mr. merkley: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: mr. president, i have a lot of concerns -- the presiding officer: the senate in a quorum call. mr. merkley: i ask the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: i have lot of concerns about the possibility of brett kavanaugh serving on the supreme court. they're concerns that come from many different directions. but let's start with the precedent that this body has not reviewed his full record. we haven't taken any look at all at the three years he spent as staff secretary to president bush because the president's team intervened and asked us not to t and a couple members of this body collaborated with the white house to deny everybody else here the possibility of looking at his record. the thing is that each and every one of us has the responsibility to review the record. this is an exceptional situation in which a few members have made it impossible for anyone in the body to fulfill their constitutional responsibility, it is an extraordinary abuse of p

mr. merkley: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for oregon. mr. merkley: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: the senate is not in a quorum call. the senator. mr. merkley: thank you. just moments ago i was outside at a rally on the mall of the capitol, looking at the supreme court of the united states of america. when you look at that beautiful building you see the phrase, equal justice under law, above the big, beautiful doors of entry -- equal justice under the law. that's the concept behind the supreme court. every other court can make decisions but it can be appealed. the final determination, balancing the parts of the constitution against each other, understanding and exercising the fundamental vision contained in that beautiful we the people document, that's what those nine justices are all about. now, for an individual to become a justice it takes two steps. the first is that is it considered by the president as to who to nominate, and having nominated, it comes over here to the senate, and this is the confirmation

mr. merkley: thank you. the most important words of our constitution are the first three, we the people. this describes the entire purpose of our constitution. that is, to create a government responsive to the people and produce laws that reflect the will of the people. and that requires a close adherence to the vision embodied in the constitution, including the advice and consent vision in the constitution. we know that the founders of our country, they struggled with how to appoint people to high positions in the executive branch and to our courts. and it was alexander hamilton that laid out the deliberations. he said, well, if a body or an assembly has that power, there will be a lot of horse trading back and forth and we won't get the best people suited to the positions in the executive branch and in the courts. so the responsibility should rest with one person, and that's how the nominating power came t so the responsibility should t rest with one person and that is how the nominating power came to be v

mr. merkley: thank you. mr. president, i ask unanimous consent for my intern srvos sierra be granted floor privileges for the balance of the day. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you. the most important words of our constitution are the first three, we the people. this describes the entire purpose of our constitution. that is, to create a government responsive to the people and produce laws that reflect the will of the people. and that requires a close adherence to the vision embodied in the constitution, including the advice and consent vision in the constitution. we know that the founders of our country, they struggled with how to appoint people to high positions in the executive branch and to our courts. and it was alexander hamilton that laid out the deliberations. he said, well, if a body or an assembly has that power, there will be a lot of horse trading back and forth and we won't get the best people suited to the positions in the executive branch and in the courts. so the resp

mr. merkley: mr. president, i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you, mr. president, today i rise to bring attention to the no internment camps act. this is an important bill to make sure that america does not repeat the mistake of world war ii and develop and expand internment camps here in the united states of america. now, you may think that this is something that is far-fetched. of course the united states would not establish internment camps, but the fact is we already have three and we have the house having passed a bill to greatly expand those internment camps. we have 35 sponsors of a bill here in the senate to expand internment camps. we have the president issue an executive order asking congress to expand internment camps, and most recently the president putting forward draft legislation to expand internment camps without congress. where does this story begin? it begins as far as public awareness on may 7, when the attorney general jeff sessions, gave a speech. he called this hi

mr. merkley. mr. moran. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. nelson. mr. paul. mr. perdue. mr. peters. mr. portman. mr. reed. mr. rish. mr. roberts. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. sasse. mr. scoh hch ochl schotts. mr. schumer. mr. scott. mrs. shaheen. mr. shelby. ms. smith. ms. st ms. st mr. thune. mr. tester. mr. tillis. mr. toomey. mr. uhe ddall. mr. van hollen. mr. warner. ms. warren. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. widen. mr. young. >> with my friend the senator from montana, senator daines who is walking his daughter down the aisle this afternoon, if he were present and voting, he would have voted aye. i have voted no. the pair will not change the outcome of the vote. i therefore withdraw my vote. >> the senator has that right. >> senators voting in the affirmative, alexander, barrasso, blunt, bozeman, burr, cassidy, collins, corker, cornyn, cotton, crepo, cruz, enzi, ernst, fisher, flake, gardner, graham, grassley, hatch, heller, hoeven, hyde smith, inhofe, isaac son, johnson, kennedy, kyle, langford, lee, manchin, mcconnell, moran, paul, perdue, portm portman, r

mr. merkley. >> no. >> mr. moran. ms. murkowski. r. murphy. ms. murray. mr. nelson. r. paul. mr. perdue. >> aye. >> mr. peters. >> no. > mr. portman. mr. reid. mr. rich -- mr. reisch. mr. roberts. mr. rounds. >> aye. >> mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. shotts. mr. schumer. mr. scott. >> aye. >> ms. shaheen. mr. shelby. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. >> aye. >> mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. >> aye. >> mr. toomey. >> aye. >> mr. udall. r. van hollen. mr. warner. ms. warren. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. >> aye. >> mr. wyden. >> no. >> mr. young. >> aye. >> affirmative, alexander, barrasso, blunt, boozman, burr, capito, cassidy, collins, rker, cornyn, cotton, crapo, ruz, daines, insee, ernst, fisher, flake, gardner, graham, grassley, hatch, heller, even, heitsmith, inhofe, isakson, kennedy, kyl, lankford, mcconnell, moran, ul, perdue, portman, reisch, berts, rounds, rubio, staff, cott, shelby, sullivan, thune, tillis, toomey, wicker, and young. >> mr. manchin, aye. >> senators voting in the negative -- baldwin, bennett, oker, brown, cant we will -- kantwell, cardin, core tes m

mr. merkley. >> no. >>> moran. >> aye. >>> ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. >> no. >>> mr. nelson. >> mr. paul. >> aye. >>> mr. perdue. >> aye. >>> mr. peters. >> no. >>> mr. portman. >> aye. >>> mr. reed. >> no. >>> mr. risch. >> aye. >>> mr. roberts. >> aye. >>> mr. rounds. >> aye. >>> mr. rubio. >> aye. >>> mr. sanders. >> no. >>> mr. sasse. >> aye. >>> mr. schatz. mr. schumer. >> no. >>> mr. scott. >> aye. mrs. shaheen. >> no. >>> mr. shelby. >> aye. >>> ms. smith. >> no. >>> ms. stabenow. >> no. >>> mr. sullivan. >> aye. >>> mr. tester. >> no. >>> mr. thune. >> aye. >>> mr. tillis. >> aye. >>> mr. toomey. >> aye. >>> mr. udall. >> no. >>> mr. van hollen. >> no. >>> mr. warner. ms. warren. >> no. >>> mr. whitehouse. >> no. >>> mr. wicker. >> aye. >>> mr. wyden. >> no summ. >>> mr. young. >> aye. >>> with my friend the senator from montana, senator daines, who is walking his daughter down the aisle this afternoon, if he were present and voting, he would have voted aye. i have voted no. the pair will not change the outcome of the vote. i therefore withdraw my vote. >>> th

mr. merkley: thank you, mr. president. i wish my colleagues were here to share in this dialogue because there is such an absence of all the members sharing with each other their perspectives. and we have a world that is enhanced by a media world that lives in different universes that accentuates the differences between the parties. i think we are on a course that does deepen the differences across america, and i hope some way we can find in this senate be able to communicate across that growing chasm in a more effective manner. i've heard many of my colleagues speak to the issue of fairness on this floor, and i offer just a brief couple sentence point for you to consider why not all of america shares the perspective that this has been fair. when dr. ford was invited to come to speak to the committee, she said she'd like to come but she wanted some time and she'd like to have corroborating individuals be able to appear before the committee. that was denied by the committee, and that bored many -- bothered many people in thi

mr. merkley: mr. merkley: mr. president, our founders had a very clear design for the ability to put individuals into high posts of great responsibility. they really wrestled with it. they considered giving the ability to appoint judges and theexecutive officers to the assembly, as it was referred to. i think we have to worry a lot about individuals swapping favors, one person saying you support my friend, i'll support yours and that wouldn't lead to those with the best qualities serving in these key positions. so they concluded after great debate that it would go to a single individual, the president, to nominate. but they realized that a president can go off track. they thought, well, the president might express favoritism over a variety of sorts. alexander hamilton talked about this at some length. maybe favoritism to the people in the home state. maybe favorite favoritism to a close group of friends, maybe favoritism to individuals doing favors back to the president. who knows. there had to be a check of the p

mr. merkley? >> no. >> mr. moran? >> miss murkowski? >> mr. murphy? >> mrs. murray? >> mr. nelson?e. >> mr. purdue? >> aye. >> mr. peters? >> no. >> mr. portman? >> aye. >> mr. reed? >> mr. risch? >> aye. >> mr. roberts? >> aye. >> mr. rounds? >> aye. >> mr. rubio? >> aye. >> mr. sanders? >> mr. salve. >> aye. >> mr. schatz. >> no. >> mr. schumer? >> mr. scott? >> aye. >> mrs. shaheen? >> mr. shelby? >> ms. smith? >> ms. stabenow? >> no. >> mr. sullivan? >> aye. >> mr. tester? >> mr. thune? >> aye. >> mr. tillis? >> aye. >> mr. toomey? >> aye. >> mr. udall? >> no. >> mr. van hollen? >> mr. warner? >> ms. warren? >> no. >> mr. white house? >> mr. wicker? >> aye. >> mr. wyden? >> no. >> mr. young? >> aye. stuart: they're tallying the votes as we speak. i was listening carefully. i'm sure you were too. sounded like a direct party-line vote. soon as we get the result, you will get it. we have to be rather quiet to make sure we don't miss it. we should tell you that lisa murkowski. >> senators voting in the affirmative. alexander, barrasso, blunt, bozeman, burr, capito, cassidy, collins

clover chart, markey, mendez, merkley, mary, nelson, peters, reeve, sanders, shots, schumer, shaheen, smith, tester, you‘d all, van holland, warner, warren, white house, waiting. mr heard a list of those in the affirmative, those who are voting forjudge kavanaugh to be the next us supreme court judge, kavanaugh to be the next us supreme courtjudge, and kavanaugh to be the next us supreme court judge, and then kavanaugh to be the next us supreme courtjudge, and then we have heard a list in the negative, we are hearing on reuters that the majority have voted in the support of the supreme court nominee, but we will get confirmation of that as soon as we can. barbara, can you explain the process here? what have we been hearing and what might happen next? the vote has finished, it is 50—48. so, judge kavanaugh has been confirmed. the reason it is 48 is because the senator from montana was not able to be present as he had to attend his daughter‘s wedding. the one republican senator who voted no voted present for him. this evened the balance, which is why you have 50-48. this the balance, which is why you have 50—48. this is a minor side story to the fact that the vote

clover leahy markey mccaskill is merkley murray nelson peters re sanders shots schumer shaheen smith stabenow chester utah van hollen warner warren whitehouse wyden mrurphy mr murphy no. watching proceedings here at the u.s. senate for the confirmation in this the final vote for the confirmation of krakow for not to the u.s. supreme court it's been a dramatic hour also there with protesters interrupting the confirmation vote and just when the roll call was taking place and that was delayed several times but here we have after a number of weeks of protests and hearings are sexual assault allegations that were brought by christine blazin forward and several other women against cavanagh the final vote taking place. so just to recap we're here with live pictures at the u.s. senate watching the final vote that is set to take place on the confirmation of supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh this would essentially cement the conservative majority on the supremes court as we know cavanagh is replacing the swing vote of the retired justice anthony kennedy this vote was set to take place this afternoon after cavanagh cleared a procedural hurdle at the senate

mr. merkley: thank you. the most important words of our constitution are the first three, we the people. this describes the entire purpose of our constitution. that is, to create a government responsive to the people and produce laws that reflect the wi o

mr. merkley: i would be happy to. mr. whitehouse: one of the touching features of the senator's presentation was the summary of the effects on god's creatures. the sea lion pups, the fish, the sea birds. just from this particular episode. you may not have a big heart for an oyster spat, but these are all god's creatures and it's frustrating when people who wear their christianity on their sleeve show so little interest for the protection of god's creatures. and the other angle on that is we are taught in the bible to look out for the least among us. and one thing that i have noticed is that climate change harms don't fall evenly across the population, that storm and flood are harder for some than for others. and that wealth and poverty dramatically affect the experience of climate change by different people. and i wonder if the senator would comment on that from his experience. mr. merkley: it's a great question or a great point because when you have resources, you can respond to the impact far more easily. you can take a