The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“RESOLUTIONS TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES--Continued” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the Senate section on pages S5691-S5695 on Sept. 25, 2019.
The Department includes the Census Bureau, which is used to determine many factors about American life. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, said the Department is involved in misguided foreign trade policies and is home to many unneeded programs.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
RESOLUTIONS TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES--Continued
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for as much time as I consume.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ukraine
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the Republican motion to instruct on paid family and medical leave.
Before I move to the issue at hand, I do want to address the very serious allegations against President Trump and the new information we are learning from the memo the White House released today.
It is deeply concerning to learn that President Trump asked Ukrainian President Zelensky to work with the United States to investigate Vice President Biden. Our democracy is at risk, and President Trump has betrayed our country. I support Speaker Pelosi in starting the impeachment inquiry she announced yesterday, and the revelations today make these investigations even more necessary.
Paid Family and Medical Leave
Mr. President, I now want to talk about an opportunity that we have in the Senate today to serve the Nation by guaranteeing paid family and medical leave for 2 million Federal workers and their families through the Schatz motion.
Every other industrialized country in the world has some version of paid leave, which allows workers to take care of their loved ones when a medical emergency arises. Yet the vast majority of our workforce in America lacks access to paid leave. That means far too many of our workers are unable to take paid time off if they need to care for a new child, a sick parent, or their spouse. Sadly, this includes 2 million of our Federal employees--and I know the Presiding Officer is aware of this, given his own family situation--but we have a chance to fix that right now. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Schatz motion.
However, Senate Republicans have offered an additional motion that would block this benefit from every other working American. This is nothing short of an attack on all workers' access to affordable and accessible paid family and medical leave.
What my Republican colleagues are suggesting is that our workers should work overtime to compensate for family leave. Their motion would require workers to shift around their hours and take on more hours in order to receive the paid time off they need in an emergency situation or when welcoming a new child.
Let me be very clear. This is not a benefit. It is a cynical plan that would erode our American workers' abilities to make ends meet and harm their access to real paid leave. It would hurt those who need this the most, including women, communities of color, and low-wage workers.
Most workers living paycheck to paycheck will not be able to take extra shifts to earn paid leave. Too many families across the country don't even have $400 in savings for emergency expenses. Take Shelby Ramirez Martinez, for example. She found herself in the most untenable situation when her daughter and her father both had simultaneous surgeries scheduled. Shelby is a mom of two, caregiver to her father, and a full-time student and security officer. She didn't have access to paid leave, so she was forced to take 2 weeks off and forgo her pay. She couldn't have planned for that by working overtime and sacrificing time with her daughter or with a flex savings account. What Shelby and all Americans need is dedicated and extended time off for medical emergencies and births.
The Republican motion to instruct calls for employer tax credits that are handouts to large and rich companies like Google, which already provide paid leave and leaves taxpayers footing the bill. They are false incentives for small businesses that still will not be able to afford the leave.
My bill, the FAMILY Act, would provide 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all workers. It is the only comprehensive proposal that is accessible and affordable for all working Americans. It is modeled off of very successful State programs like California's, ensuring that working Americans do not have to choose between their family and their paycheck.
It shouldn't be so hard. So many workers around the country have new children, sick spouses, or elderly parents, and they need access to paid leave. Today, let's stand together and reject fake paid leave by voting no on the Ernst motion to instruct, for people like Shelby and her family.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Huawei
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I come to the Senate floor to urge adoption of two resolutions that are going to be considered by the U.S. Senate, instructing the conferees to the NDAA bill, which is the Defense authorization bill. One of those motions urges the conferees, or directs the conferees, to adopt bipartisan legislation introduced by Senator Cotton, who is now the Presiding Officer in the Chair, and me and others. It is called the 5G act, and it deals with Defending America's 5G Future Act. What it does, very simply, is codify the Trump administration's Executive order putting Huawei on what is called the entity list and then making sure that before there is a change to this, if you wanted to take them off entirely, that would require a congressional action. But it also says that if you want to seek waivers under that act, you should come to Congress and at least give Congress the opportunity to disagree. This is very important to protect our security, to protect U.S. technology from theft. I urge my colleagues to support that resolution.
DETER Act
Mr. President, I am also here to urge my colleagues to support another resolution. This one is directing the conferees to the Defense authorization bill to support a motion and resolutions put forward by Senator Rubio and me and others--again, a bipartisan resolution, making it clear that we should deter foreign interference in U.S. elections. It is based on the principles of bipartisan legislation, a bipartisan act that we have introduced called the DETER Act. The idea is very simple, which is this: We want to say up front that our intelligence communities, or others in the administration, should inform Congress immediately if there has been interference in our elections. If the answer is yes, that would trigger immediate and stiff sanctions on whatever foreign government is acting to interfere in our elections.
We can spend a lot of money and resources protecting our election infrastructure and our election systems, and we should do that. We can urge all of the social media companies to improve their platforms and make it more difficult for foreign governments and adversaries to use those platforms to influence and impact our elections.
None of those measures actually impose a big cost on a foreign government like Russia for interfering in our elections. All those things do is make it harder, and we should make it harder. In this case, the best defense is a good offense, meaning the best defense to having a foreign government interfering in our elections is to discourage and deter them from doing that in the first place.
Right now, what we have learned is there is no cost to Vladimir Putin and the Russians for interfering in our elections. In fact, they assess that they get a significant benefit from creating division within the United States. If you are Vladimir Putin and you are doing a cost benefit analysis--should I interfere in the U.S. elections or not?--you conclude: Hey, I am going to gain something by creating this kind of division and confusion within the United States. What we should be doing is saying in advance and up front to Vladimir Putin and Russia or any other foreign leader or government, if we catch you interfering in our elections, you will definitely pay a price in the form of sanctions against some of your financial institutions or key aspects of your economic sector. We need to spell that out in advance.
This resolution requires that Congress be notified after the election as to whether we have detected foreign interference. Next time, someone like Vladimir Putin will know in advance that if we catch them, there will be a price to pay, a penalty to pay. That will, of course, discourage the activity in the first place.
It doesn't cost us a dime to do this. Yes, we should continue to spend money, as I said, to harden our systems at home and better defend ourselves. For goodness' sake, we should at least take the position that we are going to let foreign powers know in advance, if we catch you--and by the way, we will catch you if you interfere in our elections--there will be an immediate and severe price to pay.
I urge my colleagues to unanimously support this resolution. It is appropriate that we are directing the conferees to the National Defense Authorization Act to include this provision because, after all, the reason we invest in our defense is to protect our country and to protect our democracy. That bill should include a provision telling foreign powers: If you mess around and interfere in our Democratic elections, you will pay a price. That will make it less likely they will do so to begin with.
I urge adoption of the resolution.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Boozman). Without objection, it is so ordered.
Vote on S. Res. 330
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Van Hollen resolution to instruct.
The resolution (S. Res. 330) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5692, September 25, 2019, second column, the following appears: The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Van Hollen resolution to instruct. The resolution (S. Res. 330) was agreed to.
The online Record has been corrected to read: The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Van Hollen resolution to instruct. The resolution (S. Res. 330) was agreed to. (The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
========================= END NOTE =========================
Vote on S. Res. 331
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the resolution to instruct.
The Senator from Arkansas is recognized.
S. Res. 331
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I would like to speak briefly about our resolution, which is to instruct the conferees to adopt the bipartisan Defending America's 5G Future Act into the conference report.
Huawei is no ordinary telecom company. It is the eyes and ears of the Chinese Communist Party. That is why the administration earlier this year put it on the Commerce Department's blacklist. It is a rare action that both Republicans and Democrats can support.
Our legislation, to a large extent, codifies that decision to keep Huawei on the blacklist and to ensure that Congress has a say on any exclusion, say for a small rural telecom that needs time to transition. We might pass a resolution of disapproval if we oppose that action. But, most importantly, it is to ensure that Congress affirmatively acts to pass a resolution of approval to remove Huawei from the blacklist, because that is where Huawei belongs and where they should stay without a decision of the people's representatives in Congress.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader is recognized.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I join with my colleague, the Senator from Arkansas, in this bipartisan motion to instruct.
Huawei is a menace. It is a menace to our national security. It is a menace to our economic growth. It is a menace to the future of America in many ways. If we are not tough with Huawei, whom are we going to be tough with? If we are not tough with Huawei, what are we going to do when China continues to take advantage of us in ways that are unfair--
whether it be economic, national security, cyber, or whatever.
This resolution will ensure that the conferees know that the Senate is strongly in support of being tough with Huawei on national security grounds, on economic grounds, and, basically, on ensuring that America stays No. 1 in many of the leading technologies that we will need to create job growth, wealth, and prosperity in the future.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the resolution to instruct.
Mr. SASSE. Mr. President, I request the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California (Ms. Harris), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Blackburn). Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 91, nays 4, as follows:
YEAS--91
AlexanderBaldwinBarrassoBennetBlackburnBlumenthalBluntBoozmanBraunBrownBurrCantwellCapitoCardinCarperCaseyCassidyCollinsCoonsCornynCortez MastoCottonCramerCruzDainesDuckworthDurbinErnstFeinsteinFischerGardnerGillibrandGrahamGrassleyHassanHawleyHeinrichHironoHoevenHyde-SmithInhofeIsaksonJohnsonJonesKaineKennedyKingKlobucharLankfordLeahyLeeManchinMarkeyMcConnellMcSallyMenendezMerkleyMoranMurkowskiMurphyMurrayPerduePetersPortmanReedRobertsRomneyRosenRoundsSasseSchatzSchumerScott (FL)Scott (SC)ShaheenShelbySinemaSmithStabenowSullivanTesterThuneTillisToomeyUdallVan HollenWarnerWhitehouseWickerWydenYoung
NAYS--4
CrapoEnziPaulRisch
NOT VOTING--5
BookerHarrisRubioSandersWarren
The resolution (S. Res. 331) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5692, September 25, 2019, third column, the following appears: The resolution (S. Res. 331) was agreed to.
The online Record has been corrected to read: The resolution (S. Res. 331) was agreed to. (The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
========================= END NOTE =========================
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the remaining votes in the series be 10 minutes in length.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Vote on S. Res. 332
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the Jones resolution to instruct.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. JONES. Colleagues, today we are about to vote on a resolution that will correct a long-held injustice--one that has been on the books for decades; one that has caused significant pain to military spouses who have given so much for our country. It is an elimination of the military widow's tax. It has been voted on in this body for over 18 years and has never gotten across the finish line. Now is the time. This is our time to make sure that we tell our veterans that we are supportive but we show it with our actions, not just with our words. I urge everyone to please vote to instruct the conferees to eliminate the military widow's tax.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time in opposition?
The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I agree with the comments made by the Senator from Alabama. There is one problem with this, and that is, it is not paid for. I am supporting it. I am actually a cosponsor of the bill and was a cosponsor of the bill long before this year, but we are going to have to really get busy to figure out how to pay for this. It is very expensive. But I do encourage people to vote for it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on adoption of the Jones resolution.
Mr. SASSE. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr) and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California (Ms. Harris), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 94, nays 0, as follows:
YEAS--94
AlexanderBaldwinBarrassoBennetBlackburnBlumenthalBluntBoozmanBraunBrownCantwellCapitoCardinCarperCaseyCassidyCollinsCoonsCornynCortez MastoCottonCramerCrapoCruzDainesDuckworthDurbinEnziErnstFeinsteinFischerGardnerGillibrandGrahamGrassleyHassanHawleyHeinrichHironoHoevenHyde-SmithInhofeIsaksonJohnsonJonesKaineKennedyKingKlobucharLankfordLeahyLeeManchinMarkeyMcConnellMcSallyMenendezMerkleyMoranMurkowskiMurphyMurrayPaulPerduePetersPortmanReedRischRobertsRomneyRosenRoundsSasseSchatzSchumerScott (FL)Scott (SC)ShaheenShelbySinemaSmithStabenowSullivanTesterThuneTillisToomeyUdallVan HollenWarnerWhitehouseWickerWydenYoung
NOT VOTING--6
BookerBurrHarrisRubioSandersWarren
The resolution (S. Res. 332) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5693, September 25, 2019, second column, the following appears: The resolution (S. Res. 332) was agreed to.
The online Record has been corrected to read: The resolution (S. Res. 332) was agreed to. (The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
========================= END NOTE =========================
Vote on S. Res. 333
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the Schatz resolution.
The Senator from Hawaii.
Mr. SCHATZ. Madam President, this resolution urges the inclusion of the Federal Employee Paid Leave Act in the final conference agreement on the NDAA. This resolution provides 12 weeks of paid family leave for Federal employees in all situations already covered under the FMLA.
Too many of our Federal employees have to make the impossible choice of getting a paycheck or looking after a sick child, caring for an aging parent, or recovering from a health condition. As a result, many have been forced to leave their jobs and obtain other employment.
Paid family leave is not only the right thing to do for Federal workers, but it is the smart thing to do for our Federal workforce. This is the most practical and fiscally responsible way to provide family leave for Federal workers.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks time in opposition?
All time has expired.
The question is on agreeing to the Schatz resolution.
Mr. BOOZMAN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``nay.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California (Ms. Harris), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 48, as follows:
YEAS--47
BaldwinBennetBlumenthalBrownCantwellCapitoCardinCarperCaseyCollinsCoonsCortez MastoDuckworthDurbinFeinsteinGillibrandHassanHeinrichHironoJonesKaineKingKlobucharLeahyManchinMarkeyMenendezMerkleyMurkowskiMurphyMurrayPetersPortmanReedRosenSchatzSchumerShaheenSinemaSmithStabenowTesterUdallVan HollenWarnerWhitehouseWyden
NAYS--48
AlexanderBarrassoBlackburnBluntBoozmanBraunBurrCassidyCornynCottonCramerCrapoCruzDainesEnziErnstFischerGardnerGrahamGrassleyHawleyHoevenHyde-SmithInhofeIsaksonJohnsonKennedyLankfordLeeMcConnellMcSallyMoranPaulPerdueRischRobertsRomneyRoundsSasseScott (FL)Scott (SC)ShelbySullivanThuneTillisToomeyWickerYoung
NOT VOTING--5
BookerHarrisRubioSandersWarren
The resolution (S. Res. 333) was rejected.
Vote on S. Res. 334
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the Peters resolution to instruct.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, let me be frank. Today, our water and our health is at risk from highly fluorinated chemicals known as PFAS. These chemicals have been widely used commercially, and they are also concentrated in firefighting foams used by the Department of Defense. They are toxic, and they have been linked to serious health issues in those who are exposed to them.
High levels of PFAS contamination exist at the former Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda, MI, and at military sites all across our country.
My resolution would retain the Senate language prohibiting the Department of Defense from using firefighting foams containing PFAS chemicals to the end of 2023.
PFAS-free foams are already widely used internationally by military services and at major hub airports, such as Heathrow and Dubai.
We must protect our troops, our firefighters, our communities, and our water.
I urge my colleagues to support my resolution.
I yield back all remaining time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.
The question is on agreeing to the resolution.
The resolution (S. Res. 334) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5693, September 25, 2019, third column, the following appears: The resolution (S. Res. 334) was agreed to.
The online Record has been corrected to read: The resolution (S. Res. 334) was agreed to. (The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
========================= END NOTE =========================
Vote on S. Res. 335
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the McSally resolution.
Mr. DURBIN: Mr. President this week, the Senate will vote again on whether or not the President was right in using a phony emergency declaration in order to take money meant for our military and put it toward his medieval wall on the southern border.
In March, we voted overwhelmingly, on a bipartisan basis, to repeal this declaration. I hope we can do so again. We may also vote on a resolution offered by the junior Senator from Arizona which calls on Congress to ``backfill'' $3.6 billion in cancelled military construction projects. This means should we give the President $3.6 billion to replace the $3.6 billion that he stole for his wall.
There are no protections attached to this backfill, meaning there is nothing ensuring that he can't steal from our military again. It is said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. We should not vote to hand over more money without a guarantee that it will actually go to our military this time. The McSally resolution contains no such protection, so I urge my colleagues to vote against it.
Maybe you doubt that the President would repeat his border tricks. Well, a senior administration official admitted that he actually did plan to do it again in the Washington Post on Friday. The headline reads, ``Trump officials considering plan to divert billions of dollars in additional funds for border barrier.''
Yes, the President has already made our military pay $6.1 billion for his wall, but apparently that was just round one. Talking about the bills before Congress for fiscal year 2020, an unnamed official told the Post, ``The plan is to sell it as replenishment money to the Defense Department for the $3.6 billion they took this year. Then once they got it from Congress, they would take it again.''
It is a breathtaking statement. The question for this Chamber is, Are we really going to continue to play along? Remember, this $3.6 billion taken from military construction projects will cause direct harm to our military personnel, their families, and our Nation's security posture around the world. Don't forget, that came after the White House took
$2.5 billion last spring from our military, funds which should have gone to other military priorities were instead diverted to a political promise.
What were some of these 127 cancelled military construction projects in 26 States and Territories and on U.S. bases around the world? The Pentagon prioritized rebuilding National Guard facilities and a school for military children in Puerto Rico. Congress agreed and provided $400 million, but the President took it away a few weeks ago, and their hope is gone.
Joint Base Andrews in Maryland needed a new childcare facility, to replace one filled with mold and overcrowded rooms. Congress agreed. But the President took it away with his decision. Similarly, Fort Campbell, KY, lost a new school for military children. U.S. bases in Europe lost projects meant to reassure our allies and deter Putin's Russia. U.S. bases in South Korea and Japan lost projects meant to deter North Korea and China. All of it and more was labeled a top priority by the Pentagon and cancelled by the President anyway. This puts our men and women at real risk.
The Air Force notes that without one of the cancelled projects its base would be, ``vulnerable to hostile penetration in the midst of contingency operations and an increased terrorist threat.'' Another cancelled project to upgrade a munitions side would make it difficult for U.S. fighter and bomber aircraft to operate properly.
Congress should reject the President's phony declaration and reject the idea that Congress should throw good money after bad. Congress must reassert its powers with these votes this week.
Mr. THUNE. All time is yielded back.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the resolution.
Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California (Ms. Harris), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 42, as follows:
YEAS--52
AlexanderBarrassoBlackburnBluntBoozmanBraunCapitoCassidyCollinsCornynCottonCramerCrapoCruzDainesEnziErnstFischerGardnerGrahamGrassleyHawleyHoevenHyde-SmithInhofeIsaksonJohnsonJonesKennedyLankfordLeeMcConnellMcSallyMoranMurkowskiPerduePortmanRischRobertsRomneyRoundsSasseScott (FL)Scott (SC)ShelbySinemaSullivanThuneTillisToomeyWickerYoung
NAYS--42
BaldwinBennetBlumenthalBrownCantwellCardinCarperCaseyCoonsCortez MastoDuckworthDurbinFeinsteinGillibrandHassanHeinrichHironoKaineKingKlobucharLeahyManchinMarkeyMenendezMerkleyMurphyMurrayPaulPetersReedRosenSchatzSchumerShaheenSmithStabenowTesterUdallVan HollenWarnerWhitehouseWyden
NOT VOTING--6
BookerBurrHarrisRubioSandersWarren
The resolution (S. Res. 335) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5694, September 25, 2019, third column, the following appears: The resolution (S. Res. 335) was agreed to.
The online Record has been corrected to read: The resolution (S. Res. 335) was agreed to. (The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
========================= END NOTE =========================
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Order of Business
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following disposition of the resolutions to instruct on S. 1790, the Senate proceed to executive session and vote on the motions to invoke cloture on the Hyten and Scalia nominations in the order filed; further, that the mandatory quorum calls be waived.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Vote on S. Res. 336
Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the Ernst resolution to instruct.
The Senator from Iowa.
Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution to ensure that Congress is working toward commonsense, effective family leave solutions. It is well past time we made paid parental leave a reality in this country. Affording all moms and dads the flexibility to spend time with their new baby is something Americans want to see happen.
While I appreciate the resolution by my colleague from the State of Hawaii, putting Washington insiders and Federal employees first doesn't add up as the right first step. I believe we need to think more broadly about this issue and how it impacts hard-working families in Iowa and across the country.
We all recognize there are significant barriers for new, working parents to spend time with their baby during those critical and precious first few months. That is why I am working with Senator Mike Lee on a proposal to offer paid parental leave to all new parents in a way that is both budget neutral and flexible. In fact, a number of Republicans and Democrats are working on potential pathways forward.
At the heart of all of it, we simply cannot lose sight of the fact that we need solutions that work for all American families, not just those fortunate enough to have a government job. If we are serious about enacting paid family leave policies, instead of scoring political wins, we will support the resolution before us.
Families are the bedrock of our society. Let's look for solutions that all Americans can embrace.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment because, as it is written, it really rewards only companies that are very wealthy and successful with additional tax credits to do something they are already doing. By that measure, it will leave most American workers without basic access to leave.
The other potential idea is about shifting hours and suggesting that workers have to work overtime to be able to have paid leave. Every parent in America, every person in America, will have a time when they have a family crisis--whether it is a dying parent, whether it is a sick spouse, whether it is a new child--and we are still the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't have access to national paid leave. We should be able to come together around this commonsense solution that Senator Schatz has offered to create at least the first step to make sure our Federal workers aren't disproportionately harmed because they can't compete with the private sector.
I oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the Ernst resolution.
Mr. THUNE. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr) and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio) would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from California, (Ms. Harris), the Senator from Vermont
(Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 55, nays 39, as follows:
YEAS--55
AlexanderBarrassoBlackburnBluntBoozmanBraunCapitoCassidyCollinsCornynCottonCramerCrapoCruzDainesEnziErnstFischerGardnerGrahamGrassleyHawleyHoevenHyde-SmithInhofeIsaksonJohnsonJonesKennedyKingLankfordLeeManchinMcConnellMcSallyMoranMurkowskiPaulPerduePortmanRischRobertsRomneyRoundsSasseScott (FL)Scott (SC)ShelbySinemaSullivanThuneTillisToomeyWickerYoung
NAYS--39
BaldwinBennetBlumenthalBrownCantwellCardinCarperCaseyCoonsCortez MastoDuckworthDurbinFeinsteinGillibrandHassanHeinrichHironoKaineKlobucharLeahyMarkeyMenendezMerkleyMurphyMurrayPetersReedRosenSchatzSchumerShaheenSmithStabenowTesterUdallVan HollenWarnerWhitehouseWyden
NOT VOTING--6
BookerBurrHarrisRubioSandersWarren
The resolution (S. Res. 336) was agreed to.
(The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
=========================== NOTE ===========================
On page S5695, September 25, 2019, second column, the following appears: The resolution (S. Res. 336) was agreed to.
The online Record has been corrected to read: The resolution (S. Res. 336) was agreed to. (The resolution is printed in today's Record under "Submitted Resolutions.")
========================= END NOTE =========================
____________________
