typically young americans are looking to buy a house, condo or property and build some equity. it's a staple of building a fiscally healthy future and the foundation of the american dream. not only can young people not afford homes with current obscene interest rates, they can barely afford to keep their heads above water. while biden tries to distract young voters with his climate alarmism and that the earth is going to boil, it's actually biden's woeful mismanagement of the economy that's the real existential threat to the economy, the real existential threat to the american dream, the real existential threat to their future. furthermore, it's biden's insane energy policies that have stifled energy production and made everything more expensive. for families it's even tougher in this economy. household goods and food costs are more expensive now.

families are dipping into their savings and incurring more expenses and credit card debt which is now at record levels. r. overall prices have risen 17% and are costing the average american household $940 more per month. and for ole derly americans who are retired or about to retire, this economy poses a dire threat. higher prices on everything doesn't bode well for those on a fixed income. with people dipping into retirement savings just to cover the costs, it doesn't bode well for those hoping to retire soon either. it turns out that when you spend trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars you don't have, and declare war on domestic energy production, inflation runs rampant, the cost of, goes up. that's what americans are living through. they don't need slogans. they're not buying it. no matter how many times he says

bidenomics is working, the american people are struggling with higher costs and they know it's not. the antedote to the bidenomics poison is clear -- stop deficit spending, become energy dominant to ease the burden on working families. thank you, madam president. i yield back.

mr. ricketts: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mr. ricketts: thank you, madam president. our nation is facing many challenges at this point, and yet this week the majority leader doesn't have us addressing them. look around this room. there's nobody here. we should be voting monday there's nobody here. we should be voting. mondayur through national debt s friday $34 trillion. that is $256,000 per household. that's about equal to a second mortgage for homeowners in nebraska. we also have a humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border. i was just down there for the fourth time. what i saw was a humanitarian disgrace. record numbers of illegal

immigrants are crossing the border, children are being trafficked, people are dying, cartels are profiting. the biden administration is directly responsible for this humanitarian crisis. they should be ashamed of themselves. the biden administration's policies are also creating a major security crisis. a record number of encounters with individuals on the terrorist watch list has gone on, where that number used to be single digits, just in the past few years. washington has an important role in dealing with these challenges. the ideal time to address them is through the appropriations process. as we all know, congress must pass 12 appropriations bill every year, and this would avoid

a government shutdown. this year, for the first time in five years, the senate appropriations committee passed out all 12 of those appropriations bills. the first two came out june 22, the other ten came in july. for months, the majority leader has refused to bring those bills to the floor for votes. we could have been amending those bills, debating those bills, and then voting on those bills. instead, he has played games with the senate calendar to try and force a false choice between a shutdown and more big-government spending. as a result, we have missed the deadline for regular order. the short-term bill that we passed, that funds the government, runs out on novembe. that's just a little over a week from today.

once again, we are on the brink of another government shutdown. and the majority leader is still playing the same games. we should be debating. we should be amending. we should be voting on legislation to fund the government and secure our border right now. instead, we spent the entire week voting on nominations for a few blue-state judges and the appointment for someone to the national institute of health. if that wasn't bad enough, once again the majority leader will send us home on thursday afternoon for the weekend. the majority leader should have kept us in the senate session monday through friday every week until all appropriations bills were passed. instead, he chose to recess early or start voting late, week after week after week. he could have canceled our october state work period, like the house did.

many of my colleagues joined me and asked him to do so. he did not. the september shutdown face-off proved that there's no time to waste. most americans work monday through friday. in nebraska many of my constituents work longer hours than that. the u.s. senate should work monday through friday. i know it's a crazy idea, but we could be here all week, like normal americans. we could work 8:00 a.m. till 5:00 p.m. or 6:00 p.m., like most persons do. we should remain in d.c. until we complete our work funding the government and securing the border. it's not a radical idea to suggest that we should have an open government and a closed border. so i'll close with this, let's vote. let's do what it takes to get the job done for our

constituents. i am committed to working with my colleagues to deliver meaningful results. nebraskans and americans across the country deserve no less. madam president, i yield the floor. thank you.

the presiding officer: the senator from washington. ms. cantwell: i would ask that the vote occur immediately. the presiding officer: the question is on the nomination. is there a second? there appears to be. 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. butler. 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. 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. senators voting in the affirmative -- cantwell, heinrich, murray,

rosen, smith, and welch. senators voting in the negative -- capito, cassidy, crapo, daines, kennedy, ricketts, risch, rubio, schmitt, tuberville, and vance. mr. kelly, aye. ms. lummis, no. mr. tillis, no. mr. hoeven, no.

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

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. mr. graham, no.

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

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

vote: the clerk: mr. tester, aye. mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. markey, aye. mr. kaine, aye. mr. warner, aye. mr. cornyn, no.

the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye. mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. mr. lankford, no. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

ms. hirono, aye. mr. grassley, no. mr. paul, no.

the clerk: mr. casey, aye. the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, no. mr. merkley, aye. mrs. hyde-smith, no.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. lee, no. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye. mr. cramer, no.

mr. peters, aye. the clerk: ms. collins, no.

the clerk: mr. brown, aye.

the clerk: mr. moran, no. mr. rounds, no. mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye. mr. cardin, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. wicker, no.

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye.

the clerk: ms. warren, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. young, no. the clerk: mr. barasso, no.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no.

the clerk: mrs. shaheen, aye. mrs. fischer, no. mr. manchin, aye. mr. reed, aye. ms. duckworth, aye.

the clerk: mr. hawley, no.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye.

mr. durbin, aye. the clerk: mr. romney, no. the clerk: mr. mullin, no. mrs. blackburn, no. mr. boozman, no.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no. the clerk: mr. budd, no.

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

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. menendez, aye. mr. mcconnell, no. mr. cruz, no.

the clerk: ms. butler, aye.

the clerk: ms. sinema, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. mr. king, aye. mr. ossoff, aye.

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? does any senator wish to change his or her vote? if not, the ayes are 51. the nays are 47. and the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendars number 3310, brandy r. m{l1}c{l0}million of -- brandy r. mcmillion. 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 brandy r

r. mcmillion of michigan to be united states district judge for the eastern district of michigan shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule, and 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. butler. 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. 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. 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, bennet, blumenthal, booker, cortez-masto, fetterman, hassan, hickenlooper, king, klobuchar, menendez, murray, ossoff, reed, shaheen, stabenow, warnock, warren, wyden. mr. durbin, aye. senators voting in the negative, britt, budd, cassidy, cotton,

cramer, cruz, grassley, hawley, hoeven, hyde-smith, mcconnell, merkley, moran, mullen -- mullin, paul, ricketts, romney, rounds. mr. manchin, aye. mr. merkley, aye. ms. collins, aye.

mr. tester, aye.

mr. wicker, no. mr. crapo, no. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye.

mr. welch, aye. the clerk: mrs. capito, no.

the clerk: mr. marshall, no. mr. whitehouse, aye. ms. smith, aye. ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. tuberville, no. mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. thune, no.

the clerk: ms. sinema, aye. ms. hirono, aye.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no. mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mrs. fischer, no.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no. mr. cardin, aye. mr. risch, no. mr. carper, aye.

mr. young, no.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no. the clerk: mr. markey, aye.

the clerk: mr. johnson, no.

the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye. mr. rubio, no.

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

the clerk: mr. graham, aye. mr. padilla, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. mr. peters, aye.

the clerk: mr. schatz, aye.

the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida, no. the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye.

mr. brown, aye. the clerk: mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mr. warner, aye. the clerk: ms. butler, aye.

mr. lee, no. mr. barasso, no. the clerk: mr. schmitt, no.

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

the clerk: mr. kennedy, no.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

the clerk: mr. vance, no.

the clerk: mr. sanders, aye. mr. heinrich, aye. ms. murkowski, yiep. -- aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, no.

the clerk: mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the presiding officer: the yeas are 54. nays are 44. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: the judiciary, brandy r. mcmillion of michigan to be united states district judge for the eastern district of michigan. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate will resume legislative session and proceed to the consideration of s.j. res. 38 which the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 238, s.j. res. 38, joint resolution providing for congressional

disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, united states code, and so forth. ms. stabenow: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you so much. first, i'll speak more tomorrow about brandy mcmillion who we just forwarded to a final confirmation vote tomorrow. she's an extraordinary nominee for the district court in michigan. so appreciate the bipartisan support today. but at this moment, i rise in opposition to senate joint resolution 38. the result of passing this resolution is actually the opposite of what the sponsor is going to say. it reminds me a lot of last week when we were debating school meals and what was argued was exactly the opposite of what it would do. this is one of those similar kind of situations. so let me just explain n. last congress we worked hard to pass the infrastructure investment and jobs act despite the opposition from the senior senator from florida who is

authoring this resolution, by the way. from fixing our roads and bridges and airports and railways to expanding high-speed internet and creating jobs, this was a great bill, a great bipartisan effort. we're now seeing the profound effects of this historic law in every corner ever the country. -- of the country. the infrastructure investment and jobs act included my make it in america act which created for the first time a made in america office. and this office is charged with reviewing waivers that have been around for a long time, toughening them up, requiring more transparency that any waiver be put on a website for businesses and workers and taxpayers to be able to see, and it assured complying with other buy america laws. so as we are going forward on electric vehicles and electric vehicle charging, we have the

administration now looking at waivers, and we have a long-standing waiver called the manufactured products general waiver, and this blanket waiver has been in effect since 1983 and has allowed foreign manufactured products to be used by the federal highway administration and our administration, the biden administration, doesn't want to see that continue. and put in place a short-term waiver, took e.v. chargers out of that, put in place a short-term waiver until next july and said we'll give you a little bit of time but then you're going to have to have american companies that are making e.v. chargers if we're going to buy them with federal taxpayer dollars. and so it was very significant in expanding buy america

policies. you'll somehow hear the opposite. this is expanding buy america policies by basically saying instead of a permanent waiver, we'll give you until july 1, 2024, to ensure that new chargers can meet buy america requirements and we can move forward with american made products. so the key is temporary. this is temporary. therefore, this resolution would actually weaken buy america requirements. the resolution would result in e.v. chargers not needing to meet any u.s. manufacturing nor any buy america content requirements far into the future. this would significantly set back american jobs and american manufacturing. if you want american taxpayer dollars to be required to purchase american made products, including e.v. chargers, you

need to vote no on this resolution. and i urge my colleagues to do that. and i'm so pleased to be here with another wonderful champion on this issue, senator tammy baldwin from wisconsin who has really championed this effort in a very, very effective way. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. battled balanced i rise today to speak on the resolution submitted by senator rubio of florida. and i wanted to also start with sort of an explanation of where we find ourselves. ms. baldwin: you hear the expression made in america and buy america policies. well, what are those? that is the simple proposition that when we are spending federal tax dollars, your tax dollars, we want to see those ultimately benefit u.s. workers

and u.s. small businesses and medium-sized businesses, and that's what including make it in america or buy america policies accomplishes. but i want to start also with what this congressional review act resolution would do. this resolution would prohibit the federal highway administration's february 2023 rule, which, as you heard from senator stabenow, removes electric vehicle chargers from the agency's blanket buy america waiver from taking effect. the federal highway administration ruled implements a phase-in policy or on-ramp policy that increases buy america requirements for electric vehicle chargers. by july 2024, all e.v. chargers

purchased with federal highway administration dollars -- your taxpayer dollars -- must be in full compliance with the build america, buy america rules. and if you eliminate this rule, as the rubio resolution would do, it would remove all buy america restrictions for e.v. charger purchases, allowing federal taxpayer dollars -- your dollars -- to buy chargers from china. which is rapidly scaling up their charger manufacturing in order to offer the lowest-cost product. because of this fha rule, manufacturers are locating their facilities in the u.s. for example, ingateam, the european market leader, has built a facility in milwaukee, wisconsin, where hundreds of union workers will make half a

million e.v. charge areas. this is because this rule requires e.v. chargers to be assembled in the u.s. when they are funded with federal taxpayer dollars. under the rubio resolution, those requirements go away. they vanish. the requirements go away because chargers will once again become subject to the federal highway administration's blanket waiver for manufactured products, which has been in place since 1983. now, i am no fan of this blanket waiver. since i got to the senate, i have been pushing to get rid of it. frustrations with this waiver is one of the reasons i worked with my colleagues, senators brown and portman, stabenow and braun and peters, to get buy america requirements into the infrastructure law.

because of our work, that law requires the federal highway administration to request public notice and comment on its blanket waiver, something it did in may of this year. now, if you're a senator who opposes the fha blanket waiver, like me, you might, say, submit a comment during the open comment period, something i did. or ask the secretary of transportation to commit to resending the blanket waiver in a committee hearing, something i did. or maybe even vote for the legislation that requires the agency to review the waiver, something i did. along with 19 of my republican colleagues. but the sponsor of this resolution, senator rubio, did not do any of the things i just mentioned. it makes me think -- and the

resolution itself suggests -- that he's more interested in scoring political points rather than doing the hard work of increasing the number of products and the number of programs that are subject to buy america requirements. that is why the united steelworkers, who represent thousands of workers in wisconsin and in florida and who actually make things, that's why they oppose this resolution. and that is why i encourage my colleagues to do the same. i am fully satisfied -- or, excuse me. am i fully satisfied with the job this administration has done to implement buy america? well, the answer is no, i'm not. but this resolution makes things worse, not better. if we want to improve the administration's implementation of buy america, we need to give agencies the resources they need to do outreach to industry.

now, i've supported buy america for as long as i've been in the united states congress, and it used to be a lonely battle, and it has been at times. so is i'm very pleased that i have many new allies on the republican side of the aisle who claim to support buy america. welcome to the team. i look forward to work working h you and to get this administration the resources it needs to successfully implement buy america instead of supporting this resolution that would make things worse. with that, i yield back. mr. carper: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: madam president, good afternoon. the presiding officer: good afternoon. mr. carper: i rise to join my two colleagues who have just spoken in opposition to s.j. res. 38, a congressional review act resolution to disapprove of the biden administration's temporary waiver of the buy american requirements for

electric vehicle charging infrastructure. why is this important? why should americans care about this issue? well, we continue to see on almost a daily basis daily reminds that our planet is on fire. scientists tell us that we're running out of time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to avoid the worst of the climate crisis. the world -- the rest of the world is looking at us. the rest of the world is looking ats, to the u.s., for leadership right now on this issue. and instead we're voting on a resolution that president biden will certainly veto. that means it will not go into effect. having said all that, let me explain why i oppose the resolution offered by our colleague from florida. the way this resolution works is more than a little bit confusing. so let's take a couple minutes to try to make clear what it would actually do. my colleagues have already referred to this.

to better understand that, it's important to understand how we got to this point. as i mentioned addressing the existential threat of climate change is one of the most challenging events that we currently face as a plan eight. we also know that our transportation sector, including the cars, trucks, and vans on our road, is the largest sort of greenhouse gas emissions in our economy. the cars, trucks, and vans that we drive create nearly 38% of the greenhouse gas emissions in america. we included billions in the bipartisan infrastructure law to build out a national network of electric vehicle charging infrastructure supporting our climate goals and creating jobs, lots of jobs, right here in america. and we're already seeing the impact of our investment. since enacting the bipartisan infrastructure law nearly two

years ago, the electric vehicle charging industry has announced investments of over $500 million in more than 40 plants for assembling american-made e.v. charge areas. electric vehicle charging vehicle industry has nnounced investments of over $500 million in 40 plants for assembling american-made e.v. chargers. these plants in states like michigan and ohio and pennsylvania and illinois and north carolina are bringing more manufacturing jobs back to the u.s., back to the u.s. that means relying less on countries like china to enable our clean energy transition. if enacted, senator rubio's resolution would undermine this progress. his resolution would create greater uncertainty for our domestic e.v. charging industry, directly contradicting our goal

of having this equipment made and assembled right here in the u.s. of a. that's why groups like the this oppose it. it's because its adoption would mean shipping jobs overseas instead of building our supply chain right here at home. so in reality this resolution would actually weaken buy american requirements. it would result in more e.v. charging product being built overseas, not here. and it would undermine american workers and our nation's ability to be global leaders in electric vehicles. put simply, a vote for this resolution is a vote against american manufacturing of e.v. chargers. that's why i oppose this resolution, and i urge my colleagues to do so as well. with that, madam president, i yield the floor, and i'm looking to see if there's anyone tolls

speak. -- anyone else to speak. i don't see anyone, so i will note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin. test

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mow --. mr. moran: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moran: madam president, thank you. today i join many who mourn the passing, and i honor the life of a kansan i had the privilege of knowing and working with. nester r. wygan jr. he was a blessing to all who neuman him and improved the lives of many around him each and every day of his life. he was raised in wichita and

later graduated with a degree in finance from the university of notre dame in 1960. nester then went on to serve his country in the united states army reserve. following his time in the reserve, nester devoted much of his adult life to the real estate business. it was a tremendous passion of his. it wasn't just a job. it was something he enjoyed and loved doing, something he found satisfaction in, in putting a buyer and seller together, in making a project work. he originally joined the family real estate business in kansas in 1961. his hard work led him to become the president and ceo of j.p. wygan and sons in 1983. he succeeded in building one of kansas' most respected buildings. he eventually basement president of the national association of

realtors ten years later. nestor worked tirelessly in his role to improve the lives of kansans sans and americans by providing fair housing laws throughout the country. weigand real estate agent alyssa said one of the most important attributes was nestor would call every agent on their birthday like clockwork. he never missed my birthday in 20 years. nestor cared about details and people. in 1990, with no prior political experience, nestor made the decision to run for governor of the state of kansas. while he ended up on a very small margin on the short end, his expertise and knowledge was something i truly admired and have learned from during my time in public service. his race for governor gave him a appreciation by many kansans who might not other would is have met him -- otherwise have met

him. before running for kansas some of the first people i sought out was nestor for advice. i enjoyed conversations with him over breakfast and lunch and greatly benefited with him from those conversations and his wisdom. often in washington, d.c., here in the nation's capital and across kansas, when i'd tell somebody outside the state of kansas that i'm from kansas, they'd say, do you know nestor weigand? he had many friends in many places. he was a giant in the real estate industry and made a huge difference in people's lives. not only was he an expert in real estate, he was also a leader of the wichita community and understand, and understood the people of the state of kansas. nestor was a booster for wichita, for sedgwick county and for our state. nestor took his commitment to

his community seriously. he sat on so many boards including being the board member and chairman of wesley hospital for over 40 years. nestor's life reflected the love for business, for real estate, his passion for public service, and his dedication to people. he neuman lots of -- he knew lots of people. you meet nestor weigand and you decided this was the real deal, a person who cared about you and wanted to see good things happen in your life. his legacy will not be forgotten and he is already dearly missed. robin joins me in our prayers for his children, his grandchildren, and the entire weigand family. madam president, i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: call:

quorum call:

at stake last night was a woman's right to choose and ohio, the governorship in

controls the legislature in virginia from a state supreme court so much more. in a most every major election, democratic candidates and democratic issues prevail if this continued and straightened trend democratic victories last year. there is no possible take away from last night 11 this -- americans fiercely opposed moderate extremism. fiercely opposed total apportionment and one bipartisan leaders who can put america's need first. after last night result, i have a message to my republican colleagues. when the maga agenda can't win in kentucky, or ohio or in virginia, it's time to moderate extremism is a wrong answer to congress extremism projected

partisanship. time will tell house republicans choose the right path. our to say one more thing about the results in ohio. with strong support the people of ohio voted to legalize recreational use of marijuana. americans think it's long past time to enact canvas perform so here in the senate continue to work with colleagues on both sides and senator brown system will will will change as country

born forms will always in a i democracy the world. this year using images and text to voice converters to depict a negative light. uncensored checkbox can target millions of individual voters will political persuasion. unfortunately once damaging information is spent 2,100,000,000 homes, at times

impossible. we could soon live in a world where little camping deploy believable images but it is or republican distorting segments and harming election chances. protecting elections from a.i.'s wrist just an issue for democrats nor republicans. everyone will be. time is of the essence americans prepared to go to the polls in 2024 so i encourage my colleagues to come to this forum this morning. on global issues and challenges mr. president, the global committee is facing a great number of challenges these days. israel and hamas are more with iran. russian aggression ukraine challenges for western alliance,

the chinese government threatens taiwan's independence. united states meekly positioned, and i would argue needed to play a role in showing peaceful existence of the people of israel, gaza, ukraine. i believe most members of this body would agree with me. however, some members on the other side of the aisle, not all seem to prefer they sit on the sidelines or put their heads in the sand as we face global battles. some members on the other side putin, xi jinping and hamas pursue their missions. i stayed here and now i do not agree with those republican colleagues and believe the united states of america must make a stand against totalitarianism about help everyone but agree with me but

here in the senate it seems some of my republican colleagues are siding with putin placing unrealistic conditions on aid to ukraine but mr. president, we are not giving up, we are going to keep pushing and will succeed. whether aid to israel or ukraine or taiwan, humanitarian aid for the people of gaza keeping the government open or avoiding default, republicans must try doing the same that republicans want to do. have strong bipartisan support and inject them with provisions that make it impossible to get anything done. that's what happened last week with israel and what happens this week with the senate gop immigration proposal. at a moment when the world is in crisis when friends brought need help and troops face increase

tax in syria and the government shutdown looming over us this moment calls for bipartisanship. this moment calls for republicans and democrats to be realistic and clear eyed what we can pass through both chambers on immigration, order and all other issues. israel, ukraine, civilians and gaza, indo-pacific, all of these things have bipartisan support in both chambers. all deal with national security, none should be turned into bargaining chips for hartford policies. we must went on all of them. it's been over a month israel endured the deadliest terror attack in entire history. there's still 250 hostages held by hamas including american hostages and women and children. we promise to send israel aid as

soon as we could and we will work hard hopefully in a bipartisan way to get this done. the last two days i spoke with senior officials in the invariably government including president isaac, prime minister netanyahu and mr. gallant and reiterated the united states as israel's back. america's commitment to israel and israeli people and america will be the strongest ally. past the president package asap. in my conversations i stressed to israeli readers israel works to reduce the threat of hamas which they must do, they have the responsibility to protect innocent palestinians lives.

we know it's not easy but must be done. we must work together to send it will humanitarian aid to innocent civilians in gaza have nothing to do with hamas. i strongly urge israeli government to quickly clamp down on violence against displacement of palestinian civilians in the west bank. i listened displacement against palestinian civilians is not just wrong, it is spreading the current crisis beyond gaza at a time when israel and america work hard to deter other actors from taking advantage of the situation. in the long run it makes it harder to achieve a two state solution which i support the vast majority of americans support which hamas does not. we talked about innings with the families and hostages i shared

how i was moved by stories of families of hostages held by hamas israel and the united states and discussed the need to locate and secure the release of hostages held by hamas through all means possible. finally, i encourage israeli leaders to do they can to support the comprehensive act including robust military assistance for gaza so innocent civilians who have nothing to do with hamas can get the food, water and necessities they need. every time during my conversation with israeli leaders one idea remained constant, stand strong with israel and support israel's right to defend themselves and we will are to pass emergency assistance for israel, ukraine, humanitarian assistance for gaza and indo-pacific this weekend. finally last night the senate

reached a major milestone and confirmed 101 them and 150 judge's overall democrats took the majority. it is not only double the amount confirmed by president trump and all of his years, it more women than any holder of any president. we are going to hold more votes today and begin by confirming ray's junior adjuster judge of new york to become only the second hispanic man to sit on the second eastern district. we will advance highly qualified judges and nominees the afternoon. >> many are projects we can address, the most dangerous threats we face are together.

take it from the author of the last administration security treasury. russia, iran, say the u.s. week and in decline and willing to put aside differences to collude against american interest. mr. president, extraordinarily women. investigating the case of suspected sabotage by chinese against the communications cable and gas line connecting nato one of the alliances, putin's russia

is reporting helping iran develop space launch vehicle, a critical step toward building intercontinental listed missiles. in return, iran isn't just sending russian drones to kill ukrainians, is helping build an entire drone back big on russia oil. reportedly providing china highly enriched uranium. china is forming social media platforms pro, began in protecting both remaining russia in the un security council.

simultaneous threats is what our adversaries are testing. russian for europe, chinese aggression asia, iran for terror in the middle east and seven order for incredible enforcement, this is the reality we face right now. we face right now.

no more half measures, no more hesitation. as former secretary of state pompeo concluded last week american should be quote accelerating the flow of weapons and ammunition to kyiv. because abandoning ukraine will bolster our adversaries. we should be empowering agencies inspectors general to continue the unprecedented oversight and accountability work we have built into the u.s. assistant since the beginning of putin's escalation last year. and we should continue to invest in expanding america's industrial base both to replace its capability ukraine is using with newer consent -- mr. hawley: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hawley: madam president, on october 7, hamas terrorists crossed the border of israel and committed atrocities, the full extent of which we are only just now coming to understand. thousands of innocent israelis have lost their lives. israeli babies were beheaded, literally beheaded, put into ovens according to news reports, innocent civilians were shot in their homes when they answered their front doors, soldiers were executed and the terrorist attacks have continued. amazingly, in the united states, even as this terrible attack was unfolding in israel, in the united states hundreds and thousands of students and others took to america's campuses to

express solidarity not with innocent israelis who had lost their lives but with hamas and to voice support for the genocidal campaign that hamas has sought to carry out and continues to advance and advocate, even as we stand here today. take a look at some of the things that have been said by students on america's college campuses. students at harvard university said that they held the israeli regime entirely responsible, entirely responsible, for all of the unfolding violence. you had students at the university of north carolina who said they believed it was their moral obligation to be in solidarity with the dispossessed, no matter the pathway to liberation they choose to take. this includes violence. oh, and hamas is violent. there's no doubt that we have

seen extraordinary violence, unbelievable violence, in the most brutal attack on israel and the jewish people in 50 years. students at new york university school of law expressed their unwavering and absolute solidarity with palestinians in their resistance against oppression toward liberation and self-determination. israel, they said, israel bears full responsibility for this tremendous loss of life. i could go on and i'm happy to say that this body has unanimously condemned these statements, this pro-genocidal rhetoric by students in this country. i wish that it had stopped at rhetoric, but it hasn't. we've seen the assaults on jewish students right on our campuses. we've seen students barricaded in university libraries unable to leave as pro-hamas

demonstrators shout and scream outside calling for the destruction of israel. we've seen jewish students physically assaulted. if you don't believe me, just go look on the internet. physically assaulted on american campuses by pro-hamas demonstrators. we've seen it in high schools where students are chanting from the river to the sea, palestine must be free. what's that mean? it's a call for the destruction of the state of israel. it is a call for the execution of jews. in the middle east, in this country, everywhere. that's the hamas agenda. and so many americans, including me, have been absolutely stunned to see so many students and others echoing these claims. and it's raised the question, madam president -- where is this coming from? where are these students and young people, teenagers, where are they hearing this? where are they seeing it? where are they being fed this

propaganda? because propaganda it is. and at least one of the answers, madam president, is they're finding it on tiktok. yes, tiktok, that chinese-based, chinese-owned social media app that is a back door for the chinese communist party to track the keystrokes, the information of every american who has the app on their phone. what we know now is that for many, many younger americans, the so-called generation z, those who are in their teens and early 20's, so many of them, 74% of them, in fact, use tiktok as a search engine. and, in fact, a majority of them prefer tiktok to google as a principal search engine. so where are americans in generation z increasingly getting their news in what are they using to search senator information? they're using tiktok.

they're getting their news from tiktok. at the same time, this same cohort of young americans, more than 50% of them -- this is young americans between the anales of 18 and 24 -- more than 50% of them say they believe that hamas' murder of civilians was justified. let me repeat that a more than 50% of young americans, gen z between the ages of 18 and 24, believe that hamas' murder of civilians was justified. these are the same people who are going on tiktok to get their information to be influenced. and they certainly are being influenced. media of reports have analyzed e anti-semitic, pro-hamas content on tiktok. take a look at the trending hashtags. stand with palestine, 285

million views, impressions, according to the us in site axios in their recent analysis. by contrast, stand with israel, far, far less, 64 million. this doesn't actually begin tell the story. because the truth is, there are other hashtags, other pro-hamas, pro-palestinian sources of information where the views are even larger. take, for instance, free palestine. that has received 917 million views, far outpacing even stand with palestine and dramatically outpacing the content that is actually supportive of the state of israel. here's my point -- tiktok has become a haven for anti-semitic content, a haven for genocide. tiktok denies this, as they deny any responsibility for anything they actually do. they've tried to say this these numbers are skewed.

but you can't change the facts. you can't deny the reality that their site is absolutely awash with this content. and we know that part of the problem, the danger of tiktok is, it gives the chinese communist party enormous influence to shape the news, the content and the information of the folks that look at it. back in 2019 the chinese communist party used tiktok to suppress content that criticized the chinese government over their impression and enslavement of the uighurs in that country. they have a pattern of using this application to shape the narrative. how they're using it now is pumping out the most virulent, toxic, pro-hamas propaganda. the time has come to take another look at tiktok. i'll just say this --

as virulent and offensive as this content is, that is not a reason to ban them. the real reason to ban tiktok is that it is a spy app for the chinese communist government. let's look at what i have learned since i have last on this floor trying to pass legislation that would hold particularring to accountable and ban it from american phones. on the 24th of this month, "the new york times" reported that drivers' licenses, addresses, and photos were accessed by tiktok engineers based in china. what's extraordinary about this is tiktok has told us over and over again that this was impossible. they've come to this congress, they've testified before us and said, this never happens. american data is absolutely sequestered. you can't access it in china. it's completely safe. and yet we learn this year what

really we already knew, that that simply is not true. let's not forget, the law of china, the people's republic of china, a dictatorship, their law requires that you will age corporations, including especially data corporations, to make information available upon request to the chinese communist party. that means your data. that means our personal information. on may 30, "forbes" magazine reported that dictator creators, american users, social security numbers were being stored in china. we'd also been told this wasn't true. we'd been told by tiktok, no, no, no. americans' data is always stored in america. can't be accessed i had in where but america. not true. not true. americans don't realize that their data is being tracked. they're on there to make their videos and what's happening?

the chinese government is able to being a seas it. their personal information is being stored, not in this country, but in china, with full availability to the chinese communist party. on november 1, just a few days ago, "forbes" further reported that a platform story tiktok corporate secrets was inspected by the chinese government. of course it was. chinese law requires it. it requires tiktok and its parent company bytedance to make available all of this information to the chinese government. madam president, we have confronted dangers like this before from china. huawei is a prime example. huawei, another chinese-based corporation, also subject to the laws of china, requiring the sharing of personal information and data. and what did we do? we stood up a sanctions regime that sanctioned huawei and prevented its use here in the united states. and we went further than that. we actually went to our allies and partners and said that we

would not corporate with them and offer them security assistance. we're talking about other countries now. we would not corporate with them and offer them security assistance unless they took huawei out of their 5g net wherebies. we should protect the people of this nation. we should be honest about what tiktok actually does and protect them from the relentless spying and surveillance by a foreign government. i want to be clear. i don't like a lot of what american big tech does. i doubt you'll find a harsher critic of big tech in this chamber. but there is a big difference between an american company looking at americans' data, accessing americans' data and a foreign government tracking americans, building dossiers on americans and using it as a back door into the life of every american citizen who has that app on his or her phone. it is time to put an end to

this, madam president. and we've already voted to do it. we voted to strip tiktok off of every government device just ten months ago. states are doing it all across the country. it's time we took the step to protect the american people, to protect the integrity of americans' personal information and their personal privacy. and so i ask unanimous consent that the committee on banking, housing, and urban affairs be discharged from further consideration of the s. 85 and the snoot proceed to its immediate consideration. i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there an objection? a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: reserving the right to object, we are here once again faced with a proposal to ban tiktok and to forbid millions of americans from expressing their opinion.

this is not a subject that we should entertain lightly. if there is a better national strategy to permanently lose elections for a generation, i've not heard of it. banningban tiktok, a social medp used by primarily young americans, is a recipe for electoral disaster for republicans. the gop strategy comes just after an election year in which a national survey indicated that 71% of young women and 53% of young men voted for the democrat candidate for congress. now, admittedly, many democrats have also joined republicans in calling for this ban. but like most issues, the blame tends to stick to republicans more. the banning tiktok strategy also comes while the gop simultaneously complains of liberal u.s. social media

companies canceling and censoring conservatives. so without a hint of irony, many of these same, quote, conservatives, now agitate to censor viewpoints they don't like. so on the one hand republicans complain about censorship while on the other hand the same republicans advocate to censor social media apps that they worry are controlled by the chinese. the concern over tiktok seems to be over what the social media might do, propagating hysteria and fear of subtle communist subversion from the people's republic of china, through a social media app in the 21st century. it's similar sore akin to basically mccarthyist paranoia. today in a move that chairman moo -- chairman mao would approve, the senate -- one member doesn't approve about how

it handled content about the war between israel and hamas. just this week the senator from missouri wrote to secretary yellen, and i quote, while data security issues are paramount, less often p discussed is tiktok's power to radically distort america's. the senator from missouri wants to censor tiktok users who are biased against israel. the senator from missouri wants to ban the speech of young tiktok users that he disagrees with. sounds more like a chinese solution than an american one p. the chinese solution to combating speech, those in power do not like, is to ban it. in fact, tiktok is banned in china. so is youtube, twitter, and facebook. there's an app similar to tiktok called but it's heavily censored. try to search for tiananmen is

the 89 and nothing will come up. the american solution with the high value to our country places on free exchange of ideas is to counter flied ideas, flawed ideas or falsities with more speech and better arguments that persuade and reveal the truly. do we really want to emulate china's speech bans. do we want to intrude into the lives of americans, deprive them of their first amendment right to receive and consider information? the hamfisted ban under consideration today empowers government to determine what americans are allowed to see, hear and contemplate. the headline of an opinion piece by john tamney says it all, nauseating harassment of tiktok presumes that americans will be saved from chinese authoritarianism if u.s. politicians act like chinese authoritarians.

a ban on tiktok is what they do in china. you're worried about chinese communism and chinese authoritarianism and you want to ban speech in our country? it's inconsistent with our very american primary principles. tiktok must be banned the censors say because they're owned and controlled by the chinese communist party. in actuality, tiktok is owned by international invests and two chinese software engineers who designed the app. does tiktok do the chinese government's bidding? well, go to the app and search for falun gon. search for videos advocating taiwan's independence, criticism of chinese premier xi jinping. these videos are all over tiktok that are critical of chinese positions. that's why tiktok is banned in china.

tiktok is banned in china but you want to ban it in if the u.s.? we're going to become like the chinese to prevent the chinese from taking over our country? doctors mueller and farhat of georgia tech write, if nationalist fears about chinese influence operations lead to a departure from american constitutional principles supporting free and open political discourse, we will have succeeded in undermining our very system of government more effectively than any chinese propaganda could ever do. we'll be doing what the chinese want. if you're worried about becoming chinese communists, you will now be emulating them by banning speech. to those who are worried that the chinese government might somehow have access to millions of americans' teenage info, realize that all social media, regardless of whether their ownership is foreign or domestic, sucks up all your personal data.

and this is what people provide voluntarily and people, if you don't want your information, don't join these groups. if you're going to ban tiktok, what's next? arguably, several domestic apps censor conservatives more. i know because i've been censored and banned by american companies. i've got no love lost for any of these companies. i have a host of complaints about domestic social media platforms that cancel conservatives. but i'm not in favor of baning them or forcing them to accept my opinions. they're private companies. they have speech rights. i have speech rights. but i don't have the right to force them or to ban them if they don't post my stuff. if you don't like tiktok or facebook or youtube, don't use them. but don't think any interpretation of the constitution gives you the right to ban them. the first amendment isn't necessary to protect speech that everybody likes or everybody accepts.

the first amendment exists to protect speech that might be unpopular or might be controversial. i hope saner minds will reflect on which is more dangerous. videos of teenagers dancing or the precedent of the u.s. government banning speech? for me it's an easy answer. i will again defend the bill ofs against all comers, even if need be from members of my own party. i object. the presiding officer: objection is is heard. the senator from missouri. mr. hawley: let's just be clear about one thing. the chinese communist government is not covered by the united states bill of rights. the chinese communist government does not have free speech rights, and we're not talking about free speech. we're not talking about speech at all. the sanctions that i'm proposing have nothing to do with speech. they have everything to do with spying. for the same reasons that we have banned huawei in this country. if the senator from like to have

a debate about whether or not huawei and it's affiliates ought to be banned, i welcome it. that's the same debate we're having here. if all of those teenagers and other creators from around the world who are putting all of the pro-genocidal hamas content onto tiktok want to do it on other platforms, be my guest. i'll be right here to call them out on it. but the reason to ban tiktok in this country is that it is a spying apparatus. chinese communist party. the facts simply cannot be disputed. bytedance is subject to the laws of china, which make american data available to, accessible to upon request for chinese corporations and the chinese government. madam president, i just lament that we cannot seem to move

forward with a step that we have already taken with regard to huawei, with sensible protection of americans' privacy and their personal data. but let me just close with this. with regard to the speech itself, while the content of the speech on tiktok is no reason to ban them, i just want to say, since we are here in this moment of great dispute, apparently, in some corners of this country over whether it is right or wrong to call for the general side of jewish peoples, i want to say clearly it is wrong w and i want to say to those creatorrers who are pumping out this content on tiktok, you may have a first amendment right to do so, but do you have moral stand ago. there is a right. there is a wrong. there is good and evil. calling for the genocide of jewish people, whether this the middle east, the state of israel, or in this country is wrong, whether you do it on

tiktok or meta or youtube or just on the streets and plazas of your college campus. it is wrong. test and at this te above all times, i think, madam president, we need to stand and make that clear. mr. paul: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: the bill before us to ban tiktok is clearly an infringement of the first amendment. it would ban 150 million people who regularly post on tiktok from is expressing themselves. it is without question speech. these folks, the 150 million users of tiktok would have standing in court to sue over infringement of their speech. this isn't about who was advocating for this or that in the militaries or in israel or the hamas situation. the supreme court has looked at speech over time, and there is some speech that's not protected. but in europe they've gone one

step further in the sense that they ban all kinds of speech in europe. you have certain opinions that can't be expressed. we've never done that in our country. you can have a foul, despicable opinion in our country, and we counter it with better ideas. we counter it with better speech. it is very, very dangerous to the primary principles of our founding, of our government, of our bill of rights, of the bill of rights that is listed first, and that is freedom of speech. and my hope is that this will not be seen as a serious proposal and will be rejected. the presiding officer: ?ovment - - the senator from florida. mr. rubio: i ask unanimous consent to speak for five minutes prior to the scheduled roll call vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. rubio: i think one of the things increasingly accepted in

america is deindustrialation has left us vulnerable in supply chains. one of the things talked about in terms of industries is buy america. we have laws called buy america. i think it is especially important when we're spending taxpayer dollars on propping up an industry that have strong provisions that do so. what's called the infrastructure bill has $5 billion of american taxpayer funds to build electric vehicle charging stations in the united states, and it has in that bill embedded very specific buy american requirements that those funds may be used only so that all the iron, steel, the manufactured products, the construction materials that are used are produced in the united states. it's very simple, straightforward. that's what the law reads, a broader law that already exists and then the provisions of this bill. the biden administration, after passing this, however, didn't juster fail to implement this

provision. they were almost a year late in even issuing any findings on it. but they have now come out with this waiver, a waiver of that buy american requirement that allows foreign-made e.v. chargers, translation, chinese-made everybody everybody chargers -- chinese-made electric vehicle chargessers up in 2024. they give the highway maker the ability to extend that deadline by five years. we are now facing, under this waiver they're requesting, the real prospect that significant portions of the $5 billion that are going to go to electric vehicle charging stations will be spent on chinese companies. taxpayer dollars. we're either serious about restoring america's industrial capabilities or we're not. we should be especially serious about it when we're spending federal funds on it. i've watched some of the debate, some of the things the administration is telling people

about this is going to be the opposite effect. there is this 1983 general regulation they've written, waiver they have in place. everybody knows where that specific statutory language such as that that exists in this bill and this other law supersedes any of these. but the other is very simple. the administration, as they've done with a bunch of other regulations, can amend it or get rid of this. but they are using this as a threat. they're basically telling people if this thing passes we will interpret that 1983 general provision to just do anything we want with regards to this. it's pretty straightforward, get rid of it. don't use it that way. commit yourself to rebuilding american industry and american jobs. the bottom line is this, if you can make, you can play all the games you want with regard to language. the bottom line is this, if we're going to spend $5 billion of taxpayer money to build electric vehicle charging stations in the united states, it should be made by americans,

in america, using american products. and if you agree with me, i'm going to give you a chance right now to vote for something that wipes out this waiver that the biden administration wants to put in place that will guarantee that that may never happen and that most of this money, taxpayer money will go into the hands of chinese companies to build electric vehicles in the united states. we shouldn't allow that to happen. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president, i ask unanimous consent for up to one minute. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. without objection. ms. stabenow: i want to make it clear that the author of the make america better act, which my colleague did not support, but we have a made in america office, and i'm so appreciative of what the biden administration is doing to make sure that we are not giving waivers unless absolutely necessary. we had a general manufacturing waiver for years and years and years. what they've done is taken the

e.v. chargers out of that and said, okay, we'll give you until july of next year. we'll phase out any kind of waiver because we want these american made. we want these american made. and so the effect of voting for this resolution is to forever have e.v. chargers part of the waiver where they never have to be american made, they can always be chinese made. we want them american made, and i urge a no vote on this resolution. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the joint resolution is considered read a third time. the question occurs on passage of the joint resolution. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. 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. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto.

the clerk: mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. 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 -- boozman, braun, cornyn, cramer, graham, grassley, lankford, lummis, marshall, ricketts, rubio, sinema, tester, tuberville.

senators voting in the negative -- bennet, butler, cantwell, casey, cortez masto, fetterman, hassan, heinrich, hickenlooper, kaine, king, klobuchar, markey, murphy, ossoff, padilla, paul, reed, rosen, schatz, shaheen, smith, stabenow, warnock, whitehouse, wyden. ms. collins, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, no. mr. welch, no. mr. crapo, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, no. mr. cassidy, aye. mr. durbin, no. mr. coons, no.

the clerk: mr. kennedy, aye. mr. carper, no. mrs. blackburn, aye. the clerk: mr. kennedy, aye.

mrs. hyde-smith, aye.

the clerk: mr. romney, aye. mr. scott of florida, aye. the clerk: mrs. murray, no.

the clerk: mr. cruz, aye. mr. rounds, aye. mr. schmitt, aye.

mr. manchin, aye. mr. booker, no. the clerk: mr. wicker, aye. mr. blumenthal, no.

the clerk: mr. tillis, aye. the clerk: mr. cotton, aye.

mr. merkley, no. mr. young, aye. the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye.

mr. thune, aye.

the clerk: mr. budd, aye. the clerk: mr. vance, aye. ms. duckworth, no. mr. mcconnell,