See which convicted child molesters are going to be recidivists. Most of them are. And im not willing to take the risk that our kids should be left alone with people like that. We have a National Sex Offender registry for a reason because these people recognize the danger that extends past their time of incarceration. Parents need to know about that and thats why we have this national registry, and schools need to avoid the danger. To be clear mr. President im not suggesting that a convicted child molester can never work again anywhere, but i am saying they shouldnt work in a school, and i think thats completely reasonable. Im shocked frankly that these organizations would come out against this, against this commonsense legislation. But the objection in fairness, some objection that comes from our side of the aisle as well. I have a colleague who i have all the respect in the world for, the senior senator from tennessee is a wonderful senator, and i agree with him on far more than i disagree but i have to say i strongly disagree with his view of this particular bill. He has been here on the senate floor and has been very up front with me about his opposition to our bill. And the basis of his opposition to my bill is that he believes that passing the legislation that senator manchin and i are proposing requiring background checks and forbidding the passage of trash he believes that constitutes the equivalence of a National School board. It is an unreasonable infringement on schools. I couldnt disagree more. Now, the idea of a National School board is a terrible idea. I have no interest in that, and you will never hear me arguing that the federal government should impose on the states and the School Districts things like appropriate class size or whether or not you should teach geometry before algebra in middle school or what grade should students read the grapes of wrath, any of those kinds of curriculum issues. Or testing issues. Those should be left to local School Boards and states. But thats not what were trying to do here. What im saying with my legislation with senator manchin is if a state takes billions and billions of federal tax dollars each year, then you cant iewts that money to use that money to pay the salaries of a convicted child abuser. I think thats totally different, nothing like a National School board. And furthermore we all voted in favor of the substance of these background check requirements when we all passed the Child Care Development block grant bill which by the way passed this chamber with one dissenting vote. It was 981. There was one no vote which had nothing to do with the background check provision by the way. The senior senator from tennessee was the original sponsor of that legislation. That also passed the house unanimously and its virtually identically. It holds that children in these Day Care Centers should have the protection that comes with knowing that the employees have gone through this background check system. So do we have a National Day Care board . I dont think so. And if its okay to protect the youngest of kids, which it certainly is and should be, why cant we also extend that protection to kids who just get a little bit older . Were insisting on a standard thats appropriate and rigorous for kids who are toddlers. And then when they go to kindergarten were not going to have the same standard to protect them . That makes no sense to me at all. And then another point that i would make regarding this idea of a National School board is this idea, this practice of passing the trash when a School District sends a letter of recommendation for a known offender and he takes that letter with him and goes across state lines, what can a single state do about that . The case i described of jeremy bell the little boy who was killed by the teacher in West Virginia who originated in pennsylvania, what could West Virginia do to forbid pennsylvanians from sending a letter of recommendation for that teacher . Absolutely nothing is the answer because West Virginias legislative authority does not reach into pennsylvania. This happens across state lines. In fact, its a very conscious decision on the part of many of these predators because they want to put as much distance between their criminal activities as they can. When they move, they move far sometimes. So this demands a federal response. There is nothing a state can do to solve this problem and thats why we address it in our bill. And the other point i would make is this isnt the first time that weve had the federal government establish some employment standards. We have federal laws that, for instance ban discrimination in schools. Schools are not permitted under federal law. You cannot discriminate in your hiring on the basis of sex or race or age or religion or pregnancy. Does that mean we have a National School board . Does this mean we have to repeal all these laws . I dont think so. I think its perfectly reasonable to have employment standards. And finally madam president , i would say dont we have some responsibility of oversight of how federal tax dollars get spent by the states . I mean, do we send the money and say, hey heres a pile of cash. Do whatever youd like with that. I dont think thats a very reasonable standard. And what could be more reasonable than simply saying you cant use federal tax dollars that we are responsible for if youre going to use it to pay the salaries of convicted child abusers. I think thats pretty straightforward. I will say there may be alternative amendments here. Theres been some discussion that some of our colleagues may offer alternatives to the legislation that senator manchin and i have. And im still willing to work with anyone on our side or the other side of the aisle if we can constructively work, if the goal is to actually get something passed thats going to be helpful thats going to be constructive ill work with anybody to get there. But theres a few things i woabt agree to. I wont agree fo a provision that under the guise of privacy requires a school to say silent while a known child molester seeks a new teaching job. Thats not reasonable. And i wont agree to a bill that does nothing to change the status quo a bill that does nothing to provide additional protections for our kids. Unfortunately, in my view the amendment thats offered by the senior senator from tennessee fits into this latter category. Hes got an amendment that i think provides absolutely no additional protection. It says that all states have to have a background check system. But guess what . All states already do. The problemsome the problem is many of them are inadequate. As i said before, theres nothing a state can do about passing the trash across state lines. So it does nothing to stop passing the trash. It does nothing to stop schools from hiring a convicted child rapist. It doesnt say anything about the standards of the background check. The bill is so loose that if a state simply decided to do a google search, that would meet the criteria of the bill. Its completely unacceptable. It does not change the status quo. It does nothing to protect the kids. And you could make the argument that not only this bill is arguably worse than doing nothing because it could undermine the effort to do this right, create the illusion of having done something at the federal level when in fact it has not done so. Madam president , i will conclude by simply saying im not prepared to settle for the status quo. I am not satisfied when we have a situation where 459 School Employees are arrested in a single year, arrested for Sexual Misconduct with the kids theyre supposed to be taking care of. Obviously we have a problem here. And im not going to settle for a pretend piece of legislation that accomplishes nothing. What comes home to me is my own three kids. I have three young children. And when one of my children gets on a school bus in the morning i have every right to expect that the school that child is going to, the school my child is going to is as safe an environment for him or her as it can possibly be, and every other parent in pennsylvania and every parent in america deserves to have that peace of mind, and every child deserves to have that security. So thats why im not going to give up on this, madam president. Im confident at some point our democratic friends are going to realize that its a huge mistake for them to continue their filibuster of the trafficking bill. And when they do, theyll agree to let us proceed to it. And when that happens ill be back. Senator manchin and i will offer our legislation as an amendment. Were going to have a debate about it. Were going to have a vote about it. I certainly hope that we win this vote. This again is legislation that passed the house unanimously. If it passes the senate, it is sure to become law. And if it doesnt pass for some reason then im going to come back again and again until we do. So madam president i hope well take this up sooner rather than later. I hope well get on this bill still this week because there is still time. And i know well have an open amendment process when we do, and i look forward to offering this amendment. I note the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Snoo quorum call quorum call a senator madam president . The presiding officer the senator from delaware. Mr. Coons madam president i ask proceedings under the quorum call be vitiated. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Coons madam president today, today is the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the bipartisan Voting Rights act of 1965, a day we are reminded of whats possible when we come together across party lines. It was 50 years ago today that republican minority leader, senator Everett Dirksen and democrat majority leader senator Mike Mansfield came together on this floor to introduce landmark legislation to ensure that no person would be denied the right to vote because of the color of his or her skin. I was reminded of the power of their example just two weeks ago when i gathered with republicans and democrats from the house and senate in selma alabama to honor the americans who came from across our country 50 years ago to march across the Edmund Pettus bridge in selma and demand equal Voting Rights. Their example was one of unit yeep as was the example from members who introduced and eventually passed the Voting Rights act of 1965. Im concerned as i come to the floor this afternoon about our troubling abilities to come together on the floor in this chamber where there should be broad agreement as well. I have with me a photographic reminder that the last time that the Voting Rights act was signed into law was reauthorized, it was signed by republican president george bush with the support of democrats and republicans in the then congress and those of us who gathered on the bridge in sell selma were treated to a speech by our present president and president bush that we should come together fix the Voting Rights act and reintroduce it. When it comes to Voting Rights the america is not the america of half a century ago. Yet it is also true in too many cities and towns states and counties across our country new roadblocks are being built to make it more difficult for americans to vote. Its clear as president obama said to us two weeks ago that our march is not yet finished. In the coming weeks as senator leahy and i and others work to bring to the senate a new Voting Rights act that reflects todays challenges, it is my sincere hope my prayer that republican colleagues will partner with us to continue the work that remains undone. This was also to be the week that we would take up and consider and vote on the nomination of Loretta Lynch to serve as attorney general. And i must say madam president that the senates proceedings this week do not portend well, because we find ourselves yet again stuck in regrettable partisan gridlock. For the past 129 days weve had before us an incredibly qualified and talented nominee for attorney general. Loretta lynch was first nominated by president obama back in november. Shes now waited for a vote longer than any attorney general nominee in 30 years. As of today her confirmation has waited longer on the floor than the last five attorneys general combined. Thats unacceptable. And i frankly havent heard a single good reason from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle for why ms. Lynchs nomination deserves such a delay delay. Instead, her nomination is being used by many to continue their fight with the president over his immigration policy. This after nearly shutting down the department of Homeland Security because of those same disagreements. While we do need to have a focused and functional debate in this congress about immigration its simply irresponsible to hold up a highly qualified nominee for attorney general because some dont like that she agrees with the very president who nominated her. Madam president , i take seriously the senates role to advise and consent on president ial nominations so lets take a minute to just look at Loretta Lynchs experience, her background. Shes a graduate of Harvard College and harvard law school. She spent eight years in private practice as a stress teejous law firm then known as hogan and hartson. She served on the United NationsInternational Criminal tribunal for rwanda. She served the public and had previously been unanimously confirmed by this body, twice, i should say to be the United States attorney for the Eastern District of new york. Thats a job where shes prosecuted drug crimesly and violentcrimes andviolent crimes and where shes taken on corrupt politicians and on the Judiciary Committee our chairman called an outside Panel Witness of nine witnesses an outside Witness Panel of nine witnesses. When asked not one of them said that they opposed miss lynchs confirmation to be attorney general on the basis of her skills or experience. The committee was in fact, unable to produce one shred of testimony in opposition to her nomination. Yet here we stand today in the middle of march and the first africanamerican woman ever nominated to be attorney general of the United States our nations top Law Enforcement official has floundered on this floor longer than the five prior nominees combined. Madam president , i think this is unanthropogenic supportable and sets an unfortunate even dangerous precedent. We should not play political games with the department of justice, an executive Branch Agency with 125,000 employees and a 28 billion departmental budget thats charged with all sorts of different Law Enforcement functions from running the federal prisons to enforcing the clean air and clean water acts, to making sure that we fight Human Trafficking and money laundering. Frustratingly, we find ourselves this week also considering a bill to combat Human Trafficking which we dont seem to be able to move forward. Its important legislation that includes broad bipartisan support except for a simple partisan political provision that has now turned it into a divisive issue. The republican leader has this week argued that once we finish work on this Human Trafficking bill we can then move on to Loretta Lynchs nomination vote. But im forced to wonder when the delay tactics here will end. Not only is it seemingly untrue that we cant do Human Trafficking legislation and this nomination at the same time because if my memory serves, we just confirmed two other executive branch nominees last night, but the republican leader knows well that if he truly wanted to move this bill forward, democrats would be ready to partner with him with just a minor revision to the bill. Theres, in fact, i think a bitter air knee that as was reported irony that was as was reported last night Loretta Lynchs nomination is being held up over an issue Human Trafficking, which she herself said she would prioritize if confirmed. Madam president , i ask my republican colleagues, lets find a way to move forward on all of these issues on combating Human Trafficking, on confirming Loretta Lynch to serve as attorney general on reauthorizing the Voting Rights act which is such an important linchpin of civil rights in this country. We agree we need to combat Human Trafficking so lets Work Together on the broad areas where we are in fact, united. And lets confirm an attorney general nominee whos qualified smart and will give the fight against Human Trafficking the dedication it deserves. Madam president ms. Lynch would make a superb attorney general and someone who has herself served in Law Enforcement and served in that role at the state level, i think you well appreciate the importance of