[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 171 (Wednesday, October 18, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5055-S5062]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5,
UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER
FINANCIAL PROTECTION RELATING TO ``SMALL BUSINESS LENDING UNDER THE
EQUAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITY ACT (REGULATION B)''
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will proceed to the consideration of S.J. Res. 32, which the
clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 32) providing for
congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United
States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection relating to ``Small Business Lending
Under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B)''.
Recognition of The Majority Leader
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.
Unanimous Consent Agreement
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
recess from 3:30 p.m. until 5 p.m. to allow for the all-Senator's
briefing.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Israel
Mr. SCHUMER. Now, Mr. President, the slaughter of over 1,300 people
in Israel on October 7 reminds every Jewish person in the world of
darker, more sinister times. It lay bare, sadly, that the ancient
poison of hatred against Jews still persists.
We must be clear that Hamas does not speak for the Palestinian
people. Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to Israel's
eradication. Hamas must be defeated. And the violence of Hamas
terrorists has tragically put innocent Palestinians in harm's way.
I was deeply saddened and shocked by the awful news of the explosion
at the Al Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza. The loss of innocent life is a
sickening tragedy. My prayers are with the victims, the families, the
children, and all innocent people who were injured or killed.
Now, while we await the results of a full review to be completed, as
the President indicated and as of this morning--people should look at
this--the released signal intelligence confirms, it appears that
terrorist fighters within Gaza were responsible for the explosion and
deaths, not the Israeli IDF. It is clear that terrorists in Gaza have
no regard for civilian human life.
As I have said, and as the Biden administration has made clear,
civilian life must be protected. And we must help civilians impacted by
the war--Palestinian civilians--who have nothing to do with Hamas. As
the Senate considers a supplemental package to help Israel fight Hamas,
we will include robust humanitarian aid to help civilians and make sure
that the aid goes to those who need it urgently and does not fall into
the wrong hands, such as Hamas's.
[[Page S5056]]
When I joined my Senate colleagues in meeting with the Israeli
Government, we promised to do whatever we could to help Israel defend
herself.
In the coming days, President Biden will send Congress a supplemental
request that will provide Israel the resources they need to defend
themselves and eliminate the threat of Hamas.
The Senate will move this package as soon as we can, without delay,
with strong bipartisan support. Democrats want to act, and I know a lot
of Republicans want to act, and I was very encouraged to hear my friend
the Republican leader, Leader McConnell, express his support too.
At this moment of crisis in Israel and of the chaos in the House of
Representatives, the Senate must step into the breach and stand firmly
together to get emergency military and humanitarian aid to Israel.
In this difficult moment, the Senate must act as a steady, bipartisan
force. We must show that the work of the first branch of government is
continuing.
We will not wait for the House--we cannot--because the need for this
package is too urgent to sit and wait for them to get themselves out of
their own morass. I hope the Senate passing a strong bipartisan package
will importune the House to follow suit in whichever way they see fit.
Passing this supplemental and providing Israel the tools they need
will show Israel and the world that the United States stands with our
ally, now and always.
And I expect very soon--as early as today, maybe tomorrow morning--
the Senate will act to pass a resolution from Senator Cardin, Ranking
Member Risch, Leader McConnell, and myself, affirming that the Senate
stands firmly with Israel and firmly against Hamas. Our resolution has
overwhelming--nearly unanimous--bipartisan support in the Senate. It is
cosponsored by 99 Senators, Senator Paul being the outstanding one who
hasn't.
Passing a supplemental and passing this resolution will affirm an
unchanging truth: So long as there is a United States of America and so
long as there is a United Sates Senate, the people of Israel will not--
will not--be alone.
Mr. President, now on the all-Senators classified briefing, later
this afternoon, we will have an all-Senators classified briefing on
Israel and Gaza. We will be briefed by the top people in the
administration: Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Secretary of State
Tony Blinken, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. C.Q. Brown, and
Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines.
I encourage all my colleagues on both sides to attend today's
briefing from our top leaders so we can stay fully updated on the
latest information on the ground regarding Israel's security and their
efforts to defeat the evil, terrorist, horrible organization named
``Hamas.''
Nominations
Mr. President, on nominations, now, with all the conflagration in the
Middle East, it is really important that we have Ambassadors in
critical places. It is always important, but a lot of them have been
blocked. But now, with the conflagration in the Middle East, it is more
important than ever that they be there. When we were in Israel, the
lack of an ambassador was apparent. Now, there is a great Charge
d'Affaires person; she did a great job. But we still need an
ambassador.
So, Mr. President, for that reason, I want to thank my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle for working quickly this week on getting
critical nominees through the Senate. Last night, we confirmed Ana
Escrogima to serve as Ambassador to Oman, and earlier this week, we
confirmed Karen Sasahara as Ambassador to Kuwait.
We have more nominees whom we need to pass to fill ambassadorships in
the Middle East. More important than ever, we must do more. It is
important that the Senate show bipartisan unity right now to get these
critical diplomats confirmed. And I hope we keep doing so, like we did
with these two Ambassadors, in the days ahead.
U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Election
Mr. President, now, on what is going on across the way in the House,
thanks to MAGA Republicans, the U.S. House of Representatives has now
been without a Speaker for 2 weeks, a paralysis in governing
unprecedented--unprecedented--in modern times.
Hard-right extremists in the House have ground the people's House to
a halt at the worst possible moment: at a time when our ally Israel
faces its darkest hour and the U.S. Government would shut down in less
than a month if we don't act.
Today, the House will gavel in to try and break the impasse, though
it seems like the chaos of the hard right has exposed the deep, perhaps
irreparable, divisions within the House GOP.
No matter who becomes Speaker, one lesson remains true: Whether it is
funding the government, avoiding default, or helping American families,
bipartisanship will be the only way things get done in a divided
government.
Bipartisanship is the only way. When there is a Democratic President,
a Democratic Senate, and a Republican House, a small band of rightwing,
MAGA Republicans in the House cannot say: It is my way, not your way.
You are a minority, MAGA Republicans. You are a minority in the
Republican Party. You are a minority with the people of America. You
are a minority in this government. Certainly, your voices will be
raised, and you will want some say, but it can't be your way or no way.
Bipartisanship will be required to help Israel. It will be required
to avoid a government shutdown. It will be required to finish the
appropriations process. Bipartisanship will be required for just about
everything--everything--that happens in the Congress.
So whoever the House elects as Speaker will not be able to ignore the
realities of divided government, no matter what the hard right demands.
As former Speakers Boehner, Ryan, and McCarthy have learned, you cannot
let the hard right run the caucus or you won't last as Speaker. And,
even worse, it will lead to more chaos at a time when the American
people need unity and help and stability.
Artificial Intelligence
Mr. President, on the AI Insight Forum, next Tuesday, the Senate will
hold our second in a series of bipartisan--let me underscore
``bipartisan''--AI Insight Forums, focusing on our North Star for AI
innovation.
Our inaugural AI forum last month was one of the most historic and
informative discussions ever held in the Congress. The debate was
illuminating, and the discussions were candid, unvarnished, and direct.
Next week, we will turn to AI innovation, both transformational
innovation--the kind of innovation that creates new vistas, unlocks new
cures, improves education, protects our food supply and our national
security--but also to sustainable innovation, which is the kind of
guardrails that are needed to prevent the negatives in AI, necessary to
prevent against AI's risks and minimize the chance that this technology
becomes unmanageable or worse. We are going to focus on both of these
types of innovation, both of which are needed.
Congress has taken leaps forward in the past few months, learning
more about the benefits and risks of AI from the world's leading
experts, getting some of the companies that do AI to sit down with some
of the critics, so we can begin to fashion the kinds of guardrails that
are necessary. Our committees continue to lead the way, having hosted
more than 15 hearings on AI this year, and the bipartisan AI gang is
working to supplement the committees' critical work with our AI Insight
Forums. But there is still so much more to learn and do on AI, which is
rapidly changing as we speak. So these forums are designed to ensure
the Senate is asking the right questions, having the right debates, and
getting to the heart of this complex issue.
I urge everyone to attend next week's bipartisan forum, and I thank
my colleagues Senator Rounds, Senator Heinrich, and Senator Young for
helping organize this discussion.
To repeat, our AI forum will be--I am trying to get the date here--I
don't have it. We will get everybody the date right away. I believe it
is on the 24th of next week, at 3 p.m., in the Kennedy Caucus room.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
[[Page S5057]]
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is
recognized.
Israel
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the barbaric terrorist attacks of
October 7 have elicited two sorts of reactions in the West. Most
reasonable people have responded to the slaughter of innocent Israelis
with utter horror, fervent prayer, and strong support for Israel's
right to defend itself.
The overwhelming majority of Americans think the United States should
publicly support our closest ally in the Middle East. They recognize
this moment as a time for choosing, and they see the choice between a
democracy's right to self-defense and a terrorist group's obsession
with destroying it as an easy choice.
The United States must have Israel's back as it roots out the
terrorists who threaten it. For as long as it takes, I am proud to
stand with this overwhelming majority.
But, alas, in recent days, we have also seen just how the default
position in some highly influential corners of our society--from
national newsrooms to elite college campuses--how quickly they have
been to blindly amplify terrorists' versions of events.
This was especially true of the reporting of a deadly explosion at a
Gaza hospital yesterday. Hamas immediately blamed Israel for the blast,
and major news organizations took their word for it, running headlines
about an ``Israeli strike.'' In the hours since this tragedy, credible
evidence has emerged suggesting that the same terrorists who used
innocent civilians as human shields were themselves responsible. Well,
the media can revise its headlines, but the shameful anti-Semitic
fringe of our society has already heard what it wanted to hear.
Unsurprisingly, the woke incubators of the Ivy League have been at
the epicenter of this anti-Israel outrage. One coalition of 30 student
groups at Harvard declared that they ``hold the Israeli regime entirely
responsible'' for Hamas's terrorism--that Israel is responsible for
Hamas's terrorism.
Now, student radicals taking extremist stands is par for the course.
The more important question is how university administrators--the
supposed grownups on campus--would respond. The answer is not good. As
former Harvard President Larry Summers rightly noted, his institution's
initial silence ceded the field to campus extremists in defining
Harvard's response.
And when Harvard's leaders did respond, they failed the most basic
test: distinguishing the victim from the aggressor. The university's
response professed heartbreak at ``the war in Israel and Gaza now under
way,'' as if there were even a shred of moral equivalence between
terrorism and self-defense.
The presidents of Columbia and Dartmouth expressed regret at ``the
ensuing violence'' and ``the escalating violence,'' respectively. Not
to be outdone, Notre Dame didn't even assign perfunctory blame to the
terrorists.
Instead, they bemoaned ``the outbreak of war in the Holy Land'' and
calling ``for an end to the cycle of violence.''
I am reminded of a retort the late, great Bill Buckley deployed in a
debate when his opponent tried to have both sides of the Cold War. He
said:
That is like saying that the man who pushes a little old
lady into the path of a bus is morally equivalent to the man
who pushes her out of its path, because they both push little
old ladies around.
If you want to know where this leads, take the American Bar
Association, the organization that accredits our Nation's law schools.
At first, the ABA's president called ``on both sides to show
restraint'' and urged Israel and Hamas to ``settle their disputes in a
peaceful and legal fashion.'' But yesterday, the ABA denounced Israel's
self-defense efforts as ``collective punishment, forced displacement,
[and] ethnic cleansing.''
Terrorism and self-defense are not morally equivalent. They are not
morally equivalent. And you would think the leaders of America's higher
education would understand that.
Some leaders in higher education have argued in recent days that
schools should not wade into political disputes. Stanford's president
said that doing so means picking winners and losers on campus.
Northwestern's president observed of his students and faculty that
``for me to speak for them displaces their own freedom to speak.'' That
may actually be a wise policy, but it is certainly not one elite
academia has been known to practice in the past. It doesn't take long
to find the impassioned stances universities took following the murder
of George Floyd or the ending of DACA. So why the new policy?
Let's be clear. Some university leaders have displayed admirable
conviction. Our former colleague Ben Sasse at the University of Florida
describes support for the terrorists who murdered Israeli children as
``sickening'' and ``dehumanizing.'' Emory's president said the attacks
``must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.'' Princeton's
president called it ``among the most atrocious of terrorist acts'' and,
importantly, placed the blame for the coming war entirely where it
belongs--on Hamas's shoulders.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all of these statements--
the good, the bad, and the ugly--be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as fallows:
University of Florida
Dear Jewish Gator Alums: Many of you have reached out about
the vigil at UF last night. I was overwhelmed to see a
thousand Gators standing with Israel. You can find my remarks
here.
The chaos at the event was an unfortunate end to a
beautiful gathering, but I wanted to let you know that there
was no attack on campus and the injuries that have been
reported seem to be relatively minor. From what we can
gather, a student passed out and, when a fellow student
called for 911, other students--understandably on edge--fled.
While we all wish the night had ended differently, we are
tremendously proud of the students who came to stand with
Israel. I hope Rabbi Jonah and Rabbi Berl reschedule the
vigil, and I hope the community reconvenes.
Like you, I am tremendously grateful for our students. The
University of Florida is home to the largest number of Jewish
students at any university in this country. We are honored by
and committed to that legacy. Our Jewish students and alumni
around the world have been devastated by Hamas' terrorism.
I will not tiptoe around this simple fact: What Hamas did
is evil and there is no defense for terrorism. This shouldn't
be hard. Sadly, too many people in elite academia have been
so weakened by their moral confusion that, when they see
videos of raped women, hear of a beheaded baby, or learn of a
grandmother murdered in her home, the first reaction of some
is to ``provide context'' and try to blame the raped women,
beheaded baby, or the murdered grandmother. In other
grotesque cases, they express simple support for the
terrorists.
This thinking isn't just wrong, it's sickening. It's
dehumanizing. It is beneath people called to educate our next
generation of Americans. I am thankful to say I haven't seen
examples of that here at UF, either from our faculty or our
student body.
As for us, our educational mission here begins with the
recognition and explicit acknowledgment of human dignity--the
same human dignity that Hamas' terrorists openly scorn. Every
single human life matters. We are committed to that truth. We
will tell that truth.
In the coming days, it is possible that anti-Israel
protests will come to UF's campus. I have told our police
chief and administration that this university always has two
foundational commitments: We will protect our students and we
will protect speech. This is always true: Our Constitution
protects the rights of people to make abject idiots of
themselves.
But I also want to be clear about this: We will protect our
Jewish students from violence. If anti-Israel protests come,
we will absolutely be ready to act if anyone dares to
escalate beyond peaceful protest. Speech is protected--
violence and vandalism are not.
I'm grateful to have heard from so many of you. Like I said
at the vigil last night: When evil raises its head, as it has
in recent days, it is up to men and women of conscience and
courage to draw strength from truth and commit ourselves to
the work of building something better--to the work of
pursuing justice and pursuing peace. That is what we aim to
do through education, compassion, and truth here at the
University of Florida.
Sincerely,
Ben.
____
Emory University
Dear Emory Community: As students return to campus this
morning after fall break, I know many at Emory are in
profound pain,
[[Page S5058]]
absorbing the shock and grief from the Hamas terrorist
attacks in Israel over the weekend. So am I. The reality of
Jews being senselessly murdered and taken as hostages will
not soon leave my mind, and must be condemned in the
strongest possible terms.
We are fortunate that Emory students and faculty in the
region are safe at this time. I have heard from many members
of our community about how the attacks have affected them and
their families and friends. The suffering they are
experiencing is tremendous. I know they are not alone.
In June, I traveled to Israel with a delegation of Emory
colleagues. We visited with Emory students studying and
interning, alumni who live and work in the region, and
scholars at universities in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. It was my
first trip back to Israel in 40 years and as a Jew, it
offered me an opportunity to visit a homeland that is
meaningful to my family across generations. To see the nation
where I walked peacefully a few months ago now under attack
is hard to comprehend. Acknowledging that a war has begun and
more lives, both Israeli and Palestinian, will be lost to
this conflict fills me with grief.
Each member of our community is experiencing this tragedy
in their own way. As we move forward, we must show empathy
for one another. My wish is for Emory to come together
peacefully, and I see that we are already doing that with
student-led vigils and memorials. I also urge you to treat
your peers and colleagues with dignity as difficult
conversations take place. As a research university, we are
fortunate to have scholars who have deep expertise on the
Middle East, Israel, and relevant disciplines. Our faculty
experts will be invaluable at this time.
The students, faculty, physicians, staff, and alumni who
call Emory home come from all over the world and represent
many backgrounds and life experiences. Emory's motto, the
wise heart seeks knowledge, is based on an understanding that
we treat each other with respect even, and especially, in
moments of disagreement. That is my plea to you in the coming
days--seek knowledge but do so in a way that acknowledges our
shared humanity. That's what unity looks like at Emory.
Treat each other well and keep your minds and hearts open.
Pray for peace.
Sincerely,
Gregory L. Fenves,
President.
____
Princeton University
Even in a world wearied and torn by violence and hatred,
Hamas's murder and kidnapping of hundreds of Israelis over
the past weekend is among the most atrocious of terrorist
acts. This cruel and inhumane attack has provoked a bloody
war that has already claimed the lives of thousands of
Palestinians and Israelis and will tragically take many more
as it continues.
Princeton is a community that embraces many Israelis and
Palestinians among its cherished members, as students,
faculty, staff, and alumni. Even more have friends or
relatives directly experiencing this awful violence. The
nightmare underway in Israel and in the Palestinian
territories is being deeply felt on this campus. That pain
will inevitably continue in the months ahead. My heart goes
out to everyone personally affected.
The University has reached out to students and other
community members from Israel and the Palestinian
territories. Resources and support services are available
from the Davis International Center, Counseling and
Psychological Services, and the Office of Religious Life.
Our experts at the School of Public and International
Affairs have produced a thoughtful compilation of initial
analysis and there will be many more such scholarly
contributions and public panel discussions about these events
in the coming days.
Of course, our work as researchers and teachers must also
make space for the recognition of suffering, and for time to
grieve and heal. I hope that Princetonians from all
backgrounds will treat each other with grace and compassion
during this difficult time.
Christopher L. Eisgruber.
____
Notre Dame
Given the current situation in Israel, we have relocated
our students who were studying in Jerusalem to other Notre
Dame International locations. We will continue to support our
relocated students and ensure that their transitions are as
smooth as possible. We have temporarily suspended our study
abroad program at Tantur and will continue to assess the
situation as it develops.
Saddened by the outbreak of war in the Holy Land, I join
with many in abhorring the killing of non-combatants and I
echo the Holy Father's call to pray for all victims of the
current conflict, for an end to the cycle of violence, and
for a lasting peace with justice. I welcome all of our Notre
Dame family to join us for this evening's interfaith prayer
service for peace and protection of the innocent.
____
Harvard University
Dear Members of the Harvard Community: We write to you
today heartbroken by the death and destruction unleashed by
the attack by Hamas that targeted citizens in Israel this
weekend, and by the war in Israel and Gaza now under way.
The violence hits all too close to home for many at
Harvard. Some members of our community have lost family
members and friends; some have been unable to reach loved
ones. And, even for people at Harvard who have not been
affected directly by the fighting, there are feelings of
fear, sadness, anger, and more that create a heavy burden. We
have heard from many students, faculty, and staff about the
emotional toll that these events are taking.
Across Harvard, we will continue providing as much support
to our students and colleagues as possible. Our Schools
either have shared or will soon share messages regarding
available resources.
We have also heard an interest from many in understanding
more clearly what has been happening in Israel and Gaza. Even
as we attend immediately to the needs of our community
members, we can take steps as an academic community to deepen
our knowledge of the unfolding events and their broader
implications for the region and the world. We expect there
will be many such opportunities in the coming days and weeks.
We have no illusion that Harvard alone can readily bridge
the widely different views of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, but we are hopeful that, as a community devoted to
learning, we can take steps that will draw on our common
humanity and shared values in order to modulate rather than
amplify the deep-seated divisions and animosities so
distressingly evident in the wider world. Especially at such
a time, we want to emphasize our commitment to fostering an
environment of dialogue and empathy, appealing to one
another's thoughtfulness and goodwill in a time of
unimaginable loss and sorrow.
As many colleagues, classmates, and friends deal with pain
and deep concern about the events in Israel and Gaza, we must
all remember that we are one Harvard community, drawn
together by a shared passion for learning, discovery, and the
pursuit of truth in all its complexity, and held together by
a commitment to mutual respect and support. At this moment of
challenge, let us embody the care and compassion the world
needs now.
Sincerely,
Claudine Gay,
President, Harvard University.
____
Columbia University
Dear Fellow Members of the Columbia Community: I was
devastated by the horrific attack on Israel this weekend and
the ensuing violence that is affecting so many people.
Unfortunately, at this moment, little is certain except that
the fighting and human suffering are not likely to end soon.
I know many members of our community are being impacted in
profound ways and I want to assure each of you that Columbia
will provide any measure of care or comfort that we can. This
is your community, and you are not alone.
Since Saturday, our first priority has been to make sure
everyone connected to Columbia is safe and to provide
logistical support and other types of resources for students,
staff, and faculty who are directly affected by the conflict.
We are in close touch with students, staff, alumni, and
faculty throughout the region. I have included a list of
university resources below.
I am gratified by and grateful for the skill, agility, and
care that I have witnessed by professionals across Columbia.
Colleagues in our community have shown great sensitivity and
leadership, including staff at the Kraft Center for Jewish
Student Life, our leaders in the Earl Hall Center for
Religious Life, and the various student support teams across
our schools.
Many of you have reacted to these terrifying events by
pulling closer your friends, classmates, and relatives whose
sense of security was shattered. These acts of kindness and
empathy represent the best of Columbia and exemplify what we
as a community can contribute to this moment. I encourage you
to continue gathering, supporting each other, and listening
to one another in the days ahead.
As a global university, we are devoted to examining and
debating difficult issues that affect our world. Our job is
to educate, enlighten, and engage. We must reject forces that
seek to pull us apart and model behavior that shows respect
for all. I welcome events like the SIPA webinar scheduled for
tomorrow, examining the evolving situation in Israel and
Gaza. I strongly encourage Columbia faculty to find ways of
bringing clarity and context to this painful moment, just as
you contribute your expertise and scholarship to other great
challenges of our time.
I am committed to ensuring that these values are reflected
in our teaching, our research, and our community support.
Sincerely,
Minouche Shafik,
President, Columbia University.
____
Dartmouth
Dear Dartmouth Community: Like many of you, I watched with
growing horror the Hamas attack on Israel this weekend, the
escalating violence, and the devastating loss of life,
especially among civilians. Adding to my deep sorrow over the
overwhelming human tragedy playing out in Israel and Gaza are
the ways in which the war affects Dartmouth's global
community and many of our colleagues, peers, and friends.
Dartmouth alums live in the region, scholars work there, and
students, staff, and faculty have deep roots in the areas now
in danger. I want to extend my concern to each of you at this
time.
[[Page S5059]]
We have been working over the weekend and into this week to
make sure our community members with ties to the region--both
in the U.S. and abroad--are as safe and supported as
possible.
In every conflict, one of the most important roles a
university can play is to help us understand it, and to make
a space for dialogue and community. As Dean Elizabeth F.
Smith and Senior Vice President Shontay Delalue indicated in
their message below, shared yesterday with the campus
community, Dartmouth faculty and staff experts have organized
a series of discussions that can help bring us together and
shed light on the situation. These discussions will be held
today and Thursday at 5 p.m. and livestreamed for those who
cannot attend.
I encourage you to join these forums, which you can view
here, and others that we will plan over time. As we navigate
these difficult times, please care for one another and take
advantage of the support Dartmouth has to offer, as an
institution and a community.
Sincerely,
Sian Leah Beilock,
President.
____
Stanford
Dear Stanford Community: Our news and social media feeds
have been filled over the last few days with horrifying new
details about the Hamas attack in Israel last weekend, which
involved intolerable atrocities including murder of civilians
and kidnapping. The likelihood of a lengthy and violent
continued conflict in the region has become clearer. Our
focus as university leaders is on supporting the members of
our Stanford community in this difficult moment. We hear the
deeply felt concerns, fears, and grief that have been
expressed by students, faculty, and staff. We want to address
several issues that have arisen on our campus in the past few
days.
We have heard many expressions of concern regarding student
safety. We have heard from Jewish students, faculty, and
staff concerned about rising antisemitism. We have heard from
Palestinian students who have received threatening emails and
phone calls. We want to make clear that Stanford stands
unequivocally against hatred on the basis of religion, race,
ethnicity, national origin, and other categories. The
expression of political views, in appropriate times and
places, is important. Thoughtful, reasoned discussion of
current issues is central to the life of the university. Our
commitment to academic freedom means that latitude for
expression of controversial and even offensive views is
necessary to avoid chilling freedom of thought and ideas. But
harassment and abuse have no place here. We are committed to
working with affected communities to provide support and
resources, and also to ensuring the physical safety of those
on campus.
We have received a report of a class in which a non-faculty
instructor is reported to have addressed the Middle East
conflict in a manner that called out individual students in
class based on their backgrounds and identities. Without
prejudging the matter, this report is a cause for serious
concern. Academic freedom does not permit the identity-based
targeting of students. The instructor in this course is not
currently teaching while the university works to ascertain
the facts of the situation.
We have received complaints about banners, signs, and
chalking on campus that express views that many find
offensive. Again, it is important to remember that
controversial and even offensive speech is allowed except
when it crosses the line into certain illegal categories such
as threats or harassment for which the threshold is quite
high. Unlawful threats and harassment will not be tolerated.
Stanford also has content- and viewpoint-neutral time, place,
and manner rules that limit locations for banners and signs.
Thus, many of the banners and signs have been removed,
because they were in places where they are not allowed.
Moreover, it is worth remembering that while a climate of
free expression requires breathing room, our aspiration as a
community is for respectful and substantive discourse.
Here and across the nation this week, there also has been
discussion of the role of university leaders in commenting on
global events. This provides an opportunity for the two of
us, who are new in our current roles at Stanford, to share
some further thoughts on this topic, and on the place and
purpose of universities.
Stanford University is a community of scholars. We believe
it is important that the university, as an institution,
generally refrain from taking institutional positions on
complex political or global matters that extend beyond our
immediate purview, which is the operations of the university
itself. Maintaining university neutrality allows for our
individual scholars to explore them freely. In recent years,
many universities have gotten into the habit of issuing
frequent statements about news events. This creates a number
of difficulties. The decision to take a position about one
event or issue yields implications for silence with regard to
other issues; given that different subsets of a campus
community may be more or less affected by particular issues,
this inconsistency is felt acutely. It can enmesh
universities in politics and create a sense of institutional
orthodoxy that chills academic freedom. In addition, crafting
each message is challenging, from gathering facts and context
on complex issues at the speed of online media and the news
cycle while also walking a line between platitudes and overly
political positions.
As a moral matter, we condemn all terrorism and mass
atrocities. This includes the deliberate attack on civilians
this weekend by Hamas. One of the advances in international
law in the 20th century following the horrors of the
Holocaust was the development of international humanitarian
law prohibiting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and
genocide. Such crimes are never justified. Sadly, they occur
regularly throughout the world; the International Criminal
Court website lists seventeen different country situations
for which it has launched investigations, all of which
involve mass atrocities. And that court's docket does not
even reflect the full range of situations. We point this out
not to in any way diminish the shocking severity of the
events in Israel and Gaza this week, but to highlight the
pervasive problem that humankind faces in conquering hate.
The events in Israel and Gaza this week have affected and
engaged large numbers of students on our campus in ways that
many other events have not. This is why we feel compelled to
both address the impact of these events on our campus and to
explain why our general policy of not issuing statements
about news events not directly connected to campus has
limited the breadth of our comments thus far, and why you
should not expect frequent commentary from us in the future.
The fighting in the Middle East is likely to continue in
the coming weeks, with casualties on both sides, and the
overall situation has a deep and complex history. Stanford
has community members who are themselves from the region or
who have friends and family there. We recognize the deeply
felt impacts across our community. We encourage you to
approach one another with a spirit of compassion and respect
for our shared humanity.
Sincerely,
Richard Saller,
President.
Jenny Martinez,
Provost.
____
Northwestern
Dear Colleagues: Some of you have asked either me or the
provost about whether the University would be issuing a
statement on the current conflict in Israel and Gaza. I also
know many of you are receiving similar requests from your own
leadership, staff and communities. I am not planning to put
out a statement officially stating a University position. I
thought I would write to give you a bit of insight into why.
Let me start by saying that I am deeply repulsed, sickened
and disappointed by what Hamas has done. Kidnapping,
beheading, murdering people--children and adults, civilians
and people in the armed forces--is horrific and inhuman, pure
and simple. This sort of behavior is entirely unacceptable
regardless of one's political convictions or grievances.
Period. No moral equivalencies needed.
That is the view of Mike Schill, citizen, Jew and human
being. I didn't give up those parts of me when I assumed the
presidency of Northwestern.
However, I understand that when I put out an official
statement on a political matter, an atrocity, a catastrophe,
people read it not as the views of Mike Schill, but as
President Michael Schill speaking for the University. As
such, the decision to exercise speech takes on different
meaning. We are a University which celebrates free
expression, diversity of people and diversity of viewpoints.
This is essential to our role in society. The University does
not speak for our faculty, students and staff on these
matters--they have their own voices, and I would venture to
say, there are no doubt differences among our students and
faculty on what Hamas did and how Israel is responding. For
me to speak for them displaces their own freedom to speak.
Some of you who have followed recent discussions about free
expression may see strong influence of the Chicago
Principles, and you would not be mistaken. Regardless of what
the University has done in the past, I do not foresee that I
will be issuing statements on political, geopolitical or
social issues that do not directly impact the core mission of
our University, the education and futures of our students, or
higher education. This reticence to speak out publicly as
President Michael Schill will sometimes please and often
infuriate members of our community. But I believe it is the
right approach.
Just to be clear, as individuals in a democracy, we do not
give up our rights to have and express our personal political
and social viewpoints. We just need to make clear we are
speaking for ourselves and not for all our students, faculty,
staff and trustees. So, on Monday night when I stood with our
students at a Vigil for Israel in Deering Meadow, I did that
as Mike Schill. And I will continue to personally support,
when my conscience demands it, issues that I care deeply
about, always making the distinction in roles as clear as
possible.
I will end by expressing my concern, my prayers and my
hopes for a peaceful resolution of the current violence. We
all have an obligation at a moment like this to care for one
another . . . and most particularly our students and members
of our community who have loved ones whose lives have been
[[Page S5060]]
taken, who are held hostage or who are engaged in combat. If
you wish to relay my views to your respective communities, I
ask that you stress that our community has resources
available to help. Please contact Vice President for Student
Affairs Susan Davis if you would like to inquire more about
resources for students. Lorraine Goffe and Sumit Dhar can
address resources for our staff and faculty.
Mr. McCONNELL. I can only hope that the leaders of America's
universities recognize what time it is in America. This is a time for
moral clarity, not a time for anti-Semitic hate dressed in faculty-
lounge jargon. Leaders cannot afford to be silent. Terrorism is evil.
Anti-Semitism is despicable. And Israel has a right to exist. It
shouldn't take a Ph.D. to understand that, but it also shouldn't be so
hard for a Ph.D. to acknowledge it.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Mr. President, now on an entirely different matter, today, the Senate
will vote on a Republican resolution to chip away at yet another
example of the Biden administration's runaway regulatory state using
the Congressional Review Act. The junior Senator from Louisiana,
Senator Kennedy, has put forward a measure that would block a proposed
rule at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that would require
financial institutions to collect and report personal information on
small business loan applications, including data on race and sex.
Apparently, as if the radical progressivism on campuses wasn't enough,
Washington Democrats want to tie small business loans to diversity
quotas.
Small businesses are the lifeblood of the American dream, and I am
grateful to my colleague from Louisiana for giving the Senate an
opportunity to stick up for them. I would urge each of our colleagues
to join me in supporting his resolution later today.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hickenlooper). The clerk will call the
roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
National Defense Authorization Act
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, Israel and the world are still reeling from
the surprise attack by Hamas on October 7 that left somewhere around
1,400 Israelis and at least 31 Americans dead. In scale and scope, the
attack carried echoes of our 9/11. And as on 9/11, life changed in an
instant.
I came down to the floor yesterday to talk about these attacks and
the United States' commitment to standing with the Israeli people
against terrorism. And today, I would like to talk about another
important point these attacks raise: the importance of our national
defense and military readiness.
It has been said that ``Only the dead have seen the end of war.'' We
live in a fallen world. And as long as we live in a fallen world, there
will be evil men bent on aggression. And if we wish to continue living
in peace and freedom, we must be always ready to defend against such
men. Military preparedness is an essential and constant need. There is
never a time where we can guarantee our peace and safety, and so there
is never a time when we can afford to be ill-prepared to defend our
peace and safety.
As citizens of the United States--an immense country with a
reputation for military strength--it can be easy to become complacent
and to assume that we will always be able to deter or defeat attacks,
but that is a dangerous assumption. As strong as we are, we are not
invulnerable, and we are not the only great power out there. And if we
don't make the necessary investments in our military to back up our
reputation of strength, we may find our ability to deter hostile
countries quickly waning.
And the fact of the matter is, our military preparedness is not where
it should be. Thanks to budgetary impasses and increased operational
demands, by 2018, our readiness had eroded to the point that the
bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission released a report
warning that we might struggle to win a war against a major power like
Russia or China.
And while we have made progress since then, we are still a long way
from where we need to be. We have military services that are struggling
to meet recruiting targets. There is a persistent pilot shortage, and
in a number of cases, we have too few mission-capable aircraft. And we
are not doing an adequate job of maintaining the kind of supply we need
of munitions.
That is not an acceptable situation for us to be in, and it could
have very serious consequences. To give you just one example, recent
U.S. war games envisioning a United States-China conflict following an
attack on Taiwan have had grim results, showing enormous military and
economic costs on both sides. One story on these war games noted: And
while the ultimate outcome in these exercises is not always clear--the
U.S. does better in some than others--the cost is clear. In every
exercise, the U.S. uses up all its long-range air-to-surface missiles
in a few days, with a substantial portion of its planes destroyed on
the ground.
Let me just repeat that last line:
In every exercise, the U.S. uses up all its long-range air-
to-surface missiles in a few days, with a substantial portion
of its planes destroyed on the ground.
That is not a promising scenario, and it highlights our serious
readiness shortages, shortages that other countries may not share.
China, which is investing heavily in its military, is outpacing our
military in modern capabilities like hypersonic missiles and has
amassed a larger navy. And while Russia is currently expending its
military resources in its war of aggression against Ukraine, it too
does not hesitate when it comes to military investment.
We have serious work to do on the readiness front. And as I said, we
have made progress since 2018. But we still have a long way to go to
ensure that our military is fully prepared to meet and deter 21st
century threats, and this is a priority we need to address now, not
when we are waking up one morning reeling from an attack on our country
or on Americans abroad, but right now.
Investing in our military after we are threatened or attacked is too
late. We can't scale up defense capabilities in an instant or suddenly
produce an adequate supply of munitions out of thin air. We need to get
and keep--and keep--our military where it needs to be on the readiness
front so that we can deter threats and meet them, if needed, with
overwhelming force.
And boosting our strength is important for our friends and allies as
well. We can't and shouldn't send troops into every conflict, and we
can't solve all the world's problems. But sooner or later, world events
do affect us, and we can't retreat from the world stage and allow
maligned powers to fill the resulting vacuum, nor can we afford to
concentrate on one threat or area of the world to the exclusion of
others. Putin's war in Ukraine and Hamas's attack on Israel should be
ample reminders that threats can come from both great powers and non-
state actors alike.
So we need to get to work, and that should start with passing a final
version of this year's National Defense Authorization Act and making
progress on our annual appropriations bills, including the defense
appropriations bill. And we should also take up a supplemental to
provide the necessary support to our allies and to ensure that we
provide any additional funding needed for our own military.
October 7 was the latest reminder that we live in a fallen and
dangerous world. Let us ensure that we always are prepared to preserve
the peace and to defend our Nation.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Small Business Lending
Mr. BROWN. We know our middle class relies on strong, small
businesses. Small business ownership is the second largest source of
personal wealth in this country, only behind owning a home. Small
businesses make up more than 40 percent of our economy--no better
example than that of the Presiding Officer from Colorado and the
[[Page S5061]]
work that he did as he had the phenomenal success he did starting small
businesses.
We know, to build strong businesses, entrepreneurs need credit. A
loan lets you turn an idea into a business or invest in your company to
hire more workers. That is why small business credit is so essential to
our economy and to our middle class.
Today, small business lending takes place in the dark. We don't have
good data about how lenders are serving the small businesses in their
communities. We don't have good data about whom lenders might be
leaving behind. Without transparency, it is all too easy for
entrepreneurs in Ohio and around the country to lose out.
The data we do have suggests too many small business owners aren't
getting a fair shot at a loan for their businesses. Take rural small
businesses. We know that rural communities have seen bank branch close
after bank branch close for years, drying up access to credit for lots
of small businesses in rural Ohio. We need the data to understand how
to reach these business owners and how to grow smalltown economies.
Or take small businesses owned by women or by people of color. The
data we do have suggests they are more likely to be denied loans and
they are more likely to be charged higher interest rates. You don't
need reports and studies to know that most Ohioans don't get a fair
shake from big banks and the financial system. You do need accurate
information to fight back. That is why, in 2010, Congress required the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to get that information; and this
spring, the CFPB issued a rule to finally implement the law and to
bring transparency to the small business lending market.
We are talking about basic data on the borrowers' demographics, loan
pricing, application approvals, and other critical information--just
like we do with mortgages. It is not that complicated and not that
difficult and not that expensive. With this data, we will be able to
see gaps in the small business lending market, allowing programs to
expand access to credit for small businesses, especially like small
businesses in rural areas. More data means more accountability,
ensuring that lenders reach minority communities and helping to root
out discrimination.
We have seen this model work before. After we began publishing data
some years ago about home mortgages, more Americans of all races and
backgrounds were able to achieve the dream of homeownership.
This still protects people's privacy. Borrowers are not required to
submit information if they don't want to. Of course, big banks and
their lobbyists are putting up a fight. They always do. Any time there
is a rule that might change their behavior, they come up with the same
song and dance: It is too expensive. We have to hire new people.
Actually, it helps them serve the community better.
I am not going to help Wall Street avoid accountability. There has
been too much of that. When I took over chairmanship of this committee,
it was called the Senate Banking Committee, and it was a committee all
about Wall Street. We changed this. The colloquial name of this
committee is the Senate Housing and Banking Committee. Our charge is to
build more homes, to make them more affordable, to help with transit
systems in places like Atlanta and Denver and Cleveland, and to look
out, especially, to help small banks and communities. That is why we
are going to hold Wall Street accountable.
I want to see more rural small businesses get loans and grow and be
successful. We are not going to let the banking lobby stand in the way,
as it all too often has.
I hope my colleagues will stand up for small businesses, will stand
up for entrepreneurs, and will vote no on this resolution.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ossoff). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask for permission to speak for up to
20 minutes before the vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau--we call it the CFPB--has struck again. It has made another bad
decision--this by an Agency that has become famous for bad decisions.
Here is what is going on.
You will remember the Dodd-Frank Act, of course, which this Congress
passed after the financial meltdown in 2007, 2008, and 2009. There was
a section in the Dodd-Frank Act called section 1071--fairly innocuous.
Congress directed certain information to be collected about small
business loans. We were curious about small business lending in
America, so we directed, in this section 1071, certain covered
financial institutions--I call them small banks because most business
loans to small business people come from small banks. We directed small
banks to start collecting information about their loans to small
business people because we wanted to know and see if we could do
something to make their services more efficient.
We, the Congress, asked that 13 pieces of information be collected.
It is the sort of stuff that you would imagine, very routine stuff,
like ``What was the date of the loan, the small business loan? How much
was the loan?'' that sort of thing.
Well, the CFPB has taken our work and totally perverted it. The CFPB
has promulgated a rule that totally perverts our intention in section
1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
First, we intended for only small businesses to be covered in
providing this information. Now, if you look at the definition of a
``small business,'' most people use the definition that has been put
out by the National Federation of Independent Business. That is the
NFIB. It says that a small business is a business that has 10 or fewer
people and sales of about half a million dollars a year--not according
to the CFPB. They want to cast the net as far and as wide as they can.
Their definition of a ``small business'' will almost double that--more
than double that. They say a small business is a company with $5
million in revenue or less from the previous fiscal year, not $500,000
but $5 million. So this is going to throw the net of government much,
much wider than Congress ever intended.
But, secondly, the most egregious thing the CFPB has done is they
took our 13 pieces of information that we asked for, by Congress, and
they expanded it to 81. All of a sudden, they want a book.
Here are some examples of what the CFPB is going to require small
banks to ask of small business women and small business men when they
come to the bank and ask for a loan. The bank has to ask the small
business person how long it has been in business. That is fair. The
bank has to ask the small business woman or small business man about
its annual revenue. That is fair. But then it gets a little intrusive.
It gets a lot intrusive.
The bank has to ask the small business woman or small business man
what their race is. The bank has to ask the small business person about
their ethnic background. The small bank has to ask the small business
person if he is a male. The bank has to ask the small business person
if she is a female. It should be obvious to many, but those questions
have to be asked. The bank has to ask the small business person if that
person is a lesbian. The bank has to ask the small business person if
that person is gay. The bank has to ask that small business person if
that small business person is bisexual. The small bank has to ask its
customer, that small business person, if that small business person is
transgender. The bank, according to the CFPB, has to ask that small
business person who is applying for a loan, who just came in for a loan
for the business, if that person is queer. The small bank has to ask
that small business person if the small business person is intersex.
Not only does the bank have to ask those questions, those private
questions, of the person from the small business applying for the loan,
the person applying for the loan on behalf of the small business has to
bring in every one of its owners who owns 25 percent or more, and the
bank has got to start over with those people. Are you a male? Are you a
female? What is
[[Page S5062]]
your race? Tell me about your ethnic background. Are you a lesbian? Are
you gay? Are you bisexual? Are you transgender or are you queer or are
you intersex?
Give me a break.
Then all of this information that is collected, this private
information, has to be sent to the CFPB, and they are going to put it
on their website. Are you gay? Are you lesbian? What race are you? They
are going to put it on their website.
Now, the CFPB says: Well, it is going to be institutional-level data,
just top-line data fields. Bull. You will be able to take this data,
particularly if you are a small bank in a rural area, and be able to--
the snoops will be able to go on that public website and identify small
business people in their community--how much money they are borrowing,
how they answered the question about whether they were gay, how they
answered the question about whether they were intersex. This is
incredibly private information.
And why? Why would the CFPB need this information? Well, the truth
is, they don't, but I will tell you why. The CFPB is setting these
small business people--but also these small banks--up for lawsuits.
That is exactly what they are doing.
What happens if a small business person goes into the bank and the
small banker says: Listen, I hate to have to ask you this, but the CFPB
says I have to ask you. Are you gay?
As if that is anybody's business.
The small business person says: That is none of your business, and I
am not going to answer that question. I am here for a loan, not to talk
about my private life. What I do in the privacy of my bedroom with a
consenting adult is my opinion, Mr. Banker.
The small banker says: You are right. I am sorry. I had to ask. They
made me.
If the small business person won't answer the question, the small
banker can get in trouble with the CFPB.
What has the world come to?
And the CFPB doesn't care about the cost. Do you know what this is
going to cost to implement every year? Four hundred million dollars.
Why? And that doesn't even include the cost of actually setting up this
program. That will be hundreds of millions of dollars more.
It is not like the CFPB is exactly a wizard when it comes to data
security. I mean, yes, it is going to be on their public website, but
in terms of the granular information, the CFPB says: Oh, don't worry;
we will protect it.
Right. Like they protected it a few months ago? The personally
identifiable information of 256,000 consumers, which is being held by
the CFPB, was breached. And do you know what the CFPB did? They didn't
tell anybody for 2 months. They acted like a rock, only dumber. We are
not talking about wizards here, wizards of financial data privacy and
security.
You know, I hear it all the time, and the Presiding Officer probably
hears it back in his State, perhaps. But people tell me all the time:
Kennedy, what is wrong with Washington, DC? Why is common sense illegal
there?
This rule. This rule. What has the world come to?
So my Congressional Review Act request is to have the Senate tell the
CFPB that it is none of their business--none of their business--what a
private American does with another private adult American in the
privacy of their bedroom. We are free, so long as it doesn't break any
laws, to express our sexuality however we want to, and it is none of
the CFPB's business.
With that, I ask my Senate colleagues to overturn this rule.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we start the
vote now, 1 minute early.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Vote on S.J. Res. 32
Under the previous order, the clerk will read the title of the joint
resolution for the third time.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading
and was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the
third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
Mr. SCHUMER. 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.
Mr. SCHUMER. I announce that the Senator from California (Ms. Butler)
and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) are necessarily absent.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Kentucky (Mr. Paul).
The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 44, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 260 Leg.]
YEAS--53
Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Braun
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hickenlooper
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Kennedy
King
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Manchin
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Mullin
Murkowski
Ricketts
Risch
Romney
Rounds
Rubio
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sinema
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Vance
Wicker
Young
NAYS--44
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Fetterman
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Smith
Stabenow
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--3
Butler
Durbin
Paul
The joint resolution (S.J. Res. 32) was passed, as follows:
S.J. Res. 32
Resolved by the Senate and House of Represenatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress
disapproves the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer
Financial Protection relating to ``Small Business Lending
Under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Regulation B)'' (88
Fed. Reg. 35150 (May 31, 2023)), and such rule shall have no
force or effect.
(Mr. Hickenlooper assumed the Chair.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cortez Masto). The Senator from Oklahoma.
____________________