mr. tillis: thank you, mr. president. mr. schatz: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. in his confirmation hearing last january, e.p.a. administrator scott pruitt said there was evidence that climate change had actually leveled off over the past two decades. in response to mr. pruitt's comments, an atmospheric scientist in california pulled together some colleagues to study satellite data from around the world. they found, predictably, that mr. pruitt was wrong and they prepare to publish their findings in "nature scientific reports," but then something weird happened. a few of the scientists said they didn't want their names listed on the research. they were worried about their ability to get a green card in the united states. mr. sander told the new yorker that this was the first time he saw colleagues feared putting their names on research because they were worried about the negative consequences fors themselves and their families. in this country scientis

mr. tillis. >> aye. >> mrs. feinstein. sen. feinstein: aye. >> mr. durbin. sen. feinstein: aye by proxy. >> mrs. klobuchar. >> aye. >> mr. blumenthal. >> aye. >> mr. booker. >> no. >> ms. harris. >> no. sen. grassley: mr. chairman. >> aye. nays.yeas, 2 sen. grassley: with that majority vote, mr. williams will be reported to the floor. nt, assistant attorney general, civil division. arer. chairman, the votes 18 years, three nays. sen. grassley: with that majority vote, jodi hunt will be reported to the floor. i believe we can consider the executive nominees by voice vote. we will consider the following nominees. steve gladden, u.s. marshal, middle district, north carolina. brendan heffner, united states marshal for the central district of illinois. theodore short, u.s. marshal district of maine. those in favor, say aye. >> aye. sen. grassley: opposed say no. the ayes have it. these will be reported to the floor. we turn to senator hatch to discuss s-994. you wanted to discuss it, didn't you? havehatch: i think so -- i to -- sen. grassley: go ahead, but if you want

mr. tillis. >> no. >> mr. kennedy. >> aye. >> mrs. feinstein. >> no. >> mr. leahy. >> no. >> mr. durbin. >> no. >> mr. whitehouse. >> no. >> ms. klobuchar. >> no. >> mr. coons. >> no. >> mr. blumenthal. >> no. >> ms. hirono. >> no. >> mr. booker. >> no. >> ms. harris. >> no. >> mr. chairman. >> no. >> mr. chairman, the votes with six yays, 16 nays. >> the amendment is defeated and we go to final passage. >> mr. president. >> just a minute, before you speak -- mr. chairman. whatever. whatever. >> if we do vote just so when senator cornyn is done if we do vote on it i will stay in session so speak can speak as long as they want to. >> excuse me, mr. chairman. it's topics like this that make me glad i'm on the senate judiciary committee. i think this is really the important role that this committee plays and while i disagree with the remedy prescribed, i do appreciate the chairman bringing this up and letting the committee debate it and vote on it. this is an important topic. i join all my colleagues on the committee and their concern over russian interference in the 2016 election a

mr. tillis: thank you, madam president. i come here for the first time in what will be a weekly speech that i will give as long as we have somebody, in my opinion, who is improperly and unjustly being held in a turkish prison. as a matter of fact, this man, pastor brunson has been in a turkish prison for 5 of 65 days -- 565 days. he was arrested in october of 2016. he didn't even receive charges until two months. so arrested without charges, a conspiracy to plot a coup attempt by the president of turkey. he, about a month ago, maybe about two or three months back, i heard from some people that pastor brunson was afraid with the charges levied against him, that the american people would read the charges and forget about him and turn his back. that's why i decided to travel to turkey and meet him in prison about a month ago to let him know that i have no intention of forgetting him, and i have every intention that everybody understands what is going on with this case and why it should be a lesson to anybody thinking about tra

mr. chairman. >> senator tillis. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you both for being here. ms.gambler, , did you say the caseload doubled between 2006-2015? >> the case backlog more than doubled. the annual caseload increased by 44% during that time. . >> did you get into any route cause analysis? we found that over the ten-year timeframe we studied, newe. case receipts were staying about the same but the backlog was increasing and the annual, the total annual number of cases that a court was completing was decreasing. over time judges were completing fewer cases on an annual basis. >> mr. mchenry come , you mentin your opening testimony that the note that i took, when you're considering these cases, perjury is not considered a perjury offense and you delineate a number of other crimes that ostensibly more violent than not considered by offensive. could you drill down on that for me? >> in response to supreme court precedent, the circuit courts are adopted what's called a categorical approach of making determinations as to whether certain criminal convictions primarily in state

mr. chairman. >> senator tillis. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you both for being here. ms. gambler, did you say that the case load doubled between 2006 and 2015? >> the case backlog more than doubled. the annual caseload increased by 44% during that time. >> did you all get into any root cause analysis, or did you just gather the high-level numbers? >> when we looked at the caseload, so not the backlog, but the overall caseload, we found that over the ten-year time period that we studied, new case receipts were staying about the same, but the backlog was increasing and the annual -- the total annual number of cases that the court was completing was actually decreasing. so, over time, judges were completing fewer cases on an annual basis. >> thank you. mr. mchenry, you mentioned in your opening testimony that the note that i took, that when you're considering these cases, perjury is not considered a perjury offense and you delineated a number of other crimes that ostensibly were violate th violent that were not violent offenses. can you drill down on that? >> in response to

tillis: thank you mr. chairman. i appreciate your leadership and having the special counsel bill on the agenda next week. just want to cover a few things. let's first start with the position that leader mcconnell took this week. i was speaker of the house in north carolina. if this bill were working for the statehouse and i knew we didn't have the votes on the floor, i would make the same statement. the reality is it is on us to get the votes to get it passed. there is one of two ways we are going to get it passed. we are either going to dispense with the drama, take a look at this bill in terms of its having enduring value. i for one do not think the president is going to fire the special counsel, but i can't say that for future presidents. for some who have suggested i am filing this bill because i don't trust the president, it is quite the contrary. i trust this president on this issue. what i don't trust our future presidents that i don't know yet. i know if we pass this bill that will have this safeguard, and i

mr. chairman. >> senator tillis. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. secretary carson, welcome to the committee. >> thank you. >> when we met in my office before your confirmation, i talked a little bit about how i thought you could be a change agent in the department, and what was going to be critical was fairly quickly get in there and identify programs that are working and double down on them, and identify programs that are not. returning the value and take the tough political position that we can put this money to a better and higher purpose. i, for one, think the discussion about reducing your resources right now is premature. i think you need probably what you have and maybe some more, and what progress have you made in terms of really looking at the department and trying to really effect change so we know we're getting the best value and having the best impact on the people who need it? >> well, thank you for asking that question. we've made enormous amounts of progress. first of all, in terms of stabilizing the mutual mortgage insurance fund. i

senator payne and senator tillis presiding. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you to the witnesses for your service and your testimony. general neller, i was also at the event yesterday with darcy who is a great example and the folks around the table were really, really sharp in offering us perspectives. i have two pieces of bipartisan legislation, the military spouse employment act of 2018 and the jobs and child care for military families act that have been introduced with bipartisan colleagues on this committee that we are hoping to add to the ndaa as we work in the coming weeks. i appreciate ms. neller's leadership in this area. i want to ask each of you sort of a budget question. i'm happy with the budget we passed, the fy '18 budget in terms of support for investments to do the kinds of things you are talking about, but there can always be a challenge. when the budget gets down six months into the fiscal year and the money comes at the end of the fiscal year there is the question about whether you can spend the money and do it responsibly. we want to

mr. chairman, i offer up the cement. >> before calling senator tillis i hope that we can kind of maybe limit debate to a couple points of view on each side of an amendment because with six and seven amendments filed. senator joseph. >> thank you, mr. chairman. for the last three years i've been on this committee as t a nonattorney, every once in a while i wonder whether not i wish i'd gone to law school and become an attorney. senators, , to make me glad i didn't because i don't think there's anyco way i could match him on the arguments. in m fact, it sounds like the arguments that may go before the court when equal numbers of people are on either side of the issue. back when i was speaker of the house when we would pass a bill to try to assert legislative authority versus the executive branch, i would have meetings like these in my office where it wasn't clearly decided. i never allowed a bill to advance what i think it was clearly unconstitutional or inconsistent with the state constitution but i think this is an issue that's going to be debated. it may even open up what senator lee assert

senator peters in the break and senator tillis coming out of the break. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you have talked about your humble beginnings in starting facebook in your dorm room which i appreciated that story. certainly facebook has changed an awful lot over a relatively short period of time. when facebook launched its timeline feature, consumer saw their friends 'of posts chronologically. facebook has since been changed to a timeline driven by some sophisticated algorithms. i think it's left many people as a result asking, why am i seeing this feed and why am i seeing this right now? in light of the cambridge analytica issue, facebook users are asking new questions right now. can i believe what i'm seeing? who has access to this information about me? i think it is safe to say simply that facebook is losing the trust of an awful lot of americans as a result of this incident. i think an example of this, something i've been hearing a lot from folks who are bent coming up to me and talking about the experience they've had where they are having a conversation with friends, not on

tillis coming out of break. senator peters. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. zuckerberg, thank you for here today. you talked about your very humble beginnings in starting room, but your dorm i appreciated that story. facebook has changed an awful over a relatively short period of time. launched its timeline feature, users found heir friends post chronologically. it has turned to a timeline driven by some very algorithms.d it has left many people as a am i of that asking why seeing this feed and why am i right now. now in light of the cambridge users ca issue, facebook are asking i think some new questions right now, can i and who hat i'm seeing has access to this information about me. safe to say, very simply, that facebook is losing trust of a an awful lot of americans as a result of this incident. this is n example of something i have been hearing a lot from folks who have been me and talking about really the kind of xperience they have had where they're having a conversation with friends, not on the talk, and then they see ads popping up quickly on their facebook. i have constituents fearing t

mr. chairman, the ranking member, to my good friend senator booker and to our colleagues, senators tillis and gramm -- graham, and our staff for crafting this. and i look forward to working with you in a bipartisan fashion to insure it gets the hearing and the vote it deserves. >> your inserts, without objection, will be included. senator booker. >> chairman, you are already considered a man of solomonic wisdom, now i know you have the patience of job as well -- [laughter] to wait through all the rhetoric of your colleagues, so thank you very much for your leadership. i literally just waited this long just to give gratitude one more time. i did not get a chance to publicly thank senator feinstein. i know she's noo longer here, bt i just wanted to heap upon her my gratitude as well. her and her staff were angelic in terms of their guidance, their shoe wardship, their wisdom -- stewardship. i wanted to make sure that was on the record. i wanted to reiterate my gratitude to staff. you know this yourself, sir, that these are tremendous agents of change. there were moments that these things we

tillis, republicans have long advocated for this. what do you say to that? >> i didn't vote for it. my position is pretty clear. i don't think the president is going to fire mrnk he is way too smart for that. he hasn't fired mr. mueller. i don't think mr. mueller out to be fired. i think mr. mueller ought to be allowed to finish this investigation. the president i know has vented. he is upset about it. i'd be upset about it, too. he is trying to run the country and i'm sure he is irritated about the investigation but we have to let mr. mueller finish. i don't see any indication that mr. trump is going to fire mr. mueller. i mean, it would be like introducing a bill to say well, the president can't get out of nafta. well, he hasn't gotten out of nafta. he is renegotiating it. why don't we wait and see how it turns out before we have our 19th nervous breakdown? >> sandra: here is dianne feinstein the ranking member on the committee. i'm glad the bill is bipartisan. republicans and democrats must ensure special counsel mueller can continue his investigation without interference. based on everything we just discussed, senator, i think it's safe to say you feel t