Not, the consequences cab be devastating. What happened last week to george floyd in minnesota was horrific. He was killed by police officers, dying at the hands of men who will pledged to protect and serve their communities. Im glad that justice appears to be moving swiftly in George Floyds case. The officers who participated have been terminated from the department and the criminal process is well underway. But this is little consolation to Many Americans, including many black americans, who feel they have experienced unjust, unequal interactions with Law Enforcement. Many have protested peacefully for change in the finest tradition of our country, and in sharp contrast, the rioters and looters who have exploited this tragedy for their own purposes. We must now seek to reveal National Unity from the wreckage of broken trust and broken glass on our streets. To do this, well need to be guided by our nations noblest principles while rejecting the antiamerican l suggestions of radicals who want a revolution. Every american deserves to be treated equally by their government as guaranteed by our constitution and our countrys most fundamental principle that all men are created equal. There is no greater bulwark to tyranny and injustice than that old simple proposition. But we must real ject efforts to scapegoat and demonize all police for the actions of a few, and we must reject radical proposals to dis dismantle and Defund Police departments as some suggested. These are offered in the spirit of revenge that would lead only to more crime, more lives lost and more sorrow. The communities that would be hit the hardest by the disappearance of police would be the most disadvantaged. When police are understaffed and undertrained, there is greater risk of mistakes and misconduct, not to mention higher rates of crime. By contrast, a wellstaffed, welltrained and wellrespected force is a blessing to its community and a scourge to criminals who threaten it. Defunding the police would be deadly. It isnt a solution but an insult to good officers and a threat to lawabiding citizens. Americans are not blind to injustice. We all understand the hard work thats needed to repair trust in this country, but defunding the police is not the answer. We need the rule of law and equal justice under law. We need them both. I urge my colleagues to join with us in passing this resolution which calls for justice for george floyd and other victims of excessive use of force while also honoring the Law Enforcement officers who keep us safe. Therefore, mr. President , i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of a resolution that is at the desk calling for justice for george floyd and opposing calls to defund the police. I further ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. The presiding officer is there objection . Mr. Schumer reserving the right to object, and i will. The presiding officer the democratic leader is recognized. Mr. Schumer mr. President , there are millions of people in america marching in the streets to reform our police practices, to ask for equality, to ask for racial justice. We have seen in the savage death of george floyd, we have seen with breonna taylor, ahmaud arbery, eric garner, and so many other instances that our Police Departments need real reform. There is a demand of americans that we act and act soon. The resolution my colleague offers is rhetoric, not action. And the great worry so Many Americans have is that so many on the other side will feel rhetoric and then try to let this go away. We demand action, and we demand it now. Real action, not rhetoric. To reform our Police Departments in a fair and comprehensive way. That is what the justice and policing act does. We need it on the floor now, as soon as the house passes it. Very few of us believe that leader mcconnell will put it on the floor, but we want him to. We demand he does. Again, the resolution by my friend will do nothing, nothing. Its rhetoric. We demand action. And so in i will ask unanimous consent that the pending business upon reseat of h. R. 20, the justice and policing act of 2020, the pending business here in the senate, after it passes the house be that bill so were forced and required to debate it. At that point my friend from arkansas or anyone else can do what they want but not in an empty field of rhetoric and no action. We need justice and racial equality. I object. The presiding officer the objection is heard. The senator from arkansas. Mr. Cotton mr. President , if the senator from new york would enter into a colloquy. I did not hear an objection to my resolution, to a single sentence in that resolution, which calls for justice for george floyd and other victims of Excessive Force and opposeses radical ideas to defund the police. If the senator from new york would like to explain to the senate what part of the resolution he opposes and why hes objecting, i would be willing to hear his answer. Mr. Schumer mr. President , i have a resolution at the desk. Mr. Cotton reclaiming my time. I have not yielded the floor. Lets be clear what happened here. We have a resolution. Its a couple of pages long. The democrats have had for 24 hours. Until moments ago we had no independent indication that they had no independent indication that they planned to object or had any contrary resolution. We heard from the senator from new york and not a word of the resolution itself which calls for justice for george floyd and for all victims of Excessive Force as well as opposes radical efforts to defund the police. So i will only conclude that the minority leader is here to speak on behalf of the democratic and to speak about this idea to defund the police since he is unwilling to cite what part of the resolution he opposeses. I yield the floor. The presiding officer the democratic leader. Mr. Schumer we need action, not rhetoric. That is the objection because we believe too many on that side of the aisle will not want to act and, therefore, for them to be content with rhetoric will not serve any good purpose. We can debate all of these issues when we have a real bill on the floor and we are moving forward to bring justice. My resolution does just that. It says very simply very simply that the minute the house passes the justice in policing act, the pending business in the senate is that act. So we can debate it. We can hopefully pass it. Some may choose to modify it in whatever way they choose. But rhetoric is no substitution for action when the American People overwhelmingly in the streets, peacefully, proudly, strongly demand action. So i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of a resolution at the desk that would make h. R. 7120, the justice in policing act, the pending business upon reseat from the house repeat from the house. I ask that the motion be agreed to and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The presiding officer is there objection . The senator from arkansas. Mr. Cotton reserving the right to object. I am mystified by what happened here. We had a resolution on the floor, a couple of pages calling for justice for george floyd and victims of excessive use of ford as well as condemning the radical idea of defunding the police. The minority leader wants to offer a resolution that would make the pending business of the senate at some time in the future a piece of legislation which, if im not mistaken, hasnt been written and filed yet in the house of representatives. Maybe its been written in the last day or two and im not aware they filed that bill, but it hasnt been dweebtd and debated and voted on in the house of representatives. We have a resolution right in front of us that condemns the unjustified killing of george floyd, calls for justice for his death and all of those victims of excessive use of force, and also since the senate opposes the radical idea of defunding the police. Yet the democratic leader on behalf of his party objected to that without citing a single word, a single clause or sentence that he objects. I assume they do want to defund the police. He talks about rhetoric other than action. The senate, almost every day were in business passes multiple resolutions by unanimous consent. I think the democratic leader was on the floor last week trying to pass a resolution condemning the president once again. So the idea that we dont pass resolutions expressing the sense of the senate or for that matter there is a choice between passing the resolution and taking action is simply foreign to the way the senate acts every single day. So i just say again that what were seeing here is the democratic leader apparently objecting on behalf of the Democratic Party in defense of the radical idea that we should defund the police. So, mr. President , i object to the democratic leader. The presiding officer the democratic leader. Mr. Schumer the gentleman from arkansas has made my point. He talks about business as usual. This is not business as usual. The typical rhetoric, the kinds of avoiding action which has been so, so endemic in this Republican Party is showing itself again. If they want to act, they could have supported our resolution. They are trying to avoid it. We will not let that happen. I yield the floor. Mr. Cotton if the democratic leader again would like to engage in a colloquy. Is the bill he wants to make the impending business in the senate even written in the house of representatives . Since he has departed, i guess the answer to my question is no. That bill is not written and filed in the house of representatives. Certainly it has not been voted on in the house and sent to the senate for us to make the pending business. So the objection you just heard, again, didnt object to a single word in our resolution much less a clause or a sentence. A resolution that calls for justice for george floyd and the victims of the excessive use of force while at the same time opposing radical democratic proposals to defund the police. And i can only infer, since i didnt hear a single objection to the language of our resolution, that the rub of the matter is