refusing military promotions, apparently isn't cruel enough. now republicans want military leaders fired when they can't complete impossible underresourced missions. this is a growing attack, a growing set of attacks on our military. and all in the service of a bunch of old men telling young women what health care they can get and what health care they can't get. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? no, it's way more than that. comcast is partnering with a thousand community centers to create wi-fi enabled so students from low income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service, along with

these other television providers, giving awe front row seat to democracy. >> today senate lawmakers are expect today vote on whether to confirm tanya brad cher to be next secretary. and later today three spending bills for next year. live to the floor of the u.s. senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, our reverend, dr. barry black, will open the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. reports at the convening of this senate's session eternal god to acknowledge our total dependence upon you.

we are aware of the fragile and temporary nature of our earthly pilgrimage and look to you, the changeless one, to guide our steps. from you we borrow our heartbeats, and because of you, we live and move and have our being. guide our lawmakers today with more than human wisdom. give them the ability to solve the difficult problems of these turbulent days. break in and through their human

efforts, empowering them to permit justice to roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. we pray in your sacred name. amen. the presiding officer: 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 presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., september 12, 2023. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael g. warnock, a senator from the state of georgia, to perform the duties of the chair.

signed: patty murray, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of veterans affairs. tanya j. bradsher of virginia to be deputy secretary.

test.

test:

mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: well, mr. president, for congress to legislate on artificial intelligence is for us to engage in one of the most complex and important subjects congress has ever faced. in just a few years, artificial

intelligence has grown in complexity, speed, and power, doing things even experts didn't think possible so soon. in past situations, when subjects like this that are so complex and difficult come forward, too many congresses have tended to behave reactively or favored delaying action until it's too late. but on a.i., we can't behive like ostriches and stick our heads in the sand. it will affect just about every aspect of society in major ways, both positive and negative. and on an issue this wide-ranging and important, we must make every good-faith effort to act. congress must recognize two things -- that this effort must be bipartisan, and we need outside help if we want to write effective a.i. policies. we need help, of course, from developers and experts who build a.i. systems. but we also need help from

critics who can make sure the liabilities of a.i. are minimized by guardrails. those critics will come from two places, from outside the industry, such as labor and civil rights and the creative community, but we also need critics from inside the industry as well, who may know in a very technical sense how to minimize the dangers. that's why tomorrow will be so important. tomorrow morning, i will convene with senators rounds and heinrich and young the first of a series of a.i. insight forums to bring leaders from inside and outside the industry to debate congress' role in regulating a.i. we have a balanced and diverse group at the table. not just those from tech, but a.i. experts andeth sipses who spent years -- ethicists who spent years researching and advancing the technology. we'll also have organizations outside the industry representing labor and civil

rights, the world of academia, defense, and so much more. all of these groups, together in one room, talking about how and why congress must act, what questions to ask, and how to build a consensus for safe innovation. that is, of course, what we have called our suggestion. because a.i. must be our -- because a.i. innovation must be our north star in all we do, and i'm talking about innovation in both a transformational sense, the kind of innovation that unlocks new cures, improves education, protects our national security, protects our food supply, and sustainable innovation, so that we may find new and creative ways to protect against a.i.'s risks and minimize the chances of this technology going off the rails, which would undermine innovation altogether. the only way we'll achieve this

goal is by bringing a diverse group of perspectives together, from those who work every day on these systems to those openly critical of many parts of a.i. and who worry about its effects on workers, on racial and gender bias, and more. so i look forward to tomorrow's conversation, the first of many we will have this fall. i expect we'll hear a wide range of views and opinions and lots of dissenting views. that's how it should be. i want to thank every participant attending tomorrow's forum. thank you also to senator rounds and heinrich and young, who helped organize tomorrow's meeting. of course, i want to thank all my colleagues from both sides of the aisle who recognize the urgency of a.i. the senate is fully engaged in this issue and is ready to do more. our committees and subcommittees have already held no fewer than nine hearings on a.i., with more happening this week. all on issues ranging from national security to human rights to i.t. and more. we need all hands on deck if we

want to maximize a.i.'s societal benefits, while minimize its many risks. tomorrow we'll take the neck step in this great -- the next step there this great undertaking, and i urge all my colleagues from both sides to attend. on appropriations, mr. president, today the senate will continue the business of confirming more judicial nominees. we'll vote this afternoon to confirm jeffrey cummings, of illinois, to serve as district judge for the northern district of illinois. judge cummings was reported out of committee with a bipartisan vote. he would be the 104th district courts judge we confirm under president biden. on another matter, after a lot of hard work and compromise which by appropriators on both sides, salute to patty murray and susan collins, today the senate will take up the first procedural vote on a package of three appropriations bills -- mill con veterans affairs, agriculture and transportation hud, each of these passed

unanimously out of committee. i hope they'll have strong bipartisan support here on the floor. i mentioned both chair murray and vice chair collins. i also want to thank all the mbltion ever the appropriations committee for their great work -- thank all the members of the appropriations committee for their great work. none of it was easy, but they deserve great credit. the senate appropriations has been the gold star for good governance. all 12 bills passed through regular order, with democratic chairs and republican ranking members working together to move bills forward. as the senate continues the work of funding the government, the house gavels back in today with one very important responsibility -- following the senate's example and working in a bipartisan fashion to prevent government shutdown. the american people don't want a shutdown. it would undo so much of our progress to lower costs, create millions of jobs, and help our economy recover from the pandemic.

i once again implore house republican leadership to reject all-or-nothing tactics, roo he ject un-- reject unrealistic expectations and refuse to cave to the extremist demands from 30 or so members way out on the fringe. there's only one way we'll we'll avoid costly government shutdow. it's simple as that. we've seen bipartisan work in the senate, and now the house must follow suit. i yield the floor.:

:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: this week the senate will begin consideration of the first package of full-year appropriations for the coming fiscal year. this is an important milestone and a down payment on our goal of funding the federal government through regular order. our progress on this front has been due in large part to the leadership of senator collins and senator murray of the appropriations committee. for months, months our colleagues have worked

diligently to build consensus and process as many bills as possible with deadlines looming large. the legislation before us this week is designed to address a trio of important commitments to america's farmers, to our veterans, and to investing in transportation infrastructure. so, mr. president, 7% of american adults are veterans of the armed forces. 10% of american jobs are supported by agriculture, and our entire economy hinges on safe airports, roads, bridges and ports. so it's difficult to overstate the importance of this legislation, but it's especially important that we get it right. to that end, i hope and expect

that all senators will receive ample opportunity to offer amendments for consideration. ultimately our work will need to earn the support of a divided congress and earn the president's signature. so i'm grateful to our colleagues' commitment to regular order appropriations, and i look forward to supporting a sensible step forward in the coming days. now on another matter, i've spoken in recent days about the most common arguments deployed against u.s. assistance to the fight against putin and ukraine and how they fall short. today i'd like to address the misconception that america's lethal aid lacks necessary accountability and protections against misuse. the united states probably has a deeper understanding of how

ukraine is using weapons provided by the united states and our allies than we have had with any other partner nation, period. there are many reasons for this. first, ukraine is not iraq or afghanistan. it is a modern democracy firmly committed to integration with the west. second, russia's escalation last year led to a political sea change in how ukraine treats corruption. today corruption and misuse of funds or weapons can mean the death of loved ones or imperil critical western support. i'm not saying that corruption has not vanished, even in the worst conflicts or most advanced

democracies human nature remains. but the cost calculus has changed, and robust, independent, anticorruption bodies are making a difference. third, american diplomats, military officers, and usaid employees have finally returned to kyiv. their presence allows for more oversight and accountability of our assistance. senators who have visited the american-led headquarters in germany and seen the professional multinational effort supporting ukraine firsthand have come away impressed. they have also been impressed by lieutenant general tony ogoto, the senior american officer who runs this effort and was

confirmed by the senate last year by voice vote. through these coalition efforts, we have unprecedented insight into how nearly 30 types of western weapons, systems and vehicles are being used by ukraine, often beyond to the serial number. take, for example, an american-led effort in poland that remotely assists ukrainian units on the front lines to maintain and prepare various weapons and vehicles. when the trouble arises, ukrainian units have every incentive to share data, photos and video in real time about the status of their weapons and benefit from engineering solutions we provide to help maintain and repair these weapons out in the field. this is a win-win. the united states gets unprecedented insight into how our weapons are being used or

overused in combat which helps us improve and maintain america's own arsenal. u.s. forces also get a unique view into the situation on the battlefield and the challenges ukraine faces. even his oversight role and regular contact with ukrainian commanders, i've requested the u.s. make lieutenant ogot of available for questions on these insights. ranking member risch and ranking member wicker have ensured that $50 million was included in previous supplementals, specifically to conduct oversight of assistance to

ukraine. we've added dozens of transparency and reported requirements so congress has more insight than ever. tomorrow my colleagues will have an opportunity to learn even more. at my request, the inspector general for the pentagon, the state department, and usaid will come to brief republican senators on the state of their own independent oversight of these assistance efforts. already as the state department's i.g. put it, quote, our completed work has not substantiated any, any allegations of diversion.

it is my hope that each of our colleagues will take this opportunity to get the facts from these independent auditors. now on one final matter, across the country the end of summer gave working families gas prices near all-time highs, beyond just the seasonal swing. last week washington democrats opened a new front in their war on affordable and abundant american energy. the biden administration announced the withdrawal of more than 13 million acres in the national petroleum reserve from oil and gas leasing and canceled, canceled seven oil and gas leases in alaska's arctic national wildlife refuge. the president calls this move a necessary step to meet the urgency of the climate crisis,

but any serious observer would call it bad news for families trying to make ends meet. the last fiscal year, under president biden's stranglehold, the number of new federal acres leased plummeted, comparing the first 30 months of each administration, onshore leasing is down from 67 seams under the previous -- 67 sales under the previous administration to a mere 9 sales under president biden. 67 sales down to 9 in this administration. meanwhile the biden administration has led a five-year plan for offshore energy production required by law to expire over a year ago with no new plan in sight. in other words, there are no new offshore energy leases in the hopper. now congress has exercised its

authority and forced the president to reinstate an offshore lease it had already canceled, but in response his administration put six million acres of the sale off limits to oil and gas exploration. senate democrats have been more than willing to tow the party line. last year every single one of our democratic colleagues voted against senator barrasso's effort to require dependable onshore leaving, and -- leasing and every single one voted against senator kennedy's measure for certainty to offshore leasing. so freezing the development of plain and reliable energy here at home does nothing more than kick production of more and i have and less -- and less reliable fuels into overdrive overseas. you can guarantee it won't be

compliement conscious or environmentally sound when they come from overseas. the shortsighted obsession is measured in higher costs at the pump, higher home heating and fueling business and greater reliance on foreign energy. outsourcing our energy policy to the radical environmentalists, the biden administration's offshoreing is literally outsourcing america's energy security. our nation really deserves better. really

mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

mr. thune: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: yes. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: three weeks ago, president biden launched the second part of his student loan giveaway. his dramatic overhaul of the repay program for federal student loans. the president's revamp flew under the radar event when it was first announced overshadowed by his plan to forgive up to $10,000 of student loan debt outright or $20,000 for pell grant recipients. but the truth is that the president's new income-driven repayment plan, which he has dubbed the saving on a valuable education plan, or the save plan

is just as problematic, if not more, than the president's scheme to forgive outright. the new plan will create a system in which the majority of the federal borrowers will never fully repay their federal student loans. the wharton budget model estimates that just 24.6% of future borrowers will repay their loans in full. in other words, less than ar quarter of borrowers. the department of education estimates that borrowers with only-undergraduate debt can on average expect back just $621 for each $10,000 that he borrow. that amounts the federal government taking on almost 40% of the cost of these undergraduate student loans. so, mr. president, let's call

this what it is. it's loan forgiveness by another name. you don't have to take my name for it. one scholar from the left-leaning urban institute had this to say on npr the other day. and i quote, "i think it's going to be less obvious that it's a big loan forgiveness program to both borrowers and on-lookers as well, but, yeah, it's a big loan forgiveness program. so no longer a safety net like it has been in the past for under graduates, this looks more like a broad-based subsidy for undergraduate degrees through loan forgiveness, unquote. that from a scholar at the left-leaning urban institute. let me repeat that. a broad-based subsidy for under graduate degrees through loan forgiveness. or, in other words,in the words of one scholar from the american

enterprise institute, quote, a functional entitlement program, end quote, whose costs, he adds, and i quote again, will prove difficult to control. mr. president, i don't need to tell anyone that the problems here are myriad. let's think about it. for starters, someone is going to have to bear the cost of all these unrepaid student loans, and that someone is the american taxpayers, including taxpayers who worked hard to pay off the full balance on their own student loans without a handout from the federal government. and taxpayers who worked their way through school to avoid a heavy loan burden and parents who scrimped and saved to send their children to college debt-free. and individuals who covered the cost of their education by enlisting in the military and risking their lives for their country. and i could go on.

i am at a loss to understand why taxpayers as a whole should assume a substantial part of the educational burden for individuals who, if they graduated from college, have greater long-term potential than many of the americans who will be helping to shoulder the burden for their debts. and of course this program isn't just being offered to help with undergraduate debt. nope, graduate students including those in professional degree programs like medical school and law school, will also be eligible for the quote, so-called save program. and i don't need to tell anyone that the lifetime earning potential of a doctor or lawyer is usually pretty good. but leaving aside questions of fairness, mr. president, let's talk about the costs of this de facto new entitlement program. again, the penn-wharton budget model estimates that this program will cost half a

trillion dollars over the next ten years. we have a national debt today of $32 trillion and a federal budget that has increased by 41% since 2019. can aer to what president biden seems to -- contrary to what president biden seems to believe, we can't afford to be constantly expanding government programs. we simply don't have the money to be subsidizing the college and graduate education of a group of people whose earning potential will exceed the earning potential of a lot of the people subsidizing their schooling. mr. president, perhaps the worst thing about the president's new program is that we will be with spending all that money and doing nothing -- nothing -- to solve the real problem, and that's the high cost of a college education. president biden's student loan giveaway provides duly zero, exactly zero incentive for colleges to contain costs. there's reason to fear it could

actually encourage colleges to raise their praises or at least make -- to raise their prices or at least make them significant to do so. the president $proposal does nothing to discourage students from borrowing substantial amounts of money to finance their education. indeed, there is a good chance students will increase their borrowing as a result of the president's plan. mr. president, the president's ill-conceived student lounge giveaway does a tremendous disservice to taxpayers and our economic health. as i said it does nothing to address the real problem, which is the high cost of higher education. which is why last week i joined senator cassidy to introduce a resolution of disapproval to block the president's plan. and i encourage members of both parties to support this resolution. anyone who cares about actually addressing the cost of higher

education should oppose a program that not only fails to solve the the underlying problem but is actually like lay to -- likely to make things worse. mr. president, i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

quorum call:

mrs. hyde-smith: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mrs. hyde-smith: i ask unanimous consent to suspend the quorum call, please. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. hyde-smith: thank you so very much. mr. president, i rise today to pay tribute to the remarkable life of a legendary native of mississippi, whose music is synonymous with the spirit of summertime and enjoying life, jimmy buffet. born in pascagoola, mississippi, jimmy's journey began in the heart of the south. his music touches the heart of those well beyond mississippi or the south, but there's no denying jimmy's music embody's

the very essence ever the south with warm hospitality, vibrant culture and distirchgive -- distinctive charm. his early years with were filled with the siects and sounds -- sights and sounds of mississippi, the sun setting over the gulf of mexico would later inspire some of his most beloved songs. it was his great appetite for adventure, which ultimately propeled him to worldwide fame. he embarked on a journey that would take him to the florida keys, the caribbean, and beyond those changes in latitudes. amid more than 40 musical tours throughout his career, he channeled his tal pts into a diverse -- talents into a diverse business empire and charitable works. as we reflect on the legacy of this son of a son of a sailor, we cannot help but be inspired by jimmy's unyielding commitment to following his treatment

and -- his dreams and embracing life. his songs transport us to sandy beaches where the stresses of life fade away, and he reminds us we need to kick back, relax, and take a moment to savor the system pleasures of hive. as jimmy would put it, it's 5:00 somewhere. in honoring jimmy bu ffett, we celebrate the man who brought us with him on many adventures around the sun, from the pascagoula run to the shores of paradise. i have so much gratitude for the joy, laughter and inspiration that jimmy buffett brought into so many americans' lives. his music reminds us no matter where we come from, we can all find a bit of paradise within ourselves, and come monday it will be all right. jimmy buffett is a true southern

storyteller, who is generous enough to share his piece of paradise with the world. i have no doubt his legacy will continue to inspire generations to come. mr. president, i yield the floor.

mr. murphy: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i want to paint a picture for you, just for a moment. it takes place on a tarmac in

the zambian capital of lusaka, just a few weeks ago. a small, sprieft jet arrives from -- private jet arrives from egypt. it lands there, hoping to go unnoticed because of what's on board that jet. but it does get noticed by zambian authorities. they board the plane and find inside a cargo that sounds like something out of a james bond movie. on board that plane is $5.7 million in u.s. currency, 602 bars of gold, five pistols and 126 rounds of ammunition. to make the story even more bizarre, it turns 0u9 the gold was not -- turns out the gold was not real, it was fake bars of gold. the currency is real. the am ammunition is real. the gold is fake. zambia arrests 12 people, six of whom are egyptian citizens.

immediately, as you can imagine, speculation begins about what is exactly going on. now, that's an interesting story, right? but the reason i tell you the story isn't because of what happened in zambia, it's because of what happened next, in cairo. so, six of these individuals were egyptian citizens. the plane came from egypt. so of course, journalists in cairo start to do some digging. a fact-checking platform, named matsa-dash, i'm probably butchering the pronunciation, but arabic roughly for don't believe it, they report on the alleged involvement of former egyptian security officials in the incidents. but this kind of truth telling is just not allowed in egypt today. egypt is a closed society. it's a dictatorship in which political dissent is crushed. the free press is essentially

nonexistent. as a consequence, top officials are allowed to enrich themselves without any accountability. so what happened to the journalists is interesting, but frankly par for the course in egypt. here's what happened -- in response for doing this reporting, egyptian security officials went straight to the home of the journalist, they raided his home, forced him to log on to his computer as they were there, and they forced him to delete the facebook posts about the outlet -- about the issue at hand. egypt just wanted this story to disappear, and they were willing to do whatever it took to make this happen. now, we may never know the full story of what happened in that airport, what was going on with that plane, but what we do know is that the egyptian government's reaction is part of a completely predictable

pattern, to muzzle and silence the truth tellers by force. beyond these attacks on matza-dash, two other journalists were also detained immediately after, without charge. one of the ras remaining independent media outlets in cairo has repeatedly been refused a legal license to operate. websites that report on this kind of activity of egyptian officials are shut down as soon as they appear. activists are regularly jailed for spreading false news about human rights violations, over and over again the government's playbook is just the same -- shut down voices that are critical of the government. throw in jail people who don't comply. now, around this same time last year, i came down to the senate floor to make a very similar speech, to talk about an annual decision that the administration has to make with regard to our aid to egypt. the decision is pretty

straightforward -- congress, in a bipartisan way, cares about this campaign of brutal repression against the press and political dissent in egypt. that's why our annual appropriations bill limits the amount of money the administration can send to egypt, depending on the government's human rights record. specifically this year congress has said $320 million of the aid we send, which is roughly about a quarter of the aid, can't go to egypt until the administration certifies that egypt has made real progress on these questions of political climate. $85 million is tied to the relief of specific prisoners and the remaining $235 million on broader improvements on questions of human rights and democracy. i want to be honest with you. in the past, the bush administration, the obama administration, the trump administration, they routinely waived these conditions and sent the full amount. with any reeling progress, they said -- real progress they said

it was about american national security without evaluation as to what the consequences of withholding money would be to our national security. to the biden administration's credit, over the past two years they have withheld a portion of egypt's military aid because of these human rights violations. and last night as i was writing this speech, the administration rightly decided to withhold that first tranche, $85 million tide to the release of political prisoners because there is no question there has not been enough progress. why do we know that? because egypt released and has released more than 1,600 political prisoners since early 2022. that's good news. during that same time they have jailed 5,000 more. so for every political prisoner that egypt releases, three more are jailed. that's one step forward and three steps back. that's not the kind of clear and

consistent progress in releasing political prisoners that the law requires. the administration was right to withhold the $85 million. but what about the remaining $235 million? i'd argue the answer is just as simple. the biden administration needs to hold the line, as evidenced by the response to the fake gold-filled plane political repression is getting worse, not better in egypt. every year there are some people who argue that even though egypt really hasn't made any progress on human rights, they should get the money anyway in the name of national security. that if we dare to withhold even a small portion of that money, egypt is going to stop cooperating with us and they're going to run to russia or china instead. but as we have seen in the last two years when the administration did withhold a portion of the $1.3 billion, the sky did not fall. yeah, i will admit to you our diplomats in cairo probably had

some very tough conversations and the egyptians certainly have made life a little bit more difficult for our diplomats around the edges, but the core security relationship remains intact. why is that? it's because the things that we want egypt to do that are good for our national security, like working to keep the situation in gaza as stable as possible through its relationship with hamas, ensuring the free flow of commerce and u.s. warships through the suez canal, keeping counterterrorism operations going in the sinai, president cece does these things because it is in egypt's national security interest to do so, not because we pay them to do it. maybe when we started giving them $1 billion in aid back in the 1980's, egypt in fact complied with our national security requests because of

that monetary relationship. but today egypt engages in those activities because they have an independent reason to do so. in fact, it's telling that even though the egyptians continue to receive $1 billion per year in military aid, even with that money, they are reportedly and have been reportedly seeking to do deals with the russians and the chinese. earlier this year reporting on leaked documents reveal that egypt had made a secret deal to provide russia, in the middle of the ukraine war, with 40,000 rockets. now only after a flurry of high- level diplomatic interventions did the egyptians change course. and despite a reported request in march of this year from secretary austin for egypt to help ukraine, the egyptians have not yet done so. and so the question is, is this

the behavior of a country that we call a key security partner. and let me be clear, this decision that the administration is going to make, it matters far beyond egypt. if we say human rights and democracy matters to america, then it has to matter in more than words. when we cut corners and we fail to hold our partners accountable for human rights abuses, people notice. i'm not naive. i know that the question of whether we withhold a couple hundred million dollars of security assistance from president sisi is not going to convince him to end his brutal campaign of political repression. but when we walk the walk, not just talk the talk on human rights, another audience hears us. activists, the people who are doing this work on the streets in places like cairo, those that are fighting for democracy

and human rights in countries with little of either, they gather courage from knowing that the united states is on their side. and it is those forces, those orn -- organic domestic forces that truly make change. but when we keep on doing business as usual with saudi arabia or tunesia or egypt, despite their behavior, we send a signal to democracy activists that we aren't serious, that we don't have their back. and so i am glad for the administration's decision last night to withhold a part of the funding that congress has required to be withheld unless we see significant progress on human rights. and my belief is that there is only one decision to be made on the remaining dollars, because the record is clear, egypt continues to help us on national security priorities where our interests align. and there's good reason to continue a security relationship with cairo to preserve those interests.

in other areas like the war on ukraine, egypt has not been a helpful partner. we need to be clear-eyed about our security relationship with egypt and also eerpt's human -- egypt's human rights record. the decision the administration will make on egypt's progress for human rights is critical to america. i would urge the administration to finish the job and withhold the full $320 million as required by the f.y. appropriations act until egypt's human rights and democracy record improves. i yield the floor.

test.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question is on the nomination. the yeas and nays are requested. 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.

the clerk: mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz.

the clerk: mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mrs. feinstein. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich.

mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. the clerk: mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar.

the clerk: mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis.

the clerk: mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. the clerk: mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch.

mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. the clerk: 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 -- cardin, feinstein, fetterman, hassan, kelly, king, klobuchar, murray, schatz, stabenow, welch, whitehouse. senators voting in the negative -- cornyn, cotton, crapo, daines, kennedy hyde-smith marshall ricketts

wicker

the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. tester, aye.

vote: the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. romney, no. mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye. mr. reed, aye. mr. carper, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

ms. cantwell, aye.

the clerk: mr. schmitt, no. mr. graham, no. mrs. shaheen, aye. mr. thune, no. ms. smith, aye. mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mr. booker, aye. mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no. mr. risch, no. the clerk: ms. collins, no.

mr. manchin, aye. mr. braun, no. mr. peters, aye.

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. boozman, no. mr. wyden, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. mr. capito, no.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, no. mr. blumenthal, aye. mr. cassidy, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. bennet, aye. mr. sullivan, no. mr. johnson, no.

the clerk: mr. cortez masto, aye. mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. casey, aye. mr. tuberville, no. mr. grassley, no. ms.ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: ms. ernst, no. mr. moran, no.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no. mr. young, no. ms. -- the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. barasso, no. mr. sanders, aye. the clerk: mr. lee, no.

the clerk: mr. rubio, no. mr. budd, no.

ms. sinema, aye. the clerk: mr. mullin, no. mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. the clerk: mr. paul, no.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no. the clerk: ms. lummis, no.

the clerk: mr. tillis, no.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye. the clerk: ms. murkowski, no.

the clerk: mr. rounds, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no.

the clerk: mr. schumer, aye. mr. menendez, aye.

the presiding officer: the yeas are 50. the nays are 46. 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 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 124, jeffrey irvine cummings 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 question is, is it the sense of the senate that the nomination of jeffrey irvine cummings of illinois to be united states district judge for the northern district of illinois, shall be brought to a close. 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. 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 -- booker, cantwell, collins, durbin, graham, hickenlooper, kaine, sanders, shaheen, sinema,

stabenow, and tester. senators voting in the negative -- barrasso, lee, mcconnell, moran, mullin, paul, rubio, tuberville, and vamps. -- and vance.

the clerk: mr. young. no. the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye.

the clerk: mr. ricketts, no. the clerk: mr. thune, no. the clerk: ms. hassan, aye.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no.

mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. budd, no. mr. manchin, aye. mr. schatz, aye. mr. rounds, no.

the clerk: mrs. capito, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. carper, aye. the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, no. the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. mr. wyden, aye.

mr. reed, aye. ms. lummis, no. mr. johnson, no.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. mrs. murray, aye.

the clerk: ms. hirono, aye.

the clerk: mr. wicker, no. mr. daines, no. mr. kelly, aye.

the clerk: mr. cotton, no. the clerk: mr. schmitt, no.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye. mr. boozman, no. mr. cardin, aye. mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: plg the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no. ms. baldwin, aye. ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. murphy, yikes. mr. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye. mr. lankford, no. mr. braun, no. ms. ernst, no.

ms. cortez-masto, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. mr. lujan, aye. ms. smith, aye.

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

mr. casey, aye. mrs. fischer, no. mr. peters, aye. mr. warnock, aye. ms. warren, aye. mr. kennedy, no. vote:

the clerk: mr. risch, no. mr. king, aye. the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. menendez, aye. mr. romney, no.

the clerk: mrs. feinstein, aye.

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: mr. welch, aye. the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye. mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. kramer, no. mr. hawley, no.

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 51, the nays are 44. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, geoffrey cummings of illinois, to be district judge for the district of illinois. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate

scroll through and spend a few . >> today microsoft president brad smith will be among groups of witnesses testifying on proposed legislation for artificial intelligence. by the senate judiciary subcommittee on privacy, technology and the law. watch live 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span three. c-span now, free mobile video or

online at c-span.org. >> c-span is the unfiltered view of government funded by these television companies and more including media,. >> we believe whether you hear a right here or in the middle of anywhere, you should have access to fast and reliable internet. >> media com supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> former vice president mike pence made remarks on populism and conservatism. following his remarks mr. pence