Current government funding expires friday at midnight. Youre watching live coverage of the senate on cspan2. The president pro tempore the senate will come to order. The chaplain, dr. Black, will lead the senate in prayer. The chaplain let us pray. Eternal god, help us to remember your mighty acts. You are kind and merciful, better to us than we deserve. You feed the sparrows and cause the sun to rise. You forgive our sins and provide us with strength for every challenge. Lord, use our lawmakers today for your glory. May they be courteous and kind as they seek to do what is best for this land we love. Remind them that they represent the hopes and dreams of many people. Thank you, lord, for the wonderful things that you continue to do for us all. We pray in your loving name. Amen. The president pro tempore please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The presiding officer under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. Mr. Grassley madam president . The presiding officer the senator from iowa. Mr. Grassley i ask permission to address the senate for one minute in morning business. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Grassley this week marks the second anniversary of the passage of the tax cut and jobs act, december 2017 when the biggest tax cut in the history of the country was passed by the congress. Its been very successful, but the reason i come to honor this second anniversary is because polls show that people dont realize the benefits of the tax cut. Some are even wondering did we get a tax cut. I have some appreciation for that because i spent ten years on an Assembly Line in cedar falls, iowa, and probably if i got a 50cent tax cut every week, i wouldnt know it at the end of the year that that added up to 250 more in my pocket. So under the circumstances of the working men and women of america, it might be difficult to know that. But studies show the great benefit to the middleclass families of this tax cut. So thanks to these historic tax cuts and reforms, americans do in fact have more money in their paychecks and their pocketbooks. Individuals and families then have more to spend or if they want to, to save it. There may be a lot of people save for retirement, i hope. Small businesses and entrepreneurs benefit from the tax cut. They have more to invest in their employees and in their Business Operations and probably hire more americans. As a result, we have experienced the longest u. S. Economic expansion in history. Higher wages and historically low unemployment, the lowest since 1969. Im proud to say on this twoyear anniversary of the tax reform, that it has been a resounding success. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call quorum call mr. Mcconnell madam president. The presiding officer the majority leader. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell all signs seem to suggest that later this week, House Democrats are finally going to do what many of them have been foreshadowing for three years now and impeach President Trump. It appears that the most rushed, least thorough and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history is about to wind down after just 12 weeks and then its slapdash work product will be dumped on us over here in the senate. Ill have much more to say to our colleagues and to the American People if and when the house does move ahead. But as we speak today, House Democrats still have the opportunity to do the right thing for the country and avoid setting this toxic new precedent. The house can turn back from a cliff and not deploy this constitutional remedy of last resort to deliver a predetermined partisan outcome. This morning, madam president , i just want to speak to one very specific part of this. Over the weekend, the democratic leader decided to short circuit the customary and collegial process for laying basic groundwork in advance of a potential impeachment trial. The preferable path would have been an inperson conversation which nonetheless i still hope to pursue. Instead, he chose to begin by writing me an 11paragraph letter on sunday evening, deliver it by way of the news media, and begin a Cable Television campaign a few hours later. The Democratic Leaders letter is an interesting document from the very beginning. For example, in the second of its 11 paragraphs, our colleague literally misquotes the constitution. That error actually aligns with our colleagues apparent confusion about some of the deeper questions. Ill come back to that in a moment. At first, our colleagues letter appears to request that a potential impeachment trial adopt similar procedures to the clinton impeachment trial back in 1999. Now, i happen to think thats a good idea. The basic procedural framework of the clinton impeachment trial served the senate and the nation well, in my view. But the problem is that while the democratic leader notionally says he wants a potential 2020 trial to look like 1999, he goes on to demand things that would break with the 1999 model. In president clintons trial, we handled procedural issues in two, two separate Senate Resolutions that passed at different times. The first resolution passed unanimously before the trial. It sketched out basic things like scheduling, opening arguments, and the timing of a motion to dismiss. Other more detailed questions about the middle and the end of the trial, including whether any witnesses would be called, were reserved for a second resolution that was passed in the middle of the trial itself. As a matter of fact, we passed it only after a number of democrats, including senator schumer himself, voted to dismiss the case. They got a motion to dismiss before the senate had even decided whether to depose a single witness. Instead of a tried and true 1999 model, start the trial and then see how senators wish to proceed, the democratic leader wants to write a completely new set of rules for President Trump. He wants one single resolution up front instead of two, however many are needed. He wants to guarantee up front that the senate hear from the very specific witnesses instead of letting the body evaluate the witness issue after, after opening arguments and senators questions like back in 1999. Very tellingly, madam president , our colleague from new york completely omits any motions to dismiss the case like the one he was happy to vote for himself as a new senator back in 1999. Almost exactly 20 years ago today, prior to the senate trial, senator schumer said this on television, a direct quote. This is what he said certainly any senator, according to the rules, could move to dismiss, which is done every day in criminal and civil courts throughout america, motions to dismiss are made. And if a majority vote for that motion to dismiss, the procedure could be truncated. That was senator schumer in january of 1999. But now the same process that senator schumer thought was good enough for president clinton, he doesnt want to afford President Trump. Go figure. Look, most people understand what the democratic leader is really after. He is simply trying to lock in live witnesses that is a strange request at this juncture for a couple of reasons. For one thing, the 1999 version of senator schumer vocally opposed having witnesses, even when the question was raised after hours of opening arguments from the lawyers, hours of questions from senators, and a failed most to dismiss. He favors live witnesses this time before the senate even has articles in hand. Moreover, presumably, it will be the house prosecutors job to ask for the witnesses they feel they need to make the case. So why does the democratic leader here in the senate want to predetermine the house impeachment managers witness request for them before the house has even impeached the president . Might he just might he be coordinating these questions with people outside the senate . Heres one possible explanation. Maybe the houses public proceedings have left the democratic leader with the same impression they have left many of us, that from everything we can tell, House Democrats slapdash impeachment inquiry has failed to come anywhere near, anywhere near the bar for impeaching a duly elected president , let alone removing him for the first time in american history. And so those who have been eagerly hoping for impeachment are starting to scramble. Chairman adam schiff and House Democrats actively decided not to go to court and pursue potentially useful witnesses because they didnt want to wait for due process. Indeed, they threatened to impeach the president if they had to go to court at all. That intentional political decision is the reason why the house is poised, poised to send the senate the least thorough president ial impeachment in our nations history. By any ordinary legal standard, what House Democrats have assembled appears to be woefully, woefully inadequate to prove what they want to allege. So now the Senate Democratic leader would apparently like our chamber to do House Democrats homework for them. He wants to volunteer the senates time and energy on a fishing expedition to see whether his own ideas could make chairman schiffs sloppy work more persuasive than chairman schiff himself bothered to make it. So, madam president , this is dead wrong. The senate is meant to act as judge and jury to hear a trial, not to recountry the entire background of the investigation because angry partisans rushed sloppily through it. The trajectory that the democratic leader apparently wants to take us down before he has even heard opening arguments could set a nightmarish precedent for our institution. If the Senate Volunteers ourselves to do House Democrats homework for them, we will only incentivize an endless stream of dubious partisan impeachments in the future, and we will invite future houses to paralyze future senates with frivolous impeachments at will. This misunderstanding about constitutional roles brings me back to something i raised earlier. The Democratic Leaders letter to me, by the way, by way of the press literally misquoted the constitution. Senator schumer wrote that we should exercise, quote, the senates sole power of impeachment under the constitution with integrity and indignity. He attributed to the senate, quote, the sole power of impeachment. Well, there is a problem, mr. President. Thats the role the constitution gives actually to the house, not to the senate. Article 1, section 2, says the house of representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment. It doesnt sound ambiguous to me. If my colleague wants to read about our responsibilities here in the senate, he needs to turn to the next page, article 1, section 3 says the senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments. We dont create impeachments over here, mr. President. We judge them. The house chose this road. Its their duty to investigate. Its their duty to meet the very high bar for undoing a national election. As Speaker Pelosi herself once said, it is the house obligation to, quote, build an ironclad case to act. Thats Speaker Pelosi. Its the houses obligation to build an ironclad case to act, end quote. If they fail, they fail. Its not the senates job to leap into the breach and search desperately for ways to get to guilty. That would hardly be impartial justice. In fact, if my colleague is already desperate to sign up the senate for new fact finding which democrats themselves are too impatient to see through, well, that suggests something to me. It suggests that even democrats who do not like this president are beginning to realize how dramatically insufficient the houses rushed process has been. Well, look, i hope the house of representatives sees that, too. If the House Democrats case is this deficient, this thin, the answer is not for the judge and jury to cure it over here in the senate. The answer is the house should not impeach on this basis in the first place. But if the house plows ahead, if this ends up here in the senate, we certainly do not need jurors to start brainstorming witness lists for the prosecution and demanding to lock them in before we have even heard opening arguments. I still believe the senate should try to follow the 1999 model. Two resolutions, two. First thing first things first. The middle and the end of this process will come later. So i look forward to meeting with the democratic leader very soon and getting our important conversation back on the right foot. Now, on an entirely different matter there remains a great deal of outstanding legislation the senate must complete for the American People before we adjourn for the holidays. I was glad to see yesterdays overwhelming bipartisan vote to advance the conference report to the 59th Consecutive NationalDefense Authorization act. We moved it here in the senate 766. For months, unprecedented partisan delays threatened a nearly sixdecade tradition to express a bipartisan commitment to our National Defense. But with the senates final vote later today, well finally put this vital legislation on the president s desk. I look forward to voting to pass the ndaa today by another overwhelming bipartisan vote for our Service Members and the Critical Missions they carry out. Of course, the senate needs to follow up the Defense Authorization bill with appropriate measures and fund our National Defense and domestic priorities. Ensuring the federal government makes careful use of tax dollars is an uphill battle by definition. So it is critical that we plan in advance and plan for the full year ahead rather than careen from one shortterm stopgap to another. At this point it is especially crew shall for tower crucial for our armed forces. And our nations top military commanders have been crystal clear. This requires stable and predictable annual funding. Its as simple as that, as the chairman of the joint chiefs, general milley, put it recently continuing resolutions are, quote, a very ineffective and inefficient use of the taxpayers dollars. The secretary of defense hasnt minced words, either. Quote, every day that a c. R. Continues is one less day that we can invest in future capabilities and future technologies. It is a simple matter of good governance, avoiding another stopgap c. R. Is a good step. So i am encouraged that the house is preparing to advance full Appropriations Bills this week. Whats actually in these bills certainly matters. So im glad to say the efforts of chairman shelby, senator leahy and their counterparts in the house and white house negotiators have produced a bipartisan package of fullyear funding measures that will make needed investments in our nations top priorities. First is a topline increase in funding that our National Defense requires. For the third Consecutive Year, President Trump and republicans in congress will deliver on our commitment to continue rebuilding americas military after nearly a decade of forced belttightening. The threats to the United States and our allies continues to emerge and evolve. This work is more important than ever. America no longer stands unchallenged in the international system. As russia it eliminates the reach of its meddling influence in the middle east, as china invests in reshaping the order of the Asian Pacific region be, a new era of Great Power Competition demands our attention. And our ax. And our action. The defense funding measure the house will consider today answers these real realities with significant increases in defense funding. Our commanders will have more resources to develop cuttingedge weapon capabilities and ensure that american Service Members receive the best training, equipment, and support available. Muchneeded upgrades to the nuclear force, investments in hypersonic technologies to keep pace with our biggest adversaries and renewed commitment to Service Members and their families here at home. But our efforts are about more than equipping the u. S. Military to win a fight. The funding bill takes a comprehensive approach to the security of the United States and our allies. It will unlock targeted resources for countering the creeping influence of authoritarian powers so that military engagement becomes less likely in the first place. Im particularly proud that thanks to my own efforts, the legalization the legislation modernizes the reporting requirements of the Hong Kong Policy act i sponsored way back in 1992. It expands our support for democracy in hong kong, including Legal Support to hong kong activists and increases countering russian influence. The counters russian influence fund. Of course, our work goes beyond defense and foreign affairs. Were talking about fullyear funding for the federal governments Domestic Work as well. For example, big wins for the president s agenda to bring more security to the southern border. This years funding bills provide another 1. 4 billion for the border wall system, plus more flexibility on location than last years funding. And despite the efforts many some House D