[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 99 (Thursday, June 11, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2747-S2751]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THEODORE ROOSEVELT NATIONAL PARK WILD HORSES PROTECTION ACT
______
CROSS-BOUNDARY WILDFIRE SOLUTIONS ACT
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to ask unanimous
consent to pass two bills--S. 1377, my Theodore Roosevelt National Park
Wild Horses Protection Act and Senator Gallego's Cross-Boundary
Wildfire Solutions Act. I want to thank my colleague for joining me
here today and for his work on this legislation, and I urge my
colleagues to support the passage of these bills today.
In the case of my bill, for generations, horses have been a living,
breathing part of the Theodore Roosevelt National Park in North Dakota.
Their presence in the Badlands predates the establishment of the park
itself and traces back to the region's early ranching heritage. Today,
the horses remain one of the park's most recognizable and beloved
features, enjoyed by more than 700,000 visitors annually when they come
to the Theodore Roosevelt National Park.
But the horses are much more than just a visitor attraction; they are
an important part of the historic landscape that reflects what Theodore
Roosevelt himself experienced during his time in the Dakota Territory.
His years in the Badlands helped shape his character, and they inspired
the conservation ethic that would later define his Presidency. He was a
rancher, so he was on horseback all of the time. He really credits
North Dakota in that experience for rounding out his strength and
vitality, which are some of the attributes that he needed to go on and
be elected President. As a result, the horses of the Theodore Roosevelt
National Park have become an enduring symbol of that legacy.
Yet, despite their importance, there have been repeated efforts to
remove them from the park, including as recently as in 2022. Each and
every time, those efforts are met with overwhelming public opposition
not just from people in North Dakota but from people across the country
who recognize the contributions the horses make to the park's
incredible and colorful history. That is why we have introduced this
legislation.
S. 1377 provides a balanced, commonsense, and durable solution. It
ensures the National Park Service will continue to manage a healthy
horse herd while providing permanent protection for an important part
of the park's identity. Specifically, the bill directs the National
Park Service to maintain a herd of not fewer than 150 horses--a
population level consistent with the need for responsible management of
a genetically diverse herd.
I greatly appreciate my colleague from Virginia Senator Kaine for
joining me in introducing and sponsoring this legislation. Senator
Kaine understands firsthand the important role of the wild ponies of
the Chincoteague and Assateague Islands on Federal lands in his own
State.
I also appreciate the support from the Department of the Interior and
the National Park Service and their willingness to provide certainty
for the future of horses in the Theodore Roosevelt National Park.
This bill is about ensuring that future generations can experience
the same landscape that helped shape one of our Nation's greatest
conservation leaders. By passing this bill, we can ensure the future of
wild horses at the Theodore Roosevelt National Park.
I would also like to thank Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
the Energy Committee's staff for their work in helping us advance this
important legislation.
[[Page S2748]]
I am also pleased to work with Senator Gallego to pass his Cross-
Boundary Wildfire Solutions Act today, and I appreciate his
partnership.
Therefore, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged from
further consideration of S. 1377 and that the Senate proceed to the
immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc: Calendar No.
430, S. 2033, and S. 1377.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bills by title.
The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 2033) to direct the Comptroller General of the
United States to conduct a study on existing programs, rules,
and authorities that enable or inhibit wildfire mitigation
across land ownership boundaries on Federal and non-Federal
land.
A bill (S. 1377) to ensure the maintenance of a herd of
horses in Theodore Roosevelt National Park, and for other
purposes.
There being no objection, the committee was discharged of the
relevant bill (S. 1377), and the Senate proceeded to consider the bills
en bloc, (S. 2033) which had been reported from the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources with an amendment to strike all after the
enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic, as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Cross-Boundary Wildfire
Solutions Act''.
SEC. 2. STUDY ON WILDFIRE MITIGATION ACROSS LAND OWNERSHIP
BOUNDARIES.
(a) Study Required.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct a study on--
(1) the existing Federal programs, rules, and authorities
that enable or inhibit wildfire mitigation from being
completed across land ownership boundaries on Federal and
non-Federal land;
(2) whether changes to any program, rule, or authority
identified pursuant to paragraph (1) would allow Federal land
management agencies (as defined in section 802 of the Federal
Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (16 U.S.C. 6801)), the
Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Secretary of
Homeland Security, acting through the Administrator of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Fire
Administration, States, local governments, and Tribal
governments increased capacity or access to funding to
mitigate wildfires; and
(3) the activities carried out pursuant to subsection (e)
of section 103 of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003
(16 U.S.C. 6513), including--
(A) how to improve the efficacy of such activities with
respect to mitigating wildfire; and
(B) whether the enactment of such subsection has increased
the access of Federal land management agencies and States to
funding to mitigate wildfires.
(b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall submit to the Committee on Natural Resources and
the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives
and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the
Senate a report that contains--
(1) the results of the study required under subsection (a);
and
(2) recommendations to simplify cross-boundary wildfire
mitigation between Federal land management agencies and
State, local, and Tribal governments.
Mr. HOEVEN. I further ask unanimous consent that the committee-
reported substitute amendment to S. 2033 be agreed to; that the bills,
as amended, where amended, be considered read a third time and passed;
and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the
table with no intervening action or debate, all en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
The committee-reported amendment in the nature of a substitute was
agreed to.
The bill (S. 2033), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a
third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
The bill (S. 1377) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading,
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:
S. 1377
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Theodore Roosevelt National
Park Wild Horses Protection Act''.
SEC. 2. MAINTENANCE OF HORSES IN THEODORE ROOSEVELT NATIONAL
PARK.
Section 5 of the Act of April 25, 1947 (61 Stat. 54,
chapter 41; 16 U.S.C. 245), is amended--
(1) by striking the section designation and all that
follows through ``The Administration'' and inserting the
following:
``SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATION, PROTECTION, AND DEVELOPMENT.
``(a) In General.--The administration''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Maintenance of Horses.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred
to in this subsection as the `Secretary') shall maintain a
genetically diverse herd of horses in the South Unit of
Theodore Roosevelt National Park (referred to in this
subsection as the `Park'), with a population of not fewer
than 150 horses.
``(2) Management plan.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 120 days after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall develop
a plan to provide for the management of horses in the Park.
``(B) Requirements.--The plan developed under subparagraph
(A) shall provide for the cost-effective management of the
horses in the Park while ensuring that natural resources
within the Park are not adversely impacted.
``(3) Removal.--The Secretary shall not remove, or assist
in or permit the removal of, any horses from Federal land
within the boundaries of the Park--
``(A) unless the removal is carried out as part of a plan
to maintain a genetically diverse herd of horses; or
``(B) except--
``(i) in the case of emergency; or
``(ii) to protect public health and safety.
``(4) Monitoring and assessment.--The Secretary shall
annually monitor, assess, and make available to the public
findings regarding the population, structure, and health of
the horses in the Park.''.
Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, with that, again, I want to thank my
colleague Senator Gallego and turn to him for his comments.
I yield the floor.
Mr. GALLEGO. Mr. President, I rise today to mark an important step in
the fight against wildfires with the passage of my Cross-Boundary
Wildfire Solutions Act.
Like many Western States, my home State of Arizona is a patchwork of
Federal, State, Tribal, and private lands. The fires do not stop at
property lines. That is why we need an all-hands-on-deck approach to
reducing wildfires and improving wildfire mitigation across land
ownerships no matter who owns that land.
When fires move faster than governments can coordinate, the fire has
the advantage. The Cross-Boundary Wildfire Solutions Act takes a
practical step to fixing that. The bill supports the kind of
collaboration between Federal, State, Tribal, and local partners that
we know works. By studying and identifying the gaps in current Federal
rules that present coordination between land ownership boundaries, we
can bolster our firefighting efforts.
This couldn't be more timely. The West is getting hotter and dryer
every year. In Arizona, we watched more than 200,000 acres burn across
the North Rim of the Grand Canyon and the Kaibab National Forest.
The Dragon Bravo fire, one of the largest in Arizona's history,
devastated iconic landscapes and the local businesses that depend on
them.
In the face of these conditions, it is vital we have the research and
coordination tools to ensure effective wildfire management.
At the same time, funding for the Forest Service's State, Tribal, and
private forestry program is at risk. That is the funding that enables
exactly the kind of cross-boundary collaboration this bill is designed
to work with.
Congress needs to send a signal that we know this work matters, and
we have the chance to do so today.
As we approach peak wildfire season, I have heard from people on the
ground that cross-boundary collaboration is a top priority to keep our
fire season from growing more dangerous and more expensive, and they
are right.
The cost of inaction in lives and lands and dollars keeps climbing.
So thank you, Senator Hoeven, and his team for helping me lead this
effort. Today we take a very important step in that direction.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
Unanimous Consent Requests
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act, also known as FISA, is a critical national security
tool. Well over half of every item in the President's daily brief is
derived from section 702.
It has stopped terrorist attacks. It has stopped the flow of deadly
drugs into our country. It has protected our troops overseas. It has
allowed us to rescue troops overseas.
[[Page S2749]]
Regrettably, the Democrats, led by the two minority leaders, are
going to allow this critical authority to expire tomorrow night.
Again, this program, which has been on the books for almost 20 years,
is one of the most important intelligence tools that we have.
And why are they going to let it expire? I guess the minority leader
is mad about who Donald Trump chose to run an intelligence Agency on an
acting basis--an Agency that, by the way, has very little to do with
section 702.
To the extent it does, legislation I proposed with Senator Warner and
other leaders in this Senate would impose more guardrails on that
Agency.
And, by the way, if the law expires tomorrow night, all the
guardrails on that, and every other Agency, expire as well.
So even though we haven't been able to pass the legislation that
Senator Grassley and I coauthored with Senator Warner and others, the
responsible next step is to have a short-term extension of this
legislation, especially as we begin welcoming literally millions of
foreigners to this country for the World Cup and for the America 250
celebrations right around the corner.
If we don't extend it for at least a few weeks while we continue to
try to work on our differences, the consequences could be severe. The
consequences, to be frank, could be fatal. Americans should not have to
face that risk because of partisan game playing by the minority leader
of the Senate and the House.
Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask for unanimous
consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the
bill at the desk. I further ask 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 an objection?
The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object is particularly relevant
here, because I am sure my colleague is aware that the bill--the 3-week
bill--was just defeated in the House on a strong, bipartisan vote this
morning.
The House is not back until the 23rd. So my understanding is you
can't do anything.
Bipartisan majorities in both the House and the Senate have now
rejected what I consider to be the surveillance status quo. I believe
there just have been too many abuses of Americans' rights across
multiple administrations, and Members of Congress are now standing up
and saying: No more.
The only viable path forward is one that leads to real reforms. The
Congress has already punted on section 702 twice this year. Every day
that 702 is in effect without reforms is a day that Americans' rights
are under threat. I believe Americans deserve new guardrails. If
Congress is going to extend these authorities--and that is what we are
talking about--those guardrails are essential. And, at a minimum,
Americans deserve transparency about how these surveillance powers have
been abused.
For those reasons, Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, let me try to respond to that fog of
misunderstanding and misleading statements.
Section 702 does not surveil Americans. It is, to put it simply,
about foreigners in foreign countries: so, say, an IRGC leader in Iran
talking to one of his operatives in Lebanon; or a Russian in Moscow
talking to a Russian in Mexico--all of whom are usually up to no good.
The government is not permitted to use section 702 to target Americans,
either here or in other countries.
It is called section 702 because, as is usually the case, laws have
other sections to them--like title I has sections of the law that
govern any targeting of an American--and those sections require a
probable cause warrant, which is the Senator from Oregon's great
crusade.
So-called reverse targeting of Americans, using section 702, is
prohibited. Requiring a probable cause warrant for this information is
akin to requiring a police officer to get a new warrant every time he
goes into the evidence room to review lawfully collected evidence.
Now, for all the talk about transparency and oversight and privacy
protections, I would point out that the legislation I have introduced
has more than a dozen additional measures to include, for instance,
criminal penalties for any abuse, to include more congressional
involvement in the FISA Court's processes, more reporting to the
committees on which the Senator from Oregon sits--just like the law we
passed 2 years ago had many additional transparency measures and
privacy protections.
And, as I pointed out, if this law is allowed to expire tomorrow
night, so do all of those transparency measures and all those privacy
protections.
So it is regrettable that we have reached this point, Mr. President.
I just hope that the American people don't pay the consequences for the
Democrats' reckless intransigence.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, again, like yesterday, I am making what I
believe is a real offer now. I am offering, again, to extend section
702 of FISA for 5 weeks and give the public more facts about how these
surveillance powers have been abused.
Defenders of the status quo seem to think that there is already
enough transparency around government surveillance. So let me be very
specific about what the bill that I am now proposing would do. It would
require more public disclosure about violations of our surveillance
laws, including section 702.
It would require more public disclosure about warrantless searches
targeting politicians, journalists, and religious leaders. This
particular category of searches more than tripled in 2025, and the FBI
has refused to explain why.
It would require more public disclosure about warrantless
surveillance of Americans outside of FISA, which the public knows
virtually nothing about. And it would require the executive branch to
redact and release a March 2026 FISA Court ruling that found serious
violations affecting Americans' rights.
The executive branch is already required to release this ruling
eventually. The chairman and the vice chairman of the Intelligence
Committee, in fact, asked them to release it by May 15. But,
unfortunately, they just brushed off the chairman and the vice
chairman's request.
Mr. President, so as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous
consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S.
4740; 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 an objection?
The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. You bet there is, Mr. President.
Mr. President, all of these ideas are totally unworkable and also
beside the point.
The Senator from Oregon has never voted for section 702. He is an
implacable, ideological opponent of this law.
These measures, too, are for what--a 5-week extension that he would
then extend permanently? That doesn't sound like a very reasonable
offer to me.
But almost every one of them is designed to make this program
unworkable and to expose Americans to grave risk.
There are already, again, dozens of transparency measures and privacy
protections in place under a law passed, just 2 years ago, by a
Democratic Senate, signed by a Democratic President.
The legislation that Senator Grassley and I drafted with another
Democratic Senator, the vice chairman of my committee--the Intelligence
Committee--has nearly two dozen more. It is never enough for the
Senator from Oregon.
So perhaps the minority leaders of the Senate and the House will
eventually come to their senses and vote to support legislation that
key leaders in their party have drafted to protect this country. But it
will never be enough for the Senator from Oregon.
[[Page S2750]]
So I, of course, object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, just very briefly on this last point, the
proposals I made yesterday and the proposals I made today are longer
than anything else on offer--5 weeks--and I think that is the relevant
fact.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. A 5-week extension for permanent, radical unworkable
reforms. That is a farce.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Unanimous Consent Request
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, what the Senator from Arkansas and chairman
of the Senate Intelligence Committee just said is absolutely accurate:
The Senator from Oregon has consistently tried to kill this program and
has never believed in it, has never voted for it. And it is a program
that makes Americans more safe. That is a proven fact.
You ask any intelligence expert, any military planner in this
country, the intelligence derived from the 702 program is something
that has saved American lives in theaters of conflict, preventing
terrorist attacks, preventing drug runners from getting drugs into this
country.
Mr. President, 90 percent--90 percent--of the fentanyl disruptions
coming into this country were stopped because of this program. This is
a program that saves American lives.
And I have to ask the question. I mean, I can't, for the life of me,
figure out why the Democrats continue to support policies that make
this country less safe. TSA agents, I think, this year have worked
without pay for almost as much time as they have worked with pay
because Democrats have wanted to shut the government down, shut TSA
down.
More recently, Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
two Agencies that are critical to keeping this country safe--they don't
want to provide a single dollar--zero--zero dollars for ICE and CBP,
making this country less safe.
And so what did we have to do? We had to use reconciliation to do
something that ought to be a no-brainer around here: protecting the
American people, keeping our borders secure, protecting people in our
communities in this country from criminal illegal aliens.
I just don't understand this. And now this, blocking something that
was negotiated on a bipartisan, bicameral basis, House and Senate--the
chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, his Democrat
counterpart; the same thing on the House side--with reforms, a lot of
reforms. Something was negotiated in a bipartisan way to get a bill on
the floor that we could use to extend this program and continue to keep
Americans safe.
The ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee made some
public statements earlier today, and one was that having this shutdown
is ``obviously a high risk proposition.'' That is a quote. He went on
to say that he believes it is ``dangerous''--``dangerous''--for section
702 to lapse.
And what this is all about is a temporary acting position at DNI. So
Democrats have decided to block a vote against something that many in
the past have supported, that is keeping this country safe, because
they don't like the person that President Trump is putting into a
temporary acting role. These aren't linked.
This is a program that works, and it works effectively to keep
Americans safe. And the reforms that have been proposed, the
legislation that has been agreed upon by Democrats and Republicans in
the House and the Senate, ought to be able to pass the U.S. Senate.
Mr. President, 100 percent of the President's intelligence priorities
are informed by the 702 collection--100 percent. I am just really--I
don't get it. I just don't get it.
So what I am going to do is suggest, because this acting temporary
person doesn't even get into the acting temporary position until a week
from tomorrow, June 19, I am going to suggest that we do at least a 1-
week extension to keep the lights on at this Agency, at a time when we
are hosting the World Cup. We have got 250th anniversary celebrations
going on around this country.
This is a time of risk for the American people, and Democrats here in
the Senate said: Well, sorry. We don't like this guy in the acting
temporary position, and so we are going to shut the lights off on this
program and put at risk the American people. It is an untenable,
irresponsible position.
But since he doesn't take that position until a week from Friday, I
think we ought to at least extend this program through a week from
Friday and allow for some more time for people to figure out the long-
term solution, if there is one.
So, Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I am going to ask
unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate
consideration of the bill at the desk. I will further ask that that
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 Oregon.
Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object.
Mr. President, as the majority leader knows, the bill that came up in
the House had a strong bipartisan vote this morning. It was not
something that one party simply tried to jam something through on the
other; it was a strong bipartisan vote. It was defeated. The House is
gone until the 23rd, so they can't do anything.
Now, with respect to a couple of the details made by the majority
leader, I have already indicated that on offer is my proposal, which is
longer than anything that has come up in the last day. It is a real
offer.
By the way, it is not changing any surveillance powers at all. All my
proposal does is offer some transparency, and I think transparency
information is relevant when there has been evidence of Americans being
spied on, and I think that is why it is important.
So for those reasons, Mr. President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. THUNE. Let me just, again, say for the record, because the
Senator from Oregon's proposal is designed to kill the bill--and there
was a vote in the House. And I want to say there were 190 Republicans
in the House who voted for a 3-week extension. And there would have
been a lot of Democrats if they hadn't been told by their leadership,
like they have been told here, not to vote for an extension.
This is an extension. This is an extension of current law. We have a
proposal that has been negotiated by both sides that would be a longer
term extension.
So if you are rejecting the 3-week extension, what I am suggesting
here, and what you just objected to, because my understanding is--
correct me if I am wrong--that the reason all the Democrats went south
on this, in both the Senate and the House, was because of the
nomination of a gentleman named Bill Pulte to be the acting temporary
Director of the Office of National Intelligence.
If that is true and if he doesn't take office until a week from
Friday, what objection could there possibly be--possibly be--to
extending this program's authority until at least next Friday, so that
we don't have a period where this program lapses, this program goes
dark, at a time when there are literally hundreds of thousands of
people coming into this country for the World Cup.
A 1-week extension, that is all we are saying. And the Democrats are
going to object to that.
So, again, I will simply say this is, on its face, an irresponsible
position that makes America and Americans less safe.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
Mr. MORENO. Mr. President, I will make my remarks very, very brief.
For those watching on TV, wondering what their government did this
week, what you just witnessed on the floor of the U.S. Senate is one
Democrat, at least, who is willing to have his position stated. The
other ones are hiding because they know what they did today was so
wrong.
At the end of the day, the most important job we have is to protect
the American people. And because of Democrat political posturing, they
made this country less safe.
[[Page S2751]]
And I hope and pray to God that nothing happens in this country where
an American is killed or something happens to this Nation as a result
of what we just witnessed here today.
This is another low point in the history of the U.S. Senate.
Waiving Quorum Call
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum
call with respect to the Smith nomination.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MORENO. I ask unanimous consent for the previously scheduled
rollcall vote to commence.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of
rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, do hereby move to bring
to a close debate on the nomination of Executive Calendar No. 742,
Justin D. Smith, of Missouri, to be United States Circuit Judge for the
Eighth Circuit.
John Thune, Tim Sheehy, Pete Ricketts, Mike Rounds, John
Barrasso, Ted Budd, Jim Banks, Rick Scott of Florida,
Todd Young, David McCormick, Shelley Moore Capito, Jon
Husted, John Boozman, Mike Crapo, Katie Boyd Britt,
Eric Schmitt, John R. Curtis.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
nomination of Justin D. Smith, of Missouri, to be United States Circuit
Judge for the Eighth Circuit, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from South
Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the
Senator from Florida (Mrs. Moody), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran),
and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).
Further, if present and voting: the Senator from South Carolina (Mr.
Graham) would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.
Hagerty) would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Bennet),
the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Nevada (Ms.
Rosen), and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) are
necessarily absent.
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 47, nays 43, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 171 Ex.]
YEAS--47
Armstrong
Banks
Barrasso
Boozman
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Curtis
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Grassley
Hawley
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Justice
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Moreno
Murkowski
Paul
Ricketts
Risch
Rounds
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sheehy
Sullivan
Thune
Tuberville
Wicker
Young
NAYS--43
Alsobrooks
Baldwin
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Cantwell
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Fetterman
Gallego
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
Kim
King
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Sanders
Schatz
Schiff
Schumer
Slotkin
Smith
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--10
Bennet
Blackburn
Coons
Graham
Hagerty
Moody
Moran
Rosen
Shaheen
Tillis
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Moreno). On this vote the yeas are 47, the
nays are 43, and the motion is agreed to.
The motion was agreed to.
____________________