[inaudible conversations] >> there are a number of campaign events to watch live today on the c-span now video app. at noon eastern, vice-president kamala harris speaks at a leadership conference hosted by the hispanic caucus institute in washington d.c. then at 3:00, senator and republican vice-presidential nominee, j.d. vance campaigns in raleigh, north carolina. and at 7:00, former president donald trump makes a campaign stop in uniondale, new york, which is part of long island. again, that's all available to watch on the free c-span now video app or online at c-span.org. >> the house will be in order. >> this year c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979 we've been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced,

unfiltered coverage of government. taking you to where the policies, debate is decided all with the support of america's cable companies. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. >> the u.s. senate is coming in this morning now to consider another of president biden's judicial nominations, a vote is scheduled at 11:45 a.m. eastern on whether to advance michelle williams court as a u.s. district court judge for central california. also, expected in the coming days, debate on a short-term federal spending bill. current funding expires on september 30th. live coverage of the senate on c-span2. ... e senate will come to order. the chaplain dr. barry black will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, our shelter from the storms,

remind the nations that they are merely human. when they trust in their might and power, help them to remember that they borrow their heartbeats from you. because of you, they live and move and exist, for you are king of kings and lord of lords. today we're grateful for the religious, political and social freedoms that bless our lives. continue to use our senators to pay the price to protect our freedom. lord, provide our lawmakers with

the wisdom to depend on your strength. we pray in your powerful 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 18, 2024. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable peter welch, a senator from the state of vermont, 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, the judiciary, michelle williams court of california to be united states district judge for the central district of california.

on his life. we as house republicans this dinner gratitude to the hard-working law enforcement officers were working to keep president trump is sam and his team safe. however, we have to ask ourselves how this was possibly happen not once but twice. how were the two assassination attempt on president trump in as many months? how were these armed and dangerous individuals allowed to get so close to the former president and current republican presidential nominee and likely next president of the united states. i want to point out democrats

violent statements have fueled of this. like a very junior freshman member of the new york delegation who said about president trump, he should be eliminated. it is uncalled for. you should call the democrats out any media for fueling this violence against president trump. there must be a clear explanation of what happened this week in florida as those answer to what happened in butler, pennsylvania, and changes must be made to ensure this doesn't happen again. that's why we're proud the speaker set up that committee and broadened it from not only investigation in butler, pennsylvania, but also what happened this weekend in florida as well. on friday we kicked off early voting and americans started to cast their votes in the most consequential election of our lifetime. the american people have to ask themselves one important question. are you better off today than you were under president trump? the edge it is a no. because people understand our nation is in crisis. , here's an far left democrat

policies have to the american way of life making our nation weaker, less safe and less prosperous. with four years in office kamala harris has failed to deliver results for the american people. we had the strongest economy in history under present, the most secure border and up pieces straight for policy that brought global security. president trump is the leader of the murky people need to bring them out of the crises created by joe biden and kamala harris. look at where we are today. the highest rate of inflation in my lifetime and kamala harris was the deciding vote for joe biden's inflation expansion act. the most wide-open and dangers of border in modern history, in history of our country because kamala harris failed as joe biden's open borders are and take a look around the world. you have catastrophic withdrawal from afghanistan where kamala harris was last person in a room with the joe biden you're putting in the ukraine and, of course, the deadly terrorist attack against israel on octobe.

lastly, since this is a political press conference i want to touch on the bombshell report from "the associated press." in key targeted districts across the country democrats are illegally interfering in elections by recruiting shadow candidates to deceive voters and disrupt the will of the american people. these are blatant and unconstitutional attempts to undermine our democracy and election integrity. we are joined today by two of those districts that the democrats have legally targeted of virginia and cartman zachman from iowa. these are amazing members of congress and combat veterans who represent districts with the democrats are trying to undermine elections and are undermining our elections. these dishes have directly impacted by far left democrat policies of kamala harris as well. want to turn over to sack none from i i was there district. >> thank you, chairwoman. thank you. my name is zach and other reps

and i was there district. today like to share briefly a story, story of a man from iowa with a brain injury who was targeted by democratic operatives to get his name on the ballot. despite this man that in being able to drive they recruited him, they targeted him over the course of the year in person members of congress. deceiving him that he is in direct conversation with donald trump so he would run in a make america great style party to try and get on the ballot. and my home state of iowa democrats who were on the ballot that said they cannot win unless they have a spoiler on the ballot. that was just out this week. tragically, they lie to them because they knew they could d.c. him. they push polled, paidce for it. when he arrived in des repu second time this year, blocked legislation to protect families' access to ivf. by voting against ivf, republicans confirmed many

americans' worst fear, project 2025 is alive and well when it comes to reproductive rights. senate republicans have spent months tying themselves into knots, claiming that of course they're in favor of protecting ivf, but when it mattered most, when it actually came time to vote, republicans showed their true colors and voted no. and what made yesterday's vote even worse was that was the second time they blocked ivf protections, even though it's increasingly clear many americans are worried about access. both times, without hesitation, senate republicans caved to the extremists on their right flank. and look, blocking ivf could have terrible consequences. the hard right has been transparent that now they've overturned roe, they're moving on to other targets, like ivf. just look what happened earlier this year in alabama. senate republicans, who like to pretend ivf is not under threat,

should have a word with the likes of the heritage foundation and the susan b. anthony pro-life america. these organizations are some of the most influential conservative groups, and they're clear about their hostility, about any federal protections for ivf. sba called our bill irredeemable a few months ago and called ivf a free for all. these groups use language very similar to that of their opposition to abortion. so no matter how much republicans claim ivf is not in danger, extremists on their side say otherwise, and republicans seem to listen. and by voting against protections for ivf, senate republicans confirmed yet again that 2025 is increasingly steering the gop. now, on the salt cap, in the eight long years that donald trump has been in politics, one thing is beyond doubt -- what donald trump says and what donald trump does are two very

different things. donald trump says he fights for working people, and then ushers in perhaps the most anti-worker administration in modern times as president. donald trump claims he's a leader on fertilization ivf, unquote, whatever that means. but his maga justices overturned roe and cast women's reproductive care into chaos. yesterday donald trump did it again, totally reversing himself, claiming that he will reverse the cap on state and local deductions, but donald trump must be suffering from selective amnesia, because he was the one who took away people's salt deductions in the first place. his tax bill did it, a dagger aimed at blue states that want to spend a little more to help people with housing and health care and education, transportation. all of a sudden, now that he is on long island, donald trump's selective amnesia kicks in and

he totally reverses himself on salt. but we know donald trump. we know what his m.o. is. he's going to do nothing. he is simply trying to escape the anger of many families he's upset when he placed those caps, which affect so many middle-class people, particularly in higher-cost areas, like long island. so he shows up in long island, oh, says he's changed his mind, and we know he'll do nothing about it, and then, when some of his more right wing people go to him and say you can't do it, he'll say okay. so this is not only an empty promise, but it shows the hypocrisy of donald trump. for donald trump to pretend he's found religion on eliminating the salt caps two months before an election, speaking in long island, is comical, it's unserious, and it shows the lack of integrity that this man has. his promises carry about as much weight as monopoly money.

remember, the salt cap was one of the key parts of donald trump's own tax law. congressional republicans pushed the cap, he signed it. donal donald trump's own treasury secretary, steve mnuchin, called salt a subsidy for states like new york. even though, for decades, new york paid tens of billions more in taxes than we received from the federal government. and to this day, salt caps remain in place because extreme republicans have blocked any attempt to fix this defective policy. i've been a loud proponent of eliminating the salt cap from the start. as long as i am leader, i'll do everything in my power so that when these caps expire at the end of next year they will not come back. double-taxing hardworking owners on long island and hudson eventually and new york, and other states, largely blue states, is plainly unfair and

could not have come up at a worse time than the last few years with so much chaos caused by covid and the economic turmoil it unleashed. for families frustrated by the salt cap, so many on long island, firefighters, police officers, construction workers who make good salaries, they've got donald trump and congressional republicans to thank for their pain. now, on the shutdown, we have less than two weeks now before september 30. if the house and senate do not act by then to extend government funding, the government will shut down and there will be no ambiguity that it will be a republican shutdown. my friend the republican leader said yesterday if republicans shut the government down, quote, it would be politically beyond stupid for us to do that, because we, meaning republicans, get the blame, unquote. leader mcconnell is absolutely correct -- a republican shutdown would be beyond stupid for republicans, and they would get the blame,

because it's only speaker johnson who's headed in that direction to assuage his regard right, the freedom caucus people, who hold his speakership in -- in, shall we say -- who say it's questionable whether he should be speaker, if this happens. nevertheless, republicans are no closer to preventing a shutdown today than they were at the beginning of september. for the last two weeks, speaker johnson and house republican leaders have wasted precious time on a peripheral that everyone -- on a proposal everyone knows can't become law. his own republican conference cannot unite around his proposal. today, the house is expected to vote on the speaker's c.r. and it is expected to fail. i hope once the speaker's c.r. fails, he moves on to a striplinggy that will -- to a strategy that will work, bipartisan cooperation. it's the only thing that keeps the government open when facing a government deadline.

bipartisan, bicameral cooperation. that's what works. that's what we're willing and happy to do. the clock is ticking. if republicans keep squabbling and crean us into a shutdown, the consequences will reverberate across the country. a shutdown harms the economy. a shutdown causes costs to spike and supply chains buckle and lending slows down, federal safety programs could come to a halt, making our people and our communities less safe. if the republicans shut the government down, tens of thousands of children across the country would immediately -- could immediately lose access to head start. seven million women and children could lose nutrition benefits. food safety would be jeop jeopardized. the military could be asked to work without pay. border security, something very important our republican colleagues talk a lot about, would be thrown into chaos. increasing wait times at port of entry, propertiline border --

fr frontline border personnel would have to do their jobs without pay. america does not want another republican shutdown. america cannot afford another republican shutdown. make no mistake, if republicans don't work with democrats in a bipartisan way, if the four leaders can't come together because the house republicans are so adamant, americans will blame republicans, particularly those in the house, for shutting the government down. now, on the vba shortfall. last night, the house passed legislation through a voice vote that would ensure veterans get their well deserved benefits for october. passed by voice vote in the house. that doesn't happen too often on significant and important legislation. well, we want to pass it through the senate quickly. the need for action is urgent. without this mandatory funding for veterans benefits before september 20, the v.a. will be unable to issue compensation and

pension benefit payment to as many as seven million veterans and their survivors. we can't let that happen, so we must act and we will. one final note, a sad note, mr. president, on brian griffin. earlier this week, senate democrats lost a longtime mr. of our beloved family, brian, brian griffin. if you've been around the senate long enough, you certainly knew brian. he started as a page, worked up through the cloakroom, i remember him being there, always being helpful, and served as a top aid for senator byron dorringan. many of us considered him a dear friend, his family is in our thoughts and in our prayers. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

along with the courts, you've heard from others it's important to repeat, president biden quote it's time to put trump in a bull's-eye. the president of the united states said that and then now to different people have taken that as a call to action. where's the real scrutiny coming from the press to ask them to you now denounce what you said? because people are taking it the wrong way and are actually trying to carry it out. it's not just rhetoric. we almost lost president donald trump. and it shouldn't happen on either side but you are seeing this language from the other side get higher and higher. got to say it again. congressman goldman, quote, it is destructive to our democracy, and he, president trump, has to be eliminated. does anybody need an interpretation of that? one unhinged person hearing that

and what does it mean to them? that they're going to carry out as they call to action what they're being called to do. cannot happen. it cannot happen. congresswoman plaskett, quote, trump needs to be shot. has she been scrutinized on that quote? are other democrats being asked to call her out and stop doing that kind of thing that is being taken the wrong way. i've seen it personally when people are called to action. one person is all it takes to take it the wrong way and then look at what could be. we don't want this to happen again, but they, the democrats that are saying is, starting with kamala harris, have to stop the language of their saying. talk about your policy differences, but stop all of this language about threats to democracy and hitler comparisons and he needs to be shot. enough is enough.

with that i want to bring up the speaker of the house. >> thank you so much. sorry about the heat and humidity in here. that's steve's fault. listen, we're 48 days out from the election and we're continuing the republicans are continuing to draw the contrast between our agenda of liberty opportunistically for everybody and the democrats destructive agenda and the radical left policies. you will see that are displayed on house for this week, and in the weeks ahead. in the meantime let me give you a quick update on the assassination attempt, the second assassination attempt. it sounds surreal to say so. we were at mar-a-lago to meet with president trump. we're supposed to meet earlier acted shooting attempt. we joined him in the day thereafter. we spent almost three hours with the president. i will tell you may of heard my reflection on this, he was completely unraveled by the experience. donald trump is a strong individual and he's a strong leader.

and i don't think it's anyone can argue the case there's been anyone certainly in the modern lyrical era probably throughout her history who's been so aggressively attacked, and yet he remains so resolute and so committed to keep fighting for the american people. and i was are inspired by that. i know we all understand we've got to get to the bottom of this. the secret service has dropped the ball and it's inexcusable. they have a test for assessment investing vincent butler, pennsylvania, as our conference chair noted. we're going to expand the scope of the task force to look into the events that happened in florida on sunday as well. we've got to get into the bottom of this editor this doesn't happen again. if you need additional funding congress will supply that but we're told it's a manpower problem. even if we gave them $3 billion tomorrow it's impossible to hire 2500 new secret service agents in a short time. we have we have less than 50 days. we need donald trump to be protected as any candidate of the stature would be. i called the white house yesterday and get a demand of

the white house and president biden to supply for president trump the same degree of protection that a sitting president has. he's a former president. at least he's going to be the next president and right now he's a candidate under the greatest threat to the candidate in modern political history. it justifies that level of protection. i think the white house i hope the white house will see the wisdom in that and hope they will do everything they can mr. mcconnell: in the weeks since washington democrats made vice president harris their nominee, the american people have had their hands full trying to figure out where her campaign stands on the issues on top their minds. they've got serious questions about her role in everything from the runaway spending, engaging in the worst inflation in 40 years, to the open borders policies that invited the worst

humanitarian and security crisis the southern border has ever seen. thus far they haven't received many answers. the problem is not that the vice president doesn't have a record. she campaigned for president once before, worked hand in hand with president biden for four years since. instead, the problem is that on issue after issue vice president harris has at one time or another played both sides. well, working families want to know this time which side she's on. take energy policy -- back in 2019, then-senator harris went on record saying, quote, there's no question i'm in favor of banning fracking.

fa fast-forward -- after four years of undermining exploration for abundant american energy, the harris campaign says her policies as president would be different. during her time in the senate, our former colleague cosponsored the zero-emission vehicles act, a bill that would require car manufacturers to sell only zero-emission vehicles after 2040. these days her campaign avoids getting pinned down about whether she would seek an electric vehicle mandate. then-senator harris also went on record in support of the green new deal, including its makework programs and job guarantees. these days, as the biden-harris war on american energy rages on,

the harris campaign conveniently reveals that she no longer supports this resolution, and apparently there's no policy too small for the campaign to walk back. not even the vice president's stated support for, get this a federal ban on plastic straws. according to the campaign, that's been reversed as well. well, micromanaging fountain drinks is one thing, but as millions of americans contend with the business end of the biden-harris climate and economic agenda, they ought to the know precisely where the democratic party nominee stands. policies matter. they can quite literally be the difference between affording gas and groceries and going without. voters are fed up with

flip-flops, and the vice president ought to come clean. now, on another matter, i've noted frequently that america's resolve and willingness to lead are being tested by a dangerous world. how we respond has everything to do with preserving the peace, prosperity and security america and our allies have enjoyed for decades. today i want to talk about how the free and uninterrupted flow of goods, people, and ideas has fueled american prosperity. we all know that trade is important for american workers and american jobs, but the benefits of trade run far deeper than exports of american-made goods, services, ideas, and values. trade is a two-way street.

when we engage in the global market, we opened our own doors to new sources of economic strength -- to lower prices and more choices and to good-paying jobs from foreign companies that set up shop here at home. for 12 straight years america has been the top destination for foreign business to invest their capital. investments that do a lot of good in big and small towns alike. let's take a look at kentucky, for example. the toyota plant in georgetown, the japanese automaker has invested billions -- billions -- in our economy. today it supports nearly 10,000 jobs in central kentucky. in carroll county, a spanish-owned steel manufacturer supports nearly 1,600 more

manufacturing jobs, and it's getting even bigger. just this year the company announced a new quarter of a billion-dollar investment. so head west to owensboro where more jobs are on the way thanks to a swedish manufacturer that invested millions of dollars into a production plant. so in kentucky alone, just looking at my state, businesses from 33 foreign nations support over 116,000 jobs. these jobs aren't just benefitting the biggest cities. roughly 60% of all of our counties in kentucky are home to at least one international business. now, i've highlighted just a few examples in my home state, but these aren't anomalies. they speak to a situation true all across our country.

foreign investment benefits american workers and american communities. but it doesn't happen on its own. foreign businesses invest in america because they know they can count on our commitment to free markets and free enterprise and on our rule of law. turning our backs on the world means signaling that we're closed for business. it means dulling the magnet of foreign direct investment that draws capital from all over the world to our shores. when our leaders throw up barriers to foreign investment, they risk hurting the very communities they intend to protect. unfortunately, that's precisely what some bosses are urging our leaders to $. and if they -- to do. and if they succeed, our economy

will be worse for it. to be absolutely clear, this isn't an appeal to native globalism of the 1990's. trade is not a cure-all for the serious challenges of global competition with china and russia. but if our adversaries' predatory trading practices and exploitation of institutions tell us anything, it's that leaving a vacuum in global markses is an invitation -- markets is an invitation for further misbehavior. working closer with like-minded friends and allies to preserve free and fair trade and to protect critical supply chains is essential to both our security and our prosperity. when friends and allies invest in the u.s. economy and, likewise, when american companies invest in theirs, we drive growth, boost paychecks,

and increase american-made exports. it's good news for kentucky and for workers and job creators all across america. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: >> i don't know if this is been said anywhere but which is collected upstairs almost 10 million additional dollars for members. we are as motivated as the donors are to save this country. that's the distinction.

don bacon note has a moderate the centers on capital. our question to our viewers this morning as the rhetoric gone too far in campaign 2024? how would you answer that? >> i think it has. both sides demonizing the other side. one site is like a people for this person our democracy is over. the other side is saying if you go for the other person it's an attack on democracy. so both sides are demonizing each other to point where there's a french poem on both sides the get radicalized and you can see it with the two the temperature to a president trump. but you see it evidence on both sides of it and i think we should stick to the issues, talk about what's important to us, why argues better than the other view. don't demonize the other side to the degree that's been happening. >> host: what can and should members of carcass like yourself be doing? is a role for congress here in these final less than 50 days to election? >> guest: first of all let's be the right example.

we start with ourselves. try to focus on the issues that are important because you like in my race on a better candidate i'm not going to demonize my opponent as it's going to be the end of the universe if this person is elected. we've had election since 1789. 1789. our country will continue good or bad on how we elect who we elect. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: throughout election season, we see the dark side of politics. john adams, thomas jefferson, infamously waged smear campaigns against each other. andrew jackson and john quincy adams exchanged accusations of murder and i am -- impropriety. all to say dirty campaign tricks are hardly foreign to american

elections, but today i want to address a particularly vile lie being circulated by former president trump, his vice president candidate j.d. vance and their supporters during this campaign and this lie has real-life consequences. in recent weeks, false claims have been circulating on social media that members of the haitian immigrant community in springfield, ohio, are abducting, killing, and eating people's pets. the former president even made this claim during his debate with kamala harris. this claim is not only outrailingous and patently false with both city officials and law enforcement confirming they've received zero credible reports of such conduct, but it is now becoming a safety concern for the entire springfield, ohio, community. despite this, the former president and his running mate have continued to knowingly spread this lie.

shockingly, in an interview with cnn this week, senator vance admitted that he was willing to, quote, create stories, close quote, to get media attention, and that's exactly what he and former president trump have done. first on social media, then during last week's debate to an audience of 67 million americans and then on national news. think about that. a man who is seeking to become vice president of the united states admitted that he was willing to spread vicious lies simply to get media attention. but these lies have real consequences for haitian immigrants in springfield, ohio, and across the country. since this smear campaign began, there have been multiple evacuations of schools, government buildings, and medical facilities in springfield, ohio, because of bomb and shooting threats related to these lies. i want to thank ohio governor

mike dewine, a republican and my former senate colleague, for stepping up to debunk these lies and protect the people of his state. yet these candidates have doubled down. they are willing to spread lies and put an entire community at risk to amplify their anti-immigrant platform. but this behavior is not a surprise. for years the former president has engaged in bigoted fearmongering, especially when it comes to the topic of immigration. one incident summarizes his approach well. it was january of 2018. then-president trump, myself, and a handful of other lawmakers were sitting in the oval office in the white house discussing a bipartisan immigration deal that i had negotiated along with senator lindsay thomas. the agreement would have devoted billions of dollars to securing the border and giving legal protection to dreamers, young immigrants who grew up in this country. but the former president was not

interested. he complained that it would lead to more immigration from haiti which he dismissed in that i amt on the floor of the senate. i was stunned. his words were hate filled, vile, and racist. could i not believe that the president of the united states of america not only held these views but felt comfortable enough to speak them aloud in the oval office, but he did. so it is hardly surprising that when presented with the opportunity to continue to fuel his anti-haitian hate, the former president has taken that opportunity. i speak on the floor today to tell haitian immigrants, haitian americans, and the entire immigrant community there is no place for hate in america. no place for hate. you are a critical piece of american leadership. you make our communities and our nation stronger. just look at the attorney general of my home state of

illinois, a dear friend of mine, kwame raule. he is the son of haitian immigrants and his service to the state. illinois and the nation is invaluable. he, too, has condemned the former president's fearmongering. or look at captain alex ajudsh, a top member of his class, a graduate of west point, a pilot for the u.s. army. he was born in haiti. he rose to national prominence in 2016 after a photo showed him with tears streaming down his face at the west point graduation. his tears, he explained, were a representation of the american dream. for haitians who have already experienced violence and instability in their native country, the lies that the former president is spreading only make their lives in america somewhere they hoped would be a safe place, more dangerous. it disheartens me that in the year 2024 i must come to the

floor of the senate to condemn the lies of a former president who is running yet another political campaign fuelled by fearmongering and hate. immigrants make our nation stronger. and any attempt to score cheap political points from lies suggesting otherwise should be met with swept condemnation from both sides of the aisle. mr. president, it is ironic that at a time when these dehumanizing remarks are being made about immigrants in sprin springfield, ohio, there was a press conference yesterday in st. louis, missouri. i call it to the attention of everyone. st. louis is a town i know well. i grew up across the river in east st. louis, illinois. i spent many of a day in st. louis, missouri. the town has seen its problems and its challenges. and a few years ago they decided to try to analyze what the problem was. the problem was they needed a workforce and they didn't have one. you know what they suggested as a solution? immigrants. immigrants they needed more of

them in st. louis. yesterday, there was an announcement by the chamber of commerce. it was an extraordinary announcement that they have atrokted some 30,000 -- attracted some 30,000 immigrants to that setting. it means they can move forward now with economic development. it was a plan by the chamber of commerce. contrast those two remarks, remarks of the former president donald trump and his vice presidential candidate j. d. vance about immigration, dehumanizing these individuals and suggesting they're not only necessary in the united states but actually negative in their impact. they're wrong in springfield, ohio. they're clearly wrong in st. louis, missouri. they're wrong in america. immigrants have made this country. we are a nation of immigrants and i would say quite boldly i'm damn proud of it. my mother was an immigrant to this country, brought here at the age of 2. i'm glad my grandparents whom i never knew had the courage to make that journey to the united states.

because of their courage and determination, like so many other immigrants, because of it i'm standing here today as a senator representing the great state of illinois. how in the world can we continue to allow this rhetoric to come from trump and vance in terms of the immigrants' impact on america? we can see before our eyes it makes a difference. the diversity of our population is our strength. and that strength should be capitalized on. to think that young people who are dreamers brought here by their families run the risk of being deported at some point because of this rhetoric makes me sick to my stomach. these are wonderful young people, extraordinary contributors to america's future, and we should applaud them and not late them. i can tell you for a fact i know a little bit about the senate. i've served here for a number of years. there are members of the senate on the other side of the aisle who want not one single new immigrant to come to america. i believe there should be an

orderly process. that's why i was one of the gang of eight to create the comprehensive immigration reform bill which passed in the senate quite a few years ago and should pass again. we should have an orderly process of immigration, capitalize on the benefits that they bring to this country, and build our economy on those. but to say that we are opposed to all immigrants is just plain unfair. it's wrong. and it'sen american. -- it's un-american. st. louis not realizes that. with a workforce they can start to rebuild their economy, and they're applauding that. immigration is part of the solution if it's done in a proper, orderly manner and we can do it that way if we pass comprehensive immigration reform. the notion of deporting 11 million people from the united states is a fantasy. it cannot, it should not ever happen. these people have made a great contribution to this country.

president trump wants to say that if you have a woman, for example, who is a mother who is undocumented in a house full of documented citizens, she should be deported or everyone in the house should be deported. it isn't going to happen. it should never happen. we should capitalize on comprehensive immigration reform and make it a viable part of america's future. i yield the floor. 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: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, august border numbers came out on monday bringing the total number of encounters at our southern border thus far for fiscal year 2024 to more than two million 2,033,000 to be resighs, the third highest total ever recorded with another month still to go. the highest total ever recorded was in fiscal year 2023. the second highest total ever recorded was in fiscal year 2022. and the fourth highest total ever recorded was in fiscal year 2021. in other words, mr. president, president biden and vice president harris have presided over four years of record

breaking illegal immigration at our southern border. the problem started right away. on the day he took office, president biden began dismantling the border security policies of his predecessor and illegal immigration began surging in response. no big surprise there. and for three-+ years now president biden and vice president harris basically stood around and watched, watched as record-breaking numbers of individuals surge across the border. watched as the border patrol and border cities struggled under the massive influx. they watch as encounters of individuals on the terrorist watch list nearly quadrupled in fiscal year 2022 and then rolls even higher the next year. vice president harris was supposed to be president biden's border czar. i'd be hard-pressed to name anything she did to stop the influx. if she did take any action, it was certainly ineffective based on the steady increases in

border encounters. mr. president, i don't have to tell anyone that the problem -- what the problems are with the kind of unchecked illegal immigration that we've been seeing. as i said u.s. customs and border protection has been stretched thin for pretty much the entirety of the biden-harris administration. cities at the border and around the united states have struggled with the influx of migrants. and ply grants themselves -- migrants themselves have suffered as they've undertaken the perilous journey to our southern border spurred on by the biden-harris administration's open border policies. worst of all, it left a gaping hole in our national security, the kind of unchecked illegal immigration we've been seeing is an invitation to dangerous individuals to enter our country. i mentioned the number of individuals on the terrorist watch list encountered at the southern border has surged. and that's just individuals who are actually apprehended. we have no idea how many terrorists or other dangerous individuals have made their way across our southern border

without being apprehended. we're closing in on two million known got-aways in the biden-harris administration's watch. that's individuals the border patrol saw but was unable to apprehend. how many of those were dangerous people who should not be entering our country? u.s. border patrol chief jason owens in a march interview with cbs news said the number of known got-aways is keeping him at night. this is his quote. this is a national security threat. border cute is a big piece of national security, and if we don't know who is coming into our country and we don't know what their intent is, that is a threat. and they're exploiting a vulnerability that's on our border right now. end quote. that same month fbi director christopher wray told the senate select committee on intelligence and i quote, we are seeing a wide array of very dangerous threats that emanate from the border. end quote.

let me repeat that, mr. president. we are seeing a wide array of very dangerous threats that emanate from the border. that from the director of the biden-harris is the june arrest of eight men from tajikistan with suspected ties to isis who had illegally enterhed the -- entered the country, as well as the identification of over 400 migrants that use an isis affiliated smuggling network to enter our country are two examples of the threats we face and the dangers of the chaos that president biden and vice president harris have allowed to rage at our southern border. mr. president, in addition to threats from terrorists and other dangerous individuals, the chaos at our southern border has unques unquestionably facilitated illegal across-border activity, including smuggling of deadly drugs like fentanyl, which then make their way around our country. my state of south dakota is about as far from our southern

border as you can get, but law enforcement officials consistently tell me that the illegal drugs they're dealing with have entered the country across our southern border. in 2022, mini highway county -- minneha county sheriff estimated that 9:00% of the fentanyl -- 90% of the fentanyl and meth in our state comes from mexico. 90%, mr. president. i could go on. there's a lot more to talk about when it comes to the bide harris -- the biden-harris crisis. from the amnesty offered to hundreds of thousands of individuals whose asylum cases have been closed without a decision, to the placing of unaccompanied children with possibly dangerous guardians, something that senator grassley and senator lankford are currently working to rectify and prevent in the future. but i'll stop here.

four record-breaking years of illegal immigration, mr. president. the national security legacy of the biden-harris administration. 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.

by voting against idf, worse. 2025 when it comes to reproductive rights. senate republicans months trying to delve into lainey of course they are favorable this idea. when actually in time to vote republicans showed their true colors and voted no. what made it even worse the second time was the idea of protection even though clear. both times without hesitation senate republicans came to the extremists. walking ivf could have terrible

transparent the move on to other targets like ivf. look at earlier this year alabama, senate republicans like to pretend ivf is not under threat and the heritage foundation in america. these are the most influential conservative groups and clear about hostility about any productions ivf. call the bill you redeemable and a free-for-all. these groups use language very similar to abortion. no extremists on their side, republicans seem to listen and fight voting in a senate republican from will divide will

do everything will in the long years donald trump has been of politics will doubt, donald trump says and what donald trump does are two very different things. donald trump invites will working people. as president, donald trump places a leader ivf. whatever that means. overturn roe and reproductive care. yesterday donald trump did it again reversing himself claiming he will reverse state and local deductions donald trump must suffer from selective amnesia because he was the one who took away the deductions in the first place. his tax bill did it. a dagger, they want to spend a

little more help with housing and healthcare and education and transportation. all of a sudden now that is on long island donald trump selective amnesia kicks in and reverses himself but we know donald trump, we know his mo, is going to do nothing. he simply trying to escape the anger of many families, he's upset he placed those caps and so many middle-class people particularly in higher cost areas. he shows up and long island and says he's changed his mind. we know he'll do nothing about it then is right wing people forced him and say okay so this is not only an empty promise lower golf but the hypocrisy of the donald trump.

eliminating two months before an election will problem, a serious shows lack of this man has. remember one of the key parts of congressional republicans pushing for cap his mind. donald trump's secretary diminishing you will will exactly receive like you're giving the pool protecting paying tens of billions of more to this day they remain in place because of extreme republicans of long as any attempt and fixes attempted policy. the illuminating visit from the start. nonsense leader from ability everything in my power when

these fire the next year and hard-working huge owners on the hudson valley across new york and others as well will states, it's unfair and could not have come up at a worse time chaos caused by covid and economic turmoil so families frustrated by so many on long island -- th proceedings under the call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. collins: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i rise today to point out that we are only 12 days from the end of the fiscal year, and to call upon the majority leader to bring the appropriations bills to the senate floor.

we have wasted the last two we weeks. we have spent time voting on issues that were not nearly as time sensitive. by the end of july, the senate appropriations committee had held hearings on, thoroughly considered at full committee mark-ups, and reported for consideration by the full senate 11 of the 12 appropriations bills, roughly 96% of the discretionary funding permitted by the caps. all of the bills, all of them, received strong bipartisan support. we advanced six of the bills unani unanimously. unanimous support for any bill in today's senate is no small feat, and a testament to the hard work and seriousness of our

committee members on both sides of the aisle, led by our chairman -- our chair, the senior senator from washington. but what has happened after the committee reported its bills? nothing. they have languished on the senate calendar. instead of taking up the senate committee-passed bills, including bills that passed unani unanimously, that we passed earlier in the summer, the senate has spent this month processing nominations and taking show votes aimed at scoring political points. show votes. we had another of those yesterday. we voted for the second time on the exact same bill, on ivf. what was that?

that's not what the senate should be doing at this critical time. that was simply an attempt by the majority leader to score political points. and i think that's highly unfortunate. we need to get back to legislating, and surely funding our government is an imperative. the founders envisioned the senate as a deliberative insti institution. as i indicated, by july the senate appropriations committee had advanced the fiscal year 2025 defense appropriations bill by a vote of 28-0. it was unanimous. the bill would provide our military with the resources it needs to confront the global threats facing the united states, which combatant

commanders have described to me as being the worst and most dangerous in 50 years. our bill reject the administration's budget that would have led to the smallest air force in history, and would have yielded the seas to the growing chinese navy. the committee instead called for a 3.3% increase in defense funding levels compared to last year. our bill strengthens our military across all domains -- air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace. our bill would also provide our brave men and women in uniform the pay and benefits that they deserve. it would fund a 4.5% pay increase for most of our service men and women and a 5.5% pay increase for the most junior

enlisted personnel. these are just some of the highlights of the bill. our bill includes $37 million for navy shipbuilding, the largest shipbuilding budget ever. it begins to reverse the dangerous decline in the number of navy ships. for the air force, a the bill provides additional funding to make nearly 500 more aircraft available than the president's budget request would allow. the bill addresses the changing face of warfare with $1 billion for counterdrone capabilities to address this evolving threat. the growing use of drones by iran and its proxies as well as russia in its attacks in ukraine have demonstrated that warfare has changed, and so must our strategies and budgets. these are just some of the highlights of this critically

important appropriations bill that we should have been debating, amending, and passing on the senate floor. mr. president, don't take just my word for it. i would ask unanimous consent to submit for the record letters on why we need a full year to the appropriations bill and describing the harm of long-continuing resolutions. one of the letters is from the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. one is from the secretary of defense. one is from the chief of naval operations. one is from the commandant of the marine corps. one is from the secretary of the navy. one is a white paper from the department of the army. one is a white paper from the department of the air force. one is a letter from the military coalition representing

more than 5.5 million current and former servicemembers, their families, and caregivers. one is from the aerospace industries association. i could go on and on. i do ask unanimous consent that those be placed at the end of my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection . -- without objection. ms. collins: mr. president, here's my point. to does not have to be this way. if the senate majority leader had prioritized bringing appropriations bills to the floor, we could be in conference now with our senate colleagues on some of the most important funding bills and send them to the president's desk prior to the october 1 start of the fiscal year. it -- the senate is not doing its job.

we should be considering these bills, not engauging in -- engaging in show votes. mr. president, i would yield the floor. mu murmur -- mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator washington. mrs. murray: i really appreciate my colleagues wanting to move forward on our full-year spending bills. i share the absolute urgency that the senator from maine just talked about. this is critical work that must get done for the american people. and i have to say as a first order of business, i hope all four corners of congress can quickly come together as soon as possible to hammer out a reasonable, bipartisan c.r. we've got to keep the government open and avert a needless and disastrous c.r. so i want my colleagues to know, i look forward to working with them on the other side on a strongly bipartisan fashion to

pass all 12 of our full-year spending bills before the end of this year. our committee has worked really hard to get bipartisan bills. we are ready. they are ready. it is frustrating to all of us that we have worked so hard on this process. whether it is funding for the military or the v.a. or countless other essential services that are in our bills from child care to food safety inspection, i believe in the urgency of this, so i appreciate my colleague speaking out on this today. and i assure them that i will keep working with they will and make sure the voice of the senate keeps being heard and we get it done. thank you, mr. president. mr. wicker: mr. president. iffer officer the senator from mississippi. -- the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: thank you, mr. president. i want to join my clarkes both democrat and -- i want to join my colleagues, both democrat and republican, in expressing regret that we don't have the important national security business of this congress before the senate right now.

and, clearly, it's important to do a nomination and confirmation every few days. and the election is approaching and, of course, there's some show votes, and i think probably my side of the aisle has engaged in that sort of thing in years past. but it is such a shame that we face this access -- axis of aggressors likeve never faced in 50 years, and every national security official, whether a retired four-star or someone who's no longer in service but giving us good advice, they come before us and they say, we have never had such a threat from china, from russia, which is engaged in a shooting war right now, having

invaded the sovereign space of a next-door neighbor, from iran which is directing the three -- at least the three terrorist groups that are raining so much havoc on israel. this axis of aggressors is signalling that they don't fear an invasion of taiwan in three short years. they've said it publicly. and while all of that is going on, our leadership, the distinguished majority leader from new york, has not let us bring the appropriations bill to the floor, has not let us bring the authorization bill, which we must pass, we must pass both of these bills every year, the two

essential bills that cannot go without being taken care of every fiscal year, and i will say to you, mr. president, and to my colleagues, and to others that are paying attention, this has been bipartisan, absolutely. senator murray is correct. she's unhappy about this, too. but i point the finger to the one person on face of the earth that can actually bring a bill to the floor, and that's the majority leader. senator reed, the chairman of the armed services committee, and i have been putting togethe year's national security authorization act. it would have been much better had we brought the bill to the floor and had 100 amendments winnoweded down and worked out. have open votes so that the people of the united states could see how senators from

maine to mississippi and to the west coast, to the east stand on important issues affecting the united states military. but we have not been able to do that. but we are working together. senator reed and i are working together on a planning and we've worked together on nearly 100 variations to the legislation that was passed months and months ago by the armed services committee to resolve issues of local and state interest, issues involving how quickly we can get our industrial base going to meet the need that, frankly, we're not meeting at the present time and to get ahead of the game so we could prevent war, so we can have enough strength to have the reaganesque peace through evangelical that we enjoyed in the 1980's and early 1990's. the appropriations bills are just as important, if not more

important, than the authorization bills. they contain funding increases we need to prevent our air force from shrinking. we know that the chinese navy is expanding enormously, and our navy is shrinking, literally shrinking, mr. president. so it's regrettable. here we are a week and a half to go before we must break for the election, and the distinguished majority leader, senator schumer, has not brought any of this legislation before the full senate. bills that have been ready since july. and so -- and also i want to commend my colleague from maine, the distinguished ranking member of the appropriations committee, for accommodating the chairman of the appropriations committee. we -- i had prepared today to come down here and support senator collins in an effort to

have a unanimous consent request, to bring the bill to the floor. i mean, what else are we doing? look at us. but in a matter of comity and to continue the great working relationship that these two senior senators have had, senator collins refraineded that that. so we're not asking for unanimous consent and requiring someone from the other side to come and object to that. and we'll continue to work. but what is absolutely sure is that the fiscal year will begin in just a few days, and the appropriations for what we need to do at the pentagon, what new things we need to do, will not be passed, and we'll be stuck with last year's priorities. and, as a result, at a time when we need to be putting more resources into national security

and sending new direction based on the new facts and the new challenges that are out there, at that time we'll actually be wasting money of the taxpayers by having priorities still extended for another three months -- hopefully it's only three months -- rather than putting the resources there that the experts tell us and that we have learned are necessary for the next fiscal year. so if my colleague from maine would like to speak on my time, i'll be glad to yield to her. but if not, i'm prepared to yield the floor and just regret so profoundly that our leadership has not allowed us to do the work that the taxpayers expected us to do.

ms. collins: mr. president. mr. president, i just want to thank the distinguished ranking member of the senate armed services committee for his extraordinary leadership. he has charted a future for defense spending that recognizes the extraordinary threatses that we face -- threats that we face, and it's been a real honor to work with him. i would now yield to the senator from alabama. mrs. britt: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mrs. britt: thank you, mr. president. today i rise to discuss something that is extremely disturbing, the fact that we have less than two weeks before the end of the fiscal year and yet we have not put any of our appropriations bills on the floor. and by we, we is not the appropriations committee.

that is actually right on majority leader chuck schumer. he decides what comes to the floor. he decides when we do it. and yet he hasn't prioritized our men and women in uniform. i think today that's exactly what we should be doing. but instead i am sure he'll either conjured up another show vote, like we saw yesterday, or he'll put another nominee on the floor. instead of considering these appropriations bills, that seems to be what we're doing. i want to be very clear. for everyone in the gallery you we have members of the appropriations committee, both republican and democrat, who sit and work together. we have a job to fund the government. we're supposed to do it by september 30. we have marked up 11 out of 12 of those bills in this an extremely bipartisan fashion. yet these bills still sit on chuck schumer's desk. he hasn't brought one of them to the floor.

now, the house has sent over five bills, so what we could be doing is putting the ones that match up on this floor, sending them to conference and actually fund them. but instead we're doing nothing. this isn't new. this is exactly what chuck schumer did last year as well. you have patty murray and susan collins working together on a path forward. i commend them for that. last year we did 12 out of 12 bills that were marked up on a senate committee on tv in front of public by july 27. yet those bills sat. chuck schumer not putting them on the floor until november 1 of 2023. 127 days after they had been marked up. after that is when we saw the

next bill come on to the floor. we actually didn't finish our process until 174 days into the fiscal year last year. that's not only fiscally irresponsible, it is morally irresponsible. the people send us up here to do a job, and my question to the majority leader today is why aren't you letting us actually do it? i am extreme disappointed that not a single one of these bills again this year has seemed to find their way on the floor. he seems to have no plan to do that. only plans seems to be to kick the can down the road. and as my p distinguished colleague from mississippi said, every time we do that our men and women pay the price. secretary austin, obviously appointed by president biden, confirmed by this body, has said that a c.r. will hurt our men and women in uniform. so what we should be doing is figuring out a path forward to

fund defense and to fund our veterans. so today you see members of the republican party standing up and saying let's get this chamber back to doing the critical work we were sent here to do. it's long overdue. now for those of you who don't know, i'm new in this body. i've been here like, you know, less than two years. and yet, for some reason last year i asked the question, i said when is the last time we actually did our job on time for the american people? you heard me say it took us 174 days into the fiscal year last year to actually do our job. now i want y'all to be clear, every time we do that, every time we kick the can down the road with a c.r., continuing resolution, it costs the taxpayers more. you're halting everything, you're halting bidding processes. have any of you ever had to rebid something? when you rebid something, does

the price go up or does it go down? we know it doesn't go down. we know it goes up, which means we're being irresponsible with taxpayer dollars. but yet again that seems to be what we do year and year and year, year after year after year. so the former staffer came out in me, and i wanted to get to work and figure out when is the last time we actually did our job. the last time we did our job on time, y'all listen to this, was f.y. 97. and the last time we actually did it on time by passing those individually through regular order, f.y.' 95. so to all the senate pages, clearly you weren't even born yet. that is 30 yago, for everyone in the chamber that's doing the math, 30 p years of kicking the can down the road. the american people deserve

better. and yet somehow we can't get the media to cover this. we can't get them to cover the fact that leader schumer has refused to lead, but yet used him time on a show vote yesterday where he was trying to put my state in the crosshairs. i am proud of the work that my state has done to protect ivf quickly and effectively both from the legislature and the governor. once again ivf is accessible and legal in every single state across our great nation. but do you know what chuck schumer took his time doing yesterday? creating a show vote for commercials for men and women on the other side of the aisle that are in vulnerable seats instead of putting the american people first. and, mr. president, the american people are sick of that. and bottom line, they deserve better. and as long as i am in this body, i am going to keep pushing this issue. i'm going to keep moving it to the front. we are going to find a solution to actually getting back to

doing the work the american people sent us up here to do. thank you. i yield my time. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: mr. president, i just want to thank the senator from alabama for her eloquent words, her passion, and her leadership. she is absolutely correct that there is no reason for us to be in the situation that we find ourselves in just 12 days before the start of the new fiscal year. there is no reason why the defense appropriations bill, the military construction-v.a. bill, the labor-hhs bill, the cjs bill, i could go on and on, there is no reason why the senate appropriations approved bills could not have been

brought to the senate floor. they're important. funding the government is critical. and as the distinguished senator from alabama points out, when we go on to continuing resolutions, we cause enormous harm, which is why i entered into the record all of those letters from the department of defense and other organizations. and here is the other point, as the senator from alabama has pointed out, we end up spending more money. it costs us more money, because contracts are put on hold, new starts are delayed, and programs that should be trimmed back or eliminated continue to be funded. this just is not how the senate

should operate. and i implored the majority leader more than once to peri the appropriations bills to the floor, and it is harmful to our nation, and particularly to our national defense, that these bills were not brought to the floor. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from california. ms. butler:i ask unanimous consent that i be permitted to speak for five minutes and senator schmitt be permitted to speak for five minutes prior to the vote. the presiding officer: without objection.

ms. butler:senator collins and senator britt talked about the importance of doing the work of the american people. in just a bit the senate is going to take some action to continue to do the work, do some important work of the american people, and that is ensuring that they have access to swift and fair justice. i want to appreciate leader schumer and senator durbin and all of my colleagues on the senate judiciary committee for moving so expeditiously to ensure that we are not delaying justice for many americans across the country. i rise today to proudly support the nomination of michelle williams court to be the united states judge for the central district of california. as her name is announced on the floor of the united states senate, i want to recognize her loved ones whose unwavering love and support over the we, the undersigned senators has undoubtedly shaped judge court into the incredible jurist and person we know her to be today.

specifically i want to acknowledge her husband jamie and their two sons. i'd also like to start today by highlighting the work we do in the senate to fill these judicial vacancies and why it's so important. the central district of california serves roughly 17 million people, making it the largest federal district by population in the entire united states. the judges who serve these californians are currently facing an unprecedented number of filings, making the need to fill the court's vacancies all that more urgent. it is commonly said that justice delayed is justice denied, and at this moment the people of california central district are indeed being denied justice as a direct result of these judicial vacancies. as i noted, i want to appreciate

and really call attention to the leadership of chair durbin and the members of the judiciary committee, moving really, really quickly along with, and working in partnership with president biden and the white house to get these nominations advanced to ensure that the people across our country, in this instance the people of california, have fair access to justice. i want to make sure that also, in talking about the qualifications of judge court, that we are really talking about the importance of these seats in a way that is not just about access to the people, but the quality of justice that is, that they will have access to. ensuring that judges that are being nominated and put forth for consideration of confirmation are the most

experienced, that they are the most qualified, that they are thoughtful and prepared to follow the rule of law. that's really why i'm so proud to stand in support of judge michelle court for this nomination. judge court's determination to public service and to the state of california runs deep. born into a military family, judge court moved to california during high school and has called the state home ever since. she attended pomona college where she worked her way through school, sang in the glee club and earned a bachelor of arts in sociology. after graduating at the height of the aids crisis, judge court dedicated two years of work to the aids project, where she was working with that organization that provided lifesaving training to health care professionals in los angeles.

she pursued her legal dedication at loyola law school. as a student she,ed would the national health law program, researching health care services provided to incarcerated women. following law school, judge court began her legal career gaining experience in public interest law, including first as a fellow at the united states department of housing and urban development. prior to taking the bench, judge court served on various, served in various positions as the deputy director of litigation and then director of litigation and finally as vice president and general council at betcidic legal services which translates into the house of justice in he peru is one of the -- premier legal services in the united states that focuses on poverty law. for ten years judge court

provided critical legal services to low-income, elderly and disabled clients and worked in collaboration with the california legislature on codifying related policy efforts. in 2012, judge court was vorn in as judge on the civil division of the superior court of los angeles. during her time on the court she presided over approximately 200 civil trials and ruled on 12,000 motions and requests. in 2023, she received a well deserved promotion to supervising judge where she was responsible for overseeing approximately 150 judges in 35 courthouses throughout los angeles county. judge court's robust career has left an impression both on her colleagues and on her community. since her nomination, she's received letters of support from people and organizations representing a wide range of

backgrounds and experiences, including the national association of consumer advocates, the leadership conference on civil and human rights, and the association of african american california judicial officers incorporated. and several in california's legal community have come forward voicing their strong support for judge court. california women judges said, quote, her calm demeanor, thorough preparation and deep knowledge of whatever the subject is will serve her well in addressing any audience, answering questions, and keeping the discussions focused, end quote. five current supervising l.a. county superior court judges say she is, quote, currently serving as the supervising judge of the civil division of the largest unified trial court in the nation. judge court was selected for this position in part due to her administrative skills, technical knowledge, and being a subject

matter expert in civil law procedure. her strong management skills are illustrated by her innovative approaches to lessening the civil case backlog during the pandemic. in addition to the important professional experience that judge court brings to the central district, she also brings a unique lived experience. if confirmed to this position, she would be only the third black woman actively serving as an article 3 judge in this court and only the fifth in the court's history. her nomination is an important step towards building distrust in our legal system by ensuring that our federal courts reflect and represent the diversity of the people it serves. judge court's dozen years of experience in the superior court including as supervising judge demonstrate her ability to smoothly transition to the

district court, given her remarkable track record serving californians from all walks of life, she is prepared and has demonstrated. and so i urge my colleagues in joining me in supporting her nomination. thank you, mr. president, and i yield the floor. ms. butler: mr. president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. a senator: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: i rise in support of a bipartisan piece of legislation that is, frankly, personal to me. it's something i believe is not only necessary, but is common sense and that's something all of us can get behind and support wholeheartedly and that's why bipartisan ensuring safe access -- the enable act. mr. schmitt: this fight is personal for me. in my maiden speech i said that my entering public service is because of my son. my wife and i noticed a

birthmark on steven's leg, and we knew so little about this, my wife trusted me to take steven to the doctor. we had taken him there and it was discovered there were more of these and discovered he has tubularsclerosis. he is nonverbal and is on the autism spectrum and has epilepsy. so we've had this journey with our son steven, including a four-hour seizure, and through that process and that journey request with my son, went through what i referred to as a discernment process where trying to decide what i wanted to do. i knew there was something more i wanted to do and for me that calling was public service and i decided to run for public

office. that was nearly 20 years ago, but what i experienced with steven affects how i view the world and what i get behind and this happens to be one of those. so here we are. and that focus has led to legislation, not just my time in missouri, but here in the senate, and to be a voice, to be a voice for individuals with disabilities. and able accounts were created by congress and signed by the president nearly ten years ago. so one of the focuses that i have is to give those with disabilities a voice and achieving a better experience with those accounts, it was to allow individuals with disabilities and their families to save money through tax-free savings accounts. without having to -- this has

been a long -- been long a priority. i helped to lead a successful effort to authorize missouri's able account program and i was also able to champion help those in missouri with disabilities save and invest in the future. my steven was account number one of the missouri able program. there are over 162,000 of these able accounts nationwide since the program's inception back in 2014. thanks to these life changing accounts, people with disabilities are able totively -- actively participate in society. unfortunately, there are three able provisions that are set to expire in 2025. the sunsetting of these important provisions would create unnecessary barriers for

individuals with disabilities to save for their future needs while also likely ensuring utilitization of safety-net programs. sunsetting this would keep those with disabilities out of the workforce. i introduced the enable act, providing senator to those individuals and their families. these provisions are not only nonpartisan, but they've also played an outsized role in the lives of those this program serves. again, this simply allows individuals with disabilities to save money they earn at their jobs. all people deserve access to save and to be financially secure and this legislation would protect this access for the future. this bill is exactly why i entered public office in the first place, to fight for those who needed a voice. it's a commonsense, bipartisan

solution that provides an easy fix for those who depend on able accounts. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 706, michelle williams court, of california, to be united states district journal for the central district of california. signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of michelle williams court, of california, to be united states district judge for the central district of california shall be brought to a close? the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll.

vote: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. 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. the clerk: mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham.

mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. helmy. 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. 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 -- casey, hickenlooper, kelly, reed, rosen, sanders, schatz, shaheen, tester, warner and warren. senators voting in the negative -- cornyn, cotton, ernst, fischer, grassley, marshall, mullin, schmitt, scott of florida, and thune. mr. wicker, no. ms. cantwell, aye.

the clerk: ms. smith, aye. mrs. blackburn, no. mr. king, aye. mrs. britt, no. mrs. murray, aye.

the clerk: mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. ms. collins, aye.

the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. tuberville, no.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. helmy, aye. mr. rubio, no. mr. moran, no.

mr. barrasso, no. the clerk: mr. hoeven, no. mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye. the clerk: mr. crapo, no. . mr. ricketts, no.

sclerosis. the clerk: mr. cramer, no.

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

ms. cortez masto, aye. mr. heinrich, aye. the clerk: mr. coons, aye. mr. peters, aye. ms. hassan, aye.

ms. murkowski, no. the clerk: mr. bennet, aye. ms. sinema, aye.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, no.

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

the clerk: mr. lee, no.

the clerk: mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye. mr. budd, no. mr. hawley, no.

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

the clerk: mr. lankford, no.

the clerk: mr. capito, no. mr. fetterman, aye.

vote: the clerk: mr. manchin, aye.

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

the clerk: mr. durbin, aye.

the clerk: ms. butler, aye. the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mr. hagerty, no.

the clerk: mr. young, no. the clerk: ms. duckworth, aye. ms. hirono, aye.

the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, no.

the clerk: mr. romney, no.

the clerk: mr. kennedy, no. mr. boozman, no.

vote:

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no. mr. cardin, aye. the clerk: mr. warnock, aye.

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

mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no.

the clerk: mr. cruz, no.

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 51, the nays are 44. the motion is agreed to.

i rise today to point out where only 12 days from the end of the fiscal year, and to call upon theu. majority leader to bring e appropriations come from a stat like yours, mr. president, but we share the fact that we provide the energy, the fiber, an the food for -- and the foot

for this country -- and the food for this country and much of the world. there is a crisis that is with us, and that crisis is growing, and the consequences are dire. i was in my state of kansas, as many of my colleagues were at home, during the month of august. i traveled the state from corne on my truck. i talked to lots of people, and i listened to even more. in addition to those conversations, last week farm groups, commodity groups and farm organizations made a call on washington, d.c., to highlight what i'm highlighting today. included in those visits were those who sell farm equipment in kansas and across the country.

yesterday morning before coming to washington, d.c., i suffolk an agricultural -- i spoke to an agricultural outlook organization from kansas city and i just spoke with bankers from the kansas city bankers association, who are in the nation's capital as well today. the message i come to my colleague -- the message i bring to my colleagues is is that agriculture is in serious condition. input costs have risen dramatically. the things that farmers buy in order to put a crop in the ground and to harvest that crop have escalated amazingly in a way that is so damaging while the price they receive for what they grow has diminished. the cost of seed, fertilizer, diesel fuel, natural gas, interest costs -- all which are significant components of the farmers in kansas and the country -- they are at a point in which there is no profitability in most

circumstances for agriculture today. i would add to that, my couple of visits in kansas with farm equipment manufacturers. we manufacture lots of farm equipment. in places like salina and abilene, the place circumstances of those places are in dire shape because farmers can no longer afford to buy the equipment they manufacture. the issue here is the farm bill. the neared expiration of the 2018 farm bill. it was clear we needed to write a new farm bill and get it completed. it hasn't happened. it's past due. that's not unusual, but in this circumstance this year, it's significant. decisions not to get a pharmaceutical bill done have come home to roost, and the families of farmers and those

farmers and ranchers and the communities in which they live and work and provide the economic viability of the community and at the same time produce the food, fuel, and fiber that america and the world needs. those days of the capability of doing that are waning because of input costs, and you added to that the drought that has been suffered by many parts of my state. farm income has declined 43% over the past five years, and net farm income is expected to be 27% lower this year than it was in 2022. our agricultural trade deficit, something we always were proud about as we exported more than we import odd in agriculture, it's had a $42.5 billion deficit. we import more than we export. it puts our farmers even more at

risk. and it threatens the stability and security of our national economy. so my plea to my colleagues is this -- there aren't many weeks left between now and when congress recesses for month of october. we return in november and december, and we ought to use this opportunity to pass at least an extension of the current farm bill and, at the same time, make certain that a assistance is provided to the farmers to get them through the circumstance they're in. by the time we get a fax bill pass and -- by the time we get a farm bill pass and built we get the safety net that comes in the pharmaceutical bill to farmers -- in the farm bill comes to farmers, it will be too late. so the goal in my remarks today

is to bring the awareness of this issue to my colleagues and indicate that the direction we need to go is two-pronged -- pass an extension of the farm bill which provides certainty and ability for lenders and borrowers, bankers and farmers, to come together and make long-term decisions. it's time for farmers to renew their credit line, and without the passage or extension of the current farm bill, the ability for a banker to make that decision to benefit the farmer begins to disappear. so we need a farm bill in place even if i.t. the current one -- even if it's the current one. the current one is insufficient to meeted needs of the disaster that is occurring in the incomes of farmers across the country. last week i think it was thursday -- thursday afternoon -- senator stabenow and i visited here on the senate floor. i point that direction over there. and we had a conversation and

senator stabenow indicates that she recognizes the challenge that farmers, the dire circumstances they are in today. subsequent to that i've met with and had conversations with senator boozman from oklahoma oklahoma, my colleague -- from arkansas, my colleague who is the ranking chairman on the committee. and with john hoeven, the ranking member on the ag appropriation subcommittee. i want all of us to work on a long-term extension and a shorter-term disaster assistance plan. those conversations have begun, and i am hopeful that before year's end, we've been able to do our work. sometimes i get complimented -- not very often, but sometimes i get complimented and when i do,

it's often for my efforts. and while i'm willing to do all the efforts that are necessary, in this case, efforts are woefully inadequate and results are critically important. mr. president, i look forward to my colleagues and i moving forward on farm bill legislation and disaster assistance short-term need that's being met, and i offer myself to work with republicans and democrats, rural and urban, to see that the we get those goals accomplished. the closing -- in closing, the current farm bill is not adequate to provide the relief or safety net of our nation's farmers, nor is it reflective of the current state of the farm economy. with financial pressures building across the agricultural industry and due to increased production costs and weakened market prices, the overall

financial situation of the farm economy is bleak. the status quo is unacceptable. we must pass a long-term farm bill this year, and we must also consider immediate relief for farmers with a supplement, and i look forward to working with my colleagues on the appropriations committee and the agricultural appropriations subcommittee of which i am a member and have been its chairman as we begin the appropriations process and find the solution so that it can be included in our work before year's end. our farmers deserve and need better, and in the absence of successful farmers, the places that many of us call home, the future is bleak. mr. president, i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time on the court nomination be considered expired at 2:30 p.m. today. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you.

mrs. britt: mr. president. the presiding officer: our wonderful senator from alabama. mrs. britt: thank you. mr. president, a truly amazing thing is schaaping in our nation right now. the sitting vice president is actually running for election by running from her record. after 35 months in office, she is promising change from her own administration. her day one was actually january 2021, but she's trying to convince the american people that things were going to be different this time around. and it's not just that she's promising change for our country. it's that she says she herself has seemingly changed overnight. just about every unpopular policy position imaginable that she has taken and been on the record supporting for years, well now that she's up for elections, she no longer believes those things.

let's just look at a sampling of policy positions that the vice president has held. let's start with energy and economic security. she supported enforcing an e.v. mandate that would take gas-powered vehicles off the road, ending offshore drilling, banning fracking, eliminating private health insurance, and raising taxes by trillions. but it doesn't stop there, and it just gets worse for public safety and border security. she supported decreasing funding for the police, abolishing ice, decriminalizing illegal border crossings, ending the detention of illegal border crossers, giving taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal border crossers, defending sanctuary city policies, vowing to block all border wall funding, and even

using taxpayer funds for gender transition services for illegal aliens and federal prisoners. these are some of the most radical positions it's possible to take. that's why she was ranked as the most far-left senator when she was a member of this body. now she is her party's nominee for president and she's her party's leader. again she claims she's changed some of her own policy positions. so today we're going to give her party and the chamber she leads an opportunity to prove whether that's true. to paraphrase the majority leader from his remarks yesterday, we are going to give our democratic colleagues another chance to show the american people where they stand. we'll start today with a few bills related to energy and

border security, and we can continue this every day the senate is in session moving forward. the american people will be watching and i luke forward to seeing -- and i look forward to seeing what happens today. we're going to go ahead and start with the wall act. last year i introduced the wall act. this legislation is common sense and with a clear aim. it would appropriate funding needed to finish actually building a barrier on our southern border. and and it would accomplish that without raising taxes and without adding to our national debt. for all of you in the gallery, we are $35 trillion in debt. that's not just fiscally irresponsible, that's morally irresponsible. and for the first time ever

would he paid more money on the interest on our national debt than we did for our national defense. you can look over time, and the moment that any nation does that it begins to become a nation in decline. so i wanted to make sure that we had something that had a commonsense approach, and through the wall act construction of a border wall would be funded by eliminating taxpayer-funded entitlements and tax benefits for illegal border crossers. the bill would also close loop else though allows illegal border crossers that receive benefits intended for sfits. this legislation would impose fines on those who illegally enter the united states or overstay their visas. in 2018 the joint committee on taxation skimented that the tax

components of this bill would save $33 billion over ten years. let's use these funds to build a border wall and to help keep americans safe. so today we're giving senate democrats a very clear choice. now watch what happens next very closely. let's see how they answer these questions. do they support building a border wall or will they block building a border wall? do they want to spend taxpayer funds on keeping american citizens and legal residents safe or do they want to keep those taxpayer funds funding illegal border crossers? where does vice president's party stand on these very different policy positions? well, we're about to find out. as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule 22, i ask

unanimous consent that the finance committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 332 and the senate proceed to an immediate consideration. i further ask that the bill be considered read for a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the president pro tempore. mrs. murray: mr. president, reserving the right to object. border patrol has very serious needs that actually need funding. namely, new technology. and we should focus on how we get those done in a bipartisan way. we have limited resources. we know a border wall is ineffective and has no impact on preventing cartels on bringing fentanyl into the country. i for one recommend we stop them

from bringing them through our ports of entry along the southwest border. there was a bipartisan proposal on border policy changes earlier this year, one that senate republicans strongly endorsed, one that was frankly more, probably more conservative than i would have be preferred. but instead of voting to so much as take it up for consideration, republicans decided then that instead they wanted to campaign on the border as they are attempting to do with this proposal. because one man, donald trump, told them kill the bill. trump told senate republicans he wanted to let a fire burn so he could campaign on the ashes, and senate republicans said yes, mr. trump. i think that history tells us how serious the effort before us today is. but just like when i built the bipartisan border funding bill with my ranking member, senator collins, i do look forward to working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle on comprehensive immigration reform

and serious solutions to the challenges we are facing at the border. the door is always open. today i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mrs. britt: mr. president, i see my colleague from oklahoma here and would love to have the opportunity to hear about his bill. the presiding officer: our friend from oklahoma. mr. mullin: thank you, and thank you, senator from alabama for doing this. i think it's very important that we understand what's happening in our economy right now with the energy issue and the energy crisis we find ourselves in. the bill that i bring forth today is protecting american

energy production act. it's real simple. it allows us to be energy independent. the backbone of our economy is energy. and if you have high energy costs, which we've had a 37% increase in energy underneath this current administration, you always are going to have inflation increase because energy is the backbone of our economy. you cannot make a product nor can you deliver the product without factoring in the cost of energy. with the 37% energy increase over the last four years, we have to bring back that resilience. we've got to bring back that energy independence. and the way we do that, as we understand real numbers, for instance, in 2019 fracking, which our current vice president has been on record saying that she wants to ban fracking, in

2019 fracking accounted for 63% of our total crude oil production and 75% of our natural gas supply. underneath the current administration we've seen a significant decline in fracking wells. and at the same time we haven't seen demand decrease. we've actually seen demand increase, which by the amount that has actually been taken away from oil or from american producers, now we've seen an increase in imports. not all of them are friends of ours. so the, as i said, the bill is very simple. protecting american energy production act. as if in legislation session and now with standing rule 22, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on energy and natural resources be discharged from further consideration of h.r.

1121 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. further, the bill to 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 objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: our senator from oregon. mr. merkley: reserving the right to object. my colleague, who i'm pleased to work with on a number of issues, has come to the floor with a unanimous consent request that would constrain the power of our president to protect our public lands. and so while we may dprae on a number of -- may agree on a number of things, and i hope that doesn't hurt his reputation back home, on this particular proposal, i do bring a different perspective. i think in my role working on the interior committee and understanding that the authority we have granted the president is so essential to making sure that

the lands that are publicly held remain a treasure for every single american. and it's not that long ago, well it seems like quite a few years now, maybe a decade, i attended a hearing in which a number of folks came forward to explain different damages that had occurred to the water table in their community from fracking. now in this case, my real concern here is about constraining the president's ability to protect our treasures, our public lands from these types of effects. i think americans who have traveled our national parks and our blm land and our forest service land understand that this is a responsibility that we in the senate take very seriously. but there's also a little bit

more to my concern here as well. one is that if we're going to tackle climate chaos, we have to have international cooperation. and if we continuously say we're going to reduce the ability of the united states to have policies and abilities to address our own production of fossils, then of course every other country is like, well, the united states and china are the biggest producers of climate gases, both methane known publicly as natural gas, and they have very large footprints, if they're not going to act why should we act. if we want to address this challenge and sustain international cooperation, we can't be consistently restricting the potential flexibility of our president. the third is that the climate

impact in my home state is very substantial. we have seen a loss of snowpack in the cascades that is devastating the water in late spring and early summer to our ranchers and farmers. our rural foundation, our rural pillar is our farming and our ranching. and when you constrain the water in our rivers because of the dropping snowpack, that's a big impact. and in addition, our water tables have been dropping that many farmers have depended on. in fact, we're investing heavily in piping our irrigation ditches at huge expense knowing how precious every drop of water is. so if we care about our rural areas, we have to take on climate chaos. and not just our farmers and ranchers. our foresters too, because we are seeing significant devastation to oregon's famous forests over drought and insect infestation with climate chaos.

of course it's not just oregon that's affected. every single state is affected. i was very concerned earlier this year, earlier this summer when i heard about the 115 to 120 degrees in a heat dome that passed over my colleagues' state and the impact that was having. i think every state has their effects that they're experiencing. so this is a big issue that we need to wrestle with. and this brings me to the fourth item mentioned about energy security. in the last four years, under the biden administration, we have become energy independent. there has been a vast increase in the production of oil and a vast increase in the production of gas. as a result, we are now the largest producer of oil and gas. and we are the largest exporter of gas. now here's kind of the interesting little piece here,

is that the goal of the gas industry is to export gas and raise prices on americans. so it's more expensive for americans to heat their homes and heat their water, but we could do the opposite. we could in fact say we're going to repeal the 2015 law that put us into the world market and created these massive exports and lower the price here in america for our families. that's a much better idea than raising the prices. let's lower the prices. in fact, here's the thing. let's start right now by ending our exports of oil and gas to china. now my colleagues just not so long ago advocated that we end any sale of the strategic petroleum reserve to china, with good reason. why should we lower their prices

and increase our prices? but that is true for the exports that are going of oil and gas as well. so let's stand together on both sides of the aisle. let's lower the price for american consumers and ban these exports to china. and for that reason, i've prepared just such a solution and an opportunity to have it embraced by my colleagues. and so i turn to the formality here that i ask the senator to modify his request, and that the merkley substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table so that we will have the ability to end these exports to china and lower the prices for american consumers. the presiding officer: is there objection to the modification? a senator: reserve the right to object.

. the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma. mr. mullin: while i understand my colleague from oregon, where he stands on this issue, there are just some factual things that need to checked on that. one, it said that we're the number-one exporter of gas. just not true. russia is the number-one exporter of gas. when they say that production has increased, that's actually not accurate either. could we have been the largest liquefied natural gas export? yes. that was until the permits or the pipelines to go to export terminals in louisiana was canceled which put a lot of our allies in europe in a situation where they had to go buy gas from a bad actor that's right now invading ukraine, called russia. our allies do not want to be dependent obviously on russia. they would love to have our gas.

and as far as being the number one seller to china with crude and refined products, it's not true again. at current rate, iran is the number one seller to china, and they are the ones that are buying it because the biden-harris administration being extremely weak on the sanctions that we put on iran under the trump administration which now iran is actually funding the houthis and hamas and terrorist organizations around the world. what we're saying is let us allies count on us. we have more reserves underneath our feet and we can make it cleaner than opec, than russia, than iran. our economy needs it. we're in a recession and no one is denying that. why should we depend on allowing

opec to set the world price for crude? why are we allowing them to set the price to become rich off our backs when we ourselves could easily do that in a much cleaner and efficient way. why are we still importing petroleum products from russia, why are we importing oil, which is a dirty crude from another place, when we have sweet crude that comes out of north dakota, pennsylvania, that comes out of texas that's a much easier product to refine and burns cleaner. there's no denying that. because the world's demand for fossil fuels is increasing, not decreasing. so why are we doing it at the cost of the american taxpayer and why are we hurting the hurt economy along the way. as far as the change my colleague from oregon wants to do, it's not necessary.

the change isn't there. this is trying to kill the bill. because the legislation that my colleague is trying to do that we already know the president has the authority to restrict oil and gas exports because he did exactly that earlier this year, which is why i brought up louisiana. all this does is deflect blame away from the biden-harris administration who has been very soft on sanctions with bad actors, as i mentioned iran, the majority of which are bought, as i mentioned before, by china. and as i mentioned before, this does nothing but enable iran, when they sell their product to sponsor the largest groups around the world operating in a terror organizations. the bill my colleague from oregon is raising today would do nothing to address the massive amount of russian oil flowing

into china and what republicans are trying to do here today is bolster american energy production by preventing this administration and other administrations from banning fracking, as i said the current vice president said in 2019 she was 100% for banning fracking across the united states. so, with that, i have to object to my colleague from oregon's legislation and changes to my current bill. the presiding officer: the objection to the modification is heard. is there objection to the original request? mr. merkley: mr. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: reserving the right to object. a couple of points. the first is that my -- my colleague mentioned that the bill i'm proposing would restrict our ability to support our yiels who count on -- allies who count on us. actually my bill is about

stopping the exports to china. they are not our ally last time i checked. we're in competition with them and these exports are making their life easier and their economy stronger and making things more expensive for us, if you want more available for yiels, let's -- allies, let's stop -- i realize we are doing this on short notice, but whether the u.s. has the largest exporter of natural gas last year. so i have in front of me the information from the energy information administration that produces all the stats on this and the headline is the united states was the largest liquefied natural gas exporter in 2023. now, a third point. outside north america, china is

the largest recipient of our gas. we are directing more gas to china, who we're in competition with, than any other nation. that's just a little bit crazy and i want to support our allies, i want to support our consumers at home who want lower prices, so i'm disappointed i didn't win over your support with my presentation, but given that i'd much prefer to have a bill that lowers prices rather than one endangers our public lands and raises prices for consumers, i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. mullin: my colleague is right about the lng, my colleague said natural gas. natural gas is different than shipping liquefied natural gas,

it is a small percentage of what is exported. once it's liquefied what is actually by far the biggest is the pipelines this administration approved which president trump put a hold on going into germany for the second time. so my -- my -- my original statement is true, russia is the largest export of natural gas. once again, this wasn't to do anything, as my colleague said talking about china. the export ban to which the administration put on the export of lng out of louisiana by canceling the permits, that affected europe, they are allies of ours. if this administration wanted to do something about china, they could do it right now by an executive order. last i checked, they still had

the authority to do so. so as i go back, my colleague from oregon changed the current bill modification does nothing, the current administration currently already has that authority. with that, i yield back. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: thank you, mr. president, very much. yeah, this -- this proposal really deserves to be objected to. you know, it really deserves an objection because what -- what we really have to say here is that we object to this bill as a ridiculous attack, republican attack on the authority of the executive branch. but we don't need to talk about how this bill would work. let's talk about why this bill -- is the bill that the republicans are pushing. are they lining up here to protest something worthy like

public health? no. are they demanding we deliver something meaningful like clean air or clean water? no. are they taking a stand for the future that worries moms and dads and parents and grandparents and neighbors who are asking us to fight for those things? no. so what are the republicans doing? they're protecting the profits of fossil fuel companies. they're delivering our doctors to oil and gas exporters. they're taking a stand against a clean, healthy sustainable future. what a track record. what a track record that they have. these companies are fracturing american lands to companies to export out of our country to the highest global bidder. they want to export this. and who takes the environmental

risks? well, the families who live nearby, who are going to be near these pipelines, and then the companies take it to the first port they can give it -- get it to and send it out of our country. do they want to keep it here to lower gas prices for the american consumer? absolutely not. they want to get it out on the open market on a ship because that's the highest bidder around the world, let them bid for it. if they said, let's lower the price of natural gas in the united states, that's one thing, that's not what it is about. it's about export. get the oil and gas out of our country and get the highest price in the world. they're putting wells filled with toxic chemicals next to schools, your homes, your day cares, your hospitals. also they can ship tankers

filled with natural gas to china. or any other country that's the highest bidder. that's what this is all about, ladies and gentlemen. it's not about lowering the price of natural gas or oil for american consumers. it's about oil company executives getting higher profits for themselves. the united states exported a record-shattering amount of natural gas in 2023, more than 10% higher than in 2022, we export more liquefied gas in 2024, what do we get while big oil and house republicans say this these exports are good for the economy, soaring lng exports actually costs big bucks with americans spending $111 billion

more on natural gas as exports soared from 2021 to 2022. while many justify the rapid natural gas export build-out as critical for european energy security, the reality is that european gas demand is not only already met, it's declining. so we're not using this frac gas here in the u.s., we're not benefiting from exports of this frac gas. in fact, it raises prices at home as we export the oil, as we export the gas. if we kept it here, it would put pressure on the price of natural gas and oil here in the united states. but they don't keep it here. they put it on ships to send it around the world. this frac gas is of a reason that prices are going up in the united states, and our allies

aren't demanding a surge in frac gas. so who benefits from this fight for frac gas? 2023 alone the 15 biggest oil and gas companies made more than $172 billion in property. -- profit. that comes out of budget for food, electric, and other things. gas companies and oil companies are running the same old-fashioned playbook for their dinosaur products, fossils, drill and shil their fuels, and as we start moving toward clean energy, these fossil fuel companies are trying to get others hooked and export products to keep prices high at home. so that's a crazy economic strategic for the united states.

building export terminals to take our own oil and gas that should be here and lowering the price for consumers for our businesses, for our homeowners, for our commercial sector. but no, they say put it on the open market around the world and leave it less of it here for american consumers. so just as we can track earthquakes in states that have large fracking and be able to see that that's happening, we can track this fracking defense bill to the companies that will benefit from it. this bill does nothing to protect americans' health or the communities or even their budgets. it protects fossil fuel companies from having to answer for their actions and pay for their profiteering. and for that reason, i stand in support of senator merkley's objection to this because this is not a policy which we should

allow to go permanently unaddressed in our country. it's time we have the big debate about the impact exporting our oil and gas has upon domestic prices. you can't have it both ways. you can't say this is good for america because we're exporting it and not understand that the less that we have here is to lower the pressure is to lower the prices for ordinary americans. when you look at all the polling and it says people are concerned about high energy prices, people are concerned about our economy, what's at the center of it? what's at the center of it is oil and gas and high prices. and what this proposal does is say keep it going. send it to chinaing. send it -- china. send it to other countries around the world. in the same way we're importing lower-priced chinese goods, we're going to be sending them more materials to allow them to

be more dominant as an economic power. i support senator merkley's objection. and i hope that we actually come to the day where we have a full blown debate here on the senate floor on the impact this export of oil and gas, this impact of fracced materials with chemicals in the soil of our country have upon the totality of our economic, environmental, and environmental justice issues in our society. and with that, madam president, i yield. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mrs. britt: i would like to give my distinguished colleague from oklahoma a chance to respond. prior to that, i ask unanimous consent that jackson floi luvern, an intern in my office be granted floor privileges until september 19, 2024. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. britt: thank you.

a senator: thank you so much. it's interesting to me that my colleague from massachusetts is lecturing when massachusetts has the highest cost of energy to heat their homes in the nation. when he starts calling fracking a dinosaur technology, when the last time i checked, boston had one-of-the collect ive largest group of individuals heating their homes off heating oil and propane. mr. mullin: it creates an opportunity to bring down energy costs which is why oklahoma on the other hand which embraces fracking and embraces pipelines has the lowest energy cost on average around the country. so if we really want to talk about bringing down cost for consumer, let's look at a model that works instead of having someone lecture us from a state

that their model doesn't work. we can build infrastructure. we'd love to build pipelines in massachusetts, but they block them. the infrastructure would be awesome. i know there's a tremendous amount of companies that would love to supply natural gas to massachusetts. in fact, there's a pipeline right now ready to go that's been blocked. so let's have some serious conversations, not just lay blame and call ceo's bad names and give false opinions that they're just wanting to export. this does nothing about exporting. this is talking about becoming energy independent so we don't have to import oil. we don't have to import refined products. this is about becoming energy independent so we can bring down energy costs. as i said earlier, the current policy that we are operating under with the biden-harris

energy has brought up energy costs up by 37% which is directly affecting every single american's pocketbook today, right now as we speak. that's why every single american out there is paying $1,085 more per month and their household bills and grocery bills than they were four years ago. which if you think about that, that's over $13,000 a year directly reflecting our current energy policy. this does exactly what it's supposed to do, help bring down the energy cost and inflation will follow. it's not hard math. it's common sense. with that i yield back. mrs. britt: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mrs. britt: i could not agree more with my distinguished colleague from oklahoma. it is important that we're not only energy independent but that we are energy dominant.

the truth is we do it better, cleaner, and more efficiently than anyone. and we know the cost of energy affects everything, from whether you're at the gas pump to heating and cooling your home, to the prices you see at the grocery store. at the end of the day, the american people are hurting. they're hurting under the policies of this administration. we have now seen the vice president as a presidential candidate say all of a sudden she's okay with fracking. today we saw that her party doesn't stand behind her. i'd like to hear what my distinguished colleague from utah has to say about another opportunity we've seen in front of us where candidate harris is very different than the woman that we have seen serve. mr. lee: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: madam president, i appreciate my friend and colleague, the senator from alabama, for leading this discussion today. this is an important one to

have. i'm honored to be here to be part of it. you know, the situation at the border, across our southern border, is by any standard a humanitarian crisis and nothing short of that. vice president kamala harris appointed by president biden as his border czar publicly declared that she would focus as border czar on addressing the root causes of immigration. however, now that kamala harris is the democrats' nome for the press -- nominee for the presidency. she and the legacy media want to pretend that was never the case. axios even reported that vice president kamala harris never actually had -- it's a direct quote -- never actually had the title of border czar. that's funny because it's a claim that contradicts the reporting that we've seen from axios itself on this. in fact, we can see that right here in this chart. on april 14, 2021, axios

reported that, quote, harris who had been appointed by president biden as border czar said she would be looking for the root causes that drive immigration. moreover, a tweet from her official twitter handle further emphasized her role. quote, at potus asked me to lead our diplomatic work with mexico, el salvador, guatemala, and honduras. to address the situation at the southern border, we have to address the root causes of migration. it won't be easy work, but it's necessary. i agree. it's necessary. she took on this role. she acknowledged the role and she failed. since biden and harris' inauguration a little more than three and a half years ago, over ten million undocumented immigrants have entered the united states and have done so

illegally. this figure exceeds the population of 36 states, meaning the overwhelming majority of our states, 36 out of 50 have populations smaller than the total number of persons entering the united states illegally on the watch of border czar vice president kamala harris. thus creating a crisis that has been met with troubling combination of silence and inaction from this administration. the executive branch of government responsible for enforcing our border laws and the border itself. now, if the biden-harris administration were serious about addressing the crisis at the border and addressing the issue and ensuring in the process that real victims of government persecution in other countries would receive asylum here, then they would support

reforming our broken asylum process. sadly they're not. we're still encountering over 100,000 illegal immigrants at our southern border each month. now, since president biden took office, there have been almost ten million illegal immigrant encounters nationwide. keep in mind this doesn't reflect the sum total of those who have crossed into our country. these are just the documented immigrant encounters throughout the country. so there are more than that. that's a sub set of the total -- subset of the total flow of illegal immigration. over 360 individuals on the terrorist watch list have been stopped while trying to cross the southern border. and shockingly, madam president, 27,583 communist chinese nationals have been encountered at the southwest border in the last year alone.

that's a lot of people. and china is not close to the united states. by any metric, the biden-harris administration has shown no interest in securing our border. in fact, the data suggests this administration wants as many illegal immigrants to enter this country as possible. my democrat colleagues want to pretend that republicans are somehow responsible for this crisis. why? well, it's obvious why. they don't want to own it given that their party owns the crisis as their party is running the administration and is responsible for making decisions that has allowed this in. what argument do they use in order to blame republicans who are not in control of the administration, do not occupy the white house, or control the majority in this chamber? what's their argument as to why we as republicans are to blame? well, it's because we were unwilling to pass a bad immigration bill that would have normalized thousands of illegal

entries across our southern border each month. and particularly in the hands of the biden administration could have and inevitably would have made the situation much worse. so today i'm offering a smaller bill, a narrower bill, a more focused bill that would help alleviate the crisis by closing loopholes in the law. these would be helpful. they are not necessarily things that represent a complete loophole such that president biden would be powerless to enforce the border without them. but they would make it harder for president biden to justify the massive loopholes that he has manipulated. this isn't the entire answer. this bill wouldn't necessarily solve the whole problem, but if my democratic colleagues can't agree that these common sejs re -- commonsense reforms need to be adopted then how can we take their concern about the border crisis seriously some my bill, the stopping border surges act

would address loopholes in our immigration laws which have helped create some of the perverse incentives for illegal immigration. they've made it easier for the biden administration to facilitate this flow of ten million illegal immigrants into our country over the last three and a half years. the bill would clarify that an adult cannot bring a child into this country expecting that child to be his or her ticket to avoid detention. this would help eliminate the disturbing practice of what sometimes referred to by the border patrol as the practice of recycling children and babies by coyotes and cartels. people will bring in a child and sometimes that same child will be brought in under similar circumstances over and over and over again as the ticket into the united states, the ticket thus making it less likely that they'll be detained and ultimately deported. it allows all unaccompanied children to be returned to their home countries, thus ending the

incentive for the parents to send their young children here alone leaving them vulnerable to abuse. sadly, we see what's happening to those children under the supervision of the biden-harris administration, and secretary mayorkas. they're trafficked either into child savory, sex clavery, or as drug mules -- slavery or as drug mules. my bill would require that the department of health and human services provide dhs with biographical information about the persons to whom children are being released so that they know something about them rather than just this is the person to whom you're going to release the child. it also require -- it would also require asylum seekers to apply for and be denied asylum in at least one safe country on their route from their country of origin to the united states. it would combat the biden-harris administration's obliteration of the credible fear standard by

heightening the burden of proof. the correct application of this standard is pivotal to the operation of our asylum system and making sure that it's there for those who need it and not subject to rampant abuse by those not eligible for it. it's been corruptive over the years but this administration has destroyed it entirely manipulating it to the point where it's now beyond recognition. we must fix it. it's sad that we have to fix it but we have to fix it in large part because it's been so distorted and abused by this administration. profiting international drug cartels to the tune of tens of billions of dollars a year, leaving a huge, huge wake of human suffering in its path. it would close loopholes and restrict asylum to aliens who present themselves at an official point of entry. we must eliminate these loopholes and not allow the bin-