[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 148 (Wednesday, September 14, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4590-S4592]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                   Confirmation of E. Martin Estrada

  Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 
confirmation of Martin Estrada to be U.S. attorney for the Central 
District of California.
  The Central District of California is the largest Federal judicial 
district in the country. It serves over 19 million Californians, almost 
twice as many people as the next largest district, and it serves about 
half the population of the State of California.
  It spans from San Luis Obispo County, home of Los Padres National 
Forest, all the way to Riverside County and the Mojave Desert. It spans 
from the Pacific Ocean to the eastern border with Arizona and Nevada. 
And it is home to some of the most diverse communities in the country.
  So having painted that picture of the district that it serves, you 
can imagine that to effectively serve as the chief Federal law 
enforcement officer for such a large and diverse district, you need 
someone with a proven track record of experience, of credibility with 
the community, and the character to fight for truth and fairness in our 
judicial system.
  Martin Estrada is exactly the right person for the job. He is a proud 
son of immigrants from Guatemala. Martin has spent most of his life in 
and around the Central District community that he will now serve as 
U.S. attorney.
  He was raised near Costa Mesa in Orange County and earned his 
undergraduate degree at the University of California, Irvine. After 
earning his law degree at Stanford Law School, Martin returned home to 
the Central District, where he clerked for Federal District Judge 
Robert Timlin and then later for Judge Arthur Alarcon for the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
  After spending time as an associate at the highly regarded Los 
Angeles law firm of Munger, Tolles & Olson, Martin served for 7 years 
as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Central District, working to 
protect communities from major crimes. Now, since 2014, he has been a 
partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson, and he has represented clients from 
before both Federal and State courts in a diverse array of legal 
practice areas. Meanwhile, he has maintained a significant pro bono 
practice, fighting for equal justice and equal access to justice for 
Dreamers, Latinos, Native American students, students with 
disabilities, and more. He has excelled at every stage of his career, 
and he is more than qualified to serve as U.S. attorney for 
California's Central District.
  I have no doubt that he will bring a temperament, intelligence, and 
work ethic worthy of the community he will now once again serve.
  I want to thank all of you, colleagues. I want to thank you for 
supporting his confirmation.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4845

  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, in the last few weeks, students in Uvalde 
and the rest of Texas started a new school year. Three and a half 
months ago, on May 24, 19 innocent children and 2 teachers were 
murdered by a deranged, evil gunman.
  There are no words to describe a monster who enters a school and 
murders little children--19 children, 19 families in Uvalde who lost 
their little boys and their little girls, 2 teachers who are no longer 
here with us.
  I was in Uvalde the day after the shooting. I sat down with local 
officials and law enforcement. I went to the prayer vigil that night 
where the entire Uvalde community came together, praying, weeping, and 
mourning the unbelievable loss of those 19 precious children and 2 
teachers.
  The Uvalde shooting was the deadliest school shooting in Texas 
history. Before that, I was in Santa Fe, where yet another evil madman 
killed eight students and two teachers. I was also at Sutherland 
Springs, the worst church shooting in U.S. history. I was in El Paso. I 
was in Midland-Odessa. I was in Dallas.

[[Page S4591]]

  There have been too damn many mass shootings. With kids going back to 
school all across the country, we need to again revisit what we can do 
to keep them safe from mass shooters.
  Many students, especially in Uvalde, are scared. Their parents are 
scared, and they have expressed concerns that the security measures at 
schools in Uvalde haven't improved enough to make them feel safe.
  Today, I want to put forth two bills that would address this problem.
  Inevitably, when a mass murder occurs, Democrats in this Chamber and 
the media implore Congress: Do something.
  Well, in just a moment, the Senate can do something. The first bill I 
am going to ask this body to pass is the Secure Our Schools Act, which 
would spend unused COVID education funds on hiring police officers in 
schools and hiring school-based mental health professionals. This bill 
would be the most serious, the most significant, the most major 
investment in school security Congress has ever enacted. This bill 
would double the number of police officers on campus. So if, God 
forbid, the next deranged madman shows up trying to commit murder, 
before that madman gets into the school, into the classroom, he would 
encounter an armed police officer who could stop him outside the school 
before he commits murder.

  This bill also funds $10 billion for 15,000 new mental health 
counselors in schools. So many of these deranged killers have a long 
and horrifying descent into mental illness before they commit their 
crimes. We see the pattern of the lone, alienated, angry, deranged, 
young man who seeks to commit the most unspeakable evil. If we had 
additional mental health resources on campuses, they would be in a 
position to spot the warning signs, to see the young man heading down 
that dangerous path, and to intervene and stop them.
  Recently, the National Center for Education Statistics, which is part 
of the U.S. Department of Education, found that 88 percent of public 
schools did not ``strongly agree'' when asked whether they had the 
funding and the mental health professionals they needed in the schools. 
Eighty-eight percent said: We need more mental health professionals in 
schools and more funding to hire them.
  My bill would address both of these problems by ensuring that we are 
doubling the number of police officers so there are armed police 
officers to protect our kids and keep them safe and so there are mental 
health counselors to spot a dangerous young man before he goes down the 
road of committing a horrific mass murder.
  This bill is common sense, and in a sane political environment, it 
would be passed 100 to nothing.
  My colleague Senator Barrasso wants to make some additional remarks 
on our bill. So I yield the floor to Senator Barrasso.
  (Ms. ROSEN assumed the Chair.)
  Mr. BARRASSO. Well, Madam President, I come to the floor today to 
join my colleague and friend from Texas in support of this very 
important piece of legislation.
  What happened in Uvalde was a tragedy. It was horrendous. I commend 
the citizens of that community for their strength in a time of 
heartache.
  Every Member of this body agrees that we need to find the best way to 
protect children who go to school. Whether in Washington, DC, or 
Wheatland, WY, we need to find a way to protect those students.
  That is why Senator Cruz and I have introduced the Safe Kids, Safe 
Schools, Safe Communities Act of 2022. Our bill provides the kind of 
safety and the kind of security that our children, our schools, and our 
communities desperately need. And we do this while always protecting 
the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans.
  Now, as a doctor who served in our State legislature in Wyoming and 
now in this body, I have seen the devastating impact of mental health 
challenges, and Senator Cruz talked specifically about those, and that 
is why we addressed them in this bill. I have seen how much those 
challenges contribute and what we have seen in these terrible acts. Our 
bill would make a difference--make a difference by providing mental 
health professionals with the resources they need to identify and to 
address these behavioral health needs of our students.
  Our bill would hire 15,000 more mental health professionals at middle 
schools and high schools.
  It also significantly increases the physical safety of our schools. 
Our bill would double the number of police officers in our schools. It 
would help schools buy more security equipment and metal detectors, 
door locks, and alarms.

  Our bill also would do all of these things at no cost to the 
taxpayer. It wouldn't add to inflation. People might ask, how? Well, it 
is because our bill would redirect money that has already been 
allocated in the Democrats' spending bills. Our bill would work, and it 
wouldn't cost taxpayers a dime.
  School is back in session now all across the country, and now is the 
time to take the real action that we need to keep our kids and our 
schools safe. No child should live in fear of going to school. No 
parent should live in fear of sending their child to school. And no 
law-abiding gun owner should be denied his or her constitutional 
rights.
  So I want to thank my friend and colleague from Texas for introducing 
this vital piece of legislation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, as if in legislative session, I ask 
unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate 
consideration of S. 4845, which is at the desk; further, that the bill 
be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, what we just saw on this floor was 
stunning. I am genuinely at a loss for words.
  This bill is common sense. There is not a constituent in Texas or 
Nevada or Connecticut who, if you asked: Would it be a good thing to 
have more police officers keeping our kids safe, wouldn't say: Of 
course it would. There is not a constituent of ours who, if you asked: 
Would it be a good thing to have more mental health counselors on 
campus to stop people from committing crimes, wouldn't say: Of course 
it would.
  I was informed a few days ago that when I was going to seek unanimous 
consent, the Senator from Connecticut was going to object. Now, the 
Senator from Connecticut styles himself the leading advocate of gun 
control in the U.S. Senate.
  I was asked by reporters: Why are the Democrats objecting to this?
  I will tell you what I told reporters: I have no idea. They haven't 
said. They haven't told me why they object to it.
  So I was genuinely looking forward to seeing the Senator from 
Connecticut's remarks. I was sitting here waiting to see, why do you 
oppose more police officers to keep our kids safe? Why do you oppose 
mental health counselors in schools?
  I have been in the Senate 10 years. The Senator from Connecticut and 
I were elected at the same time. I have engaged in many debates on this 
floor, including with the Senator from Connecticut. The fact that he 
chose not to say a word about why he objects is stunning. I find myself 
genuinely flabbergasted.
  I will say that one of reasons I think the Senator from Connecticut 
feels content not only not to argue but now to walk off the floor and 
not even listen to the debate he is ostensibly participating in, one of 
reasons he feels free to do so is, if you look up in the Senate 
Gallery--I can count them--there are precisely zero reporters in this 
Gallery. Not a single one of the corporate media will report on this, 
and I think the Senator from Connecticut feels absolutely certain, when 
he walks out, he will have reporters that will say: Tell me how 
terrible Donald Trump is.
  He will lean in and say: Oh, Donald Trump is really terrible.
  But not one of the reporters will ask: Hey, wait a second, why don't 
you want police officers keeping our kids safe?
  None of them will. The Democrats are protected by a dishonest army of 
propagandists in the corporate media.
  CNN will not have a panel sitting around discussing why is it that 
the

[[Page S4592]]

Democrats simply do not care to defend their positions.
  Let me tell you, when there is a mass murdering and the Democrats 
stand up and give speeches and they point at Republicans and say: Blood 
is on your hands, it is great political rhetoric. It is dishonest, but, 
boy, it gins up their donors. It gets people to go and write checks to 
Democrats and fund their campaigns.
  What we just saw reveals that Democrats have one objective when a 
mass murder happens, and that is to take away the Second Amendment 
rights of law-abiding citizens. That is always, always, always their 
solution. Never mind that it doesn't work. Never mind that it doesn't 
stop violent crime. Never mind that if you look at the jurisdictions 
across the country with the strictest gun control laws, almost every 
single one of them consistently has among the highest crime rates and 
murder rates.
  Earlier this year, the Senator from Connecticut authored his big gun 
control package, rammed it through this body--a package which will do 
nothing, zero, to stop mass murders. We will see another mass murder. I 
pray that we don't, but evil exists in the world, and if another 
lunatic attacks a school, and there is not a police officer at the 
front door to stop him, remember right now. Remember this moment when 
the Democrats said: No, we will not protect our kids.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4586

  Madam President, there are lots of arguments the Senator from 
Connecticut could have made. He chose to make none of them.
  If he does not like how the money in this bill is specifically spent, 
I am now going to propound a second unanimous consent bill.
  There is right now $135 billion in unspent COVID relief funds to 
schools. Under the rules the Democrats have put in place, those funds 
cannot be spent on school security.
  The second bill that I am going to ask this body to pass is a bill 
that is very simple. It is one page. It says schools can spend some of 
that $135 billion on school security. They can decide what to spend it 
on, but if they decide they want to hire an additional police officer, 
they can spend the money on that. If they decide they want to enhance 
the physical security of their campus to make their students safer, 
they can spend it on that. They can invest in school security. Right 
now, the Democrats have blocked them from doing this.
  These are funds Congress has already appropriated that haven't been 
spent. And this bill is unbelievably simple. It says the schools can 
choose to invest in school security.
  Therefore, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged 
from further consideration of S. 4586 and that the Senate proceed to 
its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read 
a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered 
made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, the Senator is right--I am not going to 
engage in a colloquy on the merits of this request or the previous 
request. This isn't real. This is a TV show. This is click bait. This 
is theater. This isn't an actual attempt to pass legislation.
  Senator Lankford approached me about this particular bill on the 
floor a week ago and asked to engage in a dialogue with me about it. I 
thought it was a legitimate request, and I set my team to the task of 
trying to work something out with Senator Lankford. And now there is a 
unanimous consent request to pass a bill that is under negotiation and 
discussions between serious legislators who actually want to find a 
result.
  So, no, I am not going to debate the merits of these UCs. This isn't 
real.
  I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Madam President, the Senator from Connecticut just gave us 
the sum total of his wisdom as he walks off the floor again, which is, 
he says this isn't real.
  The Presiding Officer is well aware of how the Senate operates. When 
a Senator arises for a unanimous consent request, one of two things 
happens: A Senator objects, or the bill passes.
  I have stood on this floor and passed unanimous consent requests 
because our colleagues chose not to object.
  One of the more notable instances was following multiple instances in 
the House of House Democrats making anti-Semitic comments. The House 
tried to pass a resolution condemning anti-Semitism. Sadly, the radical 
left in the Democratic caucus objected, and the House Democrats 
couldn't pass a resolution condemning anti-Semitism.
  I joined with our colleague Senator Kaine from Virginia, a Democrat. 
We authored a resolution, the Cruz-Kaine resolution--a bipartisan 
resolution that was a clear and unequivocal condemnation of anti-
Semitism. It condemned BDS as anti-Semitism. It condemned explicitly 
the anti-Semitic comments made by those House Democrats at the outset 
of the dispute.
  When Senator Kaine and I came to the Senate floor, we did not know if 
a Senator would object. There were numerous Senators in this body who 
did not join the resolution and could easily have walked out on the 
floor and objected. We stood up and asked unanimous consent, and much 
to our very pleasant surprise, the opposing party chose not to object, 
and the resolution passed. It passed 100 to nothing.
  When the Senator from Connecticut says this isn't real, the only 
reason this bill has not passed the U.S. Senate is because the Senator 
from Connecticut stood up and uttered two magic words: I object. Had he 
done something really simple--just shut up, just shut his mouth, just 
sat there--we would be standing in a position where both of these bills 
would have passed into law.
  What does it say about the Democrats' view of the American people 
that they don't engage in debate, they don't engage in discussion, they 
don't defend their positions? They, instead, arrogantly say no and have 
full confidence that their compliant cheerleaders in the media will 
never even tell anyone about it.
  I don't know how you defend the position he just took. I was 
genuinely looking forward to hearing some form of an argument.
  I can tell you, when I forced a vote on the Cruz-Barrasso bill on 
this floor and the Democrats voted, party line, no, we don't want more 
police officers in school; no, we don't want more mental health 
counselors in school; no, we don't want additional funding for school 
safety, to the best of my knowledge, no reporter asked a single 
Democrat: Why are you leaving our kids vulnerable? Why aren't you 
acting to protect children in school? Because, you know what, there is 
no money on the left for actually stopping these crimes. The money is 
for disarming law-abiding citizens. It is a narrow-minded, political 
focus.
  We could have just passed the most significant school safety 
legislation ever passed by the Federal Government. Why didn't we? 
Because the Democrats objected. That objection is wrong, it is 
irresponsible, and it shows a willingness to play political games while 
demonstrating contempt for our constituents.
  Today, the U.S. Senate failed the American people. Today, the U.S. 
Senate failed the schoolchildren of America. And I pray that the 
consequences are not truly horrific. I pray that this body will show up 
and do its damn job: Debate real issues and pass real legislation that 
will actually stop crime rather than the empty political gestures of 
the left.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.