Will report the motion to invoke cloture. The clerk cloture motion. We, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of troy d. Edgar of california to be chief Financial Officer of the department of Homeland Security, signed by 17 senators. The presiding officer by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. The question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of troy d. Edgar of california to be chief Financial Officer of the department of Homeland Security shall be brought to a close. The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. Vote vote vote the presiding officer are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or wishing to change their vote . If not, the yeas are 62, the nays are 31. The motion is agreed to. The clerk will report the nomination. The clerk nomination, department of Homeland Security, troy d. Edgar of california to be chief Financial Officer. The presiding officer the senator from south dakota. Mr. Thune madam president , i ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the provisions of rule 22, the postcloture time on the edgar nomination expire at 4 30 p. M. Today. I further ask that if confirmed the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senates action. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Thune madam president , i have four requests for committees to meet during todays session of the senate. They have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. The presiding officer duly noted. Mr. Thune madam president , were back for our second week in the senate after spending some time working remotely to help flatten the coronavirus curve. Were getting used to the temporary new normal, social distancing during hearings, floor votes, and meetings. Masks, a lot of Conference Calls and skype calls instead of inperson meetings, lots of hand washing and hand sanitizer, and as many staff working remotely as possible. Were committed to doing the essential work of the American People, and they are depending on us to do it in the safest way possible. Responding to the coronavirus continues to be at the top of the agenda. Last week, we held a number of coronavirusrelated hearings, including a hearing on coronavirus testing and a hearing on the impact the pandemic has had on the airline industry. When people think about what the senate does, they tend to think about voting on bills and debating on the floor, but the truth is committees committee work, i should say, is some of the most important work that we do here in washington. Committees are aware we review nominees qualifications, hearing from experts in various fields, develop legislation, and conduct essential oversight of government programs. The work we do in coronavirusrelated Committee Hearings will inform any future coronavirus legislation that we might consider. This week, the Senate Banking committee will be voting on the nomination of brian d. Miller to be Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery at the treasury department. If hes confirmed by the full senate, mr. Miller will be a central part of ensuring that the trillions that we have provided for Coronavirus Relief are spent properly. The Banking Committee will also be holding an oversight hearing with key federal financial regulators to learn about the steps that they have taken to ensure the safety and soundness of our Financial Sector during this challenging time. The Senate Judiciary committee will be examining the issue of liability during the covid pandemic and discussing ways to prevent frivolous lawsuits from damaging our economy once we reopen. The Senate Commerce committee, of which im a member, will be holding a hearing looking at efforts to maintain and expand reliable highspeed Broadband Access during this time when so Many Americans are relying on their internet for work, school, and connections with friends and family. And the senate health, education, labor, and Pensions Committee will be hearing directly from the leaders of our fight against the coronavirus, dr. Fauci, redfield, and hahn and admiral giroir. Senators will be talking to these experts about what we need to do to safely reopen our economy and our schools. Another big part of our Coronavirus Response is monitoring the implementation of the funds that we have already provided. We have delivered a tremendous amount of money to respond to the pandemic, equal to almost 50 of the entire federal budget for 2020, and its important that any future funding be carefully targeted. Were facing extraordinary circumstances, and they called for an extraordinary bold response from washington. But its important to remember, madam president , that every dollar of the trillions that we have provided for the pandemic is borrowed money, and our children and grandchildren are going to be paying for that borrowing. Now, that doesnt mean that were not going to provide more money if necessary, but it does mean that we need to make sure that were spending money wisely and well and only appropriating whats really needed. And that means monitoring the implementation of the funds that we have already provided which havent been fully spent yet. Once we see how and where those funds are getting spent, we will have a better sense of where we spend sufficiently and where more money may be necessary. Its also important that we make sure those funds are being spent in the most effective and efficient way possible. Again, these are all dollars that our children and grandchildren will have to pay for. We want to make sure that were not wasting any of that money. And finally, madam president , while coronavirus will, of course, continue to be at the top of our agenda, there are other important things that we have to do to keep the government running and to protect the nation. This week well take up legislation to renew and reform several key provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which the democratcontrolled house allowed to laps, despite to lapse, despite unanimous support for an an extension here in the senate. Our Law Enforcement officers are working every day to protect americans from terrorist threats. It is essential that we make sure they have the tools that they need to do their jobs while also providing critical protections for Civil Liberties. Were also taking up two nominations this week for Senior Administration posts, brian d. Montgomery to be deputy secretary of housing and urban development and troy edgar to be the chief Financial Officer at the department of Homeland Security. Madam president , the American People are relying on us right now, and we have a responsibility to deliver for them. We will continue to do everything we can to support our nations families and businesses as the country fights its way through this crisis and emerges on the other side. Madam president , i yield the floor. And i suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call mr. Lee mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from utah. Mr. Lee mr. President , the the presiding officer were in a quorum call. Mr. Lee i ask unanimous consent to suspend the quorum call. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Lee mr. President , the constitution of the United States contains a number of constitutional protections for the citizens of our great republic. Among the many provisions that it contains, in addition to the structural safeguards of federalism and separation of powers, separating out power along two axes one vertical, the other horizontal the constitution also includes a number of substantive restrictions, things that the government may not do and penalties attached to the government doing so things. Among those many protections can be found provisions of the bill of rights, including the Fourth Amendment to the United States constitution. The Fourth Amendment remind us that it is our fundamental inalienable right as citizens in a Free Republic to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and that any warrants issued under Government Authority have to be backed by probable cause. And any probable causebased warrant has to include with particularity a description of the places and persons to be searched and to be seized. This is a tradition that reaches not just back a couple of centuries. It reaches back much farther that that. It has its origins not only in our country but in our mother country, in the united kingdom. By the time john wilkes was serving in parliament in the 1760s, there had been a longestablished tradition and understanding in fact, there had been a series of laws enacted to make sure that warrants were not abused and to make sure that the rights of english subjects would not be infringed. Among other things, there was an understanding and a set of laws in place that would make clear that those conducting searches and seizures would be subject to a warrant requirement. In other words, they would lose any immunity that they would otherwise have as government officials if they didnt obtain a warrant and if that warrant if not valid. In 1763, the home of john wilkes was searched aggressively. John wilkes, while serving as a member of parliament, had become critical of the administration of king george, and he had participated in the publication of a weekly circular known as the north britain. Although the north britain was not one likely to engage in excessive fun and praise of the reigning monarch, it wasnt until the publication of north britain 75 that the administration of king george decided to go after john wilkes. His home was searched. It was searched pursuant to a general warrant. A general warrant was something that basically said in that instance find out who had anything to do with the authorship and publication of north britain number 45. You see, north britain number 45 accused, among other things, king george and those who served in his government of laying aggressive taxes on the people, taxes that they knew couldnt adequately be enforced or collected without intrusive measures that would involve kicking open peoples doors, rummaging through their drawers, and doing things that couldnt be justified for the use of a warrant laid out with particularity. John wilkes in that circumstance was arrested within a matter of a few weeks he won his freedom, albeit on something of a technicality at the moment. He asserted parliamentary privilege and was released. Eventually after becoming subjected to multiple searches, using general warrants, wilkes sued lord halifax and those who separated in the searches and seizures in question. He was able to obtain a large judgment consisting of money damages. John wilkes at the time became famous really on both sides of the atlantic. The name of john wilkes was celebrated in taverns, saloons and other Public Places in england and in the nascent United States of america. The colonies in north america that would later become the worlds greatest republic. John wilkes example was something that helped solidify a longstanding legal tradition, one that would in time make its way into our constitution through the Fourth Amendment. You see, because we have to remember that government is simply force. Its the organized collective official use of force. When john wilkes and those who worked with him on the north britain culminating in north britain number 45, criticized the king too much, questioned excessively, in their judgment, the collection and imposition of taxes, the administration of king george decided that that had gone too far and that it was time for john wilkes to pay a price. Fortunately for john wilkes and for people on both sides of the atlantic, john wilkes emerged victorious. Today we dont have general warrants, at least nothing masquerading under that title in the United States. The fact that we have a Fourth Amendment is a testament to his vigorous defense of the rights of english subjects. What we do have is something that ought to concern every american. We have a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act which we know has been abused, and weve known for a long time is ripe for opportunities for abuse among government officials. In fact, what weve seen is that the current president of the United States has himself become the target of abuse under fisa. Back in 2016, when this started being abused and when we saw the emergence of things Like Operation crossfire hurricane, you had the campaign of a man who would become the 45th president of the United States targeted and singled out quite unfairly, using these practices, these procedures that were designed originally for use in detecting and thwarting the efforts of agents of foreign powers. As the name of the law implies, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is not something thats intended to go after american citizens. Its certainly not something thats intended to be used as a tool for bullying a president ial candidate. And now that it has been used to bully and surveil incorrectly, the 45th president of the United States, we need to do something about it. Thats what the leeleahy amendment does. But first a bit of background on this particular law. Weve got three provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that expire on march 15, 2020, just a few weeks ago. We have one provision known as section 215. Another provision known as lone wolf and no provision known as roving wiretaps. On march 16 the Senate Passed a bill to reauthorize those provisions through may 30, 2020, which would give us a few weeks to debate and discuss reforms that need to happen under fisa. In order to pass this bill, the senate entered into a unanimous consent agreement for votes on three amendments to the pelosinadlerschiff build passed by the house of representatives a few weeks ago. One of those amendments is the one that i referred to a moment ago, the leeleahy amendment, introduced by myself and senator leahy from vermont. Unfortunately, however, the house of representatives never passed that shortterm extension measure so that the three authorities that i mentioned lone wolf, roving wiretaps, and 2015 have been expired for a few months. This is not for lack of trying. The part of those of us who really want to see meaningful fisa reform. In fact, a few days before these authorities were set to expire, i came down here to the senate floor and i asked a series of unanimous consent requests to consider the housepassed reauthorization bill with a handful of relevant and i believe very necessary amendments. Unfortunately, my friend pannedd distinguished colleague, senator burr, objected. The department of justice Inspector GeneralHorowitz December report on crossfire hurricane proved what many of us reformers have been saying now for years in my case ive been working on this and tried to call out the dangers inherent in provisions of fisa now for a decade. But what the horowitz report in december demonstrated was that fisa really is ripe for opportunities for abuse. Inspector general horowitz not only found evidence that the fisa process was abused to target president Trumps Campaign, he found evidence that basic procedures meant to protect the rights of United States persons that is to say u. S. Citizens and lawful permanent residents of the United States were not being followed. And so just as we see that john wilkes through his publication of north briton number 45 solidified a set of preexisting civil rights, we now see that president number 45, donald john trump, has the opportunity to strengthen this right protected in our Fourth Amendment, hearkening back to the example of john wilkes in the publication of north briton number 45. My amendment with senator leahy would make reforms to applications for surveillance across the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, including both section 215, the authority that recently expired, and under title 1, which happens to be the authority that was abused in order to surveil president Trumps Campaign. First the amendment would strengthen the role of the friend of court provisions, the amicus curea provisions we adopted in 2016 with the act introduced by senator leahy and myself back then. It would strengthen the provisions and make them applicable in circumstances in which there are sensitivities inherently at play. Now these amicus curiae or friends of the court are people who as contemplated under the proposed legislation would prima