[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 51 (Monday, March 25, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1927-S1928]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                             Climate Change

  Madam President, I am going to speak briefly on the matter of climate 
change, and then I will address matters relating to the special 
counsel's investigation.
  During the last month, this Chamber has been the forum for debate on 
a topic I never thought I would see Republicans raise on their own--
climate change. They have long been the party of climate change denial, 
with President Trump as the climate change denier-in-chief. It is an 
awfully difficult position to defend. It becomes more difficult every 
week and every month, and it is directly at odds with strong consensus 
views of scientists in the United States and around the globe.
  As our weather changes and as we face disasters, the average American 
is saying more and more: Uh-oh. Climate change. I wonder what the 
people in Nebraska and Iowa think. They have had these huge floods that 
have been so devastating to them.
  It is long past time for Republicans to take these issues seriously. 
This Chamber is supposed to debate the most serious issues of our day. 
Climate change is at the top of the list and shouldn't be an exception. 
That is why for a month all 47 Democrats have asked our Republican 
colleagues three simple questions, which none of them will answer. They 
are going to have to answer them sooner or later. One, do you agree 
that climate change is real? Two, do you agree that it is caused by 
human action? Three, do you believe that Congress should take immediate 
action to combat its effects?
  We are not prescribing one part or another; we are saying, let's 
debate it. Let's not have a sham vote that is meant to embarrass one 
person or another. This is too serious of an issue for that. 
Republicans owe the American people some real answers, not games.
  As I mentioned, just over the last week in the plains of Iowa, we saw 
the devastating effects of climate change with devastating clarity. The 
kind of weather we saw in the Iowa plains has no precedent. It was the 
equivalent of a category 2 hurricane lambasting the heart of the 
Midwest. Our hearts are with the people whose homes were destroyed or 
damaged, whose farms were decimated, and the animals that were lost.
  The science is clear: A changing climate and warmer air make these 
freakish weather incidents more likely and more intense.
  Republicans may want to keep their heads in the sand. I think that is 
a loser for them, especially among younger and younger voters. Like on 
so many other issues, Republicans are clinging to the past and not 
looking at what has happened, but Republicans do so at their own peril. 
With each passing year, their climate change denial is increasingly out 
of step with the American people. A majority of Americans--two-thirds, 
including a large percentage of Republicans--believe climate change is 
real and believe human action has accelerated its pace. They know it 
for a very simple reason--they can see it themselves.
  On the South Shore of Long Island, all of a sudden after Sandy, very 
Republican areas understood the need to address climate change. That is 
happening all over the country. The American people see the effects of 
climate change every time a fire devastates California, another 
hurricane strikes the Gulf States, or Biblical flooding strikes some 
part of the country or another. They see them personally, not 
theoretically. That is what is happening. Indeed, scientists in the 
United States and Canada now say that the evidence for climate change 
has reached a ``gold standard'' of certainty.
  What have Republicans done about it? Rather than take these warnings 
seriously, they choose to play games with our planet's future. Rather 
than get serious about the world our children will inherent, Leader 
McConnell has elected to push a sham vote on their version of the Green 
New Deal. They will play that game right before voting on funding for 
natural disaster relief. Let there be no doubt--these disasters are 
magnified precisely because of climate change. I cannot fathom the 
level of cognitive dissonance required to schedule these two votes one 
right after the other.
  No one is fooled by the Republican attempts to posture and politicize 
climate change. If they really want to debate the issue, let's debate 
it. Let's bring different views to the floor. Let's see how people 
vote. Let's not put something on the floor for the first time--a 
serious proposal on climate change, which the leader has never before 
put on the floor. Let's debate them all. We are not getting that to 
happen. Oh no. It is just a game--politics, politics, politics--that 
the American people, on this issue and so many others, dislike.
  Let Republicans come at us with all they have. The facts are on the 
people who understand that climate change is real. It is no wonder our 
Republicans colleagues don't want a real debate but a game. But the 
American people are not going to be fooled by the Republicans' stunt 
vote.
  Democrats are prepared to take bold action to address the climate 
crisis head-on. That is why we are pushing for the creation of a 
bipartisan committee on climate change so we can examine this issue 
with the level of urgency and depth it deserves. I urge my colleagues 
on the other side who know the truth to speak out and join us as we try 
to put a halt to the greatest threat of our time.


               Unanimous Consent Request--H. Con. Res. 24

  Madam President, now on another matter, last night, Attorney General 
Barr delivered a brief letter to Congress that included his summary of 
Special Counsel Mueller's investigation. We have all seen the Attorney 
General's letter, but none of us--neither the Congress nor the public--
have seen the report itself. The Justice Department has declined to 
even say how many pages the report includes, as if that were some sort 
of State secret.
  After all, let's not forget why we are here in the first place. Two 
years ago, a hostile power attacked our democracy. As Mr. Barr's letter 
says, Russian actors, with the backing of Mr. Putin, waged a 
sophisticated and malicious campaign of disinformation and falsehood in 
order to influence the outcome of our elections. That has never 
happened before.
  The American people deserve to see the documentation. What did they 
do? Whom did they approach? What happened? To sweep an issue like this 
under the rug, when the security of our wellspring elections--fair and 
not interfered with by foreign power--is at stake?
  It is overwhelmingly self-evident in the public interest for the 
Mueller report to be released to the people. The American people simply 
want the truth. Each American, if he or she chooses, could read the 
report for themselves and draw their own conclusions. Whether or not 
you are a supporter of President Trump, whatever you feel, there is no 
good reason not to make the report public.
  On March 14, just prior to the recess, the House of Representatives 
surprised a lot of our Republicans friends here in the Senate by 
passing a resolution calling for the report to be made public. Guess 
what the vote was. It was 420 to nothing. Even the most vociferous 
defenders of President Trump--Mr. Meadows and Mr. Jordan--voted yes.
  When the resolution arrived here in the Senate, I asked unanimous 
consent that it be adopted. I thought it would be. Regrettably, one 
Senator objected. The Senator from South Carolina--my friend, Senator 
Graham--said he wouldn't agree to the resolution unless it was amended 
to call for a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton. The 
Senate was unable to pass the resolution that passed the House 
unanimously without controversy.
  In fact, President Trump had said, even before the report came out 
and repeatedly afterward several times, that he supported passage of 
the House resolution and he supports making it public, and so did a 
good number of my Republican colleagues--a whole bunch today.
  So, in a moment, I am going to renew my request of March 14 that the 
Senate

[[Page S1928]]

adopt H. Con. Res. 24, calling for public release of the Mueller 
report. Now that President Trump supports public release of the report, 
there is no good reason for anyone to object to this request.
  It is a simple request for transparency, nothing more, nothing less--
not to make a decision as to what you believe, not to say what we ought 
to do about it, but just to make it public. Transparency is a great 
American virtue that we have tried to uphold through the centuries.
  So I hope I will not hear a request from the other side to amend the 
resolution to call for a different special counsel investigation. If 
there is going to be an objection, the American people deserve to know 
why--why should this report not be made public--not why something else 
shouldn't be done, not some extraneous issue. Why shouldn't this report 
be made public?
  I ask my friend, the leader--I see him rising, and I imagine he is 
going to object--to give a reason why this report should not be made 
public, not that something else should be done at the same time. This 
is serious stuff. If there is an objection raised, it will only serve 
to frustrate the compelling public interest that is made in the special 
counsel's report in making it public.
  Therefore, I will now give the Senate another opportunity to join 
every one of their colleagues in calling for the public release of this 
important report.
  Madam President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous 
consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. 
Con. Res. 24, expressing the sense of Congress that the report of 
Special Counsel Mueller should be made available to the public and to 
Congress, which is at the desk; further, that the concurrent resolution 
be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider 
be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action 
or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Boozman). Is there objection?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, as I 
said just a few moments ago, it is certainly good news for the country 
that the special counsel concluded that there is no evidence that the 
Trump campaign collaborated or conspired with the Russian Government to 
influence the last Presidential election. It is also good news for the 
country that due to the special counsel's work, we now have more 
insight into Russia's efforts to interfere with our democratic 
institution.
  Now, I have consistently supported the proposition that the special 
counsel should be allowed to finish his work without interference. The 
work of the special counsel, however, is not yet complete. Neither is 
the work of the Department of Justice. The Attorney General told us 
yesterday that he is working with the special counsel to determine how 
much of the special counsel's report can be produced without violating 
the law and without jeopardizing other ongoing matters, including other 
matters initiated by the special counsel. The special counsel and the 
Justice Department ought to be allowed to finish their work in a 
professional manner.
  Now, my good friend, the Democratic leader, was all for allowing the 
special counsel to conduct his work without political interference when 
it might be politically advantageous to him, but, apparently, my friend 
from New York is not for allowing the special counsel to complete his 
work with the Justice Department, according to his best professional 
and legal judgment, when that might be inconvenient to my friend's own 
current political purposes.
  To date, the Attorney General has followed through on his commitment 
to the Congress. One of those commitments is that he intends to release 
as much information as possible. I certainly welcome that commitment to 
transparency, as do others, but to the extent that the Attorney 
General, in consulting with the special counsel, believes it is 
important to protect sensitive sources and methods, protect material 
that could affect ongoing investigations and prosecutions, and is 
legally protected, then he deserves the time to work through these 
issues.
  I am going to object in order to allow the special counsel and the 
Justice Department to finish their careful and professional review of 
a, no doubt, voluminous record--a record that likely contains 
sensitive, classified, and legally protected material.
  For all of those reasons, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The minority leader is recognized.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I will be brief. The resolution does not 
say it has to be done immediately. The resolution certainly allows for 
the Attorney General to make sure that nothing is released that 
violates the law. All it says is that it ought to be released. It is 
hard to understand why the majority leader wouldn't be for that 
resolution.
  None of his objections--none--are in the words of the report. In 
fact, the words of the report are very simple. It shows a sense of the 
Congress that it should be released--not when, not in violation of the 
law, not in a hurried matter, just to be released.
  So I am sort of befuddled by at least the majority leader's reasoning 
in this regard because it is not in the words of this resolution.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the country and the President had to 
wait 2 years. It has been going on for 2 years. This very expensive 
investigation took 2 years to be concluded. Look, it is not 
unreasonable to give the special counsel and the Justice Department 
just a little time to complete their review in a professional and 
responsible manner.
  Remember, as I said earlier, we are likely dealing here with other 
potential prosecutions, classified information, and damaging people's 
reputations. There is no evidence that the Attorney General is not 
going to produce as much information as possible for all of us, and 
that is why I objected.
  I think it is a reasonable thing to do. We have been waiting for a 
long time for this report to wrap up. It is largely good news, not just 
for the President but for the country.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader is recognized.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, again, this language was good enough for 
every Republican in the Senate, as well as every Democrat. The 
President himself says it should be released. It is hard to understand 
why the majority leader should stand alone in objections no one else 
found to be reasonable or sustainable and oppose this resolution. The 
report should be made public, and the Senate should resolve that it 
should be.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.