[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

     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 (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.

                          ____________________