Transcripts For CSPAN2 U.S. Senate U.S. Senate 20240713

Policy and plans. The confirmation vote is expected at 11 a. M. Eastern. Lawmakers will also work on a judicial nomination. The president pro tempore the senate will come to order. The chaplain, dr. Black, will lead the senate in prayer. The chaplain let us pray. Eternal god, hear us when we cry to you. You have been our help in ages past, and our hope for the years to come. You dont keep a record of our transgressions but shower us daily with mercy and forgiveness. Great is your faithfulness. As our senators wait for the unfolding of your powerful providence, give them your peace. May they cling to your promise, knowing that you will lead them to a desired destination. Give them the wisdom to trust your unconditional love and your willingness to save those who call on your name. We pray in your mighty name. Amen. The president pro tempore please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mr. Grassley i ask to speak for one minute as if in morning business. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Grassley november is National Adoption month. This year we have very good ne news. In 2018 over 63,000 young people were adopted from foster care. Thats an increase of 4,000 from the previous year. However, the number of children waiting for adoption also increased. That number rose to 125,000. Unfortunately, teenagers, sibling groups, and those with medical challenges often wait much longer to be adopted. Every child deserves a safe, permanent, loving home. So i want to commend all those who have chosen to adopt children in foster care. If you wonder where i get the opinion that its unfortunate that people want a permanent, safe, and loving home, all you have to do is listen to the kids in the foster care system and youll always get this response. What id like to have is a mom and dad and id like to have a home. In other words, they get tired of being shuffled around from one foster home to another foster home to another foster home. Thats where i come from in recognizing november as National Adoption month. Thank you. I yield the floor. Mr. Mcconnell mr. President . The presiding officer the majority leader. Mr. Mcconnell after we confirm chad wolf to serve in a senior position at the department of Homeland Security, the senate will turn to President Trumps nominee to serve on the Second Circuit court of appeals. Steven menashis nomination continues, an already distinguished career studying, teaching, and practicing law. After earning degrees from dart moth and stanford, he clerked for Douglas Ginsburg on the d. C. Court of appeals and Justice Alito on the Supreme Court. Mr. Menashi has held a Research Fellowship at the New York University school of law and taught at George Mason Universitys Antonin Scalia law school. Even the american bar associations Standing Committee on the federal judiciary which is lately, lately made headlines for treating President Trumps nominees in a less than evenhanded way has rated this nominee well qualified. Obviously, a majority of our colleagues on the Judiciary Committee concurred and now the entire senate will have the opportunity to confirm yet another outstanding jurist to the federal bench. I would urge each of my colleagues to join me in supporting Steven Menashis nomination this week. Now, on another matter, today President Trump will host the leader of turkey at the white house, although expressed concerns about granting president erdogan such an honor in light of his recent actions. I hope the meeting produces better behavior from this important nato ally. We recognize turkeys legitimate National Security concerns about the destabilizing conflict in syria. Indeed, no nato ally has suffered more terrorist attacks or host more refugees than turkey. Nevertheless, we have legitimate National Security concerns of our own. And i know the vast majority of my colleagues share my concerns about turkeys recent behavior. Its important for the region and the fight against isis that turkeys encourage into syria not further jeopardize the antiterrorism campaign against the syrian forces. Its important for turkeys 80 Million People that turkeys government moves to restore its democratic traditions, freedom of the press, religious freedom, respect for secularism, and ethnic minorities in a robust space for civil society. Despite the optimism from the Obama Administration and others that turkey under president erdogan would be a model democracy, in practice these important values have suffered under his tenure. As the turkish peoples concern continues growing, its troubling that the political space for them to express those concerns has seemed to shrink further. But at the same time, mr. President , the United States must recognize that the path to addressing our concerns involves working with, with this important nato ally and aligning its interests with ours. Turning a Cold Shoulder all together would be a major strategic misstep and would jeopardize our National Security and our interest. We do not need turkey to fall further into moscows orbit. I know my colleagues are looking to see whether a deal can be reached on the s400 air defense system. So i share my colleagues uneasiness that seeing president erdogan honored down at the white house, but i would urge this body to remain cleareyed about our nations vital interest in the middle east and the fact that advancing them will mean strengthening our relationship with this nato ally, not weakening it further. Now, on one final matter, today almost three years into House Democrats quest to impeach the president , and seven weeks into the inquiry that Speaker Pelosi proclaimed in a press conference, House Democrats will hold their first public hearing on impeachment. This hearing was mandated by the strange resolution that House Democrats passed a couple of weeks ago. That resolution did not provide President Trump with important rights which the house afforded to president s of both parties during past impeachment inquiries. It didnt even afford their own House Republican colleagues the same rights that House Republicans gave democrats during the clinton inquiry. No, House Democrats resolution just codified their unfair approach. No due process now. Maybe some later. But only if we feel like it. Thats what it establishes. The American People know that many washington democrats have had their minds made up on impeachment for years. It was clear on election day 2016 and it became undeniable by inauguration day. Thats when the Washington Post ran this headline, this headline, mr. President. The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun, before he was sworn in. The whole country saw a prominent House Democrat state publicly in april of 2017, im going to fight every day until hes impeached. Thats the chairwoman of one of the committees the speaker has given responsibility for this inquiry promising impeachment three months into his presidency. So its hardly sure pricing that this partisan journey is not yielding a neutral process. Unfortunately its also crowding out important legislation for the American People. In the house Speaker Pelosi is more interested in taking away President Trumps job than creating 176,000 new jobs for American Workers by passing the usmca. Shes blocking this landmark trade agreement. In the senate our democratic colleagues have filibustered the funding of our armed forces despite promising to forego poison pills a few months back. Democratic leadership has run the appropriations process aground so they can fight over immigration policy with the white house. And speaking of our armed forces, House Democrats are also slow walking the National Defense authorization act. Thats an essential bill that congress has passed every year, every year since 1961. Like clockwork every year on a bipartisan basis for almost six decades. But this year House Democrats broke with the president and passed their own partisan version and are now stalling the conference committee. These are the priorities that are languishing as impeachment marches on. Now, mr. President , i understand theres a bill at the desk due a second reading. The presiding officer reporting the title of the bill. The clerk s. 2840 a bill to authorize appropriations for military activities of the department of defense for military construction and for Defense Activities of the department of energy and for other purposes. Mr. Mcconnell in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceedings. The presiding officer objection having been heard, it will be placed on the calendar. Under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. Morning business is closed. Under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. The clerk nomination, department of Homeland Security, chad f. Wolf of virginia to be under secretary for strategy, policy, and plans. Mr. Durbin mr. President . The presiding officer the democratic whip. Mr. Durbin mr. President , if members of the American Public came to the Senate Chamber this week to witness legislative activity, such as a piece of legislation on the floor, amendments, debate, votes, deliberation, compromise, theyre out of luck. We dont do that . T senate anymore. Were not going to do it this week. We didnt do it last week and we didnt do it the week before. Now, the republican leader just said the problem is impeachment. The problem is not impeachment. The problem is a senate that is not a senate anymore. All we do in the senate, all we do in the senate is a serial list of judicial nominations, one after the other after the other after the other. Thats it. We dont take up legislation. Yesterday there was right across the street from this Capitol Building in front of the Supreme Court, thousands of people there because of a hearing in the Supreme Court on the issue of daca, a program created by president obama where 780,000 undocumented young people had a chance to stay in this country, abolished by President Trump. Hundreds of thousands of them came out yesterday. They wanted to hear or at least try to hear the Supreme Court deliberations on their future and what would happen to them. Its quite possible that the court will rule in the president s favor. I hope not but its possible. The future of these young people will be deportation. You can imagine how they feel about this issue. If they look back over here to the capitol and wondered what are they doing in the United States Capitol Building to deal with an issue of take grave importance for that grave importance for a large people of the United States, heres what were doing. Nothing. Nothing. The house of representatives passed the dream and promise act in the month of june and sent it to the United States senate, and senator mcconnell wont let us bring it to the floor. Is he going to blame the impeachment proceedings for the fact that we have waited four months now with this critical bill, having passed the house, not even being considered in the United States senate . Is that the reason we havent been able to take up serious legislation for weeks here in the United States senate . Of course not. Its not about impeachment. Its about a design strategy by the Senate Republican leader not to entertain substantive legislation, just to take up the issues of nominations. And the nominations, of course, are an issue themselves. I mentioned the judicial nominations. Well, last week in the senate Judiciary Committee, we had the ninth Trump Nominee for the federal bench who had been found unqualified by the american bar association. Thats nine so far. You say to yourself, well, that must happen from time to time. It never happened one time under president obama. Not one nominee was judged unqualified. Nine of them under President Trump. Why . Because this administration, with the cooperation of senator mcconnell, are hellbent to fill these vacancies regardless of the competency of the individual who is being nominated. On the calendar today is another nomination. Today the senates going to vote on the nomination of chad wolf. This is technically a vote for mr. Wolf to be the department of Homeland Securitys under secretary for policy. Lets be clear. This is actually a vote on whether mr. Wolf should run the entire department of Homeland Security. He would be the sixth, sixth secretary in charge of this critical agency, department of Homeland Security, the sixth one since President Trump was elected. Talk about a fastmoving revolving exit door. You can hardly get your desk put together and a few pens and computers on top of it, then youre out the door with President Trump if youre secretary of the department of Homeland Security. Well, next up, chad wolf. The president has indicated he is going to appoint him, not as the secretary of Homeland Security. No, the acting secretary of Homeland Security. But he first has to be confirmed as an under secretary. The Trump Administration has shown in their immigration policy an approach to this issue that we havent seen for decades in washington or the United States. The president has been especially harsh when it comes to families and children. President trumps ineffective policies have made our southern border much less secure than when he took office. The situation has even been worsened by this gaping leadership vacuum at the department of Homeland Security. In less than three years, four heads in the department and wolf will be the fifth i said sixth earlier. Im sorry. Fifth person to run it and the third acting secretary. Every position at the department of Homeland Security with responsibility for immigration is now held by a temporary appointee ready to be fired at a moments notice, and the white house has not even submitted nominations for those petitions. This is a conscious choice by the Trump White House to increase their power and to undermine the role of the United States senate and the republican majority thinks its just fine. The president has posted about all of his acting secretaries. He even has an acting chief of staff. Heres what he said. I like acting, donald trump said. It gives you great, great flexibility. It sure does. You can just fire a person, next up in a moment in a matter of days. Steve lattick, a leading expert on the senates confirmation process, notes that the president s approach is, quote, depriving the senate of its constitutional role, and in the process of opportunities to vet his nominees to reject those who are unqualified and to conduct meaningful oversight of the executive branch. So what do the Senate Institutions like the senator from kentucky think about diminishing the role of the senate . Just fine, mr. President. Whatever you want. Today the senate will actually have a chance to vote on this individual, chad wolf, up to become an under secretary on his quick path to become an acting secretary on his even quicker path to be, in some way, retired or fired. So as chad so is chad wolf the right person to run the department of Homeland Security, one of the most important Law Enforcement agencies . Well, his main qualification appears to be his chief of staff and top advisor to former secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. I would say that arguably she may have been one of the worstperforming Homeland Security secretaries ever in our history. It was Kirstjen Nielsen who falsely claimed, and i quote, we do not have a policy of separating families at the border, end of quote. And then came along a federal judge in Southern California and demanded an accounting of what actually was going on at the border. Do you know what he found, what the judge found after he demanded that the department of Homeland Security under Kirstjen Nielsen account for family separations . They found that more than 2,800 infants, toddlers, and children had been separated from their parents at the border, and even worse, there was no effort made to trace where the parents were headed and where the child was headed. At the end, 100 of these children never, ever were reunited with their parents. Separated by Kirstjen Nielsens department of Homeland Security. I have seen the result of these disastrous celebrations. Immigration court, downtown chicago, a loop highrise building. You would never pick it out as a court. You take an elevator to one of the top floors and get off to a crowded corridor. People standing four or five deep waiting for the doctor to call an Immigration Court. I go into the court just last year to see what family separation was all about. I find a good judge who has been at it for almost 20 years, and she says to me, senator, please stay for the daca call, at least the first group of clients. Well, the first group of clients were called. Marta was one of the clients. The judge said would the clients please take their seats. Problem. The problem was marta was 2 years old. Marta had to be lifted into her chair and handed a stuffed animal, which she was hanging onto throughout this hearing, which im sure she never understood. But hamilton was the little boy who was also the client in the Immigration Court that day. He was 4 years old. 4 years old in a u. S. Immigration court because of this separation of children from their parents. He did jump up on his chair because he saw a matchbox car up on the table which he could play with while this hearing was deciding his fate. Do you know what happened . They continued their cases for another six months. Fortunately, marta was reunited with her mother in less than six months. Do you know what happened when they were reunited . Marta would not even let her mother hold her. Thats what happens when you separate a 2yearold from its mother for months at a time. Thats what happened over and over again under the watch of Kirstjen Nielsen, the secretary of Homeland Security. And mr. Chad wolf who is on our calendar today was her chief of staff during this zerotolerance policy. These disastrous celebrations have done permanent damage to countless children. I saw two of them. Publicly released emails show that mr. Chad wolf, who will be voted on today in the senate, was deeply involved in the discussions that led to this policy. As far back as december of 2017, wolf was acting chief of staff to secretary nielsen. He sent the Justice Department a list of 16 options for deterring undocumented immigrants. Number two on the list, quote, separate family units, close quote. His fingerprints are all over zero tolerance. Mr. Wolf was also imminently involved in the Trump Administrations efforts to use dreamers as bargaining chips to advance the president s antiimmigrant agenda. After he repealedback, President Trump rejected numerous bipartisan deals to protect dreamers. I wont go through the awful details of our bipartisan efforts to come up with a bill which the president time and again rejected. Instead, he said heres my approach to the senate, take it or leave it. The senate left it. It received fewer than 40 votes in a senate dominated by a republican majority. The administration said it would support legalization for dreamers if the Congress Passed his plan, which included the largest cut in Legal Immigration in almost a century. The senate rejected it. How do i know that mr. Wolf was involved in this effort . I sat in. A meeting with secretary nielsen and mr. Wolf just down the hall from here in the office of republican congressman kevin mccarthy. He was there. Wolf was part of the program. In another administration, involvement in family separation that daca would be grounds for dismissal. In the Trump Administration, its grounds for promotion, promotion to become the acting secretary and to see if this flavor of the month is the head of one of these key agencies can actually gut it out for six months. It might be a record if he did. I urge my colleagues to oppose the nomination of mr. Wolf. Mr. President , i ask consent the next statement be placed in a separate part of the record. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Durbin on the subject of nominations, last week, every republican member of the senate Judiciary Committee voted to report out the nomination of Steven Menashi for a lifetime judgeship on the Second Circuit. Every democratic member voted the other way. And for good reason. Steven menashi lacks even the most basic courtroom experience. He has never argued in court, conducted a deposition, or tried a case. He has written dozens of incendiary editorials and articles where he showed a lack of judgment and judicial temperament. Let me give you a couple of examples. He said, quote, charges of racism are typically overblown, close quote. He went on to say that gun control legislation is, quote, pointless and selfdefeating because guns reduce crime. Then he said, quote, the Animal Rights crowd is by and large a contemptible bunch, end of quote. Mr. Menashi currently works in the white house. He works with steven miller. There is a name that may be familiar. He is pushing steven millers antiimmigrant agenda. He spent several years advising secretary of Education Betsy Devos on some of the most antistudent measures that department has ever undertaken. Mr. Menashis hearing testimony before the senate Judiciary Committee was an embarrassment. He refused to answer basic questions from either democrats or republicans, basically saying to the Judiciary Committee my experience, what i have done, what i believe is none of your business. It was a deeply troubling nomination, to the point where even republican colleagues on the committee were chiding him to answer a question if he wanted a lifetime appointment to the secretary highest court in the land. He continued to refuse, but he still won all of their votes when his nomination came up last week. Apparently, mr. Menashi is hoping that in this busy week, were going to hold this floor vote and nobody will notice. Well, a lot of americans will notice, especially the tens of thousands of americans who have been the victims of the forprofit college scams. Remember those schools . Youve heard a lot about them, havent you . All these schools that said they were colleges and universities. They were in it for a buck. Many of them turned out to be frauds. They werent really colleges and universities. 9 of High School Students in the United States go to forprofit colleges and universities. 9 . Onethird, 33 of all the student loan defaults were students at forprofit colleges and universities. Why . They overcharge the students, they undereducate them, and they leave them with an amount in debt. When these schools go out of business, we have an opportunity to basically say to them, were sorry you are defrauded, but it shouldnt ruin your life. Were going to make sure your student loan at this Bogus Institution is forgiven. Months ago, the Devos Department of education misused private Social Security Administration Data to deny Student Loan Relief to thousands of students cheated by the failed forprofit school Corinthian Colleges, but last week, we learned that mr. Menashi, the nominee well consider this week, was the architect of this plan to deny these students full and fair relief. He gave legal advice to secretary devos on how to carry it out. It was certainly bad advice. A federal court ruled that the menashi plan illegally violated student privacy and ordered the department to stop putting corinthian borrowers into collection while they waited for relief. This man who wants a lifetime appointment to opine and rule on judge on laws and statutes and the constitution gave advice to the secretary of education, which turned out to be found in violation of the law. In the months that followed, the department failed to even comply with the court, resulting in holding secretary devos in contempt of court and forcing her to pay a fine because of menashis advice. What a debacle, yet my republican colleagues believe that the appropriate response to this debacle by mr. Menashi is to promote him to a lifetime appointment to a court one step below the United States Supreme Court. While mr. Menashi is looking forward to his lifetime job, the victims of this Corinthian College fraud and menashis illegal scheme continue to suffer without the relief they deserve. Victims shrike a man named sheldon, one of my constituents from bloomington, illinois. He took out Student Loans to enroll in an online criminal justice course at everest college. Corinthian may have gone bankrupt in 2016 after it was revealed that it had defrauded students into signing up. But the former students like sheldon had no relief from the department of education from this bankrupt school that defrauded them. The collection agencies still keep calling sheldons home. He wrote to my office. He told me how hed had his wages garnished because he owes 13,000 in Student Loans for enrolling in this bogus Corinthian College program. He said, quote, my checks have been taken away from me for the past three years. Mr. Menashi should be embarrassed by the advice he gave to secretary devos to deny full and fair relief to students like sheldon and thousands of others who were tricked and cheated by forprofit colleges. Hes not. Mr. Menashi told me in writing after his hearing, and i quote, im proud of my work at the department of education and of the legal advice that i provided. The Second Circuit is one of our most important appellate courts. It hears appeals coming out of the Southern District of new york where there are multiple investigations under way of national note. The senate should have grave reservations about advancing a nominee who currently works in the white house but would not disclose under oath when he does, who has minimal courtroom experience, who has a record of giving troubling legal advice, and who has a history of expressing views which were entirely out of the mainstream. I want to commend my one republican colleague, senator Susan Collins of maine, who said she is personally going to oppose the menashi nomination because, in her words and i couldnt say it more clearly quote, i do not believe he is wellsuited to serve on the federal bench. Wouldnt it be great if a few more Senate Republicans felt the same way . I urge a no vote on the menashi nomination. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. The presiding officer the clerk will call the roll. Quorum call quorum call quorum call quorum call a senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from north dakota. Mr. Cramer i would ask consent to suspend the quorum call. The presiding officer without objection. All postcloture time is expired. The question is on the nomination. Mr. Cramer i would seek the yeas and nays. The presiding officer is there a sufficient second . There appears to be. The clerk will call the roll. Vote vote vote vote the presiding officer on this voament the yeas are 54. The nays are 41. The confirmation is confirmed. Under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senates action. The clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. The clerk cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of steven j. Menashi of new york to be United States circuit judge for the Second Circuit signed by 17 senators. The presiding officer by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. The question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of steven j. Menashi of new york to be United States circuit judge for the Second Circuit shall be brought to a close. The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. Vote vote bz vote the presiding officer any senator wish to change their vote . On this vote the ayes are 51. The nays are 44. The motion is agreed to. The clerk will report the nomination. The clerk nomination, the judiciary, steven j. Menashi of new york to be United States circuit judge for the Second Circuit. A senator mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from connecticut. Mr. Blumenthal thank you, mr. President. Im really proud to be here to advocate on behalf of a bill that has enjoyed rightly bipartisan support, the affordable prescription for patients act. We all know that the astronomically rising costs of Prescription Drugs are a burden, in fact, a bane for americans regardless of where they live, regardless of their party, race, religion, or age, but particularly for our seniors. The choice between paying a mortgage, putting food on the table and buying Prescription Drugs has become a daily challenge for people across the country, and this bill offers a positive solid step toward ending abuses in the use of patents, abuses that are called patent thickening and product hopping that all too commonly raise the costs of Prescription Drugs and preclude access for the people who need those drugs the most. This effort has been a bipartisan one involving many of us in this chamber. It passed from the Judiciary Committee unanimously, and it is a testament to the still possible bipartisan cooperation on an issue of paramount concern to the people of america that we have reached this point of bringing it to the floor of the United States senate. Im proud to have worked on this measure with my colleague from texas who has really helped to lead this effort, senator cornyn, who is here on the floor with me, and im happy to yield to him now. The presiding officer the senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , i thank the senator from connecticut for his leadership. At a time when people see bipartisanship in short supply here in washington,d. C. , this is one area where we can actually make some Real Progress for the people we represent. We all know that climbing Health Care Costs are keeping people up at night. Many texans reached out to me in my office about the impossible decisions that theyre required to make in order to keep pace with rising Prescription Drug costs, particularly their outofpocket costs, whether or not they pay some bills and have to defer or not pay others, whether they cut their pills in half, whether they selfration the doses they take, which is dangerous to their health, or not filling prescriptions altogether because they cant afford the outofpocket costs. No family should be required to make those sorts of decisions. Sadly, i know that my constituents in texas arent alone. The Kaiser Family Foundation Poll in september found that the number of, the numberone health care concern of the American People is Prescription Drug pricing. This is something the president has said he wants to address. The house has said they want to address, the senate has said we want to address, and this legislation that were talking about will help move the ball in the right direction. A whopping 70 of people think lowering Prescription Drug costs should be the top priority for congress, making it it should make it our numberone item on our todo list. So the good news is were making some progress. Here in the senate, weve taken a bipartisan approach, which is the only way to get things actually done here in congress. Weve talked to every major player in the supply chain, and weve asked questions about what are confusing practices that are not transparent to the, to outsiders that are combining to drive up costs. What i find seriously concerning are the anticompetitive behaviors of some of the drug manufacturers, the gamesmanship particularly when it comes to our patent system. We know companies pour a lot of time and money into the research and development of new medications, and we dont want to do anything to stop that. We want to incentivize that so theyre able to recover their costs and perhaps make a profit when the drug turns out to be a successful one. But we dont want them playing games with the patent system in a way that prevents others at some point after that period of exclusivity being able to compete with the generic alternative. 90 of the drugs we take are generic, and thats why theyre so affordable and so inexpensive. But for the 10 of branded drugs that people take, many of them simply are unaffordable. These patents that i refer to do protect the intellectual property for these key drugs and are an important part of the incredible innovation that occurs here in the United States. But increasingly were seeing Companies Using the patent system as a shield for competition beyond the life of the patent, and its time to put a stop to that, and we can do that today. We can begin that process today. Thats exactly why i introduced the affordable prescriptions for patients act with the senator from connecticut, and it targets two specific practices used by Drug Companies to keep prices high. First is product hopping which occurs when a Company Develops a reformulation of a product thats about to lose its exclusivity period. And then pulls that original product off the market. This is done not because the new formula is necessarily effective, but because it prevents generic competitors for that product that has been pulled off the market. The second if he the senator from New Hampshire were trying to combat the second phenomenon is patent thickening when an innovator uses overlying patents which makes it nearly impossible for competitors to enter the field. This is not how patents were supposed to be used and we shouldnt allow anticompetitive practices to continue. In one case involving the drug humira, the most popular drug being prescribed today, there are more than 120 separate patents for essential the same molecule. Meanwhile patients cant get academies to competitive get access to competitive drugs that probably would be cheaper here in america while theyre for approved alternatives in europe. The American People should not have to put up with this. We need to stop companies from manipulating the system and keeping competitors tied up in the courtroom so that patients can start to feel some relief. But patients arent the only ones who would benefit from this bill. The Congressional Budget Office released a cost estimate and found it would lower federal spending by more than 500 million over ten years. Thats not a whole lot of money in the grand scheme of things, but when you consider what the impact would be in the private Insurance Market too, that begins to add up, and it adds up where it counts the most when it comes to seniors and other patients paying out of pocket for their copays or their deductibles in order to get the drugs they need. So this bill really checks every box. It protects innovation, it increases competition, and it lowers prices for patients and saves money for taxpayers. Not surprisingly, as the senator from connecticut pointed out, it has strong support on both sides of the aisle. The Judiciary Committee, which ordinarily is a pretty contentious place, unanimously voted this bill out of the committee. And our friends from illinois, senator durbin and senator murray from washington, two members of the democratic leadership, are both cosponsors of the bill which shows just how noncontroversial this is. So i think its time that we pass this legislation and let our constituents know that weve heard their concerns and we are committed on a bipartisan basis to bring down drug prices. So, mr. President , as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 132, s. 1416. I now ask unanimous consent that the committeereported substitute be withdrawn and the cornyn amendment at the desk be agreed to and the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The presiding officer is there objection . Durbin reserving the right to to. Mr. Durbin reserving the right to object. I support this bill, the bill offered by senator cornyn and senator blumenthal. Its a bipartisan measure that passed the senate Judiciary Committee. I not only voted for it, i cosponsored it and i believe it should pass and should become the law of the land. It will be helpful in reducing the cost to pharmaceuticals. Im offering a modification to the bill. I believe this modification is one that should be passed by the senate as well. In fact, it did pass the Senate Last Year by a voice vote. Not a single senator not a single senator objected when it passed the Senate Last Year. And we know, ive been told by my colleagues they support the concept, but theyre not alone. The bill i am offering is also supported by the mernl medical association the american medical association, the American Hospital association, 88 of the American People, republicans and democrats, President Trump, his Health Secretary dr. Azar, the aarp, and a long list. Whrakd i possibly propose what could i possibly propose that would have all those people supporting it . Simple. When the Drug Companies decide to run an ad on television and you see a lot of them, dont you . The average american sees nine every day. All we ask that included in that ad they disclose the cost of the drug. How did i pick this as the cost of the drug . I the didnt pick it. It was chosen by the pharmaceutical companies. Its the list price of the drug. They can go on to say you may not pay that full amount, your insurance may cover some, theyre welcome to do that but i believe the American People should know what the drugs cost. The most heavily advertised drug on television today, humira. Humira, of course, is used for forms of arthritis and psoriasis. But very few americans know as they watch people sitting by the Swimming Pool with their clear skin that humira costs 5,500 a month. The reason i want to disclose this is i think the consumers have the right to know. Somebodys got to pay that amount. Your Insurance Company, someones going to pay that amount. And when blue crossblue shield of illinois says the numberone driver of Health Insurance premiums are high Prescription Drug prices, i think people ought to know. It the isnt just a matter of being in a bathing suit without a red patch on your elbow. Its 5,500 a month. President trump believes that that disclosure should be made. His secretary of health and Human Services believes it. The american medical association, hospital association, l all of the people that i mentioned as well as almost 90 of democrats and republicans. Now who opposes this . Who would oppose disclosing the price of the drug . Ill bet youre guessing the pharma, the pharmaceutical industry. And youre right. They are looking for one senator who will object to what im offering. Thats what they need. They just need one senator to say no. And frankly, im afraid were going to face that just this afternoon, in the early afternoon. The bottom line is this, if you believe consumers in america have a right to know the cost of the drug, if you believe that the pharmaceutical companies have a responsibility to disclose it, if you believe that high Prescription Drug prices are unfair and costing a lot more in our Health Care System than they should, then support this basic measure that passed the Senate Last Year without one negative voice. None. None whatsoever. So having reserved the right to object, i ask that the senator modify his request so that in addition to the pending request, the finance committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 1437 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, that the durbingrassley amendment at the desk be agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, the durbingrassley amendment to the title be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered maipped and laid upon the table with be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. The presiding officer does the senator modify his request . Mr. Toomey reserving the right to object. The presiding officer the senator from pennsylvania. Mr. Toomey first, let me say that i think senator cornyns legislation is fully constructive. I think it would result in lower costs for consumers. Very commendable. I think we should pass it. I am sympathetic with the idea of requiring Greater Transparency with Health Care Costs generally. But i have significant policy concerns and process concerns with the proposal by the senator from illinois. The policy concern broadly is that what his legislation would do is single out one industry and then require a mandate that in their direct to Consumer Advertising they provide misleading information. Isticicly systematically misleading information to consumers. It doesnt strike me as obviously a good idea to mislead people, including in this context. Why do i say its misleading . Its because the legislation requires the list price or the wholesale Acquisition Price of a drug to be in the price thats put in the ad. Besides which, no one pays those prices. There are rebates built into the system. You can have a debate as to whether its a good model by which the government has created the diversity in the Health Care System. Almost no one pays either the list or wholesale Acquisition Price. Think about it, if youre on medicaid, you pay zero. If youre on medicare, you pay often zero. Usually gleerl zero. Nearly zero. If you have private insurance its zero or something significantly different. Almost no one pays the price the senator from illinois say would be posted in the advertisement. Think of the unintended consequences. The number that would have to be in the ad would have to be with a way, way higher than what nirn pays. Think of what would happen. I can imagine Senior Citizens watching an ad. Maybe they see a medicine that they would actually benefit from and then at the end theres some huge number that does not reflect the it doesnt even come close to reflecting what their actual cost would be, but its a big number, and so that Senior Citizen would say, i cant afford that. I guess i cant pursue that therapy. Im sure thats not the intended consequence of this legislation, but im pretty sure it would happen. Its peculiar to me that the authors of this legislation choose to single out a small fraction of the Health Care Industry to impose this mandate. Prescription drug spending is about 10 of health care, hospitals are 32 , but i havent seen that were going to impose this. If you look at rate of price increases in the various sectors of health care, you will see that actually Prescription Drugs over the last 20 years, their increase in prices is considerably less than hospital services, considerably less than other health care services. Are we going to put mandates on college. The rate of increase in colleges is much greater than the rate increase of Prescription Drugs. I havent heard a proposal yet. Maybe thats coming that will require this of other industries as well. If i didnt know better, i would think it seems part of a theme to vilify the industry that has developed the therapies that allow us to live longer, healthier, and save lives. And most importantly, maybe it wont lower costs, right. Its not going to lower costs for consumers. The only way were going to do that is if we better align the incentives of the consumer. The finance committee and help committee reported out legislation that lower out of pocket costs for Prescription Drugs. We vr senator cornyns legislation that i think absolutely would lower the cost of consumer Prescription Drugs, and yet that is not what is on the floor today from the senator from illinois. Now, despite my policy concerns, and they are serious, i actually think we ought to debate these things. We ought to put this kind of legislation on the floor. We ought to have a debate. We ought to have a vote. But this is complicated and its fraught and we should not be trying to just pass this by unanimous consent. This legislation has not gone through committee and contrary to my colleague from illinois, this actual piece of legislation has never had a vote as a freestanding matter. It was a version of it what is offered today was buried in a larger legislation that passed, that is not the same as scrutinizing this policy, subjecting it to amendments and deciding on it. I think thats what we should do. Unlike my colleagues on the other side who have been preventing us from taking up legislation, such as the appropriation bills, or the secure act, which i acted a unanimous consent process for us to take up and process, i think we ought to consider this legislation even though i dont think thats important for the final product. What i would suggest we do is lets move on to the defense appropriations bill, arguably the most important responsibility of congress, fund the National Defense and lets make the first order after the managers amendment, the senator from illinois amendment that he just described. I dont support it, but i support his right to have a debate and have a vote. Lets go on to an appropriation bill and lets make his amendment in order as the First Amendment. We can debate it, we can vote on it, and well live with the consequence. I think thats what were here for. I think thats the purpose of the senate, to take these issues, put it on the floor, have a debate, and have a vote. Im willing to live with the outcome of that. Mr. President , i ask that the senator from illinois modify his request and that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 132, s. 1416. I further ask that the committeerecord substitute be withdrawn and the cornyn amendment at the desk be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. Finally, that following disposition of s. 1416, the senate proceed it the immediate consideration of h. R. 2740, and following the offering of a substitute amendment by senator shelby or his designee, the First Amendment in order be an amendment to be offered by senator durbin or senator grassley, the text of which is identical to s. 1437, as amended, which is at the desk. The presiding officer does the senator from illinois so modify his request . The senator from illinois. Mr. Durbin i dont know if crocodiles can cry, but im concerned with the argument made by the senator from pennsylvania that he is standing here in defense of Senior Citizen by objecting to disclosing the list price that the pharmaceutical companies charge for these drugs. I didnt choose that price, they chose that price. I wont yield until i finished. I said they could put a disclaimer on depending on the insurance or coverage. The fact that youre saying that youre defending Senior Citizen and denying this information to them and the only way to do it is to call up the department of defense appropriation bill. From where im standing, this measure which passed the Senate Without your objection last year should pass now with the underlying legislation. Lts get this lets get this done in a comprehensive way to help seniors and not stand in defense of pharmaceutical companies. They have plenty of people to defend them. The presiding officer does the senator object to the modification . Mr. Durbin i object. The presiding officer objection is heard. Is there objection to the original request by the senator from illinois to modify . Objections heard. Is there objection to the senator from texas . Mr. Cornyn reserving the right to object. Mr. Schumer thank you, and im so glad to be out here today to reduce prices on drugs for seniors and others. There are so many things that we must do. Some are small, some are large. We want to do all of them. We democrats know how bad drug prices are for seniors. We know how bad the sabotage of our Health Care System is for seniors. If you dont have insurance, you probably cant pay for the drugs no matter what happens. And so we i would say to my good friend, the senator from texas, that we have a whole lot of legislative ideas, not just his. He demands his. Its good. Its hardly large. There are millions and millions who need help who are not affected. The senators from illinois and iowa have a bill to lower Prescription Drug costs, the help committee has a bill that would help Community Health centers, the Senate Finance committee has a good bipartisan bill to lower costs for seniors and im a strong supporter of allowing medicare to negotiate prices. That would do more than anything else anything else. I would ask my friend from texas, will he get his leader and himself to allow us to bring an amendment or bill on the floor that protects seniors who have preexisting conditions from their Insurance Companies withdrawing from them . Will he let us do that . Thats far more consequential than his wellintended, good, but not largely effective bill. Will he, the number one thing, ask aarp the number one thing that will protect Senior Citizen and others from high drug prices is to allow medicare to negotiate with them, something the senator has blocked repeatedly. Will he change his position . So lets not have this charade, this manipulative charade where my dear friend from texas comes to the floor with a bill he proposes but blocks everything and his party blocks everything that would have far larger consequence. Number one, allow medicare to negotiate. Every member of our caucus is for that. It will lower drug prices dramatically. Number two, stop the administration the administration the senator from texas supports 95 of the time. Even my microphone and thank our xabl staff who capable staff who comes to the rescue. We need senator cornyn to rescue our Senior Citizen and not play a game like this. So, again, preexisting conditions, we want to bring an amendment to the floor to protect those people, a maam whose daughter was a mom whose daughter has cancer and the drug company says youre off. The Insurance Company says youre gone. Isnt that important . Lets not make a comparison, but wouldnt it do far for more far more for the health of the middleclass . Lets have both. We will not cherry pick one unless the senator from texas walks across the aisle and joins us and says, i want to help you to get a vote on eliminating preexisting condition inhibitions. I want to join you in saying that medicare can negotiate with the Drug Companies and greatly lower prices. So of course i object. We democrats believe that we should bring a bill to the floor that has a debate and allows amendments because theres so much to be done here. Not one small decently put together and decently intended proposal, but many more. And we know if we allow our republican friends to just pass their little bills, we will never get the big picture done. Thats how this place works. So lets come together and do it all. I object. The presiding officer objections heard. The senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , like the minority leader, i hope we are able to pass a larger bipartisan package this year. I serve on the finance committee. The Judiciary Committee mr. Schumer will the gentleman yield. Mr. Cornyn after im through. I serve on the finance committee, the Judiciary Committee, where this bill came from. And i know that senator murray and senator alexander have a package out of the health, education, labor and health, education, labor and pensions committee. I welcome the opportunity to have those bills come to the floor and offer amendments and debate them and pass them because i agree that the country would benefit by bringing down Health Care Costs, by bringing down Prescription Drug costs, and i believe that that work is long overdue. But my bill is not going to sink the prospects of that larger package of legislation. What we have in front of us today is an uncontested bipartisan bill that we can pass today. Lets pass it. Lets dont let the perfect be the enemy of the good. What i hear the minority leader saying is that its either everything or not. Mr. Schumer would the gentleman yield for a correction . Mr. Cornyn that is a recipe ill yield for a question after im through talking. That is a statement in effect that i want everything to be done now or nothing at all. And you know what happens . Every single time that argument is made, that position is taken, nothing happens. Nothing happens. Thats what people hate about washington, d. C. , when they look at cspan if they do look at cspan and see these debates everything or nothing. So the democratic leader has now objected to the unanimous consent request to take up and pass a bill that he has called good, hes called wellintentioned. He said its not large. But he objected to it. I can think that the only people rejoicing at this very moment are the very same people who are gaming the patent system and who are keeping the price of outofpocket price for seniors of their Prescription Drugs high. Those are the people popping champagne corks right now, because this is nothing more than a big wet kiss for the people who are gaming the patent system right now to the detriment of the American People mr. Schumer would the gentleman yield for a question . Mr. Cornyn i will. Mr. Schumer would he support a unanimous consent request so that we can protect people with preexisting conditions and bring that to the floor in the same way . The presiding officer the senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , i say to my friend, the democratic leader, i support coverage for preexisting conditions. Im not aware of anyone in the senate who opposes that. And if such a bill is scheduled for a vote on the floor, im more than happy to participate in that process. Mr. Schumer and how about would the senator support a proposal coming out of the house to allow medicare to negotiate with the Drug Companies to greatly lower prices . Mr. Cornyn mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , speaking through the chair, i would say to my friend that, you know, nothing gets done around here unless its bipartisan. And right now the bill that the house has sent us is one that divides people along party lines, which means its unlikely to build the bipartisan consensus we need to get it through the senate. Im more than happy to engage in that debate and to vote on amendments on such a bill, but im not going to say that im not going to agree to pricefixing by the u. S. Government which will make more scarce and less available the lifesaving Prescription Drugs that many people need. But im happy to engage in that debate and vote and let the senate and the Congress Work its will. Mr. Schumer mr. President. The presiding officer the democratic leader. Mr. Schumer i thank my colleague for his answers. I would say this, let him use his power and position as leader, go to the majority leader who has prevented any debate on anything on drugs to document floor, including theser including these two most significant issues that i have talked about, and let us put a package together of all three, get a debate on each, a yes or no vote on each, and really make progress for those who are paying too much for drug prices. I would await him to work with me on that, and we can bring all three bills to the floor. I yield the floor. Mr. Cornyn mr. President. The presiding officer the senator from texas. Mr. Cornyn mr. President , as always, im happy to work with the senator from new york on things where we find our interests aligned. Obviously there are going to be things we disagree on, frequently there are. He knows we have worked together on legislation where weve been able to find enough common interest and build a consensus and get things done. They call that legislating around here. But there are other things that we should be doing here on a bipartisan basis. For example, taking up and passing the Appropriations Bills, including the defense Appropriations Bills so the United States military can remain the most powerful, the best equipped, best trained, best led military in the world. That is of overwhelming importance. Yet our colleagues on the other side have objected, having blocked on at least two occasions that defense appropriations bill. And now we have a shortterm continuing resolution that expires november 21. Im told that theres likely to be a followon continuing resolution that takes us up to december 20. But thats important work too because none of us wants to see another government shutdown. No one wins in government shutdowns and this sort of gamesmanship that occurs by blocking bills that should have the support of overwhelming bipartisan numbers of the senate, things like paying the military, making sure they maintain their readiness to fight and win the nations wars. And even more importantly, to keep the peace. Those are important too. So i know the majority leader has a challenge trying to figure out how to schedule legislation on the senate floor. But it certainly doesnt help when our democratic colleagues repetitively object to things like Appropriations Bills and put us into this dysfunction when it comes to paying the bills for the federal government. But i would say to my friend from new york, im always happy to work with him and any other member in the senate, no matter what their Political Party is, no matter what their ideological persuasion is because i actually believe we were sent here to solve problems and to get things done. And what i dislike, what i am disappointed about is the dysfunction that we see here in the United States senate where politics, even though were here less than a year before the election, politics has overwhelmed our ability to get things done. And what i came here to the floor to do today is to say, you nope, maybe we cant is to say you know, maybe we cant do all of this right now today but we can do this and lets build on that once weve gotten the bill passed. Im disappointed the democratic leader has seen fit to object to passing this bill he himself called good and wellintended and which is supported by organizations like the American Association of retired people. I dont understand it. Maybe somebody else does. But saying that we cant do something because it doesnt include everything we want to do here right now is disappointing to me. And i dont think thats what the American People sent us here to do. Mr. President , i yield the floor. The presiding officer the democratic leader. Mr. Schumer mr. President , i ask to speak as if in morning business. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Schumer thank you, mr. President. Now and i thank my colleague for the interchange, and it will continue. We democrats will not rest until we get votes not bringing the house down simple votes on issues of great consequence to drug prices and the American People while the other side blocks them. Okay, now as we speak the House Intelligence Committee is conducting the first day of public hearings in its impeachment inquiry into President Trump. The list of witnesses this week includes several key figures with knowledge of the events in question. While most of the witness requests from House Republicans were non sequiturs or individuals who would have no knowledge of the president s action nor of the allegations against him, three of the individuals requested by the republicans were agreed to and are slated to testify next week. The idea that republicans and the president have no due process and cant call witnesses or influence the process is simply knack rat. As the inaccurate. As the impeachment inquiry in the house begins a new phase today in pursuit of the facts, we have a serious responsibility here in the senate not to prejudge the case but to examine the evidence impartially. We have a responsibility to let all the facts come out. And as they do, to keep an open mind and let ourselves be ruled by reason rather than by passion or partisanship. As public hearings in the house begin, we would do well to remember our constitutional duty to act as judges and jurors in a potential trial when and if it comes to one. Not to say we wont even read the transcript, not to say the vote would come out this way, but to be as dispassioned a juror as each of us can be. On another matter, today President Trump will roll out the red carpet for president erdogan of turkey as he visits the white house, after everything thats transpired over the last few months, after President Trump green lit turkeys reckless and destabilizing invasion of northern syria, after turkish troops and their proxies committed atrocities against civiliansened a the syrian kurds, former partners in the fight against isis, after ender with erdogan cut a deal with president putin. The fact that President Trump will reward president erdogan with an Oval Office Meeting today is mindboggling. And the meeting will serve as a very public example of how President Trump has mismanaged the situation in syria, and most importantly, complicated and slowed the effort to secure the enduring defeat of isis. It is isis that creates the greatest danger to our american homeland. They will try, as al qaeda did before them, to create huge damage. We in new york know that can sometimes unfortunately occur, god forbid it happens again. But holy mackerel, the president has no plan for isis, detainees are escaping, the turks are far more upset with the kurds who have been on our side with isis than they are with isis. Erdogan suppresses free speech, arrests opponents, and does so many other terrible things to his country which was once a much more shining example of democracy. And inviting him here, does the president have no sense of value . Does the president have no sense of morals . Does the president have no sense of what affects American Security . Its appalling. On a. G. , on agriculture. Yesterday a report issued by the democratic minority on the Agriculture Committee shed new light on troubling disparities and how the Trump Administration has treated farmers through the department of agricultures Market Facilitation Program. Farmers in need of federal aid have leaned on this program to offset losses caused by retaliatory foreign tariffs. In an industry where margins are sometimes very thin, this support makes a real difference for struggling farmers across the country. But rather than helping those farmers most in need, the Trump Administration through this program is picking winners and losers using a flawed methodology to favor certain regions over others and wealthy agricultural conglomerates over small farmers. The whole idea of the program was to help small farmers, particularly those with soybeans and corn and hogs throughout the middle west. The bulk of the program went to five southern states. 95 of the top payments defined as 100 or more per acre went to counties in southern states. And where did the lowest payments go . To the counties in the midwest, even though the midwest has suffered greater losses overall. And instead of coming up with a strategy to help smaller and less established farms, which are often more vulnerable during tough economic times, the Trump Administration has doubled the payment caps for row crops while leaving other caps in place. This will disproportionately funnel money to the largest farms in america while limiting aid to smaller farmers. Most concerning, however, our study shows that the Trump Administration has awarded tens of millions in purchase contracts to foreign owned companies, including the large beef factory in brazil. Instead of ensuring that the aid goes to American Farmers, the Trump Administration has been handing millions of taxpayer dollars to foreign agribusiness. This program was put together on the spur because the president was worried about political effects with soybean farmers particularly, but others too in the middle west. But it was put together so poorly, in such a slap shod and unthought out manner that cotton farmers do best of all even though their prices are not hurting the way soybean or corn or hog prices are. For my friends on the other side of the aisle, the fiscal conservatives, we need your voices. This program if it were going to urban areas or maybe to poorer people, wed hear an outcry from certain members on the other side. But our farmers need the help too, and when you waste money on an ag program, the people hurt the most are our smaller and family farmers, particularly in this case in the middle west. For years my republican friends in this chamber accused the Obama Administration, unfairly in my mind, of picking winners and losers in the market. It was one of their favorite talking points. Here we have the Trump Administration literally picking winners and losers among American Farmers. Sometimes the winners are not even americans. Oftentimes the losers are the small family farmers who need assistance the most. So im so glad that my colleagues my democratic colleagues on the Agriculture Committee, especially Ranking Member stabenow, have worked to inject some transparency into the agricultural relief program. The Trump Administration should be using the Market Facilitation Program to help those farmers most in need, period. The Trump Administration needs to stop picking winners and losers and make sure all of American Farmers get the help they deserve. Fainlly, finally on veterans. When i look at what this administration is doing. If every american knew all these things, donald trump wouldnt stand a chance. This one, i hope, will this one, i hope will get out. We talked a little bit about it yesterday. We all know that so many of our young men and women, my generation, went to vietnam, and risked their lives, many of them gave their lives for our country. One of the worst aspects were they were not treated as heroes when they came home. I think america has made up for that now. But heres how they are not treated well. Many of them were exposed to agent orange and many of them got sick after being exposed to agent orange while fighting in vietnam. Well, what the v. A. Has found is that certain illnesses are caused by exposure to agent orange, and they found that there were four more illnesses that had an agent orange link. But quietly and secretly the Trump Administration denied payments to over 60,000 veterans who had these illnesses, who received Emergency Care at nonv. A. Facilities in 2017. It has missed deadlines to expand the v. A. Caregivers program to vietnam and korean veterans, and there are some reports that trump v. A. Hired doctors on probation. But whats galling at the moment is this agent orange situation. Hiding the report, mulvaney evidently, the chief of staff, just said quietly, were not funding it. It took a freedom of information action to reveal that they were cutting the money off for these folks that went to vietnam. Some of them volunteered, some of them were drafted. They got sick because of exposure to agent orange, and the administration this Trump Administration which loves to have rallies with veterans, cuts the money off with them. Saying that mulvaney said we couldnt afford it. These veterans could afford to risk their life for us, we could afford to help them in their hour of need. I hope the administration will reverse its decision. I yield the floor. The presiding officer under the previous order, the Senate Stands in recess