>> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 7 p.m. eastern, former naacp president speaks about healing america using parables and conversations through notable americans in his book, never forget our peoplere always free. 10 p.m. eastern on after words, us policy professor shares her book, the overlooked americans, she argues that urban and rural america have more in common than perceived. and by heidi hinecamp. look for your schedule or anytime on book tv.org. >> c-span shop.org is c-span's online store. browse our latest collection of

c-span products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there's something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or anytime at c-span shop.org. >> and the senate is coming in now for more work on president biden's executive and judicial nomination. including a confirm nation vote on a member of the equal employment opportunity commission set for 11:30 this morning. we take you live now to the senate floor here on c-span2. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. today's openings player will be offered by dr. dale a. meyer from colvinville, illinois.

the guest chaplain: let us pray. o god, your eternal being is beyond our comprehension. we are but creatures of a day. the magnificence of these buildings in which senators and their staffs serve, these monumental buildings we americans visit, are sacred spaces. in silent splendor they testify to the mercies you have bestowed upon this nation in generations past. may they inspire in us a passion that our stewardship of this republic will serve your good will and purposes for many years to come. jesus said, "when i am lifted up, i will draw all people to myself." he gave his life in selfless service so that all people might experience your goodness in their lives. such service, pure service untainted by thoughts of self, is difficult, indeed impossible.

we ask you to descend upon this chamber with your grace, grace received in honest confession that my time, our time, is fleeting. unless you build the house, we labor in vain. we cannot achieve justice, we cannot embrace mercy unless we humbly walk with you. o eternal god, you alone endure from generation to generation. help us to be faithful stewards of this trust. in your holy and revealed name we pray. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the president pro tempore: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. and, under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, equal employment opportunity commission, kalpana kotagal of ohio to be a member.

a senator: madam president. the president pro tempore: the senator from georgia recognizee. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> thank the gentleman. we begin today's hearing with asthma noma do with opening statements and then we'll get right to our witness. we appreciate you being with us today. at a speech in berlin 2022 chair con told the audience the challenges facing antitrust

today were quote the result of a choice made 40 years ago to follow the mr. scott a flossy people like robert bork. in other words, according to chair a con the prevailing view over the last 40 years bipartisan view shared over 20 congress, six president and adopted and felt by all 50 states in their enforcement is now somehow wrong. it says over this for use as the economy grew from about $320 annual economy to 25 trillion and was a single greatest time history. everyone oversaw it economic policy according to the chair was wrong. she knows better. she's been ushered in a radical departure from the norms amid the american economy great to assist have unchecked power over business practices in our country untethered from any reasonable reading of president or statutory law. so we should act now over two years into her tenure, how has her approach to antitrust in

playing out as she heads one of those critical agencies in our government. the shortage is that it's been a disaster. she's bush investigations into burden parties with bacon kolstad demands without any substantive follow through a frankly logic for the request of themselves. she centralized decision-making at the commission within her office eliminating pretext of due process for transparency in the decision-making. her approach is countries one of intimidation followed by an action. best example of this which was because of her work on the select committee was her targeted harassment of twitter. after mr. musk about the company of following freshman democrat senators, left-wing activist groups, the ftc issued over 350 request for information from twitter. these request included asking for every communication about mr. musk inside the company. the most troubling for information about twitter's work

with journalists come working to shed light on governments, on the government driven censorship practices that existed and i think at some cases still exist at big tech. we got a great court decision last week that talked about this how pervasive this effort was in a preliminary injunction from that federal court in a western district of louisiana. just this morning though in a filing in federal court we have learned the situation is actually even worse than we could imagine. this was an harassment. it was a shakedown. the ftc as is common practice pursuant to the consent order required twitter to hire independent assessor, and independent assessor whose legal obligation is to be truly independent and objective, not for one party or another. well it turns out objectivity was not what the federal trade commission was interested in here. here's what the filing said about ernest and young independent assessor hired in

this matter. quote, the ftc was so adamant with ernst & young conveying that this is absolutely what you will do, and this is going to occur, and you will produce a report at the end of the day that would be negative about twitter, the senior ernst & young leaders fear that if ernst & young resigned as independent assessor the ftc would er: withot objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, yesterday i moved to proceed to the national defense authorization act. we'll have our first vote on tuesday. this bill was reported out of the armed services committee on a huge 25-1 bipartisan vote. we're encouraging filing amendments for the managers' package before the close of business today. senator mcconnell, the committees and i will have our teams working over the weekend to see what we can include in the package of amendments. undoubtedly hundreds of amendments will be filed to this important piece of legislation.

i'm hopeful that all committee chairs and committee rankingers will work together in good faith. obviously both sides sides willt to have amendment votes, just like we have in recent efforts, i'm willing to ensure we consider and vote a reasonable number of amendments. no senator wants a dilatory process. i know senators reid and wicker, who have done such a fine job putting together a bipartisan bill, will work with senator mcconnell and me and we will develop a list of amendment votes and hopefully can proceed from there. there are important issues that i believe we must address while we're on the floor. we must consider a chinese government competition package. we must consider the australia-united kingdom and united states submarine deal. i know there will be more to do here next week, and i look forward to the debate on the floor. now on a.i. -- last night i informed my colleagues we will hold our third all-senate briefing on

wednesday, july 26. our first briefing focused on the one hand the state of a.i. as it stands today. our second briefing held earlier this week was a classified presentation on a.i.'s national security implications. our third briefing will turn to the future. we'll hear from federal researchers and developers about where a.i. is headed in the years to come and how it'll 0 continue to change our world w i encourage all members to attend this important briefing. i'm also pleased to announce that our presenters for that day will be rick stevens from the department of energy's argonne national laboratory, dr. setharaman, head of the nsa, known as perform anch easier to say. and dr. catherine catherine fisr from darpa, a the defense advanced research project

agency. our moderator will be the president of dakota state university. so, it's a broad range of presenters, from academic, defense, energy, and scientific backgrounds. it will be a great discussion and truly important one, because senators have no time to waste learning as much about a.i. as possible. a.i. is going to be a regular part of our lives from here on out, rapid changes may at times seem frightening, but if applied correctly a.i. promises to transform life on earth for the better. but there are real risks too. we must now work to anticipate the risks, mitigate them, and ensure that a.i. innovation is safe in the decades to come. so i encourage all senators to attend the briefing on the 26th. i thank our presenters, who had join us that day, and i thank my colleagues, particularly senators, rounds, heinrich and young for working together as a

team and putting this briefing together. now, on inflation, yesterday we learned that inflation slowed down for the 12th month in a row, down to 3%, 3%, the lowest it's been in two years. this morning, as american families stopped for gas on the way to work or checked their pocketbooks or go to the supermarket, they can continue to see throughout the country that we're turning the corner. they're seeing more money in their pockets. they're seeing inflation cool down. and they're seeing wages continue, continue to go up. listen to this -- this is important -- wage growth is now significantly above inflation for the first time since march of 2021. this is the work of the democratic agenda in action, of president biden's good work, lower costs for families, higher wages for workers, and millions and millions of new jobs

created. republicans claim if we pass -- had claimed if we passed the inflation reduction act, inflation would only get worse. the rblg chairman of the ways and means che claimed the inflation reduction act would prolong and make worse the current crisis. it is becoming clearer and clearer they were dead wrong. in fact, since we passed the i.r.a., inflation has been cut by more than half on an annual basis. since we passed the inflation reduction act, inflation has been cut by more than half on an annualized basis. if that's not enough proof that the democrats and president biden's agenda is working, the other major pieces of legislation we passed in congress, like the infrastructure law, the chips act are creating millions of good-paying jobs throughout the country and in my home state of new york. since president biden took office, private companies have

announced over $500 billion, $500 billion in investments across industries like semiconductors, clean energy, e. investor's and battery -- e.v.'s and battery manufacturing, heavy industry. what does this mean? jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs. so many jobs, in fact, that some of my republican colleagues, who voted against all these bills, are claiming credit for the projects and the growth that they're generating in their own states and districts. so we've got a lot of work ahead of us, but yesterday's report makes clear the democratic agenda is working. now, on democratic office diversity, mr. president, this morning the democratic senate diversity initiative released the results of the annual survey of democratic staffers, of the seventh year they have done so in a row. when i became majority leader, i promised to work to increase the diversity of senate offices, so that they can reflect the

diversity of the states and the communities in which we serve. this year's survey shows we continue to make important progress, and i want to highlight a few of the results. for the fourth year in a row, the number of diverse staffers has increased, reaching the highest level since we launched our survey and almost certainly the highest level ever. certainly, the highest level in our conference's history. our survey also shows that more african americans work for senate democratic offices than ever. in fact, that's also true for latinos, middle eastern and north africans and asian american pacific islanders. additionally, more staffers identify as par of the lgbtq community since we first asked that question starting in 2010. these mile -- in 2019. these milestones matters. diversity matters. our democracy thrives when all voices had -- are heard and recommended.

i have learned more and more from people of diverse backgrounds. it's a great thing and helps me to be a better senator for all of new york state. our have survey matters too,s because the only way we can make progress is holding ourselves accountable through transparency. to say we're doing it is not enough. to do it, have the statistic and numbers showing we do it, shows the real progress we're making. we have a lot of work left to do. we're not there yet, for sure. but i'm encouraged our caucus tips to grow more diverse with each passing year. mr. president, i yield the floor. and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. quorum call:

would have eroded competition in critical sectors of the economy including the fence,

semiconductors, energy, digital markets and pharmaceuticals. we are tackling anticompetitive practices including those that harm american farmers, small businesses and workers. last year the ftc in a bipartisan coalition of ten state attorneys general charge two large pesticide manufacture the prevent farmers from an access to cheaper products, costing them billions of dollars. in january the ftc proposed a rule that would ban employers, posing noncompete restrictions that locking workers a clinically depressed their wages by up to $300 billion while also depriving started in businesses of the employees they need to expand and compete. in the months since proposing this rule we have received over 21,000 public comments including from nurses and doctors, fast food workers and hairdressers, all told us about how noncompete had hurt their livelihood and undermined the economic liberty.

already several enforcement actions by the ftc have led firms to drop noncompete restrictions imposed on thousands of workers to the ftc also continues to use its tools to conduct marketwide increased. last june the commission launched an inquiry into the practices of pharmacy benefit managers to shed light on the opaque operations of these large middlemen who can dictate pricing and access to life-saving drugs from millions of americans. this inquiry follows thousands of public comments the ftc received explaining the real-life costs that can follow from pbms current practices. one doctor for example, recounted how delays in pbm approval caused her patient to develop resistance to an otherwise effective treatment ultimately leading to the needless loss of her patients i peer and addition to these critical areas of work we are redoubling our efforts to protect americans privacy and combat fraud but also activating additional authority that congress has given us be we have brought actions to protect

consumers from made in usa fraud, protect military families from predatory financing and protect addiction recovery patients from deception. we are fighting to protect the security of people's sensitive personal data and have obtained record monetary judgment including the largest ever judgment to protect children's privacy. the commissioners propose rules to address some of the most widespread scams like government impersonation fraud, made in usa fraud and fake online reviews the agency is tackling junkies plaguing american consumers and scrutinizing dark patterns that trick people into entering unwanted charges or surrendering sensitive data. our click to council proposal would require companies to make it is easy to cancel a subscription as it is to sign up for one. the ftc is also a to fighting for people's right to repair their own products. the ftc has brought several major actions against companies for imposing unlawful restrictions come hurting

customers and independence of bike. the ftc decided on all cylinders fighting every day to protect the american people from unlawful business practices. these efforts reflect the extraordinary work of our agency staff whose talent and dedications are second to none. it is a deep honor to serve in this role and i am enormously proud to see how our enforcement action and policy work are materially helping americans in their day-to-day lives. in the aggregate our work helps promote the open competitive resilient market that have been the bedrock of america's economic success and dynamism throughout our nation's history. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today, and i'm happy to answer your questions. >> thank you, madam chair. we will now to five-minute question for recognize the gently from ireland. >> like other federal agencies the ftc has a designated agency

ethics official known as dale. on april 18, 2023 you testified before a a subcommittee and he energy and commerce committee. at the hearing chair rogers asked you quote are the any instances where you have not followed advice? end quote. responded no and you followed up by saying that you quote have consulted with the daeo and taken actions that are consistent with the legal statements that daeo has made come in court. on june 16, 2023 a bloomberg journalist published the leaked memoranda written by the ftc daeo analyzing chair khan ability to sit as a judge in ftc's review med acquisition of company called within. according to the ethics memoranda the daeo court recommended you were recused to avoid and partially concern. do you believe you're completely honest and forthcoming with congress when asked if there were quote any instances where you would not follow the daeo advice and you answered no? yes, sir pgh yes congresswoman.

>> okay. in a letter that you sent to this committee yesterday evening to claim that you received only oral advice from the daeo but never subtly to memo and to left you decide to recuse yourself. first, it is unbelievable to me that you would not ask for written ethics advice on this particular topic. you admit you have written, you have written ethics advice on other topics but on this topic you claimed you did not see the written memo. instead you want as to believe you on the received oral advice and a specific oral advice but only general advice on quote understanding the legal framework end quote. did they'll give you advice that is different from what was written in the memoranda. >> was thanks for the question congresswoman. my work before i joined the commission with focus on assessing the power of large -- >> i need you to answer the question asked. >> i speak did you receive different oral advice than what was written in the memoranda from daeo? very simple question.

>> so i consulted with the ethics official. the ethics official as will spirit in the memo that decided although it i did not receivt memo, noted that the ultimate framework for instances in which somebody has to financial context of interest -- >> did she give you different oral advice and what was in the written memoranda? yes or no? >> -- the employee themselves to trim it. whether they should or should not refuse. that was -- >> did she to be given advice than what was in the written memoranda yes, sir? >> as was noted in the written memoranda that was no ethics violation created by my participating -- >> but you didn't follow advice p2 could've recused at any time, could you? >> i followed the determination that there was no speedy you could've recused at any time, could you? >> there was no violation under the ethics law because i have not been in financial stock, not a penny a financial -- >> did they'll give you advice to recuse and you did not do so,

correct? >> congresswoman, as was noted in the memo as a notice. i'm going to move on center not willing to answer my question. i read your letter which was nothing more than a front to your obligations of honesty and integrity and candidate for this tribunal that is owned by every public servant. and i would reference part 2635 of the code of federal regulations which described your ethical standards. i want to i want to note the ethics standards are higher mr. mcconnell: across the country surges in violent crime and deadly drugs have forced businesses to board up, working americans to think twice about the cities where they've chosen to raise their families. and while repeat offenders are increasingly turned loose to run up longer rap sheets, victims

of senseless violence are usually guilty of nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time. for example, just days ago i was reminded of this when a 6-year-old girl in my hometown of louisville was shot by a group of motorcycle thugs while riding in the back seat of her car. while she remains in critical but stable condition, i join the entire louisville community in wishing her a full recovery. so tragedies like this are unfortunately not unique to kentucky. in our nation's capital, crime has surgd to startling levels. compared to last year, car thefts shot up 119%, robberies

are up 53%, homicides are up 17%. just last week a social study teacher from kentucky who was visiting washington for a conference was fatally shot on a university campus. the assailant had a previous firearm charge and repeatedly violated the terms of his release. this young man from my home state was one of ten people who was shot and killed in washington during the first five days of this month, including a college student, an afghan immigrant who had risked his life as an interpreter for the u.s. military. so, mr. president, too many americans are mourning loved ones, and in cities across their country as they look for

answers to this senseless violence, they find radical prosecutors refusing to do their jobs. liberal district attorneys are watering down criminal codes and outright refusing to prosecute repeat offenders who ought to be behind bars. earlier this year the liberal d.c. council tried to pass a new criminal code that would make it easier for repeat offenders to get back on the street. thankfully republicans used congress' jurisdiction over our nation's capital to block this nonsense. but at every level of government democrats continue to turn a blind eye. keeping our communities safe is a fundamental governing responsibility. the american people deserve to feel safe in their own streets. now on another matter, during this week's summit in vilnius,

nato allies issued a wide-ranging joint statement on the challenges facing the alliance. among other things, i was encouraged to see our allies united in a particularly frank new assessment of the chinese threat. quote, the people's republic of china's stated ambitions and coercive policies challenge our interest, security, and values. the prc's malicious hybrid and cyber operations and disinformation target allies and harm alliance and security. some of us have even more stark concerns about the prc. but even this consensus statement indicates a promising shift toward the realism the

current moment simply demands. of course nato allies have never been concerned with -- of course nato allies have never been concerned with the north atlantic individual nato allies fought along u.s. soldiers in korea and other far-flung regions to help contest soviet aggression. after 9/11 nato invoked article 5 for the first time and came to america's defense. a nux nato allies deployed to afghanistan. some stayed to the bitter end, long after american l politicians had simply p given up. nato created a training mission in iraq and nato allies remain focused on the threat radical terrorists still pose to our collective security.

russia's invasion of georgia in 2008 and ukraine in 2014 woke some allies and some americans to the threat posed by great power adversaries. but the dramatic escalation in ukraine last year sounded an even larger alarm. nato as an alliance is focused on the threat posed by great power adversaries and not just on the european continent. it is the u.k. parliament and intelligence security put it in a new report, china almost certainly remains the largest apparatus in the world dwarfing the u.k. community and presenting a challenge for our allies, our agencies to cover. europe's largest and most

integrated economies are recognizing the dangers of getting in bed with authoritarian regimes. as germany's foreign minister has observed candidly, quote, we paid for every cubic liter of russian gas twofold and threefold with our national security. i'm hopeful our allies are determined not to make similar mistakes in the future. they seem to be understanding of the deep strategic links between our province and the indo-pacific. that's why the ally invited key partners, japan, south korea, australia and new zealand to participate in the summit. now effective resilience and defense means much more than strong words and diplomatic displays of unity. it means concrete plans backed

by robust investments. today germany's government is releasing a follow-up to its new security strategy dedicated to what it calls systemic rivalry with china. the foreign minister describes the long awaited plan as an effort to, quote, protect our own resilience, our own security, and reduce dependencies that threaten us. it's encouraging to hear the foreign minister acknowledging that the prc has become, quote, more present at home and more offensive abroad. however, the document clearly reflects an ongoing debate within the german government about how to engage both economically and strategically with china. the united states and other allies will be watching how this debate unfolds and what practical steps germany takes to limit the growing threats from

beijing. as germany's major pledges to make significant new investments in defense suggests, it really is at a turning point. i'm hopeful germany's defense commitments will be realized, that promised funds will go under contract or, and that german businesses will diversify investments away from increasingly risky bets in the prc. the united states, for our part, needs no convincing that china poses a singular strategic threat. in fact, a clear majority of americans support expanding our deterrence in the indo-pacific. but if we want to succeed at the big things like outcompeting china, we need to get our ducks in a row on our most basic governing responsibility --

providing for the common defense. hard power is essential, more so than any number of pet rocks politicians hold up as helpful to compete with china. hard power is the currency of geopolitics. the national defense authorization act, our must-pass opportunity to secure security priorities is finally before us. when it comes to actually delivering the robust funding our armed forces need, the biden administration has left our work cut out for us. its defense budget was plainly insufficient to meet the growing security challenges we face. we need to invest in the cutting edge capabilities that will make our adversaries think twice and rebuild the industrial base that

keeps america's arsenal and the arsenal of democracy, our allies arsenal stocked. it's no time to rest on our laurels. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. quorum call:

>> so i'm just going to be limited in what i can say about the merits. our complaint lays out the staff view of what this merger would result in and why that would be ample of violation. >> but the judge roundly rejected it and says there were not serious questions and i haven't lost your spending more taxpayer money on it appeal you were less likely to win because

the appeals court is going to defer to the trial court finding of fact. why are you spend even more taxpayer resources pursuing this deal? >> i can say this was staff recommendation, a general matter. staff always looks closely at an opinion and looks at whether there are certain errors in law that they believe are worth appealing. those are in general the types of determinations by going to whether the ftc into appealing. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from tennessee. >> thank you, mr. chair here chairman con, thank you for being here, for putting up with some of the questions you have been asked. yesterday fbi director wray sat here for almost five hours and put up continue questions attacking his patriotism, his judgment. it was really amazing the hypocrisy that was shown. the issue was weaponization of the fbi, and yet every member of

this panel who was here on january 6, 2021, knows that the government was weaponized on that date, as i said no clear eyes, to take over the government, to overthrow the government in contradiction of the oath of office each of us has taken and that we learn certain members of this committee went and met with donald trump, and that they were participating in the overthrow of our government, the nuclearization/weaponization of our government. and yet they have the chutzpah, the audacity, lack of integrity to question raised judgment and went on and on. i'm sorry i came in your today speech is a judgment accusing us of a lack of integrity. >> was mr. chairman, if you could ask whoever it is to shut up i'm sure the chairman will roll when he comes back. >> i heard questions about your relationship with the bar association. hey, you don't talk about rope

and house where a man has been home. you to ask about membership in the bar association on the judiciary committee with our members and never passed the bar and are not members of the bar. and they are members of this committee in good standing. so we need to get the on the hypocrisy and realize where we are and don't raise such subjects. chairman con, let me ask you this. the federal trade commission deals in issues that protect consumers. and subscriptions to magazines, to the services on subscription services for media are everywhere and you can subscribe to them easily. but it's hard to unsubscribe. it's difficult to find that spot. this has been a problem to consumers and the companies just make money hand over fist as people give up on trying to unsubscribe or cancel their membership and what steps is the ftc taking too real in these predatory practices?

>> congressman, you are absolute right. we had a complaint database for me or directly from consumers. oftentimes we are about frustrations about the subscriptions that are very easy to sign up for but impossible in some cases a foley catheter we brought enforcement actions including a case about against bondage last you. we also briefly proposed a rule with our click to cancel role that require companies make it as easy to cancel a subscription as it is a sign up for one. we have been collecting public comments. we will look hulsey at the record and determine how to proceed. >> thank you for that. i tried to, i had a bundle with disney, hulu and espn 26 or something, and i tried to get out of that bundle and just do hulu. and whatever it is i am being charged for both of them. i have given up. i just try to cancel and it just too much. it needs to be easy. >> that's right and we've also seen through our work that companies company sometimes use what are

known as dark patterns. these are these manipulative design techniques that are designed to trick people into either sign up for unwanted services or that make a very difficult to cancel or opt out of something. so those manipulative design tactics are very much on our radar. >> another consumer at the consumer practice is robocalls. heard about it forever. it bothers me. bobby seale people to get these robocalls and asking you to sign up for this or sign for that and to speak and they get you. this is also, i think the sec may be but what is the ftc doing to help us with these deceptive call? >> we work hard on this front for one thing we've been thinking about is how can we be most effective and efficient with our resources? we've been looking upstream at the voiceover internet protocol providers who sometimes are helping facilitate or enable these robocalls and so he brought we brought whole set of enforcement actions against them in order to

have a more determined in fact, invalid protect consumers from these unwanted call. >> have you try to encourage or ? the presiding officer: yes. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: the farm bills we take up with essential pieces of legislation. they help provide the tools and resorrieses that farmers and ranchers need to carry out their task of feeding our nation and with parts of the 2018 farm bill expiring in the next few months, passing our next farm bill needs to be one of the congress' top priorities during the remainder of the year. the senate agriculture committee has been working on this year's legislation, but there's more work to be done. and we need to make sure that we don't delay in getting this bill over the finish line. farmers and ranchers already face a lot of the uncertainty. few jobs are as certain to market fluctuations or the whims of the weather and the least that we can do is to have in

congress make sure that we -- that they know that the critical programs won't be expiring and that they will continue to have access to essential resources that help make farming and ranching possible. mr. president, as a member of the senate agriculture committee and a senator from the state where agriculture is not just a way of life but the way of life, the farm bill is always one of my top priorities. i've had the privilege of helping to craft four farm bills during my time in congress. and for me the process always begins and ends with farmers and ranchers. i've been gearing up for the 20923 farm bill pretty much since work finished on the last one and last year i kicked off a sears of roundtables. these conversations i regularly have with farmers and ranchers have provided me with invaluable feedback. and i'm working on a number of measures toker this year's farm

bill that reflects input i receive from south dakota producers. mr. president, one thing that farmers have made clear is the critical role of the farm safety net. crop insurance is the cornerstone of the farm safety net and it needs to be maintained and to the extent possible strengthened in the next farm bill. currently, the agriculture risk coverage and price risk coverage programs which help offset losses are not always proving sufficient. and one of my top priorities toker this year's bail is improving commodity and livestock programs 10 into ensure that farmers and ranchers have sufficient backup. i will also working to make the conservation reserve program a more effective option for producers and landowners. currently the program doesn't sufficiently support grazing infrastructure which limits the benefits of participating. the annual payment limit hasn't changed since 1985. to address these issues i

introduced the conservation reserve program improvement act which will provide more flexibility for producers and increase the payment cap to account for increased land values. i will-to-work to ensure that the crp improvement act is included in the final bill. in addition to farmed crops, livestock production is an integral part of south dakota's agricultural economy. and one of my top priorities was addressing some of the challenging facing south dakota livestock producers inest going their products to americans' tables. the last few years have revealed some vulnerabilities in our food supply chain that had an outsized impact on agricultural -- on livestock producers. early pandemic closures of some meat processing plants led to bottlenecks in processing livestock and delays for a lost ranchers. and this led to supply shortages and empty cases at the grocery

store, shortages caused by lack of processing capacity, not a lack of livestock. it's become clear that livestock producers need more processing options and one way we can reduce dependence on the big packers is by expanding smaller meatpackers' capacity. i've introduced the strengthening local processing act to help smaller processors invest in the infrastructure they need to expand. my bill would also allow more state inspected meat products to be sold across state lines which would open up new markets for small meat processors and the farmers and ranchers who supply them. i've also required the u.s. trade representative to develop a world trade organization-compliant means of reinstating mandatory country-of-origin labeling for beef. under our current system, beef that is neither born more raised in the united states but is

simply finished here can be labeled product of the united states, even if the only american thing about the beef is the plastic that it's wrapped in, if that. that is unfair to american cattle producers and misleading to consumers. and i'm pleased that usda is working on a proposed rule to close the product of the usa labeling loophole. and i will continue to work to get my american beef labeling act included in the 2023 farm bill so that consumers can be confident that any beef labeled product of the usa really came from american cattle producers. mr. president, new practices and technologies can be game changers for farmers, and without reliable data, it can be unclear whether these practices and technologies will have positive impact. and that's why earlier this year i introduced the agriculture innovation act, which would make it easier for producers and

trusted researchers to use usda data to assess the impact of various production practices so that producers can gauge whether these practices are right or their farm or ranch operation. and of course while the macro-level data usda collects can provide valuable information, farmers are already beginning to look to the next frontier collecting real-time micro level data from their own fields. i've introduced the promoting proo he significance agriculture act to helicopter advance precision agriculture technology and ass how more farmers to take advantage of this data revolution. because without a reliable internet connection precision agriculture technology doesn't get very far, i'm has working to enshould you are that my bill to streamline usda's authorities and enshould you are that funding go toss areas where at least 90% of households lack

broadband access is included in this year's farm bill. mr. president, producing the food that fills americans' dinner tables is no easy task. we owe the men and women who do this important work the certainty that the programs they depend on will be there for them. i hope that leaders in both houses of congress will put passing the 2023 farm bill at the very top of our to-do list. and i will do everything i can to advance this important legislation. and today and every day i will continue to make farmers and ranchers my priority. mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona.

mr. kelly: mr. president, when congress passed the chips and science pact last summer, we made a promise to america that these historic investments would be felt in communities across the country. more microchip manufacturing facilities, more high-paying jobs that do not require a four-year degree, lower costs, a stronger supply chain and a stronger economy. since the chips act became law, companies have announced plans to invest hundreds of billions of dollars to bring microchip manufacturing back to america, including in arizona. but here's the problem -- as currently implemented, when these projects receive scientifics through the chips act, they are subject to a new federal review under a process called nepa.

this includes projects that have already received the necessary state and federal environmental permits and are already under construction. so factories that are being built right now in places like phoenix could be forced to pause construction and undergo a redundant federal review. and that just doesn't work. so this week, along with my colleagues senators young, round, and hagerty, i introduced the building chips in america act, and this bill would speed up the construction of projects supported by the chips act by streamlining federal permitting reviews and keeping in place bedrock environmental protections for clean air and clean water. to do this, the bill designated the department of commerce as

the lead agency to carry out nepa reviews for any chips act project. it also clarifies that certain projects, certain chips projects like those already under development with necessary permits are not major federal actions and, therefore, are not subject to a nepa review. these measures would -- would prevent costly delays for projects, and right now we have an opportunity to maximize the impact of the chips act for our economy and for our national security. plans are already under way that have received the necessary permits should not have to face extra hurdles. so, mr. president, let's cut the red tape. let's start reaping the benefits of our historic chips act. thank you, i yield the floor.

mr. president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call:

with that i know we have unanimous consent. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would move for the entry of a letter from small business rising to yourself as well as to the ranking member, jerrold nadler, into the record without objection. >> without objection. >> and i would also like to take, if the chair will allow me the opportunity to clarify to my friend -- >> briefly. >> chairman issa, that no personal affront was intended.

this was directed at the entire speedy we got that. the chairman recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. .. only adoption of a particular set of commitments. the first part of their response, he did not answer whether you would block a merger if it met criteria but pulled short of a standard on these goals, could you say the issue will not play a role in the merger?

>> we looks at the statute that says they substantially us in competition or create model, as we look at the company makes a commitment models are irrelevant. >> since becoming chair, have you communicated using signal, whatsapp or a different messaging app through anti- trust or consumer protection policy, enforcement actions, press, political strategy or any official communication? in particular, are interested in any communication with warren, state attorney general or groups? >> a very clear policy requiring any ftc business relating to substantial matters on authorized devices and i fully comply with the. >> did you have any communication with your now senior advisor?

>> joined by staff earlier this year, correct. >> while she was in her role in the liberties product regarding the decision on members of this committee including myself were in opposition to the proposed document. >> i talked to a lot of people but i was never involved in those. >> you are involved in going after members of the committee? >> we are excited about this proposal, a lot of public, and eager to hear, i talked to many of you about the proposal and we are eager to hear your feedback and input. >> it was announced you intend to break 30 years challenging the merger of microsoft, can you explain why despite 39 countries of european union are hearing the merger the you intend?

>> this is pending before the commission so i can't comment on the met. when we get an adverse ruling, our teams look at the opinion and determine whether there are errors of law they believe warrant an appeal, those of the types of considerations. >> in april this year ftc associate director for litigation for the bureau of competition stated at the conference that merger policy is industrial policy and a role for merger policy. that means at the next meeting cannot wait to say what's the exit via acquisition? it will be how do we get to an ipo? do you endorse this statement? >> are not familiar with the

details. i'll say generally it's true competition policy is about ensuring competition, entrepreneurs benefit, startups benefit and they got with frederick c-uppercase-letter of the week expressing concern about lack of exit options that don't involve being brought up by a large technology companies, these are certainly issues we hear about. >> the issue for myself and colleagues has been the way you run the ftc you're not simply trying to kill deals, you're killing small businesses. the cost of entering the public market double since the 90s and your colleague has been piling on with the ruling so i don't know if this is what the administration means by biden

economics but i have to ask, why would anyone start a small business under this administration right now? >> we hear regularly from small businesses and one thing we started is open commission meetings for anybody in the country and sinus have an we hear from a lot of businesses. we hear is about the challenges they face being able to compete and an open competitive marketplace to hear about how the existing giants and incumbents are squeezing them making it difficult for an independent grocer or pharmacist, we are eager to hear from small businesses and enforce new laws enabling everybody to compete in the market. >> judgment else back and the gentleman from california. >> thanks to our witness for being here. i have several areas where it seems to be the ftc is less than

robust. first in the area of visa mastercard with more than 82% of market share. congressman and i introduced credit card competition act of 2023 to introduce competition. we are small businesses they higher fees than people do and other developed nations and i'm wondering whether the ftc will have active engagement in this area and i am concerned about the issue of consolidation in the grocery sector. large companies have power to secure preferential pricing and treatment for independent grocer's and led an appropriation request for $10 million specifically for ftc

enforcement. i'm interested in what you tell us. i've long been a champion for care, we've recently introduced legislation to limit enforcement. design patents so monopolies cannot prevent individuals from repairing the report before your tenure, interested in this area going forward and as you and i introduced what i think is the toughest online privacy act ever introduced in congress prevents companies from collecting data so they cannot use it to manipulate americans. i'm interested in what action the ftc will take to minimize

data, minimization which i think is key to data security privacy and in competition. >> on your first part a few months ago ftc announced enforcement action against mastercard. we alleged a violation of the durban amendment and mastercard engaged in unlawful tactics to block competing networks and stifle the competition congress has to encourage in this market in 2010 because you are right, these are higher than we see in sectors with more competition. reinvigorating enforcement is a top priority. we've heard from independent grocer's about the ways in which differential treatment and discriminatory prices may be squeezing them and favoring them making it difficult to compete

especially in rural america, it's something we are looking at closely. several months ago we launched a market inquiry looking at supply chain disruptions and that treatment may have contributed. right to repair, this is a big area of focus for us in addition to the staff report you mentioned and policy statements that followed up with enforcement actions including one against harley-davidson and since then we've been working with state legislatures also considering right to repair legislation. the other month a staffer went to california before the state senate to get feedback on their efforts in this area so we are bringing our own lawsuits but also looking on suppliers or other legislatures are looking to be active but ensuring robust protection for americans is a

top priority, even extraordinarily this area especially when it involves children's privacy, and enforcement action that we found privacy policies they had in place. we've been looking at people's sensitive health information and companies are collecting health data for the purpose of providing health services and turning it around making it available for advertising and we are looking at geo location data, a lawsuit pending in idaho and we alleged in our complete the practices allow people to allow companies to track sensitive geolocation information in ways that revealed whether they were going to church, seeking certain types of health services or additional recovery facilities, very

sensitive data and that lawsuit is still pending. >> i see my time has expired and i feel back. >> why are you harassing twitter? >> things for the question. as you might know the work on twitter goes back a decade -- >> i'm talking about now. 300 separate requests you've demanded of twitter. why are you harassing them next. >> twitter has a history privacy policy. >> you've asked for every communication relating to elon musk, not communications he sent to someone or communications he received but anytime he's mentioned -- actually more than harassment, it seems like session. why such intense focus? >> was found twitter's last

privacy policies allow unauthorized users for accounts including lawsuits subsequently twitter voluntarily entered into a consent order. >> here's what you wrote in december. identify all journalists and other members of the institute twitter granted access to the company. you want to know the name of every journalist, private company has talked to? is not consistent with the first amendment? >> i take extremely seriously valuable work they do and understand there can be instances in which government action -- >> particularly in the context here, you got government acting about who they're talking to, what the other names of journalists, that's bad enough, i think a threat to the freedom of the press but in the context

of giving information have government suppressed speech on these platforms, that's the context, that is particularly troubling, don't you? >> we have profits to consider from sharing personal information with third parties. when we ran the papers that twitter may have granted, that's what our team receives information about the companies -- >> limited time. who david roque? >> are not familiar. >> called him june first, 2023, independent partner for independent assessment of twitter's program. let me read this because this is important.

this is one of your lawyers testified ftc's conduct made him feel as if the ftc was trying to influence the outcome of the engagement. he said in some discussions we were having with the federal trade commission, expectations were conveyed about what the results should be before we begin any procedures. the independent assessor the ftc has with twitter and you are telling the guy, whose the person? use the accountant to get the information telling him you're putting finger on the scale telling him what the outcome should be. why are you doing that? >> i'm not familiar -- >> this is your deposition. >> i'm happy to take a closer look and get back in touch. we want to make sure assessor's and auditors consider responsible for overseas clients during their job.

>> was been filed in court today, suggestions of what they would expect the outcome to be, they being ftc, a suggestion of what they want him to find in his independent assessment of the agreement between the ftc and twitter. >> i'm happy to take a look and get back to you but our staff are professionals and their focus on cash. >> is your harassment on twitter, is based on the fact that democrats have asked you to do this and some things you've written about dealing with this information? does not have anything to do with it? >> only independent determinations whether there were violations. >> the statements were a letter from democrat senators with no impact on that. >> absolutely not, we work

closely and take this matter into our hands. >> telling the independent assessor put your finger on the scale, this is the result we want, that's not harassment and had something to do with the fact that they seem to tell you to go after twitter. >> our focus on protecting privacy and security. there's sensitive data on americans including private messages, we need to make sure especially given 2010, we are doing everything we can to comply with the order. >> don't attack the first amendment and i yield back and recognize the gentleman from california for five minutes. >> thank you for your testimony today and thank you for the refreshing aggressive approach you are taking your competition. in my view, we reached a dangerous place where there is tremendous concentration at the

expense of working families. the challenge we face is not that people aren't working, people aren't working. they're not making enough to get by and part of that is a result of this concentration of power and the likes of which i don't think we've seen in our history. i appreciate the work you're doing. i want to ask you in particular about consolidation among large grocery stores, grocery chains. this has the potential of not only an impact on price but also adverse impact in the form of job losses and creation of food does it impacting communities and if you're able share your thoughts, great. if you're not, i asked more generally what you're looking at in terms of impact and the

narrowness of the focus only on consumer prices. with that prevent you from looking at other criteria such as impact on communities and workers? >> to make sure you fully understand a merger, lessening competition in ways that are harming consumers but it might suppliers. we take care to make sure we look at all sides. there is pending investigation, ftc is looking at their proposal and i think you're right, who seem consolidation that could have devastating effects for communities and shooting to food deserts. one practice on the radar is the way in which we retain restrictive covenants to lockout

competition which may be in jeopardy to food deserts so we are looking at that and we want to make sure we enforce antitrust laws in a way that serves all communities. >> i have great concerns about the merger and impact throughout california and the country in terms of impact on workers and prices and communities. let me turn to the issue the chairman was raising, didn't get much chance to elaborate on the privacy and security problems at twitter and they could impact the privacy of millions of americans. i like to give that officer because i am concerned with the enormous amount of hate speech, firing of individuals charged with security at twitter that would impact the rise of hate

and decree in security and privacy of people's data. >> we are focused on privacy and security of any decision made. i noted twitter's history back over a decade where security and privacy led to personal information optimized. twitter today deeply personal and sensitive information. in 2022 we entered into a revised consent order because twitter was in violation of prior consent order. we have repeat offenders, we are thinking hard on what could do to prevent violations, revise order has tighter privacy and security provision voted on unanimously and will continue to make sure orders are followed

and companies protect people's privacy and security. >> i like to ask unanimous consent, articles, elon musk censorship ten times free speech and government demands under elon musk which includes twitter's self-report and companies complied for censorship or surveillance especially countries such as turkey and india. >> gentlemen from colorado is recognized. >> thank you for being here. if you own stock apple and was unlike any competitors? you know the ethics official the

request recuse yourself from activities involving facebook own stock? >> i learned about that. >> you know how much it cost to buy congress? big tech does. $250 million against bills that passed out of his committee last congress. they spent money lobby, they spent money on advertising and members district, they spent money with third-party think tanks. basement money no other effort in recent memory has been spent and it's not just the money they spent but lobbying, meta- spent a call it facebook, $20,070,000, amazon $19,320,000, alphabet

$11,770,000. apple 6,500,000 is not just the money they spent on lobbying. june 18, 2021, 5 days before the appearing of tax bills in his committee, nancy pelosi's tech investor husband but 4000 shares of alphabet in which he promised stocks at a later date of the price of $1200 a share. a month later after we passed the bill but nancy pelosi, the speaker majority leader tells the press the bills were not ready for the four. a month later stock price rose over $2500 making paul pelosi $5.2 million richer without spending a penny. speaker pelosi's office issued a

statement in any prior knowledge of the transaction. the fact remains reduced to bring to a vote on the house floor those bills. they resulted from a team of long investigation. we had last year as a result of efforts stopped in the house, a band that would prohibit members from buying individual stocks and probably you don't know more than 50 members of congress stocks and pharmaceutical companies when congress immunized pharmaceutical companies if there is any problems with the vaccines they created.

we call you into congress and suggest you shouldn't be involved in activities involving these companies because you wrote a law review article. you have a child? you have a child lobbying or amazon or facebook? >> no, turning six months this week so no. >> they would probably still hire him. if they thought they could influence you, they would hire your child at six months old because they've hired senator schumer's daughters to lobby for them and the same bill that passed the house passed or didn't get a chance -- i'm sorry, the same bills passed house judiciary committee passed the senate judiciary committee and never saw the light of day

on the senate floor either but that's just how the game goes. you are well aware of the need to update the antitrust laws concerning the new economy we are facing and if you could, briefly explain why is it so difficult to apply antitrust laws written at the turn of the last century the new economy. >> thanks. there is antitrust doctrine embedded within it how certain markets work and what incentives businesses state. doctors in some cases 30, 40 years old, way before this. the digital markets are different. companies face incentives and engaged in these strategies.

between what the theory says and what the doctrine says and what we are living in actual markets and that's where legislative action will be. >> time is expired. gentlemen from california is. >> welcome to the. what is your job? >> i have the honor of serving chair at the federal. >> what you do and that will? >> help manage the agency overseeing bureau of consumer protection. >> where you get the authority? >> congress charged that in the subsequent legislative amendment. >> was that you?

>> that's back to 1914. >> we talked earlier about litigation enforcement costs. for you it agency in charge of protecting consumers enforcing the law and going after individuals consumers and taxpayers? >> we are a government agency keeping every dollar we have to protect from illegal practices. >> let's talk about mainstream, through washington. i get scam calls everyday, robo calls. seniors get robo calls, veterans get robo calls. how are you working stop these calls from happening? >> we have your addiction as noted, one thing we are doing in addition to going after robo colors, identifying factors

allowing to delivery, sometimes they originate from other countries and make it difficult to go after them and look at providers. >> a number of years ago i had a situation, we had to get involved. calls from mexico and a local telephone company providing quality information is a huge mess. international very much a difficult challenge, what can we do to help you rain and these calls? >> there are certainly updates their happy to recommend between you and your team, i would say generally giving the authority over telecom carriers directly taking action and it could have a big challenge. >> at the end of the scam calls we have victims, people who get

hurt really bad and struggled to get the money back. what is your agency doing to help consumers get their money back? >> we are where we can. a couple of years ago suffered a setback in court where the court said the ftc act -- objection. the presiding officer: the question is on the nomination. mr. kelly: i ask gor the -- for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto.

mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. the clerk: ms. ernst. mrs. feinstein. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan.

mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan.

the clerk: ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz.

mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. the clerk: ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner.

mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- kelly. king, lujan, and rosen.

senators voted in the negative. crapo and rounds. the clerk: mr. thune, no.

the clerk: ms. earns, no -- ms. ernst, no.

the clerk: cassidy, -- mr. cassidy, no.

the clerk: mr. barasso, no. mr. paul, no. vote: the clerk: mr. scott. mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye. mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. ms. hassan, aye.

the clerk: mr. wicker, no.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye. mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. warnock, aye. the clerk: mr. cardin, aye. mr. menendez, aye. mr. welch, aye. mr. carper, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. mr. romney, no. mr. coons, aye. mr. ricketts, no.

the clerk: mr. risch, no. the clerk: mr. markey, aye. mr. cruz, no.

mr. merkley, aye. mr. tester, aye. mr. murphy, aye. the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. mr. brown, aye. ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. mrs. britt, no. mr. rubio, no.

the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye. mr. tuberville, no. the clerk: mr. cramer, no. the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. mr.off, aye. -- mr. mr. ossoff, aye.

mrs. gillibrand, aye. the clerk: mr. peters, aye. mrs. lummis, no. mr. capito, no. mr. young, no. mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. whitehouse, aye. . the clerk: mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: reed, aye. ms. hirono, aye. the clerk: mr. cotton, no.

the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. the clerk: mr. mullin, no.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye. -- ms. duckworth, aye. mr. johnson, no. ms. sinema, aye.

the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye. the clerk: mr. daines, no. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye.

the clerk: mrs. feinstein, aye. the clerk: mr. tillis, no. mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. the clerk: mr. kennedy, no. the clerk: boozman, no -- mr. boozman man, no.

the clerk: mr. budd, no.

the clerk: mr. graham, no.

mrs. fischer, no. the clerk: warner, -- mr. warner, aye.

mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: mr. moran, no.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no. vote:

the clerk: mr. lee, no. the clerk: mr. manchin, no. the clerk: mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: mr. marshall, no.

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. the clerk: ms. collins, no.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, no. ms. baldwin, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no.

vote: the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 49, the nays are 47. 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 note nide of the senate's action. 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 the nomination of executive calendar number 141 is david m. uhlmann of michigan to be an assistant

administrator of the environmental protection agency, signed by 17 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 david m. uhlmann of michigan to be an assistant administrator of the environmental protection agency shall be brought to a close e the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet.

mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn.

ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mrs. feinstein. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono.

mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray.

mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance.

mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. senators voting in the affirmative --

baldwin, cantwell, collins, hassan. king. murray. reed. sanders. sinema. stabenow, and welch. senators voting in the negative -- bozeman more roone, mullin, paul. rubio. scott of florida. sullivan. the clerk: mr. romney, no.

the clerk: mr. heinrich, aye. mr. young, no. the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. kennedy, no. the clerk: mr. cramer, no. mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. manchin, no. mr. marshall, no. mr. hickenlooper, aye. the clerk: mr. rounds, no. mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. bennet, aye.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. the clerk: mr. schmitt, no.

vote: the clerk: mr. tillis, no. mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no. mr. tuberville, no. the clerk: mr. graham, no.

mr. cardin, aye. mr. crapo, no. mr. lee, no. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. mr. carper, aye.

mr. thune, no. mr. schumer, aye. mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. brown, aye.

mr. peters, aye. the clerk: mr. wicker, no. mr. kaine, aye.

mr. budd, no. ms. cortez-masto, aye. mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. johnson, no. the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. ricketts, no.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. mrs. capito, no.

the clerk: the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. barrasso, no. mr. cotton, no. mr. merkley, aye. mrs. feinstein, aye.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no. mrs. gillibrand, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mrs. fischer, no. the clerk: ms. ernst, no.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. the presiding officer: mr. cruz,

no. the clerk: mr. cruz, no.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. markey, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

the clerk: mr. risch, no. the clerk: mr. schatz, aye.

the clerk: mr. menendez, aye.

the presiding officer: the yeas are # 55, the nays are 44, the motion is agreed to. the clerk: nomination, environmental protection agency, david m. uhlmann, to be assistant administrator. the presiding officer: the senate will proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to calendar number 119, s. 2226. the presiding officer: the clerk: , motion to proceed to calendar number 119, zest

226, a bill to authorize military activities at the department of defense. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the motion to proceed to calendar number 119, s. 2226, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2024, for military activities of the department of defense, and so forth and for other purposes, signed by 18 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask that the reading of the names be waived are. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, july 13, be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

single turn of the future. we will hear and developers objection. mr. paul: i ask unanimous consent that we proceed to the previously scheduled vote at 1:45 now. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session. 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 the nomination of executive calendar number 21, rachel bloomekatz of ohio to be united states circuit judge for the sixth circuit signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of rachel bloomekatz of ohio to be united states circuit judge for the sixth circuit shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins.

mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mrs. feinstein. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson.

vote:

mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray.

mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville.

mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- baldwin, blumenthal, brown, casey, dush, heinrich, peters, smith, wyden. senators voting in the negative -- barrasso, collins, cornyn, cotton, cruz, daines, fisher, graham, hyde-smith, johnson, kennedy, lee, marshall, mcconnell, moran, mullen, paul, ricketts, romney, rubio, schmitt, tillis, tuberville.

mr. reed, aye. mr. braun, no. ms. hassan, aye. mr. welch, aye. mr. grassley, no. mr. schatz, aye.

mr. cramer, no. mr. cardin, aye. the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mr. fetterman, aye.

mr. markey, aye. mr. tester, aye. ms. lummis, no. the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. ms. sinema, aye. mr. crapo, no.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. mr. rounds, no.

the clerk: mr. risch, no.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. mrs. finstein, aye. -- mrs. feinstein, aye. the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mr. wicker, no. mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. coons, aye. the clerk: mr. young, no.

mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. ms. warren, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, no.

mr. king, aye. the clerk: mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.