So we saw from the air, sort of i guess about 10,000 feet what we have previously seen on the ground. From up in the air, you definitely have a different perspective on the waterlogged landscape. You see so much more. You see the levees, the reservoirs, areas hit. You see again as well the damaged goods and drywall that people have taken out of their homes as the first step toward recovery. And it definitely has an impression on you, particularly the size and scale of the affected area. Its really hard to believe until you see it from that perspective. When i took off my headset and sunglasses by the way, Speaker Paul Ryan joined us on that particular trip, and i appreciate we all appreciate his being there, but when we stepped off the chopper, what i thought about is what weve done so far, but how much farther we still have to go. Its not just about Building Materials and street and roof repairs or even just the temporary housing that people need, although all of those are surely important. We need to remember that the remedies are not going to be onesizefitsall. We need broad support, but we also need targeted and narrow support to help people get back on their feet. We need to keep each family in mind and what their own particular needs may be, depending on their particular circumstances. But as i started out to say, its not just texas were talking about anymore. Its florida, puerto rico, and the virgin islands, too. And we all remember that those places were hit by hurricanes irma and maria right after texas was hit by harvey. I want to make one thing clear, though, mr. President , that we in texas stand together with our fellow americans who suffered from hurricanes maria and irma, as well as those who have suffered from other natural disasters occurring in and around our country, and we will do everything we can to help the people who were harmed and damaged, even devastated by these terrible storms, we will help them fight to get back on their feet and to recover and to return their life to some form of normalcy. One way we can Work Together and deliver relief applies to different people in different geographic areas is providing temporary tax relief. I know this sounds kind of like a small thing to do, but if you think about it, this was a thousandyear storm in texas. Hurricane harvey dropped 34 trillion gallons of water on the same area over a period of about five or so days. Many people were not in the flood plain, the 100year flood plain which is typically where you would buy flood insurance, and so many people suffered losses that were not covered by flood insurance. What many of these folks will have to do is to dip into their Retirement Savings and other savings in order to help get life back to normal. This will help people get back on their feet as they rebuild their homes and neighborhoods in the wake of these hurricanes. We just recently passed earlier this afternoon a f. A. A. , federal Aviation Administration reauthorization, but it also included the tax package that im talking about now that provided this targeted relief. These provisions will help hurricane victims in all of the devastated areas keep more of their paycheck, first and foremost, but would be able to deduct the cost of their Property Damage from their tax return and encourage even more americans to generously donate to Hurricane Relief and help their neighbors and employees. And i know tax this tax package is really a small matter. Its not a panacea. Its certainly not a cureall. Its not supposed to fix every stormrelated problem or absolve us from honoring our ongoing responsibilities in the days ahead, but as John Steinbeck once said, and now that you dont have to be perfect, you can just be good, and i think these are good reforms. They will complement other measures taken by the federal government as well as state and local actors. Similar provisions were introduced in a noncontroversial section of the f. A. A. Reauthorization bill that unfortunately House Democrats led by leader pelosi tried to block earlier this week. But despite the delays, im pleased that the house has acted a second time earlier today to make sure this relief is delivered to those who need it most. Gephardt, not just in texas, but in florida, in the virgin islands, and in puerto rico, which reportedly has been devastated. And now we in this chamber seem to have finally gotten the message, too, by passing this relief that just this very afternoon is part of the f. A. A. Bill. As our colleague from florida, representative carlos corbelos, said about the hurricane victims in his home state, he said they dont have the time to wait, and they certainly dont have time to play political games. Well, hes right, and now we can say we have taken those words to heart. So i remember what i saw from that helicopter. Now the time for surveying the scene has ended. Whats no longer up in the air is this for many texans, floridians and puerto ricans, targeted tax relief will serve to make a difficult year just a little easier. So i salute the house for getting the job done, and im glad that we in this chamber have quickly followed suit. Mr. President , i yield the floor. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from hawaii. Mr. Schatz thank you, mr. President. I want to thank the senior senator from texas for his leadership on Disaster Response and pledge my commitment to whatever is needed for houston and the areas around houston, as well as florida, and i appreciate the commitment at the legislative level to what needs to be done in puerto rico. We also need to continue to apply pressure to the administration because it does appear as though there is an unequal response between whats happening in puerto rico and what has happened in houston and in florida. And so we need to hold as a country the executive Branch Accountable for the lack of a sense of urgency for three and a half million americans who are mostly going to be without power for nine months or currently without Potable Water or in a devastateed situation. It is all of our obligation to do everything that we can. Mr. President , i ask unanimous consent that what follows these remarks appear in a different part of the journal. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Schatz thank you, mr. President. The senate is about to make an important decision about who leads the federal agency that oversees everything from the internet to tv to the radio. This vote is a choice. We can either give our stamp of approval on the f. C. C. s direction under the leadership of chairman pai or we can decide that his leadership has put the f. C. C. On the wrong track and that its time for someone else to take charge. Now, generally speaking, here is how i approach these kinds of things. Three reasons why you might reject the nominee. The person is corrupt. Its a nonstarter. If the person is unqualified, also a nonstarter. Or on policy grounds. And even in the policy space, just disagreeing with someone can often boil down to the fact that there is a president from another president. Thats not sufficient to vote no. Chairman pai is someone i know. He is skillful, he is a decent human being. Hes very smart. Hes qualified. And when we disagree, which is often, we can do it without ruining our ability to Work Together on following day, the following issue. This is no small thing in todays political climate. So its important if were ever going to get something done that were able to disagree and then find Common Ground afterwards. So i do like chairman pai as a person. I think he is ethical, i think he is capable, but he is just so wrong on policy. For me, that means hes not the right leader for the f. C. C. And i want to highlight four of the concerns that i have. First, the f. C. C. Really is trying to end the internet as we know it by getting rid of Net Neutrality, and if they succeed, your Internet Service provider will have the power to stop you from seeing certain kinds of content. They will be the ones that make decisions about what you can access online and how fast and how much you have to pay for it. Some people say, well, the sbs arent going to change the internet because its not in their interests to change the internet, even if the law goes away. But think about this. Most often these i. S. P. s are publicly traded companies, and theyre going to make decisions based on their own financial interests. That is exactly not just an objective of theirs. Its their obligation. And so if there is an opportunity to change their Business Model for Internet Service, they are dutybound to pursue it. They do not have any obligation to a free and open internet. They have an obligation to shareholders and to profits. Thats why Net Neutrality exists in the first place, because we should not leave it up to any company to decide whether or not they are going to charge people more to stream video, for example, or block certain content altogether. If we allow the f. C. C. To end Net Neutrality, americans across the country are going to find that the internet no longer works in the way that it should, and this has happened under chairman pais leadership. Its not just bad policy in the space that he is pursuing. They have also had some serious process fouls. When chairman pai announced that the f. C. C. Was revisiting the rules, he made clear that the f. C. C. Was going to get rid of Net Neutrality, regardless of what happened through the process. He said, and i quote, this is a fight he attempts to wage, and it is a fight we attempt to win. Now, why is that a significant thing to say its a fight we intend to wage and a fight we intend to win. This is a quasijudicial agency. They just opened up for public comment. There were 22 million members of the public who submitted Public Comments after the chairman of the commission has already announced that he has decided which way theyre going to go. And i think that is antithetical to the governing statute and its antithetical to the basic premise that if you have an open Comment Period where an individual has an opportunity to express themselves, youve got to listen to that. You dont say ive already decided, but you 22 Million People, if you have an opinion, you would be happy to receive it and file it and do what i planned to do all along. This is the exact opposite of how this is supposed to work. The Agency Proposes the rule, the public weighs it, and then the agency considers the comments from the public in making the decision, but chairman pai turned it upside down. The f. C. C. Has tried to diminish the fact that so many people have tried to weigh in. About 96 of the roughly 22 Million People who have weighed in have weighed in in favor of Net Neutrality. Theyre trying to lay the groundwork so that they can get rid of Net Neutrality, even though the vast majority of people are for it. And by doing that, the f. C. C. Is effectively saying that lobbyists and law firms matter more than regular citizens. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The f. C. C. Has also claimed that setback kept people from being able to comment, but they have not been forthcoming about what exactly happened, and were still working on in our oversight role figuring all of that out. The second area id like to address is media ownership. Local tv broadcasters are an essential part of every community. People know their local tv station, they trust it. Theres a range of perspectives offered. Because the broadcasters are based in the community, they have relationships with their viewers that make their content better and more relevant. And so for decades, congress and the f. C. C. Have taken steps to keep local broadcasting local, because it benefits the public interest. These are the public airwaves. Like fast food options across the country. You may not mind mcdonalds once in a while, but you dont want that to be the only option in your hometown. You want something that captures the local culture in a community, and thats what local broadcasting does. It makes tv in honolulu different than tv in hartford or in houston. But now the american tradition of local broadcasting is in real danger because the f. C. C. Is going to change the rules so that these stations can be bought up by a Single Company without any limits. And i have no doubt that this would create a world of sort of nationalized content distributed to each of these local companies with consumers having to watch whatever is distributed to them by their national headquarters. This is no longer local news, and this is not the broadcast media that americans deserve. The third area i want to talk about is Broadband Access. Right now, americans have widely Different Levels of internet speed, basically based on where they live. In some places, you have great Broadband Access, no trouble streaming video, accessing Government Services online, downloading, uploading, but in rural and tribal communities, they are very, very harry very, very far behind. As the f. C. C. Noted, 231 of those 21 lack access to broadband. A mobile network will typically offer slower speeds than fixed broadband. They cant go online and do what we can in washington, d. C. , or other constituents across the country. Everybody on a bipartisan basis understands that this needs to change. High Speed Broadband is needed in every community no matter how many people live in your community. Thats why the f. C. C. Has historically worked so every home, school, and business had adequate access to the internet because thats what it will take to unlock innovation and potential for all americans. The f. C. C. Has worked on this issue by setting the bar for what it will take to connect more americans to the internet. Theres already a threshold in place that says this is what highspeed Internet Access is so we know who has it and who doesnt. As were working to get more people broadband, the f. C. C. Is working to change the definition of broadband so it looks like theyve gotten more people broadband. That way they can say more people are covered. They are not actually solving the problem. They are identifying what it means to have access. They are papering over the problem that they are not solving this much is a real solving. This is a real issue and something that the Committee Members have worked on in on a bipartisan basis. The way to get more people Broadband Access is to get more people Broadband Access. It is not to change the rules and the access so you can come back to be congress and say, look, we have changed the access by claiming the people who are covered are not. The final subject i want to raise is a little more sensitive. Like i said, i respect chairman pai, but he made some comments during his confirmation hearing that worried me. I asked if he agreed with the president s comments calling the media the enemy of the state. He would not give a direct answer. I understand that mr. Pai is a republican. Thats not the problem. I understand republicans will be appointed to a republican administration. Im the former Democratic Party chairman of the state of hawaii. So i understand party loyalty. I respect party loyalty, but we have a president and white house that are pushing to blur the legal, moral, and ethical boundaries in our nations capital. This is not the time to get cute when we ask a question about the rule of law. This is not the time to finesse an answer. The only acceptable answer is this, i will not let anyone interfere with my work whether it is the president or anyone else and the media is not the enemy of the state. Mr. Pai did not take that opportunity. This is one of the few opportunities mr. Pai had to be unequivocal, the senior senator from new mexico, if i remember correctly, and other members of the panel, sort of gave him a second and third bite at the apple so he could get it right. It was an easy one to get right. I understand it is politically complicated, but sometimes you just have to say and do what is right. My instinct is that he will not use the f. C. C. To do anything to cross any ethical boundaries that im worried about, but the fact that he wont say so leaves the opening that should not be there. The president has tweeted about Media Companies that give him bad coverage. He consistently refers to the media as Fake News Media and garbage media and makes unsubstantiated claims about newspapers and networks. Its not out of the realm of possibility that this goes beyond the talking points of the Commerce Committee and into a real crisis. And i just want to hear from mr. He will be confirmed on monday, but i want to hear from mr. Pai that he doesnt that he does not believe the media is the enemy of the state and will not allow any interference from the white house. Liked to end by bringing this back to the American People. This vote is our chance to stand up for them. There will not be a vote on Net Neutrality in the next weeks and months. They deserve a free and open internet and they deserve to have adequate access to the internet no matter where they live. Thats why i have to vote no on this nominee. I like chairman pai. I like him as a person, but he is the wrong person to lead the f. C. C. I urge my colleagues to join me and vote no on his nomination. I yield the floor. The presiding officer the senator from New Hampshire. Ms. Harris i too rise to say that i do not support chairman pai. I echo what senator schatz h has said about chairman pais dedication and commitment, but i too find myself, as a member of the Commerce Committee, as somebody who has sat through testimony from mr. Pai and watched a number of things unfold with regard to policy that is critically important to the people of New Hampshire and our country, and find that i too am in a position of being unable to support this nomination. Mr. President , the f. C. C. Plays a Critical Role in overseeing our communications network, protecting consumers and ensuring that our nations businesses can compete on al level play on a level playing field. Unfortunately, throughout his tenure at the f. C. C. , and particularly during his time as chairman, chairman pai has not demonstrated a commitment to those goals. To start, i have real concerns with the chairmans actions to undermined Net Neutrality and the impact that would have on people in New Hampshire and throughout the country. Mr. President , a free and open internet is essential to consumers, essential to entrepreneurs and innovative Small Businesses that are the foundation of our economic success. So Net Neutrality is the concept that Internet Service providers should provide equal access to applications and content online and they should not be able to discriminate against content and content providers by making certain web pages, applications, or videos load faster or slower than others. Put simply, Net Neutrality ensures that even the smallest voices and businesses can be heard and can thrive. People in businesses in New Hampshire know this. Businesses have called and written to my office in support of Net Neutrality. The f. C. C. Has received a record brearking number bernankeing recordbreaking number of comments from people who want their voices heard on this topic, but chairman pai is not addressing the concerns of americans who are speaking out instead he is listening to big Cable Companies and Internet Service providers and taking direct aim at Net Neutrality protections. S that unacceptable thats unacceptable. Protecting Net Neutrality is essential, but with chairman pai at the f. C. C. , these critical rules are in danger. Mr. President , i also oppose this nomination because chairman pai is putting Rural Broadband advancements at stake. Recently chairman pai and the f. C. C. Released a notice of inquiry that raises questions about its goals, suggesting it will consider mobile broadband as an adequate replacement for fixed broadband which would allow speeds that are twothirds slower. For many parts of New Hampshire, mobile is not dependable enough or fast enough to meet our economys needs, promote innovation, and connect Young Students with their homework. We must address the challenges that Rural Communities face in getting access to broadband, but by focusing instead on mobile broadband, the chairman would have us leave Rural America without a reliable connection. Finally, thrp, i have concerns about finally, mr. President , i have concerns about chairman pais ability to evaluate the sinclair merger that sits before the f. C. C. For decades our nation has maintained a policy that limits the number of broadcast stations that one company can own nationwide. This policy has protected americans by allowing them to receive robust and fair news content about their communities and has provided a diversity of voices in the broadcast news media marketplace. But this merger would result in sinclairs ability to reach over 70 of americans across our country, far exceeding the commissions ownership caps and threatening the diversity in broadcast news that americans deserve and expect. Since chairman pai took the lead of the f. C. C. , the commission has worked to loosen regulations regarding media ownership and in turn sinclair benefited. As this preposed merger is still under consideration, we need someone at the helm of the f. C. C. Who will thoroughly vet the implications and ensure that it is in the public interest. Theres too much at stake with this merger and chairman pais actions raise doubts that he can evaluate it impartially. Mr. President , we need an f. C. C. That is focused on putting consumers first and ensuring that all americans have the opportunity to thrive in the 21st century economy. There are simply too many concerns about chairman pais record, his ability to express impartiality on key decisions and his goals for federal Communication Commission priorities. I will vote against chairman pais renomination, and i urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And i suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk should call the roll. Quorum call quorum call mr. Wyden mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from oregon. Mr. Wyden thank you, mr. President. Mr. President , im going to take some time this afternoon to respond to the remarks of mr. Gary cohen, the president s top the presiding officer the senate is in a quorum call. Wide i ask unanimous consent to vacate the quorum call. Mr. Wyden i ask unanimous consent to vacate the quorum call. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Wyden thank you, mr. President. Im going to take some time this afternoon to respond to the remarks of the president s top Economic Advisor, mr. Gary cohen, with respect to this administrations approach to taxes. And let me be clear right at the outset, the president and hicksf millionaires are illustrating a middle class con job and im going to be very specific as to why i reach that judgment with respect to what theyre saying about taxes. Now the president said, i dont benefit, very, very strongly. I think theres very little benefit for people of wealth. Those are the president s exact words. He also said its not good for me, believe me, the president said in a speech unveiling the tax reform blueprint on wednesday. Now unless the president pays zero tax, the president is going to benefit enormously from his tax plan. His family would save billions if the estate tax is eliminated as hes proposed. His more than 500 passthroughs will be able to take advantage of the new grand canyonsized passthrough loophole that his plan proposes. Based on his 2005 tax return, thats the only one available, the president would save millions each year if the alternative minimum tax is eliminated. Now today the president and his the president s top advisor gary cohen said weve also said that wealthy americans arent getting a tax cut. They expect you to believe them and not your lyin eyes. And i want to just take a few minutes and describe exactly what the welltodo are getting in this bill. The plan outlined by the Trump Administration would cost upwards of 5 trillion, and it is overwhelmingly skewed towards the wealthy and the biggest corporations. It lowers the corporate rate from 35 to 20, and much of that goes to wealthy shareholders. The new passthrough which would give this big gift to high fliers, hedge funds, basically would let them start calling ordinary income, business income so it could be taxed at a much lower rate, and they would be in the process harming Social Security and medicare because they werent paying those payroll taxes. Now i mentioned the estate tax, and this is for just a few thousand people, the exemption for a couple is already 11 million. This break would cost the American People between 250 billion and 270 billion. Thats an awful lot of money to parcel out to a few thousand families. And then they would lower the individual top rate from 39. 6 to 35 . So lets make no mistake about it, mr. President. The president of the United States and his top Economic Advisor have said that theyre not going to give tax cuts to the wealthy. Thats not what they said yesterday. They said that the top rate was going to go down from 39. 6 to 35 . And to add insult to injury, for those at the bottom of the Economic System who pay 10 now, theirs would go up to 12 . So this is just making a mockery out of the president s pledge that this was going to be about working families and not about the wealthy. And the fact is, with respect to the middle class, mr. President , the trump team is running sleight of hand a sleight of hand shell game. What they give with one hand, they just take away with the other. So they touted yesterday that they were going to be helping middleclass folks by doubling the standard deduction. Now, first of all, that is walking back, mr. President , the bipartisan proposal that wed had here in the senate written by myself and my colleague, dan coats, now a member of the Trump Administration, that would triple the standard deduction. But what is particularly outrageous is that the trump people arent leveling with those middleclass families. Basically, theyre saying, oh, youre going to really do well. Youre going to get double the standard deduction. What they dont tell them is that theyre going to eliminate the personal exemption that large middleclass families rely on. In effect, those large middleclass families i have a lot of workingclass families who may have supported the president they are going to see a tax increase under the president s tax outline you heard about it yesterday even with this larger standard deduction. The president s team also took a big pass on the opportunity to expand the Child Tax Credit to make sure that more working families would benefit from them. There are no specifics about the Child Tax Credit in this plan. Now, the treasury secretary went on fox news and said the tax plan is going to cut down the deficit by 1 trillion. Now, mr. Mnuchin is doubling down on the failed experiment. The idea that tax cuts for themselves, in effect, paid for themselves through economic growth. History shows that just is not true. Tax cuts dont pay for themselves. The 2001 and 2003 bush tax cuts were billed as tax relief for the middle class that would spark economic growth. Instead, the benefits skewed to those at the very top and they added trillions of dollars to americas debt. Middleclass wages fell, unemployment increased. This is a pattern that working families, middleclass families cannot afford to have repeated except now the secretary of treasurys claim is that, well, the trump tax cuts wont just pay for themselves, theyre going to bring in an additional 1 trillion in revenue atop their own cost. Mr. President , William Peter wyden, age 9, my son, would say, thats just a bunch of whoppers and it couldnt be further from the truth, as even republica republicanappointed budget director steve holts said and made clear, the tax cuts do not pay for themselves. Quote, no, the evidence is that tax cuts do not pay for themselves. Those are the words of the budget director appointed by the republicans. And that budget director, mr. Mr. Keith hall, went on to say that the models that theyre doing, the macroeconomic effects, the fancy lingo for the big picture in the long term, show it. The other comment that was not noteworthy from mr. Gary cohn is that the president remains committed to ending the carried interest deduction. Despite his Campaign Promise tha,once again, the president sn doesnt close carried interest loophole. Now, this is the second big occasion on which the president has failed to follow through on his Campaign Promise. A few months ago in the spring they had a onepage outline that said that was where they were going on taxes. They said that onepage outline was shorter than a typical fred myer receipt fred my certificate sort of an iconic store in our state. So they had one page then, didnt do anything about following through on the president s promise to get rid of the carried interest loopho loophole. So yesterday again we didnt get a bill, but at least when you kind of eliminate all the white space, they put out close to five pages. But once again they didnt close the carried interest loophole. In fact, the plan gives such massive tax cuts to those at the top, Investment Managers wont be the only people who can get away with paying less than their fair share. Many of the megawealthy are going to be able to do so. Its all going to be legal under the president s plan. What is the one question on which the trump team doesnt bend the truth . Whether their plan will protect the middle class from a tax hike. On abc, the trump advisor, mr. Cohn, said he couldnt guarantee that taxes wont go up for middleclass folks. On abc, the treasury secretary said that he couldnt guarantee middleclass folks would pay more under the tax plan. So whats really striking about this and its quite a contrast people at the very top, mr. President , what theyre going to get is spelled out in detail, in detail. Theyre going to see the abolition of the estate tax, an incredible windfall to a few thousand families. Middleclass folks uh, cant guarantee you wont pay more. And, mr. Cohn said, well, were aiming to help the middle class. But then when he was asked, well, will you commit to it . Well, i dont know. The there might be somebody somewhere. And then theres state and local taxes. He just wouldnt stand behind the middle class, mr. President , the way that this Administration Stands foursquare behind those at the top, and it is why ive said that the president and his parade of millionaires are execute ago middleclass con job and we sure saw it today. The president s ultrawealthy, outoftouch advisors clearly failed to understand that the time is now to deliver tax relief to middleclass folks who need it most. Its time to go back to the drawing board and come up with a plan that doesnt threaten middleclass americans, particularly those with larger families, and dont hit them with a tax increase they cant afford. And i want to close by way of saying, mr. President , that on our side, we have repeatedly said we share the view that the tax system is a dysfunctional brokendown mess, filled with loopholes and then you have the inversion virus. And often my wife says, why dont you just stop there because any more is just going to frighten the children. We share the view that the tax system is broken, and i have been very proud over the years to join two senior republicans, close allies the majority leader, Mitch Mcconnell in a tax reform proposal that is bipartisan that really puts the focus on the middle class and on red, white, and blue jobs. And, mr. President , our propos proposal, number one, and the outline laid out by democrats that there had to be fiscal responsibility, it had to focus on the middle class, that the tax relief wouldnt go to the people of the 1 the bill i wrote that had republican support, the outline led by the distinguished democratic leader, senator schumer, it doesnt even go as far as Ronald Reagan and the democrats went in 1986. President reagan, who no one would call a flaming liberal, president reagan entered into an agreement with democrats in 1986 that said there would be equal treatment of income earned by a cop and a nurse with somebody from a hedge fund or an investment shop. In effect, Ronald Reagan said that a dollar is a dollar is a dollar and everything ought to be treated fairly. And that was important then, and its even more important now, mr. President. Because in reality, there are two tax systems in america there is one for the cop and the nurse, and they have their taxes taken out every paycheck, and that taxation is compulsory. No Cayman Islands deal for them, mr. President. Then theres another tax system the kind of people who benefit from what the president outlined yesterday. Those are the high flyers. They get to pay what they want when they want to. And i think it is very unfortunate that what the president has described is another gift to those group that group that i just described, pay what they want, when they want to. And that it is really, to quote the president , it is really sad to hear that this administration and the president is pretending that theyre doing Something Else and putting the focus on the middle class when what they really are doing is advancing the parade of millionaires the cause of the parade of millionaires, the number of which the number of those who are part of this administration. With that, mr. President , i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer and the clerk should call the roll. Quorum call quorum call quorum call quorum call mr. Mcconnell mr. President. The presiding officer the majority leader. Mr. Mcconnell i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations executive calendar number 328, 334, 335, 336. The presiding officer without objection. The clerk will report. The clerk nomination, department of state, jon r. Bassett new york to be ambassador to the Islamic Republic of afghanistan. Jon m. Huntsman jr. Of utah to be ambassador to the russian federation. Justin hicks siberrell, a. Wess mitchell of virginia to be assistant secretary of state of eurasian affairs. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the nominations be considered en bloc, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table en bloc, the president be immediately notified of the senates action and no further motions be in order and any statements related to the nomination be printed in the record. The presiding officer is there objection . Without objection. The question occurs on the nominations en bloc. All in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes have it. The nominations are confirmed en bloc. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following nominations, executive calendar number 316, 317, 318, 319. The presiding officer is there objection, the clerk will report. The clerk nominations department of justice. Robert j. Hickton jr. Of North Carolina to be United States attorney for the eastern districts of North Carolina. J. Cody hiland of arkansas to be United States attorney for arkansas. Joshua minkler of indiana. Byung pak. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the the motions to reconsider be considered made en bloc, the president be modified of the senates action and no further motions be in order and any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record. The presiding officer without objection. The question occurs on the nominations en bloc. All those in favor say aye. All opposed . The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. The nominations are confirmed en bloc. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of sciewch calendar 338 executive 338 through 348 and all nominations placed on the president s desk and the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order, that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the record, the president be immediately notified of the senates action and the senate then resume legislative session. The presiding officer without objection. The clerk will report. The clerk does not need to report. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h. R. 2519, which was received from the house. The presiding officer the clerk will report. The clerk h. R. 2519, an act to require the secretary of the treasury to mint commemorative coins in recognition of the 100th anniversary of the american legion. The presiding officer without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the bill be considered read a third time. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i know of no further debate on the bill. The presiding officer no further debate. The question on passage, all in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. The bill is passed. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 217, s. 770. The presiding officer the clerk will report. The clerk calendar number 217, s. 770, a bill to require the director of the National Institute of standards and technology to disseminate resources to help reduce small business, cybersecurity risks and for other purposes. The presiding officer without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the committeereported substitute amendment be considered, the schatz amendment number 997 as modified with the changes at the desk be considered and agreed to, the committee reported substitute amendment as amended be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of s. Res. 267 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. The presiding officer the clerk will report. The clerk Senate Resolution 267, designating september 2017 as National Workforce development month. The presiding officer without objection, the senate are will proceed to the measure. Mr. Mcconnell i ask that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of following Senate Resolutions submitted earlier today, s. Res. 272, 273, 274, it 75, 275, 276, and 277. The presiding officer without objection, the senate will proceed to the resolution en bloc. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the resolutions be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table all en bloc. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent the majority leader and the senior senator from alaska be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions on friday, septembe, october 2, 2017. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Mcconnell i understand there is a bill at the desk and i ask for its first reading. The presiding officer the clerk will read the bill. The clerk a bill to exempt puerto rico from the jones act. Mr. Mcconnell i ask for a second reading and in order to place the bill on the calendar, i object to my own request. The presiding officer objection having been heard, the bill will be read for the second time on the next legislative day. Mr. Mcconnell i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3 00 p. M. Monday, october 2, further, that prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. Further, following leader remarks the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the pai nominations with the time until 5 30 equally divided between the two leaders or designees an an at 5 30 the senate vote on the confirmation of the pai nomination and 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. Mcconnell if in is no further business to come before the senate i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. The presiding officer the Senate Stands adjourn