Congressional Record, Volume 167 Issue 171 (Thursday, September 30, 2021)

[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 171 (Thursday, September 30, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6801-S6810]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

______

EXTENDING GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND DELIVERING EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will proceed to the consideration of H.R. 5305, which the clerk
will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

A bill (H.R. 5305) making continuing appropriations for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for providing
emergency assistance, and for other purposes.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. ROSEN). The Republican leader is
recognized.

Government Funding

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, today the Senate will consider and
pass a government funding bill and do our part to avoid a shutdown.
The continuing resolution contains a number of key items that
Republicans called for. That includes supplemental funds to help
resettle vetted Afghan refugees and hurricane recovery aid for
Louisiana.
It is seriously disappointing that the Democratic side would not let
us include funding for Israel's Iron Dome in the base text. It honestly
baffles me that defensive aid to our ally Israel has become a thorny
subject for the political left.
But, overall, this is encouraging progress. The Democratic majority
has begun to realize that the way forward on basic governing duties
matches the roadmap that Republicans have been laying out for months.
On government funding, what Republicans laid out all along was a clean
continuing resolution without the poison pill of a debt limit increase.
That is exactly what we will pass today. Earlier this week, the
Democratic leader tried to muscle through something different through a
partisan jam, but it failed. Now the government will be funded as we
laid out. That is step 1.
Next will come step 2: the debt ceiling. And we have clearly laid out
the way forward there as well. As I have explained since last July--
last July--Democrats need to begin the fast-track process for handling
this issue through reconciliation. Clumsy attempts at partisan jams by
the majority will not change that reality. It didn't work on government
funding, and it won't work on the debt limit. They will just be wasting
valuable time.
I think this reality is hopefully starting to dawn on our colleagues.
Multiple leading House Democrats acknowledged just this week that their
unified Democratic government is fully capable--fully capable--of fast-
tracking a debt limit increase on their own. Nonpartisan experts have
confirmed that they have plenty of time to get this done before late
October.
At the same time that the Senate Democratic leader says, incorrectly,
that he doesn't have enough time, he has spent weeks of the Senate's
time processing midlevel nominations. Today, the majority is spending
multiple hours to confirm a Bureau of

[[Page S6802]]

Land Management nominee who literally collaborated with ecoterrorists,
fiddling away day after day after day while they pretend they lack the
time to do their most basic job.
Senate Republicans have been totally transparent. We have given
Democrats a step-by-step guide to governing in this environment and
months of advance notice to get it done. The conclusion to draw from
this week is very clear: Clumsy efforts at partisan jams do not work.
What works is when the majority accepts the reality of the situation.
We are able to fund the government today because the majority
accepted reality. The same thing will need to happen on the debt limit
next week.

Tribute to Sue Tharp

Now, Madam President, on an entirely different matter, few public
servants know Western Kentucky and its people as well as my good friend
Sue Tharp. Sue has served as my team's Paducah-based field assistant
since 1985. She is retiring this month after nearly four decades of
uninterrupted service to the Commonwealth.
Sue holds the record for being the longest continually serving
employee from my entire career in public service. She has been with me
since day one of my Senate service.
So, today, I would like to honor this one-of-a-kind Kentuckian whose
steady leadership in Western Kentucky has been integral to my office's
mission to serve the Bluegrass and the people who call it home.
Now, when you ask Sue's colleagues to describe their coworker, you
hear one word again and again and again: dedicated. In 36 years, Sue
has scarcely missed a day in the office. She tackles each constituent
problem with her quick wit and her smile. Her knowledge of Western
Kentucky is encyclopedic. And Sue has played a key part in training
almost every other field staffer on our team, sharing hard-won wisdom
with the next generation of public servants.
So when I think of Sue's service to Kentucky, two images come to
mind. The first is Sue winning over even the most impassioned callers
to my office, whether the call started out friendly or not. Sue will
listen carefully, record their concerns, and do all she can to help.
But then she also invariably will end up discussing other favorite
topics, such as quilting. Sue is an avid volunteer at the National
Quilt Museum in Paducah. So when the conversation wraps up, Sue will be
smiling, and you know the person who just hung up on the other end is
smiling too.
The second image comes from an event called Fancy Farm, which is an
annual picnic in Graves County. It is the crown jewel of Western
Kentucky's heritage. Sue is one of the event's most enthusiastic
attendees. She often travels down early to peruse the area's many
antique stores. She loves attending the church barbecue, taking in the
speeches, and cheering with the crowd. Any politician who steps up to
that podium is guaranteed to notice Sue amidst the throng.
Sue's day job has been public service for more than three decades,
but even that hasn't soaked up all of her love and service for her
community. She is also an enthusiastic volunteer, a frequent
participant in Paducah's ambassador program, and one of the city's all-
around biggest boosters.
If you sample a Paducah boat tour or roll into town for a ribbon-
cutting, it might well be Sue Tharp welcoming you to town, decked out
in the ambassador's characteristic red jacket. Visit the Quilt Museum,
and it will be Sue handing you a brochure. Vacation in one of Western
Kentucky's beautiful parks, and Sue Tharp will be waving to you from
the door of her RV.
Sue's dedication to Western Kentucky and its people is boundless. For
all these years, she understood that while my staff report to me, all
of us report to the people of Kentucky. In fact, at one point I believe
Sue even lived directly across the street from our Paducah office.
So while Sue is departing our team, I am positive she isn't finished
serving Kentucky. This is just the next chapter. More time to
volunteer, more time to be generous to her friends and her neighbors,
and more time with her husband Dan and son Benjamin.
So, Sue, I couldn't be more grateful. Thank you for your decades of
hard work and for your lasting impact on the Commonwealth.

Tribute to Jane Lee

Madam President, on one final matter, the pressing matters I
discussed at the beginning of my remarks suggest I could not find a
more appropriate time to honor the sterling staff expert who has
advised me on budget issues and appropriations for over 5 years. But,
in another sense, it pains me to say there couldn't be a worse time
because the occasion for this tribute is that Jane Lee is soon taking
leave of the Senate and taking the next step in her career.
Jane arrived in my office with a big job to do but the perfect skill
set to do it. She studied at a couple of schools called Stanford and
Columbia. She had worked in the private sector, risen through the ranks
at OMB during the Bush 43 administration, worked for a House Budget
chairman named Paul Ryan, and held leading rolls with Senate
Appropriations and Republican Whip John Cornyn.
Jane's resume was impeccable, her references unimpeachable. She was
already a force of nature on Capitol Hill, so my expectations, as you
can imagine, were high from the start. But for about 5\1/2\ years, day
in and day out, through a never-ending catalog of serious challenges,
Jane kept raising the bar higher and higher.
Jane's colleagues throughout the Senate admire her determination and
her dogged focus. She is methodical and meticulous. She grasps both the
big political picture and the finest policy details much more capably
than most people could hope to grasp either.
When you handle budget talks and funding negotiations for a
leadership office, you are kind of a hybrid player-coach to offices and
committees all across the Senate. Jane is a skilled leader. She can get
a diverse team driving toward a goal with warmth and good humor but
also tenacity and total professionalism.
For countless major bipartisan and bicameral compromise bills over
the past 5 years, Jane has been one of very last staff experts on
either side holding the pen. She is a principled fighter, but once
negotiations concluded, everyone on both sides trusted Jane to be an
honorable and honest broker. That speaks volumes.
Earlier this week, one of Jane's colleagues remarked simply, ``I
don't think I've ever worked with someone like Jane.'' This turns out
to be the universal consensus of everyone. Her knowledge and her
instincts spill outside her portfolio and make everyone look better.
The high standards to which she holds herself are infectious.
She marshals the knowledge and the relationships that come with many
years of government service but also inexhaustible earnestness, energy,
and enthusiasm for the fray.
So Jane is exactly the kind of person you would hope to find in the
government, just the kind of worker a Senate office is lucky to find,
and just the sort of public servant the country deserves.
I don't think anyone would be terribly surprised if, one day, the
Senate finds itself refamiliarizing ourselves with Jane's
qualifications in a formal capacity.
I have to note that Jane would hasten to redirect all this praise
toward her parents Michael and Jean, as well as her grandmother Hee
Soon. She is a proud daughter of first-generation Americans and small
business entrepreneurs whose love of country and commitment to hard
work have shaped their daughter's life at every step.
At clutch moments, these qualities have benefited not just me, not
just our conference, but our entire country. Today, one such time
especially stands out in my memory.
It was a year and a half ago when COVID thrust our country into a
health crisis and an economic crisis at the very same time. During the
bipartisan scramble that built a historic CARES Act, Jane, our Swiss
Army knife, wound up as my liaison to the Small Business Committee. She
poured herself into helping Senators set up, preserve, and protect the
landmark Paycheck Protection Program that saved a huge, huge number of
jobs and countless small businesses exactly like the ones she grew up
watching her parents manage.
But while Jane's commitment to her work has been peerless, her
commitment to her family is greater still. Her beloved husband Tom and
her son Mitchell and her parents and grandmother need to see more of
her than

[[Page S6803]]

her bottomless Senate portfolio has often permitted. So while the whole
institution will sorely miss her, we also join her in celebrating the
new adventures to come.
To our incredibly competent budget expert, our cherished colleague,
and one of the Senate's most talented jazz and rock-and-roll singers,
we say not just ``farewell'' and ``good luck'' but ``bravo'' on a
simply outstanding performance.

Recognition of the Majority Leader

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.

H.R. 5305

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I begin this morning with some good
news: Today, the Senate will pass a continuing resolution that will
eliminate the possibility of a government shutdown tonight. The CR we
are voting on will keep the government funded until December 3, provide
funding to help process and resettle Afghan refugees, and finally
deliver on critical disaster aid for Americans battered by the storms
and wildfires this summer.
As part of today's agreement, we will hold a vote series starting at
10:30 this morning on three amendments offered by Senators Cotton,
Marshall, and Braun. We will hold a vote on final passage soon
thereafter, and I am confident the House will approve this measure
later this afternoon and send it to the President's desk before funding
runs out.
This is a good outcome, one I am happy we are getting done. With so
many things to take care of here in Washington, the last thing the
American people need is for the government to grind to a halt. But, of
course, we have more work to do. Just as our Republican colleagues
realize that a government shutdown would be catastrophic, they should
realize that a default on the national debt would be even worse. I will
have more to say on this later.

Nominations

Madam President, now on nominations, despite a week marked by
Republican obstruction, the Senate is making great progress on our
responsibility to confirm President Biden's nominees to his
administration.
Last week, a handful of Members made a scene here on the Senate floor
in a doomed effort to stymie a number of nominees critical to our
national defense. I am glad to say that, over the course of the week,
we have successfully confirmed these individuals despite these
theatrics from that handful of Republicans Senators.
This Chamber will not allow anyone to hijack the confirmation process
to score political points and to prevent these nominations from being
approved. It will not happen. We will move forward. It will take a
little more time, but we will get it done.
Today, the Senate will keep going. After passing the CR, we will turn
to the nomination of Rohit Chopra to serve as the Director of the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Mr. Chopra is the right man to
lead this Agency tasked with protecting Americans from predatory
financial institutions. He is a veteran of the CFPB from the Obama
years, where he specialized in protecting students from unscrupulous
practices of student loan providers.
Under President Trump, who didn't give a hoot about the average
person, the CFPB spent more time protecting the likes of payday lenders
and for-profit colleges than American consumers. With Mr. Chopra's
confirmation, the CFPB will return to fighting on the side of the
American worker instead of big financial institutions. I look forward
to his confirmation today.
After that, we will turn to the nomination of Tracy Stone-Manning to
lead the Bureau of Land Management. Few Agencies are as important for
protecting and promoting America's public lands. In the years to come,
the BLM will play an even greater strategic role in our government's
effort to fight climate change.
Ms. Stone-Manning is a familiar face here in the Senate. She served
as a staffer for Senator Tester before moving to Montana to work for
then-Governor Bullock. As head of Montana's environmental agency, she
earned the reputation not only as a skilled policymaker but also as an
honest broker, one who commanded the respect of conservationists and
ranchers alike.
Of course, you would never guess that by listening to some of the
histrionics coming from the other side. Unable to disqualify Ms. Stone-
Manning on the merits, which is so obvious to just about anyone who
studies it, some of our Republican colleagues have used her nomination
to launch cheap, out-of-context attacks. Thankfully, no one is taking
these attacks seriously.
Because of her exceptional qualifications, Tracy Stone-Manning has
broad support of the Democratic caucus to lead the BLM, and I expect
her nomination to be approved later today.
Finally, I am also pleased that today President Biden is announcing
the nomination of another outstanding judge from my home State: Dale Ho
to serve as district judge for the Southern District of New York.
Like so many of President Biden's judicial nominees, Mr. Ho is a
prominent civil rights lawyer and voting rights expert. A graduate of
Yale and Princeton, a veteran of the NAACP and the ACLU, Mr. Ho would
bring an impressive resume to the judiciary. I am thrilled that
President Biden has taken my advice to nominate Mr. Ho, and I look
forward to working on his confirmation.
In a more general note on this issue, I am proud that the Senate is
not only increasing the demographic diversity on the bench--more women,
more people of color, and more individuals from immigrant families--but
also its occupational diversity as well--voting rights experts, civil
rights lawyers, public defenders, and more. This is how we work to
strengthen not only diversity in our judiciary but the trust that it
represent all Americans.

Debt Limit

Madam President, finally, on the debt limit, just as our Republican
colleagues realized a government shutdown would be catastrophic, they
should realize that a default on the national debt would be even worse.
Throughout American history, the Federal Government has consistently
paid its debt on time. The unbroken promise is what made the United
States the leading economy in the world for so long, benefiting
countless millions of families. So when we talk about extending the
debt limit, that is what is at stake.
All week long, Senate Democrats presented our Republican colleagues
with reasonable proposals to prevent a default from happening. We
offered to hold a simple majority vote so Democrats could fix the debt
ceiling ourselves. They rejected that offer.
We are not even asking Republicans to vote yes, even though we know
they should, but, instead, just to get out of the way; just get out of
the way, and let us keep the faith and credit in America's finances
intact. Unfortunately, Republicans spent the week solidifying
themselves as the party of default; the party that says America doesn't
pay its bills; the party that would send our economy into unknown and
dangerous territory.
On Monday, Republicans unanimously blocked a measure that would have
funded the government and raised the debt ceiling.
On Tuesday, the Republican leader blocked the proposal to raise the
debt ceiling with only Democratic votes--exactly what Republicans
insisted they wanted from the start.
By Wednesday, it was clear that Republicans were committed not only
to voting in favor of default but even preventing Democrats from
solving this risk crisis on our own.
Every day that Republicans continue their cynical obstruction, they
risk causing irreparable harm to the economy. The last time Republicans
played games with the full faith and credit of the United States, our
sovereign debt was downgraded. This time around, the consequences for
American families could be far worse.
Despite Republicans' intransigence, the facts have not changed. We
must raise the debt ceiling. We cannot allow America to default.
Yesterday, the House approved legislation providing for a clean debt
limit extension until the end of 2022. At the appropriate time, I will
move to proceed to its consideration, which could come as early as next
week.
By now, we are not asking Republicans to vote with us to solve the
debt limit crisis they have created. If they want to oppose this
measure and bring

[[Page S6804]]

us closer to financial disaster, they can write their names in the
history books as the Senators who let the country default for the first
time ever. But Republicans need to get out of the way so Senate
Democrats can address the issue quickly and without needlessly
endangering the stability of our economy.
We cannot afford the risk of a drawn-out, unpredictable process
sought by the minority, which could very well actually cause a default,
no. The way to resolve this crisis is much more simple. Either
Republicans snap out of their insane position and work with Democrats
or they get out of the way while we solve the problem ourselves.

Unanimous Consent Agreement

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the previously
scheduled votes begin at 11:05 a.m. and that all provisions of the
previous order remain in effect.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. SCHUMER. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.

H.R. 5305

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, we will have before us a substitute
amendment identical to H.R. 5305, which we will be voting on today.
H.R. 5305 is the House-passed continuing resolution, except that the
provision raising the debt ceiling has been removed because Republicans
continue to block raising the debt ceiling.
But the stop-gap measure really keeps the government funded through
December 3. It provides $28 billion to help States that have been
ravaged by hurricanes and wildfires. It provides critical assistance to
Afghan refugees who fled the Taliban in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal
from Afghanistan. Many of those refugees have worked with American
forces and helped us. So I urge all members to vote for it.
But I agree with the majority leader that it is shameful we can't
reach an agreement today to raise the debt ceiling and protect the full
faith and credit of the United States. If Republicans don't want to
vote to protect the full faith and credit of the United States, if the
Republicans don't want to vote for the money that pays for the programs
that they had supported under Donald Trump, well, then, stand out of
the way and Democrats can raise the debt ceiling.
Over and over, the last few days, we heard from Members on the other
side of the aisle speak about the importance of passing a continuing
resolution that contained disaster relief to help hurricane-ravaged
States, like Louisiana and Texas. They are pleading for help. Well, we
are about to pass a CR that provides that help.
I have always taken the position that if there is a disaster in any
State, that we should all come together to provide assistance because
we are the United States of America; it is not just one State. Whether
it is my State of Vermont or Texas or any other State, we can provide
the assistance.
But they may go home and say: Hey, we voted to get money, disaster
relief for our hurricane-ravaged States.
Somebody is going to say: Well, wait a minute, where does the money
come from to help recover and build if the U.S. Treasury is literally
out of money?
In other words, they have a position where they can vote for
something that would be popular back home, and it is kind of like ``the
check is in the mail.'' We are not going to give you any money for it,
but, boy, we are going to speak about how important it is to help.
Many Senators here today want to provide a billion dollars to fund
Israel's so-called Iron Dome, even though Israel has not spent the
money we have already given them. Well, we will pass a bill to do just
that. But if there is no money in the U.S. Treasury to pay the bills,
it is nothing but an empty promise to one of our closest allies. We are
voting on a blank check.
According to the Treasury Department, we are going to reach the debt
ceiling in 18 days. Now, I say that because we ought to know what we
are not voting on. What we are not voting on--as the majority leader
pointed out, we are not voting on the debt ceiling.

We could say: Oh, we are helping hurricane-ravaged areas; oh, we are
making others happy with things we vote for, but we are not voting for
the money.
If we don't raise the debt ceiling, once that happens, we run out of
money to pay our men and women in uniform. We all support our men and
women in uniform. We are just not going to put in the money to pay
them. We can't send out Social Security checks. Find a Senator in this
place that would say they are against Social Security. But to put the
money in for it, they are not ready to do that. Just saying: Oh, we all
support our veterans. Of course, we do. We are just not going to put
the money in to support them.
For the first time in history, the U.S. will default on its debt. The
economy will take such a hit that it will take years to recover.
Millions of people will be out of work. Bills will not be paid. Watch
the stock market go down faster than we have ever seen and millions of
Americans' lifetime savings will be at risk. Oh, we are for all of
those--we just--you are on your own.
Now, the Republican Party is playing political games with U.S.
economy and with people's livelihoods, and it is shameful. Senator
McConnell said he would not provide a single Republican vote to raise
the debt ceiling. It is interesting because most of this debt was
incurred under a Republican President and a Republican-controlled
Senate.
But as irresponsible as it is for the Republican leader to say we
won't vote to pay for the debt that we incur, we, on the Democratic
side, are prepared to show what leadership looks like and do it all on
our own. We are willing to pass this with Democratic votes.
But the Republicans continue to filibuster. If we don't resolve the
debt issue in the coming days, make no mistake where the blame lies:
squarely at the feet of the Senate Republicans.
When we go back and say all these wonderful things we have done for
you in the continuing resolution, but we are not going to pay for it--
we need to pass the CR today, of course, to avert a government shutdown
tomorrow. A government shutdown, as we know from those in the last
administration, wastes billions, accomplishes nothing. But it is also
essential not only to pass the continuing resolution, but to unite and
pass the debt limit extension, or there is not going to be money in the
Treasury--no money to pay for the funding of this bill for American
families, for the elderly, for our troops.
Now, prior to the final passage, we will have a series of three
amendment votes. With only 13 hours for the government set to shut
down--13 hours and a few minutes--any one of these amendments could
peril the continuing resolution. They are controversial. They could
complicate House passage. So I would urge a ``no'' vote on all three
amendments and an ``aye'' vote for final passage.
Any one of those things in those three amendments, bring them up as
legislation somewhere else, but don't shut down the government because
you didn't get your political amendments.

Amendment No. 3830

(Purpose: In the nature of a substitute.)
Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I call up amendment No. 3830.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment by number.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. Leahy] proposes an amendment
numbered 3830.

(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of
Amendments.'')

Amendment Nos. 3833, 3831, and 3832 to Amendment No. 3830

Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to call up all
remaining amendments, in order, with respect to H.R. 3505 en bloc, and
ask that they be reported by number.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will report the amendments by number en bloc.

Amendment No. 3833 to Amendment No. 3830

The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. Leahy], for Mr. Cotton and
others, proposes an amendment numbered 3833 to amendment No.
3830.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To modify the immigration benefits for which certain Afghan
nationals are eligible)

Beginning on page 80, strike line 6 and all that follows
through page 83, line 4, and insert the following:

[[Page S6805]]

Sec. 2502. (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, a citizen or national of Afghanistan (or a
person with no nationality who last habitually resided in
Afghanistan) shall be eligible for the benefits described in
subsections (b) and (c) if--
(1) such individual completed security and law enforcement
background checks to the satisfaction of the Secretary of
Homeland Security and was subsequently--
(A) paroled into the United States between July 31, 2021,
and September 30, 2022; or
(B) paroled into the United States after September 30,
2022, and--
(i) is the spouse or child (as defined in section 101(b) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(b))) of an
individual described in subparagraph (A); or
(ii) is the parent or legal guardian of an individual
described in subparagraph (A) who is determined to be an
unaccompanied child (as defined in section 462(g)(2) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g)(2))); and
(2) such individual's parole has not been terminated by the
Secretary of Homeland Security.
(b) Benefits.--An individual described in subsection (a)
shall be eligible for--
(1) resettlement assistance, entitlement programs, and
other benefits available to refugees admitted under section
207 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1157)
until March 31, 2023; and
(2) services described in section 412(d)(2) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1522(d)(2)),
subject to subparagraph (B) of such section, if such
individual is an unaccompanied alien (as defined in section
462(g)(2) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
279(g)(2))).
(c) Expeditious Adjudication of Asylum Applications.--With
respect to an application for asylum under section 208 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1158) filed by an
individual described in subsection (a)--
(1) the initial interview on the asylum application shall
occur not later than 15 days after the date on which such
application is filed; and
(2) in the absence of exceptional circumstances, final
administrative adjudication of the asylum application, not
including administrative appeal, shall be completed not later
than 150 days after the date on which such application is
filed.
(d) Clarification.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, nothing in this Act may be interpreted--
(1) to preclude an individual described in subsection (a)
from applying for or receiving any immigration benefit to
which such individual is otherwise entitled;
(2) to entitle a person described in subsection (a) to
adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident; or
(3) preclude a person described in subsection (a) from
applying for a driver's license or identification card for
which such person is eligible under State law.
(e) Report.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, and every 3 months thereafter, the
Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, shall submit
a report to Congress detailing--
(1) the number of individuals described in subsection (a);
(2) the number of individuals receiving benefits under
subsection (b), including those who are eligible for benefits
as refugees; and
(3) any other information that the Secretary considers
relevant.
(f) Emergency Requirement.--Each amount provided by this
section is designated by Congress as being for an emergency
requirement pursuant to subsections (a)(1) and (b) of section
4001 of S. Con. Res. 14 (117th Congress), the concurrent
resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022.

Amendment No. 3831 to Amendment No. 3830

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. Leahy], for Mr. Marshall, and
others, proposes an amendment numbered 3831 to amendment No.
3830.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To prohibit the use of Federal funds for implementing or
enforcing COVID-19 vaccine mandates)

At the appropriate place in title I of division D, insert
the following:

SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON FUNDING FOR COVID-19 VACCINE
MANDATES.

(a) In General.--None of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available under this Act may be obligated or
expended to implement or enforce a COVID-19 vaccine mandate,
including the promulgation of any rule or regulation with
respect to such a mandate or the enforcement of such a rule
or regulation.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) COVID-19 vaccine mandate.--The term ``COVID-19 vaccine
mandate'' means--
(A) any requirement that a person (other than a Federal
employee or an individual performing work on or in connection
with a contract with the Federal Government) receive a COVID-
19 vaccine, including a requirement that such a person either
receive such a vaccine or be subject to COVID-19 testing; or
(B) any requirement that an employer require an employee or
independent contractor to receive a COVID-19 vaccine,
including by requiring such employee or independent
contractor to either receive such vaccine or be subject to
COVID-19 testing.
(2) Employer.--The term ``employer'' means a person engaged
in a business affecting commerce who has employees or
independent contractors. Such term includes a State or
political subdivision of a State but does not include the
United States.

Amendment No. 3832 to Amendment No. 3830

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. Leahy], for Mr. Braun and
others, proposes an amendment numbered 3832 to amendment No.
3830.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide that Members of Congress may not receive pay after
October 1 of any fiscal year in which Congress has not approved a
concurrent resolution on the budget and passed the regular
appropriations bills)

At the end, add the following:

DIVISION E--NO BUDGET, NO PAY

SEC. 4101. SHORT TITLE.

This division may be cited as the ``No Budget, No Pay
Act''.

SEC. 4102. DEFINITION.

In this division, the term ``Member of Congress''--
(1) has the meaning given under section 2106 of title 5,
United States Code; and
(2) does not include the Vice President.

SEC. 4103. TIMELY APPROVAL OF CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE
BUDGET AND THE APPROPRIATIONS BILLS.

If both Houses of Congress have not approved a concurrent
resolution on the budget as described under section 301 of
the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(2 U.S.C. 632) for a fiscal year before October 1 of that
fiscal year and have not passed all the regular
appropriations bills for the next fiscal year before October
1 of that fiscal year, the pay of each Member of Congress may
not be paid for each day following that October 1 until the
date on which both Houses of Congress approve a concurrent
resolution on the budget for that fiscal year and all the
regular appropriations bills.

SEC. 4104. NO PAY WITHOUT CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET
AND THE APPROPRIATIONS BILLS.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, no funds may be appropriated or otherwise be made
available from the United States Treasury for the pay of any
Member of Congress during any period determined by the
Chairpersons of the Committee on the Budget and the Committee
on Appropriations of the Senate or the Chairpersons of the
Committee on the Budget and the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives under section 4105.
(b) No Retroactive Pay.--A Member of Congress may not
receive pay for any period determined by the Chairpersons of
the Committee on the Budget and the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate or the Chairpersons of the
Committee on the Budget and the Committee on Appropriations
of the House of Representatives under section 4105, at any
time after the end of that period.

SEC. 4105. DETERMINATIONS.

(a) Senate.--
(1) Request for certifications.--On October 1 of each year,
the Secretary of the Senate shall submit a request to the
Chairpersons of the Committee on the Budget and the Committee
on Appropriations of the Senate for certification of
determinations made under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
paragraph (2).
(2) Determinations.--The Chairpersons of the Committee on
the Budget and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate
shall--
(A) on October 1 of each year, make a determination of
whether Congress is in compliance with section 4103 and
whether Senators may not be paid under that section;
(B) determine the period of days following each October 1
that Senators may not be paid under section 4103; and
(C) provide timely certification of the determinations
under subparagraphs (A) and (B) upon the request of the
Secretary of the Senate.
(b) House of Representatives.--
(1) Request for certifications.--On October 1 of each year,
the Chief Administrative Officer of the House of
Representatives shall submit a request to the Chairpersons of
the Committee on the Budget and the Committee on
Appropriations of the House of Representatives for
certification of determinations made under subparagraphs (A)
and (B) of paragraph (2).
(2) Determinations.--The Chairpersons of the Committee on
the Budget and the Committee on Appropriations of the House
of Representatives shall--
(A) on October 1 of each year, make a determination of
whether Congress is in compliance with section 4103 and
whether Members of the House of Representatives may not be
paid under that section;
(B) determine the period of days following each October 1
that Members of the House of Representatives may not be paid
under section 4103; and
(C) provide timely certification of the determinations
under subparagraphs (A) and (B) upon the request of the Chief
Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives.

[[Page S6806]]

SEC. 4106. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This division shall take effect on September 29, 2023.

Mr. LEAHY. We obviously have these amendments, so we will have them
in order to be voted on. I call them up to have them all before us.
I can assure you that the three amendments that I have referred to, I
will strongly oppose them because, were they to pass, we would not be
able to get the continuing resolution done, the government will be
closed, billions of dollars goes out the window, and we would not have
done our job.
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. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Border Security

Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I came down to the floor to talk about
President Biden's mishandling of Afghanistan.
Today, I want to talk about another situation the administration has
mishandled and perhaps, more accurately, failed to handle; and that is
the crisis at the southern border.
I say ``failed to handle'' because, by and large, the Biden
administration has completely failed to take any meaningful action in
response to this crisis. Sure, they occasionally made half-hearted
stabs at the problem--usually when the media starts noticing things
like thousands of migrants and their children residing in a squalid
refugee camp under a bridge in Del Rio, TX. Mostly, they seem content
to ignore it.
More than 6 months into this crisis, there are no signs the President
plans to travel to the border to get a look at the problem firsthand.
In fact, it is not clear whether President Biden has ever visited the
border at any point during his political career.
The President seems to have adopted an ``if I pretend the problem
doesn't exist, it will go away'' attitude. It is kind of like earlier
this year, when Biden administration officials refused to call the
situation a crisis, despite overwhelming evidence border influx has
reached crisis proportions. It is like they believed that if they
didn't use the word, they could somehow avoid the reality.
Unfortunately for the administration, there is no way to avoid the
fact we are facing a border crisis.
Last month, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection encountered
208,887 people attempting to cross our southern border illegally, a
318-percent increase from August of 2020.
Madam President, let me repeat that. In August, Customs and Border
Protection encountered 208,887 people attempting to cross our southern
border, a 318-percent increase from prior August.
For context, that number is bigger than the population of Sioux
Falls, SD, the largest city in my home State--in a single month--in a
single month.
At this point, the situation at the border is beyond a crisis. It is
completely out of control. The situation will soon deteriorate further
with one outlet reporting yesterday that tens of thousands additional
Haitian migrants are set to head to our southern border.
Illegal immigration across the southern border tends to slow down
during the heat of the summer. Not under the Biden administration.
Under the Biden administration, the numbers this summer just got worse.
Encounters along the southern border in July were up 420 percent from
July of 2020--420 percent.
Of course, these numbers only reflect individuals Customs and Border
Protection has been able to apprehend. There are, undoubtedly,
individuals who are successfully evading apprehension and illegally
taking up residence in our country.
Then there are the individuals being detained and released into the
country with orders to appear at an immigration court. This so-called
catch-and-release approach is notorious because the individuals
released into the country often never show up to immigration courts as
directed. In spite of this, the administration is using this strategy
and is apparently employing it to deal with the surge of migrants from
Haiti. Despite having committed to deporting these individuals, the
administration is releasing thousands of Haitian immigrants into the
United States.

The situation at the border is a crisis. It is a security crisis, it
is a logistics crisis, and it is a humanitarian crisis. Attempting to
cross the border illegally is a dangerous enterprise. Migrants face the
risk of death, injury, heat exhaustion, and disease, to say nothing of
the risk of exploitation from smugglers and traffickers, who are
profiting to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars by conveying
people across the border illegally.
By failing to stem the flow of illegal immigration, the President is
perpetuating this humanitarian disaster, and Democrats in Congress are
helping him. My colleagues across the aisle have been trying to add
amnesty for illegal immigrants into the tax-and-spending spree that
they are considering. That is a policy that is pretty much guaranteed
to further encourage individuals to make the dangerous and illegal
journey across our southern border.
Most people are familiar with the expression ``fiddling while Rome
burns.'' It is an expression I am forcibly reminded of when I consider
the actions of my Democratic colleagues and the Biden administration on
the crisis at the border. Our country is, as I have discussed, facing a
massive security and humanitarian crisis at our southern border.
On top of that, we just completed a disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal
that has put our country at greater risk from terrorists, damaged our
standing among our allies, and condemned the Afghan people to Taliban
tyranny.
Meanwhile, on the economic front, we are facing a serious inflation
problem, and it doesn't look like it is going to go away anytime soon.
Americans are seeing their purchasing power shrink as they face higher
prices on everything from groceries to gas. The Democratic response?
Essentially sticking their fingers in their ears and humming or
checking their watches to see if the unpleasantness is over yet.
If you were just going by the Democrats' legislative priorities, you
would be forgiven for thinking that none of these problems I have
discussed even exist. Rather than addressing our border crisis or our
inflation problem, Democrats are, right now, attempting to tee up a
massive--massive--reckless tax-and-spending spree to vastly expand the
reach of government into Americans' lives. Our border is in crisis, our
country is at risk, American families are struggling with inflation,
and the Democrats' top priority is advancing socialism.
Not only does their bill fail to address any of the major challenges
I have outlined, it is pretty much guaranteed to make them worse.
Dumping trillions of additional government dollars into an economy
already struggling with inflation is pretty much guaranteed to send our
already high inflation rate even higher.
As I mentioned, the Democrats are frantically working to circumvent
Senate rules and insert some type of amnesty into their spending bill,
which will only aggravate the crisis at the border. Although, at this
point, I am wondering if Democrats will even be able to pass their tax-
and-spending spree. The Democratic Party is in disarray, and the story
changes so often, I think reporters are starting to get whiplash. I
certainly am.
One minute, the Democratic leaders are united; the next minute, the
Senate leader doesn't know what the Speaker is doing. One minute, the
House is going to consider the tax-and-spending spree and the
infrastructure bill together; the next, it is going to consider them
separately. Democratic leaders announce an agreement on a framework for
their tax-and-spending spree; their rank-and-file Members report they
have never seen it. Their spending spree is going to cost $3.5
trillion. No. Wait. It is going to cost zero.
Democratic progressives and Democratic moderates are at each other's
throats. The House Speaker is chewing out centrist Democrats, and
Democrats can't agree on a host of issues from Iron Dome funding, to
prescription drug measures, to infrastructure. The Democratic Party is
unraveling fast, and it is deeply unfortunate that Democrats can't seem
to rise to the challenges of governance.
President Biden's administration was supposedly going to usher in a
new era

[[Page S6807]]

of domestic tranquility and international respect. The professionals,
we were told, were back in charge. Well, instead, it looks like
Democrats and the President are going to leave our country a lot worse
off than they found it, burdened by tax hikes and government spending--
that is, if they can ever manage to agree on a bill--in greater danger
from terrorism, and with a never-ending crisis at our southern border.
If Democrats don't change their focus and get their act together, a
weakened country is likely to be their legacy.
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. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Budget Reconciliation

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, yesterday afternoon, the Senate
Parliamentarian ruled that long overdue immigration reform could not be
included in the budget reconciliation process. I respect the
Parliamentarian very much, but I respectfully disagree. The pathway to
citizenship has a substantial and direct budgetary impact, which makes
it appropriate to be included in a reconciliation bill.
The last measure which we put before the Parliamentarian literally
was a date change. That was the sum and substance of the amendment--a
date change that had a budgetary impact in it. We were not creating new
categories of immigration. We were not creating any new laws other than
the date change.
I want to say to all of the Dreamers and immigrants and all of the
mixed-status families who are desperately following the situation: We
are not giving up, and you shouldn't give up either. America needs you,
and I will keep my promise to keep working on this as long as it is my
honor to serve in the Senate.

H.R. 5305

Madam President, on another matter, I can remember when ``certainty''
was the Republican refrain on tax cuts and the economy. They used to
say businesses and families need certainty. That is what the
Republicans used to say when they wanted to pass more tax cuts for
wealthy people. American businesses couldn't invest or hire new workers
and American families couldn't plan for their futures without
certainty. We heard that repeatedly on the Republican side of the
aisle.
Now it is a radically different message. Instead of preaching the
gospel of certainty, as they used to, Senator McConnell and today's
Republicans are threatening to deliberately, cynically, recklessly push
America toward an economic cataclysm. We are less than 3 weeks away
from a default on our national debt--that has never happened in
history, a default on our debt--and 14 hours away from a government
shutdown.
Later today, the Senate is expected to vote on a clean continuing
resolution. If it passes, we can keep the Federal Government
functioning until December 3, and we obviously should do that in the
midst of a pandemic and with all of the things that are threatening
America. We expect that the CR will also include emergency funding, as
it should, to assist with the recovery from Hurricane Ida in Louisiana
and the gulf coast, and with the wildfires in the Western States and to
help Afghans, who aided us in the longest war in history, to resettle
in America.
Even the threat of a government shutdown costs taxpayers money. It
damages the economy, and it undermines confidence in America's future.
If reason and responsibility prevail, the continuing resolution will
pass, and the threat of a government shutdown will be off the table for
now, but that CR will do nothing to resolve the far greater threat to
our economy--the looming potential default on the national debt.
The Democratic leader of the Senate, Chuck Schumer of New York, came
to the floor the day before yesterday, I believe it was, and said to
the Republican leader: If you don't want to cast any Republican votes
to establish and recognize the debt ceiling, the Democrats will vote
for it. Step out of the way. Let us take the responsibility for doing
the right thing.
Senator McConnell objected. He wants it to happen, he wants the
threat to be there, but it creates the uncertainty which they used to
decry in their Republican leadership days. This is a manufactured
crisis ginned up by Republicans to score political points.
The harm to the U.S. and global economies would be cataclysmic. Here
in the United States, respected economists warn us that the results
would trigger a painful recession--the opposite of what we need at this
moment in history--the loss of more than 6 million American jobs--how
can that be good for the Nation?--and 9 percent unemployment.
We would likely see a broad selloff in the markets, which would take
a big bite out of Americans' retirement savings. Interest rates could
spike. Not only does that affect American consumers and businesses, but
it affects our government. We will be paying a higher interest rate. So
taxes won't be spent on highways; they will be given to banks and
companies and countries that are buying our debt. For working families,
higher interest rates would mean bigger monthly payments on their
mortgages, car loans, credit cards. For the Federal Government, higher
interest rates would result in larger deficits and even a larger
national debt.
Think about that. Republicans are threatening to default on America's
national debt because, they say, they are worried about deficits and
debt, and defaulting on the national debt will make both worse.
Because we have never been through a default, it is hard to know
exactly which payments the government will have to stop immediately and
which payments might continue for a while. I don't want to sow seeds of
fear across America, or panic, but we have got to be honest and
realistic. If we don't establish and recognize the national debt of
this country, it will be the first time in history.
Some of the payments that are at risk in my State of Illinois and my
nearby State of Kentucky are obvious. More than 1.3 million families in
Illinois and more than 500,000 families in Kentucky could see their
child tax credits delayed. Nearly 600,000 veterans in Illinois and
nearly 300,000 veterans in Kentucky could see their benefits delayed.
That includes disability payments, VA pensions, education benefits,
loan guarantees, and other benefits that veterans have earned with
their service and sacrifice. Seniors would be hurt. Almost 2.8 million
seniors in Illinois and more than a million in Kentucky would see their
Social Security checks threatened.
Defaulting on our national debt could trigger a global financial
crisis. It would squander one of our Nation's most valuable economic
assets as trust by investors that America pays its bills and keeps its
word would be at risk. The U.S. dollar could lose its valuable place as
the world's primary currency. That would be a gift to our competitors
in China.
American families and businesses are still struggling from financial
devastation caused by the coronavirus. The crisis threatening America
today is being manufactured right here in the Senate by politicians who
believe, cynically, that it will help them politically to default on
America's debt. Haven't the institutions of this great Nation suffered
enough?
Ten months ago, an angry man, enraged over losing an election,
summoned a mob to attack this Capitol Building on January 6 and tried
to overturn the Presidential election.
And now that former President's party is refusing to do its part to
avoid a default on our national debt.
Let's be clear about why Congress needs to address the debt limit.
Addressing this debt limit allows Congress to continue to borrow money
to pay for expenses that have already been incurred.
This measure that we are talking about, the acknowledgement of our
debt ceiling, is to pay the debts of the Trump administration. The
national debt of America increased by 36 percent under President Trump
in one 4-year period. We are taking recognition of the fact that that
money was spent and has to be paid for.
Ninety-seven percent of the total Federal debt occurred before Joe
Biden

[[Page S6808]]

became President. This is debt that was built up under Presidents and
congressional majorities in both parties. As I said, $8 billion--nearly
a third of the entire debt--was added under Donald Trump, with the
support of the same Republican Senators who will not acknowledge that
that is now part of our responsibility.
Now Senator McConnell and his Republican colleagues are playing a
verbal shell game, claiming falsely that we need to address the debt
limit to pay for future spending. That is not true, and they know it.
If this Congress had not spent a penny since Joe Biden took office,
we would still have to deal with the debt limit to pay for the Trump
bills he left behind.
Democrats have offered proposals twice this week. On Monday, Senator
Schumer offered a proposal that dealt with the debt limit. It included
a CR to avoid a government shutdown and provided emergency aid which is
needed for the victims of Hurricane Ida, wildfires, and resettlement of
Afghan refugees. The Republicans used the filibuster to stop it.
On Tuesday, Leader Schumer offered a proposal to allow the Senate to
address the debt limit with just a majority vote. Senator McConnell
objected.
Not only are Republicans refusing to help pay the debt incurred under
Presidents of both parties, they are making it as difficult as possible
for Democrats to address the debt limit in a responsible way.
Defaulting on this debt would be the ultimate dine-and-dash. It would
be a grave, self-inflicted wound that would harm innocent Americans for
decades.
Our Republican colleagues used to preach the gospel of economic
certainty. The only thing certain about defaulting on our national debt
is that it would be ruinous to our economy, and it is a responsibility
both parties should want to avoid.
I yield the floor.

Amendment No. 3833

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Booker). Under the previous order, there
will now be 2 minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to a vote in
relation to the Cotton amendment, No. 3833.
The Senator from Ohio.
Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I rise in support of this amendment. I
think it is important that we pass it, and I hope my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle support it.
As we all know, as a result of the rushed and chaotic evacuation from
Afghanistan, people were left behind, including some American citizens
and a lot of Afghans who had helped us.
But because of the chaos, we also evacuated many Afghans who have no
record of assisting us or our allies. In fact, we were told by the
administration that the majority of the evacuees in the United States,
called parolees, are neither U.S. citizens, green card holders, or SIV
applicants who had helped us.
This is a commonsense amendment to simply make sure those parolees
are properly vetted like any other group of parolees or refugees would
be. Part of that vetting, of course, comes from individuals applying
for what is known as the REAL ID, a system designed to make identity
documents more consistent and secure.
Remember, the REAL ID law came out of the 9/11 Commission. It was a
key recommendation of that Commission. We supported it here.
Our amendment does not stop Afghan parolees from getting driver's
licenses or qualifying for REAL ID cards after appropriate screening.
It simply requires the Afghan parolees to follow the same processes
that other parolees must follow in order to be eligible.
Unfortunately, the CR before us makes an exception to that normal,
commonsense security process.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio's time has expired.
The Senator from New Hampshire.
Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Ohio is
mistaken. In fact, this would--the Afghan refugees who are coming here
are going to be properly vetted.
In a September 2 letter led by Senator Cotton, he said that ``[o]ur
immediate priority is the safety and well-being of American citizens,
permanent residents, and allies who were left behind in Afghanistan.''
But it seems that that concern for our allies only extends so far for
Senator Cotton and this amendment. As our Afghan allies are being
brought into the United States on humanitarian parole, he wants to
limit their ability to settle into a new life.
We need to vote no on this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the Cotton Amendment short changes critical
assistance provided to Afghan parolees that is included in the
underlying bill and it should be defeated.
It shortens the length of time that we provide refugee assistance to
thousands of Afghan men and women who fled to the U.S. to escape the
wrath of the Taliban--financial assistance, medical care, emergency
housing, mental health care, job placement services, the things that
they desperately need to begin their new lives in the U.S. For some,
this would mean benefits for only a matter of months, and then they are
on their own. This is not nearly sufficient for them to get on their
feet in a new country. Especially when many of them came here with
nothing.
Many of these men and women were critical U.S. partners during the
war in Afghanistan, putting their lives at risk along with our men and
women in uniform. We cannot turn our backs on them now.
The amendment also limits their ability to apply for a driver's
license. A driver's license is vital to successful integration in this
country--to securing a job, to getting an education, to starting a
small business. This is especially true outside of urban areas and
without public transit, where many are likely to resettle.
This should not even be a debate. I urge a no vote on the Cotton
Amendment.

Vote on Amendment No. 3833

The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired. The question is on
agreeing to the amendment, No. 3833.
Mr. PORTMAN. 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 bill clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 50, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 394 Leg.]

YEAS--50

Barrasso
Blackburn
Blunt
Boozman
Braun
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Portman
Risch
Romney
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shelby
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Tuberville
Wicker
Young

NAYS--50

Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Lujan
Manchin
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas are 50, the nays are 50. The
amendment is not agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3833) was rejected.

Amendment No. 3831

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 2
minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to the
Marshall amendment No. 3831.
The Senator from Kansas.
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, I rise in support of our amendment to
prohibit funds in this legislation to be used to promulgate, fund, or
enforce President Biden's unconstitutional vaccine mandate on private
employers.
As a physician, I am confident the vaccine has saved lives. My wife
and I got the vaccine. My parents got the vaccine, and they are waiting
to get their boosters. But whether to receive it is a personal choice
between individuals and their doctor, not mandated

[[Page S6809]]

via unconstitutional Executive actions that the administration recently
acknowledged they didn't have authority to put in place.
No precedent exists in American history for punishing private
employers that don't enforce government vaccination edicts.
Astonishingly, House Democrats included fines of up to $700,000 on
businesses that have unvaccinated employees as a way to pay for their
out-of-control spending.
Make no mistake. This vaccine mandate is not about public health or
science. If it were, we would recognize natural immunity as a highly
effective way to combat the virus.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, families across the country are frustrated,
and so am I.
People are doing everything they can to end this pandemic, only to
see some Republicans trying to prolong it with bills like this.
We are fighting a highly contagious virus. It has killed over 685,000
people in our country.
And that that number is only going to keep going up if people don't
get vaccinated, and variants like Delta will continue to spread,
undermine our economy, and take lives.
We need to end this pandemic, and getting people vaccinated is one of
the most important things we can do to accomplish that.
So why would we pass an amendment that weakens one of our strongest
tools to get people safely through this crisis?
I urge all of my colleagues to stand with people across the country
who have been following the public health guidance, and who are ready
for this pandemic to an end, by voting against this dangerous,
counterproductive amendment.

Vote on Amendment No. 3831

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on
agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. LEAHY. 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 senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 50, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 395 Leg.]

YEAS--50

NAYS--50

Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Lujan
Manchin
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). On this vote, the yeas are 50,
the nays are 50.
Under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this
amendment, the amendment is not agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3831) was rejected.

Amendment No. 3832

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 2
minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to the vote in relation to
the Braun amendment No. 3832.
The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. BRAUN. Mr. President, I left my business to run for Senate
because I was fed up with business in DC as usual. Americans are fed up
as well.
I think the place is broken when it comes to our budgeting process.
We don't do them anymore. We are debating a funding bill for the fiscal
year that ends today. That is how you end up $28 trillion in debt.
Congress can agree on basically one thing: budgets, deficits, debt
don't matter anymore. Well, they do. Every business, every State, and
local government have to do them. Congress should as well.
No budget, no pay is simple. If we do not fund the government by
October 1, we don't get a paycheck until we get it done. It is a
popular bill because it works.
In 2013--the only time we have done one on time in 20 years--it was
in place. Many here voted for it, including the majority leader.
Americans are watching. They are tired of the job we are doing. They
demand accountability. Vote for this amendment. It makes sense. Our pay
is in the 94 percentile of income to boot.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, you know, this amendment has no business
whatsoever being in a CR which has to be enacted by 12 midnight
tonight. It may make a great sound bite or political ad, but it is not
good policy. It is not a thoughtful solution to the many complicated
reasons that we fail to enact budget resolutions or appropriations
bills precisely on October 1.
We all have serious policy disagreements that lead to inaction or
delay. Let's debate those policies. Threatening to withhold pay or
whatever has absolutely nothing to do with the structural issues, but
it would do one thing. It would make sure that we had only
multimillionaires in the House and Senate. It is a dangerous precedent
and potentially corrosive influence of public policy.
Let's stop the political posturing. If you want this, do it as a
freestanding bill, under regular order, by the Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee. The CR is not the place for it.
I urge a ``no'' vote.

Vote on Amendment No. 3832

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. BRAUN. 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 senior assistant bill clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 47, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 396 Leg.]

YEAS--53

Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Braun
Burr
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hassan
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Kelly
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Manchin
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Ossoff
Portman
Risch
Romney
Rosen
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sinema
Sullivan
Thune
Toomey
Tuberville
Warnock
Wicker
Young

NAYS--47

Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Lujan
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Padilla
Paul
Peters
Reed
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Shelby
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Tillis
Van Hollen
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). On this vote, the yeas are 53, the
nays are 47.
Under the previous order requiring 60 votes for adoption of this
amendment, the amendment is not agreed to.
The amendment (No. 3832) was rejected.

Vote on Amendment No. 3830

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2
minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to a vote in relation to the
Leahy substitute amendment No. 3830.
The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I thank the Senators who stayed with us to

[[Page S6810]]

make sure we could get a good continuing resolution passed, which we
are about to do. I just want to thank everybody and urge--it will be a
voice vote, but shout ``yes'' on this next vote. Thank you.
I yield the floor, and I yield back the time on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.

Vote on Amendment No. 3830

The question is on agreeing to the amendment No. 3830.
The amendment (No. 3830), in the nature of a substitute, was agreed
to.
The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the bill is
considered read a third time.
There will now be 2 minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to the
vote on passage of the bill, as amended.
The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, first, let me thank Senator Leahy on the
Appropriations Committee, as well as Senator Shelby and all those who
worked diligently and hard to put this continuing resolution together.
This vote says we are keeping the government open. At this time--at
any time, it is a very, very bad thing to let the government shut down
but at this time in particular when there is so much going on in the
country. And it is a glimmer of hope as we go through many, many other
activities.
I would say this: Just as the CR is so important and requires
bipartisan cooperation, I wish my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle saw the debt ceiling as equally important and equally requiring
bipartisan cooperation. They don't, and we are willing to move forward
on debt ceiling ourselves. But for this moment, this is one of the
larger problems, the biggest problem that has faced us in the last
while, making sure the government stays open, and now we can be sure it
will.
So I thank all of my colleagues who worked so hard on this issue.
I yield back time on both sides.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Vote on H.R. 5305

The bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the
bill pass?
Mr. SCHUMER. 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 senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced--yeas 65, nays 35, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 397 Leg.]

YEAS--65

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

NAYS--35

Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Braun
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
Moran
Paul
Portman
Risch
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sullivan
Thune
Toomey
Tuberville
Wicker
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 65, the nays are
35.
The 60-vote threshold having been achieved, the bill is passed.
The bill (H.R. 5305), as amended, was passed.

____________________