[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 134 (Friday, July 30, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5197-S5201]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

       INVESTING IN A NEW VISION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND SURFACE 
       TRANSPORTATION IN AMERICA ACT--Motion to Proceed--Resumed

  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 3684, which the 
clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to H.R. 3684, a bill to authorize funds 
     for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and 
     transit programs, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from California.
  Mr. PADILLA. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Padilla). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                         Remembering Carl Levin

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, this has been a week. I spoke earlier about 
the loss of my good friend Senator Mike Enzi, as many other Senators 
have, out of respect, from both sides of the aisle.
  Yesterday, another good friend, Senator Carl Levin, left us. And, 
again, there will be respect shown, I am sure, by both Republicans and 
Democrats because he was of the school that worked with both.
  I had the privilege of being here throughout his decades of service, 
and he epitomized what the Senate should be. He was a person of 
complete integrity; a person who knew the issues, whatever they were, 
that he was going to be discussing and working on. He knew them as well 
as anybody else. But everybody knew, Republican or Democrat, that they 
could take his word for anything.
  And I couldn't help but think last night, if more Senators had 
listened to him at the time of the major Iraq war, supposedly because 
Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which of course he did 
not; when we had been told by many in the administration they had 
evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, when they did not; and 
because he actually took the time to read the intelligence--he was one 
of three Senators, another one being the vice chairman of the 
Intelligence Committee, a conservative Democrat from Florida--they 
would come to us and tell us specifically what parts of the 
intelligence we should read, as did a third Senator.
  Those who actually took the time to read it, as, of course, Senator 
Levin did, voted against the war. They knew there were no weapons of 
mass destruction. They knew that this would ultimately put America at 
risk. And, unfortunately, by having to transfer forces from Afghanistan 
that were closing in on the Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden and his 
followers, the people who had organized 9/11 and the strike against us, 
he was able to escape and stayed loose for years, until captured during 
the Obama administration.
  But Carl Levin I remember saying: Please, do your due diligence.
  He and Vice Chairman Bob Graham and a third Senator kept saying: Read 
the intelligence.
  Those who did voted no.
  But I could give hundreds of other times when we would gather around 
Carl Levin, Republicans and Democrats alike, and say: What do you think 
of this issue? What did you study?
  And we would get it, chapter and verse. It was always accurate.
  He was what I considered a Senator's Senator. He was the type of 
Senator I hoped to be able to serve with when I first came to the U.S. 
Senate.

[[Page S5198]]

  I remember sitting in the Gallery up there as a young law student at 
Georgetown Law School. Between classes or exams, I would come here just 
to watch the U.S. Senate, and I would see so many giants in both 
parties speaking, and I thought how wonderful it would be to serve in 
such a body. When Carl Levin was here, that was the example--his 
brother in the House of Representatives; he in the Senate.
  And I remember Carl, with his sense of humor, speaking of his mother, 
whom I also got to meet, when she was asked by the press: What do you 
think about one son in the U.S. House of Representatives and the other 
in the U.S. Senate? Does that make you proud?
  And she said: Well, if it is what makes them happy, I think that is 
good.
  And Carl would just say that with his own self-deprecating sense of 
humor.
  I hope Senators will look at his life and realize, whichever party 
you belonged to, this is a person you could follow. When he did lead 
the Armed Services Committee, he listened to everybody in this body, 
from the right to the left, and studiously considered their concerns.
  I would not interrupt the Senate here, but I mentioned him because 
this is what a Senator should be, as I said earlier with Senator Mike 
Enzi. Losing two people I admired, two close friends, two people who 
worked to make the Senate better--let us all pause and try and do the 
same.
  I appreciate Senators coming together yesterday in the legislation 
that Senator Shelby and I put forward to help our Afghan translators 
who worked with us, to bring them to safety, and to help our Capitol 
Police and those who work around the Capitol to be able to recover from 
January 6. And it gave me hope that they came together by a 98-to-0 
vote and passed that legislation.
  Let's take a break, and let's think of Carl Levin. Let's try and do 
more of that.
  I think of my days as a young student looking down on this body, and 
I look at it now as the dean of the Senate. I have seen the good and 
the bad. I prefer the good.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Majority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, now, for the second time this week, 
sadly, the Senate has lost a greatly admired former colleague. Last 
night, Carl Levin--Michigan's longest-serving Senator, a Harvard-
educated civil rights attorney, and former taxidriver--passed away 
after a battle with cancer.
  Over the years, many have been called model Senators, but few have 
earned the title like Carl. He was no frills, hyperfocused on policy 
and results, and fearless in taking on entrenched powers.
  When the Pentagon was profligate, you could be sure that Carl Levin 
was there. When large financial institutions fleeced consumers, you 
could be sure Carl Levin was there. And whenever and wherever the 
interests of assembly line employees, the shift workers, or the 
servicemembers were at stake, you could be sure Carl Levin was there.
  He was Mr. Integrity. Like a true son of the ``Motor City,'' he 
punched the clock at an auto assembly plant as a young man. Decades 
later, he proudly carried his 1953 union membership card in his wallet, 
a silent reminder of where he came from and who he fought for.
  He was certainly not a Senator out of central casting. As the 
tributes came pouring in from all corners of the country, the word most 
often you would see associated with Carl is ``disheveled''--the rumpled 
suit, the stark-white hair, the glasses perched precariously at the end 
of his nose.
  Well, he may have been disheveled in his appearance, but there was 
nothing--nothing--disheveled about his mind and principles.
  It reminds me of one story. In 2006--I try to teach some of my caucus 
members some certain Yiddish words, and one of them is ``schlumpy.'' It 
means disheveled, not dressed to the best.
  So when Harry Reid heard that Bernie Sanders was coming to the 
Senate, he got up at our caucus lunch one day, and he said: Well, we 
will finally find somebody here in the caucus more schlumpy than 
Schumer: Bernie Sanders.
  Carl Levin said: I object to that; I am the most schlumpy.
  He had a great sense of humor. He was a fine man. His intellect was 
fierce, a sharpened blade designed to cut to the core of an issue, or 
sometimes cut through the unimpressive answers of a witness in front of 
his committee. To modify a well-known expression, one of the most 
dangerous places in Washington was the witness chair across from 
Chairman Levin.
  And while he was not a veteran himself, the Armed Forces of the 
United States could not count on a better friend than Carl Levin. For 
more than three decades, the not-so-invisible hand of Senator Levin 
shaped America's defense policy. There were large and weighty issues: 
matters of war and peace, terrorism and national security, billion-
dollar budget decisions.
  But there was also the Michigan Korean war veteran, denied a 
veterans' loan because his military records were destroyed in a fire. 
It would have been enough for Carl to set his office to the task, find 
the lost records, and ship them off in a manila envelope. Instead, Carl 
went to visit with him in person and deliver four service medals.
  He was an example that inspired and one to aspire to. Because of who 
he was and what he accomplished, the Senate, the State of Michigan, 
these entire United States, and our globe, our world, are much better 
off thanks to Mr. Carl Levin.


                             Infrastructure

  Mr. President, on another matter entirely, later today, we will vote 
on the nomination of Ur Mendoza Jaddou, of California, to be Director 
of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. This is a Department 
in desperate need of capable leadership after four chaotic years under 
the Trump administration.
  The daughter of Mexican and Iraqi immigrants, Ms. Jaddou would be the 
first woman to ever lead the USCIS, and I am confident she has the 
skills, expertise, and experience to do the job well.
  In a short time, the Senate will also take a procedural vote to move 
forward with a bipartisan infrastructure bill. I expect the vote will 
receive the same significant margin of support today as it did on 
Wednesday.
  Once Senators agree to proceed to debate on the bill, it is my 
intention to offer the text of the bipartisan agreement as a substitute 
amendment, making it the base of the bill on the floor.
  The Senate remains on track to reach our goal of passing both a 
bipartisan infrastructure bill and a budget resolution, with 
reconciliation instructions, before the start of the August recess. It 
is an ambitious deadline, absolutely, but the hard work put in by 
Senators and staff means that we are on the right track to get it done.
  Given the bipartisan nature of the bill, the Senate should be able to 
process this legislation rather quickly. We may need the weekend. We 
may vote on several amendments. But with the cooperation of our 
Republican colleagues, I believe we can finish the bipartisan 
infrastructure bill in a matter of days.
  While our job is not nearly complete, I do want to take a moment this 
morning to recognize the sweat that our Members and staff have already 
put in. Senators from the bipartisan group have worked long hours for 
many weeks to first reach, and then finalize, this agreement.
  I want to thank Senators Sinema and Portman for taking the lead, to 
the entire G-22 group--as it is called--as well as the White House for 
helping pull all of this together.
  There has been significant work behind the scenes. In order to 
prepare the legislative text, staff members from our committees, the 
group of bipartisan Senators, and the legislative counsel have worked 
not just long hours but endured sleepless nights to finish writing the 
bill.
  And the work I am talking about--a massive down payment toward 
rebuilding our Nation's infrastructure--will

[[Page S5199]]

benefit our economy for years and decades to come.


             Unanimous Consent Agreement--Executive Session

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that upon the 
disposition of the Jaddou nomination, the Senate remain in executive 
session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. 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 PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cortez Masto). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The majority whip is recognized.


                         Remembering Carl Levin

  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, this has been a sad week in the U.S. 
Senate.
  First, we lost Senator Mike Enzi of Wyoming and last night brought 
news of the passing of Senator Carl Levin of Michigan.
  Carl was an extraordinary Senator and an extraordinary person. I 
remember after I had been in the Senate a few years, my friends back 
home said: Well, who are the real stars of the U.S. Senate?
  There were many who were as obvious as could be, Ted Kennedy, for 
example. I said: There are two you probably don't know much about that 
I would turn to time and again if I had to make an important decision, 
either policy or politics, that I know I would get a thoughtful, 
intelligent response. One was Paul Sarbanes of Maryland, and the other 
was Carl Levin of Michigan. Those two, more than many of the colleagues 
I served with, really represented the best of the U.S. Senate.
  Carl Levin was brilliant, nothing short of brilliant, and he was my 
friend. Many times we sat together and talked. I reflected on the way 
he approached legislation. Many of us think about the big-picture items 
and leave the details to staff--not Carl. Somebody would bring an 
amendment to the floor. Carl would say: I would like to get a copy of 
that. That, in itself, is unusual. We usually trust our staff to look 
at copies of amendments.
  Then he would say, as he read the amendment: Can I take this home 
tonight and read it and tell you what I think about it in the morning? 
You knew that wasn't a pose; that was a fact. Carl took his job that 
seriously.
  He served in the Senate, representing his beloved State of Michigan, 
for 36 years. When he retired in 2014, he left a legacy in the Senate, 
certainly, of important and good legislation but, more importantly, of 
the image of a real Senator. He left a powerful example of what we can 
achieve in life and in politics when we choose integrity over ideology 
and common good over confrontation. His keen intellect, his honesty and 
fairmindedness, decency and unfailing civility earned him the respect 
of Senators on both sides of the aisle.
  The list of laws that he can claim to have authored is long and 
historic.
  If you knew his background, you understood where this man came from 
and what made him what he was in the Senate.
  First and foremost, he was a son of Detroit, MI. He showed up in 
Washington in 1979. He was driving a 1974 American-made Dodge Dart with 
a hole in the floorboard. He was still driving that car 10 years later. 
That is how devoted he was to the U.S. auto industry, its workers, and 
unions.
  He wasn't flashy. I don't think he owned a shirt of any other color 
than white. And when we would go on the informal weekends with our 
families, he would be wearing a white shirt, which he rolled the cuffs 
up on to merely let his hair down and be informal. He was just that 
humble a man.
  But when General Motors and Chrysler faced potential collapse in 
2008, he knew what he had to do. He pressed Congress and the new 
President to support those companies with billions of dollars in loans, 
and thank God he did. He saved jobs and saved companies that are still 
major players in the industry. By the time he retired 6 years later, 
the loans to those companies had been paid off, and the companies were 
earning record profits.

  His work on the Armed Services Committee is known to all. For 36 
years, he served on that committee. He was the champion of America's 
military and military families and veterans and one of Congress's most 
respected voices on national security and the military issues. He voted 
for the repeal of don't ask, don't tell when it was far from a popular 
thing to do anywhere, and he voted against the war in Iraq. I felt 
honored to be joining him in that vote. He and I were 2 of only 23 
Senators who voted no on that, sadly, misguided war, and I will tell 
you for sure, before I made a final decision, I sat down in that seat 
right--I can see it from here, right next to Carl Levin--and we talked 
about what it meant. It was amazing. I was making that decision before 
an election, just a few weeks, but he was making that decision as 
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. It was a brave vote, 
and history has shown that he was right.
  A Jewish publication in Detroit once wrote that Carl Levin and his 
brother--my pal--former Congressman Sandy Levin, both deserved what 
they called ``honorable menschen awards,'' with the accent on 
``mensch,'' for their historic service to America. I couldn't agree 
more.
  Loretta and I extend our deepest condolences to Sandy and the entire 
Levin family, especially to Carl's beloved wife Barbara, their children 
and grandchildren.
  And to their cousin Dan Levin, my pal in Chicago, IL, I know how 
proud the Levin family was of their name and reputation. It was well 
earned in whatever they chose to do--law, politics, business. Carl 
Levin was a great man and a good friend. I will truly miss him.


                              Immigration

  Madam President, last night, we had an opportunity. We sat down with 
the President of the United States for more than an hour. We were 
discussing with him and with Vice President Harris our Nation's need 
for immigration reform.
  The Presiding Officer was there, Senator Menendez, Senator Lujan, 
Senator Padilla, along with our colleagues in the House. We got to 
speak to the President in a very informal setting.
  I want to thank President Biden for taking the time to meet with us. 
He could have taken the whole day on a victory lap in the Senate after 
passing the historic infrastructure plan or at least starting the 
debate on it 2 nights ago. But instead President Biden said: I want to 
meet with you. He gave us his undivided attention for more than an 
hour. That is because President Biden understands that we cannot wait 
any longer to fix America's broken immigration system.
  It has been 35 years--35 years--since we passed any meaningful 
immigration bill. We passed it here. It was known at the time as the 
Simpson-Mazzoli bill, and it was sent to President Ronald Reagan, who 
signed it. Critics of what was signed called it amnesty, but it was a 
sincere and bipartisan effort to deal with a broken immigration system. 
We have since learned that the immigration system is broken again in 
many significant ways. This effort that we are discussing now has been 
decades in the making.
  Back when we passed that original immigration reform under President 
Reagan, our adversary in the world was the Soviet Union. ``Top Gun'' 
was the most popular movie in America. Under the last administration, 
our broken immigration system absolutely collapsed. Former President 
Donald Trump's zero-tolerance policy at the southern border was not 
only inhumane, it was ineffective. It made our Nation weaker and less 
safe.
  The hatred that many people in the Trump administration had for 
immigrants was palpable. I can go through the list of names, but I 
don't want to give them any satisfaction to hear their names on the 
floor of the Senate. But what they think of people who were not lucky 
enough to be born in America is just sad, in many ways, disgusting.
  Some of my Republican colleagues have tried to blame President Biden, 
who has been in office for 6 months, with the failure of our 
immigration system, but the reality is Donald Trump was the one who 
provoked the crisis at our border.

[[Page S5200]]

  Do you remember the speeches when he talked about all the rapists and 
murderers who were coming in, wanting to live in the United States? Do 
you remember what he did to our Muslim friends and their families when 
he cut off immigration from their countries?
  His administration implemented policies that blocked nearly all 
claims by asylum seekers. They also prevented members of law 
enforcement from exercising prosecutorial discretion, which made it 
harder for ICE and DHS to apprehend true criminals. Former President 
Trump's hate-based policies created a massive bottleneck at our border 
and a giant backlog of cases that our courts are still working through.
  President Biden understands that closing our doors to families and 
children fleeing violence is not only cruel and inhumane, it is not 
good policy. And it is contrary to the values of this country. The 
stories are legendary about when the United States closed its borders 
in World War II under a Democratic President, Franklin Roosevelt, 
turning away people who were escaping the Nazis in Europe, sending them 
back to their deaths in the Holocaust.
  We learned a bitter lesson during that war that that is not what the 
United States is all about. And we have tried to make it up ever since, 
trying to lead the world when it came to refugees embraced in America. 
And those refugees have proven over and over again that they are 
positive influences on this Nation.
  The Biden administration is bringing order to immigration 
enforcement, and it will take some time, but it is on its way. Since 
President Biden took office, roughly 7 in 10 individuals apprehended at 
our border have been denied entry into the country--7 out of 10. You 
wouldn't know that from the speeches given on the other side. 
Of course, there should be exceptions to the policy, humanitarian 
exceptions. Our Nation has a moral obligation, a moral responsibility, 
to provide refuge to families and unaccompanied children fleeing gang 
violence, natural disasters, paramilitary violence, and other crises.

  This is at the heart of our values as a nation, and under President 
Biden's leadership, our Nation is no longer tearing babies away from 
mothers' arms.
  I just read a story in the newspaper yesterday about efforts that are 
being made in Guatemala and other countries, going deep into the 
forests and jungles to try to find families whose children were taken 
away from them by the policies of the previous administration. The 
lengths we are going to, to try to reunite them, were totally 
unnecessary if they had just kept records of the families and children, 
but they tore these kids away from their mothers and had no plan at all 
to reunite them.
  President Biden also recognizes that just fixing the mess of Donald 
Trump is not enough. We need to provide a path to citizenship for 
Dreamers and others who make our economy better every day and who help 
over the years to add to its growth. The vast majority of Americans 
agree with this--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Tens of 
thousands of Dreamers have been saving American lives during this 
pandemic as nurses and doctors and first responders. Tens of thousands 
more help the economy grow every day as teachers, engineers, business 
owners, entrepreneurs, essential workers. They even have volunteered 
for our military. They respect our country so much, though so many in 
the Senate do not respect them.
  The Dreamers need to be provided a path to citizenship as well as the 
farmworkers who are toiling in sweltering heat right now, right now at 
this moment, in this terrible heat that we are witnessing across the 
country. They are out in the fields, picking the crops that will be on 
our tables today, tomorrow, and beyond.
  We had a recent hearing on farmworkers in the Senate Judiciary 
Committee. One of the Republican Senators said: Here we are talking 
about mass amnesty, giving these people an automatic path to 
citizenship.
  Automatic? Read the bill that passed the House of Representatives. Do 
you know what it takes to be eligible for citizenship as a farmworker 
under that bill? Nineteen years of back-breaking work in the fields. 
Automatic? Nineteen years of slaving away at jobs that Americans don't 
sign up for--ever--and a possibility at the end of 19 years that they 
can be citizens. They should be given that chance. Every day, these 
workers head out to the fields and do back-breaking labor, sometimes 
for 14 hours straight, just to put food on our tables. Giving these 
people a chance to become citizens is the right thing to do.
  It will help our economy. Reforms of our immigration system could add 
$150 billion to spending power in our economy every year and, over the 
next 10 years, boost our Nation's GDP by $1.5 trillion. That is enough 
money to pay off every student loan in America just by doing the right 
thing for immigrants in our country.
  Providing these essential workers a path to citizenship puts more 
money in the pockets of every American. It will create 400,000 new 
jobs, increase each American's annual wage by $600. These people, when 
they are given some clear picture of what their future will be, can 
plan it, can start making decisions that in the long haul will make 
them better and our Nation stronger. That is what it means to bring 
these immigrants into the sunlight and to give them a chance to be part 
of America.
  By nearly every measure, a path to citizenship is an investment in 
our Nation's future. Last night, President Joe Biden agreed. It can't 
wait any longer. There is going to be a bill soon called 
reconciliation.
  In 2005, Senate Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to 
dramatically increase the number of green cards available to 
immigrants. During the Trump administration, Republicans used the 
budget reconciliation process to enact a $1.9 trillion tax cut for 
wealthy donors and corporate fat cats, and they tried to use it to 
repeal the Affordable Care Act. So there is ample precedent for passing 
important legislation through budget reconciliation.
  I have tried for many years to pass a citizenship program through 
regular order. Senate Republicans have obstructed bipartisan 
immigration reform time and again, filibustering the DREAM Act five 
times. In 20 years, I have brought the DREAM Act to the floor five 
times and been stopped by the filibuster. They repeatedly blocked 
bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform, passing the Gang of 8 bill 
but never returning to it.
  This year, I am convinced bipartisan immigration negotiations are not 
going to lead us to where we need to be. Republicans made unreasonable 
demands in that process to limit the path to citizenship to a number 
that was dreamed up by President Trump as fair--650,000 current DACA 
recipients. Sounds like a lot. However, that approach would exclude 
Dreamers who have been blocked from the program for years by President 
Trump. Republicans also wanted to attach partisan provisions to block 
innocent asylum seekers and to cut legal family immigration.
  For all of these reasons, I believe the only viable option, at this 
time, for passing a path to citizenship is through reconciliation. The 
overwhelming majority of Americans support this pathway for Dreamers, 
many of whom have risked their lives to save Americans during the 
pandemic. This is a critical component of our economic recovery and 
rebuilding our communities. It cannot wait any longer.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The 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 PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senate 
return to regular order.


                             Vote on Motion

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, all postcloture time 
has expired.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.

[[Page S5201]]

  The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. MORAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kelly). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Marshall), the 
Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), 
the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), and the Senator from 
Florida (Mr. Rubio).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Kansas (Mr. 
Marshall) would have voted ``nay.''
  The result was announced--yeas 66, nays 28, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 288 Leg.]

                                YEAS--66

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Lujan
     Manchin
     Markey
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Romney
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Tillis
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden
     Young

                                NAYS--28

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Braun
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Hagerty
     Hawley
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Moran
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Toomey
     Tuberville
     Wicker

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Inhofe
     Marshall
     Paul
     Risch
     Rounds
     Rubio
  The motion was agreed to

                          ____________________