think that the unspoken

assumption is that this can't happen to me. that this won't happen to me. it won't happen to people that i love. but with a mass shooting every day? the truth is the chances are great. i shudder to say it, but the truth is, in a real sense, it's only a matter of time that this kind of tragedy comes knocking on your door. and then, in a deeper sense, i think it's important for us to recognize that it's already happening to you. you may not be the victim of a

mass shooting. you may not know anyone who's a victim of a mass shooting yet. but in a real sense, it is already happening to all of us. dr. king is right, we are in a single garment of destiny caught up in a network of mutuality, whatever affects one indirectly. this is knocking on all of our doors. i feel this afternoon, in a very real sense, i feel it in my bones, because my own two children were on lockdown. this afternoon. i have two small children and their schools are on lockdown responding to this tragedy. they're there, i'm here hoping and praying that they are safe.

but the truth is none of us is safe. as a pastor, i'm praying for those who are affected by this tragedy, but i hasten to say that thoughts thoughts and prayers are -- that thoughts and prayers are not enough. in fact, it is a contradiction to say that you are thinking and praying and do nothing. it is to make a mockery of prayer. it is to trivialize faith. we pray not only with our lips, we pray with our legs. we pray by taking action. and still there are those who want to convince us that this -- that this is the cost of freedom. to them we have to say no.

this ongoing slow-moving tragedy in our country, mass shootings as routine is not the cost of freedom, it is the cost of blind object city nens, a refusal to change course, it is the cost of demagoguery, those who want to convince us that commonsense gun reform is somehow trying to take everyone's guns. this is not the cost of freedom. dare i say it, it is the cost of greed. gun lobbists willing to line their pockets even at the cost of our children. and so we must act.

i'm proud of the fact that we did, after 30 years, pass some gun safety legislation last congress. it was a significant piece of legislation, but obviously it's not enough. 87%, or more, of americans believe that we ought to have universal background checks and still we can't get it. think about that, in a country where everybody says we're divided, and there are deep divisions to be sure. there's disagreement on this issue, to be sure, but in a country where there is 87% agreement on something, there's no movement on it in congress. which means that that's a problem with our democracy. the people's voices have been squeezed out of their democracy and there is a growing chasm of

what people want and what they can get from their government. we saw it in a stark and ugly way two weeks ago when we had two young brave legislators stand up in tennessee -- three in fact -- and the same legislature that refused to do anything on gun violence came down on them with all of their might and expelled them from the legislature. we have to stand up against these anti-democratic forces at work in our country, and we have to give the people their voices back. and if we refuse to act while our children are dying, and in a moment when no one is safe, then shame on us.

shame on us if we allow this to happen and we do absolutely nothing. st. augustine, the african bishop of the church said that hope has two beautiful daughters. he said they are both beautiful. anger and courage. anger with the way things are and courage to see that they do not remain as they are. i'm pleading, i'm begging all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to remember the covenant that we have with one another as an american people,

stand up in this defining moment and do everything we can to protect all of us and certainly all of our children. we owe it to the people who have sent us here. i know that there are those who will look at this moment and say, politically, do you really think we can get anything done here? they will ask, if -- they will ask if this is the time given the state of politics in our country right now. i respond with the words of dr. king who said that tt time is always right to do -- who said that the time is always right to do what is right, and that time is right now. madam president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senior senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. wicker: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that hubert couch and james kasi, interns in my office, be granted floor privileges until may 24,

2023. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wicker: thank you, madam president. and i come before the senate this afternoon to discuss the united states' navy ability to deter conflict in the pacific. as china's navy has grown, ours has shrunk and we're running out of time to tilt the balance of power back toward the united states and to ensure that deterrence does not fail in the western pacific. for centuries, american naval power has proven the decisive factor in our security and prosperity. the u.s. navy secured our victory in the american revolution, and during the 18th century, it enabled our transformation into a world power into the 19th century. it defeated adversaries in two world wars in the 20th century and it will decide our success or failure this century also. china's rising strength on the

seas is a direct threat to international peace and security. their ability to exercise total control of the major sea lanes strikes at heart of free and market-based economies in asia and around the globe. for that few minutes today i will outline the threat, our lack of preparedness, and what it will take for us to deter china from acting in an irresponsible way. the chinese communist party understands a truth 19th century american capital bert mohan who said, whoever rules the waves, rules the world. beijing knows a great navy is a necessary step in their match for regional dominance. and so while our own shipyards are closing and downsizing and our shipbuilding budget shrank, china went to sea.

according to the secretary of the navy, china has more ship-building capacity in just one shipyard than we have in our entire industrial base. by the end of this decade, china is expected to have a fleet of 440 war ships. if the navy's latest 30-year shipbuilding is a guide, we would only have 290. the latest act by the congress is 355. a chinese navy of the size i mentioned, 440, and the strength relative to our own direct -- to our own directly endangers our partner taiwan, our allies in japan and in the philippines and our military bases in the pacific. more chinese ships means more sea-based chinese and vertical missile launch cells, missile

delivery systems which are the primary offensive tool of any navy. a recent analysis found beijing has more vertical launch cells than the united states and our allies combined. those cells, in addition to china's extensive sensing capabilities on the ground and in space, increase their advantage in the western pacific as our navy plays an away game far from home. these troubling facts demand a decisive response and yet our navy has failed to keep up. the department of defense recently delivered another 30-year shipbuilding plan that fails to meet congress's requirement. their plan can take three shipbuilding options, only one of which would grow the fleet to the legally required battle force of 355 ships. even then it would take two

decades to get there. this is not a blueprint for long-term american command of the sea. instead, the administration is ceding control of the western pacific to the dictator xi jinping and his communist fleet. in fact, we are still living off the remains of the reagan era defense buildup. retiring ships we built at the end of the cold war without replacing them. our shipbuilding pace has slowed. at the peak of the 1980's construction we constructed four los angeles attack submarines a year, today we struggle to build two advanced submarines annually. some put a positive spin on this policy, labeling it a strategic pause or saying this is a deliberate strategy of divest to invest. whatever the catch phrase, it is

dangerous, madam president. we are shrinking our fleet and leaving our sailors to fight a war without the tools to win. in some cases technicians are forced to repair destroyers by taking parts off other destroyers just to meet deployment requirements. one of our most vital submarines in the indo-pacific, the uss connecticut, sustained damage two years ago and will likely not be repaired for another five years -- another five years. congress has already appropriated $50 million to repair the connecticut, and we'll probably need to set aside more funds. the uss boise, one of our fast attack nuclear submarines, has spent eight years in dry dock -- eight years in dry dock to receive rudimentary maintenance.

eight years. this is absolutely unacceptable. it will cost over $350 million to repair the boise on top of the costs associated with keeping it in port for nearly a decade. a diminished fleet size is not just about numbers, it has other cascading negative effects, particularly on our sailors. when when we have fewer assets and yet ask our navy to perform the same mission, we make sailors take longer deployments, that means a lower quality of life and higher stress on our ships and our sailors. both of which impede our readiness effort. this leaves us in a dairnlgus near-term -- dangerous near-term situation with china. and time is not on our side. we have promising new military technology set to come online in

a decade or more. but china will likely reach its strongest position against us. -- long before that new technology is operational. that the combined with the retirement of ships is set to dub the decade as the terrible 20's. this discrepancy led rear admiral mike studdeman to say we have china blindness. it's no small thing for a one-star to tell us we are blind to the capabilities and urgency of our chief adversaries sierra's -- adversary's military. we're short on time, but we are not out of time.

we do not want a conflict with china. china and the united states can prosper and coexist. but the best way to achieve peace is deterrence. to deter china in the short term and restore our long-term maritime strength is i propose three concrete steps that we can take right now. first we need to make a monumental investment in maritime infrastructure. our shipbuilders are ready to build more but they need the investments in machine tooling, workforce and materials t as our chief of naval operations recently testified, our navy should get a second shipyard for constellation-class frigate construction and we should increase investments in our submarine industrial base if we have any hope of implementing the aucus deal, a 2022 agreement in which we promised to sell submarines to australia as fast as we can build them.

congress can spark a renaissance of shipbuilding by offering a demand signal for a major maritime buildup. ba.longside a bipartisan group of representatives and senators, i have introduced the shipyard act to offer just such a demand signal. the act authorizes $25 billion of investment in our shipbuilding efforts. and it powers our it empowers our shipyards to build the future of the u.s. navy fleet and could be immediately implemented into this year's defense measures. increased funding could push the department of the navy shipyard infrastructure optimization program to new levels of efficacy. this would add to the success we are already deeing, and there is no time to waste. second, we must give the navy the capabilities they need to deter a conflict in the next five years. this means taking technologies and concepts that are already on the shelf and integrating them

into our western pacific posture. we should be forging ahead with purchases of sea mines, unmanned platforms and long-range munitions which would all be relevant and capability in the near term. we also need to accelerate our efforts to field maritime target cells to ensure our fleet is properly able to coordinate and target adversarial assets far from our shores. third, we should continue to boost the programs within the navy that are already making major strides toward deterring china. the commandant of the marine corps, david burger force design 2030 has transformed the marine corps into the cutting edge of our deterrent posture in the pacific. and general burger needs a fleet of amphibious ships to complete the job. congress should step up and add funding for amphibious ships in this year's ndaa.

the multiyear block buys would also signal demand to the shipbuilding industry. these programs will be difficult and will of course cost money. but failing to complete them will facilitate china's advance and be much more difficult and much more expensive in the long run. we are in our most dangerous national security moment since world war ii. we are in our most dangerous security moment since world war ii, madam president, and we must urgently restore our naval deterrent to meet the moment. others have recognized this throughout our history. reflecting on the dark days of world war ii in early 1942, winston churchill wrote, the foundation of all our hopes and dreams was the immense shipbuilding program of the united states. once again, the peace and security of the free world depends on our navy. we need to rebuild it with

haste. thank you, madam president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. it is an honor to join my colleagues of both parties on the floor today to read one of the greatest pieces of writing of the 20th century, dr. king's letter from the birmingham jail. i thank the other senators for joining me. i -- madam president, i ask unanimous consent that after i speak briefly, you will recognize in this order, senators warren, capito, boozman. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: our colleagues began this tradition. it is an honor to carry it. today we recommit to dr. king's commission to equal rights to all to ensuring that every voice is heard and to the dignity of work. on friday, we will -- we marked

workers' memorial day when we honored workers killed on the job. people don't talk enough about what dr. king was doing when he was assassinated. he was killed in memphis while fighting for sanitation workers, acsme local 1633, some of the most exploited workers in our country. he traveled there following the death of two sanitation workers on the job. those two workers -- not only was it a segregated neighborhood in memphis, of course, even the garbage truck was segregated. two white workers worked in the cab. two black workers worked in in the back of the truckment. they were killed when the truck malfunctioned and crushed them. dr. king understood the keep connection between workers' rights and committee on foreign investment in the united states rights. whenever you're engaged in work and serves humanity, it has worth and dignity, all labor has dignity. until we have dignity for all

workers, our work here remains unfinished. we have a long road left to travel. it is up to us to push our country further along the road. that's the message to knee in dr. king's words in the letter we read today. just a quick preface of what this letter was all about. we will turn to reverend warnock. dr. king was held in the birmingham, alabama, jail for the supposed crime of leading a series of peaceful protests and boycotts. est the goal was to pressure the business community to end discrimination in hear hiring for local jobs. some white ministers in alabama had taken issue with the boycotts. they told dr. king, slow down. we're supporting. we're for voting rights too. don't move too fast. don't demand too much. dr. king rejected that premise. it is up to all of us as members of our churches to demand justice now, not at some hazy

far-off point in the future that never seems to get here. dr. king made that point more eloquently and persuasively than any of us ever could. so i will turn to the reverend, senator warnock. mr. warnock: thank you, very much, madam president. the presiding officer: the junior senator from georgia. mr. warnock: thank you so much. i am deeply honored to participate in this great tradition started by senator doug jones of alabama during his tenure, carried out by my colleague, senator brown, and i'm always honored to revisit these words from dr. king from the letter from a birmingham jail. so without delay, my dear my dear fellow clergymen, while confined here in the birmingham city jail, i came across your recent statement calling my present activities "unwise and untimely." seldom do i pause to answer

criticism of my work and ideas. if i sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have litte time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and i would have no time for constructive work. but since i feel that you are men of genuine goodwill and tht your criticisms are sincerely set forth, i want to try to answer your statement in what i hope will be patient and reasonable terms. i think i should indicate why i am here in birmingham, since you have been influenced by the view which argues against "outsiders coming in." i have the honor of serving as president of the southern christian leadership conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in atlanta, georgia. we have some 85 affiliated

organizations across the south, and one of them is the alabama christian movement for human rights. frequently we share staff, educational and financial resources with our affiliates. several months ago, the affiliate here in birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. we readily consented, and when the hour came, we lived up to our promise. so i, along with several members of my staff, am here because i was invited here. i am here because i have organizational ties here. but, more basically, i am in birmingham because injustice is here. just as the prophets of the eighth century b.c. left their

villages and carried their "thus saith the lord" far beyond the boundaries of their hometowns, and just as the apostle paul left his village of tarsus and carried the gospel of jesus christ to the far corners of the greco roman world, so am i compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own hometown. like paul, i must constantly respond to the macedonian call for aid. moreover, i am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states. i cannot sit idly by in atlanta and not be concerned about what happens in birmingham. injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. we are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.

whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly. never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. anyone who lives inside the united states can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds. you deplore the demonstrations taking place in birmingham. but your statement, i am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. i am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. it is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's

white power structure left the negro community with no alternative. in any nonviolent campaign, there are four basic steps: collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist; negotiation; self-purification; and direct action. we have gone through all these steps in birmingham. there can be no gainsaying the fact that racial injustice engulfs this community. birmingham is probably the most thoroughly segregated city in the united states. its ugly record of brutality is widely known. negroes have experienced grossly unjust treatment in the courts. there have been more unsolved bombings of negro homes and churches in birmingham than in any other city in the nation.

these are the hard, brutal facts of the case. on the basis of these conditions, negro leaders sought to negotiate with the city fathers. but the latter consistently refused to engage in good faith negotiation. then, last september, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of birmingham's economic community. in the course of the negotiations, certain promises were made by the merchants -- for example, to remove the stores' humiliating racial signs. on the basis of these promises, the reverend fred shuttlesworth and the leaders of the alabama christian movement for human rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. as the weeks and months went by, we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. a few signs, briefly removed,

returned; the others remained. as in so many past experiences, our hopes had been blasted, and the shadow of deep disappointment settled upon us. we had no alternative except to prepare for direct action, whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and the national community. mindful of the difficulties involved, we decided to undertake a process of self-purification. we began a series of workshops on nonviolence, and we repeatedly asked ourselves: "are you able to accept blows without retaliating?" "are you able to endure the ordeal of jail?" we decided to schedule our direct action program for the

easter season, realizing that except for christmas, this is the main shopping period of the year. knowing that a strong economic withdrawal program would be the by-product of direct action, we felt that this would be the best time to bring pressure to bear on the merchants for the needed change. then it occurred to us that birmingham's mayoral election was coming up in march, and we speedily decided to postpone action until after election day. when we discovered that the commissioner of public safety, eugene "bull" connor, had piled up enough votes to be in the runoff, we decided again to postpone action until the day after the runoff so that the demonstrations could not be used to cloud the issues. like many others, we waited to

see mr. connor defeated, and to this end we endured postponement after postponement. having aided in this community need, we felt that our direct action program could be delayed no longer. mr. tillis: mr. president, i will continue. you may well ask, "why direct action? why sit-ins, marches, and so forth? isn't negotiation a better path?" you are quite right in calling for negotiation. indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. it seeks so to dramatize the

issue that it can no longer be ignored. my citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. but i must confess that i am not afraid of the word "tension." i have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. just as socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. the purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will

inevitably open the door to negotiation. i, therefore, concur with you in your call for negotiation. too long has our beloved southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue. one of the basic points in your statement is that the action that i and my associates have taken in birmingham is untimely. some have asked, "why didn't you give the new city administration time to act?" the only answer that i can give to this query is that the new birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one before it will act. we are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of albert boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to birmingham. while mr. boutwell is a much more gentle person than mr. connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to

maintenance of the status quo. i have hope that mr. boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. but he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. my friends, i must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as reinhold niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals. we know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. frankly, i have yet to engage n a direct action campaign that

was "well timed" in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. for years now i have heard the word "wait!" it rings in the ear of every negro with piercing familiarity. this "wait" has almost always meant "never." we must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied." we have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and god-given rights. the nations of asia and africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse-and-buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "wait." but when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and

fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your 20 million negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your 6-year-old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that funtown is closed to colored children and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a 5-year-old son who is asking: "daddy, why do white people

treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross-country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes, [racial slur] your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "john," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness" -- then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait.

there comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: i'll continue the reading of martin luther king's letter from the abraham jail. i hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience. you express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. this is certainly a legitimate concern. since we so diligently urge people to obey the supreme court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. one may well ask: "how can you

advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" the answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. i would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. i would agree with st. augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." now, what is the difference between the two? how does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? a just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of god. an unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.

to put it in the terms of st. thomas aquinas, an unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law. any law that uplifts human personality is just. any law that degrades human personality is unjust. all segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality. it gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. segregation, to use the terminology of the jewish philosopher martin buber, substitutes an "i it"

relationship for an "i thou" relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. hence, segregation is not only politically, economically, and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and sinful. paul tillich has said that sin is separation. is not segregation an existential expression of man's tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? thus it is that i can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the supreme court, for it is morally right; and i can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong. let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws.

an unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. this is difference made legal. by the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compelsa minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. this is sameness made legal. let me give another explanation. a law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, s a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. who can say that the legislature of alabama which set up that state's segregation laws was democratically elected?

throughout alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single negro is registered. can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured? sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. for instance, i have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. but such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the first amendment

privilege of peaceful assembly and protest. i hope you are able to see the distinction i am trying to point out. in no sense do i advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. that would lead to anarchy. one who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. i submit that an individual who breaks the law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice is, in reality, expressing the highest respect for law. of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. it was evidenced sublimely in

the refusal of shadrach, meshach, and abednego to obey the laws of nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. it was practiced superbly by the early christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the roman empire. to a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because socrates practiced civil disobedience. in our own nation, the boston tea party represented a massive act of civil disobedience. we should never forget that everything adolf hitler did in germany was "legal" and

everything that the hungarian freedom fighters did in hungary was "illegal." it was "illegal" to aid and comfort a jew in hitler's germany. even so, i am sure that, had i lived in germany at the time, i would have aided and comforted my jewish brothers. if today i lived in a communist country where certain principles dear to the christian faith are suppressed, i would openly advoobing that country's antireligious laws. i yield the floor. mr. brown: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. i must make two honest confessions to you, my christian and jewish brothers. first, i must confess that over the past few years, i have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. i have almost reached the

regrettable conclusion that the negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the white citizen's counselor or the ku klux klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, "i agree with you in the goal you seek, but i cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the negro to wait for a "more convenient season." shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. i had hoped that the white moderate would understand that

law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose, they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. i had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the south is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. we merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. we bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness for the natural

medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured. in your statement, you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. but is this a logical assertion? isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? isn't this like condemning socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? isn't this like condemning jesus because his unique god consciousness and never-ceasing devotion to god's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? we must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently

affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. society must protect the robbed and punish the robber. i had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. i have just received a letter from a white brother in texas. he writes: "all christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. it has taken christianity almost 2,000 years to accomplish what it has. the teachings of christ take time to come to earth." such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that

will inevitably cure all ills. actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. more and more i feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. we will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. human progress never rolls in n wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be coworkers with god, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. we must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood.

now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity. you speak of our activity in birmingham as extreme. at first i was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist. i began thinking about the fact that i stand in the middle of two opposing forces in the negro community. one is a force of complacency, made up in part of negroes who, as a result of long years of oppression, are so drained of self-respect in the sense of "somebodiness" that they have adjusted to segregation; and in part of a few middle-class negroes who, because of a degree of academic and economic security and because in some ways they profit by segregation, have become insensitive to the problems of the masses. the other force is one of bitterness and hatred, and it

comes perilously close to advocating violence. it is expressed in the various black nationalist groups that are springing up across the nation, the largest and best known being elijah muhammad's muslim movement. nourished by the negro's frustration over the continued existence of racial discrimination, this movement is made up of people who have lost faith in america, who have absolutely repudiated christianity, and who have concluded that the white man is an incorrigible "devil." i have tried to stand between these two forces, saying that we need emulate neither the "do nothingism" of the complacent nor the hatred and despair of the black nationalist. for there is the more excellent way of love and nonviolent protest. i am grateful to god that, through the influence of the negro church, the way of nonviolence became an integral part of our struggle. if this philosophy had not emerged, by now many streets of the south would, i am convinced,

be flowing with blood. and i am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as "rabble-rousers" and "outside agitators" those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies -- a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virng. mrs. capito: mr. president, oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. the yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the american negro. something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of africa and his brown and yellow brothers of asia, south america and the caribbean, the united states negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. if one recognizes this vital urge that has engulfed the negro community, one should readily

understand why public demonstrations are taking place. the negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. so let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides -- and try to understand why he must do so. if his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history. so i have not said to my people, "get rid of your discontent." rather, i have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled through into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. and now this approach is being termed extremist. but though i was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as i continued to think about the matter, i gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. was not jesus an extremist for

love -- "love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you." was not amos an extremist for justice -- "let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream." was not paul an extremist for the christian gospel -- "i bear in my body the marks of the lord jesus." was not martin luther an extremist -- "here i stand; i cannot do otherwise, so help me god." and john bunyan -- "i will stay in jail to the end of my days before i make a butchery of my conscience." and abraham lincoln -- "this nation cannot survive half slave and half free." and thomas jefferson -- "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created. equal ..." so the question is not whether we will be extremists but what kind of extremists we will be. will we be extremists for hate or for love?

will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? in that dramatic scene on calvary's hill three men were crucified. we must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime -- the crime of extremism. two were extremists for immorality and, thus, fell below their environment. the other, jesus christ, was an extremist for love, truth, and goodness and, thereby, rose above his environment. perhaps the south, the nation, and the world are in dire need of creative extremists. i had hoped that the white moderate would see this need. perhaps i was too optimistic; perhaps i expected too much. i suppose i should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed rac, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent, and determined

action. i am thankful, however, that some of our white brothers in the south have grasped the meaning of this social revolution and committed themselves to it. they are still all too few in quantity, but they are big in quality. some -- such as ralph mcgill, lillian smith, harry golden, james mcbride dabbs, ann braden, and sarah patton boyle -- have written about our struggle in eloquent and prophetic terms. others have marched with us down nameless streets of the south. they have languished in filthy, roach-infested jails, suffering the abuse and brutality of policemen who view them as unlike so many of their moderate brothers and sisters, they have recognized the urgency of the moment and sensed the need for powerful "action" antidotes to combat the disease of segregation. let me take note of my other major disappointment. i have been so greatly

disappointed with the white church and its leadership. of course, there are some notable exceptions. i am not unmindful of the fact that each of you has taken some significant stands on this issue. i commend you, reverend stallings, for your christian stand on this past sunday, in welcoming negroes to your worship service on a nonsegregated basis. i commend the catholic leaders of this state for integrating spring hill college several years ago. but despite these notable exceptions, i must honestly reiterate that i have been disappointed with the church. i do not say this as one of those negative critics who can always find something wrong with the church. i say this as a minister of the gospel, who loves the church; who was nurtured in its bosom; who has been sustained by its spiritual blessings and who will remain true to it as long as the cord of life shall lengthen.

mr. boozman: when i was suddenly catapulted into the leadership of the bus protest in montgomery, alabama, a few years ago, i felt we would be supported by the white church. i felt that the white ministers, priests, and rabbis of the south would be among our strongest allies. instead, some have been outright opponents, refusing to understand the freedom movement and misrepresenting its leaders; all too many others have been more cautious than courageous and have remained silent behind the anesthetizing security of stained glass windows. in spite of my shattered dreams, i came to birmingham with the hope that the white religious leadership of this community would see the justice of our cause and, with deep moral concern, would serve as the

channel through which our just grievances could reach the power structure. i had hoped that each of you would understand. but again i have been disappointed. i have heard numerous southern religious leaders admonish their worshippers to comply with a desegregation decision because it is the law, but i have longed to hear white ministers declare "follow this decree because integration is morally right and because the negro is your brother." in the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the negro, i have watched white churchmen stand on the sideline and mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. in the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, i have heard many ministers say, "those are social issues, with which the gospel has no real concern."

and i have watched many churches commit themselves to a completely other worldly religion which makes a strange, unbiblical distinction between body and soul, between the sacred and the secular. i have traveled the length and breadth of alabama, mississippi, and all the other southern states. on sweltering summer days and crisp autumn mornings, i have looked at the south's beautiful churches with their lofty spires pointing heavenward. i have beheld the impressive outlines of her massive religious education buildings. over and over i have found myself asking, "what kind of people worship here? who is their god? where were their voices when the lips of governor barnett dripped with words of interposition and nullification? where were they when governor wallace gave a clarion call for

defiance and hatred? where were their voices of support when bruised and weary negro men and women decided to rise from the dark dungeons of complacency to the bright hills of creative protest?" yes, these questions are still in my mind. in deep disappointment i have wept over the laxity of the church. but be assured that my tears have been tears of love. there can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. yes, i love the church. how could i do otherwise? i am in the rather unique position of being the son, the grandson, and the great-grandson of preachers. yes, i see the church as the body of christ. but, oh! how we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and through fear of being nonconformists. there was a time when the church was very powerful -- in the time when the early christians

rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. in those days, the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. whenever the early christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the christians for being "disturbers of the peace" and "outside agitators." but the christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were "a colony of heaven," called to obey god rather than man. small in number, they were big in commitment. they were too god-intoxicated to be "astronomically intimidated." by their effort and example, they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests.

things are different now. so often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. so often it is an archdefender of the status quo. far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church's silent -- and often even vocal -- sanction of things as they are. but the judgment of god is upon the church as never before. if today's church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the 20th century. every day i meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust. perhaps i have once again been too optimistic.

is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world? perhaps i must turn my faith to the inner spiritual church, the church within the church, as the true ekklesia and the hope of the world. but again i am thankful to god that some noble souls from the ranks of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom. they have left their secure congregations and walked the streets of albany, georgia, with us. they have gone down the highways of the south on tortuous rides for freedom. yes, they have gone to jail with us. some have been dismissed from their churches, have lost the support of their bishops and fellow ministers. but they have acted in the faith

that right defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. their witness has been the spiritual salt that has preserved the true meaning of the gospel in these troubled times. they have carved a tunnel of hope through the dark mountain of disappointment. i hope the church as a whole will meet the challenge of this decisive hour. but even if the church does not come to the aid of justice, i have no despair about the future. i have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in birmingham, even if our motives are at present misunderstood. we will reach the goal of freedom in birmingham and all over the nation because the goal of america is freedom. .

the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. ms. rosen: thank you. i'd like to continue finishing the letter from the abraham jail. abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with america's destiny. before the pilgrims landed at plymouth, we were here. before the pen of jefferson etched the majestic words of the declaration of independence across the pages of history, we were here. for more than two centuries our forebears labored in this country without wages; they made cotton king; they built the homes of their masters while suffering gross injustice and shameful humiliation -- and yet out of a bottomless vitality they continued to thrive and develop. if the inexpressible cruelties

of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. we will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of god are embodied in our echoing demands. before closing, i feel impelled to mention one other point in your statement that has troubled me profoundly. you warmly commended the birmingham police force for keeping "order" and "preventing violence." i doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent negroes. i doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push

and curse old negro women and young negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. i cannot join you in your praise of the birmingham police department. it is true that the police have exercised a degree of discipline in handling the demonstrators. in this sense, they have conducted themselves rather "nonviolently" in public. but for what purpose? to preserve the evil system of segregation. over the past few years i have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the

means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. i have tried to make clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. but now i must affirm that it is just as wrong, or perhaps even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends. perhaps mr. connor and his policemen have been rather nonviolent in public, as was chief pritchett in albany, georgia, but they have used the moral means of nonviolence to maintain the immoral end of racial injustice. as t.s. eliot has said, "the last temptation is the greatest treason -- to do the right ded for the wrong reason." i wish you had commended the negro sit-inners and demonstrators of birmingham for

their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. one day the south will recognize its real heroes. they will be the james merediths, with the noble sense of purpose that enables them to face jeering and hostile mobs, and with the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. they will be old, oppressed, battered negro women, symbolized in a 72-year-old woman in montgomery, alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride segregated buses, and who responded with ungrammatical profundity to one who inquired

about her weariness, "my feets is tired, but my soul is at rest." they will be the young high school and college students, the young ministers of the gospel and a host of their elders, courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience' sake. one day the south will know that when these disinherited children of god sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the american dream and for the most sacred values in our judeo-christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the constitution and the declaration of independence.

never before have i written so long a letter. i'm afraid it is much too long to take your precious time. i can assure you that it would have been much shorter if i had been writing from a comfortable desk, but what else can one do when he is alone in a narrow jail cell, other than write long letters, think long thoughts and pray long prayers? if i have said anything in this letter that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, i beg you to forgive me. if i have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than brotherhood, i beg god to forgive me.

i hope this letter finds you strong in the faith. i also hope that circumstances will soon make it possible for me to meet each of you, not as an integrationist or a civil rights leader but as a fellow clergyman and a christian brother. let us all hope that the dark clouds of racial prejudice will soon pass away and the deep fog of misunderstanding will be lifted from our fear-drenched communities, and in some not-too-distant tomorrow the radiant stars of love and brotherhood will shine over our great nation with all their scintillating beauty. yours for the cause of peace and brotherhood, martin luther king jr.

ms. rosen: mr. president, i yield. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, senator row is en. thank you to my colleagues who joined us today to read these powerful words, senators warnock and tillis and casey and capito and boozman and row is en. this is a diverse group on the floor today whose states reflect the vibrant and wonderful diversity of our great nation from the deep south to the mountain west to the industrial midwest. we represent different places. we may disagree on many things, but we love this country. we know we can do better for the people who make it work. dr. king and the civil rights leaders of his generation did more than just about anyone to push this country to live up to our founding ideals and to make the dream of america real for everyone. protesting, working for change, organizing, demanding our country do better, those are some of the most patriotic

things all of us can do. that's dr. king's charge in this letter. my favorite single line certainly in this letter, and maybe in all of dr. king's preechtions and teachings and writings, progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. it rolls in because we make it so. that is our charge. think about, think about that campaign dr. king was waging when he was martyred in memphis. think about who he was talking to -- union sanitation workers, local 1633 afsm. think of the circumstances. this was very segregated mems. he was in a -- segregated memphis. it was a segregated neighborhood. even the truck where the workers were working was segregated. the cab of the truck was two white workers. the back of the truck were two black workers, picking up

garbage. in february before dr. king first visited, the garbage truck there was a torrential downpour. in this segregated neighborhood there was no nowhere for the black sanitation workers to go. they sat in the back of the truck and were crushed. dr. king was in memphis for the first time and second time. he told these workers what is the profit as he wove together civil rights and labor rights. what is the profit of a man to be able to to eat at an integrated lunchl counter if he doesn't earn enough money to buy a hamburger. those -- they were denied fair pay, political rights, denied basic safety on the job. the presiding officer today is senator cortez masto from nevada has joined in so many efforts on this senate floor to fight for workers, to fight for safety and

worker rights. it is not a coincidence that the workers who are so often exploited were low income and especially black workers. until all workers have the dignity they work, doctor king's words -- it means providing good benefits, safety in the job, it means letting them, if they so choose, organize a union. that means all workers, it's about the dignity of work. all workers get a fair share of the wealth they create. when we empower workers, we bring us closer to the society dr. king envisioned where all labor has dignity.

the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: i ask unanimous consent that the senate judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration of s. res. 152 and s. res. 185, and the senate proceed to the following senate resolutions, s. res. 152, s. res. 85, s. res. 193, s. res. 194. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection, the committee is discharged of the relevant resolutions. the senate will proceed to the resolutions en bloc. mr. brown: i know of no further debate on the resolutions en bloc, madam president. the presiding officer: if there's no further debate, the question's on the adoption of the resolutions en bloc. all in favor say aye. all opposed, no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do -- the resolutions are approved en bloc. mr. brown: madam president that the preamble be agreed toes, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: thank you, madam president. i will speak briefly. i know we're expecting a vote at 5:30, i will not speak nearly that long. i know we are about to vote on a congressional review act, on an issue i happen to disagree with the president on.

my whole career has been standing pup for workers, -- standing up for workers and standing up for presidents, sometimes presidents of both parties. if you look at the history of trade in this country and what we've done, we've seen this body, that down the hall in the house of representatives have historically not stood up for workers. i grew up in mansfield, ohio, a small industrial city of about 50,000 people. it was a very industrial city. i went to johnny appleseed junior high school and i remember walking the halls of sons and daughters of machinists who worked at tap and stove and steelworkers at empire detroit reeves, i believe was the company's name then, auto workers who worked at general motors, a number of electrical workers at westinghouse and also the sons and daughters of people in the trades, insulators, pipe

fighters, operating engineers and laborers many people highly skilled who built america. and as companies, as corporations throughout -- particularly in my part of the country, but in nevada, corporations began to shut down plants in the midwest and moved them to alabama, louisiana, mississippi, georgia georgia and north carolina and south carolina, because because also those -- because those wages weren't low enough to satisfy the greed of corporate america, then they began to lobby congress. one of my first votes as a member of congress was the opposition to the free trade agreement. most of us who opposed native nafta, -- opposed nafta, once

you oppose this and give them the opportunity to go to mexico, china, with no tairns with low wages to exploit workers in those countries, which is what they did, you begin to see plants shut down. and, madam president, we know what happened. we know that far too many of our colleagues in the house and senate were willing to pass these free trade agreements like nafta. down the hall, house of representatives did it and the senate did it and the lobbist were were here pushing for nafta, weakening the rules so these companies -- they were up and gone. they left -- they left ohio, they left indiana, will he left illinois, they left so much of the industrial midwest. because this congress and presidents of both parties, from trump wallet way -- trump all

the way back to clinton, they were willing to sell out american workers to the lobbists, who pushed for the trade agreements, that they could seek cheaper wages in china. another thing that happened with china, what we did when we moved jobs to china, we built up their -- we sent wealth to china who were able to build up to high-tech military, not quite rivalling ours, but certainly dangerous enough that we paid attention. the -- my vote against nafta was one of my proudest votes and my vote against pntr with china. in the end it's a simple choice. are you on the side of the chinese communist party or the side of the american workers, and that, to me, is what this vote is about, today the congressional review act about solar tariffs. one of the biggest solar

manufacturers, i believe the biggest solar manufacturing plant is toledo, they will benefit if we vote yes an override the president -- and override the president's veto. it's what i ask my colleagues to do, to continue these tariffs on china because as long as they keep cheating, as long as american companies are willing to take the products from slave labor and underpaid labor and exploited labor and bring these into the country, these problems will continue with the industrial base. i heard the president of the united states down the hall i believe at the last state of the union saying the term rustbelt, we are burying the term rustbelt. i talked to him, and he mentioned it on the state of the union, and we are starting to see a reindustrialization of america.

we are seeing chips now. chips were invented in the united states, 90% are made mostly in taiwan and china. the light bulb was invented in ohio, thomas edison grew up not far from where i grew up. if we're going to reindustrialize this program, that's what the chips legislation is about, that's what we are doing with intel in columbus. this sets us back, this president's veto of this bill sets us back a couple more years and redeveloping, bringing these jobs back, doing the kind of insourcing that -- that senator casey and others have fought for he. i will wrap-up by asking my colleagues to vote yes on this congressional review act on solar tariffs, because, again, who's side are you on, the side of the chinese communist party

or the american workers? to me it's clear as day which side to be on. thank you, madam president.

mr. moran: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: madam president, thank you very much, today in fact, just a few hours, a few minutes from now, the senate will act on an effort to protect farmers, ranchers, and producers from the unnecessary consequences of the listing of the lesser-prairie chicken. even as i say the words, it brings back so many instances where we had this conversation on the senate floor, going back to my earliest days in the senate. this issue has been with us now for a long number of years. range-wide studies over the last decade has shown that conservation efforts are helping

bird populations in the five habitat states, including kansas. so the lesser-prairie chicken is a native bird to five states and its populations are important to us in kansas and to those other states and to the country. but what strikes me is that this administration claims that american agriculture is at the heart of needing to list the lesser-prairie chicken as an endangered species because agriculture is causing harm to the populations. a quote from the rules state, grazing by domestic livestock is not inherently detrimental to lesser-prairie chicken management and is needed. a pretty good paragraph when it comes to the well-being of the lesser-prairie chicken. what that's saying is agricultural management practices of grasslands,

including grazingly ranchers improve the habitat. listing the bird as a threatenedded and endangered species is not the answer. we need more rainfall. we need nor rainfall, not regulations -- more rainfall, not regulations. farmers and ranchers have always been and will always be the original conservationists, their livelihood depends on the soil soil they use for crops and livestock. i am confident there are ways to conserve the species without hindering economic opportunity in rural communities and i will continue to push what kansans have been pursuing for years now, voluntary solutions. madam president, i yield the floor.

a senator: i would take a moment to address of some of what we heard on the senate floor today. mr. scott: there have been a lot of accusations about what this cra does, and i will clear it up in a minute. i will set the record straight on what this measure does not do. my colleagues often talk about their work to protect human rights. i ask the simple question, what could possibly be a greater threat to human rights than the united states of america turning a blind eye to child slave labor? what message does it send to the world? we heard this measure will force american companies to pay for tariffs, not true. madam president, what this measure does do is rightfully

punish foreign companies that are actively working to get around u.s. trade law and help import products made with slave and child labor into the united states. the only entities who will pay tariffs are chinese manufacturers. if you are doing the right thing, this doesn't change a darn thing about how you do business. if you're working with people who believe slavery has a role in supply chains, you're right, i have a problem with that and will do what i can to stop it. the rule that the cra would eliminate was negotiated by the solar panel industry. we've heard that the solar panel industry greece we need this exemption -- agrees that we need this exception and therefore it is good. of course the solar panel industry that supports the rule is the chinese solar panel industry, american manufacturers do not. thanks to the biden administration waiver, chinese companies have been giving everything they need to dominate

the solar market. just like how russia has dominated cheap goose supply to europe. madam president, i've also heard some of my colleagues that this cra is unnecessary because we already passed a law because products made with slave labor cannot be sold in the united states. we did pass a good bill that prevents products made with slave labor from being sold here. thank god we did that. but since when has u.s. law meant anything to communist china? we know companies controlled by the ccp lie, cheat, and steal. we know that companies in communist china are moving solar panels made with child and slave labor to other countries to circumvent our laws and they aren't being caught. president biden's own commerce department has proven that to be true. when half the world's solar panels are coming from a region with well documented child and slave labor, are we really expected to believe that the companies making these panels aren't using slave labor?

no, we know that's not reality. finally, madam president, i've heard the claim that this cra will somehow be terrible for american jobs. this one actually surprised me. here's how that logic goes. letting communist china dominate a market by using slave and child labor is better than supporting american manufacturing and american jobs here at home. let me know if you can figure that one out. see how that makes sense. some of my colleagues on the left claim that 30,000 jobs will be lost. that's not even close to being true. guess who gave that information? the chinese dominated solar lobby group, the same group who is perfectly happy to keep things the way they are so they can make a buck on the back of slave and child labor. when i looked at this report today, i couldn't find it. it's not on the website. this is what you get when you try to look at their so-called analysis. comer we couldn't find that -- sorry we couldn't find that pain. honestly i think our colleague from pennsylvania got it exactly

right when he told a news outlet this week too often china gets away with undermining our markets, undermining our companies, and every time they cheat, we lose jobs in pennsylvania. senator casey is right. it's not just true in pennsylvania. it's true in every state across our great country. senator wyden is right, too. discussing the same issue he said, red, white, and blue manufacturing particularly now when people see we're serious about it, that's the key time in this two-year window when the chinese can hit us. to be honest, madam president, i'm shocked by dispiewses -- excuses by some of might colleagues. i know it's only some because this cra is actually a bipartisan bill. the excuses for inaction by some on the left doesn't make sense to me. what we are talking about tonight is whether anything is worth hurting a -- turning a blind eye to slavery and child labor. the chinese dominated industry has agreed that this waiver is a good thing. what a shocker. what some of my colleagues on the left are saying is that the

endorsement of chinese manufacturers is enough to turn a blind eye to slave and child labor. i clearly disagree. when this rule -- with this rule repealed by the cra, tariffs first put in place by president obama's commerce department to hold chinese manufacturers who violated our trade laws accountable, we'll be reinstated. forcing companies to work with only those partners who aren't actively involved in slave and child labor. madam president, to say what a good thing, to that i say what a good thing for the senate to put it behind us and to support it. president xi is a dictator and human rights violator. he's yet another communist leader trying to be the dominant world player. the chinese communist party has tripped the -- stripped the people of hong kong of their freedoms. mall tar rised the south china sea, threatened taiwan and committed genocide against the week gears simply -- uighurs because of their religious.

the communist party will do anything to destroy america. the national security threat of communist china cannot be taken lightly. and the human rights abuses against the uighurs including slave labor, child labor and genocide cannot be ignored. the united states cannot tolerate communist china's horrific human rights abuses and genocide of uighurs. in addition to this, communist china will stop at nothing to exploit american markets and take advantage of u.s. investors and companies doing business within its country. communist china poses a clear and present threat to the united states and the world. in 2022 the department of commerce caught communist china circumventing u.s. trade laws to avoid american tariffs. xi's regime started sending products made with slave labor to southeast asian countries claiming they were made in the corresponding nation. it was made here. she shipped them down here and said they were made here and shipped them here so they didn't have to pay the tariffs.

these chinese made products again made with slave and child labor -- and you can see this is some -- there's not a lot of pictures that come out of this area but these are some of the uighurs and they're clearly being put to work to do whatever the communist party wants them to do. these chinese made products again made with child and slave labor with an import to the u.s. despite his own department of commerce investigation, president biden issued an emergency declaration exempting these chinese-made solar products again made with slave and child labor for a full two years. the solar emergency declaration is a giveaway to president xi and the chinese communist party. it's a massive gift to a regime that is using slave and child labor, a favor to an evil regime that wants to destroy our great country. there's no other way to describe it. the declaration allows china to circumvent trade laws at the expense of american

manufacturers and american jobs. it's an approval of slierve and child -- slave and child labor and anti-american jobs. the solar manufacturing is based on forced labor, government subsidies and trade abuses. communist china isn't doing the united states any favor through their dominance of the solar industry. we're building dependence on them. even today communist china is using forced labor to produce solar panels. purchasing these panels is helping fuel the human rights abuses. because of this the uighur human rights project has announced its support of the cra. so this is why we are taking this vote today. this cra would reinstate the department of commerce's own findings that certain companies in southeast asia countries are acting in violation of u.s. law by importing chinese-made solar products again made with slave labor. therefore tariffs should apply to these specific bad actors. the tariffs would only apply to these companies. it would not apply to any other industry or to any companies who are lawfully importing solar

products. not made with slave lake. and to the u.s. -- labor. and to the u.s. this measure is pro american jobs and anti-chinese forced child labor. it's that simple. passing the cra will send a message to communist china. when you break american laws and use slave labor, you pay the price. under the leadership of my friend and fellow floridian congressman bill posey, this cra has already passed the house with bipartisan support. now it's time for the senate to finish the job in congress and send this to president biden's desk. this isn't partisan. it's about human rights. madam president, i will not stand by and i hope the u.s. senate will not stand by and accept excuses to turn a blind eye to communist china's human rights atrocities. the united states is a beacon of freedom to people all over the world. voting tonight against hold accountable those who enslave others including children will be a stain on our nation and the -- i look forward to all of my colleagues supporting this cra. and i yield the floor.

a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. a senator: i ask unanimous consent to use a prop during my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. marshall: today i rise in support of s. j. -- of the senate joint resolution regarding the lesser prairie-chicken under the congressional review act. madam president, since i was ten years old, my family has enjoyed hunting prairie-chickens. as a matter of fact, the first bird i ever shot, the first time i ever went hunting, ten years of age with a 20-gauge single shotgun, i was able to down one of these beautiful birds. but last november, the fish and wildlife services ignored decades of voluntary conservation efforts and published a rule listing the

lesser prairie-chicken species as eninning dearped and threatened under the endangered species act. enacting in 1973 the endangered species act, the esa, was created to protect species believed to be on the brink of extinction. today the consequences of this law reach far beyond its original intent. if saving species were the only consideration, then this administration wouldn't be listing the lesser prairie-chicken whose population is considered stable in my home state of kansas. i ask you, was the esa made for the good of humankind or was humankind made for the good of the esa? now make no mistake about it. the listing of any species adds more rules, more hoops to jump through, more time and cost from everyone from our farmers and ranchers, our oil field workers, our utility lynnmen -- line men who are building new power poles and electric lines to get wind-generated electricity out to more populated states. the esa is another weaponized

tool that this president uses to attack rural america. this is not surprising considering the president recently vetoed the bipartisan resolution to strike down the wotus rule. this white house continues to push policies and resurrect taxes that disproportionately hurt rural america. for over 20 years now, federal, state, and private land owners have voluntarily collaborated with fish and wildlife services to conserve the lesser prairie-chicken and its habitat. these partnerships have already resulted in conservation agreements covering roughly 15 million acres of potential habitat for species. to list the bird now after all the conservation effort sends a message to stakeholders that no matter how much good work you do, the hammer will still fall. the heavy-handed government will still step in and enlist species under the esa in an attempt to regulate your industry out of existence, all in the name of

climate. the federal government thinks it knows best when it comes to conservation but this law continues to fail its most basic mission, reeferring and delisting -- recovering and delisting species. despite billions of dollars spent in the name of esa, less than 2% of all listed species have been removed from its esa protection since 1973. just 2%. through a combination of public and private efforts, the lesser prairie-chicken is better protected now than ever. listing them as threatened or endangered will not provide any additional conservation benefits above what already exists. as this chart shows, whether the prairie-chicken numbers fall rain fail, they've been growing since the obama administration first attempted to list the bird in 2014. no one in this body wants to see this beautiful bird go extinct. we're fighting to preserve it. my hope is some day once again my grandchildren can hunt lesser

prairie-chickens like their great, great-grandfathers did. listen, no oil producer, no rancher, no farmer, no wind energy producer wants the demise of the lesser prairie-chicken. that's why voluntary partnerships have worked and are working. just like all my fellow kansans, i'm committed to saving our environment for future generations. to share some wise words from one of my friends and i quote him, we are passengers on this planet, not captains. end quote. and we need to continue to work with mother nature, not punish hardworking americans. a listing of this species will only slow down and drive up the cost of our wind energy exports from kansas which shares many of the same range. the listing will also push oil and gas development to countries that have long track records of violating human right, or the extraction of these important and necessary energy sources in a manner much more harmful to the environment than those utilized by american producers.

whether it's gas or diesel or wind energy, this decision to list the chicken would increase the cost of energy. it would federalize million, of arkansass of ranch lands and expand the regulatory burden on our farmers and ranchers ultimately increasing the cost of food. but for what? an attempt to protect a species by an agency has only successfully recovered 2% of the species it has listed. no thanks. the local communities have and will continue to do what's best for the bird and more importantly for the environment. through ongoing proven conservation efforts, conservation efforts passed on from one generation of farmers and ranchers to the next. with n

-- since january 1 of this year alone, that number is 148 billion dollars. under this administration, the annual paperwork burden on business has increased to over 220 million hours. since january 1, that number is approaching 50 million hours. indeed a red tape, a nightmare for businesses. this resolution is one of many vital steps the gop is taking to unleash the economy from the bureaucratic harassment that the white house has deployed. i'm asking you to join me in applauding rather than punishing voluntary conservation efforts and support the joint resolution for congressional disapproval of the lesser prairie-chicken listing. thank you. and i yield back.

mr. barrasso: i ask unanimous consent to yield back all time and the vote begin immediately. the presiding officer: is there an objection? without objection. under the previous order, the joint resolutions are considered read a third time. the question occurs on passage of h.j. res. 39. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote: vote:

vote:

vote:

aye vote:

vote:

vote : vote: the presiding officer: the yeas are 56. the nays are 41. and the joint resolution is passed.

the presiding officer: all time is yielded back. the question occurs on passage of s.j. res. 9. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 50. and the nays are 48. and the joint resolution is passed. under the previous order, the senate will resume executive session. the question occurs on the hsu nomination. is there a sufficient second? fll appears to be.

-- there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: nomination, the yeas are 53, the nays are 43, and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture.

the clerk: cloture motion, we the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on nomination of executive calendar number 125, lashonda a. hunt, of illinois, to be united states district judge for the northern district of illinois, signed by 20 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of lashonda a. hunt -- there will be order in the senate, please. -- of illinois to be united states district judge for the northern district of illinois shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote: the presiding officer:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 54, the nays are 42, and the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: the judiciary, lashonda a. hunt, of illinois, to be united states district judge for the northern district of illinois. mr. schumer: madam president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session, be in a period of morning business, with the senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: and madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on thursday, may 4, that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. following the conclusion of morning business, the senate

proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the hunt nomination, postcloture. and that all the time be considered expired at 11:30 a.m. further, that following the cloture vote on the shogan nomination, notwithstanding rule 22, the senate resume consideration of the gupta nomination, with the time until 1:45 p.m. equally divided between the two leaders or designees. at 1:45, the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination. further, if any nominations are confirmed, the nomination to reconsider be considered -- the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. and the president be immediately notified. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: there will be two roll call votes at 11:30 a.m. and one at 1:45. if no further business to come before the senate, ski that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the very, very learned remarks of senator sullivan. the presiding officer: without objection.

mr. sullivan: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: madam president, i thank the majority leader for his fine compliment to me on the senate floor, about learned remarks. i appreciate that very much. not if you're going to take away your compliment. mr. schumer: no, no, no. mr. sullivan: if you're going to keep, i will yield. mr. schumer: i want to reserve the right to read the remarks before closing debate. mr. sullivan: actually, i think you'll appreciate these remarks. mr. schumer: thank you. i yield the floor. i'm looking forward to the senator's remarks. mr. sullivan: madam president, recently, there have been numerous articles in the media about the u.s. navy's lack of amphibious ships. one that i would like to submit for the record headlined

grounding of u.s. marine unit spots the lack of ships in the asia-pacific. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: thank you, mr. president. in this piece, the writer leads with how the 31st marine expeditionary unit, a rapid response force of the marine corps, designed for quick deployment on three navy ships, what we call amphibious ready group, how they were forced to abandon a training exercise because the amphibious warships that they're supposed to train on were not available due to maintenance problems. here's what the article said in part -- the marine units' grounded status illustrates the larger obstacles the u.s. is facing as it tries to pivot its military to handle the challenges from china. overall, defense officials said the navy doesn't have enough amphibious ships to transport

marines. an essential part of the marine corps' mission is to hop from island to island in the asia-pacific and harry chinese forces in event of conflict. by the way, the marines are very good at this. they've been doing it for decades. but they need ships. another article from "defense news" is also a recent one about the lack of amphibious ships,ed a be pro-- and the problem that popeses. this, mr. president, is from another part of the world, but very recent. the article starts with how hundreds of american citizens were stranded in war-torn sudan. it says, quote, hundreds of americans in war-torn sudan last month needed a way out of the country, but the u.s. marine corps, the go-to service for

such rescues of american citizens, could not help. the article continued, typically this kind of mission would be standard for the navy and marine corpse' amphibious ready groups, a marine expeditionary unit, what we call in the marine corps, a mue, and amphibious ready group. three ships, super well-trained, special operations capable, can go anywhere in the world, kick the door in, save american citizens. the article continues -- but for the americans who fled the coast in sudan, the pentagon sent an auxiliary transport ship that they contracted out, i believe, from another country, to shuttle them safely to saudi arabia. it was, in essence, a

self-evacuation of u.s. citizens. mr. president, npr reported that the buses actually took hundreds of americans to the port of sudan. imagine -- imagine, my colleagues, what would have happened had those americans traveling in contract buses, in the middle of a civil war, got caught in the crossfire. the article that i just quoted, mr. president, was entitled "marines want 31 amphibious ships, the pentagon disagrees. now what?" i'd like to submit that for the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. sullivan: finally, mr. president, there was another recent article from the "defense news," and it's title was, the navy is on path to violate the

31 amphibious requirements for amphib shims in 2024 -- ships in 2024. this is what i wanted to get to. last year, in the armed services committee, we held a number of hearings, with the navy, and the marine corps, saying what is the minimum number of amphibious ships that would enable the marine corps to do its global force response mission? the minimum number. after many hearings, after much discussion with the marines and navy, we came up, in a bill of mine, with a minimum of 31 ships. mr. president, this bill in the armed services committee last year passed unanimously. every democrat and every republican voted for it. the law now reads as follows, i know this is a little small, but here's the new united states

code that has the new language, it says, the naval combat forces of the u.s. navy shall include not less than 11 operational aircraft carriers and not less than 31 operational am fickious -- amphibious warships, of which not less than ten shall be am -- amphibious assault ships, that can carry helicopters and us a pries and harriers and now f-35 bravos. that was the law. that passed. the president signed it. here's the problem, mr. president, the united states navy is violating the law. the united states navy is treating that law, 31 amphibs, a

minimum, as a suggestion from the congress, as an option from the congressional. how do i know? because we had a hearing two weeks ago on the armed armeds committee, and the secretary of the navy essentially said we're looking at different options for the president's budget on how many amphibs that the navy is going to have. currently, the navy presented a budget that doesn't have 31 amphibs. i had some cross words with the secretary of the navy, the cno of the navy, because they're violating the law. and i will tell you, mr. president, my democratic and republican colleagues on the armed services committee were supportive of what i was saying.

we had a hearing on the armed services readiness subcommittee yesterday. the vice chief of naval operations, admiral franchetti said that the navy was, quote, studying the issue. mr. president, the navy can't study the issue anymore. the navy needs to follow the law. the united states congress has done the studies. we need the ships. but here's what the navy presented to the armed services committee two week ago. -- two weeks ago. they provided us their 30-year shipbuilding plan for the navy. right here is the 31 amphib ship statutory minimum that is required by the law. here's the navy shipbuilding plan for the next 30 years.

you're seeing the numbers. these are different options, plan one, plan two, plan three. you might notice the navy never gets to 31 amphibs. so the secretary of the navy, the cno of the navy, the vice cno of the navy came to the congress in the past two weeks and said ah, your 31 amphib ship requirement, we're going to ignore it. ah, your 31 amphib ship requirement, congress of the united states of america, we're going to violate that. mr. president, this is unacceptable. the united states navy, the secretary of the navy, the secretary of defense should not be thumbing their nose at the congress. and worse, they should not be violating the law. and not trying to abide by the

law. they're saying for 30 years we are going to ignore the congress and we are going to ignore the laws of the united states of america. this cannot happen. this cannot happen. mr. president, let me end with this -- whether you're a democrat or a republican, whether you are a hawk on defense issues or a dove on defense issues, if you are a united states senator, this should make you really mad. this should make you really mad. last year the congress spoke. and again, on the armed services committee, on which i serve, it was unanimous. every member of that committee who'd studied the issue said, at a minimum, the navy needs 31 amphibs so the u.s. marine corps

can do its mission around the world. everybody agreed. we passed the law. the navy, the secretary of the navy, the secretary of defense are thumbing their nose at this body, are breaking the law as we speak, are intending to break the law for the next 30 years -- that's their 30-year shipbuilding plan, never hits 31 ships. but here's the worse thing they're doing, mr. president -- and this is a real serious issue lives of american citizens at risk. why do i mean that? well, let me end where i began, sudan rescue of american citizens. again, normally that is a mission tailor made for the united states marine corps.

whether in an embassy or another part of a dangerous part of the world, what we call a noncombatant evacuation operation, a neo. the marines do them all the time. bring up their amphibs, launch helos, launch support craft, helicopters, fighters if they need the air support, the capability of a mue-r to rescue a lot of american citizens, a lot of them is unsurpassed by any service in the world. the u.s. marines do it all the time. guess what they can't do it without, mr. president. they can't to it without amphibious ships. and right now we don't have enough. so we dodged a bullet two weeks ago in suzanne. american citizens put on buses and driven across dangerous

parts of suzanne in a civil -- sudan in a civil war for hours after hours and got to a port, self-evacuated on some other country's ships. we are so lucky that those americans did not get killed or wounded. did not get killed or wounded because there was mo mar -- was no marine corps to rescue them. so, mr. president, i'm going to keep raising this issue. the secretary of defense, secretary of the navy, today they are violating the law. today they have no intention of meeting this 31 amphib ship requirement, and american citizens are at risk. and the next time we might not be so lucky. the next time americans somewhere around the world need

to be rescued, the next time an enemy of our country does something nefarious to our citizens or our national interests and we don't have the ability to respond as a marine corps because we don't have the ships, we're going to know who's responsible. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow. said, judges percent new yk and central california, lawmakers pass a resolution, revealing commerce department roll, waving paris solarar, d for southeastern asian countries which numbers the present the resolutionhe removes the lesser prairie

icns, from the endangered species list later this week, work is expected nomination llg children cedy - o the united states and more lives tonight coverage when the bargaining session here on "c-span2". watch video on demand anytime online, cspan.org entire points of interest feature, timeline fully uses quickly got you two news worthy and interesting highlights of key coverage, point of interest anytime about, at c-spine .org cspan's washington journal, everyday we take take your calls come alive fire on the news of the day and we discussed policy issues that impact you coming up on thursday morning, national federation of independent business vice president kevin coleman, talks about the state of small business post pandemic and her current economic conditions are affecting business owners have invited new tax proposals could

impact those businesses democratic presidential candidate, marion williamson come joins us better platform policy objectives which he sees as a path to victory. watch washington general live in seven eastern on thursday morning, cspan on c-span now, free mobile app, the discussion the phone calls facebook comments texan tweets. >> early saturday morning, the coronation king charles the third take place and became the king of the united kingdom following the death of his mother, queen elizabeth the second uk's longest reigning monarch. she's been later the bbc coverage of the coronation in its entirety at 4:00 p.m. eastern from the royal procession to westminster abbey, to the official running of the new king. the coronation of king charles the third, saturday 4:00 p.m. eastern, on c-span or online at paorg.

c-span is your unfiltered view of government, by these television companies and more including media calm community come, we believe that what you hear, or right here, our way out in the middle of anywhere from a chef test to fast reliable internet and that's what we are taking you - trinity. >> media calm support cspan, is a public service along with these television providers, getting a front row seat to democracy hundred 18 congress has nearly 80 new house members next, live from some of those lawmakers about their upbringings their careers, and political philosophy. >> democrat the new representative for nor carolina's fourth congressional stct, in the