[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 223 (Thursday, December 31, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7987-S7990]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

  WILLIAM M. (MAC) THORNBERRY NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 
           FISCAL YEAR 2021--VETO--MOTION TO PROCEED--Resumed

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of the veto message on H.R. 6395, 
which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Veto message, a bill (H.R. 6395) to authorize 
     appropriations for fiscal year 2021 for military activities 
     of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and 
     for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to 
     prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, 
     and for other purposes.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Vermont


           Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 9051 and H.R. 6395

  Mr. SANDERS. Madam President, let me briefly respond to some of the 
points that Majority Leader McConnell has made, to his inaccurate 
statements.
  Now, I am delighted that, after years of talking on the floor of the 
Senate about socialism for the rich, apparently, that has gotten across 
to my Republican friends. Of course, that is what we do every single 
day. That is why we have the incredible level of income and wealth 
inequality that exists in this country, because, decade after decade, 
we have used this body to provide massive tax breaks to the rich and 
provide corporate welfare to corporations that don't need it. That is 
socialism for the rich. The majority leader is right, but let's talk 
about, in fact, what is in this bill.
  According to the Tax Policy Center, fewer than 1 percent of the 
benefits of the direct payments--that is the $2,000 per working-class 
adult that Senator Schumer and I are talking about--would go to the top 
5 percent of Americans. Virtually nothing would go to the very, very 
rich. The overwhelming majority of those funds would go to the middle 
class, the working class, low-income people, who in the midst of this 
pandemic are in desperate economic condition.
  Again, I am delighted to hear the majority leader talking about 
socialism for the rich, and I hope we will continue that discussion in 
the next session. Let me talk about the socialism for the rich that the 
majority leader is enthusiastically supportive of as the majority 
leader helped to lead this body to pass Trump's tax bill.
  Now, do you want to talk about socialism for the rich, Mr. Majority 
Leader?
  Under that bill, Charles Koch--one of the very richest people in 
America, who has a net worth of $113 billion--received a $1.4 billion 
tax break.
  Mr. Majority Leader, that sounds, to me, like socialism for the rich. 
Ah, but that is not all.
  In Nevada, you have a gentleman named Sheldon Adelson, who is a major 
contributor to the Republican Party and a big funder for Donald Trump. 
Under that same tax bill led by the majority leader, Sheldon Adelson 
received a $560 million tax break. A guy who is worth $34 billion 
desperately needed that tax break of $560 million.
  Do you want more tax breaks for the rich? Do you want to talk about 
socialism for the rich?
  Senator McConnell had no problem giving a $104 million tax refund to 
Amazon over the past 3 years despite the fact that the company made $30 
billion in profits. So the argument that this bill, in any significant 
way, benefits the rich is just not accurate, but let us talk about whom 
this bill does benefit.
  This bill benefits tens of millions of Americans who, as a result of 
this pandemic, have lost their jobs and have lost their incomes. Some, 
in fact, have lost their lives. These are people who are going hungry 
today. We are seeing today a recordbreaking level of hunger in 
America--the richest country in the history of the world. All over this 
country--and I receive emails from people all over this country--people 
are frightened to death that they are going to be evicted from their 
homes. Think about what a $4,000 check or a $5,000 check would mean to 
those struggling families--husband, wife, kids. In fact, let me give 
you an example.
  This is a problem taking place all over this country. It is taking 
place in Vermont. It is taking place in Senator Schumer's State. It is 
taking place in Kentucky. In fact, the State of Kentucky--a very 
beautiful State; I have had the pleasure of being there a number of 
times--a beautiful State--is the State in which 10 out of the 25 
poorest counties in America exist. I am sure Senator McConnell is aware 
that, throughout his State, you have thousands and tens of thousands of 
people living in economic desperation. I am talking about counties 
where 30 to 40 percent of people are living in poverty and where many 
thousands of residents are trying to survive on less than $20,000 a 
year.
  I am just using Kentucky as an example because that is the State 
Senator McConnell represents, but it is true all over this country.
  In Kentucky, over 22 percent of the children are living in poverty. 
Do you think they might need a little bit of help?
  In the State of Kentucky, more than 190,000 workers are making 
extremely low wages, and over a half a million people earn less than 
$15 an hour. Somebody might want to ask those people what a $2,000 
check per adult would mean. I am talking about Kentucky, and I will 
never forget this because I visited Kentucky and talked to some of the 
people there. Kentucky has suffered from a particular opioid crisis. I 
will never forget talking to a football coach who told me that a bunch 
of the kids on his football team were living with their grandparents or 
on couches because of the opioid epidemic.

  In other words, the people in Kentucky, the people in New York, and 
the people in Vermont are hurting. They need help.
  So I say today to Senator McConnell, the leader here, let us address 
the horrendous economic crisis facing tens of millions of Americans.
  The pandemic today is worse than it has ever been. Hopefully, 
hopefully, the vaccine will make a profound difference, but, right now, 
people are hurting, and they are looking to this institution. They are 
looking to Congress. The House did the right thing. They are now 
looking to the Senate. They are looking to Senator McConnell.
  After all is said and done and after all of the legalese--and I am 
going to be introducing some legalese in a moment--it comes down to one 
thing: Senator McConnell disagrees with the proposal that Senator 
Schumer and I are making. I got it. That is fine. This is a democracy. 
He has the right to his point of view. I would love to have the debate 
on the floor with Senator McConnell about this legislation. All that we 
are asking is to give us the opportunity to vote up or down on whether 
or not working families in this country should be able to receive a 
$2,000 check. Senator McConnell disagrees.
  Come to the floor. Tell us why you disagree. Then we will do what 
this institution is supposed to do. We will have a vote.

[[Page S7988]]

  The truth is, in the House, Senator McConnell knows that 44 
Republicans voted for the House bill, which won, by the way, by a 2-to-
1 majority. Two-thirds of the House voted to make sure that working 
Americans would get a $2,000 check. Right here in the Senate, there are 
a number of Republicans--it is not clear how many--who have already 
gone public in saying they think it is a good idea that we go forward 
with the House bill.
  So all that I am asking Senator McConnell is to give us a vote. What 
is the problem? You can vote no. By the way, we need 60 votes--a 
majority. There is no question in my mind that a majority of the 
Senators will vote yes, but because of house rules, we need 60 votes. 
So we are going to have to get 48 Democrats--that is what we have--plus 
12 Republicans. Can we get 12 Republicans? I don't know--maybe we can; 
maybe we can't--but give us a vote. What is the problem? What is the 
problem with having the American people see how their Senators vote on 
this issue of such enormous importance?
  As Senator Schumer indicated, Senator McConnell has some other 
concerns.
  He is concerned about section 230 of the 1996 Federal 
Telecommunications Act. I am sure that this is absolutely on the minds 
of everybody in Vermont, in New York, and in Kentucky. It is probably 
all that they are talking about, the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Fine. 
If he wants a vote on that, bring it to the floor. Let's vote on it as 
a separate bill.
  Do you want to talk about election security? Senator Schumer is 
right. There are a lot of issues out there. I am concerned about voter 
suppression. I am concerned about people waiting online for 5 hours to 
cast a vote. I am concerned about voter intimidation. Senator McConnell 
has different points of view. Let's have that discussion. Put together 
a commission. No problem. Bring that bill to the floor. Yet everybody 
understands that, when you combine all three elements, this is a poison 
pill designed to kill that legislation.
  After everything is said and done, all of this comes down to one 
simple fact: Will Senator McConnell, the Republican leader of the U.S. 
Senate, allow this body to vote on a bill which will provide $2,000 per 
person to working-class families all across this country? That is what 
this whole debate is about. It is not whether you like the bill or you 
don't like it. We can have that debate. We have 3 days left in this 
Congress. The House did the right thing. It is now time for the Senate 
to have that vote.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 3 p.m. today, 
Thursday, December 31, the Senate proceed to the consideration of 
Calendar No. 645, H.R. 9051, to provide a $2,000 direct payment to the 
working class; that the bill be considered read a third time and the 
Senate vote on the passage of the bill; and that if passed, the motion 
to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; further, that 
following the vote on H.R. 9051, the Senate resume consideration of the 
veto message on H.R. 6395, the National Defense Authorization Act, and 
the Senate vote on the passage of the bill, the objections of the 
President to the contrary notwithstanding, all with no intervening 
action or debate.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I object.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I would like to for a moment just 
reflect on where we are at this session of the U.S. Senate and the 
choices that have been made.
  I want to thank Senator Sanders and Senator Schumer for bringing 
this, with clarity, to the floor of the Senate.
  We support $2,000 as a helping hand to people across the United 
States. There is a limitation on the amount that individuals receive if 
they make more than $75,000 or if their family makes more than 
$150,000, but we are following the template that has been employed both 
with the CARES Act and with our own COVID relief act of just a few days 
ago.
  We have been told by the Department of the Treasury that if you want 
to put money into the hands of Americans who desperately need it, this 
is the best way to do it, the quickest way to do it. There are better 
ways, I am sure, but in a time of crisis, we need to respond and 
respond in a timely way.
  So Senator Sanders and Senator Schumer have brought to the floor for 
consideration, we hope, a bill that has already passed the House of 
Representatives. The significance of this is that the House is now in 
recess and not scheduled to return in this congressional session. So 
whatever happens over here cannot be a new bill--there is no House to 
send it to and no time to pass it--but, rather, has to be an up-or-down 
vote on a bill that has passed the House as is. That is what they have 
come to the floor now for 3 straight days asking.
  Senator Schumer has asked repeatedly of Senator McConnell, the 
Republican leader, a simple request: Whether you are for the House bill 
or against the House bill, allow the Senate to be the Senate. Allow us 
to vote on the bill--for those of us who support it, to vote on it.
  It isn't a lock; it isn't guaranteed that we are going to win and 
prevail with that vote. There are 48 Democratic Senators, and you need 
60 votes. We need help from the other side. Four or five Republican 
Senators say they support it as well, but we don't know if we have the 
12, if all of our Members can be here. In this era of COVID-19, sadly, 
even some of our Senators have illnesses in the family, which may make 
it impossible for them to be here. So there is no guarantee we win, but 
there will be a guarantee that we are recorded and our positions are 
known to the voters across America. That is a simple request. Yet, time 
and again, the Republican leader, Senator McConnell, has said no.
  I am worried about what is happening to this institution, not just in 
this instance but with what we have seen over the past several years.
  We will conclude this calendar year having voted on the floor of this 
U.S. Senate 29 times on amendments--29 in the course of a year in what 
is supposedly the world's greatest deliberative body. I guess I 
shouldn't complain--it is a 30-percent increase over last year, when we 
voted on 22 amendments in the entire calendar year. The Senate is out 
of business and out to lunch when it comes to legislating, and that is 
a fact.
  All we are asking for is the chance to legislate a $2,000 helping 
hand to families across America. I have heard over and over again that 
we are just trying to featherbed the rich, that we are trying to give 
big checks to rich people. Well, Senator Sanders made a point on that 
earlier. Less than 1 percent of the money we are asking for is going to 
go to the top 5 percent.
  When it came time for tax policy and tax breaks, many of the people 
complaining the loudest about $2,000 were giving away millions of 
dollars to the richest people in America without any hesitation. Well, 
today is another day, and today is a different America. Today, we are 
facing a country that is in the depths of the crisis created by COVID-
19. The numbers coming back to us every night on the news are 
heartbreaking numbers.
  I understand--and most of us do--that those wonderful women and men 
who are in the healthcare business usually are very stoic and calm in 
reporting the reality of their lives. Not so anymore. More and more 
doctors and nurses are breaking down on television as they describe the 
scenes in emergency rooms across this country. They describe the 
reality of telling families that they cannot be by the bedside of one 
of their loved ones who is about to die, and they break down in tears 
and tell us they don't know how much more of this they can take.

  That is the reality of America. It is not an America of vastly rich 
people sitting by the swimming pool hoping Congress sends them more 
money; it is an America of those patients and their families and the 
people who are out of

[[Page S7989]]

work and the business men and women who have lost everything, who need 
a hand from this government.
  If there is one thing about America, I hope it is clear, no matter 
what your political persuasion, we are a caring people. If a hurricane 
hits Florida, I care about it. If a tornado hits the State of Nebraska, 
I care about it. And we come together on a bipartisan basis to help 
those families. Now more than ever, those families need us to do 
something significant in their lives. How can you see the scenes on 
television every night of the parade of cars lined up in Texas, in 
Kentucky, in Illinois, hoping they can get some food to give to their 
families? Are those grifters and chiselers who are just trying to get a 
free meal? I don't think so. Would you sit in your car for an hour or 
two for food unless you really needed it? I think those people really 
need it. Many of them are heartbroken that they are in this situation. 
Some are even embarrassed--and they shouldn't be--that they have been 
the victims of this economy.
  So all we are asking, Senator McConnell, is, give us a chance to 
vote. You can vote no if you wish. Give us a chance to vote for the 
$2,000 that can make a difference in a person's life; $4,000 for a 
husband and wife who are struggling to get by--rent checks, mortgage 
payments, car payments, utility bills, things that really are basic to 
families' survival. We are trying to help, and I think we should be 
given that chance.
  We have tried time and again. We have the support of President Trump 
in this effort, and I am glad to have it. I think we have enough 
support in this Chamber to come up with 60 votes. I pray that we will, 
if we are given that chance, and I hope the Senate Republican leader is 
not afraid of that outcome. He shouldn't be.
  He has two of his incumbent Republican Senators in a runoff election 
who have both publicly said they want to vote for this, and yet he 
stops them. He is the one who has put an end to their opportunity. Why? 
Shouldn't he give them the opportunity to vote yes? He even refuses, in 
this situation, with this looming election, to bring this matter to the 
floor for an honest up-or-down, bipartisan vote.
  I listened to the stories that were told by Senator Sanders and 
others about the plight of people in this country and how much they 
count on us and, frankly, how many of them have given up on us. They 
just don't believe the Congress of the United States is in touch with 
the reality of America.
  If we are in touch with the reality in our home States, in our home 
towns, we should do something--something significant--to end this year 
on the right note.
  I plead with the Republican leader, who has the power. The sole 
Member of Congress of 100 Members--he has the power to bring this 
matter to a vote and to do it immediately, within the hour. We could 
call the Members who returned to Washington yesterday together, take a 
vote soon, in a matter of minutes, and know once and for all whether we 
have the 60 votes that are necessary to pass this measure. Then we can 
pass the override of the President's veto of the Defense authorization 
bill--a critical piece of legislation.
  That would be the right way to end this year. Let us not end it in 
suspense as to whether or not we are going to come to the aid and 
assistance of American families who rely on us time and again to be 
there when America needs a helping hand. Let's do our job. Let's fill 
this Chamber with Senators who will actually vote on an issue that 
makes a difference in the lives of Americans. That is what we were 
elected to do. We have no excuse if we fail.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, we are here in the waning hours of 
2020, expectant and hopeful about the coming year, and I want to wish 
all of my colleagues a very healthy and happy new year in the hope that 
we will fulfill the promise of our constituents, our country, our 
Constitution in moving forward to meet and conquer the pandemic that 
still ravages our Nation and to renew our economy that still is 
failing.
  We are the greatest Nation in the history of the world, and Americans 
are hurting. This body has taken positive and important steps toward 
meeting this public health and economic crisis, as well as the hurt and 
harm that continue to plague Americans.
  In a number of important relief packages, we have helped to meet 
those needs and enabled the Nation to bridge the gap created by this 
pandemic--an economic gap that has become a chasm, a cliff that seems 
without end and, for many of our fellow citizens, a time of 
unparalleled and unanticipated pain.
  The relief package that we passed most recently--I think we can be 
proud to say--is the second largest in our Nation's history, and it 
will provide a second round of paycheck protection loans, forgivable, 
becoming grants, so that small businesses can keep their doors open; 
more aid for our transportation and education systems; money to 
distribute the vaccine that will be a lifesaver for so many Americans; 
and other important aid, including a $600 stimulus payment for every 
American who is making less than $75,000. That is real assistance for a 
family of four--$2,400--because every child, as well as adult, will 
receive that money.
  But all of that $906 billion is only a downpayment. It is a life 
raft, and it has to be followed by an even more robust, bigger, bolder 
package to provide real relief and sustenance for the survival of our 
economy and, literally, the survival of Americans who are struggling to 
put food on the table and to buy medicine, pay rent and mortgages, 
clothe their children.
  We have all told our stories on the floor of the Senate during 2020 
about constituents waiting in food lines, hurting for the funds needed 
to stay in their home or apartment and to pay for the medicine that is 
literally a matter of life and death.
  We have told those stories. We have talked about Americans who are 
struggling. We have the opportunity now to do something about it, so I 
appeal to my Republican colleague very bluntly and simply: Give us a 
vote on the CASH Act. Let us vote on a stand-alone $2,000 stimulus 
payment bill. Allow every one of us to go on record on that $2,000 
stimulus payment bill that would add $1,400 to that $600 already 
provided--not to minimize the importance of $600, but it is 
inadequate. It is insufficient. It is unacceptable because it fails to 
provide the basic needs to meet the desperate and dire straits of so 
many Americans.

  We are talking about families who need that money to buy bread and 
milk, paper towels and toilet paper, goods and services that are 
necessary to the survival of their families. Six hundred dollars is 
simply not enough, and that is why I call on my fellow colleagues to 
persuade their leaders that we should be permitted this vote, because I 
believe that if there is a vote, it will pass. Having spoken to 
Republican colleagues here, I have no doubt--none--that the stand-alone 
$2,000 stimulus payment measure would pass overwhelmingly, just as did 
the $600 payment as part of the larger bill.
  The simple fact is, that measure is the only viable vehicle. Any 
other measure loaded with other provisions, whether it is the section 
230 reform or a commission to investigate the last election on 
fictitious fraud, is doomed. It is doomed logistically. It is doomed 
legally and physically. There is no way for the House to pass it.
  Only the House bill, if passed, can provide Americans with the $2,000 
stimulus payment that they so desperately need. Only the House bill 
provides that relief. Any other measure will be doomed because the 
House cannot come back to pass it in the time we have left in this 
session. So the majority leader is essentially blocking a step that 
will literally save lives, supported by the vast majority of the 
American people, a significant part of his own conference, and every 
Democrat.
  Have no doubt--every Democrat will vote for it. We clamored for a 
higher stimulus payment for months when the majority leader refused to 
come to the table and then when the President of the United States 
failed to lift a finger--he was on the golf course--when it

[[Page S7990]]

might have made a difference in raising that $600 amount higher during 
the negotiating.
  Looking forward, there is a way to provide this relief to Americans 
without leaving here in a contest of blame but in a new year of mutual 
congratulation. Pass the $2,000 stimulus payment plan as a stand-alone, 
clean bill.
  I just want to say that I am probably the only Senator who has 
supported two measures--one of them actually passed by the Congress and 
signed by the President to reform section 230 and the other unanimously 
voted out of the Judiciary Committee. They reformed section 230, and I 
support reforming section 230. I have hardly been uncritical of section 
230. There should be major reform of section 230, but it has to be done 
in a careful, deliberate, and considered way as a separate measure, not 
as a meat ax in a totally unrelated bill, the $2,000 payment bill that 
provides real relief for the country.
  Loading the CASH Act with poison pills is obstruction. It is not 
constructive legislating, and it fails to meet the test of this moment. 
It is vital that we move forward to provide struggling Americans with 
this relief, and scuttling the $2,000 stimulus payment bill with a 
half-baked, meat-ax evisceration of section 230 is cruel and downright 
stupid. It betrays the mission and obligation that we have in these 
waning days of 2020.
  Americans need more help, and they need hope. Help and hope are 
embodied in the vaccine. Unfortunately, the rollout of this vaccine, 
despite the $8 billion contained in the latest pandemic relief bill, 
has been hopelessly behind schedule. The number of doses distributed is 
roughly one-tenth of what it should be even under the scaled-back 
schedule that this administration has adopted. Twenty million 
vaccinations were promised by the end of the year. That number was way 
below the initial promise, and only about one-tenth of them--probably 2 
million--will actually be provided.
  Instead of taking responsibility or taking control, President Trump 
is still tweeting; instead of action, more talk. Only action will save 
lives, and either he doesn't care enough, or he doesn't really see what 
is necessary to do in order to save these lives, because the 
distribution of this vaccine is a matter of life and death.
  Using the Defense Production Act, mobilizing America, making sure 
States have the resources they need, providing money to hospitals, and 
making sure there are the vials, syringes, training for workers, as 
well as the facilities to transport, store, and distribute this 
vaccine, are essential now. They are missing at this moment, and the 
President is where the buck stops.
  Now I look forward to a 2021 when a new President will expand the 
stimulus payments to individuals and when many of the other gaps left 
unfinished--action that still is necessary--will be fulfilled by 
another, more robust, bigger, bolder pandemic relief program. I hope we 
will have the same bipartisan support that we saw at the end of this 
year for the latest. I hope we will overcome the divisions that 
prevented us from doing what is really necessary and adding $1,400 to 
the $600 already provided.
  We need to do more for small businesses. Yes, there will be another 
round of PPP payments, but this chasm faced by restaurants, retailers, 
and small businesses struggling to keep their doors open, keep their 
people on payroll during the holidays--we have seen them all and talked 
to them. Their stories are riveting and heartbreaking. Businesspeople 
have poured their hearts and souls and lives into these businesses, 
only to see them threatened with extinction.
  This crisis has a racial justice aspect that cannot be ignored 
because disproportionately, the businesses that have failed are Black- 
and Brown-owned. Disproportionately, the lives lost have been in Black 
and Brown communities. Disproportionately, the jobs lost have been in 
those same communities--Black and Brown communities that have suffered 
more than any other as a result of this pandemic. So we need to make 
sure that they receive the vaccine as well as the therapeutics and 
testing that are necessary to save lives.
  We are in the midst of a racial justice moment that affects policing 
and criminal justice, but it also affects our schools, where the ZIP 
Code of a child's residence can mean the difference between a quality 
education or not; where Black and Brown communities suffer twice or 
three times the death rate of others as a result of this pandemic; 
where job discrimination still exists and where, in housing, redlining 
still afflicts these communities; and where environmental quality--
rivers, lakes, air can still be disproportionately contaminated and 
polluted in communities inhabited by Black and Brown people.
  We are here in the last day of an unprecedented and catastrophic 
year. More than 342,000 of our fellow Americans are dead as a result of 
this insidious virus--over 342,000 gifts unwrapped, places at the table 
left open, and many of them without a final goodbye. This past year 
will go down as one of the hardest in our history.
  I think we all hope for a better year, but it will come only if we 
take the kind of action that apparently my Republican colleagues are 
failing to provide today, which is to meet the need to match the moment 
of the desperate and dire straits of so many Americans.
  The failure to approve an additional $1,400 and pass the CASH Act is 
a haunting omission. My hope is that the hopes of a hurting nation will 
be met in this new year, that the calls for justice and relief will be 
heard, and that the ailing and sick--not just physically but 
emotionally--will be met. This crisis has been one of physical health 
care but also mental health care, and the emotional strains can be seen 
in the rising rates of domestic violence, substance abuse disorder and 
addiction, and so many other areas where mental and emotional stress 
and anxiety have taken a toll. The hopes of a fearful and grieving 
nation rests on our shoulders, and we cannot let them down.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.

                          ____________________