[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 37 (Thursday, March 1, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1302-S1304]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                              Gun Violence

  Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the mass murder 
in Florida this month, and I rise to ask a simple question that 
millions of Americans in every part of this country are asking at their 
kitchen tables right now: Is Congress finally going to do anything 
meaningful about gun violence? When will enough be enough? What will it 
take for this body to move beyond the same talking points that we hear 
after every mass shooting and actually do something to prevent more 
deaths? Will Congress finally see what the vast majority of Americans 
see--gun owners and non-gun owners alike--that America's gun problem 
isn't going away unless Congress musters up the courage to take it 
head-on, or will Congress continue to give the lipservice of thoughts 
and prayers and then do absolutely nothing?
  We have to act because once again there was a massacre on American 
soil. Once again it was inside a school. Once again American children 
were gunned down. We keep living through a nightmare of gun violence 
that repeats itself in schools, movie theaters, churches, nightclubs, 
concerts, and every single day on the streets of cities in every State 
around this country--Sandy Hook, Aurora, Charleston, San Bernardino, 
Orlando, Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, and most recently, Parkland, 
FL.
  We can help stop this. We have the power to help stop this. The 
question is whether Congress has the political will to do it, whether 
this institution will finally put families first, our children first, 
and stand up to the gun manufacturers and the NRA.
  I urge every Member of Congress to reflect on why they first ran for 
office. We are here as public servants to serve the people who sent us 
here, not to serve the gun industry's profits, not to serve the 
organizations and companies and lobbyists who demand political 
retribution when we do the morally right thing. Does Congress have the 
will to act? Does Congress have the basic courage this country needs? I 
am sorry to say, I don't know, but we can put it to the test.

  There has been a lot of talk--more than normal even--about our need 
to act in this Chamber. So I will say this to my colleagues: Let's make 
this time different. Let's listen to the children from Stoneman Douglas 
High School. Let's seize this moment. Let's take action.
  I implore my colleagues to listen to what the country is saying about 
gun violence today, listen to the families, listen to the survivors 
from Parkland and tune out all the other noise. I did. It is possible.
  Ten years ago, I had an A rating from the NRA, just like many of my 
colleagues today, but then I met the mother of Nyasia Pryear-Yard. Then 
I met her classmates. Nyasia was an honor student from Brooklyn. She 
was dancing with her friends, having fun, loving life. She was killed 
by a stray bullet in her community. Now I have an F rating from the 
NRA.
  I don't understand how, after meeting with all of these families, 
after meeting with all of these children whose lives have been 
destroyed and torn apart by gun violence--I don't understand how any 
public servant would not vow to do what is necessary to make sure it 
never happens again.
  It is what we do after a terrorist attack, rightfully so. It is what 
we do as a country. We come together. We say never again, and we do 
whatever it takes to protect our country. We have to have the very same 
sense of urgency now.
  Plain and simple, it is a lie to say we have to choose between 
protecting law-abiding gun owners' rights and protecting our children 
from being murdered by assault rifles. It is a false choice to say we 
cannot end gun violence without violating people's constitutional 
rights. It is time for Members of Congress to stand up for what is 
right for America and do what is right for our communities, and say no 
to the NRA.
  I commend one of our colleagues in the House of Representatives--a 
Republican from Florida and an Army veteran--who is seeing this crisis 
differently now too. He wrote:

       I know that my community, our schools, and public gathering 
     places, are not made safer by any person having access to the 
     best killing tool the Army could put in my hands. I cannot 
     support the primary weapon I used to defend our people, being 
     used to kill children I swore to defend.

  That is what leadership looks like.
  I implore my colleagues in the Senate to see our gun violence problem 
differently. See it with your heart. See it for what it is. It is a 
matter of national security, of public health, of public safety that 
will never go away unless Congress does its job.
  So, once and for all, let's pass laws that actually are meaningful, 
that actually can do something, not just something simple so we can say 
we did something and move on. I strongly agree with my colleagues that 
we need to improve the mental health system. Let's make those 
investments, but it should not stop there.
  We have to address the fact that we have weapons of war on our 
streets today. We have to address the fact that it is so easy for 
people to buy a gun--people who should never have that privilege. Let's 
vote to ban semiautomatic assault rifles.
  Congress has already banned fully automatic weapons. Congress has 
already recognized that some weapons have no place in the civilian 
world, and a weapon of war that was designed for military use, that can 
fire up to 100 rounds in 1 minute or 100 rounds if you just add a bump 
stock, a weapon that can completely outgun a police officer has no 
place in the civilian world.
  Will my colleagues vote with me to ban semiautomatic assault rifles?
  Then, let's vote to ban the high-capacity magazines that go with 
them. They are made for wars; they are not made to be in our schools, 
not in our cities. High-capacity magazines let killers fire dozens of 
rounds without having to frequently stop and reload. They are designed 
to let someone fire bullets at as many people as possible in the 
shortest amount of time.
  Let's vote to ban high-capacity magazines, and let's vote to pass 
universal background checks. That is something that is so commonsense, 
so obvious. Too many people who should not get their hands on these 
weapons are easily able to get them, and there are so many loopholes 
that allow people to buy semiautomatic assault rifles online, where 
there are no background checks. They allow people to buy semiautomatic 
assault rifles at gun shows, where there are no background checks.
  It simply doesn't make sense that every person who buys a firearm 
doesn't go through a basic background check system. Do you know who 
agrees with that? Ninety-seven percent of the American people. I can't 
think of any other issue where there is such near-universal agreement 
across our entire population.
  So let's do what our constituents are demanding from us--not what the 
NRA is demanding from us--and vote to pass universal background checks. 
When we do it, let's make sure the effort is actually sincere. If we 
are only voting on universal background checks, when it is tied to the 
issue of concealed carry reciprocity, then that is not a sincere 
attempt to fix our broken background check system. If Congress is 
saying we will only pass universal background checks if we pass a new 
law that says a stranger from one State has to be allowed into my State 
or your State when he has a gun hidden under his jacket, that is an 
insult to 97 percent of the American people who want Congress to pass 
universal background checks now.
  Then, let's finally vote to overturn the outrageous law that has 
banned the Centers for Disease Control from even studying the issue of 
gun deaths. The CDC can study any other cause of death--heart disease, 
cancer, car crashes, plane crashes--unless it involves a gun. Don't you 
think it is strange that when we debate this issue, the two

[[Page S1303]]

things related to gun violence that Congress has actually banned in 
recent years are research--research on gun violence--and a ban on the 
ATF from using computers to keep records? Let's vote to allow the CDC 
to conduct research on gun violence so we can finally have the 
information and the data we need to fight gun violence as effectively 
as possible.

  Let's also pass a law that finally makes gun trafficking a Federal 
crime. Over and over again, law enforcement officers keep finding 
illegally obtained guns being used in crimes. Numerous NYPD officers 
have been killed by guns that were illegally obtained by criminals, and 
there is literally no Federal law to stop someone from loading his 
truck with guns in Georgia, driving up I-95, and selling them in a 
parking lot in the Bronx directly to criminals and gang members.
  I have a bill that would make this illegal. It is called the Hadiya 
Pendleton and Nyasia Pryear-Yard Gun Trafficking and Crime Prevention 
Act. It is bipartisan, because both parties agree that gun trafficking 
is a source of gun violence in our cities.
  This bill is named after Nyasia, whom I mentioned earlier, and 
another teenager from Chicago who was also killed by a stray bullet. 
Both guns in those crimes were trafficked. So let's pass this bill and 
finally make gun trafficking a Federal crime.
  If we are not trying to solve this problem now, then we are failing 
as elected leaders. Congress must solve America's gun violence crisis 
now. It is urgent. Our country is demanding it. Americans deserve more 
from Congress than just banning bump stocks, just fixing NICS, which, 
while I strongly support both of them, will not do enough on their own. 
So let us not fail our country again.
  I would like to ask our colleagues to immediately vote to ban 
semiautomatic assault rifles and bump stocks, to pass a universal 
background check system and close all of the loopholes, to allow the 
CDC to research gun violence as a cause of death, to close the gun show 
loophole, and to finally make gun trafficking a Federal crime.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, it was 2 weeks ago yesterday that the 
tragic incident in Parkland took place--one of many that have impacted 
our country over the last decade and beyond. That community in 
Parkland, FL, and the residents of the State of Florida whom I 
represent--and, frankly, the entire Nation--have demanded not just 
action but immediate action.
  We know--and anyone who watches this process is well aware--that 
there are deep differences on how far and how much we should restrict 
the Second Amendment right of every American. We know there are deep 
differences about whether some of those proposed restrictions work. I 
imagine those debates and those differences will not be easily resolved 
and will continue, but I also know there is widespread support and 
agreement that we must act now--as soon as possible--to do everything 
we can to prevent another tragedy like Parkland from happening anywhere 
else ever again. That is a consensus position. No matter where one 
falls on this debate, no matter how one feels about how far or how 
restricted restrictions on gun sales in America should be, no matter 
what your views are on that, I don't know of anyone who is in favor of 
school shootings, and I don't know anyone who is in favor of seeing 
another one happen. There is common ground in that regard.
  What I have tried to do, over the last couple of weeks, is undertake 
efforts to determine what changes in Federal law not only could have 
prevented this attack but could prevent future ones. In that vein, I 
have met with State and Federal law enforcement investigators involved 
not just in this case but in gun laws in general. I have met with 
students and with teachers from Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School, 
including two teachers who were injured in the attack. I have met with 
school board administrators. I have met with the community at large, 
including an appearance last week at a nationally televised townhall. I 
have been in contact with several of the parents of the victims who 
lost their lives. I have also spoken to experts in firearm sales. I 
have spoken to a number of federally licensed firearm dealers who 
talked about some of the frustrations they have with our existing law 
and their inability to address people who ultimately turn out to be 
individuals who should not own any gun of any kind.
  So based on these meetings, based on all of this input, and based on 
all of the other research that is out there leading up to now, the 
first thing I want to say is, I actually believe this attack could have 
and should have been prevented if current law had been fully enforced.
  This killer was a well-known danger to the school district. He was a 
well-known danger to the Broward Sheriff's office. He was a well-known 
danger to his neighborhood. He was also the subject of two separate and 
specific warnings to law enforcement agencies: a call to the Broward 
Sheriff's office last November, a call to an FBI hotline in January.
  In essence, we are always telling people, if you see something, say 
something. People saw something and people said something and other 
people saw it as well over a course of time. Yet somehow this deranged 
and violent individual was able to pass a background check and purchase 
not 1 but 10 separate firearms, and this deranged and violent 
individual was ultimately able to walk right into the school a few 
minutes before dismissal and take the lives of 17 innocent Floridians.
  This tragedy is the result of a massive multisystemic failure--a 
failure involving Federal agencies, State agencies, and local 
authorities who all failed to both identify the threat he posed and 
coordinate a response to stop him before he took action. It is this 
failure I hope we will focus on by addressing the shortcomings and 
vulnerabilities in our current laws and in our current policies. We may 
still have a debate on the broader issues of regulating gun sales, but 
irrespective of that debate, we still must and should do this.
  So today I wanted to come here for a few minutes and announce a 
comprehensive plan--not a simple bill you just vote on and move on but 
a series of measures I believe could prevent these attacks before they 
happen and that also help schools protect their students and their 
teachers. I believe these ideas should all enjoy bipartisan support, 
and, if passed, could and should help prevent the next potential mass 
shooting.
  These are ideas I outline not just because they work, but because I 
believe we can get the votes to pass them. Sixty votes in the Senate, a 
majority in the House, and the signature of a President--that is what 
it takes to turn an idea into a law, and these ideas I am about to 
outline both work and, I believe, could enjoy that widespread support.
  One of the things we have learned is, our schools are woefully 
unprepared to prevent an attack before it occurs. Furthermore, during 
my visits to the site of the attack and my followup meeting with 
teachers at the school, I learned of various changes to school 
facilities and practices which could have stopped this attack or 
improved the response. Therefore, I will be joining later today with 
Senator Orrin Hatch and others in introducing the STOP School Violence 
Act.
  If passed, this law would provide Federal grants to do some important 
things that would have been really helpful in this case: strengthen 
school security infrastructure of the school, provide school training 
for everyone--administrators, teachers, even students--to be able to 
identify threats and to report them. Something that really would be 
helpful is the creation of a school threat assessment and crisis 
intervention team. There is a successful program in Los Angeles that 
does this. That is a team that is a coordination between law 
enforcement, other State agencies, school districts and the like where 
they are all talking to each other about students and former students 
who may pose a threat of violence and intervene before they act.
  A second issue we identified is that even if law enforcement, school 
administrators, or family members believe an individual poses the risk 
of committing an act of violence, they have very few options to prevent 
them from purchasing any gun or taking away the guns they already have.

[[Page S1304]]

  Therefore, I intend to present a new law--perhaps in coordination 
with others who are working on it now--that will lead to the creation 
of gun violence restraining orders, something that will give law 
enforcement and close family members the option of obtaining a court 
order to prevent gun sales or remove guns from individuals who pose a 
threat. To be clear, the due process in such a situation would be on 
the front end, not on the back end.
  The third issue we uncovered is, Federal law appears to discourage 
school systems from reporting dangerous students to law enforcement. I 
don't support criminalizing all school misconduct, but a student who 
has threatened violence, who has exhibited violent behavior needs to be 
reported to law enforcement. A student who has committed a crime by 
issuing a threat of death using social media--a crime under Florida 
law--that needs to be reported, but under Broward County school 
policies, pursuant to something called the PROMISE Program, reporting a 
student, a dangerous one, to law enforcement is the sixth step--step 
6--in their plan. Therefore, I intend to propose changes to the Federal 
Youth PROMISE Program so a school district plan under this program does 
not delay and does not discourage law enforcement from being alerted to 
dangerous and violent or hazardous behavior.
  Fourth, we need to strengthen background checks. That is why I have 
joined with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle pushing for the 
immediate passage of Fix NICS--something that will require all Federal 
agencies and incentivize every State to fully report relevant 
information to the national background check database--because a 
background check is only as good as the information that is on it. This 
deranged killer was able to buy guns on 10 separate occasions because 
he would have passed any background check because none of this stuff 
that was known about him was reported to that system.
  Fifth, we must begin to prosecute the purchase of guns by people 
prohibited from doing so. Next week, I hope to be joining a bipartisan 
group, led by Senators Toomey and Coons, in filing the ``Lie and Try'' 
bill, which will require the FBI to notify States when someone who is 
not allowed to buy a gun, tries to buy a gun and fails the background 
check, so they can be investigated, so they can be prosecuted.
  In addition, we will be presenting a new law to provide more 
prosecutors to go after straw purchases, which is where someone buys a 
gun on behalf of someone else because that someone else could not pass 
the background check.
  Now, there are some additional reforms that I am open to: the 
possibility of looking at age limits on semiautomatic rifles, the 
notion of looking at what could be done with high-capacity magazines. 
We will continue to explore and look at those. These reforms do not 
enjoy the sort of widespread support in Congress that the other 
measures I have announced do, and, in order to successfully pass, these 
ideas will have to be crafted in a way that actually contributes to 
greater public safety but also do not unnecessarily or unfairly 
infringe on the Second Amendment right of all law-abiding adults to 
protect themselves and their families, to hunt, or to participate in 
recreational shooting.
  Ultimately, there are things we can do that have widespread, 
bipartisan support that we can act on, that we can get passed, that 
will actually make a difference. These are impactful things.
  I urge the Senate and the House, all of my colleagues here, do not 
hold hostage a piece of legislation that would work and that we all 
support because it doesn't have everything you want. There are things 
we can act on and do, and there are things we can continue to argue 
over, debate, and perhaps do in the future, but on the things we agree 
on--and they happen to be things that could have prevented this attack 
and will prevent future attacks--let's get those done. I have outlined 
those here today. There may be others, but we owe it not just to the 
victims and the families of Parkland but to all Americans everywhere; 
for this attack may have happened in Southern Florida, but there is no 
reason it can't happen somewhere else and, I fear, will happen 
somewhere else if we do not fix the deficiencies and the flaws in our 
policies, in our laws, and in the way they are enforced.
  We have learned from this incident what is wrong with our system. Let 
us fix it. We have an opportunity to do so while we continue to debate 
and work on the issues we do not agree on. That is what I hope we will 
do, and that is what I commit to doing everything I can to achieve.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the 
Quattlebaum nomination?
  Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the 
Senator from Arizona (Mr. Flake), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. 
McCain), and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds).
  The result was announced--yeas 69, nays 28, as follows:

                       [Rollcall Vote No. 42 Ex.]

                                YEAS--69

     Alexander
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Capito
     Carper
     Cassidy
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cortez Masto
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Hatch
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Jones
     Kaine
     Kennedy
     King
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Manchin
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Nelson
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Reed
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--28

     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Casey
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Heinrich
     Klobuchar
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Peters
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warren
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Flake
     McCain
     Rounds
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). 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 Senate's action.
  The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAPO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
remaining votes in this series be 10 minutes in length.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________