Transcripts For CSPAN2 U.S. Senate U.S. Senate 20240712

And securing the blefg of liberty blessings of liberty for all americans has taken a long and bumpy road and we still have a lot further to go. It starts with that one step. But at this moment the country and the world are demanding we pick up the stride. Lets follow iowas lead. Lets come together and take meaningful action. And to be clear, the passage of a single bill is not going to suddenly reverse centuries of injustice. Passing laws are a simple part. If we really want to change behavior, we need to commit ourselves to changing our hear hearts. The best way that we can personally commemorate the life of george floyd and the many others before him who lost their lives or suffered injustice is to open our own hearts. Chaplain black summed up the solution best when he quoted to me mark 12 31. Love your neighbor as yourself. Its both that simple and that challenging. So im asking all of us in this body to be more like iowa. Lets find a solution. Lets take that first step and begin our journey together. Thank you, mr. President. Ill yield the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call a senator mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from missouri. Mr. Blunt mr. President , are we in a quorum call . I move we suspend the quorum call. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Blunt mr. President , when i heard your comments earlier today and i couldnt have agreed more the importance of us dealing with the issues that were on the floor today that we failed to deal with. I heard our good friend senator scotts response to the way his hard work was looked at and frankly ignored. When the congress stops resembling an honest and open discussion of the issues, i think it gives us a lot to be concerned about. The solution should be the goal. When mechanics of congress when members of congress are more interested in a bill that they believe to be perfect rather than seriously engage in debate, it raises a lot of concerns about how we protect liberty and how we do our constitutional duty. Ive been in the congress for a while, mr. President , as some of my friends are more than eager to point out and i never voted for a perfect bill ever. Ive introduced a couple of perfect bills, but ive never voted for a perfect bill. Ive never voted for a bill that couldnt be improved. Our good friend tim scott said something the other day that struck me as a truism. He said i think most americans are tired of republicans and democrats talking about republicans and democrats. Most americans, as senator scotts point was made, want us to solve problems. They want us to come up not with the best answer possible. They want us to come up with the best possible answer. And whats the difference in the best answer possible and the best possible answer . The difference is figuring out when youve gotten done as much as you can get done and you decide that in this process you want to accept that and come back at a later time and see if you can do a little better. They dont want us to reject a promising solution just because someone from the other party said it first. They dont want us to reject a promising solution just because it doesnt solve everything. Nothing around here happens as fast as wed like it to. Debate, discussion, compromise all take time. Remember, the constitution was put together by people who didnt trust government and they didnt want to make it easy for government to do things, and they didnt. One of the great successes of all time was the success of making it hard for our government to do things. Its hard to explain in other countries where they have parliamentary systems where if the leader doesnt get what the leader wants, the government collapses. Thats not the way this government is designed at all. Its designed to take some time, but you have to be willing to take the time. Its designed to reach compromise but you have to be willing to reach compromise. We think our job should be to, again, come up with the best solution we can come up with and try to do the job that were sent here to do. Try not to wait and say, well, were too close to election. Apparently were too close to election all the time now. Never want to griff away anything give away anything that could be a political issue because its better maybe in some minds not to solve it than it is to solve it. Todays disappointing vote doesnt have to be final. The majority leader changed his vote at the very end. It was 5654. Three democrats and all of the republicans wanting to move forward, but it takes 60 votes here to move forward. And by the way, mr. President , it also takes 60 votes to get off the bill to have a vote. There was nothing to be lost by seeing if we couldnt make senator scotts bill better. In fact, i understand from his speech earlier he agreed to 20 amendments that had the possibility to do that. And thats what were supposed to do. Were here to vote. Were here to make decisions. Were here to move forward or to decide we dont want to move forward. There are times when a decision is we dont want to solve, this is not the right solution to this problem. That was not what we were dealing with today. Our colleagues in the house planned their own legislation. There was that moment of hope when the speaker of the house said she looked forward to taking their product, their bill to conference. Well, you only get to take a bill to conference if theres a conference. And you only get to take a bill to conference if we pass a bill and the house passes a bill. By the way, if theyre exactly the same bill, theres no reason to go to conference. That bill goes to the president. We pass a bill. The house passes a bill. We go to conference and then we come back and we were unwilling, 44 of our colleagues were unwilling to go through that process. You know, you get on a bill like this you get a lot of votes. You get to vote to go to the debate. You get to vote to go to the vote. You get to vote to pass the senate bill. Its been actually a while since i heard somebody say what used to be said often, im voting for this bill. I dont think its where it should be yet, but i look forward to voting for a Better Process coming out of conferen conference. You used to hear that all the time. Im voting for this bill so we can get to conference, and in Conference Im going to do everything i can to work to make it better. Thats how the process works. This take it or leave it, nobody shows up, our friends on the house show up one day to vote on a bill that god knows who decided what would be in that bill, and thats the bill that we either accept or reject, what a foolish way to do business. What an unsatisfactory way to fail to debate the issues that people sent us here to decide on. But again the house will pass a bill this week. And unless we reconsider this decision, that will be the end of it. That will be the end of it. The house has passed a bill. Were not going to take the house bill up. Theres no senate product to go to conference. Thats the end of it. It is an issue that we need to find a solution to. It was an issue we needed to find a solution to after what happened in st. Louis in 2014. Its an issue we needed to find a solution to the dates seem to keep getting closer to where this year three things happened in a row, maybe more than three that shouldnt have happened. And things have happened since those three things that shouldnt have happened. We need to lead on this issue. We need to find a way to make a successful conclusion to the best we can do. And the best we can do today doesnt mean thats the best we can ever do. It just means when you have something that youre agreeing with it this isnt even a bill where senator scotts bill, i didnt hear democrats say i agree with 80 of whats in the bill. Theyre more likely to say 80 of what i want for do is in the bill. Take 80 of what you want to do to conference. Hope it comes back with 90 of what you want to do or 96 of what you want to do, but if you dont trust the process, the process cannot produce a result. People are tired of us failing to do our job. We need to vote. We need to have amendments. We need to have bills on the floor on issues like this that the American People are in the streets of america saying solve this problem. You cant solve this problem by turning your back on it. You cant solve this problem by saying if i dont get this exactly the way i want it, id rather not have anything. Ill tell you what that gets you. That gets you nothing. In a democracy that does not work. If youre getting your way all the time, at home, at church, at school, at work, in the congress, there is something wrong with you. There is something wrong with you. Nobody gets their way all the time. Compromise is the essence of democracy. But youve got to have youve got to be willing to go to the place where compromise happens. On this bill that would have been a conference to see if we cant come closer to a bill that everybody believes is the best we can do. I think senator scott did a great job with his bill. I think senator scott thinks his bill could be better. But his bill is not the house bill, and the house bill is not going to be the final bill either. What a mistake, mr. President , to walk away from the chance to solve a problem. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from oklahoma. Mr. Lankford we just finished up a vote on the senate floor where we fell four votes short of opening debate on a bill to deal with Police Reform. Four votes short. We are four votes short of opening debate to discussing every to discussing. Every single republican voted for this and a handful of democrats, but the vast majority of democrats actually said no, we dont want to debate this bill. We will only debate the pelosi bill when it comes out of the house. Well, thats absurd. That didnt happen, i can assure you, when Speaker Boehner was the leader of the house that the senate said i tell you what, were going to wait and see whatever Speaker Boehner sends over to harry reid and harry reid would say oh, yes, please, well take up whatever the boehner bill is. That was never done, and they know that. Its such an odd an odd, peculiar season in our country politically and a painful season in our country culturally and practically. Our hope was to be able to have a real debate on a real bill. I was part of the team in writing this bill. This bill was a genuine push to be able to reform how we do police work and to increase accountability and transparency across the country. The bill that we just needed four democrats to join, just four democrats to join to be able to open up for debate would have banned choke holds across the country. It would have required it would have required the reporting of all serious Bodily Injury or death in Police Custody from everywhere in the country to start tracking all of this. It would have gathered information on noknock warrants all around the country, to start tracking this information to see if they are being abused. It would have put more body cameras on the streets. This bill that we just needed four democrats to join us on, just four, would have put 150 million more in bodyworn cameras all over the street and would have just put those body cameras on the street, it would have also put new requirements to be able to make sure they stay on, which has been an issue. This bill that we just needed four democrats to join us just so we could debate it, discuss it and amend it would have had a whole new system tracking complaints, discipline actions, would have pulled together records for Law Enforcement officers to make sure that they would have had those records, their commendations and their discipline travel to the next department with them, so before an officer leaves one department and goes to the next, all the records are made available to the next department so that we dont have a bad apple moving department to department. This bill that we just needed four democrats to be able to join on with us, any four, just so we could even open it up and debate it and amend it, would have changed a system on a duty to intervene. Putting new obligations, new training, new requirements on an officer thats watching another officer do something they know is wrong to be able to intervene in that process and to be able to stop it. The National Commission to be able to pull folks together to get the best ideas from around the country, to be able to gather best practices that have happened. There is also a new piece thats in this. Its not in the pelosi bill. Its only in this bill, that deals with giving a false report if youre a Police Officer. Because at times well have a Police Officer, there is serious Bodily Injury or death, and their written record doesnt match the reality of what really happened. Its not just a misremember. They intentionally intend to make a false report. This bill that we wanted to just debate today would have allowed us to be able to add additional penalties on that. To be able to make sure someone receives the due penalty if they are trying to lie on forms. This bill would have dealt with mental health. This bill would have dealt with deescalation training. This bill was designed to be able to help get additional training. This bill has a section in it using the museum of African American history to design a curriculum that we could put out to every Department Around the country in the history of race and Law Enforcement. Its modeled after what was done with the Holocaust Museum to deal with antisemitism. Thats what this bill was designed to do. We just needed four democrats to join us. But instead, they dug in, did press releases, and said that bill is terrible, its awful, it has no teeth in it. That bill is unsalvageable. I would ask any american listening to me and anyone in this room, are there one of those ideas that you dont like . Then the conversation was well, were not going to have an open enough process. So senator scott, who is our point negotiator in this, sat down with democratic leadership and said how about 20 amendments. 20 amendments on this bill. So if you want to bring something up to be able to amend it, change it, great. They said no. Because their desire is only Speaker Pelosis bill or nothing. I think thats exceptionally sad because we have been through this journey so many times where we will see a black man be killed and well all watch the footage, and the whole country rises up and Congress Starts debating and then it stops, and it stops because of silly stuff like this. Where people dig in and say if you dont do it entirely our way, then were not going to do it at all, because its not about solving the problem, its just about prolonging a problem until you can make it a political issue when families out there want this solved. All of those things i listed are all out there. Now, there is two things that i have heard to say were not going to take up your bill, were not going to debate it, were not going to discuss it, were not going to even block it from coming to the floor, which is what happened today. The two issues that i have heard is, you know what . I really want us to go to committee. I want a committee to look at this, take some time, go through this. Thats a fascinating argument. And i wish it was true. Because two weeks ago, the discussion was we need to get on this as quickly as possible until we actually put out a legitimate bill, and then my democratic colleagues said well, there is a problem with how youre putting it out. Were going to debate it on the floor. I would rather debate it in committee and then have the floor just bring it but not debate it on the floor. I dont want to debate it out here. Lets debate it over there. No one is buying that argument, no ones buying that. If you can put 20 amendments on this, thats what would happen in the committee, lets bring it, lets talk about it. Everyone sees what that is. Shuffling bills off to committee is about delaying and stalling and lets delay this out, because they know, okay, we wont get it this week, they will delay it out, and its after the 4th of july, and when you come back from the 4th of july, we have the coronavirus bills they know, we have the Appropriations Bills that they know. Its like okay, it wont happen there. Then there is the august gap. Then i will move to september. What they are trying to do is try to get it closer and closer to the election and make it a big election issue about it and say those crazy republicans wont resolve this. Get it close to the election and make it an election issue. Hello. Why dont we just solve this instead of dragging the country through something we all know key ways to be able to solve. So our two issues that we know of, one is a purely political issue, stall, delay, try to get us closer to the election and then divide the country. The second one deals with an issue on whether Police Officers should not only face criminal liability, they should face civil liability as well. And you hear this get kicked around all the time in all kinds of different terms. Speaker pelosis bill says not only put that Police Officer in prison, which they deserve, they murder someone commit a crime, a Police Officer is as liable under the law. We fix that. Speaker pelosis bill says not only put them in prison, but also civilly take away their home and their car and their pension away from their family, make sure we leave them destitute and their family destitute as well as putting them in prison. Thats what their bill is all about. And its the reason so many Police Officers are so frustrated and furious with the bill they adamantly want to put on the floor because they are saying if they did something wrong, they should face the consequences for it. But dont punish their family. Speaker pelosis bill says no, the Police Officer should be imprisoned and their families should have their home taken away from them and their Police Pension taken away from them and everything else. You know what we have talked about . We have talked about a Police Officer facing criminal penalties, as they do now and as they should. If there is a civil case, why dont we bring it against the department that didnt train their officer, that didnt supervise that officer . Instead of attacking an officers family, why dont we hold people to account to actually supervise People Better . To push the city and the department to do the right thing, to train, equip people, and if someone has a problem, dont leave them out there on the street with 18 discipline records. Take them off the street, because if you dont, the whole city is going to be held to account for it. Thats trying to end this. Thats trying to push towards more supervision. Not just trying to be punitive. Those are the two differences that i can pick up, political and civil. Otherwise, a lot of what i mentioned thats in our bill is in their bill as well. Tim scott made a very simple statement. Why dont we put this on the floor, why dont we actually debate the differences that we have, why dont we have a vote, and then why dont we finish this. Leader mcconnell dedicated this week and next week to this bill on Police Reform to give two weeks to do all kinds of amendments, all kinds of debate, but instead the conversation was no, dont want to do that. Its Speaker Pelosis bill or nothing, or lets just slow the whole thing down, send it to committee, and delay, delay, delay, delay this thing. Why dont we deal with this right now . There is two weeks been set aside to do it. There is plenty of time for amendments. Why do that instead of just blocking the bill . I dont i just dont know a lot of folks that say to me i really dont want there to be more body cameras on the street. I dont want more oversight on Law Enforcement when they turn in a false report or when they turn off their body camera. I dont run into a lot of people that say i want to just go ahead and leave the system the way it is, that we really dont know whats happening in a mr. President when there is in a Police Department when there is Bodily Injury and harm. I made a lot of people say those things make sense to me, why dont we do it . Which unfortunately is my same question today standing on the floor of the senate. Why dont we do it . With that, i yield the floor. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from West Virginia. Ms. Cooperate thank mrs. Cai want to thank my colleague from oklahoma for his dedication to this issue. Mrs. Capito i was proistled to serve on the group that put a lot of work into this on senator scotts very able leadership. I want to thank the way that senator lankford always approaches issues, not disparaging motives, but always looking at ways to improve and make this world a better place. Thats what this is about. Its been listening and aim saying, somebody watching this from afar, from oklahoma or West Virginia or vermont, im thinking to myself, what is all this talk about 60 votes and cloture and all this . Theyre not they dont theyre not focused on that. All they know is, we failed. This failed. And this was an opportunity that we should have grasped. We had a chance to discuss the need for Police Reform and to look at the very, very serious issues of racial inequalities. And i am exceedingly, exceedingly disappointed. I thought yesterday no, actually monday monday, i thought, good. Signals were we were going to get on this bill. Were going to have a healthy date with amendments. Were going to be in front of the American People giving our different opinions and were going to vote up and down and actually have a product here thats actually going to help. Its going to help. But it derailed, it derailed badly, and im very disappointed by that, as i think everybody in this country should be, those who are protesting, those who are deeply hurt by what theyve seen. They dont care about cloture and 60 votes and who gets the political point and hose whos going to be able to and whos going to be able to drag this to the election. They care about a deep lay, deeply emotional issue. We know that every american is entitled to equal protection under the law. We also know theres a lot of good Police Officers in this country, many, the vast majority. And its clear, though, that we have a real need to improve our Law Enforcement so that every american can have the confidence that the officers are there to serve them equally. We should provide better resources to train police on not just deescalation but use of force, intervention, all of the issues that we see really came forward in the horrifying death of george floyd. We should provide more body cameras. We wouldnt have known about george floyd had there not been a camera i dont believe it was the camera on the officer. It was a bystander camera. But cameras can be so incredibly useful to protect the rights of the people confronted and to protect the rights of the police. So we need to make sure that those not only are provided and in for our Law Enforcement but that theyre turned on, because we saw in louisville they werent turned on. We should make sure that the bad Police Officers cant pass from department to department and that their disciplinary actions and employment records are there, kept either locally or the pelosi bill says kept at the state, or the president says kept at the federal. Any way, in any event, kept for the transparency that we need. And we should eliminate the use of choke holds by officers unless the officer is in a situation where we cant get out of it. But quite frankly, im for banning them in any circumstance. Those statements are really not very controversial, and most americans really agree with them. And how do we knee . Well, because and how do we know that . Well, because both the boil sponsored by senator scat and cosponsored by many and the bill supported by senator booker and cosponsored by many democrats. The quotes from their report in comparing both bills, quote, both bills seek to establish best practices for Law Enforcement officers and training officers . Areas on the use of force and racial in the areas of use of force and racial bias. Both bills would seek to increase the use of body cameras worn by state and local Law Enforcement. Both bills. Both bills would contain provisions designed to enhance transparency concerning records of misconduct by Law Enforcement officers, both bills. Both bills include provisions designed to limit the use of choke holds by federal, state, and local Law Enforcement, though the two statutes dont different in the approach. What happens if we differ with the house . We go to conference and work out our differences. But were not having that chance today. Given these areas of exxon ground, it should have been easy given these areas of Common Ground, it should have been easy to come together and begin the debate on the senate floor. Thats what were supposed to do. There are a few major differences in the bill and this is where i think the American People would have really tuned into the debate. We know there is advenes on qualified we know there is a difference on qualified immunity. Lets have the debate. Had we moved forward, i think we could have ended up with a bipartisan bill that could pass both the house and senate and be signed into law. But as of now, you know what weve got, as senator scott said in his speech about an hour ago . Nothing. We have nothing. We have people on the streets of every town in america begging us to do something positive to help the situation. And today crickets, nothing, because we couldnt get cooperation. It would have made significant progress. I heard senator scott say and i didnt realize this until i heard him say it on the floor 20 amendments an a managers amendment. He offered in conversations with the other side. And again, nope nothing. We dont want that. We could have shown the American People, you know, we dont have the best record on showing the American People that we can Work Together and get things done. But, boy, we could have shown them that today. We could have anthony them that we could have shown them that today and the rest of the week. Maybe we all wouldnt have agreed on it, but some of us would have agreed on those issues and formulated better, smarter, more efficient legislation. We could have demonstrated that were united in support of the civil rights of all americans, in support of the men and women in Law Enforcement, and instead partisanship was allowed to carry the day. It should be clear because i think it should be to the American People that this motion that the other side says we dont have a seat at the table would have provided the world stage for their seat at the table to debate this issue. You know, we need 60 votes to continue and here i am talking about the technicalities of how to get it done. But there would have been an enormous amendment process that probably would have been quite lengthy and very, very, i think, beneficial. So i am really disappointed. Im disappointed to tell the American People that were listening to you, but, you know, maybe its not in our own political benefit to cooperate to move forward. So lets just draw it out, as senator lankford said. So i think it is important to point out in the process, if wed had an amendment debate, if wed had a debate on the senate floor, if wed cultivated and came up with a final product, it still is within the right, within the 60vote margin for the other side to say, no, cant do it, its not enough, cant go there. Okay, at least we tried. Now weve got nothing. So, as we move forward, i was on several radio interviews today. A lot of people want to know whats next. I dont know whats next. Weve got to do better than this. Weve got to do better by what we see happening across our country in listening to the crisis and when i to the cries, and when i heard senator scotts speech, when he talks to the communities that are the most vulnerable, that have the most difficulties in all struggles of their lives, we owe it to them to have this debate on the floor of the greatest deliberative body, the United States senate. So we could have demonstrated a lot today, and it didnt work. It was denied by 44 senators. And here we are having to go back to our constituents, go back to those folks who are very vulnerable to say, it didnt matter enough to try to fix it. It didnt matter enough that we gave you that we give each other 0 amendments. It didnt matter enough that we were going to have the debate on the senate floor. It didnt matter enough that we were going to have our experts come in and tell us whats the best. It didnt matter enough. And so i hope maybe as time goes by it will matter because this issue is not going away. And our passion to solve it as a collective body shouldnt go away. And im committed to seeing that it doesnt go away. Thank you. Mr. Leahy mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from vermont. Mr. Leahy mr. President , this afternoon weve heard a lot of rhetoric. Id like to now deal with some reality, and as so often happens, the reality is different than the rhetoric. Since i last spoke on the senate floor in the wake of George Floyds murder, americas peoples calls for justice have not diminished. Fortunately, theyve grown stronger, and rightfully so. And even since then, our nation has had to confront yet another needless killing of an African American man when an atlanta Police Officer shot Rayshard Brooks twice in the back when he was fleeing from officers. Now, i know from my own experience in Law Enforcement that nobody can dispute that officers have incredibly challenging jobs. No one will dispute that they are faced with difficult splitsecond decisions that impact life and death. But that difficulty does not excuse the fact that something is deeply wrong in our country. It does not excuse the fact that people of color have disproportionately suffered from police misconduct. People of color disproportionate i will profiled, are stopped by police, are arrested by police and are the victims of Excessive Force at the hands of police. Though confronted with the kilting of george floyd, millions of americans are demanding we do better as a nation. Theyre recognizing there are longstanding societal prejudices and biases have created a Law Enforcement culture and broader criminal Justice System that perpetuates these prejudices and these biases. And the American People are demanding that we roll up our sleeves and do the hard work that those charged with preserving the law are also subject to it. That no person is above the law. And for millions of americans, the time to act is now. But i think the senate is acting as though it is not up to the task. Well, on thursday, the house is expected to pass a comprehensive legislation to reform policing and theyre going to do that with republicans and democrats voting for it. What did the senate do . Its only passed a patchwork of half 46 of half measures that would do little more than place a bandaid on generations of wounds. I dont doubt at all that the legislation drafted by senator scott is a good faith attempt to find consensus within the republican conference on how to reform policy how to reform policing. But by any reasonable measure, the bill the republicans have put forward fails to actually reform policing. Onment of the most pressing on many of the most pressing issues, for example, addressing new racial inequalities or disparities or discrimination, the republican bill diverse either by doing nothing at all defers either by doing nothing at all or leaving it in the future for a commission to study it. The republican bill purports to create a new Grant Program to fund and mandate the use of bodyworn cameras which have been instrumental in holding both the police and suspects accountable. Maybe everybody failed to notice, but Congress Already created that program five years ago. In our appropriations committee, in a bipartisan fashion has been funding it ever since, all five years. This is not something new. The republican bill would create grant in my views to encourage police grant incentives to encourage Police Department behaviors. But the legislation introduced by senators booker and harris would actually change those behaviors. They dont say, here, please do t they say you have to do t they ban choke holds, they ban noknock warrants. Unlike the bookerharris bill, the republican bill would not address qualified immunity. Which allows officers to evade accountability even when a court finds that theyve violated Constitutional Rights. Can you imagine, mr. President , anybody else in this country, they violate someones Constitutional Rights, that they can stand up and say, im in a protected group, you cant do anything about it. Byebye now, see you. The republican bill does nothing to address racial profiling. It does nothing to that especially against somebody who is running away and gets shot in the back given a death penalty. It also does nothing to ensure there is federal oversight when a local Law Enforcement agency demonstrates a pattern of violating their citizens civil liberties. Its well known that the Trump Administration has effectively abandoned practice investigation and consent decrees which are proven instruments for positive change within some of our troubled departments. Thats why the bookerharris bill strengthens these investigations at both the federal and state level. And in return, the republican bill provides a talking point, the bookerharris bill provides real accountability and real transparency. But, sadly, and i think disturbingly the fact that i think the majority leader will not even allow the senate to debate the bookerharris bill reveals that hes interested in neither. Now, for a moment last week it appeared that some republicans were serious about finding bipartisan compromise. During a Judiciary Committee hearing on policing reform, chairman graham said hed like the committee to Work Together to find solutions, to sit down and see if we can reconcile the policing reforms packages and come up with something in common. A number of my republican colleagues on the Judiciary Committee even expressed an openness to reevaluate qualified immunity to ensure that there is a sense of accountability within Police Departments. I agree, but these are difficult issues. Certainly based on my experience under both republican and democratic majorities, i know the Judiciary Committee is capable of handling these difficult issues. I know because weve done it before on tough issues. Let me give you an example. Seven years ago a Bipartisan Group of senators, republicans and democrats across the political spectrum, put together a thoughtful bipartisan bill to reform our immigration system, but the bill wasnt put here on the senate floor with a take it or leave it. I held three hearings on the bill and we had five days of markups, some going late into the night. We considered 212 amendments, 141 of which were adopted, including 50 amendments offered by republicans and voted by both democrats and republicans. Our process was fair, thorough and deliberate. And what happened when it came to the senate floor . 68 senators of both parties across the political spectrum supported the legislation and voted for it. Now, if we could replicate that process for policing reform today, go to the committee, have the debate, bring up the amendments, have the hearings, vote on something and bring it here on to the floor with that kind of strong support, i suspect even more senators, democrats and republicans alike, would support it. But senator mcconnell is skipping all of thavment hes not that. Hes not allowing the Judiciary Committee to do its work, hes not allowing bipartisan compromise, instead he is forcing the senate to take up a wholly inadequate bipartisan bill or do nothing else. Here, vote for this deeply flawed bill or you get nothing. Thats not being the conscience of the nation. Thats not why i and many others came to the senate. And thats not how the senate gets things done, and every senator, republican and democrat alike, knows that. So i suggest to the leader, if hes serious about tackling Racial Injustice and policing reform, there is a blueprint to follow. This is not it, but i urge the majority leader to reverse course. If hes unwilling to bring meaningful legislation to the floor to address these issues today, well, then allow the Judiciary Committee to put in the hard work necessary to build bipartisan consensus. Im sure it could be done within a couple of weeks of actual hearings and votes in our committee. But instead the leaders insisting on a process thats designed to fail. In doing so the senate fails. The senate fails george floyd, it fails breonna taylor, but it fails countless others who have been victims of brew talt or discrimination by brutality or discrimination by a flawed Justice System. But in doing so, the senate also fails the American People. I hope thats not the path we take. I voted not to go forward on the flawed process hoping that we might have a real bipartisan process. I believe that the senate should be the conscience of the nation. Lets be so on this. Lets go to committee. Lets have republicans and democrats vote for or against amendments and bring a bill to the floor. Stop this take it or leave it steps to the republican leader. Lets have a bill that both democrats and republicans have worked on and then bring it up, vote up or down, vote up or down on amendments, and give the American People something they can be proud of and finally, finely something the senate can be proud of. Mr. President , i do not see another senator seeking recognition, so i suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call mr. Durbin mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from illinois. Mr. Durbin i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be suspended. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Durbin mr. President , our founders did not give us a perfect nation, even they knew that. When thomas jefferson, himself a slave owner, reflected on the existence of slavery in a nation which claimed to believe that all men are created equal. He wrote, i tremble for my country when i reflect that god is just and that his justice cannot sleep forever. Jefferson was not alone as a slave owner. George washington, the namesake of this great city and another great state, the father of our nation, he and his wife owned 300 slaves. Just minutes before he died, he asked his wife to bring the two copies of his last will for him to look at for one last time and to decide. He handed one of the copies of the also to his wife and said burn this one, keep the other. The one he burned would have released all of his slaves at the moment of his death. The one he signed said that they would continue to be his wifes slaves for as long as she lived. He was the father of our nation. We might not have had an independent nation without his skill and leadership, and yet, he was not a perfect man by any means. The true measure of a nations greatness is not simply the words written by an earlier generation, it is the work of every generation to make those words not just ideals but facts. We see that work all around us today. For weeks americans have joined together in an incredible display of constitutional petitioning of this government of this nation for change in cities large and small and virtually every state. They are protesting systematic racism and Police Violence against people of color. These protests have spread around the world. Videotapes and d. N. A. Evidence have done more to assault the foundation of justice in america than anything in our history. In the midst of a pandemic caused by a new virus, a multiethnic, multigeneral multigenerallal alliance has found a collective will to fight the virus of racism. It was a different protest 51 years ago this month that began one of the newest chapters in americas long struggle for equal rights. That protest is the reason that june is celebrated as pride month. It started in the Early Morning hours of june 28, 1969 at the Stonewall Inn in gren wish Greenwich Village in new york city. It stands as a milestone on americas journey toward equal justice alongside revered names such as selma and seen came falls. In 1969, however, the Stonewall Inn was a ram shackle refuge for outcast, a home away from home for some of the poorest, most powerless members within one of americas most marginalized communities. Its patrons included drag queens and lesbians, transgender and nonconforming people, lgbtq youth who lived in the nearby park after being abandoned by their own families. Police raids and arrests were regular events at the Stonewall Inn as they were at most gay bars in america at that time. But something changed during that raid in the Early Morning hours of june 28, 1969, something in this great universe shifted. That night when the Police Became violent, the patrons of the Stonewall Inn fought back. The stonewall uprising was a sixday protest against Police Mistreatment and while the protests were contained almost entirely within Greenwich Village, they changed the world. On the First Anniversary of the stonewall uprising, the first gay pride parade was held in new york, in los angeles, and in the city of chicago. Within two years of that uprising, there were gay rights organizations at every major city in the United States and canada, australia, and western europe. The month of june is now recognized throughout much of the world as pride month, a celebration of diversity, acceptance, and inclusion. Last year on the 50th anniversary of stonewall, the grand marshal leading chicagos pride parade was our citys first openly gay mayor lorri loi light foot, an incredible leader. This year most pride festivals in the u. S. And around the globe were canceled or transformed into virtual celebrations because of covid19 but those virtual gatherings still had much to celebrate. Weve witnessed poe found progress in profound progress in half century since stonewall. Public attitudes about gay and trans rights have increased greatly. Openly gay men and women serve as corporate and civic leaders, as mayors, governors, members of congress and an openly gay married man ran a Serious Campaign for president. Gay men and lesbians serve openly in Americas Armed forces. While this generation has regrettably reinstated a ban on transgender persons serving openly in the military, transmen, women and children are becoming more visible members in much of the rest of our society. This june also brings a major new cause for celebration. In a landmark 63 ruling the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that employment discrimination on the basis of Sexual Orientation and gender identity is prohibited under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This is an amazing story in history. Where an ultraconservative congressman in virginia in 1964 thought that he would torpedo the civil rights bill by adding the word sex into those bases for discrimination thus inviting protection for women, he was sure that would be the end of the conversation. His amendment was adopted and of course led to a lot of debate on gender equality and ending gender discrimination. Little did he know or many others that it would lead to this historic Supreme Court ruling when it came to Sexual Orientation. This is history happening before our eyes. And thank goodness, thank goodness were alive to see it. But work of equal justice under law is never finished. We were reminded of that last week when the Trump Administration released a dis crime toar rule that attempts to eliminate Explicit Health care protections for lgbtq americans. And we were reminded that the work of equality is not finished each time we learn of another victim of alarming violence, violence against black transgender women, including the deaths of 25yearold riah milton in ohio and 27yearold dominick fells in philadelphia. On may 29 four days after George Floyds murder, more than a hundred of the nations most prominent lgbtq civil Rights Groups released a letter condemning racial violence. Their letter said that violence against transgender and gender nonconforming people of color happens, quote, with such regularity, it is no exaggeration to describe it as an epidemic of violence. The groups went on to say, we understand what it means to rise up and push back against a culture that tells us we are less than them, that our lives dont matter. Today we join together to say black lives matter and commit ourselves to the actions those words require. Among the organizations signing the pledge are the human rights campaign, equality illinois, and the aids foundation of chicago. Nearly all americans recognize dr. Kings i have a dream speech at the 1963 march on washington. It was a great moment in americas long struggle for equal rights. But how many of us know that the organizational genius behind that great gathering was a gay black man. How many of us know the names marcia p. Johnson, sylvia rivera, activist and transgender women of color, members of one of the most marginalized and victimized groups in america. They were also leaders of the stonewall uprising. They both continued to fight for gay and transrights all of their lives until marcias death in 1992 and sylvias death a decade later. Years after stonewall marcia p. Johnson recalled history isnt something you look back at and say it was inevitable. History happens because people make decisions that are sometimes very impulsive and in the moment, but these moments are cumulative realities. James baldwin, a brilliant writer, thinker, gay black man warned us that, quote, nothing can be changed until it is fac faced. Stonewall was the tipping point. The protests today against the deaths of george floyd, Rayshard Brooks, breonna taylor, tony mcdade, ahmaud arbery, mcquan mcdonald, tamir rice, sandra bland and so many other black men, women, and children are in fact a tipping point. Lets not look away from this historic moment of change. Let the senate join on the right side of history. Lets not let a setback ow oa procedural setback on the floor of the senate stop us from finding some Common Ground to move forward. Let us acknowledge the rightness of this months Supreme Court decision and pass the equality act to make it plain that discrimination based on Sexual Orientation and gender identity is illegal and will not be tolerated, not just at place of employment but all across america in every walk of life. And let us add to end violence and oppression against our black and Brown Brothers and sisters. Let us do our part in our time to make the noble promises of our founders real for all americans. Mr. President , i ask that the following statement be placed in a separate part of the record. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Durbin thank you, mr. President. Mr. President , last week in another landmark decision, the Supreme Court rejected President Trumps effort to repeal deportation programs for dreamers and young immigrants who came to the United States as children. In an opinion by chief justice john roberts, an opinion which i have here, the court held that the president s decision was to rescind the deferred action for Childhood Arrivals Program was, quote, arbitrary and capricious. It was ten years ago, ten years that i joined republican senator dick lugar of indiana on a bipartisan basis to call on president obama to use his Legal Authority to protect dreamers from deportation. President obama responded by creating daca which provides temporary two years at a time protection from deportation to dreamers if they register with the government, pay a substantial fee, pass a criminal background check. More than 800,000 dreamers came forward to sign up for daca. It unleashed the full potential of these young men and women who are contributing to america as teachers and nurses and soldiers and Small Business owners. And more than 200,000 Daca Recipients are now officially characterized by our government as essential, Critical Infrastructure workers. I didnt make that up. It is the definition of President Trumps own department of Homeland Security. 200,000 of the 800,000 daca, essential, Critical Infrastructure workers. Among these essential workers are 41,700 Daca Recipients in health care. Doctors, intensive care nurses, paramedics, respiratory therapists. But on september 5, 2017, President Trump repealed daca. Hundreds of thousands of dreamers faced losing their work permits and being deported to countries they barely remember. Thankfully the Supreme Court has now rejected that effort. Unfortunately, the president through his tweets has responded by attacking the court and threatening the daca protectees again. But chief Justice Roberts has made it clear its not going to be easy for the president to carry out his threat. The chief justice wrote that in order to repeal daca, the Administration Must consider, quote, accommodating particular reliance interests. Heres what it means. In order to repeal daca, the Administration Must consider the interests of those who have come to rely on the program. This includes not just Daca Recipients but the american citizen children, the schools where Daca Recipients study and teach, and the employers who invested time and money in training them. Today im calling on President Trump to do the right thing for our nation and not make another effort to repeal daca. Instead the president should direct the department of Homeland Security to reopen daca. Since 2017 when the president announced the end of daca, the program has been closed to new applicants. As a result there are tens of thousands of dreamers whove never been able to apply for their opportunity under daca. Now Congress Also has a responsibility. Last week President Trump tweeted, and i quote, ive wanted to take care of Daca Recipients better than the do nothing democrats, but for two years they refuse to negotiate. End of quote. Heres the reality. President trump has rejected numerous bipartisan offers to protect the dreamers. One example, on february 15, 2018, the Senate Considered a bipartisan amendment offered by republican senator mike rounds, independent senator angus king, including a path to citizenship for dreamers. A bipartisan majority of senators supported the amendment but it fell short of the 60 votes needed to pass the senate because of the Trump Administrations opposition. On that same day, the senate voted on the president S Immigration proposal and that amendment failed by a bipartisan majority of 3960. In other words, we came close to 60 in a bipartisan effort to answer the president s challenge. His response legislation received 39 votes for and 60 against in the senate. On june 4, 2019, the house of representatives passed h. R. 6, the dream and promise act, legislation that would give dreamers a path to citizenship with a strong bipartisan vote. The dream and promise act has now been pending in the senate on the desk of senator mcconnell for more than one year. Yesterday i sent a letter signed by all 47 Democratic Senators calling on senator mcconnell to immediately schedule a vote on the dream and promise act. The president has challenged us. Do something legislatively. Do something, congress. Senator mcconnell, its within your power for us to do something and to do it quickly. Over the years ive come to the floor of the senate many times to tell the simple stories of these dreamers. These stories show whats at stake when we consider the fate of daca. Today i want to tell you about Diana Jimenez. The 123rd streamer whose story ive told on the senate floor, came to the United States if mexico at the age of 6, grew up in loredo, texas. She wrote to me and heres what she said about her childhood. Growing up in the United States was both great and challenging. I love the people, the culture, the language. At times it was also hard. Simulating and learning english, a totally new language for me came with setbacks. Still my neighbor, teachers and the Community Around me were very welcoming. Ill never forget that. When diana was 13 her mother was admitted to the hospital because her mother didnt speak english, diana had to serve as a translator. This experience inspired her to become a nurse. Diana attended texas a m, she was on the deans list, offered a scholarship for academic accomplishment, but she had to turn it down because she was undocumented. She went on to earn her degree in nursing and history, along with a minor in economics. Thanks to daca, now works as an operating room nurse on the cardiovascular, cardiothoracic Specialty Team in a hospital in austin, texas. She is married. She has a baby girl. Heres what diana says about daca. Daca means opportunity to me. Im glad i live in a country that gives me the chance to better myself if i want to. There are doors and opportunities for the taking all around me, and daca is the key to my success. Now diana is on the front lines of the covid19 pandemic at a state which is seeing a dramatic increase in infection. She is worried about infecting her little girl. Heres what she says about her experience. I have come in contact with patients infected with covid multiple times, and i will continue to do so as long as im doing my work. Even though this pandemic has affected both my personal and professional life, i will continue to do my job as a nurse. I want to thank Diana Jimenez for her service. She is, in fact, a health hero. She is a daca health hero. She is putting herself and her family at risk to save american lives. Can we ask for anything more . She shouldnt have to worry about whether a decision by this administration will lead to her deportation. As long as im a United States senator, im going to continue to come to the floor and tell the stories of people just like Diana Jimenez. It would be an american tragedy to deport this brave and talented nurse who is saving lives in the midst of this pandemic. We must ensure that diana and hundreds of thousands of others in our essential workforce are not stopped from working when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become american citizens. Would america be better if Diana Jimenez was returned to mexico . If this nurse left the operating room at that hospital . If she decided that she could no longer stay in the United States and was forced, deported, to leave in the midst of this pandemic . Of course not. Every american knows that. Democrat, republican, or independent. Why dont we stand together and remind the president that there are values worth fighting for, and one of them is to make sure that this land of opportunity also has room for the immigrants who bring so much to our shores. I yield the floor. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from tennessee. Mr. Alexander i have one request for committees to meet during todays session of the senate. It has the approval of the majority and minority leaders. The presiding officer duly noted. Mr. Alexander mr. President , i agree with the senator from illinois that there ought to be a legislative solution to the daca children. In fact, we had one in 2013. We worked on it in a bipartisan way. It solved a large number of immigration issues. Trying to have a Legal Immigration system, sent it to the house, and the house didnt consider it. Im ready to continue to to do that. I disagree with one thing that happened today, though, about bringing bills to the floor. He talked about the importance of bringing the daca legislation to the floor. That is important. Once we have an agreement, either in the committee or among us informally, the second bill thats very important to bring to the floor is the National Defense authorization act, which has been enacted for more than 50 years in which in which members in the Armed Services committee have a chance to offer amendments. But senator mcconnell, who is the majority leader and because he is has one right, really, which is to decide what to bring to the floor, he pushed aside the National Defense authorization act, which is important, and said in these times, i think the important thing for me to do is to bring to the floor legislation on Police Reform and Racial Justice and allow the senate to have an open amendment process, and he did that in what would be the logical way since he is the majority leader, he offered a majority bill sponsored by senator tim scott and cosponsored by a number of us on the republican side. So the vote we had a little earlier today was shall we proceed to the issue of Racial Justice and Police Reform, starting with the scott bill with an open amendment process. Now, what does that mean . That means that any democrat could offer the house bill or any democrat could offer any other amendment. We have gotten into a bad habit around here which i know the senator from illinois doesnt like either, which is if he offers an amendment, i object to his amendment, and then if i offer an amendment, he says well, because you objected to mine, i will object to yours, and so we dont have any amendments. But we should be able to bring an important bill to the floor, whether its daca or National Defense or whether its criminal justice, and say its open for amendment. And lets have amendments. I think thats happened so little over the last several years that people have forgotten how to do it. If you dont like the amendment, someone can move to table it. That takes 51 votes. Sometimes its 60 votes. If we get to the end of the process and the Minority Side doesnt like the bill the way it is, they can keep it from going off the floor by refusing to give 60 votes. So that was very disappointing that when the majority leader has taken a limited number of weeks and said okay, i will give a week and a half to Racial Justice and Police Reform and start with the majority bill and offer to the entire senate the chance to amend it, for the other side to say no, we wont let you even go to the bill, i think thats very disappointing. And senator scott i know is disappointed, and many of us are, and i dont believe it distinguishes the senate when that occurs. I came to the floor today, mr. President , to talk briefly about a hearing we had yesterday in the Health Committee on the next pandemic. What do we need to do to prepare for the next pandemic . That caused at least one senator to say what are we doing talking about the next pandemic when were in the middle of a big one right now and we have a lot of work to do . We do have a lot of work to do, but i want to answer that question. The reason we need to talk about the next pandemic is that we have short memories, memories fade. We go on to the next issue, and we dont do everything we needed to do. We have had Public Health emergencies before. Some members are still here when anthrax drove senators from their offices. There was sars. There was the 2009 flu pandemic. There was ebola. There was mrsa. Four president s bush, obama, trump, clinton all reacted tu would think. They issued reports, they made proposals, we passed nine laws, many new regulations. We tried to do some things to be ready for the next Public Health emergency. We built buildings to manufacture vaccines. We created a new structure for managing a Public Health emergency. We made we changed the way that the National Stockpile is managed. We did a number of things. One of our witnesses yesterday was senator bill frist who was the majority leader during the mid 2000s. He said he made 20 speeches on or about 2005 where he said the only question about the next pandemic is not whether its coming but when it will come. And he listed six things that needed to be done back then. Well, the reason we had the hearing yesterday was we didnt get all those things done. Now, some people might say well, werent we prepared for this pandemic, and most experts thought we were pretty well prepared. I read yesterday in the hearing a frontpage story from the New York Times on march 1 of this year about covid19. In it, it said that most expert. March 1. That was six weeks after we knew about the disease. The time we had about 100 cases in the United States, only two deaths. There were many cases around the world. But at that time, the New York Times has reported that experts doubt that this disease experts say it is far from certain, the word certain, that this disease will spread to all parts of the country, especially at the same time, and experts believe that the United States is as well prepared as any country to deal with this pandemic. That was on march 1. And two and a half weeks later, we began to shut down the whole country by order of the governments of this country. So we were prepared, but we were surprised, too. We underestimated this virus and how aggressive it is and how contagious it is and the fact it can travel silently without symptoms. So dr. Frist was one of the witnesses yesterday. Mike leavitt, a former secretary of the health and Human Services, former governor of utah was another. Julie guberding, who was a former head of the center for Disease Control was yet another. She is now at merck. The chief medical officer of the state of michigan was there. We talked about the next pandemic and why talk about it now . Because the things that dr. Frist mentioned 20 years ago and the things that really need to get done, we didnt get all done in between pandemics. Why . We have short memories. Four or five months ago, we were in the middle of the impeachment of a president. That sounds like ancient roman history today. But our minds go on to the next crisis and we dont get things done. So the time the time to look at the next pandemic is while we are in the middle of this one and say what are we lacking, what could we do better, and lets fix it while the irons hot, while our eye is on it. For example, one of the things that they suggested that we do, all the witnesses, is that we have a dedicated source of funding for stockpiles and for research. You think thats easy to do . I dont think it will be easy to get done. It took us years to pass the Outdoor Recreation bill, the Great American outdoors act, because of those kinds of funding issues. Were more likely to create a dedicateed stream of funding for preparedness for the next pandemic if we do it in the middle of this pandemic when we have got our eye on the ball. Another recommendation was that we should have an office in the National Security council to provide coordination between epidemics and during the next one. Thats not easy to do either. When is the best time to do it . Now during this pandemic when we have got our eye on the ball. Another proposal that came up very often was that we ought to build manufacturing plants for vaccines that we dont use between pandemics and that we ought to spend the money to keep them open and warm, in the words of mike leavitt, so that they are ready when suddenly a pandemic comes. Remember, this one hit us fast. Not many cases on march 1, shutting down the government by the end of march. And we need those manufacturing plants, and thats something that we havent gotten done in the way we should have gotten done. Thats some of it. When is the best time to do it . Now, while we have our eye on the ball. Strengthening our state and local Public Health system. Governor leavitt said that over the last 40 years, we have consistently underfunded our state and local Public Health systems. They are the leaders in our effort to deal with this pandemic or any pandemic, including the next pandemic. When is the best time to to get over this bad habit of underfunding our state and local Public Health system right now while we see that we need it and while we see what deficiencies it might have . And then on stockpiles, in between some of these earlier pandemics, we changed the management of the stockpile required, spend some money to make sure that protective equipment is in there and the other things that we need, but it turned out not to be sufficient, and why was the problem, is because between pandemics, we took our eye off the ball and bubts got tight and states and hospitals began to save money buy getting rid of the things in their local stockpiles. So for all those reasons, the things that we need to do need to be done now. I put out a white paper a few weeks ago inviting comment from experts around the country on what do we need to do now to be prepared for the next pandemic. Item one was tests, treatments, and vaccines. How do we accelerate research and development . Were doing a good job of that now. What can we learn about that from the next pandemic . Disease surveillance. There is a lot of criticism of the of the center for Disease Control inability to gather all of the data that it needs to track diseases, emerging diseases in the way that it should. Now is the time to deal with that. Stockpiles, distributions, and surgeons in hospitals. Had to shut down hospitals, elective surgery, creating enormous costs all across the country. We had to come up with 175 billion just over the last three months to try to help hospitals recover that. Can we not do a different job of preparing for the surge of patients that will come with a pandemic . Maybe the best time to do that is while were in the midst of a pandemic. And then Public Health capabilities. I mentioned strengthening the local Public Health system. And then whos on the flag pole. Is there a better way to have a sort of supreme allied commander, all the various agencies that we have today. Those plus the need for dedicated funding, mr. President , are difficult issues. The answer to the question, why in the world are we having a hearing on the next pandemic when were in the middle of this one, is because for the last 20 years between pandemics we havent got the job done on some of the things that need to be done that dr. Frist mentioned when he was majority leader in 20 speeches 20 years ago. So if we cant do it between pandemics, lets do it during a pandemic. And thats what our hearing was about. It was a good hearing, terrific witnesses, good suggestions. At the end i asked all four witnesses to please summarize the three things that each one thought should be done this year if they could. As it turned out, theyre all hard to do and, second, most of them will not open help with the next pandemic, they will help with the current one, the current one that were in. So, i wanted that was our fourth hearing this month by the Health Committee. Weve had a hearing on going back to School College safely. We had one on going back to school safely. Those two hearings made clear to me the need for us to consider, if we have another piece of covid legislation in july, that it needs to include sufficient funds to make sure our 100,000 schools and 6,000 colleges can open safely in the fall. The way to open the economy is to go back to school and back to college and back to child care. Thatll get us comeback to work. Twothirds of the married families in this country have parents, both of whom work outside the home. Children arent learning when theyre let out of school in march and dont go back to school for several months and maybe even six or eight or ten months if they dont go back to the fall. So there is some health risk. But if we do our job here and provide sufficient funds in july to make sure our 100,000 schools and 6,000 colleges can open safely, that will be the surest avenue toward normalcy in the year 2020 before we have a vaccine. We also had a hearing last week on tellly health. We had on telehealth. We had ten years of experience crammed into three months. Weve gone from very little Telehealth Medical Services delivered remotely to in some cases 40 or 50 of the doctorpatient visits are remotely. Many people think that will level off at 15 or 20 . That would probably be the biggest change in delivery of medical services in our nations history. I cant think of a bigger one. Hundreds of millions of visits would be done remotely instead of in person. And ive recommended that at least the two major changes that weve made temporarily in telehealth be made permanent. And then yesterday was what to do about the next pandemic and then next tuesday will be our fifth hearing this month, and it will include dr. Fauci and dr. Redfield and dr. Hahn, admiral giroir who will give us an update on going back to school, college, and going back to work. Mr. President , i ask unanimous consent to include in the record my Opening Statement from yesterdays hearing. I yield the floor. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Casey mr. President , i rise this afternoon to speak about the bill that we voted on earlier today and the debate that has ensued prior to that vote and im sure afterwards. This is a moral moment for the country. I think most would agree with that. And the question is, how will our nation respond at this moral moment . The brutal murder of george floyd by a Police Officer, quote, shames us before the world, unquote. Im quoting an naacp official, who i think said it well for all of us. His murder did shame us before the world. So did the murder of Rayshard Brooks and breonna taylor, and you can go on from there, so many other names that we may not have heard before and many that well hear offered and over again. That well hear over and over again p. A lot of us feel that shame. Countless millions of americans feel that shame. They feel that sadness and they feel that anger all these weeks since that terrible moment that we all witnessed. And so many moments before and after that. And as they feel that shame and express anger and frustration, and as they protest and proclaim, as they march and mobilize, as they use their voice and cast their votes, they demand change but not simply just change in and of itself; a certain kind of change, the kind of change we see rarely in washington these days and frankly rarely over the course of american history. But i think we might be in one of those moments now. They demand transformative change. They demand and appropriately so systemic change to a criminal Justice System that is infused with racism. Their righteous deed manned for change is their righteous demand for change is in fact a petition for justice. In the 1950s and 1960s, Martin Luther king jr. Said it well. Among many things he said well about where we were then and unfortunately where we are now. His words still ring true. He said, injustice any wither is a threat to justice he said, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Still true in the context of this debate. But you can go back even further than what dr. King said. You can go back hundreds of years. St. Augustin said it well about justice. He said without justice, what are kingdoms but great bands of robbers. Kingdoms as bands of robbers. Theres been a lot of robbery over many, many years, even generations, when it comes to black americans. For hundreds of years, black americans have been robbed of the equal protection of the law. The United States Supreme Court has emblazoned on the front portico of that building just yards from here, equal justice under law. So many black americans have been robbed of equal justice under law. Theyve been robbed of opportunity, the opportunity to advance in a country that would not hold the color of their skin against them. But theyve been robbed of that. Robbed of their dignity over and over again, in ways grave and in other ways that people never saw. All the indignities, all the insults, all the mistreatment, not to mention worse than that. Black americans have been robbed of the chance to truly pursue the American Dream and robbed of peace of mind, something is that those of us who are white should think about a lot more. That i should think about more as a white male. The peace of mind that a parent has, a father or a mother should have the peace of mind in america that when their son or daughter but often its their son when he leaves the house in the morning, will he be mistreated walking through a neighborhood by an official of our government, Law Enforcement or otherwise . Will he be pulled over and have his rights violated because of the color of his skin . Black americans have been robbed of that peace of mind in addition to so many other kinds of robbery thats impacted their lives. So what do we do . Do we simply march and protest and express outrage . All of that is important, all of that is vital, in fact all of that is one of the reasons were even here talking about it on the senate floor, people in both parties talking about it. In my home state of pennsylvania, there are very few counties just a handful of counties that have not had one or two or many more protests in a state with 67 counties. So part of what weve got to do as legislators, as members of this legislative body called the United States senate, is to in fact legislate. Let me start with the bill that was introduced about two weeks ago, the justice in placing act, senate bill 3912. If i had to describe it in one bill or one word, i should say, describe the bill in one word, it would be accountability. And i think its a big difference between that bill, the justice in policing act, and the bill offered by the majority. Accountability is vital. Its essential. We cannot move forward and say that weve done something substantial to bring about justice, to advance the cause of justice, unless theres accountability. The bill also has very strong transparency provisions, as well as a long menu of actions we can take to improve Police Practices in a meaningful way. Let pee start with accountability. We talk about accountability, were talking about constitutional violations, preventing those violations and holding those accountable that engage in constitutional violations. We could, for example, revise 18 United States code section 242. Its right now, as a matter of law, a violation of law for any Law Enforcement officer to the willfully deprive a person of any right protected by the constitution. But its almost impossible for prosecutors to prove willfulness. And the department of justice doesnt prosecute very many cases in a nation of 18,000 Law Enforcement agencies. This bill would revise the intense standard known by the latin mens rea, the intense standard to knowingly or with reckless disregard. So the change of that standard under law would make it more likely that successful prosecution can be brought when Constitutional Rights are violated in a criminal manner. The second constitutional violation provision speaks to civil liability, reforming our civil liability laws often referred to by a particular doctrine, qualified immunity. Cases where a citizen is a victim of police misconduct, this is a constitutional violation when it happens. Currently, a Police Officer who violates an americans Constitutional Rights are often protected by a liability shield that we know as qualified immunity. This doctrine has been questioned by many. At least two Supreme Court justices who dont usually agree on much have questioned it. Members of the United States senate in both parties here have questioned this doctrine. Basically, the doctrine holds that police cannot be liable unless the conduct violates, quote, clearly established, unquote, standards. Or a standard set forth in prior cases. And most courts dismiss such cases. The bill would reform that doctrine, qualified immunity, to ensure that americans can recover damages in a case where their Constitutional Rights are violated by the actions of Law Enforcement. So theres two provisions that speak to accountability. Theres a third as well is and i wont go through all of them. Accountability also means strengthening pattern and practice investigations by granting subpoena power to the Civil Rights Division of the department of justice. And also providing grants, funding to state attorneys general to conduct these pattern and practice investigations at the state level. The focus here, again, is on constitutional violations that are systemic in a local jurisdiction or systemic in a state agency. What results from these kinds of investigations often are consent decrees. These consent decrees by courts are, of course, supposed to be judicially enforced. These decrees can often ensure that a Police Department implements reforms. Heres one of the problems. The Trump Administration has virtually abandoned this practice of bringing these pattern and practice investigations. The Obama Administration opened 25 such cases. But even under the Obama Administration there was a constraint because of the lack of subpoena power. That should be changed. Ill just mention two more provisions, mr. President. Its a long list, but ill just mention two more. The justice in policing act bans choke holds and bans carotid holds and bans noknock warrants in federal drug cases federal drug cases. What about the bill offered by the republicans, the majority here in the senate . The republican bill does not, in my judgment, respond to this moral moment. It does not substantially advance the cause of justice because its devoid of provisions that would impose accountability real accountability on Law Enforcement and especially on a particular Law Enforcement officer who is sworn to protect americans. Hes not sworn to violate their Constitutional Rights. So when a Law Enforcement officer engages in that conduct, there must be accountability. The bill does not speak to that in a fashion that i think would bring about change. The bill also doesnt even explicitly ban choke holds and carotid holds. Meaning a choke hold that can cut off your air flow and the carotid hold can cut off your blood flow. Both are lethal. The bill doesnt ban it. Thats why were here. Because the American People, god only knows tens of millions who watched a Police Officer choke the life out of a human being, george floyd. Without that bill im not sure we would be here debating this bill or any bill, but the idea that that practice is not banned under this bill makes the bill woefully deficient and i think thats an understatement. The bill fails to abandon noknock warrants, particularly in cases of drug warrants, and that kind of ban might have saved the life of breonna taylor, for example. The republican bill doesnt prohibit racial profiling and provides no substantial change in the militarization of police forces. So in the end, mr. President , were here not just to debate on focus on bills and policy and language, but were here to talk about justice. Theres a great hymn ive heard in church over many years rooted in the scriptures and one of the refrains or one of the parts of the refrain of that hymn is that we are called. We are called to act with justice. Those are the exact words of that hymn. The first couple of lines of the hymn are come live in the light, and then it says and then it goes on to say were called to act with justice. If were going to act with justice here by way of legislation, we should listen not just to the scriptures or to dr. King or to st. Augustine, we should listen to a more recent dr. King. He just happens to be the former education secretary, dr. John b. King, just testified in our health and Human Services committee, the committee that senator alexander was talking about. King said the following regarding students returning to school this year and i think it bears directly not just on these justice issues but also on the broader agenda that we should push forward to advance the interests of black americans and communities of color. Dr. King, in this testimony just recently, dr. John king said the following, quote, when our students return to school buildings, they will not Additional Support as they grapple with the continued reality of racism in america and the legacy of over 400 years of antiblackness. The murders of george floyd and then he lists some others those murders have once again sent the message to black students that their lives are devalued. He goes on in his testimony to talk about the moment were in, the moment ive called a moral moment, as have others. Dr. John king said, quote, we face a moment where our students our nations students of color and their families also find themselves enduring a pandemic which disproportionately impacts their health, mired in an economic crisis that disproportionately affects their Financial Wellbeing and living in a country that too often still struggles to recognize their humanity. Unquote. So said the presiding officer please takes conversations off of the floor. Mr. Casey mr. President , im almost done. Mr. President , as dr. Martin luther king, and dr. John king, the former secretary of education, and others have told us, we have to make sure this is a moment we can act with justice, as the hymn tells us. All of us, no matter where were from, no matter what party were in, all of us are called to act with justice. So let us not fail to act with justice in this moral moment. Let us embrace this moment. Pass the justice in policing act or something very close to that and bring the warm light of justice to millions of americans, especially black americans. I yield the floor. Mr. Young mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from indiana. Mr. Young mr. President , theres been a lot of talk on this floor about Border Security in recent years. Its amazing how much of what is said resembles what was said a quarter century ago. Im equally amazed by how the politics of Border Security has changed over that time period. Earlier this week its been widely publicized, President Trump visited humana, arizona, to h punch ma, arizona to highlight the need for Border Security. Now, as someone who has actually had firsthand experience with Border Security, i thought id say a few words as well. As a United States marine in the 1990s, i spent months in the desolate area that was a stones throw away from huma, arizona. The same place these Border Patrol agents stand. Now, my marines and i were part of an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle unit. We worked with Border Patrol agents like these gentlemen, and we were charged with patrolling the border in the huma sector. They were on the ground. We flew Drone Missions to help them collect intelligence. Its a dangerous area with heavy narcotics and human trafficking. While there, i saw the need for greater Border Security. Now, uniquely among the military services, and i know our presiding officer had a distinguished career in the United States army, but marines are charged by statute by tackling whatever mission, however daunting, the president requests of us. In fact, in 1834, Congress Passed a statute right on point indicating a law under the law marines would, quote, conduct such other duties as the president or department of defense may direct. Pretty broad. Pretty broad language. When in doubt, send in the marines, i guess. Well, our units mission, not glamorous, but important then and important now was to help make the border more secure. Its a Critical Mission which remained a priority under president s clinton and bush. Later a physical barrier was placed in the huma sector. It was years after i left active duty. Trafficking increased by 95 after the physical barrier was erected. Shouldnt be controversial. Its not ideological. This is just factual. We know walls work. When properly and intelligently placed. Now, historically there has been a bipartisan consensus around the idea that we not only put boots on the ground to protect the border but we also must invest in technology to secure our border, including physical barriers where they are required. So the president was absolutely right years ago when he brought up this issue. He was right this week in huma, arizona. Hes right today and hell be right tomorrow, as he continues to emphasize this issue. We must address this situation thats taking place along our southern border. We mustnt lose our resolve. There are illegal crossings and smugglers who are trafficking drugs and people that have created a horrific humanitarian crisis and an ongoing National Security threat. According to the dont take it from me. According to the United Nations missing migrants project, more than 2,400migrants have died near the United Statesmexico border since 2019. This includes 497 deaths last year. Thats a 26 increase from the year prior. This is a true humanitarian crisis today. Its also a National Security threat. In addition to migrants fleeing central america, its possible that foreign terrorist organizations could penetrate this porous border. So Border Security and the safety of americans has long been and should remain a priority of all republicans and democrats, especially those who serve here at the federal level. President trump is not the first president i want to underscore not the first president to understand this or emphasize this issue. When i was serving in arizona as a marine, president clinton was our nations commander in chief. During a 1993 press conference, president bill clinton touted, increasing the number of Border Patrol agents and working to supply them with the best possible equipment and technology. He repeated this message on multiple occasions. Then during his 1995 state of the union address, president clinton said, our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a Record Number of new border guards. President clinton understood this, and he wasnt the last democrat to flier advertise border prioritize Border Security. President obama too understood its importance. We forget this. Its amazing how quickly we forget. Under the Obama Administration a surge of Border Agents and resources were provided to secure the southwest border and to prevent illegal crossings. In fact, this may be uncomfortable to some, but president obama was often called the deporter in chief during his presidency with roughly three Million People deported under the Obama Administration. Again, Border Security should not be a partisan issue. Historically both sides of the aisle have agreed that the humanitarian and Security Issues at our southern border must be addressed. So its time for democrats to partner with Senate Republicans and President Trump to secure the border and to put americans first. If we resolve to Work Together on a sensible solution to this crisis and i resolve to, the result will be safer border towns, more jobs for american workers, fewer strains on limited government resources, and a deterrent to foreign nationals coming to america illegally and putting themselves and others at great risk. So the senate cannot lose its nerve when it comes to the rule of law and addressing Border Security. This is one area where we cannot just send in the marines. We own this. This body owns this. Every United States senator owns this issue. And so we, the United States senate, must work collectively. We must come together on this, work with our president to keep america safe and secure. Thank you, madam president. A senator madam president . The presiding officer the senator from north dakota. Mr. Cramer thank you, madam president. Madam president , i come to the floor today with frankly a heavy heart and a fair bit of trepidation. My goal over the next few minutes is to pay tribute to somebody who is so special, so remarkable, so beloved, so important to my home state of north dakota that i feel inadequate, frankly, but here i am to pay tribute to sister thomas welder who died, went to be with the lord on monday morning of this week at the age of 80. Sister thomas was for 31 years the president of the university of mary and the last served as president eher take emerita. She was a dear personal friend, not just to me but everyone. When i say everyone, i mean everyone that met her. Unprepared im prepared frankly to begin really to address all that she is and was and does and means to people. First of all, madam president , i would like to ask for unanimous consent to put into the record her obituary as well as the news release announcing her passing from the university of mary. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Cramer thank you, madam president. Im going to read some of the facts of her life from her obituary and do my best to fill in some personal thoughts while i do that im not going to read the entire thing. It starts out sister thomas welder, 80, a member of the benedict and sisters of enunciation monastery bismarck and president of the university of mary for 31 years passed into eternal life june 22, 2020 at the monastery. Following a recent diagnosis of kidney cancer. A graduate of st. Marys high school she joined enunciation monastery after a year of college in minnesota. Attracted by the community and prayer life of the sisters, she felt gods call to become one of them. As a novice she was given the name of sister thomas. She made her mon naasic profession on july 11 of 1961. Sister thomas cherished benedict life which she lived faithfully for 59 years. I recall a speech, an interview once. I think in fact it was during her retirement. And she was asked about monastic life. She was asked what is it that grounds you, where is it that you get your inspiration. She said my well spring of the sisters of enunciation monaste monastery. Skipping down a little bit, she her obituary reads, a dedicated servant leader and we will speak to that in a little bit more. She gave her life to the university of mary for 57 years. She led from her heart and touched the lives of many. She was president from 1978 to 2009. I had the great honor of serving as the master of ceremonies at her 30th anniversary as president. Under her remarkable leadership, the school attained University Status in 1986. Tripled in size, added the universitys first doctorate. Grew on site and adult Online Learning in 16 acres around the state, the region and the country and moved the school to Ncaa Division two athletics. Sister thomas was this is an important line. Sister thomas was present to students, faculty and staff. Ill elaborate on that in a bit as well. She attended student recitals and concerts, cheered at athletic events and participated in many gatherings. She called students by name and her genuine, caring attitude left a deep impression on them. She enjoyed getting to know friends of the university whose Financial Assistance made growth possible. And one of many i went on many fund raising calls with her. After her retirement she served in the universitys mission advancemenadvancement office. I had the great honor of working with her and then working for her after she hired me. And then working with her again as a member of the board of trustees and sharing and serving on many boards and committees at the university. Her obituary goes on to say one of the most widely known and highly respected women in north dakota, sister thomas loved visiting with people of all ages and walks of life. People gave her energy. She would focus her entire attention toward listening to the person right in front of her. Boy, do we need that lesson here, sister thomas. We need you to teach us. Let me say that again. She would focus her entire attention toward listening to the person right in front of her. In fact, in a ted talk she did for tv, about three years ago or so she was speaking to a lot of young people, of course, at this ted talk. She was talking about connectivity and she was speaking to the issue of monastic life and community and the stability that comes from being grounded in a community. While also talking about not criticizing, mind you, she was rarely critical, but speaking of the challenges of the digital era. And she said this. The challenge is to be fully present to those around us. The challenge is to be fully present to those around us. To engage face to face with ones child, with a colleague, with a neighbor, and she went on to say, even that person who may not be in our circle of friends. See, she didnt just speak to this value of being present. She was present. She was the epitome of always being present. In fact, her humility caused her to always deflect attention away from herself and to the person in front of her. Earlier i mentioned that in the obituary it mentions she called the students by name. This is perhaps the best example of what i mean when i say she was always present. University of mary had about 3,000 students a year by the time she retired. She knew them all by name. And whether she would greet students, faculty, friends, neighbors, supporters of the university, she always called you by name but not just you. She asked about your spouse by name, your children by name. Now, we all thought that was some special spiritual gift, a big brain with an incredible memory that just automatically recalls peoples names. She was really smart. She had a good memory, to be sure. But she didnt call us by name because she had a great memory. She called us by name because it was important to her because she knew it was important to us. It was a conviction, a commitment that she had to being present all the time. It was a remarkable thing, a remarkable thing. Sister thomas modeled many benedict continue values. We learned them all, all the time. The six that they highlight there are the benedict and values of hospitality, respect for persons, prayer, moderation, service, really important, as she called them, gospel values. But she didnt just call them gospel values. She didnt just teach them although she does a lot. By the way, the internet and youtube is full of her speeches on leadership. She committed herself to instilling these values throughout the monasterysponsored institutions which included, of course, the university of mary and st. Alexis health. She served on many state and national boards, including the board of c. H. I. St. Alexis health and a fortune 400 corporation. She received many honors during her lifetime, including north dakotas highest honor the Theodore Roosevelt rough rider award. She earned them all. She earned them all. In fact, when whenever she was complimented which was often, as you might imagine, when you know as many people as she knows and accomplished as much as she accomplished, she always, as i said earlier, always deflected her accomplishments. Gave someone else credit. She said this in an interview once when confronted with her many accomplishments. She said, ive always been blessed with the sense that i can do only what i do with the guidance and the help of the spirit. Think of that. All that she accomplished. Takes no credit. But credits the fact that she was blessed with the sense. At least she was aware that the spirit was the one that was guiding her. Her obituary also states sister thomas was grateful for Many Blessings in her life. She was particularly thankful to two kidney donors who gave her the gift of life through two kidney transplants. She often prayed for and stayed connected, connected to these special people. In that ted ex speech i talked about from about three years ago, she was talking about connectivity, as i said. And she was challenging them. She said a disconnect from our cell phone or ipad makes possible a reconnect with those around us. A disconnect from our cell phone or ipad makes possible a reconnect with those around us. Madam president , i could share lots of personal stories. Im tempted to but i dont think that would be the tribute shed want. Her and i made a lot of calls together. We went on a lot of road trips together. We spoke at a lot of the same events. I was always grateful when i could go first. It was impossible to follow her. Incredible speaker. One time we were at an event, i think i was the esm see actual emcee, actually, a local event in bismarck. She gave one of her phenomenal speeches. They all are and all were. And in the audience unbeannounced to me was unbeannounce to me was the president of the automobile association. He came up to me afterwards and said, do you realize that every year we pay about 50,000 for a speaker at our National Annual meeting and weve never had one this good. I said well, i could get her to do it for less. He said its unbelievable. Ive never been this inspired in my life. And i would just challenge everybody who wants to be inspired to do a quick Google Search of sister thomas welder and youll find a video that will inspire you. Every person i know that ever met her is better because they did. Everybody i know that he encountered. I once brought john wooden, the great wizard of westwood, the winningest coach in naib ncaa history to the university of mary to give speech on serving leadership. It was a remarkable time. I sat there and i as i coach wooden, he was 96 years old at the time and after sister thomas introduced him and i stood between them and i thought, wow, i am between saints, two of the best servant leaders who both taught and lived that incredible value. As i said, my heart is heavy. Its hard not to be sad. And yet sister thomas and i have all of the things we talked about over the many years that i worked with her and for her. Talked mostly about matters of faith. Im not catholic. I do have a degree from the university of mary. I am on the board of trustees. I love the sisters of annunciation monastery. I will never forget one trip to fargo. I will never forget where we were, sitting in my car, waiting to go in to call on somebody about a gift to the school. We talked about heaven. And she said i think were going to be surprised, as we will see there. And i thought yeah, youre probably right. She gets the blessing of being there first now and seeing who all is there. There will be a lot of people there that know her, and they are looking forward to welcoming her and thanking her for the incredible gift she was in their life. And i look forward to the day when i can be welcomed by her. Im grateful for her life. I love you, sister thomas. I notice the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call mr. Cornyn madam president. The presiding officer the senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Cornyn madam president , i hope todays events in the senate will not soon be forgotten by the American People. Over the last few months, it is an understatement to say that our country has experienced unprecedented physical, financial, and social turbulence from the pandemic to the economic challenges that came on its heels to the widespread protests against Racial Injustice, the needs of our country should have transcended politics. But unfortunately, that does not seem the case today. You know, we had been on a pretty good run. Republicans and democrats have put aside our differences to pass bold and transformative legislation to support our nations fight against covid19, as well as to ease the ensuing financial fallout. I had hoped that that trend would continue as we worked together to address the injustices that still persist in our society, beginning with Police Reforms. As we all know by now, thanks to our friend, senator tim scott, and others who worked with him, we introduced the justice act to enact real and lasting reform so we can begin to restore the broken trust between minority communities and our Law Enforcement agencies. This package of bills addressed some of the most pressing changes that americans have been calling for, ending choke holds, better training for Police Officers, accountability for body cameras, and more diverse police forces, and the list goes on and on. We know it wasnt the only bill thats been introduced in the senate. Our democratic colleagues introduced a bill of their own which would address many of the same issues, and while there are some important differences between the two, what to me is more important is that there was a lot in common, a lot of overlap between those two bills. That should have, in a normal time when people were logical and reasonable, that should put us on a strong footing to begin debating the ultimate product, which is what our democratic colleagues actually asked us to do. A couple of weeks ago, the democratic leader came to the floor and urged the majority leader to bring Police Reform bills to the floor to be debated and voted on before july 4. And when senator mcconnell did exactly that, what did they do . Well, as soon as they were told that they would actually have a chance to vote on a Police Reform bill, they changed their tune. A 180degree change. It kind of reminds me a little bit of last years debacle over the green new deal. After this resolution was introduced, a number of Senate Democrats rushed to endorse it, but given the opportunity to vote on the resolution they were praising, what happened . Well, not a single one of those individuals on the other side of the aisle voted for it, not one. What kind of games are they playing here . Senator markey who introduced that resolution here in the senate even accused the majority leader, who scheduled a vote on a bill he was the lead sponsor for, he called it sabotage. Well, history seems to be repeating itself and not, not in a good way. Our friends across the aisle who have been asking to debate and vote on a Police Reform bill this morning had that opportunity, but once again they pulled a 180. Now, let me be clear on what we were voting on this morning. This was not a vote to finally pass the justice act as is without any changes or amendments. This was simply a vote to begin debating a bill. You cant finish a bill, you cant actually vote on legislation if youre unwilling to start. And thats exactly what happened this morning. Well, knowing that republicans and democrats did have some differences, even though there is a lot in common, leader mcconnell provided for the opportunity to have that debate right here on the senate floor. We could have had that debate in front of the American People. I think it might have helped. Number one, as senator scott likes to say, send a signal that we actually are listening, we hear you, we see you, and we are responding to you. No backroom negotiations like apparently what our democratic colleagues want. Rather, an open and honest debate right here in full view of the American People. But our democratic colleagues refuse to participate in the process and have blocked us from even considering Police Reform legislation. This my way or the highway legislative strategy we have come to expect from our colleagues is absolutely shameful, and its counterproductive. I remember talking to rodney floyd, George Floyds brother, shortly before his funeral. He told me, he said senator, were from texas, and what we want for george is texassized justice. And i said rodney, im going to do my very best to deliver. But unfortunately, even though there were many of our democratic colleagues who decried the cruel and tragic death of george floyd, when it came time to step up and actually do something about it, they absolutely refused. Let me just go over quickly what the bill would have done as proposed, subject to amendments and votes. There would have been multiple opportunities to stop the bill if it wasnt heading in a direction they liked. But first of all, this would have made lynching a federal crime. You know, the that provision in the bill was actually authored by senators harris and booker, but believe it or not, they filibustered and blocked their own bill. Well, the justice act would have ended choke holds and prevented this dangerous and outdated tactic from being used in Police Departments across the country, but what did our democratic colleagues do . Well, they blocked it. This legislation would have helped local Police Departments improve minority hiring so that the departments would look more like the communities they serve. Our democratic colleague blocked that, too. This bill would have strengthened the use and accountability for body cameras, improved access to deescalation and duty to intervene training and established two commissions to give us a better understanding of the challenges that need to be addressed in the long run. What did our democratic colleagues do . Well, they blocked each and every one of these things. Without even taking the time to debate. It frankly is insulting to the memory of people like mr. Floyd and others for whom so much empathy and sympathy and concern was expressed and when the time comes to actually do something, they come to this emptyhanded. Well, for weeks, we have watched people of all races and cultures and backgrounds marching and demanding action. They want to see Greater Transparency and accountability. They want better training and education for our Police Officers. And they want to know that at the end of the day, the color of your skin wont determine the nature and outcome of an interaction with a Police Officer. Well, i agree with each of those points, and until this morning, i believed every member of the United States senate did as well. But the actions we have seen this morning blocking this legislation, stopping us from even debating the bill, offering amendments, trying to make it better, well, i guess i was giving our colleagues credit which they clearly do not deserve. The problems that led to the death of george floyd, breonna taylor, and other black americans have not gone away, but our democratic colleagues have proven they are more interested in politics than solutions. Let the record reflect that this morning, the senate had the opportunity to take the first step toward passing reforms that would begin to heal the divisions and distrust between Law Enforcement and the communities they serve. And our democratic colleagues unequivocally and shamelessly stood in the way. Madam president , i yield the floor. A senator madam president. The presiding officer the senator from wyoming. Mr. Barrasso thank you, madam president. Madam president , i come to the floor today to discuss republicans historic record of confirming judges and why it matters to our country. Its these judges respect and uphold the rule of law. This week, the senate marks a major milestone by confirming the 200th, 200th, madam president , trump judicial nominee. Now, the Appeals Court nominations and confirmations are especially critical. These are the Circuit Courts, and they rank right below the Supreme Court. Their decisions have a major impact on our nation. With the confirmation of cory wilson to the fifth circuit, we have now filled all 53 Appeals Court vacancies that existed in the United States. There is not a single vacancy at that court level in america. We have changed the makeup of powerful Appeals Courts like the seventh, and ninth circuits. Seven of the appeals circuits are now at a point where they have a majority of republicanappointed judges. The 200 judges we have appointed represent a sea change, a generational change in the federal bench. These, i remind you, are lifetime appointments, so they will decide cases for decades. Let me assure those who are tuning in today, madam presidens will apply the law as written. They will not legislate from the bench. We have had enough of that. Republicans are stemming this liberal judicial tie that we have lived with in the past. Were delivering on our promise to promote an independent judiciary. This concept is key to upholding our constitutions separation of powers and our systems of checks and balances. Simply put, it is the blue holding our democracy together. The constitution limits the power of the judiciary. Only Congress Makes law, not the courts. Thats not the way some courts li like to operate. The courts interpret the law as a separate coequal, independent branch of the government. Thats what the constitution tells us. The judges job is to follow the law, period. Yet for decades, democrats have hijacked the courts. Theyve sat to make their theyve sought 10 make their preferred policies through something known as judicial being a victim. Activist judges have used the bench to make liberal laws or interpret laws in a very liberal way. Rather than decide cases impartially, liberal judges have a habit of playing politics, favoring the left. The result has been a slew of radical rulings. These include promoting onerous overregulation that hurt farmers, blocking the president s efforts to secure the border. Republicans are replacing these liberal activist judges with trumpappointed constitutional conservatives. These judges are ruling right now all across the nation. So if you ask how are they making a difference, well, theyre doing it by protecting our Constitutional Rights, by safeguarding our individual freedoms and by checking unbridled government power. These judges are blocking federal overreach. Theyre preventing washington bureaucrats from inventing endless rules, theyre upholding prolife precedent and recognizing the right to school choice. Theyre defending the second amendment, securing the border, and protecting our First Amendment rights, including free speech and religious liberty. Above all, republicanappointed judges are applying the law, as written. They are not making law from the bench. Now, this has democrats worried, madam president. Youve seen it. Youve heard the comments here and around the nation. Democrats are worried that theyre losing control of the courts. Senator schumer, the minority leader, is so worried in fact that he even threatened harm to Supreme Court justices who dont rule his way. He recently stood outside the Supreme Court and he yelled at the Court Building and the justices inside. He mentioned judges by name and said, you have released a whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will pay the price. This is how the left tends to operate intimidation. Do what we say, they say. Give us control, they say, and then the intimidation will stop. They are threatening the independence of the judiciary in other ways as well. Democrats have announced their plans to pack the Supreme Court. They have announced they will pack the court with justices friendlier to their causes. Now, the standard we all know for the court, the Supreme Court, is nine justices. In fact, its been nine justices since 1869. So for over 150 years. Yet they want to change this longstanding precedent by actually increasing the number of Supreme Court justices, taking it from nine to 11. Some are proposing going to 13, if a democrat is elected president and they have control of the senate. Let us be clear, courtpacking amounts to deckstacking by the far left. Madam president , democrats want to regain power, tip scales of justice, and deliver their leftwing agenda any way they can. If the democrats win the election, as they have threatened, they will pack and stack the court with impunity. So the state stakes in this so the stakes in this upcoming election could not be higher. The next president will appoint maybe 60 Circuit Court judges and possibly another Supreme Court justice. Madam president , this is about entouring justice. Its about ensuring fairness. Its about ensuring freedom for all americans. Republicans through today confirming our 200th judge to the courts, stemming this liberal judicial tide. We have delivered generational change on the bench. We must continue confirming wellqualified judges who will secure our freedoms and our future. Thank you, madam president. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. The clerk will call the quorum call mr. Inhofe madam president . The presiding officer the senator from from oklahoma. Mr. Inhofe i ask that the quorum call in progress with vitiated. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Inhofe madam president , on tuesday night, senator reed and i had the honor of filing s. 4049, the 60th annual National Defense authorization act. Now, stop and think about that. 60 years. You know, and thats something were always pretty confident well eventually get the thing passed. To me, it is the most significant bill of the year. And weve been doing it now successfully for 60 years. This is what we consider every year, and we know its going to pass because its always passed. But its also, its about taking care of our troops and defending our country. You know, theres a document no one reads anymore. Its called a constitution. It talks about what our primary responsibility is, but that is to defend america. And its and were in such a much more dangerous position today than weve ever been in before, so its and i think its fitting that were doing this ahead of the 4th of july, our nations birthday. We wouldnt have our freedoms without our men and women in uniform, past and present, and thats what we are dedicating this to, and thats what they are the beneficiaries of what we are doing, as we are the beneficiaries of what theyre doing. Thats why we can all come together and finish this bill by you know, id still like to say, even though theres opposition to this, we could do this by next thursday. And when i say that its because thats it would be the last day before the recess that is coming up for the 4th of july. And i think it would be good if we could do it that way. And theres a reason for that. But we also are realistic and were not sure that were going to be able to do that. Were going to make every effort to do that. And one thing about working with my partner over here, senator reed, is that we have always operated in a very cooperative manner, and weve supported each other. He is answers to his democrat friends, and we bring them together because of the relationship that we have in this committee. So i think that what were talking about is theres always a possibility we can get this done. Both senator reed and i would like to use an open amendment process. This is a process that would allow all of our members to come in and do what they have to do, things that they want to have in the bill. And we were not able to do that in the last couple of years because we had objection. One thing about the senate is everythings operated on the basis of a unanimous consent. And so we have someone who objects, and were unable to do it. Hopefully that will not happen again this year and wed be able to use the open amendment process. But having said that, its not going to be nearly as significant this year because what we did in this years bill is we actually had made an appeal way back in february to our democrats and republicans, not just those on the committee on the Armed Services committee but those in the entire senate, and we said start getting your amendments ready. This was last february. Dont wait until the last minute. Get them up there so we can talk about it and we can prepare them for ultimate votes and so people actually started and they were warned at that time they didnt want to wait until the last minute to do this. So we did something that was really the first time weve been able to successfully do it. And that is of all the items in this bill, this bill that i consider to be the most significant bill of the year, 40 of that came from our members of the senate and 40 of that came from the administration and the pentagon. So, you know, all of those things have already been treated once. Now, i can remember, ive been around here long enough to remember, when that 40 wasnt 40 , it was about 6 . So we didnt get the input of the members like we do today. We just operated differently at that time. This is the third year ive been involved with this and weve been able to get a higher percentage of of input from the members. So i think thats that is a a thats something that is working well, and its given the members already time to have participated. Ill put this in a different way. The bill includes nearly 600 requests and amendments from members of the Armed Services committee and almost 200 requests that came from senators who are not on the committee. So they are the ones who have put this bill together. Now, with your input already in there, im confident that we have a solid bill that reflects the needs that we have and that it wont be as necessary to have more amendments. Thats what weve already done. Now, if we want to finish this bill by the end of this week, we need to reach a unanimous consent agreement before this friday. I understand there may be an objection to this. That could happen or it could be a change of mind. That is still my hope that this would take place. There it is a reason for that too. The house is going to be working on their bill right after we come back from the recess and were just running out of time so we need to get this started and were doing that on a managers package, the partisan set of amendments that we can all agree on. So if you will get all of those in by this coming friday, id ask all of our members to do that. And even with that, it will be necessary for our staff to work all the way through the weekend to put it in position. So we know we want to get the first managers package so the amendments will be filed and lets keep in mind we have that. Senator reed and i have that as a deadline for getting those amendments in. Now, in recent years weve been able to consider many amendments on floor. As i said earlier, i hope that doesnt wed be able to do that again. So that may or may not happen. If you have an amendment and you want to debate on the floor, we also need to know that you do desire to have a debate so we can work that in. Lastly, as you are working through your amendments, please be thoughtful that we shouldnt lets get bogged down a lot of amendments that have nothing to do with the National Defense. This is the ndaa, the National Defense authorization act, and we should be talking about military. But one of the things characteristic about this is that for as many years as ive been here, since this is the one bill that is going to be a mustpass bill an mustpass and mustpass bill this year, that people unable to get their tbhils or bills in or amendments in, wait until this come along to do their amendments. Im discouraging that from happening. Im hoping that doesnt that doesnt happen. Whats most important here is that we take care of our men and women in uniform. Thats what its all about. They are all volunteers, and they are deserving of our support. Again, my message to you is to get your amendments filed as soon as possible. As i noted, this is the 60th annual ndaa in the last 56 Years Congress has passed an ndaa always on a bipartisan basis. And thats a big deal. Its not a legacy we take lightly. Ive been privileged to participate in this process as a member of the big four. Ill tell you how that works. We do our bill and the house does its bill. We go to conference, but were still not able toe get together so to get together, so they put together the big four, which constitutes the ranking democrat and republican in the house and the ranking democrat and republican in the senate and the four of us sit down and get it done. Weve done that several times in the past. Thats the stopgap. Thats the last thing we have to do if were not able to do it any other way. Every year were told there are things we cant accomplish, every year were told theres no way we can find Common Ground. Always happens but we always do it. Our grand bipartisan tradition continues just as it will this year. The reason is failure and worse failure on the backs of our Service Members is just not an option. Now ill remind everyone why were doing this. Our military was was hurt pretty bad under the previous administration. I always admired president obama because he had a different agenda, and consequently we had some problems. I would say this, in the last tief years of his five years of his eightyear administration, that would be from 2010 to 2015, we are defense spending was dropped by 25 . Thats never happened before. And weve been working to rebuild after that. Were not quite there yet. We made great headway. And its easy to cut a military, to reduce readiness, slowdown production and all of that, but its hard, not to mention slower and more costly to rebuild it. Thats what were in the middle of now. Thats what this is, its a significant bill, something we work on all year long and the time we come to the floor, thats where we are now. I would say this, i cant think of anyone i would rather have as a partner than senator reed. Senator reed and i worked together for many years and we have a way of getting along with each other and coming to conclusions and the right decisions. So its been an honor for me over the years to be working as we are this year with senator reed and were going to get a good bill done and with that i yield the floor. Mr. Reed madam president. The presiding officer the senator from rhode island. Mr. Reed thank you, madam president. I rise to join my colleague, my chairman, senator inhofe, to discuss the 2020 National Defense authorization act. I want to begin by thanking senator inhofe for his leadership in ensure that we have a bill to consider this year. This was an extraordinary year. Social distancing just began as the Armed Services committee was finishing our hearings and getting ready to go into the markup for the National Defense authorization bill. Despite the uncertainty, the unusual challenges and the logistical challenges particularly, senator inhofe ensured the bill was written and the markup was held on schedule and he should be commended for this accomplishment. Its a tribute to to his leadership, his wisdom, common sense and common decency. Thank you for that. I also want to take a moment to thank the staff. Both the chairman and i are operating under the same rubric. They do the work, we get the credit. It works for us they work for us. They do a superb job. They find ways to draft the legislation and they too were disrupted. Their work spaces were separated. Many had to work from home. This has been an extraordinary achievement and it is a tribute to their commitment, professionalism and skill and their collaborative bipartisan effort. I thank them for that. The senator the chairman has said several times, emphasized bipartisanship and that is the hallmark of this legislation for many, many years. We can recall colleagues going back to john warner and sam nunn and others who had this attitude of we have to Work Together. And, again, let me give chairman for preserving that attitude and insisting on that attitude and getting the best of his committee because of his example and setting a tone. We have differences in the bill but we are strongly behind this effort. One of the things, and i think weve been able to do, is to, you know, figure out what might be a point of difference and then if it comes down to it, we take a vote and then we move on and we get the bill done and thats what we did this time. And we look forward on the floor to be doing the same thing, to be taking Amendment Proposals from our colleagues, trying to deal with them if we can include them in the bill unanimously, that would be great, if we need a debate, i hope we can get the debate and a vote. Now, we all understand that this bill provides the Defense Department with the resources it needs particularly to ensure that the men and women who defend us have the resources they need not only to fight the fight but when they return to have a quality of life for their families themselves that are in keeping with their sacrifice and their service, and this bill does that. It also operates under the recently enacted budget control act about two years ago so were providing the muchneeded stability the department needs. It will include many items that benefit the families and military members and later in our discussion ill go into those details. Now, two weeks ago the committee took up the bill in the markup, and, again, under the leadership of the chairman, we had a very good day of discussion and debate and the bill was adopted by the committee with a strong bipartisan vote of 252. This legislation is coming to the floor with an overwhelming bipartisan support and as the chairman indicated, one reason is because he solicited the input of all the members. We both tried very vigorously with our staff to try to incorporate those proposals and ideas and at the end of the day it was a strong overwhelming vote. Even though we did consider, as the chairman said, hundreds of different proposals by members of the committee and members of the senate, there are still issues that will come before us, and that is why on the floor i hope we will have as the chairman indicated an open debate, consider amendments, hopefully do some under reasonable time constraints so that we can get a lot done, and then at the end of a vigorous debate be able to vote for a bill that will advance the welfare of the men and women that serve and advance the common defense, which is our constitutional responsibility. I again thank senator inhofe and look again forward to the consideration of this bill. Thank you. Mr. Inhofe madam president , let me just make one other comment. Senator reed talked about the staff and what we the what the staff has done. When i talk to people back in oklahoma about about how hard a lot of these people work, they think of people in government not doing not really spending the time and the effort. I mentioned a minute ago that our staff was going to be working all this next weekend. Theyve been working every weekend that i can remember to get this thing done. And there are two people in particular, john bonzo and liz king. Liz king is the top advisor and manages things for senator reed and john bonzo has done the same thing for me. He was actually my m. L. A. Many years ago. But when you see how hard they work, long hours, they are from early in the morning to late at night and on weekends, i just really want to say not just those two individuals, but the people that they have working for them, ive never seen a harder working group and their job, i guess i say to my friend, senator reed, is to make us look good. But they are the ones who do the work. So i would at this point yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call quorum call quorum call a senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from north dakota. Mr. Hoeven i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Hoeven i rise today to honor an influential n and beloved north dakotan, sister thomas welder who passed away this week. I know the presiding officer knew her very well and just a little bit ago spoke about her here on the senate floor. Thats so appropriate. She was such a wonderful concern, and we both are so very fortunate to have known her and to have had time with her, to have learned much from her. You know, truly somebody who i think epitomizes the term servant leader, sister thomas welder. She is somebody who for me is certainly a friend, mentor, in so many different ways, its hard to recount, and also for my wife mikie. Sister thomas welder dedicated her life to the university of mary and its students. My wife is a trustee on the board at the university of mary. So my wife and sister thomas have been working together for many, many years and share an unbelievable bond as well. Im not even sure how long mikie and i have known sister thomas. Its been many years. We have seen her in so many different capacities and so many different ways, but without fail, she was an inspiration, an inspiration to both of us, and frankly an inspiration to everybody that ever met her. She was truly one of the most exceptional, amazing, wonderful people that i have ever met. She was certainly a person of incredible faith. She lived her faith and she provided that to others in her certainly in her words but in her deeds and just in her spirituality, in the way she handled herself and her caring and her compassion, and it kept her in everything she did, everybody she met. They felt that radiant glow and i think reflected it back because it was so powerful within her. She was a member of the benedict sisters of annunciation monastery and faithfully lived the monastic life for 59 years. From 1978 until 2009, she served as the president of the university of mary and was, as i say, beloved by students and faculty. Under her leadership, the university did Amazing Things. I think for a time the presiding officer worked there at the university of mary during her tenure as president of the school. It tripled the enrollment. She was a gifted leader, she was an inspiring leader, she led by example. I think one of the most Amazing Things about her is a story you hear over and over again. People marveled at it. When she had be originally come back after her schooling to the university of mary, she taught music, but then she eventually became president of the university. And then even after she was president of the university and monsignor shea became president of the university, she stayed and continued to work with the university and the students. One of the Amazing Stories that people would talk about and marvel at is she would go around campus and get to know all the students. She got to know thousands of students. Of course she knew all the faculty, all the administrators, that kind of thing because they were there all the time, but she would get to know all the students, and without fail, she would remember those students names. So as she went around, she didnt just it wasnt just hi, how are you, she knew the student. She knew their names, she knew who they were. And people would marvel not only that she was able to do that but she never seemed to forget a name. And you have got to remember there are thousands of students, they are there for a while, they move on and more come in. Its one thing to get to know the faculty and the administrators and all those kinds of things, People Like Us who were there a lot, year in and year out. Think about that flow of students coming through and always know and always remember their name. I think thats i mean not only a testament to her but a testament to the university of mary where they really make those young people feel special and feel unique, feel that they are an individual, an individual who is somebody, who has that they are not just another student at the school, right. They are somebody special. She made them feel special because she knew she took time to talk to them. She open always had time to talo them. She had a lot of important things to do, but she always took time to talk to them and made them feel appreciated. You know, when we think about sending our son or our daughter off to school, thats certainly something we would want, is that when they go to that school, there is somebody there that says yeah, you are an individual, you are unique, you are special, youre not just a number, but youre here and i appreciate you and im here for you, and thats what she did for those students. And not just when she was president or not just when she was in service. Even after she retired, thats what she did because thats who she was. Thats just i mean, thats just one story but thats part of her special gift, her special gift. She gave it to everybody. She gave it to everybody. She gave that gift of her time, her attention, her compassion, and that spirituality to everyone. I dont know that i ever saw her in any setting where that isnt exactly what she was doing, and thats why i say she really did epitomize that concept of servant leadership. As governor, i was privileged and honored to award sister thomas the Theodore Roosevelt roughrider award, which is our highest recognition in north dakota. Thats the highest award that we give. And as part of it, then we hang the individuals portrait in our State Capitol, and along with the portrait then there is also kind of a bio that is right there so that people going to the north dakota State Capitol can see these people from across our state who are truly inspirational and influential leaders and not only see who they were. And the pictures are always a montage. We put it up with things in their life, like in the case of, of course, sister thomas and the university of mary there, so they can see, get kind of a visual sense of what the person looked like, some of the things that are important, what they did. Then we have a bio that goes with it. Just a couple of the lines that we have in the bio that we put in there im going to reference here. For example, sister thomas is recognized as a woman who lives, serves, and leads by example. Her personal achievements, character, and leadership have been an inspiration to countless of individuals, students, entrepreneurs, and business and state leaders. Envisioning the university of mary as the nations premier institution for the preparation of servant leaders, sister thomas promotes competence and communication in communication, commitments to values, service to community. Her strong belief in the ability of an individual to go into leadership through service is an example for north dakota and the nation. And there is a lot more, but that was just some of the things that we put in there to try to capture who she was, what she did, and what a difference, what a difference she made in the lives of so many. As i said, i dont know that i ever met anyone who didnt immediately like her but it was more than that. There are a lot of people that are likable, right, affable, amiable. She was all of that. She was very, very likable. She had a great smile, good wit, good humor. She was a very good speaker. Really a good speaker. She was always very prepared, too. She was very prepared. Always had a good message and was wellspoken. But she had a great smile, a ready laugh, and she immediately made people feel comfortable. And then you could just see how she would kind of lean in on and gaze in on them and just start saying tell me about you. You know, give me some of who you are, you know. A little bit of a whats your spirit . What moves you . What makes you . What are you interested in . What do you like . How do you feeling . All those things. And she just did it naturally. And i just again cant think of anybody whoever mattered and didnt come away and say i like her, but boy, she is special, she made me feel good. She seemed interested in me. She is genuine. She cared. She made an impact on me. You know, the you know, they remembered her. She made an impact on me. So for mikey and me, we extend our condolences to her loved ones. When he i say her family, she had a huge family, because everybody she met was basically her family and all those kids and all those students. And we want to express our sincere puerto rico for her lifetime of service and our sincere appreciation for her lifetime of service and her commitment to god. Sister thomas was patient, sister thomas was wonderful. Sister thomas was beloved. And sister thomas will be missed very, very much. God bless her. Thank you, mr. President. I with that, i yield the floor. Mr. Grassley mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from iowa. Mr. Grassley today my colleagues on the other side of the aisle voted to block consideration of the justice bill. This happens to be the first major piece of Police Reform legislation in years. To be clear, this vote wasnt a vote to pass the bill in the senate. It wasnt even a vote to limit debate on Police Reform. It was a vote to whether we could simply begin debate on Police Reform. Were standing now on the floor of whats called the worlds greatest deliberative body, the United States senate, and yet my colleagues on the other side wouldnt even entertain a debate on an issue that has stirred our nation and shaken it to its core. We know why were here. There was a murder of a citizen in minneapolis, george floyd. Theres been Peaceful Demonstrations all over the country since then. And congress is trying to respond probably should have responded years ago, but this has brought it to a head that we need Police Reform. Yes, were in the worlds greatest deliberative body, were told. The senates legacy and prestige is built on our ability to debate and discuss legislation to address the most pressing issues before our country. My colleagues on the other side have robbed the American People of the opportunity to pass meaningful Police Reform. Now, on the other side, they argue that the justice act doesnt go far enough and that their version of Police Reform is the only bill worth considering. You know, all the brains in the United States senate are on the other side of the aisle. More or less what theyre saying. I want to remind them that we live in a country with diverse ideas and varying opinions. Debating those differences is the only way to make meaningful reforms. Now, democrats complained that their views werent represented in this bill. Well, the justice act contained a number of proposals that actually have bipartisan support and even if that wasnt enough for them, every democrat would still have an opportunity to make additional changes. On our side, senator tim scott of South Carolina led this effort for all of us. 46 of us are joining him. I hope the other seven will join in as well. But thats just republicans, and this is a bipartisan bill. Presumably not big enough bipartisan to satisfy the other side, but still bipartisan. And they wouldnt let us move ahead. But senator scott made clear when the bill was introduced thats monday no, it was last week he was interested and willing to discuss changes. Leader mcconnell pledged an open amendment process. Even Speaker Pelosi noted that she welcomes the opportunity to conference the democrat house Police Reform bill with senator scotts justice act. But instead of letting our timehonored legislative process work, my colleagues sent a letter calling the justice act unsalvageable. Lets remember, these are the same senators who insisted that the senate consider a Police Reform bill before the july recess, which starts next week. But now that theyre getting what they asked for, they say they dont want it anymore. At least thats what their vote tells me today. So my question is, what are they afraid of . Are they afraid of losing control of the process if it goes to a vote . Well, then they are real afraid well then theyre afraid of democrats democracy. Theyre afraid of every senator that voted in this body. Are they afraid that their ideas wont be adopted . The justice act has many similarities to the justice in policing act. We want to find a way forward on a bipartisan basis. In ideas have merit, they will have to be voted on and be included. Are they somehow afraid that if we make progress, it will be perceived as giving the president and his party a win . Ive been around here long enough to know that in an election year, it gets harder and harder to get things done because Neither Party wants the other to get any credit for anything or have an advantage. But on an issue as important as this, its the height of cynicism and hypocrisy to prevent progress to gain political advantage. But im reminded of a scripture. Quote, for what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world but lose his soul, end of quote. The American People expect better. I know that my fellow iowans expect better. Frankly, i expect better as well. I hope my colleagues reconsider their obstruction and let us get on with crafting a bipartisan Police Reform bill. I know my colleagues on the other side share our desire to deliver for our constituents. I dont doubt their sincerity about wanting to address inequities in the communities or unfairness in policing. I dont doubt they have legitimate ideas on how to improve this legislation, if it had come before the United States senate. But at the very least, we cant accomplish any of those things unless you start debate. Weve done it before on other issues. Only 18 months ago this chamber passed the most significant Justice Reform bill in a generation. That was a strong, bipartisan bill. It wasnt easy. But senator durbin and i and democrats and other republicans in addition to the two of us, we found a path forward and are giving thousands of americans a chance to improve their lives when they leave prison. Im frustrated that the senate cant consider this justice act, but i promise iowans and the American People that this partisan exercise doesnt represent my last hope for meaningful change. I stand ready to work with any democrat or any republican on the issue of Police Reform and, for sure, umnot alone i am not alone in the willingness to do that. In fact, at the Judiciary Committee just last week, the issue was police use of force and community relations. At that meeting, chairman graham indicated that he wants to hold more hearings on this issue. So i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to not let todays vote be the end of the story. There is and has been an evergreen issue. George floyds murder was the spark that ignited a national outcry. We must rise to the occasion. We cannot let electionyear politics and differences of opinion prevent us from even discussing how best to improve justice and safety in our community. Mr. President , just a short period of time on another issue that was resolved today by the d. C. Circuit court of appeals. Finally justice has been done to a person thats been very unjustly treated, a person by the name of Lieutenant General flynn, who served this country 33 years in the military. So today the u. S. Court of appeals for the district of columbia ordered the District Court to grant the governments motion to dismiss the flynn case. Remember, this has been going on for almost four years. Im pleased the Appeals Court upheld what it rightfully called quote, unquote clearly established legal principles the Appeals Court said that the first quote, unquote troubling indication of the district judges and again, quote mistaken understanding of his role was to appoint a former judge and now a private citizen to argue against the governments proposal to district judge sullivan to dismiss the flynn case. And, remember the reason for that was he was mistreated in the first place. As the majority opinion said, quote, the court has appointed one private citizen to argue that another citizen should be deprived of his liberty regardless of whether the executive branch is willing to pursue those charges, end of quote. The d. C. Circuit is ordering an end to this charade and let general flynn get back to his life and his family. Remember, this is a case where he was set up. You saw the emails from people that were going to prosecute him. Is this to get him fired flynn fired . Or is it to get him prosecuted . Thats how open it was, but we dont know about it until a few months ago. So today flynns legal Team Released strzoks notes regarding a meeting between obama, biden, flynn, yates and susan rice. These notes appear to show several important things. The first one is, comey said the flynn calls with the Russian Ambassador quote, unquote appear legit. Two, president obama ordered comey to quote, unquote look at things. Three, president obama directed that quote, unquote the right people investigate flynn. Four, Vice President biden appeared to raise the logan act. Those four things lead to these questions. Well, if it was legit, then why, quote unquote, look at things . If it was legit, why would biden mention the log ang act . The logan act . This raises legitimate questions. For example, did president obama and Vice President biden deliberately take steps in the final hours of their administration to undermine the Incoming Administration . It sure looks like thats what they were up to. It also is treenl to question the extent it is reasonable to question the extent of president obamas and Vice President bidens knowledge about russia and the flynn investigation. So i give this to you asage example. We know that on january 4, 2017, the same day that strzok allegedly wrote the meeting notes, the f. B. I. Wrote a closing memorandum on flynn who was code named crossfire razor by the f. B. I. That said the Intelligence Community could find no derogatory information on him. So the person they couldnt find any derogatory information on him, a person that has served in the military for 33 years, got out as a Lieutenant Governor or Lieutenant General and was going to be the National Security advisor for this new administration, they could find no derogatory information, but for the next three and a half years, hes been fighting for his freedom. And on that very same day, january 4, 2017, the f. B. I. Was ready to close this flynn case, probably based on the fact that comey said that all this connection between flynn and russia ambassador was probably legit. But that doesnt matter to somebody by the name of strzok, who was kind of leading all of this. He asked another f. B. I. Agent, quote, hey, if you havent closed razor yet, dont do it. The case was still open at the moment and strzok ask that it be kept open, quote unquote for then. Strzok messaged his lover lisa paige, saying that razor still happened to be open because of some oversight and said to her, i dont know whether this is tongue in cheek or real serious. He said, quote, yay, our utter incompetence is actually helping us. So what is helping us . It seems like any excuse to keep going and getting flynn. So at that point we all know the case should have been closed, but three and a half years later, its solved by a decision of the d. C. Court of appeals. So instead even in light of comeys apparently saying that the calls between flynn and the Russian Ambassador appear legit, president obama, still president of the United States, directed comey to quote, unquote, look at things and make sure, quote unquote, the right people investigate it. Thats kind of been questionable the extent to which president obama was involved in all of this. It seems like those quotes make it pretty clear. And then at this very same conversation, Vice President biden chimed in as well by bringing up the logan act which was used as a pretext to interview flynn weeks later. Mind you, all of this happened after the election. Now people are raising questions about what are you worried about things that happened three years ago . An injustice was done to flynn, and if you let people run wild over the freedoms and liberties of the American People, if it can happen to a Lieutenant General, it can happen to anybody else. And we saw it happen to george floyd. He was murdered because of justice and the Constitutional Rights of people not being followed. So then we have the incoming Trump Administration, all of this going on having no idea that obama, biden, comey, strzok were busy setting the stage for what would become a multiyear struggle to show that trump didnt collude with the russian governments. So much for a peaceful transition of power from one president to another, from one Political Party to another, something that for 240 years we prided ourselves in, but not in this case. Ever since the election, november of 2016, think of all the things thats been done to get trump out of office, and it started even before he was sworn in. Well, thankfully the d. C. Circuit stepped in to restore a bit of justice after the governments multiyear campaign to destroy flynns reputation, the f. B. I. And the department of justices actions to frame an american citizen, dragged that citizen into court, setting him up to plead guilty to lying and then doing everything they can to cover up their transgressions should never happen. Should never have happened either and lets all hope it never happens again. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Mr. Portman mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from ohio. Mr. Portman mr. President , i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Portman im here to talk about a complicated but really important issue, and its one that congress and the Administration Needs to address before its resulting in a devastating Financial Impact on millions of retirees, raises costs to thousands of businesses, some of which are going to go insolvent, bankrupt unless its dealt with and an issue that can harm the overall economy if its not dealt with. The presiding officer has been very involved in this issue and i hope others will bear with me as we talk about it because it is complicated but it is important. Im talking about multiemployer pension reform. As anyone who has worked on this problem can tell you, its something we cannot ignore. Briefly the multiemployer pension plan consists of different companies, usually employees in a single union. They pool their assets together and define a guaranteed pension, socalled, to cover workers and retirees. These plans are jointly administered between the union and the employers as trustees who determine the benefits and the employer contributions based on a collective bargaining process and subject to whatever statutory funding requirements there are that we provide here in the u. S. Congress and through law. So its a system of a lot of different employers coming together, providing a pension under one union typically. This system now come of comprises over 1,400 plans covering 10. 8 million participants and their families, but unfortunately its on the verge of collapse much the system is underfunded by 638 billion and that figure has probably increased significantly because of the coronavirus epidemic. On top of that the federal agency pensions are a sort of guaranteed benefit but they are guaranteed by a federal entity called a pension benefit guaranty corporation. That pbgc for the multiemployer programs is protected to become insolvent in less than five years. Over 1. 4 million workers and retirees are in plans already in what is called critical and declining status, meaning they are facing benefit cuts of over 90 . So thats the problem. This chart can sort of show it to you. These are the assets at the start of the year 2019, 2020, 2021. This is what happens, the assets goes down, the liebilities go up liabilities go up. As you can see, the green is only going to last until 2025. And, again, with the new economic numbers, that will be exhausted even before that, which creates a real problem for those planned participants, the retirees, for the companies, they are going to have huge new liebilities, some of them liabilities they wont be able to handle it and for our economy because that will have an impact on the entire economy. So those workers who are expecting to have the benefit because they are still working and those retirees who are facing these cuts are looking to us to come up with a bipartisan solution to address this crisis that faces the multiemployer Pension System and the pbgc. They are counting on us to put in place commonsense reforms to ensure these hardearned pension benefits will be there for workers and retirees during their requirement. A lot of these workers will tell you they didnt take the pay increases or deny take the Health Care Benefits in their collective bargaining because they bar gained for this which was the hope of having a pension,