provisions, it depends on when those are enacted. if they are enacted for 26, that's when the investment will happen. if you get the trump timing, you can have economic benefits this year. in terms of overall economic performance, my concern is that there are other fiscal tax and trade policies that are going on at the same time that are going to be subtracting from gdp. so that's going to weigh against anything that comes out sooner. but like also, the last thing i will say is that i would hope that congress takes a close look at the tariffs in the trade policy that the administration is enacting and ask themselves whether they think that the president has just the right amount of power to enact tariffs or maybe a little too much power to enact tariffs for various reasons. >> i an article one guy.

>> i am in article one got sought got my answer down pat on that one. that wasn't the subject of this one but thank you tha. so please join into thanking tile for a great conversation. [applause] >> live now to the u.s. capitol with the senate is about to gavel in on this monday afternoon. at 5:30 p.m. eastern lawmakers are expected to vote to confirm lori chavez-deremer for labor secretary. live coverage of the sin is here on c-span2. -- of the senate is here on c-span2. senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. black, will open the senate with prayer.

the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, you are the ancient of days, yet the ever-new god. thank you for your mercy and faithfulness. as the dew refreshes the earth, so you restore us each day to newness of life. sustain our lawmakers in their work. give them guidance and inspiration to focus on issues that truly matter. provide them the wisdom to meet needs, solve problems, and lift burdens. may the talents possessed by the members of this

legislative body help in the awesome task of making our nation and world better. lord, to those who are given the responsibility of seeking the ways of peace, empower them with creative stamina equal to this difficult task. we pray in your amazing name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in the recitation of the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the president pro tempore: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report read. the clerk: nomination, department of labor, lori chavez-deremer of oregon to be secretary.

the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: for my colleagues who are protectionists, i think that when it comes to the issue

of trade, we need less of peter navarro and more of adam smith. i think the certainty that comes with trade policy will benefit our economy the most. hopefully we don't have a government shutdown this week. i want my colleagues to remember that it costs money to shut down the government, costs money to open the government up. there's even some money being wasted this week as bureaucrats plan for a possible shutdown. and the government is supposed to be servicing the american people, and you can't serve the american people if government is not functioning. i would also like to address my colleagues to remind them of the genocide of the 1990's in the western balkan region of the

world and of the peace accords of 1995 that brought an end to that genocide. for years the leaders of the serve entity within the country of bosnia, mr. dotick i think it's pronounce ed pronounced --t there was a war and a genocide in the 1990's because of people like him acting like he is now. he has a predecessor serving life in prison for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. many bosnians who suffered from that terrible ethnic violence came to iowa for protection and

have enriched our state and nation. many of these iowans have friends and family still in bosnia. i spoke to some of them last friday about an escalating crisis with frightening echoes of the great violence of the 1990's. mr. dodik was sentenced by a boss bosnian for unconstitutional actions that reject the authority of bosnian state institutions. so rather than stop, he chose to double down. the bosnian serb has now passed and ifrp mandated laws for the functioning of bosnian state level security and judicial institutions in that area. provincial institutions there

have been ordered to use force to stop and prevent the lawful actions and operations of a bosnian state. bosnians who are loyal to their country or who these ethnic separatists do not consider serbs, those people are at risk, including family members of my fellow iowans. this concerns me greatly. now, the united states through secretary rubio is taking some action making it clear that it is also of great concern to the trump administration. western balkans stability has been a u.s. priority across administrations. clinton, bush, obama, trump one, biden, and now trump again.

i'm following this situation very closely. america is also watching who in the region is supporting stability and who is backing the return to ethnic separatism and the possible genocide that could once again happen. remember it didn't end well for those same people in the 1990's. i will work with the trump administration to make sure that we keep up the pressure on m mr. dodik and his allies to stop and respect the dayton peace accords that ended this violence in 1995. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

♪♪ ♪♪ [cheering] [cheering] as i look across this room, i

have this was in question. how are you doing tonight? [cheering] >> it hasn't been, thank you for being so patient with me even when i was stressed, traveling too much and couldn't think about anything other than work but please know in the most difficult times, you've inspired me, you gave me courage, you reminded me i should focus on what's really important and not just words urgent. being prime minister has been the honor of my life. i'm so looking forward to be devoting myself to the most

important. i love you above all. [cheering] >> i can imagine you are all expecting me to stand up and talk about all we become. don't get me wrong, i am so proud of what we have done for the middle class but tonight is about our future. i know we often get criticized for not taking a victory lap after we get something big done. we do something to the big and then we move to the next challenge because us progressives, as liberals, we

know what we are to do so it is important to take the time to reflect and share the things but not tonight. not tonight because when liberals gather, we are focused on just one thing. the work that still needs to be done to build the country. [cheering] that is a lifetime for each one of us. it's very simple. liberals are dedicated to making this country even better. we have an opportunity and therefore we have the responsibility is days the best

country on earth. [cheering] past ten years have been challenging. crisis after crisis but through every crisis canadians have shown who they are. we've set up for each other and every single time, we emerge even stronger. [cheering] now, as canadians face our neighbor and exit central challenge, and economic crisis, canadians are showing exactly what we are made of. [cheering]

canadians show what it means not by defining ourselves by who we are not but probably embracing who we are. [cheering] we are a country that is standing up for everyone's fundamental rights as the only way to protect our country. [cheering] we are a country that believes no one should be left behind and a real shot at success. [cheering] we are a country that refuses to accept the false choice between

a healthy environment. we are a country that embraces and an indigenous people, the only path for shared prosperous future. [cheering] >> is would protect its heritage, we are heard across the world. [cheering] >> we are a country that celebrates diversity and strength from differences. [cheering] >> when you are country that celebrates the right of each and every person to be who they want to be and pray as they walked pray and love who they love.

[cheering] we are a country that will always defend a woman's right to choose. [cheering] we are a country that will be diplomatic and but we must elbows up. [cheering]

>> here in this room and follow liberals, you know all about fighting, determination and the going gets tough. you remember where we were 15 years ago 35 feet in the house. ups and downs and all those times people counted us out in our party on its last breath like all canadians call us out and we show our true side.

>> 2019 and 2021. in the rain, in the freezing cold in the middle of the pandemic, a country and you changed for the better. [cheering] our party is more than just a name, a leader. it's all about you will carry the hopes of canadians day in and day out. it is a vision built gradually day after day, friends and

neighbors and for all of those who have built this vision together. i think about my first volunteers, those weapons and sister and so many others, grocery stores and rally the movement and every step of the way the extraordinary site and the unstoppable efforts. [cheering]

>> has a look at you in the room, no speeches enough to thank you all. i can't even offer you a well-deserved break because once again, we need you. you country needs you may be more than ever and i have no doubt you will answer the call because it difficult for. liberals will meet this moment. [cheering] make no mistake, this is a nation defining moment.

democracy is not a given. even canada is not given. none of them will continue without effort. it takes courage, it takes sacrifice, it takes hope and hard work. [cheering] sixty years ago prime minister lester the canadians had, there was much debated at the time but knew well what we do now -- hour flight would serve as a unifying symbol and the next chapters in

our national story. sixty years later there are still so many more chapters to write. i can tell you the world is looking to see what canadians will do. [cheering] let us not dwell on the things we've achieved the past ten years and aspire to achieve even more call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, last week, the "washington examiner" published an article highlighting democrats' third, third filibuster of this new congress. that's right, you heard it, third. the party that mere months ago literally was gleefully making plans to destroy the filibuster

is now using the filibuster left and right. but as we know, for democrats, it's one rule for me, another for thee. as the "washington examiner" piece made clear, some democrats are even embracing their hypocrisy. you use the rules that exist, one democrat said. i might advocate for a higher speed limit, but i still observe the speed limit, until it's changed. well, okay, mr. president, but the democrats -- but are democrats still crew saiding to abol -- crusading to abolish the filibuster while republicans are in charge? the answer is -- of course not. because abolishing the filibuster isn't about principle for democrats. it's about political advantage. so democrats will unashamedly support different rules depending who is in charge. now, mr. president, i could spend my whole time today talking about democrats' rank

hypocrisy when it comes to the filibuster. but i would also like to talk about the content of the bills that they filibustered and what that says about the democrat party. mr. president, a few short weeks of this new congress, democrats have filibustered three bills -- the born-alive abortion survivors protection act, the illegitimate court counteraction act, otherwise known as the icc sanctions bill, and the protection of women and girls sports act. the born alive survivors protection act was a simple bill, that stated that a baby born alive after attempted abortion must get the aim attention and medical care any other newborn would be given. that's it. you would assume such a bill would be entirely uncontroversial. democrats may not believe in protecting unborn human beings, but surely, surely they still

believe in protecting born human beings. but as it turns out, protecting born human, at least when they're born alive after an abortion, is not on the democrats' priority list. in fact, every democrat in the senate, every democrat, without exception, voted against this bill. i'm afraid the sad truth, mr. president, is the democrats are so deeply concerned with preserving the supposed right to kill unborn babies, they couldn't bring themselves to protect born babies. for fear that it would eventually lead to recognizing the humanity of the unborn. all i can say, mr. president is that a party so committed to killing unborn babies, that it can't vote to protect born babies, is nothing short of morally bankrupt. so that was the first bill that democrats filibustered. the next was the icc sanctions bill, and that was another

straightforward bill, mr. president. it would have sanctioned foreign individuals who are involved in international criminal court efforts to investigate, arrest, or prosecute u.s. citizens or citizens of u.s. allies that are not party to the icc, or the international criminal court. the bill was a response to the icc's decision to pursue warrants for israeli officials. it was also designed to protect americans, and american soldiers in particular, who've been targeted by the icc in the past. once again, senate democrats, with one lone exception, found themselves incapable of taking a stand. now, i'm not sure if it was anti-israel animus or they were afraid of antagonizing the anti-israel wing of their party or they're simply too buy holden to -- too beholden to big tech.

but for whatever reason, democrats filibustered the bill. in doing so, they not only failed to rebuke the icc for its illegitimate targeting of israeli leaders, but failed to protect u.s. citizens. mr. president, the third bill the democrats filibustered, and filibustered just this past week i might add, was the protection of women and girls in sports act. this legislation was designed to restore the original tenet of title 9, which is giving women equal opportunities in education by ensuring women and girls, and women and girls only, are permitted to play in women's sports at federally funded educational institutions. the bill is a response to biological basis being allowed to play in girls' sports. this last august a report from

the united nations on violence against women and girls, and it noted, and i quote, the replacement of the female sports category with a mixed-sex category has resulted in an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities, including medals, when competing against males. according to information received by march 30 of 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports, end quote. over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports. that is a quote, mr. president, out of united nations report on violence against women and girls coming in august of last year. mr. president, it's not even remotely fair. girls should not be having to

compete in races that are stacked against them. women deserve their own athletic opportunities, opportunities that are not taken away from them by biological males who have their own spaces in which to compete. but try explaining that to democrats. democrats like to portray themselves as leading the charge on women's issues, but not one democrat -- not one -- could bring himself or herself to vote in support of women and girls. biological males, not women, got democrat support last monday. well, apparently democrats' commitment to equal opportunity for women only runs so deep. and quickly falls by the wayside when the left demands adherence to some new ideology. mr. president, the outcome of the 2024 presidential election was partially a rebuke of

far-left dogmas and ideologies. apparently democrats have learned nothing from that electoral rebuke. today, mr. president, the supposed party of the little guy you the underdog, the disadvantaged has become a party willing to sacrifice born human beings to abortion extremism and quality for women and girls on the altar of transgender ideology. i have to say, mr. president, it is no wonder that the american people rejected them in november of 2024. 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. alsobrooks.

[laughter] this room is strong. [cheering] this room is canada strong. [cheering] thank you our children leo.

[cheering] [cheering] like the prime minister, without your example, i wouldn't have this. [cheering] [cheering and applauding] without your love, i wouldn't have the strength i need to love my country. [cheering] [cheering] >> you still know how to energize the liberal party supporters like no one else can do it. [cheering]

you took courageous decisions and showed allies that canada will always stand up for what is just and fair. >> you are a source of inspiration. >> you inspire my family to become liberal putting my father who ran as a liberal candidate in the 1980s. [cheering] some elections are tougher than others. [cheering] [cheering]

no. [cheering] prime minister trudeau, my time doesn't permit me to recognize all of your accomplishments. you have combined strength and compassion every day as a fighter canada. [cheering] you have led us through some of the hardest challenges this nation has ever faced. [cheering] >> at the same time you have transformed canada. you lifted hundreds of thousands of kids out of poverty.

[cheering] moving reconciliation forward and defending freedom and democracy here across the world. [cheering] >> i think i'm speaking for everyone here when i thank you for your hard work. for your leadership and for your service to our great country. [cheering] i'd also like to thank you, liberals with the greatest honor possible which is serving as

your new leader. thank you. [cheering and applauding] i'd like to thank the tens of thousands of volunteers across the country who have devoted themselves to rebuilding our country and giving hope to our country. >> i pledge to you and all canadians that i will follow their example. i will work day and night with one purpose, to build a stronger canada for everyone. [cheering] [laughter] but i will need help. i will need a lot of help. i'd like to thank frank and karina for your energy and ideas

and leadership you have brought to this campaign. [cheering] i would like to thank those ministers who remained to serve cannot directly. [cheering] and the incredible group of liberals, you are the voices for your community. thank you. [cheering] to give a sense of service, i'm going to quote from a message

from karina and frank, the four of us received from bob. bob, full disclosure, so -- full disclosure. i just want to get this on the table. [cheering] bob goes to my church. actually, i go to bob's church. he goes a lot more frequently. the four candidates, he said right now, everyone sees the main threat as the trump tariffs but the far greater challenge will be as it always has been, foster unity and a sense of good. those who will seek power by dividing us -- will get to that later on.

[laughter] we, the people of canada, we need you, fellow candidates and myself, continued the position of leadership to unite canada. [cheering] a commitment to common good and rule of law throughout the world. i quote law because all canadians are being asked to serve in their own ways. we are all being called to stand up for each other and the canadian way of life. who's ready? [cheering] who's ready to stand up with me? [cheering] one 100%. yes canada.

the liberal party is united and strong and ready to fight and build and even better country. [cheering] i feel like everything in my life has helped prepare me for this moment. two months ago i put up my hand to run for leader because i felt we needed big changes. big changes guided by strong canadian values. i learned at the dinner table for my parents and three siblings, values i learned in the hockey rink's from mike coaches. my parents were teachers and

they stressed the importance of hard work of community and tolerance. mike coaches were dedicated volunteers and taught me the importance of teamwork and mission and because it's canada -- humility. [cheering] >> the right values, canadian values, i took them with me to university and kept them close to me when i was called upon to manage crises and they have guided me in my work to build stronger economies and today i will use the values again as we face this crisis. >> new threats demand new ideas and a new plan.

new challenges demand new leadership. canadians fought positive leadership and help us hold together. [cheering] by government will put into action a plan to build a stronger economy and trading relationships with reliable trading partners. [cheering] >> to be clear, this will require exchange and i know canadians are ready. people want change because they are concerned about the cost of

living. they are worried about the future canada and trump that in more divided dangerous world. >> i am a pragmatist of all so when i see something not working, i will change it. my government will immediately eliminate small and medium-sized and they should be rewarded when they succeed. [cheering]

canada needs more of this type of change. change that puts more money in people's pockets. change that makes our companies more competitive. [cheering] there's someone trying to weaken our economy. donald trump. donald trump, as we know, has put the prime minister unjustified tariffs on what we build and what we sell and how we make a living. he's attacking canadian families, workers and businesses

and we cannot let him succeed. [cheering] we won't. i am proud of the response of canadians making their voices heard and their wallets felt. [cheering] i'm grateful for how our preferences are stepping up to the fight because when we are united, we are canada strong. [cheering] the canadian government has rightly retaliated with our own tariffs that will have maximum impact in the united states and minimum impact here in canada. my government will keep tariffs on until americans show respect. [cheering]

and until he can join us and make reliable commitments free and fair trade. [cheering] and we will ensure proceeds protect our workers. [cheering] >> the americans want our resources, water, land, our country even. never. think about it for a moment. it will destroy our way of life.

>> our water, our land. if they succeed, they would destroy our way of life. and america, healthcare is a business. in canada it is a right. [cheering] america is a melting pot. >> in the u.s., differences are not respected or recognized. the french language would never

have any rights and as part of our identity. we must protect that and remove the. will never give them up for any trade agreements. [cheering] >> canada, america is not canada and canada will never ever be part of america in any way, shape or form. [cheering]

we didn't ask for this fight. the canadians are always ready. [cheering] they should make no mistake, canada will win. [cheering] >> to americans, i say to you, we will when. [cheering] >> victory won't be easy. we are facing the greatest crisis of our lifetime. we have to do extraordinary things and we have to build things would never imagine we have to do. at a pace with never believed

possible. we must place people above money. [cheering] we have to unite to build the youngest, fairest and freest country in the world. [cheering] >> now donald trump is trying to weaken our economy but there is no one else who if he succeeds, will weaken our economy. just doesn't get it. he is the type of lifelong politician and i've seen this type around the world, lifelong politician who worships at the altar of the free market despite never having made a payroll

himself. [cheering] now the base of president trump threats he still refuses to get security clearance at a time when national security is under threat like it's never been before. at the time of immense economic insecurity, he'd undermine the bank of canada. [cheering] >> the shutting down of at a time when information of foreign interference around the march and they ignore the nation's

when it's time to build to put an end to democracy human rights are across the world and will also allow. >> would let our planet burn. [booing] this is not leadership. it's ideology that betrays what we as canadians value. each other. it is an ideology that represents a fundamental misunderstanding of how the economy works. unlike pr quality of, i know how the world works. i know how it can be made to work better for all of us.

that knowledge is especially useful now in the service of canadians when we must build a new economy create new trading relationships. [cheering] let me tell you something else that we know that he doesn't. we know markets don't have values. people do we know as liberals, it is our job to make the economy work for all. [cheering] ...

they will deliver enormous wealth for the lucky few in hard time for the rest. [applause] and, in this crisis, we must help those who are hit hardest

by the american tariffs. while we rebuild our strength here at home. that is the right thing to do. that is the fair thing to do. that is the canadian thing to do that is what makes us strong. [cheering and applause] so donald trump for weakening us to divide and conquer. the plan will leave us divided and ready to be conquered. kneeling before him not stand up to him.

they are not solutions the division is in strength. division will not win a trade war. division won't bring down the price of groceries, division won't make canada stronger. this is where anger takes us. half of the u.s. fears the other half though weary of each other. we cannot allow such a situation to occur here in canada. [cheering and applause] the americans are increasingly divided when it comes to canada,

we are all on the same side. canada strong. [cheering and applause] now, i've learned a few things from long experience in crises and the first is that the plan beats no plan. you need to distinguish what you can change from what you can't. we cannot change donald trump. [speaking in native tongue] but we have to understand what we can and must change. we are masters in our own house. >> and we can and because we are masters in our own homes, we can control our economic destiny with a plan that puts more money in your pocket. a plan that will ensure your government spends less so that

canada can invest more. a plan to build millions of homes. a plan that makes us an energy superpower and both clean and conventional energy. a plan that creates new trade core doors with reliable partners. a plan that creates one economy, not 13. because we are stronger when we are united. we can give ourselves far, far more than donald trump can ever take away. [cheering and applause] but it will take extraordinary effort. it will not be business as usual we will have to do things we

have not imagined before at speeds we did not think possible so that everyone benefits. [cheering and applause] i do care about the economy. it is not because i am an economist. it is because i care about people. that is why i am a liberal. that is why we are liberals. [cheering and applause] >> it is clear that the value of our strong economy starts with the workers to have a good well-paying jobs today and to have a better future for them and for today's youth. we know was liberals that we come to redistribute what we do not have. we also know that we cannot be

strong abroad if we are weak at home. we also know that we cannot build a better future if we are unable to manage the present. >> so we need a strong economy. when we are fighting for a strong economy, we are fighting for good canadian healthcare for everyone. we are fighting for strong support for our seniors who built this country. we are fighting for child care for young families. we are fighting for dental care and pharma care for everyone that needs it. [cheering and applause] we are fighting for rights. we are fighting for a strong economy so we can trade a more sustainable world for our children and grandchildren.

[cheering and applause] and we will deliver. [cheering and applause] i know. i know that these are dark days. dark days brought on by a country we can no longer trust. we are getting over the shock, but let us never forget the lesson. we have to look after ourselves. and we have to look out for each other. [cheering and applause] we need to pull together in the tough days ahead. and, so, the families watching this evening in fort smith and

across every community in canada , i promise you this. together, we can and we will get through this crisis. [cheering and applause] we can and we will come out stronger than ever. [applause] and we will because canada is built on the strengths of its people. from our minds to our reports to our logging roads to our city streets, we are strongest when we are united, when we are one economy, not 13, monique and cheer for different teams and still be on one team when it counts. when we come together, we build things that last because we are canada strong. [cheering and applause]

♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪

quorum call:

with the draft budget cr that would immediately have the effect of cutting $1 billion out of our local budget. what is happening. in the most recent continuing resolution language, it ignores our already congressionally approved fiscal 2025 budget. instead, it would take us that fy 2024 levels. the level that the federal agencies are because they do not have an approved budget. but we are not a federal agency. we are a city, county state all at once and we provide direct services to the people of the

district of columbia, visitors to the district of columbia, visitors to the district of columbia and heads of state. everyone who works here in the congress. our budget was balanced and approved and if we go back to fiscal 2024 levels, we would be forced to reduce spending by $1.1 billion in only six months. here is why we are here today because congress can fix this. they can fix this problem that we have brought to the attention and draft cr. they can add the language back to the resolution, the same language it has been therefore to continuing resolutions. locally generated revenue according to the budget and

timeline. i want to localize a part of that statement. spending its own money just like every other state. the budget we are talking about, the approved budget introduced by me and approved by this council, it focuses on three main areas. safety education and economic growth. repping those investments will not be good for d.c. or our country. this is not just about us. certainly, we are concerned about the 700,000 taxpaying. i want americans across the country that we are proud of our city. if we were estate, last year we would have been the fastest improving state in the nation.

we have 28 balanced budgets. we have increased visitation. people from around the world broke a record last year and we have driven down the lowest levels in 30 years. actually, this is a good time to visit the district because soon we have trade blossoms as well. this action, let me be clear, if the congress goes through with this action, we will work a priority that president trump and i share. and that is to make washington, d.c. the best most beautiful city in the world did and we want to work with our partners in the federal government to ensure that d.c. always represents the strength and prosperity of this country. i am pleased now to introduce our congresswoman who always works with our colleagues to make sure that any anomalies are

addressed. congresswoman norton. [applause] fema thank you, mary. house republicans release the text of a continued resolution this weekend that is nothing less and fiscal sabotage of d.c. it is the latest low in an escalating war on d.c. residents and a limited home rule d.c. currently possesses. the cro omitted a long-standing provision that would allow d.c. to continue spending it local fiscal year 2025 budget and instead treat d.c. as a federal agency, forcing the district to

revert to spending at fiscal year 2024 levels for the remainder of the year. if enacted, the cr would result in a projected cut of $1 billion which would force dramatic reductions in essential services the city provides, including d.c. police, ems and school spirit it is contrary to the state republican goal of improving public safety law and order in the nation's capital and what in fact have the opposite effect. d.c. has not been treated as a federal agency for funding and more than 20 years. precisely because republicans of a different generation

recognized the disastrous effect that this causes. congress should keep its hands off of d.c. d.c. is not a federal agency. the omissions constitute a dramatic escalation in the republican efforts to undermine what small measure of democracy in metonymy the more than 700,000 residents at the nation counsel currently have. introducing bills in both chambers of congress to row pool -- repeal the home rule act which aims to abolish d.c. counsel, the d.c. council and mayor's office leaving d.c. to depend on members of congress elected by the jurisdictions to run the districts. the revolutionary war was fought to give consent to the governor

and end taxation without representation. republican efforts towards the federal government take over d.c. run counter to this district. d.c. population is larger than that of two states. the federal taxes per capita than any state and or than 21 states overall. d.c. residents have thawed and died of all the nations wars. we deserve statehood. the only measure that would bring d.c. quality and the states and full protection d.c. -- and fully protect d.c. residents from this type of disastrous congressional interference. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, congresswoman norton had i would like to

introduce now the chairman of the council of the district of columbia phil mickelson. [applause] >> thank you, mayor bowser. good afternoon. i do want to introduce my colleagues who are here. we are all here because we are making a point that the district of columbia government is unified and unified in concern and opposition to the language that is or is not in this continuing resolution adversely affecting the district. i am joined by my colleagues, zachary parker, charles allen, anita bonds, kevin mcduffie, christina henderson and robert white. there is one member missing because she is out of town. we are deeply concerned about the language that was released in the continuing resolution because of its adverse effect on the district.

the mayor made the point that we would have to cut about $1 million. we would have a half a year to cut that one year savings. the difference between fiscal year 2024 and 2025. what does that mean, why am i saying that? we would have to cut $2 billion and the remaining six months to achieve the billion-dollar annualized savings. but it is not really savings. these are d.c. dollars. these are not federal dollars. most folks think the district of columbia is funded by the federal government. we are not. it is true that we are included and then appropriations act, not that we want to be, but the fact that we are included and then appropriations act which congress does year after year is approve the dollars that we have appropriated. our dollars. by treating us like any federal agency when we are not is to fail to recognize that the

district operates as a state in the so-called savings are not savings as they would get by flooding -- cutting a federal department or holding a federal department of fiscal year 2024. but as the mayor and the congressman noted, they have already been to continuing resolutions that have authorized our spending at current year levels. and, so, this switch the rules of the game in the middle of the game is even more damaging. what is the impact? the impact on public safety. on policing. on fire response, on public education, schools, charter schools, on the cleanliness of our city. on housing. dealing with the homelessness, dealing with these issues. that is what would be adversely affected. congress has set us up to act like -- we do act like the state

, we are organized like the state, we tax like the state does and we spent like the state does so we have balanced budgets year after year. these are not savings for the federal government. this is simply damage to the district. it cripples this district for the remainder of this year which is why again we stand here and unified opposition to this language and ask that the amendment that the congresswoman has asked me included to be accepted so that we can avoid this damage. thank you. [applause] >> i think phil and i are available to take a few questions. one second. i also want to acknowledge we've been joined by the city administrator, the budget director for the budget and my deputy mayor that served on my cabinet.

they are aware of what is happening and we have asked for their help. >> have they indicated they would help on your behalf. >> i think they have indicated that it did not come from them. >> if this were to go through and you would think a billion dollars the next six months what would happen, do you think you would have that billion dollars at the end of the fiscal year? >> that is not where we are. you heard the chairman indicate that our congresswoman is moving an amendment to correct, i like to think of as a 1.1 billion-dollar estate had mistakes can be corrected and there is time to do that. what sale also mentioned is we are halfway through our fiscal year. we have actually less than six months left to cut $1.1 billion. and the way our budgets are made up, and i will ask kevin and jenny to be on deck is that, you

have to go through the big spending agencies to get to that kind of money that fast. so there is no way to cut that kind of money and the time that we would have in this fiscal year, not to affect police or teachers and not to affect some of the basic government services that allow us to keep our city clean, safe and beautiful. >> is there any question about the speaker in the chair? have you spoken to them about this? >> i don't know, sale, if you want to mention anything else? [inaudible] >> when i say reach out, let me be more clear. having conversations with the staff that we always work on issues affecting the district. >> new york times. do you propose a budget about half a billion dollars cut last

year? >> some of that was restored by city council. >> yes. well, you know how budgets work. can you explain why this would be more painful. [inaudible] >> well, let me just step back a little bit on the premise. the district, as i already mentioned, is not a federal agency. so, we have an approved budget. it is affected have not approved the budget. we have that we have been operating under that budget for over six months he had so we have expended half of what has been approved. if we are asked now to cut the remainder in six months, it hasn't even more significant impact and that is why we say before when i introduce cuts, to answer you more specifically, it did not affect police spending.

this probably would. it did not affect to the public charter schools. this could because if you think of the district's budget and how it is made up, our top agencies are helping human services, medicaid spending which in a short period of time we probably would not be able to do anything there, but the other big agencies for public education and public safety. [inaudible] >> correct. [inaudible] be dispensed with. be dispensed the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: madam president, last week, i came to the floor to debunk some of our democratic coll colleagues' myths, disinformation, mistaken information, about the work of elon musk and the department of

government efficiency. in a ronald -- you know, ronald reagan liked to say facts are stubborn things, and it's important to talk about the facts, because hopefully even in washington, d.c. we can agree on the basic facts. we ma have some different interpretation, different policy preferences, but facts are facts are facts. well, today i want to do the same thing about republican efforts to extend the upcoming expiration of the tax cuts and jobs act, or what is sometimes called the trump tax cuts, through the budget reconciliation process. now, i don't blame the american people or anybody else from listening to all of the process we talk about and just their eyes glazing over and just tuning us out, but the truth is if we don't extend the expiring provisions of this tax bill that we passed back in 2017, during

president trump's first term, a vast majority of the american people will experience a tax increase, and that, of course, is on top of 40-year high inflation during the biden administration. so you know, i guess nobody likes to -- nobody likes to -- to talk about taxes, because, on one hand, people say, well, that's -- you know, people need to keep more of their hard-earned money. on the left what they like to say is you're giving billionaires a tax cut and leaving average wage earners and working families high and dry. and the truth is the tax cuts and jobs act bill we passed in 2017, the individual rates that will expire at the end of this year, if we don't continue the current policy using the budget

reconciliation process, 62% of american taxpayers will experience a tax increase. that's not just millionaires and billionaires. that's everybody across the income spectrum. well, on the left our democratic colleagues, some of them have been claiming that extending these tax cut provisions will benefit the very rich at the expense of the rest of us. our colleague from massachusetts, senator markey, said, quote, instead of fighting for working people, trump is selling them out to give billionaires tax breaks. there they go again. and to no surprise, our colleague from vermont, senator sanders, accused president trump and elon musk of being oligarchs. oligarchs. he went on to say, and i quote, the oligarchs, that's the very rich people who've accumulated

massive wealth, primarily in russia and europe, he said the oligarchs with their tremendous resources are waging a war on working class of this country, the needs, the concerns, the ideas, the dreams of ordinary people are simply an impediment to what they, the oligarchs are entitled to. well, this accusation, if true, would be serious, but it's not true. representative neil, from massachusetts, on the other side of the capitol, went so far as to describe the trump tax cuts as reverse robin hood scam. and the list goes on and on and on and on. it's almost as if there is a concerted or orchestrated effort to use disinformation and propaganda to try to prejudice the american people against what it is we need to do in order to avoid this huge tax increase on

the vast majority of americans. but let's set aside for a moment the fact that president trump won this last election, promising to do -- what? -- well, to extend the tax cuts that passed in 2017. we know before covid hit, our economy was hitting on all cylinders. all cohorts of the population, african americans, hispanics, everyday working americans, were experiencing record high levels of employment, and the economy was the best it's been in my lifetime. well, we know what happened these last four years. we know that biden economics, or bidenomic as they like to call it, i don't know why in the world president biden embraced the name biden economics, because it was associated with

just so much misery and pain and a reduced standard of living by average working-claing families across the -- working class families across the country. we know inflation, again, the 40-year high inflation we experienced in the last few years, has a disproportionate effect on low-income families. now, that's no surprise, because your purchasing power, if you're on a fixed income or just getting by paycheck to paycheck, the more inflation goes up, the more everything you buy costs. and households across the specs rum are -- across the spectrum are affected. we've seen that with our own eyes. i believe that was one of the reasons president trump was reelected in 2024. well, when you spend a higher percentage of your may check on necessities, you have less of a cushion, as prices increase. it's just common sense. now, to add insult to injury,

what did our democratic colleagues do when they were in the majority, in response to this massive inflation, which was the direct result of their policies? well, they poured gasoline on the fire of inflation by using reconciliation to pass something called the inflation reduction a act. well, hold that thought for a minute, because the inflation reduction act, even at the time it passed, was evaluated and calculated not to reduce inflation. so again, this is deception, really, at the outset, claiming that this inflation reduction act maybe would have a negative impact on inflation. but president biden himself later admitted it, quote, has less to do with reducing inflation, closed quote, that's

what president biden said, and was full of even more spending. well, milton friedman, the nobel prize winning economist would say the main cause of inflation is too much spending. you flood the economy with more dollars, and naturally the price of everything tends to go up. and you don't need a ph.d. econ economist, like dr. larry summers, who was probably the most prominent democratic economist in our country, to tell anyone, especially not the president of the united states, that the answer to runaway inflation is not more government spending. but that's exactly what the inflation reduction act did. but that's not all. not only did the inflation reduction act do nothing for inflation, it actually did what democrats have wrongly accused republicans of doing, it

benefited high earners at the expense of ordinary americans. you don't have to take my word for it. just look at the data. look at the facts. by some estimates, the inflation reduction act's electric vehicle and charging infrastructure provisions are projected to cost $180 billion over the next decade. the average cost of an electric vehicle is nearly 7,000 more than an internal combustion engine in 2023. so most working class families, rather than pay $7,000 more for an electric vehicle, assuming they wanted an electric vehicle, have 079ed for the -- have 079ed for the lower-priced internal combustion engine. so the ones that were taking advantage of the subsidy of $7,500 if you bought an e.v., were wealthy people, by

definition. so our democratic colleagues, contrary to their propaganda and misinformation, have been the ones providing your hard-earned dollars to subsidize wealthy people to buy luxury items, like an electric vehicle. households that earn more than $200,000 reportedly represent 42.6% of electric vehicles sales. so people who make more than $200,000 a year, 42.6% of electric vehicles sales. while those earn between 100,000 and 200,000 represented 32.9%. so, if anything deserves to be called reverse robin hood, it would be democrats' inflation reduction act. given the inflationary and regressive policies that the democrats promoted during the

last four years, it's ironic, and maybe even you would say laughable, to hear them accuse republicans of being disconnected from everyday americans. the reason why republicans won the majority in both houses and president trump was reelected is because he connected with the concerns of everyday americans, and particularly their concerns about the overspending and infl inflation. not to mention the border. so, our democratic colleagues really don't have legs to stand on when it comes to the facts. failing to extend the trump tax cuts would mean, this is according to t"the wall street jou journal", 62% of americans would see a tax increase in 2026. on the other hand, extending the tax cuts would result in a 3.4% increase in after-tax income in

2026, by some estimates. in the two years after president trump signed his tax cuts into law, median household income grew by $5,000. that's more money to spend on the necessities of life. and in the same period, real wages grew by nearly 5%. again, madam president, those are the facts. you would think that the facts would be something we could agree on, then we can talk about policies, but unfortunately our democratic colleagues seem to gloss right over those facts while making wild accusations, which frankly are way off the mark. ken raft this with president biden's policies, with higher prices for food, gasolines, and other necessities, inflation-adjusted disposable income per capita during the biden presidency went

down 7.7%. no wonder people felt squeezed, particularly if you were relatively modest income or you were a senior on a fixed income. your purchasing power went down 7.7%. the stark reality and the fact is, if congress fails to extend the trump tax cuts that expire at the end of this year, the average family of four making $75,000 a year will face a $1,500 tax increase next year. working families will see the child tax credit cut in half. so the facts are pretty obvious, as plain as the nose on your face. extending the trump tax cuts will actually benefit working families and doing nothing, which is what our democratic colleagues steam want, will make

them worse off. -- seem to want, will make them worse off. at the end of the day, we work for the people we represent in our respective states and certainly the voters in alabama and texas and in the majority of the country have made their preference clear. president trump campaigned on extending these tax cuts. republicans in the house, the senate did the same, and we were rewarded with majorities in both houses and president trump with being reelected to the white house. working families in texas and across the country voted for the president and the political party who they thought would benefit them the most, especially their pocketbooks and their standard of living. and they voted resoundingly for president trump and congressional republicans. so it's simply not true to say that republicans are somehow out

of touch with the voters that gave us, the majority in both houses and president trump, reelected to the white house. i know our democratic colleagues are angry. they don't like being in the minority. it's not a lot of fun. but there's a reason, and they still haven't learned that the policies they promoted and that they sold to the american people were rejected on november 5. so sometimes, as ronald reagan liked to say, again, facts are stubborn things. so i would invite our colleagues across the aisle to look at the facts and maybe look in the mirror and say what we were doing didn't work out so well, so maybe we ought to work with republicans to change our policies. the american people simply cannot afford a tax increase on top of 40-year-high inflation.

i look forward to working with my republican colleagues in the house and the senate to deliver by extend something the trump tax cuts -- by extending the trump tax cuts and to make life better for working families in texas and across the country. i would invite our democratic colleagues to join us. they're still pretty angry. they're still pretty upsext they're still -- what do they call it? -- they're resistant. right now they're resisting what's best for the american people. that's a bad place to be. madam president, i yield the floor. and i would note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

some democrats are embracing their hypocrisy. use the rules that exist one democrat said. i may advocate for a house limit but i still observe the speed limit intelligence changed. okay, mr. president. all democrats abolishing the filibuster while republicans are in charge. the answer is of course not. because abolishing the filibuster is not about principle for democrats, it is about political advantage. the democrats want to support different roles depending on who is in charge.

i could spend my whole time today talking about democrats rank hypocrisy when it comes to the filibuster. i also like to talk about the content of the bills that they filibustered and what it says about the democratic party. a few short weeks of this new congress democrats have filibustered three bills. the born alive abortion survivors protection act, the illegitimate court counteraction act otherwise known as the icc sanctions bill and the protection of women and girls in sports act. the survivors protection act was a simple bill. simply stated that a baby born alive after an attempted abortion must be given the same attention to medical care than any other newborn baby would be given. that is it. you assume such a bill would be entirely uncontroversial. democrats may not believe in protecting unborn human beings,

but surely, surely they still believe in protecting human beings. at least when they are born alive after an abortion is not on the democrats priority list. in fact, every democrat in the senate, every democrat without exception voted against this bill. i am afraid the sad truth the democrats are so deeply concerned because they are breaking the supposed right to kill unborn babies they could not bring themselves to protect born babies for fear it would eventually leave for recognizing the humanity of the unborn. the party that is so committed to killing unborn babies that it cannot vote to protect born babies is nothing short of morally bankrupt. that was the first bill that the

democrats filibustered. the next was the icc sanctions bill that was another straightforward bill, mr. president. it would've sanctioned individuals who are involved in international criminal court efforts to investigate, arrest or prosecute u.s. citizens or citizens of u.s. allies that are not party to the icc for the international criminal court. the bill was a response to pursue warrants for israeli officials. it was also designed to protect americans and american soldiers in particular who had been targeted by the icc in the past. once again, senate democrats with one loan exception found themselves incapable of taking a stand. i am not sure if it was anti- israel animus or if they were afraid of antagonizing the wing of their party or they are simply too beholden to big tech

which leads to concerns about this legislation. but for whatever reasons democrats filibustered the deal. in doing so they not only failed for israeli leaders, but they failed to protect u.s. citizens. the third bill, the democrats filibustered filibustered just this past week i may add was the protection of women and girls in sports act. this legislation was designed to restore title ix. which is giving women equal opportunities in education by ensuring that women and girls only are permitted to plan women sports a federally funded education institutions. the bill, of course, is a response to the growing problem of women's sports being invaded by biological males. i want to accord to you.

august 2024. this last august or from the united nations noting the replacement of the female sports category with a mixed sex category as a result of an increasing number of female athletes losing opportunities including metals when competing against males. according to information received by march 30 of 2024, over 600 female athletes and more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 metals and 29 different sports. over 600 female athletes and more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 metals and 29 different sports. that is out of united nations report coming in august of last year.

mr. president, it is not even remotely fair. girls should not be having to compete in races that are stacked against them. women deserve their own athletic opportunities. opportunities that are not taken away from them by biological males that have their own spaces in which to compete. but try explaining that to democrats. democrats like to portray themselves as leading the charge on women's issues. but not one democrat, not one could bring himself or herself to vote in support of women and girls. biological males, not women. got democrats support last monday. apparently, democrats commitment to equal opportunity for women only run so deep. quickly falling on the lakeside and the left demands adherence to some new ideology.

the outcome of the 2024 presidents election was partially rebuked. far left dogmas and ideologies. apparently democrats who have learned nothing from that electoral rebuked. today, mr. president the supposed party of the little guy the underdog, the disadvantaged. becoming a party willing to sacrifice born human beings to abortion extremism and equality for women and girls on the altar of transgender ideology. after say, mr. president, it is no wonder that the american people rejected the minimum november 2024. i yield the floor and i suggest the absence of a quorum.

quorum call:

a lot of people died this weekend ukraine, not only civilians but russians. i think everybody wants to see progress.

[inaudible] >> what did he do? disrespecting me? [inaudible] >> lost a lot of credibility. >> i think it will be the greatest thing ever in this country. as you know, companies are opening up land now but many more are coming. we've given away over many decades. we lost 90000 the beginning. 90000 we are going to get them back and they are coming back

with big anthony's, by far the most powerful in the world. they are going with 200 and they will give us 35, 40%. it will bring it back and it will bring it to numbers with never had before. [inaudible] >> she's a very good one. she's very smart and i don't know about people attacking her. she's a good woman, very smart. it could happen. the democrats want to destroy the country so i can't tell you what it could happen shouldn't have happened and it probably

won't. but it could happen, you never know if the democrats are out of control you saw the other the when they wouldn't stand up for two of the young ladies killed by illegal aliens. one with cancer, the young man with cancer. a young boy and nobody's ever seen anything like. they took that back as you know. i was taken back. you know that, right? i have a very good relationship

with him. a lot of people wanted so there could be. [inaudible] [inaudible] >> elon is a very special person. i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hirono: thank you. madam president, i request unanimous consent that robert goldman, nicholas kikuta, fellows in my office be granted

floor privileges through december 21, 2025. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. hirono: madam president, since 1996 we have recognized march 10 as abortion providers appreciation day. i rise today, therefore, in gratitude for the doctors and health care professionals who bravely continue to provide necessary care despite attacks on reproductive rights and lg abortion providers. to express gratitude for the hard work of abortion providers and their staff across the country and in remembrance for those providers tragically lost to extreme anti-abortion violence, providers like dr. david gunn. on this day 32 years ago, dr. gunn, a dedicated medical professional, was murdered while walking into the clinic where he

worked. dr. gunn was targeted by an anti-abortion p extremist for simply doing his job, providing crucial lifesaving care to his patients. tragically this kind of violence against abortion providers, patients, and clinics has only increased over the years since his murder, and even before. since the 1970's there have been at least 11 murders, 42 bombings, 531 assaults, and thousands of other criminal incidents against innocent people, doctors, patients, and staff, simply providing or receiving necessary reproductive care. congress enacted the freedom of access to clinic entrances act

in 1994, more than 30 years ago, to prevent this violence at health care reproductive centers and clinics. rather than supporting this law, within days of being sworn in office, president trump pardoned 23 antiabortion extremists, incarcerated for violating the law enforcement moreover, his department of justice announced they would stop prosecuting most cases under this law. as the trump administration is taking steps to dismantle safe licensed clinics that provide quality, lifesaving reproductive care, republicans are also working to fund unregulated

anti-abortion centers or crisis pregnancy centers nationwide. earlier this year missouri republicans introduced a bill that would let their taxpayers take 100% deduction on state income taxes for donations to crisis pregnancy centers. essentially, in missouri they want to redirect funding from critical state services to these so-called crisis pregnancy centers that spread dangerous misinformation while doing very little to actually help women seeking fact-based medical counseling. republicans are trying to help women. they're attacking fundamental health care and emboldening

violent p antiabortion extremists by not prosecuting the violations short of murder effectively eliminating any serious consequences for those who attack, threaten or intimidate people in reproductive health care spaces, patients and providers alike. democrats, on the other hand, remain committed to protecting abortion access and protecting the professionals who provided where legal. today on abortion provider appreciation day we remember dr. david gunn and all those killed and targeted by senseless acts of anti-abortion violence. and we honor the of bravery of abortion providers across our country. these providers, their staff, counselors continue to provide essential care despite the threats they face.

while republicans work to ban abortion nationwide, we democrats reaffirm our commitment to protecting and strengthening rereproductive rights for all. to abortion providers in hawaii and across the country, mahalo for your critical, courageous work. madam president, i yield. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

♪♪

[cheering] ♪♪ [cheering] as i looked out across the room, i have one question. how is the liberal party doing tonight? [cheering] >> i know it hasn't been. thank you for being so patient even when i was stressed and traveling too much and couldn't think about anything other than work but no in the most difficult times you inspired me,

you gave me courage and reminded me i should focus on what's really important along with what's urgent. being prime minister of the country has been made on of my life but i'm so looking forward my most important role, i love you above all. >> all that we've accomplished together. my them about what we've done. [cheering]

is a party, a country. i know we as liberals often get criticized by our friends for not taking a victory lap after we get something done. we do something to the bank and then move on right away to the next challenge. there's always more to do what is important to take the time to reflect on and share the big successes. we are always focused on just one thing. worthy of all canadians. [cheering] simply put, it's the lifetime

for each one of us. liberals are dedicated to making this country even better not because we think it's broken but because we have an opportunity, therefore a responsibility to ensure canada stays the best country on earth. [cheering] past ten years have been challenging. crisis after crisis but through the crisis, canadians have shown who they are. instead of rachel and every single time we've emerged even stronger.

[cheering] now the space from our neighbor, the existential challenge in economic crisis showing what we are made of. it makes us canadian. proudly embracing who we are. [cheering] standing up for everyone, fundamental rights is the only way to protect our freedom. [cheering]

we are a country that believes no one should be left behind unless everyone has a real and fair shot at success. [cheering] we are a country and a healthy environment true partners because it is only time for a shared prosperous future. [cheering] for this culture and heritage in this language heard across the world.

>> celebrate diversity and strength. [cheering and applauding] [cheering] we are a country. [cheering] [cheering] it will be diplomatic when we

can. [cheering] [cheering] [cheering] our fellow liberals across the country, you know all about fighting. when the going gets tough. you remember where we were 15 years ago with 35 seats in the house. you remember our ups and downs.

like all canadians, it's when you count is out that we show our true side. [cheering] >> in 2021, you mobilized, you knock on doors. the middle of the pandemic wearing a mask, you fall for your country. [cheering]

the hopes of canadians yesterday between friends and neighbors. others in thinking about the grocery store parking lots when talk to people to rally the cause.

>> thinking of two friends in particular ways and for me every step of the way. close 20 years the unstoppable kt. [cheering] as much as you should be break because once again your country needs you more than ever and i have no doubt you will answer the call because you've done it before and it will meet this

moment. [cheering] make no mistake democracy is not a given, freedom is not given canada is not a given. will continue with that effort. it takes hope and hard work. [cheering]

lester b pearson in the canadian sky, it was much debated at the time but knew well what we all know now. the next chapters in our national story. sixty years later there is still so many more chapters to write. i can tell you the world is looking to see what canadians will do. [cheering] to achieve even more over the next ten years and decades to

come. [cheering] let us advantages think. [cheering] and every single day to help the country that states for the of all. [cheering] have done it for your kids, to and although for the future in your hands.

[cheering] [cheering]

. the presiding officer: the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks.

ms. baldwin. mr. banks. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. ms. blunt rochester. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mrs. britt. the clerk: mr. budd. ms. cantwell.

the clerk: mrs. capito. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons.

mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. curtis.

the clerk: mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mr. gallego. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mr. husted.

mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. justice. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. kim. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. mccormick. mr. merkley. mrs. moody. mr. moran. mr. moreno. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. sanders.

mr. schatz. mr. schiff. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. mr. sheehy. ms. slotkin. ms. smith. mr. sullivan. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. warner.

mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden.

lead the government of labor reinforcing the workforce the

victory and i prepared with resolving purpose. before i can, i want to take a moment to honor the incredible people who have aborted me throughout my 24 year journey in public service. should 36 weeks pregnant and lifted michigan and no more line, i know you support me today. they been my steadfast defenders teaching me patience and value of an open mind. i loving husband, sean, my high school sweetheart who stood by my side perfect triumphant challenge to all of you, thank

you. i am grateful to president trump but the extraordinary opportunity to serve as secretary of labor both humbling and the call to action but i do not take lightly in 2024 our nation witnessed the single greatest political achievement of our time. president trump has united working class americans like never before to 9.69% of teamsters backing him support from african-american and latino voters record-breaking turnout these and states. americans are speaking loud and clear putting the american

worker first. my father tirelessly for 30 years of benefits he received in short our family stability and security from his example i learned transformative power of hard work and determination telling me to be the first in my family to graduate college. after supporting my husband through medical school we build our own small business. we successfully navigated challenges by employers from complex regular two workforce shortages. these experiences have given valuable insight into struggles and triumphs of american business owners.

and every role, my priority has been clear. five for the american worker and business that drives our economy. our current economic landscape has changed is my father worked in the creamery demanding bold action and prices have risen, wages have fallen in 70% of americans do not feel confident children will be better lives lost across the country. to strengthen our workforce must invest in educational pathways access for long-term success.

part of that requires discussion about labor policies and believe labor laws need to be updated to reflect the workforce conversations that are deeply the people of oregon my guiding principle will be president trump's guiding principle ensuring a level playing field for businesses, unions and american worker. i also know will not always

agree five, several never be surprises. my door will always be open and i will never put my self on the scale. safe working conditions and retirement. a shared belief under president trump's leadership within the liver build solutions. the promise to fight for every working mom and single dad and every american striving for their fair shot at the american dream. i look forward to work with each of you and we can shape our

economy and uplift every american. that controversial legislation democrats have championed and it's not pro worker, it's prounion. cosponsor the proactive. you still supported? >> thank you, it was great to visit with you. i recognize i'm no longer the lawmaker and do not believe the terry of labor should write the laws. it's up to congress. the american worker deserve

that. that was our conversation for the american worker. i was working for them. i wanted to be at the table. i never want to be left the conversation and i respect the right medical bill was imperfect and i am no longer the lawmaker. >> the proactive -- ozman, britt, collins, cornyn, cotton, cramer, crapo, daines, fischer, grassley, hagerty, hassan, husted, hyde-smith, johnson, kennedy, lankford, marshall, mccormick, moreno, ossoff, rounds, shaheen, sheehy, tuberville. senators voting in the negative -- alsobrooks,

duckworth, durbin, heinrich, kim, lujan, mcconnell, murphy, paul, wyden.

mr. scott of florida, aye. mr. van hollen, no. mr. reed, no. mr. mullin, aye.

mr. tillis, aye. mr. kaine, aye.

ms. smith, no. mrs. moody, aye. mr. thune, aye.

mr. markey, no. mr. booker, no. mr. ricketts, aye.

mr. moran, aye. mr. hickenlooper, aye.

mr. justice, aye. mr. merkley, no. ms. cantwell, no. mr. wicker, aye.

mr. lee, aye. ms. rosen, aye. mr. sanders, no. mr. schatz, no. mrs. murray, no. ms. klobuchar, aye.

ms. klobuchar, aye. ms. baldwin, no.

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

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. curtis, aye.

the clerk: mr. coons, no. the clerk: ms. cortez masto, aye.

mr. scott of south carolina, aye.

the clerk: ms. blunt rochester, no. mr. sullivan, aye. the clerk: ms. warren, no.

the clerk: mr. budd, no. mr. warnock, aye.

the clerk: mr. schiff, aye. the clerk: mr. schmitt, aye. ms. lummis, aye. mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: ms. ernst, aye.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, aye. mr. schumer, no. the clerk: mr. welch, no.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, no.

the clerk: ms. slotkin, aye. the clerk: mr. graham, aye.

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

mr. gallego, aye. vote:

the clerk: ms. hirono, no.

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

the clerk: mr. risch, aye. the clerk: mr. cruz, aye.

mr. padilla, no.

mr. padilla, no.

>> your opinion is president of either party or a congress of either party should assure that the national labor relations board has a quorum correct? it can't do its job, correct? >> that would be -- yes. >> the equal employment opportunity commission. do you believe in the notion that workers should have equal opportunities? >> i'm sorry could you repeat that? >> do you believe in the notion that workers should have equal

employment opportunities? >> absolutely. >> the erk eoc is an independent agency that deals with workers you said you want to put workers first eeoc right now lacks a quorum it was created by statute and it is law of the land, correct? >> yes. >> have you ever taken the position as a congresswoman that either the nlrvoceeoc should be eliminated or unfunded? >> no. >> it is important that workers have unqawl employment opportunities, the eeoc should have a quorum to operate, correct? >> yes. >> because of actions of the president eeoc currently has no quorum and cannot protect the equal employment opportunities but you would agree with similar discussion about the nlrv it being the law of the land any president of the party or congress of either party should protect workers, correct? >> yes.

>> the department of labor has some specific programs designed to benefit veterans. there's a couple of programs within the dol focused on veterans employment needs should you be confirmed would you take those obligations to watch out >> absolutely. >> you became aware that an employer a major employer was taking actions that disproportionately negatively affected veterans would that concern you? >> yes. >> the mass firing that president trump is doing within the federal government right now is hitting veterans very, very hard. this civilian work force is about 3% veteran. the federal work force is 30.veteran. and veteran workers are also disproportionately employees. the actions thus far taken by this administration are punishing american veterans. badly -- i live in one of the states that has high esper capita

representation of veterans. we're seeing veterans we're seeing people laid off at v.a. clinics i have two virginia clinics supposed to open and opening jeopardized because of the mass firings, and even outside of the v.a., the disproportionate affect of the firings to this point fall hard upon veterans -- i'm happy to hear that you will take it seriously if any major employer in this country disproportionately punishes veterans. do you know restrictive covenant is? >> i do not. >> a restrictive covenant is when an employer as a condition of employment makes an employee say and if you leave you can't work with anybody in the same industry. i'm sure you're familiar with the concept people use different titles. but you're familiar with the concept. >> yes. >> do you think restrictive covenants limiting workers ability to choose where they want to work is anti-worker? >> well, i'm assuming you're

probably also naming noncompete -- >> yes. >> is that what you're referring to? >> not compete is the better -- >> sorry i didn't recognize other term. >> not compete is probably more common. >> so i know that that's primarily taken up by most of the state jurisdictions on whether that's their law or not their law -- that term determined by that and depends on the state laws are and how they focus and -- >> if you want to put workers first restricting their ability to find a job after they leaf one flower that that's not puttg workers first that's restraining workers the reason i ask because in the nlb general council issued a memo rescinding previous order of the biden administration protecting workers put workers first. >> thank you senator. >> i yield. >> thank you collins. >> shift to -- a major provision of the proact

would you cosponsored would eliminate secret elections when voters when workers vote on whether or not to organize. the secret ballot, obviously, helps to protect workers from intimidation, pressure, and retaliation. do you continue to support the elimination of secret ballots in union elections? >> i do not support that portion. that's an important supporting secret ballot is key. not only to protect the employee from maybe a bad union by also about a worker so i think it is good to have that democracy and keeping those ballots protected. the secret ballot. >> let me turn to a different issue in the last administration osha had a proposed rule that

would have our firefighters and our fire departments. i've heard directly from many volunteer and rural firefighters from the state of maine who have concerns about the high compliance cost and what they do as totally impractical training requirements that this rule would impose. some of the larger departments could accommodate these changes. but the majority of the fire department are not large. they're serving small rural communities. osha itself has estimated that the nationwide compliance cost could exceed a hundred million dollars per year for volunteers fire departments alone. so the result is going to be closed departments reduced

firefighter work force, and harming public safety in small rural communities. although there may be some benefits to take a look at the old standards and see if they are updated. what osha has published with the extremely harmful and actually decreased public safety in rural america, what is your position on this rule and will you re-examine it if confirmed? >> senator collins, i will look to re-examine i would imagine all rules and regulations confirmed once i can get in those doors and fully understand the protecting our first responders. we have seen it in a small community like happy valley oregon and beyond protecting our firefighters and making sure they have the resources they need, and helping them, of course, confide sometimes

understanding what that clines looks likes is a -- remit of the department of labor for all rules and regulationings. people want to comply but they -- the cost they would close their doors is not going to be good for any community and i promise you if confirmed that i will tack a hard look at that. at that regulation and work with your office as well. >> thank you. >> last year, the state of maine had 15 million tourists. that is about ten times our state's total population. so it's not surprising that those are in the hospitality industry despite every effort cannot come up with the sufficient number of employees to serve the flood of tourists which we're very happy to welcome to the great state of maine. so we rely heavily on seasonal worker visas known as h2b visa

to have helped filled that work force gap. can you commit to making available the maximum amount of h2b visas what congress authorizes? there's some discretion on what the number will be. but congress gives the administration the authority to go to the maximum level. >> that's right senator. i commit to working not only with you all and this is brought up by many of you in our meetings on how important h2h2b, visas are and seasonal visas i will work with the department of homeland security secretary noem and looking at those caps. and the department of labor's role and remit on this is testing the market and understanding who's asking for these permits and working with department of homeland department of state to talk

about that cap and whether or not congress wants to enact that. so yes i commit to working with you and them as well. >> senator -- >> thank you mr. chair. and -- good morning still congresswoman it is good to see you and i appreciated the time we had when we met my office a little bit ago. i appreciate your willingness to serve that and of your family. i wanted to follow-up before turning to a couple of questions i have on a line of questioning we heard from senator murray. i take it from her questions and your answers that you have stated that if you're directed by the president to take enaction that would break the law you would follow the law. >> absolutely. the law and constitution and president wouldn't ask me to break the law. >> i understand that as the path of nominee we've seen evidence that he will in the last four weeks and follow-up on mr. murphy's about musk's d rks ol and i want you to understand

where we are focused on this. mr. musk spepght a quarter of billion to get donald trump elected and since inauguration day we have found out that of the state department was planning to give tesla a $400 million contract for armored veebs vehicles now elon musk has a access to department of transportation records and data systems when, in fact, he's investigated by d.o.t. because of multiple inquiries into the safety of the tesla vehicles and deaths they may have caused and find out he's got access to department of labor information he's got programmers with him when we know that he's being -- investigated by the department of labor. so it seems like mr. musk is getting a big payback from mr. trump right in the first month of this administration. flb and that concerns us greatly. no i did i want to turn to issus that you and i talked about we have a shared interest in

increasing access to apprenticeship and real bipartisan focus on that. and if confirmed, will you expand these programs and how do you prioritize rural communities in the effort? because getting apprenticeship programs in rural communities to fit the actual economy and -- work force needs in those rural communities is a pretty -- unique thing i just like your thoughtings on that. >> thank you senator and i enjoyed our conversation as well. you know, again, a lot of this information that i in experience comes from being a former mayor. and then having the experience as a member of congress as well to understand how laws are made. but in the rural areas oftentimes forgotten, it is a forgotten part of a lot of our states. and one of the things we talked about is the hub i think i talked about that with senator hickenlooper as well knowing there are programs that are going to scale the work force in those rural communities. and in -- for instance, an example in oregon, one of the hubs i think

i mentioned to you and senator hickenlooper was, you know, it is a real direct it is not apprenticeship program until we can fortify or work toward possibly what that looks like in other parts of, you know, certain industries we talked about i think about the health care industry specifically. it is working with our community colleges and our local technical colleges to have the certificate base so that we have that work force right in the communities and we tack that information from our businesses and kind of back into a degree for our students in order to do that but i look forward to fortify apprenticeship programs to have that skilled work force. >> i would look forward to working in a bipartisan way on that one of the things we could do is to pass the bipartisan reauthorization of the work force innovation and opportunity act that we agreed to last congress so that's an important way we could move forward. with 2.6 million work place

injuries and illnesses reported annually we have to do more to protect the health and safety of our workers yet workers have to fight for common sense protections like air-conditioning for delivery drivers during the scorching heat of the summer and properly fitting protective equipment for construction workers. if confirmed how will you coordinate and prioritize work force safety across all of the dol agencies? >> thank you senator -- under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. under the previous order, the senate will resume legislative session and resume consideration of the motion to proceed to s. 331, which the clerk will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 18, s. 331, a bill to amend the controlled substances acted, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question occurs on the motion to proceed. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no.

the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the bill. the clerk: calendar number 18, s. 331, a bill to amend the controlled substances act and so forth and for other purposes. mr. thune: mr. president, i call up grassley amendment number 1237. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senator from south dakota, mr. thune, for mr. grassley, proposes an amendment numbered 127. mr. thune: -- nurmdz 1237. mr. thune: i ask that the reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 31. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, executive office of the president, stephen moran, of new york, to be chairman of the council of economic advisors. mr. thune: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk

will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of stephen miran, of new york, to be chairman of the council of economic advicers, signed by 17 senators as followed. mr. thune: i ask consent the reading of the named be waived -- names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. thune: mr. president, i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 34. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of labor, keith sonarling of florida, to be deputy secretary. mr. thune: i send a cloture

motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of keith sonderling of florida, to be deputy secretary of labor signed by 17 senators as followed. mr. thune: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. moreno: mr. president, with great honor i stand before you. as you know, i've been in this chamber for ten weeks, it's one of the greatest honors of my life to represent the people of ohio here in the united states senate. it's especially an honor because i wasn't born in this country. i was born in bogota, colombia. my mom and dad moved myself, my sister and five brothers to america to find a different opportunity, a better opportunity. we are part of a long line of

immigrants that have come to this country to make this country stronger and to make this country better and to live our version of the american dream. we know what happened, mr. president, over the last four years at our southern border. it was a total and complete disgrace. it's a disgrace not just because of the unlimited amount of people that came into this country, almost ten million encounters over a four-year period, but it's a disgrace because that's not how we should welcome people to this nation. we should not have people who want to come to america pay a drug cartel to smuggle them across mexico, raped along the way, beaten along the way, every last cent that they have robbed from them and their families, then smuggled into the country, then charged even more money when they think the journey is over. in some cases, the people coming into the interior of the country

have to pay back enormous sums of money so that cartel members don't find them and kill them, or kill their family members back home. that's no way to have people come do this country -- come to this country. if you look at this chart, a very famous chart because president trump referred to it at his rally, you can see immigration is not a new issue in this country. we've had a problem for a long, long time. president trump took office and he put in place right here an executive order. what that did was said, hey, you can only claim asylum at a legal port of endry. if you cross the river, if you scale a wall, if you go through a tunnel, you can't claim asylum once you get to the other side, because as we know asylum is for refugees, people fleeing dangerous situations because of their race, their religion, or the political beliefs.

when he put that in place, look what happened, mr. president. a total collapse of border encounters. president trump left office, joe biden rescinded that executive order, and we saw what happened, massive spike in illegal crossings. devastating our border patrol agents. our border patrol agents were totally outmanned. they were completely overwhelmed and unable to do their jobs. now, in a political season, joe biden put in place the exact same executive order. what it that executive order say? you can only claim asylum at a legal port of entry. if you enter through a nondesignated port of entry, you're immediately returned. look what happened, another massive drop. now, here president trump took office and is now actively returning anybody who comes through in a nondesignated port of entry, and we're down to

8,326 border crossings in one month. at the peak of biden, that number was almost 350,000. we didn't have to pass a law. we didn't have a hire new border patrol agents. we didn't need new equipment. we honestly didn't need more wall. we needed better policy. mr. president, i campaigned to run for the united states senate for two years, and during that two-year period of time i drove to every corner of my incredible state. i drove to every corner of ohio. to a man or a woman, the voters would tell me, please go down to washington, d.c., and do some something. the american people wanted to have faith and confidence that their leaders are actually able to come together and accomplish legislation that's purely common sense. i present to you, mr. president,

today, a very simple bill, very simple bill. we don't have to boil the ocean. we don't have to reinvent the wheel. it's very simple. it says, if you're an asylum seeker, you must file a claim for asylum at a legal port of entry. if you're going to come to america, and you're seeking asylum, do it at a legal port of entry. no release of asylum applicants into the interior of the country. we're going to follow the law. we're going to have them wait in the prior country, and in 180 days, which is currently the law, which is being violated, sometimes it's five or six years, but they wait until their asylum claim is heard. there's no second chance. once we've identified that you have a fake asylum claim, then you can no longer claim asylum ever again. anyone who enters of the u.s. illegally is banned from claiming asylum. we welcome people in our homes

every day. we don't let people come through our windows to see us, because that's insane. i know that my democrat colleagues are in a mode where they want to fight everything we're doing, mr. president, but we should at least come together on this. as i look over at my democrat colleague, there's only two of us, two of us in this entire chamber that are naturalized u.s. citizens. we know firsthand what it means to be able to be accepted by this country. 98 were born here, two of us were not. we became citizens in this country, and we got the ultimate opportunity to represent this country in the united states senate. let's come together, one time, and show the american people we don't have to fight about ever everything. we can actually accomplish

commonsense legislation. let's put in code, let's put in legislation, those executive orders that, not once, not twice, but three times has been proven to reduce border enc encounters. i can't imagine that my democrat colleagues will fight this, and i hope, as somebody who's been here for ten weeks, as opposed to my colleague, some have been here for two or three decades, failed to understand that the american people are watching, the american people want to have a senate and a house and a government that can actually do something that matters a lot to them. so, i will yield to my democrat colleague from hawaii, and i implore you, let's show leadership together, you and i.

let's show this leadership and get a very, very simple bill accomplished. i ask unanimous consent that the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of s. 200 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. further, i ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be be made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there an objection? a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii hirono hirono mr. president, reserving the right to object. he claims this will -- as the other naturalized citizen in this body, i object. ms. hirono: and we actually passed comprehensive immigration reform out of this senate in 2013, and i was one of the senators who worked on that bipartisan bill, but when the bill got to the house, it didn't pass. so we are here once again.

and more recently, there was a bipartisan immigration bill that was about to be brought to the senate, and everything was set to go until the president -- current president decided that he would much rather this bill -- this issue continue to not be addressed. so there you go. we can all agree that our immigration and asylum systems need reforms, but i have serious concerns about this legislation. my colleague has stated that this bill is intended to prevent those who come to the united states in between ports of entry from applying for asylum. but as it is drafted this bill eliminates the section of the law that allows people present in the united states to apply for asylum. this means that it would prevent anyone, even those who have lawful status from applying inside the united states. instead they would have to

travel to a port of entry. this bill would also require that anyone, including families seeking asylum at a port of entry be arrested and held in custody for the entire time their request is pending. and it could take quite a long time using taxpayer money to detain them. i certainly agree with my colleague that we need to do more to address our immigration court backlog which includes many asylum cases and improve our asylum system. but this legislation would not address these concerns. let me give you an example. this bill would prevent a ukrainian fleeing russian aggression who entered lawfully from applying for asylum from within the united states. it would force them to travel with their families to a port of

bring to apply for asylum. they would then be detained with their children while they wait for their application to be processed. these are individuals who have work permits and are contributing to our economy and society every day. they came here lawfully. how does making them leave and seek asylum at a port of entry improve our system? it doesn't. here's a reality. this bill and the recent actions by the trump administration are not focused on truly addressing problems with our asylum system. if the trump administration was serious about improving our asylum system, why did they recently fire nearly two dozen impartial immigration judges without cause or notice.

they fired military veterans and expert judges who had experience processing immigration cases effectively. with a backlog of over 3.6 million immigration cases -- you heard me right -- 3.6 million immigration cases, we need more immigration judges, not less. but the current leadership, executive office of immigration review which oversees immigration courts has said they plan to fire more judges. exactly the wrong thing to do. this is no way to address our broken immigration system. i urge republicans to set aside this misguided bill and to stop taking a chainsaw to our federal workforce, including immigration judges. believe me, this chainsaw

approach to what is going on in our federal government, if the administration wanted to create fear and chaos, if that is their aim, they are succeeding mightily. i urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join us in good faith to work on the truly comprehensive, bipartisan reforms that we so desperately need. for these reasons, mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. moreno: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio mr. moreno: if i could go back and reiterate. border crossings dropped. president biden -- president biden put in place the exact same executive order that in effect is this exact legislation. border crossings dropped. i have -- i'm confused by my

coll colleague, the explanation about the ukrainian refugees. if they're coming from ukraine and they're entering through a legal port of entry, that's when they would claim asylum. i don't think we have a scenario where we're asking americans or legal residents to apply for asylum. because if you're already in the interior of the country, that decision was already made. so if you're the ukrainian family that you talked about, you claimed asylum at the legal port of entry, the law says, which we're not following, this body refuses to enforce its own laws, is that it will adjudicate that claim in 180 days. i absolutely never said they would be arrested. in fact, nothing in this bill mentions being arrested. what it says is they must wait in the prior safe country so in the case of ukraine, they can go to france, apply for asylum there, wait 180 days, and then

we'll welcome them with open arms to america the right way, the legal way. i hope my colleague is not hoping for a scenario where that ukrainian family goes to mexico city, pays a drug cartel member a few thousand dollars and gets smuggled across the border, across a river with a family where the children, who knows what can happen to them. that's how you want refugees to come to this country? it doesn't even make any sense. there's nobody being arrested by this bill. there's nobody being detained about i this bill. it's exactly the opposite. we're asking the refugee to wait in the prior safe country for 180 days which is the law. once your claim is adjudicated, we welcome you with open arms. my college mentioned there's 3.6 million cases backlog. that's true.

it's a steady and shameful number. what she doesn't mention is 90-plus percent of those cases, a judge rules. once they get to it in five or six or seven years that it's an invalid asylum claim. it's -- doesn't mean that they're economic migrants. doesn't mean it's something that may want to come to this country but they're people who clearly are not refugees. not my thoughts. the thoughts of immigration judges that are making this decision over and over again. but only in washington, d.c., only when you've been here so long that your head can't see straight, you think it is a better idea to have unlimited amounts of fake asylum claims and the way you handle that instead of changing the law is to hire thousands of more judges to give the answer you already know? to waste taxpayer dollars that way? you know, my colleagues talk about republicans being on the side of billionaires. you know would billionaires the

democrats have created? the drug cartel members that are making billions of dollars smuggling people. i went to a border crossing in del rio, texas. border patrol agents let me come right to the enof the river. -- edge of the river. i saw four people come across. two men, two women. the minute they landed, they got on their knees and said -- [speaking spanish] which is asylum in spanish. i asked if they knew what it meant. they said no but it's what the drug cartel told them to say the minute they landed in america. they're not refugees. why are you making the ukrainian families wait behind economic migrants claiming asylum claims? this is what's wrong with washington, d.c. this is an easy, obvious fix. the data proves it out. you put that law in place, border crossings drop. trump, biden, trump, they put

the exact executive order in place. you don't have to take my word for it. on cbs just yesterday, face the nation, wake up to a beautiful sunday and turn on face the nation. margaret brennan asked the congressman -- she says to the congressman, illegal border crossings as we just discussed, they are at a historic low. president trump made that point when he was addressing congress this week. was he right that he didn't need to wait for congress? we didn't need comprehensive immigration reform. was he right? that it really was mess anning for the white house beyond? -- messaging for the white house beyond? this is what a democrat, a democrat from new york says. well, obviously -- key word obviously -- we've seen a reduction in crossings. why is it obvious? because we know this works. we know that if we make asylum only in a legal port of entry,

180 days to process, can't claim it if you cross illegally, we know obviously, his words, well obviously we've seen a reduction in crossings. we saw it under biden at the end of his administration. after he did his executive order to say no asylum applications are between ports of entry. but we need to make it permanent law. democrat mechanic of the house of representatives. we need to make it permanent law. i guess after ten weeks in the united states senate, i should expect that everything has to be hard. everything has to be a battle. but i can tell you people all over this country, the people who don't watch c-span 24/7, the people who don't go on x and read every last debate between their elected members, they're just regular americans wanting to enjoy their lives, pay taxes,

cannot understand why we can't come together on something so incredibly simple. so easy. democrat president did it. republican president did it. it works. this is not theoretical. and to my colleague, i don't want those ukrainian refugees waiting behind millions of economic mi grants. it's not -- migrants. it's not fair to them. why would we do that? i yield back. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii ms. hirono: mr. president, i hear my colleague acknowledging that the asylum system is broken. my objections remain. mr. moreno: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent that the committee on judiciary be discharged from further consideration of s. 200 and the bill be placed on the legislative calendar.

the presiding officer: is there an objection? the senator from hawaii ms. hirono: reserving the right to object for the reasons previously stated i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard.

mr. moreno: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session and be a myriad of morning business --

period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: i understand there is a bill at the desk and i ask for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill. -- for the first time. the clerk: s. 924, making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2025, and for other purposes. mr. moreno: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. moreno: i ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the bill will be read for the second time on the next legislative day. mr. moreno: mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that the senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until 10:00 a.m. on tuesday, march 11. that following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in

the day, and the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of calendar number 26. further, that at 11:45 a.m. the senate vote on cloture on the bradbury nomination and following the cloture vote the senate recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly conference meetings. at 2:15 p.m. if cloture is invoked the senate vote on confirmation of the bradbury nomination followed by cloture of the slater nomination. further, that if cloture is invoked on the slater nomination, that all time be expired and the senate vote on confirmation the at 5:15 p.m. finally, if any nominations are confirmed during tuesday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: if there is no further business to come before the senate, ski that it stand in recess under the previous order.

the presiding officer: the senate stands in recess until

>> 3500 students participanted in this year c-span student cam documentary competition asked to craft a message to the new president exploring issues important to them or their communities. this wednesday tune into c-span washington journal of 8 a.m. eastern and a knowns grand prize winner of this year eetion competition. c-span we're funned by these television company's more including cox. >> one connection is most cox is going to help. building affordable internet and support to veterans. wherever it matters most, we'll be there. >> cox, support c-span as a public service along with the other television provide. give you a front row seat to democracy. ♪