tv U.S. Senate 10022017 CSPAN October 2, 2017 3:00pm-7:33pm EDT
>> we do have this online in our archives. go to c-span .org and click on the link for washington journal. take you live now to the senate about to gamble in. they will be resuming debate over the nominee to chair the federal communications commission. if we confirmed it will be the second five-year term for german type. the confirmation vote for 5:30 eastern. we also expect here responses from senators to the las vegas shooting. take you live now. coverage from the senate floor here on c-span2. me to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal lord god, we lift our
hearts to you. lord, please shower your mercy on our nation, as we seek to deal with the las vegas mass shooting. please show mercy to the victims and their families. lord, in spite of this horrific act, give us faith to believe that evil will not ultimately prevail in our world. may this tragedy motivate us to plant and water seeds of peace, as we cultivate a greater respect for the laws of seed time and harvest. cut in pieces the cords of
wickedness that seek to bind us. today, guide our senators and use them as ambassadors of reconciliation in our nation and world. eternal god, though we walk in the midst of trouble, stretch forth your hands and revive us with your might. we pray in your merciful name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate now observe a moment of silence for the victims of the las vegas attack. the president pro tempore: without objection, it is so ordered. the senate will now observe a moment of silence for the victims of the attack in las vegas.
mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. mcconnell: the us in we awoke to this morning -- the news we awoke to this morning was heartbreaking. what happened in las vegas is shocking, it's tragic, and for those affected and their families, it's devastating. it's hard to even imagine their pain. i hope they will know that we
are praying for them now. i hope they will find strength in the love and kindness of those around them in these hours of such darkness and pain. i hope they will see that our country is standing by their side today. many americans are still in shock. others have begun to wonder why someone would do something this terrible. investigators will continue their dedicated work in search of answers. but what is clear now is that this is a moment for national mourning and for prayer. just a moment ago president trump led the country in observing a moment of silence. as he noted this morning, we're all grateful for the courageous efforts of the first responders. they always put their lives on the line to save others. they do so with selflessness. it reminds us of the inherent
courage and mercy that remains possible within each of us. light amidst the dark, open times of terrible grief, the same is true of the national spirit of compassion that shines through our country in the moments when it is needed most. whether it is lining up to donate blood or signing up to volume they're their time, our fell will he americans -- our fellow americans are always there to offer what they can when others are in need. we thank these americans and law enforcement and the first responders for everything they have done. we thank them for their efforts that continue. we again send our condolences to everyone affected by this terrible tragedy.
the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the pai nomination, which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, federal communications commission, pie pie pie of kansas for a -- ajit varadaraj pai of kansas to be a member. mr. hatch: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator utah. mr. hatch: mr. president, there are a number of issues i wish to speak on today. but first i wish to extend my most sincere condolences to the
victims of violence in las vegas. what we witnessed last night was a tragedy without precedent. today our thoughts are with all those folks who have lost families, loved ones and friends whose lives will never be the shame as a result of the shooting. our heart are with all of you and so are our prayers. we love you, we stand by you today, and we ask that god will stand by you always. now, mr. president, on another solemn subject, i wish to pay tribute to elder robert d. hales, a member of the church of jesus christ of latter day saints. he passed away peacefully yesterday after noon in between sessions of a conference. more than a beloved leader, he
was a caring family man, a powerful role model and a close friend whom i will miss dearly. today i wish to pay tribute to him and remember a life well-lived. elder heals was born in 19332t e group up in long island in a neighborhood that allowed him to become familiar with many cultures. he would speak fondly of the summers he spent in utah. baling hay, riding horses, tending sheep, herding cattle in the mountain pastures. although he would later become an accomplished businessman, he was no stranger to manual labor. he credited his earlier days working on the farm as the source of his strong work ethic.
during his teenage years, he distinguished himself as a student and excelled as a pitcher for his high school baseball team. after enrolling at the university of utah, he returned home to new york for the summer and met mary crandall. it was love at first sight. they married a year later in the salt lake temple on june 10, 1953. followless his graduation from college, elder heals joined the united states air force where he served as a fighter pilot. his squadron's motto was "return with honor." in his own words, quote, the motto was constant reminder to us of our determination to return to home base with honor after we had expanded -- expended all of our efforts to successfully complete every aspect of our mission, unquote. return with honor would become
the credo with which he lived his life, expending every effort as a faith leader, father, and friend to better himself, less oh, and build the kingdom of god. yesterday afternoon after decades of dedicated service as a minister of jesus christ, he completed his mission and returned to heaven. the challenge he leaves behind is for all of us to do the same. to the very end, he was a model of selfless service. even in his later years, he continued to carry out his responsibilities of his apostolic office without hesitation and without complaint. he decided when he was still a young man that he would never let anything get in the way of his church service.
following his career in the air force, elder heals enrolled in harvard business school where he was called to serve as president, one of the most demanding positions in the church because of his verily courseload, elder heals could have easily declined the calling. but he gladly accepted it. his wife mary guided him in making this decision. he said he might fail his classes if he agreed to serve as the president, mary said, quote, bob, i would rather have an active priesthood elder than a man who holds a law degree from harvard. unquote. with mary's support, he would serve as the president in addition to earning his mba. he would later go on to work as a high-level executive at multiple national corporations. from this formative experience, bob and mary learned that god
would provide for them as long as they put the gospel first. that's why elder hales did not hesitate to leave his business behind when he was called to serve as an apostle for ther church. mr. president, elder hales provided a model of servant leadership for all of us to follow. it was a -- he was a true disciple of geez utah christ putting the welfare of others before self and the kingdom of god above all. he was gracious and loving, thoughtful, and kind. and all things elder hales exemplified humanity and humility, which was the hallmark of his life. while millions of us grieve his passing, we take peace and comfort in knowing that his service continues on the other side.
i knew him very well. i played golf with him, thought he was one of the great men that -- in my life. and i want to pay tribute to him and his family here today in front of the whole united states senate and the country. he was one of the most worthwhile people i ever met and we're going to miss him. now, mr. president, with the time i have remaining, i wish to address an issue that remains critically important as well. over-criminalization and the need to reform criminal intent requirements in our federal criminal code. like many of my colleagues, i believe congress has criminalized far too much conduct and has mandated overly harsh penalties for too many crimes. a number of my colleagues have sought to address these problems by cutting prison sentences, altering statutory minimums, or releasing prisoners earlier for good behavior.
but as we seek to reform the criminal justice system, we must be careful mott to overlook -- not to overlook one of the major roots of the problem -- the lack of adequate criminal intent requirements in federal criminal statutes. there is a latin phrase meaning guilty mind. one of the time-honored, fundamental features of our criminal law, is that for a person to be found guilty of a crime, he or she must have criticalled the act with criminal -- committed the act with criminal intent or mensrea. this principle is summarized in the idea that the act is not culpables unless the mind is guilty. mensrea requirements protect individuals against an illegal act without knowing if their action was wrong or unlawful. to give an example, a person who mistakenly retrieves the wrong coat from the coat room does not
become a they have nearly because he took something that wasn't his but looked like his. only if he knows the coat belongs to someone else does he commit a criminal act. unfortunately, many of our criminal laws and regulations contain inadequate mens s rea requirements and some contain no mensrea requirements at all. this leaves individuals, innocent individuals subject and vulnerable to prosecution for conduct they believe to be lawful at the time. in recent years, as congress and federal agencies have criminalized more behavior, they have often been vague about mensrea requirements or even silent about mens rea altogether. in a 2017 "law review" article, michael cattone investigated how many federal criminal statutes there are in the u.s. code.
mr. cattone explained that, quote, tellingly, no exact count of the number of federal statutes and imposed criminal sanctions has ever been given, unquote. most lawyers agree there are approximately 5,000 federal statutes that impose criminal sanctions, but those criminal statutes do not include the nearly 300,000 federal regulations that also carry criminal penalties. with so many criminal laws on the books, it's far too easy for americans to break federal laws unwittingly with no understanding whatsoever that their behavior happens to be illegal. for example, did you know it's a federal crime to write a check for an amount less than $1, or that it's a federal crime to allow a pet to make a noise that frightens wildlife on federal land?
even more incredibly, did you know it's a federal crime to keep a pet on a leash that exceeds six feet in length? on federal land? mr. president, there are examples -- these are examples of unlawful activity that reasonable people cannot reasonably be expected to know. what's worse, many of these unlawful activities are punishable by time in prison. this is not only ridiculous, it's immoral. the lack of accurate mens rea requirements in our federal criminal code subjects innocent people to unjustified five-minute. on this issue, i introduced the mens rea reform act of 2017 today. today i wish to express my sincere appreciation to the heritage foundation and the federalist society for highlighting the need for mens
rea reform and for supporting my efforts to protect innocent people. they're not the only ones. anybody who looks at this has got to say we're going to send people to jail when they didn't know what they were doing was wrong? it makes anybody stop and think, is that right, should we do that, is that fair? likewise, i wish to thank senator rand paul, ted cruz, mike lee, and david perdue for joining me as cosponsors on this bill. my bill sets a default intent requirement of willfulness for all federal criminal offenses that lack an intent requirement. additionally, the bill defines willfulness to mean that a person acted with knowledge that his or her conduct was unlawful. naturally, our bill does not apply to any offenses that congress clearly intended to be strict liability offenses. our bill has garn eshed
widespread support from a variety of organizations, including the national association of criminal defense lawyers, koch industries, federal defenders, the u.s. chamber of commerce, the federal defenders, and the national heritage foundation, just to name a few. importantly, our bill does not remove any crimes from the books nor does it override any existing mens rea standards written in the statute. moreover, it does not limit congress' authority to create new criminal offenses, including strict liability offenses. mr. president, mens rea really is a simple issue individuals should not be threatened with prison time for accidentally committing a crime or for engaging in an activity they did not know was wrong. if congress wants to criminalize an activity, it does not want to include any criminal intent requirement, congress should have to specify in statute that
it is creating a strict liability offense. i believe this simple legislative solution will go a long way in reducing the harsh sentences for mostly -- or morally innocent offenders. it will also push back against the overcriminallization of innocent behavior. as i have said many times, any consideration of criminal justice reform or sentencing reform is incomplete without reforms to mens rea requirements. mr. president, on a final note, i wish to express my concern about a provision in u.s. law that allows foreign litigants to come into u.s. courts and gain access to documents and other evidence for use in foreign judicial proceedings. under current provision 28 u.s.c. 1782, an american citizen can be subjected to invasive requests by a foreign entity,
even when the citizen has no ability under the laws of the foreign jurisdiction to obtain similar information from the foreign entity itself. this gives foreign entities an unfair advantage over their u.s. counterparts. equally problematic, u.s. persons may be compelled under federal law to turn over confidential business information or trade secrets for use in federal judicial proceedings without any guarantee that such information will be adequately protected in a foreign jurisdiction. this places u.s. businesses at risk and again creates an unfair playing field. such unfairness and lack of reciprocity is deeply concerning, mr. president. our laws should not disadvantage our own citizens and companies. rather, we should ensure a level playing field in the coming weeks. mr. president, i will be introducing legislation to do
a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schatz: thank you, mr. president. before my planned remarks on the federal communications commission, i want to say a few words about the awful events in las vegas. our hearts are with the families affected by the tragedy and with the city of las vegas. and we do send them our best wishes and our prayers, but we can do more than send our thoughts and prayers to the grieving. we can do more than thank the
first responders. we can do more than lower the flag to half-mast. we can take a stand against gun violence by passing commonsense gun safety laws. otherwise, this just becomes a ritual of mass murder, mourning, moving on. let's stop this awful ritual. let's stop the violence. let's do something about it. now, i'd like to talk about the nomination of chairman ajit pai to lead the federal communications commission for another five years. when it comes to chairman pai personally and professionally, i want to say i believe in his integrity as a public servant and i believe he is smart and qualified, but the f.c.c. is supposed to create competition and protect consumers, and chairman pai just isn't doing
that. first, chairman pai's f.c.c. is trying to get rid of net neutrality. there is a federal rule that sis i.s.p.'s, internet service providers, must treat all content equally. it cannot discriminate by making certain kinds of content slower, charging more for other kinds of content or blocking some content altogether. that's the basic premise of the internet. once you pay for your broadband internet access and then you jump on a browser, everything comes down at the same speeds. and it is so foundational to the way we use the internet that it's actually hard to describe a future without net neutrality, but it could be that you pay your i.s.p. and certain websites download fast, certain websites are almost impossible to find, certain websites you have to pay a premium just to be able to capture their content.
forget what you may have to pay hulu, netflix, others. the i.s.p. will essentially control your access to the internet. and that's why net neutrality was so important, not that things were necessarily undermining in that moment the current internet, but that without a firm rule, these companies may have incentives to change the internet as we know it. when chairman pai announced the f.c.c. would review the rules on net neutrality, he said, quote, quo this is a fight we intend to wage and a fight we intend to win. that is not how the f.c.c. is supposed to work. this is a quasi judicial rule. they are supposed to propose the rule, allow the public to weigh in before the agency makes a decision. chairman pai made clear from the beginning that he already made
his mind up even though there were 22 million individual comments from american citizens about what we should do with the free and open internet. he decided in advance of that. unfortunately this is part of a pattern. right after congress took away the f.c.c.'s ability to protect people's privacy online, he wrote an op-ed essentially saying good news, this is pretty unusual to have a chairman of a quasi judicial body weigh in on something that the legislative branch does, or to completely disregard the process of public input. chairman pai has not yet demonstrated a willingness to stray from the party line. and one of the things i like about him is i know he's got a big brain. we have talked policy. and when we have private conversations, i can see that he likes the engagement and he likes the job and he likes public service. but the challenge is that there
has been no instance in which he has done anything that was other than predictably republican. and that's okay for now. it's only been a relatively short tenure. but what we need in an f.c.c. chairman is someone who takes his own views and the facts as he, as the record becomes established, and makes up his own mind. he is not a republican on the f.c.c. his job is to apply the facts and his own judgment. during the confirmation hearing, i asked him about the president of the united states calling the media the enemy of the states. and he would not say one way or another what he thought of those comments or how he would guide the f.c.c. based on those comments. at some point he needs to demonstrate some independence from his party and from the president. with this vote, the senate has a chance to say that the person who leads the f.c.c., at a bare
minimum, should understand how to run a quasi judicial agency in a nonpartisan fashion that he or she should value public input, that he or she should not simply go along with whatever the party is asking and implement it no matter how it stacks up against the statute. here's another example. earlier this year chairman pai rolled back a rule in order to allow local tv stations to be bought up by one single company without any limits. this decision seems to be for the benefit of one company, the sinclaire broadcasting group, who just happens to be a company with strong conservative leanings. sinclaire is already the largest owner of local broadcast stations in the united states, but now they are trying to buy another company, tribune media, which would expand sinclaire's reach into 72% of the households. for decades both congress and the f.c.c. have taken steps to
protect local broadcasting because it benefits the public interest. under normal circumstances, sinclaire would not be able to buy up these other stations, but chairman pai has changed the rules so that this company will have even more power and reach. and the secondary beneficiary of this change is the republican party, because sinclaire has a decades-long history of pressuring local stations to broadcast certain news that helps the republican cause. we need an independent chairman at the helm of the f.c.c. we need someone who will make decisions based on statute, not based on political affiliation. that's why i will vote no on mr. but i hope that i will be proven wrong. i yield the floor. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the democratic leader. mr. schumer: first, let me thank my friend from hawaii for his words.
i will have a statement for the record on mr. pai. i'm not going to give it today because of the horrible situation in las vegas which i want to speak about. but i agree with his vote. i'm voting no on mr. pai. well, mr. president, there are precious few words for days like this. last night, as everyone now knows, at a concert in las vegas, nevada, a gunman opened fire on a crowd of 22,000, killing at least 58, sending hundreds, hundreds more to the hospital. it was the deadliest mass shooting in the history of our country. our collective hearts, so hardened now by the absurd frequency of this mass shootings, are broken once again. we mourn the families of the fallen. we pray with the families of the wounded. we have the deepest gratitude for every first responder, cop, and firefighter who rushed
to the scene. that hetheir heroism is an insp. today we're filled with shock and horror, sadness, and rage. the horrific massacre was perpetuated by an american on his fellow americans, and the visitors from every corner of the world were the very lifeblood of las vegas. and we're left with many questions whose answers we'll be seeking in the coming days and weeks. how did this monster acquire the arsenal he used to rain down death on a crowd of innocents? were those guns purchased and compiled legally? was this person -- what was this person's perverted motive? was there any history of mental health issues? what circumstances could lead a man to commit such violence upon his fellow human beings, complete strangers? what twisted reasoning, what
demented logic, what kind of madness? there is much more that we don't know than what we do know. some of the questions we have today won't have clear answers. others are perhaps beyond our fathoming. but some will have answers, and we'll have to reckon with the fact that this man was able to assemble an arsenal of military-grade weapons. as much as we might hope to, we cannot banish evil in the earth. congress can't do that. the president can't do that. what congress can do, what congress must do is pass laws to keep our citizens safe. and that starts with laws that help prevent guns, especially the most dangerous guns, from falling into the wrong hands. we will take care of the injured, their bodies and their hearts, and nurse them back to
health. we will mourn those lost with all our collective love and support. we will bind up this new national wound. and then we will ferret out the facts based on that reality we will confront, we must confront deeply troubling issues that are raised by this atrocity. now before i yield the floor, mr. president, our friends and relatives and fellow americans in puerto rico and the u.s. virgin islands should know that even while we mourn the and process the incomprehensible events in las vegas, we remain laser focused on the needs of puerto rico and the virgin islands, and we'll continue our advocacy for a more comprehensive, more sure-footed and better coordinated response to their crisis. now i ask unanimous consent that my comments on the upcoming vote on f.c.c. commissioner pai be inserted in the record.
a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: mr. president, thank you. i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moran: mr. president, thank you very much. today i'm here to speak on behalf of a good friend and exceptional public servant, chairman ajit varadaraj pai. federal communication division. i have admired his work within the commissions which dates back to 2007 when he was in the office of the general counsel. he was promoted over time to become the deputy general counsel of the federal communications commission. in 2012, the senate confirmed by a voice vote his service to the commission, and he's continued to embody the integrity, honesty and dedication in this role, something we'd expect from a
kansan. as only the second kansan to ever be nominated to serve on the federal communications commission, the first being bob wells of garden city kansas who served from 1969 to 1971, ajit pai has proven himself to be a capable and talented leader and one of the smartest ones i've met when it comes to public policy. i've worked with him, traveled with him throughout our home state, and getting to know him on a personal level has really been a delight, something that has been a highlight of my time as, in serving in the united states senate. he's a native of parsons, kansas, a small town in the southeast corner of our state. and he brings with him an understanding of the challenges that face rural america. he understands the importance of access to high-speed broadband and wireless connectivity, and i believe his roots as a
small-town kansas kid make him exceptionally qualified to advocate for rural america. jipt came to wichita just this past week to explore ideas and explain policy opportunities, close the digital divide within local broadband providers who work in the kansas communities that i serve. the lack of blond band connectivity in rural kansas has an educational and health impact and ajit pai has the connect america fund to close this divide in a fiscally responsible and competitively driven way. aside from getting high-speed broadband to underserved, he has the policy recommendations to
promote broadband deployment across america, including removing regulatory barriers and improving the permitting and right of way process through regulatory reform. while in kansas he was also able to see the great work being done to implement the next generation 9/11 technology in our home state. as we know, improving these communications systems is absolutely necessary to assuring adequate emergency services to rural and urban americans alike. and we have seen that today and other the last several months the disasters and tragedies that have occurred in our country. ajit have proven himself as a leader, clearly understanding that regulations should be balanced with pro-growth principles that do not harm employers or stifle innovation. to this send ajit pai announced his intentions to stand up a new office of economics and data to
provide economic analysis on the policies and functions of the agency. we're looking for thoughtful data-backed input to the agency that should lead to market-driven policy decision that the commission can then hang their hat on. critical issues before the f.c.c. today require this type of expertise, things such as efficient broadband deployment, quality spectrum management, schools and libraries need as well as hospitals desperately need this spectrum and fostering innovation in the general sense. if we want a growing economy with better jobs, higher-paying jobs, we need access to technologies across the current. as the currently appointed chairman of the f.c.c., ajit has improved transparency within the commission and he has protected
consumers from illegal and fraudulent robo calls. one recent decision unhis leadership that has received so much attention from consumer advocates, industry representatives, and policy academics, is the f.c.c. order restoring freedom. under chairman pai's leadership the commission has collected tens of millions of comments regarding the agency's proposal to roll back the open internet order and extended the deadline for even more comments so that more interested parties could be heard. this input collection, upled with fundamentally improving rule-making process has increased the commission's openness and transparency, something that i certainly support and would continue to encourage. i believe the federal government must ensure a fair and open internet that is not blocked or
slowed. i do not want outdated utility style regulation to the internet that was established for telephone companies in the 1930's. instead of leaving this important framework open to interpretation and changes with every new administration, congress, the united states senate, should craft bipartisan legislation that preserve the fair and open internet. chairman pai has taken thoughtful steps toward a long-term solution by seeking to eliminate the harmful 2015 regulations hindering broadband deployment and harming an innovative internet echosystem. ajit pai has repeatedly proven himself to be a public service of the highest caliber with strong integrity and character, and i'm proud to recommend his swift confirmation to the federal communications commission and call upon my
colleagues to support his nomination. ajit pai is an intelligent, articulate public servant who has the character and integrity that is required at the federal communications commission. i support his nomination and ask my colleagues to do the same. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:
mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator for texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, today we mourn the loss of at least 50 lives in las vegas, victims of senseless violence at an outdoor concert near the mandalay resort and casino. the lives of our fellow
americans were taken in a barbaric manner that defies all justification, excuse, or explanation. that these events have become almost commonplace makes them no less shocking. the date of location, a country music concert, makes it even more cruel. thousands were enjoying themselves with security being the furtherrest thing from their mind until the shots rang out. as news reports indicated, the shooting is one of the deadliest mast shootings in american history. it continues to tear apart our country and the scars left by families will be painful and permanent. my prayers go out to all of
those in nevada who have not slept since yesterday and still grappling with the aftermath of the shooting, the families tending to loved ones in hospitals, as well as sphroanders and -- first responders. here in washington we'll continue to monitor the situation and we'll continue to keep the fallen in our prayers in the days ahead. mr. president, turning to the legislative business at hand, the last time congress enacted tax reform was 1986. back then i was a state district judge in san antonio, texas. the spurs had a bad losing spreec -- streak and gas was 89 cents a gallon. a lot changed since 1986. we've seen parties in congress
win the majority, lose it, and win again. and we've seen six presidents come and go, bringing us to this moment, this year with the president committed to providing americans with real tax relief and the promise of a resurgent economy. after countless meetings, hearings, and conversation amongst members who represent varying and diverse constituents, republicans in the house and the senate and the administration have joined together to unveil a unified framework for tax reform. in the more than 30 years since our tax code has been overhauled it's become the punchline in a bad joke. no one will defend it. everyone knows it needs to be fixed. over time the code has become more complex and is now riddled with deductions, credits and
loopholes advocated by an army of lobbyists and special interests. so much so that a majority of americans pay someone else to do their taxes because it is too complex for them to do it on their own. with a renewed focus and determination we are committed to take this framework and enact real reforms who simplify a tax code that has become so complex over the years. but that's not the main reason. the main reason we need tax reform is that the tax code has become the enemy of a growing prosperous economy, the enemy of more take-home pay, and the enemy of america's competitiveness in a global economy. it is self-inflicted harm and we can and must do better. now, our first priority should be to reduce taxes for all american families, not one
socioeconomic class or another, everyone. with a simpler, fairer and more competitive tax code, we can raise living standards so that people who can earn the money can make decisions on how best to spend it themselves -- on their children's education, on their home, on a car they need in order to get reliable transportation to get to and from work, or maybe, just maybe, putting a little bit of money away for retirement. i think about the newly graduated teacher in houston public schools whose worried about stagnant wages, the entrepreneur in austin with a great business idea who needs investors to succeed or a single parent in san antonio who is living paycheck to paycheck. ultimately this is about empowering all citizens to pursue the american dream.
this is about reducing government's big bite out of our wages each month and about small businesses spending more time growing and creating jobs. by coming to the aid of hardworking american and texas families, we will reawaken the sleeping giant that is our economy by reincentivizing investment and job creation. i know these are lofty goals. if it were easy, we would have done it sometime more recently since 1986, and i know some of our colleagues across the aisle, and some in the public, are already questioning this framework. some have wasted no time lobbing accusations, but they don't even bother to do their homework first. they are engaging in the same kind of class warfare that many have come to love to wage here
in washington, d.c., but those tactics are deeply cynical and deeply untrue. here's their line -- they say our tax plan cuts taxes for the wealthy and hurts the poor even though the actual plan hasn't been written yet. some already claim they already know what the bill says, and they don't. s that entirely -- that's entirely predictable in this political environment and wholly false. let me tell you why. first, we will cut taxes for all american families without sifting the burden from higher income households to lower or middle-class income households. to accomplish this the framework c.e.o.ites a larger zero -- creates a larger zero tax bracket. the first $12,000 for an
individual and $24,000 for a couple would be tax free. let me say it again. if you're a couple making $24,000 or less, you will pay zero federal income tax which is effectively a zero tax bracket. additionally, the proposed individual rates are collapsed into three at 12%, 25%, and 35%. so instead of seven tax brackets which we have now for individuals, we'll have four, including the zero tax bracket. this framework also enhances the child tax credit, and it repeals the death tax that has hurt small businesses and their families, has broken up family farms and ranches and repeals the special interest tax breaks that primarily benefit the wealthy. the other refrain some critics have already started making is
the claim that our tax plan gives big tax cuts to job creators. well, as i said, in addition to closing the special interest loop hoals, nearly -- loopholes, nearly everyone will see some sort of benefit, and job creators will take that benefit and invest in their business. they'll hire more people and they'll improve wages and growth in the economy that we will all benefit from. so why would our democratic colleagues oppose that? well, our unified framework is a templet that will be used by the tax writing committees to put the nuts and bolts together for tax reform. as a member of the senate finance committee, i look forward to working with chairman hatch, ranking member wyden, as well as our colleagues in the house, the house ways and means committee chairman kevin brady, speaker ryan and others, on
these ideas. and i even look forward to working with our democratic colleagues if they will join us. madam president, i yield the floor. i understand there's a bill at the desk that's due for a second reading. madam president, while they're sorting out the paperwork on that, i have one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the senate. it's been approved by both the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. cornyn: now, madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new mexico.
mr. udall: thank you, madam president, for the recognition. madam president, today is a day of mourning for las vegas and for america. my heart goes out to all those touched by the ruthless and cowardly shooting last night. one of the victims was lisa romero, a secretary at a lie school in new mexico. the on -- high school in new mexico. the students knew her well by miss lisa and she was adored by everyone at the school. her loss will be deeply felt. i send my condolences and prayers to her family as well as her school family and to everyone in gallop, new mexico. i also want to recognize the true bravery of first responders, the police, the firefighters, the e.m.t.'s, some of whom risked their own lives to save others. there are heroes in america and we saw them in action last
evening. madam president, las vegas, nevada, and new mexico share a long kinship. nevada is a sister western state. many new mexicans have family in las vegas. and new mexicans are reeling because of this tragedy. as westerners and as americans, we must all come together to support the victims, thank our first responders, and focus resources and policy on preventing future massacres. madam president, i would ask consent that the -- that my statement i'm now going to make be placed in a separate place in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: thank you, madam president. madam president, i rise in opposition to the renomination of mr. ajit pai to the federal communications commission. mr. pai both as f.c.c. commissioner and now as chairman has not been a vigorous watchdog
for free speech. he has not put the people's right to information first. in fact, he has put corporate interest first. and he has opposed policies outright that ensure underserved communities have access to essential technology. i strongly oppose his renomination to the commission. let's begin with his responsibility to guard first amendment rights. president trump has relentlessly attacked nbc, cbs, abc, cnn, "the new york times," and "the washington post." he called these established and esteemed news outlets fake news. he even called them the enemy of the people. earlier this year in february during a senate commerce hearing, this was an oversight hearing, i asked chairman pai point blank whether he agreed with the president that these
mainstream news organizations were itself enemy of the people -- were the enemy of the people. he refused to answer, refused to disagree with this patently outrageous and anti-american statement. his written answers were better, but even then chairman pai did not demonstrate that he could stand up to power and defend first amendment rights. democrats on the commerce committee sent a letter asking again whether he believed the media were the enemy of the people. and he qualified his answer in the negative by writing, and i quote here, the president has made clear that he was referring to fake news as the enemy of the people, end quote. i wish that was true but it is not. the president referred to well respected mainstream media organizations. the f.c.c. must u unequivocally
stand up for the first amendment, and the chairman needs to strongly disavow the president's unfounded attack on the media. the f.c.c. took a huge step forward in favor of consumers in 2015 when it passed the open internet order. that order known as the net neutrality order was codified. the principle underlying net neutrality is simple and fair. it means that internet service providers must treat all internet traffic equally. they cannot block access to particular websites, apps, or services. they can't give fast lanes or special treatment to websites or apps that pay more or are naiferred by -- are favored by some company's executives. consumers benefit because internet service providers can't pick winners or losers on the
online marketplace for services and ideas. those are the words of president obama. our democracy benefits because the internet lowers the barriers to communication, but not if the massive companies that control infrastructure can erect new ones. as a commissioner, mr. pai voted against that pro consumer measure and as trump's chairman, he has now moved to dismantle it. the american people are outraged with the chairman's move to undo net neutrality. the commission has received a record 22 million comments in that regulatory proceeding. so who is against net neutrality? the mega providers, like comcast and verizon, chairman pai's old employer, who can benefit financially from giving advantage to selected websites.
but chairman pai's record is that. if there is a choice between consumers and big corporations, corporations win out. let's look at what the chairman did recently to allow the biggest broadcast company in america to become even bigger. congress has put into law a limit on the market share that ultrahigh frequency or u.h.f. stations can own. that limit is 39%. the commission had considered that sinclair broadcast group, the largest broadcast company which holds 38% market share but sinclair wants to expand its reach and merge with another big company tribune media. the $3.9 billion deal would give sinclair control over 200 more local television stations.
and expand its market to 72% of the television-owning household. here's a chart that shows how expansive sinclair's proposed takeover would be. you can see here the current markets and you can see down below the proportional footprint. traditionally the f.c.c. has interpreted its rules to prohibit sinclair from making that deal but chairman pai offered -- for allow sinclair to grab almost three-quarters of the market. and sinclair happens to be well known for its friendly coverage of president trump. it even requires local broadcasters' outlets to carry regular commentary from a former trump campaign and white house
media surrogate. and its executives have been complimentary of chairman pai personally. congress intended for there to be a multiplicity and diversity of voices and opinions on the airwaves. congress explicitly wants to prevent one media organization from having an outsized influence over the nation. madam president, i have strong reservations about chairman pai's leadership and values. free speech, media ownership rules, and net neutrality are essential to a healthy democracy, and the chairman is equivocating or moving backward on all fronts. for these reasons i oppose this nomination. nevertheless, if he's confirmed, i hope we can find common ground and work together. one area where we could do that is rural and tribal broadband in the west. in my home state of new mexico, rural areas, pueblos and tribes do not have anywhere near
adequate access to the internet. approximately 63% of people living on tribal land lack access to acceptable fixed broadband speeds. compared to only 17% of the u.s. population as a whole. the gap is even higher for residents of tribal lands in rural areas with approximately 85% of tribal people lacking access. we all know that in today's world, broadband internet is essential to virtually all successful economic and commercial activity, essential to everyday life in america. as a member of the commerce committee, i will continue to push the f.c.c. to do all it can to close the digital divide. broadband expansion is not a question of political ideology. it is a question of political
will. the government, the federal government, played a big role in expanding electricity and telephone service to every american. we as a country made major investments. we must do the same for rural broadband. senate democrats have made a number of concrete proposals recently. i hope that we can work with our republican colleagues on these. i urge chairman pai to take them seriously. mr. president, -- madam president, members of the commission must be 100% committed to principles of free speech and to protecting consumers and to the underserved. mr. pai's record does not give me sufficient confidence that he shares that commitment and, therefore, i urge all of my colleagues to reject his nomination. madam president, i note the
mrs. capito: i ask that we vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. exit fit thank you, madam president. i come here today to talk about the nomination of ajit varadaraj pai. mrs. capito: before i begin, i think all of us have incredible heavy hearts in our homes, in our states, in the country, really in the world as the horrifying events of las vegas begin to really sink in. and for me, i just saw an article come across the newsline in my home state of west virginia identifying one of the first identifications of one of the victims, and her name was denise berdidas, from hedgesville near martinsburg, west virginia. she and her husband were at the concert together. they've been married 32 years, high school sweethearts. and they were there vacationing
and at the concert. tony wrote on his facebook page that his wife died in his arms. so a mother of two, soon to be a grandmother of five, was lost to this horrible tragedy. so my heart sinks for them, for everyone, and i really don't have the words to say how to comfort or how to explain or how to understand except that i feel very, very deeply sad and sorry and prayerful for them and their families. so today i wanted to talk about the nomination, reappointment of ajit pai of the federal communications commission. he has been an important partner in my quest to bring rural america in much of my state online. i was really lucky to meet him several years ago. without question he has been a champion and without question high-speed internet access has
allowed us to connect with one another on a scale we never could have imagine add decade ago. no other technology has become so critical to our daily lives. it is the backbone for our innovation, competition, and our economic growth, from starting a business to digital learning, broadband access is critical to the strength of our economy and our communities. unfortunately, for all the potential opportunities that broadband can offer, not having access to this important service can create insurmountable barriers. better-connecting states like mine, like west virginia, through improved broadband has become one of my top priorities. without this our rural areas really risk being left behind. the digital divide exists in this country, and rural americans are the ones who are on the wrong side of the divide. small communities and businesses across west virginia and elsewhere in rural america lack
this fundamental infrastructure, and to one understands these issues more than ajit pai. chairman pai grew up in rural kansas. he told me sometimes when he goes home to visit his panders, he cannot get connected in his own hometown. he knows the challenges facing rural communities. i have had the pleasure of hosting chairman pai and his staff multiple times in west virginia. most recently chairman pai came to war deniesville, west virginia where we have good connectivity and have been able to create nobi nobis. we traveled just 20, 30 miles over to hampshire county where getting high-speed internet hag far more challenging. there he met eric hot who has a small chocolate business. eric has been having trouble
following up with orders because he can't get consistent broadband access. last august i held a roundtable table discussion with chairman pai focusing on the digital divide and impacts on tourism. we visited adventures on the gorge and i even convinced him to join me on a bridgewalk across the beautiful new river, new river gorge. this outdoor recreation is one of west virginia's most beautiful tourist destinations. the small businesses there are hampered by the lack of connectivity. we heard firsthand from business owners who can't grow their business because of poor internet connectivity. it is hard a tract businesses to locate in these more rural parts of our states. a restaurant owner shared their difficulty in getting online reservations.
chairman pai is a great listener. he listens to what the issues are. and those are reducing barriers to investment, streamlining the regulatory environment, encouraging public-private partnerships, ensuring accountability on behalf of the taxpayer, and so following his tour across the country where he stopped in west virginia, chairman pai has proposed a digital empowerment agenda right down the alley of the issues that we've just talked about, to grant americans living in communities of all sizes, from urban cores to smaller towns with these opportunities. l chairman pai's agenda highlight add variety of specific measures the f.c.c., congress, and state and local governments could make to simplify broadband deployment. broadband access will be the result of partnerships between private, local, state, and
federal agencies and organizations. we need to have this collaboration to eliminate duplicative and out-dieted programs -- outdated programs so that states like mine can efficiently deliver broadband to our communities efficiently and cost-effectively. by listening to communities like ours -- remember, i said chairman pai is a great listener, which he is -- the chairman has built a plan for achieving widespread broadband that meets the unique demands of our rural communities. the -- the f.c.c. plays an imperative role in addressing these issues. in large and small states, particularly rural states like mine. in the 21st century economy, robust telecommunication networks are increasingly important for today's users and the foundation of future innovation. under his leadership at the f.c.c., he has already taken steps towards modernizing the commission's role and promoting digital empowerment.
since the beginning of his tenure, the commission has hit the ground running, enacting a broad strategic vision to close the digital divide, to modernize the commission's rules, promote innovation, protect consumer and public safety and improve the commission's daily operations. under his leadership, under chairman pai's leadership, the commission has made significant investments to deliver broadband service to underserved and unserved areas of the country. and i am confident that rural america will see more progress with his continued leadership, and i am very proud today to support his nomination -- his renomination to the f.c.c. as he ascends and retakes the chairmanship of a very important part of our communications and telecommunications network. so with that, i would yield back and i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.
a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are in a quorum call. ms. warren: i ask the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. warren: thank you, madam president. i want to begin my offering my condolences to the victims of the massacre in las vegas and their loved ones. i am heartsick for the residents of las vegas and everyone around
the country who woke up to the horrendous news of last night's attack and are worried sick about whether their family members, friends, and neighbors are okay. thoughts and prayers are good, but they are simply not enough. thoughts and prayers are not enough when more moms and dads will bury their children this week, and thoughts and prayers are not enough when sons and daughters will be forced to grow up without their parents. attacks like we have seen today have happened all too often in america. enough is enough. we have to have a conversation about how to stop gun violence in america, and we need to have that conversation right now. now, madam president, i want to take some time to discuss the vote that we will be taking shortly on the nomination of ajit pai to serve as the chair of the federal communications commission, or the f.c.c. one thing that last night showed us is the importance of
connections. every day, moms and dads pick up their phones to check in on their kids, students go online to do research on homework assignments, families sit together to watch the newest hit television show or movie. it's just a fact. media and telecommunications services play a vital role in helping american households connect with their loved ones, communities, and the world around them. the f.c.c. makes sure that those services are available and accessible to all americans, whether they live in a rural community or in a large city. at least, that's what the f.c.c. is supposed to do. but there is a lot of powerful companies that want to change that picture, companies that want to change the rules so they can line the pockets of their corporate executives and their wealthy investors. those powerful companies have launched an all-out assault on every branch of our government, with only one goal -- to make sure that the government works
for them and for their buddies. if it leaves everyone else in the dirt, they don't much care. as powerful companies know, it is good to have friends on the inside, and they have invested a lot of money in making friends. giant corporations have spent unlimited amounts of money to elect politicians who will promote their views and to flood congress with lobbyists who will work around the clock to destroy laws and rules that the industry doesn't like and to reshape those laws to suit corporate interests. but electing politicians and flooding congress with lobbyists just isn't enough. their republicans buddies in congress can only do so much. powerful corporations need weak agencies that won't hold them accountable, so they work to fill those agencies with their allies. friends who can undo the rules that giant corporations don't like. friends who won't go after those
companies when they throw the rules out the window to make an extra buck. the f.c.c. is one of the agencies that's been on their hit list for a long time, and now they see their opportunity to execute a corporate takeover of the f.c.c., and they started at the top with agent pai, president trump's pick, to chair the f.c.c. since his appointment as chair of the f.c.c., chairman pai has worked at breakneck speed to transform the f.c.c. from an agency that works in the public interest to a big business support group. chairman pai started with net neutrality protections, rules that helped keep the internet free and open by preventing giant broadband companies from discriminating against certain internet users and turning the internet into another service that caters to those who can pay top dollar. like his big broadband buddies,
chairman pai opposes net neutrality rules. once president trump was elected, chairman pai declared that the days of net neutrality protections were numbered, and now he's working hard to reverse those rules. but chairman pai has more items on his agenda. he is working to weaken the f.c.c.'s lifeline program that helps low-income households across the country pay for phone and broadband service. chairman pai has also halted the f.c.c.'s efforts to demand some accountability from private prison phone companies that charge sky-high rates to prisoners and their loved ones. chairman pai thinks it's just fine for private companies to make it harder for prisoners to stay connected to their families and their communities by charging exorbitant phone fees. chairman pai defends killing these strong public-centered rules by repeating a version of the same old tired refrain that
we have heard over and over from industry. government should stay out of the way and let big corporations do as they please because when big corporations make lots of profits, that benefits everyone. yeah, right. that wornout theory has been disproven time and time again. americans know that when government is asleep at the wheel and big companies get to make the rules, those giant companies make out like bandits while everyone else gets stuck with the bill. but that's not all. when government doesn't do its job, when it fails to protect the public interest, the big guys can grow even larger and more powerful and can translate greater economic power into greater political power, and that's where it gets really scary. just look at sinclair broadcast group. sinclair is the largest television station owner in america, and it's made a name for itself by aggressively
promoting ultraconservative views. it is infamous for forcing its stations to regularly run right-wing segments, and it melds its radical ideology with a take-no-prisoners profit-making mission, finding more and more creative ways to reduce news coverage and instead promote its sponsors' products. being the biggest isn't enough for sinclair. it wants to become even more powerful, so it's put in a bid to purchase tribune broadcasting, another large television station owner. now, if government regulators don't stop the merger, sinclair will have access to over 70% of american households. if the alarm bells haven't already gone off, this is where they should start ringing like crazy. during the presidential campaign, sinclair was a huge
supporter of then-candidate trump, and it uses its power in local television markets to spread slanted pro-trump news stories. jared kushner, president trump's son-in-law, even bragged about reaching a deal with sinclair to get more positive news media coverage of trump. the day before trump's inauguration, sinclair's chairman met with pai who was then an f.c.c. commissioner but who was expected to be promoted to chairman. he met with him to change -- to urge him to change the rules so sinclair could grow even more powerful. when president trump nominated pai to chair the f.c.c., sinclair got exactly what it wanted. chairman pai immediately got to work changing the rules so it would be easier for sinclair to acquire tribune. local media is sacred to many
americans. it's where we catch up on what's happening in our communities from people who know and care about our communities. a merger between sinclair and tribune would allow sinclair to change that dynamic. with more local programming coming from a centralized source, there would be less information and less diversity of ideas in local reporting. that kind of concentrated power is bad for competition, and it's worse for democracy. whether the sinclair agenda was on the political right or the political left, no single centralized corporation should control access to local programming for so many households. we need a strong chair at the f.c.c., a chair who understands that the government's role is to work for american families and to hold giant corporations
accountable. we do not need a chair at the f.c.c. who is working for the most powerful communications corporations in this country, and that is why i will vote no on the nomination of chairman pai to be chairman of the f.c.c. thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mrs. fischer: thank you, madam president. i rise today to recognize two nebraskans who are retiring after long careers of service to the american people. the honorable lylee. strom and and -- lyle e. strom and the honorable william j. riley. both of these judges have spent years upholding the rule of law and their professionalism has established a strong reputation for their respective courts. they are true role models for current and aspiring lawyers and judges, and their exceptional
work should be acknowledged. lyle elmer strom was born on january 6, 1925, in omaha, nebraska. his mother was a schoolteacher. his father worked as an oil trader. judge strom has said he didn't much care for school while he was growing up. instead he found himself causing more trouble than good, especially when he played football on top of a nearby grain silo with some friends. in 1943, after being rejected by the navy because of weak eyesight, strom enlisted in the merchant marines as a radio signal operator. during his time in the naval reserve, he was inspired to become a lawyer. after being impressed by his fellow merchant marines who had obtained college and professional degrees. after serving his country in the military, strom graduated from
creighton university with a b.a. in 1950. that same year he married the love of his life, his wife regina. together they had seven children. in 1953, strom graduated from creighton university school of law, finishing at the top of his class. he soon joined the prestigious firm of fitzgerald, shore, bar, metler and brennan. strom started his career believing he'd be a business-type of lawyer. shortly after joining the firm, however, bob haymer brought strom into his litigation group because he was smart and a hardworking professional. by 1958, strom lead the litigation practice for the firm. over his years of private practice, lyle strom became a well-known, well-liked
litigator in nebraska, especially in omaha. in 1985, after 32 years of law practice and with encouragement from congressman haldon, president reagan appointed him to the district court for nebraska. he served as chief of the court from 1987 until 1994. and in 1995 took senior status, allowing him the ability to continue sitting as a judge on cases over the past 22 years. judge strom has always been dedicated to the craft of practicing law. he served as the president of the omaha bar association from 1980 to 1981, and as president of the nebraska state bar association from 1989 to 1990.
one of his biggest joys has come in the form of mentoring aspiring lawyers and young people, something that he has done throughout his career. in his first decade as a lawyer, he worked as a professor at the creighton university. in his fifth, after becoming a federal judge with a full caseload, judge strom served as a creighton law school internship program director and clinical professor of law. strom has also dedicated decades of service to the boy scouts of america and was the founder of the ends accord organization in nebraska and been closely involved with the nebraska mock trial program. during his 64 years of practice, judge strom has been a model for the dedication to
the rule of law. his hard work and mentoring to both aspiring lawyers and young people across omaha have made him a staple in our community. he's also had an eye for talent. in 1973, while still working as a litigation lawyer, strom hired a new lawyer to the firm, william j. riley. this began a great professional relationship between two of the top lawyers in nebraska. born in lincoln in 1947, bill riley obtained both his b.a. and his juris doctorate from the university of nebraska, graduating from the law school in 1972. while in school, riley served as the editor and chief of the nebraska law review, and he graduated at the top of his
class. from 1972 to 1973, riley clerked for the honorable donald p. lay with the united states court of appeals for the eighth circuit, a court he would later serve on 30 years later. it was judge lay who told riley that the best tutelage he could receive as a trial attorney would be at the firm of fitzgerald, shore, barton, atler and brennan, the firm where legendary attorney lyle strom had lead the litigation department since 1958. it was great advice. after strom became a judge, it was riley who took his place as chair of the firm's litigation department. in 2001, riley's professionalism caught the eye of both nebraska senators and the president of the united states, george w. bush.
the new president nominated him to the u.s. court of appeals for the eighth circuit. riley was confirmed unanimously in september of 2001, becoming one of president bush's first circuit court appointments. he became chief judge for the eighth circuit in 2010. during his tenure, riley was intimately involved in the governance and policy setting for the entire united states federal court system. he served on the executive committee of the judicial conference of the united states, an organization presided over by the chief justice of the supreme court. riley also served as strategic planning coordinator for the judicial conference, helping enact greater cybersecurity
measures throughout the federal court system. judge riley has served our country well over the last 16 years, and on june 30, 2017, after 45 years of practicing law, judge riley took senior status on the eighth circuit. he said that now he's going to have time to relax with his wife norma, their three children and their nine grandchildren. riley has served his local legal community by teaching trial practice at both creighton university school of law and the university of nebraska college of law. he is a decorated boy scout leader and served as a founding member of the robert m.spire in support legal mentoring program. before his appointment to the
court, riley served as president of the omaha bar association from 2000 to 2001. both of these judges deserve our respect for how they approach the justice system and the law. both are role models that i hope future lawyers and judges follow. their careers should be applauded and their commitment to our community should be honored. i wish them the best in their retirement. and now, madam president, if i may, i would like to express my sympathies and the sympathies of the people of nebraska for those who have lost loved ones in las vegas. our hearts are heavy, and i am praying for them and for those who are also injured and for their families as well.
the presiding officer: the senator from washington. ms. cantwell: i ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. cantwell: madam president, i come to the froor to speak about the -- floor to speak about the vote that we're going to have at 5:30, but first i want to give my condolences for those impacted by the shooting in laughings. i -- las vegas. my thoughts and prayers also go out to at least one washington family that i know is one of those who have been impacted and is at this event.
we may find out that there are others, but we are thinking and praying for their recovery and i hope that everybody will take tt time to say some thoughts and prayers for those people who have been impacted by this incident. madam president, i also want to come to the floor and speak in opposition to the nomination of ajit pai to have a second term as the chairman of the f.c.c. and the reason why we're out here speaking about this vote that's going to happen in a short period of time is because we're concerned about the future of innovation, the future of where consumers plan the decision making of how they access content and the future of our economy. and what i'm worried about is in the short period of time that chairman pai has been at the f.c.c., that instead of the policies that would have been enabling consumers, he's taken
actions that i think will have consumers paying more for less access, that media concentration will be more enabled and that plans to protect net neutrality in an open universe will be worse. this, in and of itself, is the biggest issue that i and the economy of washington state could see with this renomination. that is to say that the state of washington and the internet and innovation that exists there could be greatly impacted by the rolling back of protections that we have now that says that you cannot artificially throttle or slow down internet activity or hold consumers hostage to pay more. the mission of the f.c.c. is to have the deployment is carried out. undoing the existing net neutrality laws on the books is
not in the public interest and won't promote the access that we need. dismantling this rule which would preserve the diversity of content i think are things that will negatively impact our marketplace for a long time. when you think about some of the issues that we've already seen and what we could see in the future is if more consumers are led to having to pay a toll. it's almost like what we see if you want to get into the fast lane, if you want to have this kind of rapid access, you have to pay more. so today consumers are using mobile apps to order coffee, get access to health care information, to work to make sure that we protect from everything from our electricity grid to people's home security systems. so protecting people from
cybersecurity, i'm worried if the internet's arteries are are slowed down or clogged our critical information could arrive too late to protect consumers. if we're listing in ale world where just the -- in a world where just the advent of more smart phones, we want to mick sure they can get access to information and are not slowed down or throttled in any way. when you think about this and the app economy in washington state, they are the fastest growing businesses. it is part of a large organization. today 1.7 million american jobs are because of these apps and nearly 92,000 are in the state of washington. they have grown at an annual rate of 30%. the annual growth rate for other jobs is 8%. why would you nominate someone who has pledged to roll back the rules of an open internet that
will create throttling and slowing down of content that will hurt the content of these businesses. no one wants to have -- whether it's in health care or protecting people in cyber or education or for that matter even the united states senator, will they have to pay a faster toll to get access to information? dismantling net neutrality puts our economy in jeopardy. it causes the issues that created an open internet to be called into question. and while i know that some would say that it is necessary for investment, i would say that we've seen in the last several years, while the rule of an open internet has been in place, much of the internet is in structure to carry on. i do not believe with my colleagues that this is a necessary way to ground
investment. i think it's a way that large cable companies would like to tell you they need so they can continue, as i said, fast and slow lanes, and charge consumers more if they want access to those fast lanes. i encourage my colleagues to vote no for ajit pai as f.c.c. commissioner and get exfolk r- -- and get focused on protecting the internet. i thank the president and yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: mr. president, i would like to start my remarks with my deepest condolences and prayers for the people of las vegas and to the victims of the worst mass shooting in our nation's history. our innocent concert goers had to experience such violence, may you are -- may you be able to
overcome this. and to the medical professionals who are working tirelessly to heal wounds and save lives right now, but enough is enough. americans are tired of living in fear that their community will be the next in newtown or aurora or las vegas. we must not become number to this. -- numb to this. we can begin by banning these military style assault weapons like the ar-15, which are the guns of choice for others who seek to inflict mass casualties on victims. unfortunately the gun lobby prevailed on congress to let the assault weapons ban expire in 2004, but we need it now more than ever. we must also pass legislation to
ensure that all purchases, including -- include a background check. 92% of americans support expanded background checks. 92% of americans support expanded background checks. no one should be able to purchase a gun through facebook or i nsta -- instagram. let's close the gun show loophole that allows anyone to go into one of these k-mart killing machines without with a background check. let's close the loopholes that allows straw purchases to buy guns and flood our streets with them. let's are repeal -- take away the gun manufacturers liability.
placa should stand for protecting lives, creating arms and accountability. we must realize that the epidemic of gun violence is a public health emergency and we must treat it that way. we must fully fund this critical research agenda at the centers for disease control and give the c.d.c. the resources that it needs. you will hear lots of people say that now is not the time is politicize this tragedy, that talking about legislation is insensitive and wrong. the only thing the n.r.a. wants more than to sell lots of gun silencers is to put a silencer on the debate about gun safety legislation. the only thing the n.r.a. wants more than allowing nationwide conceal carry laws is to conceal the overwhelming support for background checks. the only thing the n.r.a. wants more than to stifle smart gun technology is to stief debate --
stifle debate on gun violence protection. for anyone who says this debate is too soon, it's already too late for at least 58 people in las vegas and hundreds of others who were wounded. we should not wait another day. we need to compass commonsense -- we need to pass commonsense gun safety so we can hold a moment of silence for the n.r.a.'s stranglehold on american politics. we must make n.r.a. stand for not relevant anymore in american politics in our country. that should be our agenda here on the floor of the united states senate. what is wrong is leaving americans in our communities unprotected yet again from gun violence. what is wrong is not having a debate and allowing the n.r.a. to block sensible gun safety legislation. we must act so we do not become
numb to the preventable carnage for the people of las vegas, aurora, and san bernardino and every community in our country. that should be our responsibility in our country. like to turn my attention to the confirmation of ajit pai, the subject of today's vote out here on the senate floor. last week i took to the floor to explain how in his shorten your as chairman of the federal communications commission ajit pai has stood up for big corporations and ignored american consumers. under ajit pai, the f.c.c. now stands for forgetting consumers and competition. and here are the five reasons i gave. number one, on net neutrality, i explained how ajit pai wants to take a weed whacker -- his words -- to net neutrality allowing broadband providers to serve as
internet gatekeepers and pick online winners and losers. number two, on privacy. chairman pai has actively supported efforts to allow broadband providers to sell consumers sensitive information without their consent and eliminating requirements for those companies to put in place data security protections despite the obvious need to protect personal information. three, on mega mergers. mr. pai has paved the way for massive mergers which will squeeze out independent programmers and lead to higher prices for consumers. four, the e-rate. the education rate. chairman pai has refused to commit to protecting the e-rate, the most successful, educational technology program in our country's history which links up schools and libraries to the internet. and five, the lifeline program. mr. pai has undercut the
lifeline program which provides access to voice and internet service for millions of low income americans. the case against chairman pai's nomination is clear, but i want to spend a few more minutes today on the particularly critical issue of net neutrali neutrality, the chief governing principle of the internet. net neutrality ensures that all internet traffic is treated equal, requiring that internet service providers like at&t, charter, verizon and comcast do not block, slow down, censor or prioritize internet traffic. today essentially every company is an internet company. every company has to deal with the digital revolution to be relevant in the 21st century. in 2016 almost half of the venture capital funds invested in this country went towards internet-specific and software
companies. that's $25 billion worth of investment, half of all venture capital in this country. that's good. and to meet america's insatiable demand for broadband internet, u.s. broad band companies, telecommunications industry, the big companies invested more than $87 billion in capital expenditures in 2015. that's the highest rate of annual investment in the last ten years. that's good. so we've hit the sweet spot. investment in broadband and wireless technologies is very high. job creation very high. venture capital investment in online start-ups is very high. and with net neutrality rules in place, the best ideas, not merely the best funded ideas can thrive in the 21st century. now, chairman pai says that he, quote, likes net neutrality. but then he says he wants to
take an ax to the very order that establish today's net neutrality rules. that's like saying you value democracy but don't really like the constitution. it makes no sense. net neutrality is the organizing principle of the internet. chairman pai and the i.s.p.'s, that's internet service providers, the big companies keep walking around whis perking how -- whispering how title 2 is some terrible word, some terrible thing. let's understand how we landed here. what is title 2? it gets all very mysterious until you put it into very simple language. in 2010 the federal communications commission attempted to put net neutrality rules in place without reclassifying broadband under title 2 of the communications act. the district of columbia circuit
court proceed to invalue dade -- proceeded to invalidate those rules and said to the federal communications commission, here's how you can do it and it will not be struck down. here's a smart way for you to put net neutrality on the books, that makes it legal. so the federal communications commission in correctly reading the court decision went back in 2015, adopted the open internet order, which reclassified broadband as a telecommunications service under title 2. under this ability to regulate. and they did it. and the circuit court of appeals upheld the rules in a 2016 decision. so there it is. constructed by the court how to -- instructed by the court how to do it. follow the instructions. implement. done. it is now baked into the personality of the internet to have openness.
the ap turs are there for -- aper turs are there for anybody to get on. not to be discriminated against. that's what the internet should be like in the 21st century. and title 2 is appropriate because it was congress' intent to preserve the f.c.c.'s authority to forestall threats to competition and innovation in telecommunication services, even as those technologies used to offer those services evolve over time. we're not locked in one period of technology. as it evolves, so, too, does the evolution occur in what openness means, the ability for everyone to be able to use the internet without being discriminated against. broadband has become the single most important telecommunications service americans use to transmit information to one another, and it has become clear that innovators, businesses, and consumers overwhelmingly view broadband as a telecommunicati
telecommunications service. this is common sense to americans around the country with the only exception being big telecommunications, lobbyists and lawyers who work to close this internet, who want to stop this incredible, incredible entrepreneurial democracy-enhancing of set of rules that exists to ensure that this communications mechanism is not controlled by just a small number of companies. and now ajit pai has said that he likes net neutrality but that he thinks it should be voluntary, but voluntary regulations won't work. we know that the broadband industry, your cable, your wireless, your telecommunications provider cannot regulate themselves. they struggle to even show up on
time to install or fix your service. do we really trust the broadband industry to resist leveraging their internet gatekeeper role and putting their online competitors at an unfair disadvantage? of course not. americans have made their voices heard about net neutrality. more than 22 million americans have written to the federal communications commission in the past several months sending a clear message of support for net new tralty -- net neutrality. hear that again. 22 million americans sent a message to the federal communications commission that they do not want to see a change in the net neutrality rules for our country. and yet ajit pai will not listen. his plan will allow broadband providers to stifle innovation,
stifle entrepreneurship. his plan will allow big broadband barons to crush competition, reduce choice, and then make consumers pay more. we cannot allow this to happen. that is why this vote we are about to take is so important. that's why i urge my colleagues to stand up for consumers and to vote no on ajit pai's nomination to be the chairman of the federal communications commission. mr. president, i yield back the balance of my time. and i doubt the presence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:
a senator: i ask the quorum call be dispensed with. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent that i be able to complete my remarks prior to the vote. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: i rise to express my strong support to ajit pai to a five-year term to the federal communications commission. he has served as a commissioner since 2012 when he was first confirmed by voice vote in the senate. he was designated as chairman earlier this year. a native of kansas, chairman pai has focused on the expansion of rural broadband, acceleration of next generation infrastructure deployment. in recent yeeks -- weeks, he's worked tirelessly to help ensure communications are restored to communities affected by hurricanes harvey, irma and maria. mr. pai has also made much-needed reforms to improve transparency at the f.c.c. and improve the agency's processes. i'm particularly heartened by chairman pai's efforts to treat
his fellow commissioners fairly by instituting a process of sharing documents with other commissioners before discussing them publicly. additionally, under chairman pai's leadership, the public is now able to view the text of all agenda items in advance of commission hearings. with respect to the thorny issue of internet regulations, i am pleased that chairman pai has sought to hit the reset button on the 2015 title 2 order because, as i have previously said, the f.c.c. should do what is necessary to rebalance its regulatory posture under current law. at the same time, i continue to believe that the best way to provide long-term protections for the internet is for congress to pass bipartisan legislation. rather than prolonging the back-and-forth debate on this issue, i once again invite my colleagues to work with hey to find a lasting legislatively solution that will resolve the
dispute over net neutrality once and for all. as for the nomination before us, i can think of no better pick to lead the f.c.c., as it works to address a host of issues at the heart of our internet-connected economy. as i noted at the outset, chairman pai has already made much-needed reforms to improve the processes at the f.c.c. and empower his fellow commissioners. he has already shown a commitment to ensuring transparency and openness at the commission that gives me great confidence in the direction he will lead the agency. chairman pai's approach, i believe, will lead to more long-lasting and positive results at the f.c.c. that is why i believe the elevation of ajit pai to be the chairman of the commission is a much-needed breath of fresh air and why i believe he should be confirmed without delay. i urge my colleagues support his nomination. i yield the floor and ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second?
the presiding officer: have all senators voted? any senators wishing to change their vote? on this nomination the yeas are 52, the nays are 41. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order the motion to reconsider is made and laid upon the table. the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. flake: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. flake: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in
a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. flake: mr. president, i rise today to discuss how we allow religious believers to participate in public life. from the founding of our country, religious believers have played a central role in our government. a declaration of independence was signed by a presbyterians minister, john witherspoon and charles carol, the cousin of our first catholic bishop. the importance of religious participation was in the air the founders breathed and the benefits religious believers of all backgrounds contributed to the common good was understood by the framers of the constitution. that's why they made it clear in article 6 of the constitution that no public officers could be subject to a, quote, religious test. unquote. this new country wouldn't be a country for aing gli cans or for
congregationalists. it would be a country for all americans and all faiths, all of thois who are committed to the -- of those who are committed to the constitution and the common good. unfortunately, the religious test clause is no longer just a subject of history lessons. during this congress, there have been a number of cases where my friends in the minority have seemed to ask nominees about their substantive religious beliefs. i find this particularly troublesome because as a mormon, i am a member of a faith that, while it is growing rapidly, still counts fewer adherents than many other religions. it is religious liberty espoused in constitutional provisions like article 6 and the first amendment that has allowed my faith, despite a very difficult history, to flourish in the united states.
and it is religious liberty that is threatened when we seem to evaluate the fitness of nominees for higher office on religious orthodoxy. the most recent example of this was the recent judiciary committee nomination hearing of professor amy barrett of the notre dame law school. during the hearing she was asked repeatedly about her catholic faith and faced what bordered on ridicule when she repeatedly stated that she would perform her judicial duties without interference from the doctrines of the catholic faith. it was stated by one questioner, quote, the dogma that is loudly within you, and that's a concern. what does that statement mean in this context if not to question professor barrett's judicial fitness based on her religious beliefs? now liberal groups have been relentless in their opposition to professor barrett mischaracterizing her record to paint her as some kind of fringe
ideologue waiting to take orders from the pope or others in clergy on how to decide cases. just last week "the new york times" ran a 1,500 word story on where professor barrett worships. as it turns out, apart from her parish church, professor barrett has been part of an ecumenical charismatic community. i should note that charismatic christianity is gaining a lot of ground among latinos in the united states and throughout latin america. it is a vibrant and very diverse religious tradition. according to the "times" professor barrett should have disclosed her participation in this charismatic community to the senate judiciary committee. professor barrett's former professor and colleague, professor kathy kaveny of boston college, went so far as to ask nominees have to disclose everything from the elks lodge
to the alumni associations we belong to. why didn't she disclose this? i'm no law professor but i can tell you why, because in the united states of america it doesn't matter where you worship when you are being considered for federal office. and that is as it should be. the judiciary committee does not require disclosure of religious affiliation, and i trust my colleagues would join me in strenuously objecting if it did. mr. president, it is ironic that a notre dame professor is the target of this kind of animas. notre dame of course has long been at the forefront of fighting prejudice in this country. early in its years notre dame helped rid america of the scourge of slavery. many artists noted professor father william corbi giving the irish brigade during the battle of gettysburg.
they faced down the ku klux klan at a time when white members of the klan, notre dame students made it clear that the klan's brand of nativists, anti-immigrant, anti-catholic hate was not welcome in south bend. four decades later notre dame's president, father ted hesburg received a call about a rally at soldier field being organized by dr. martin luther king. hesburg was told mayor daily and cardinal cody declined invitations to appear at the civil rights rally and the organizers wondered if he would be willing to appear. in response, hezburg drove to chicago, locked hands with dr. king and sang "we shall overcome. " whether it's slavery, nativism or jim crow, notre dame has stood up to it and has triumphed. in the same tradition i'm confident that professor barrett is up to that task. what is remarkable is that i
need to say this in 2017. it bears repeating. a roman catholic can be a faithful steward of the law. so can an episcopalian. so can a mormon. so can a muslim. of course, so can an atheist. we in the senate give the president advice and consent on judicial nominations. we therefore should examine their jurisprudential views and their qualifications. we must not examine their relationships with the almighty. i sincerely hope that this body will step back from that dangerous ledge and evaluate professor barrett based on her impeccable qualifications, not where she attends church. with that, mr. president, i yield back. mr. mcconnell: mr. president?
the presiding officer: the senate majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i move to executive session to calendar number number 119 lee francis cissna. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. those in favor aye. those opposed no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, department of homeland security, lee francis cissna of maryland to be director of the united states citizenship and immigration services. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloirm. cloture motion. the clerk: we the undersigned senators in corns -- accordance with rule 22 of the striewlt hereby move to move the nomination of lee francis cissna to be director of citizenship --
mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call be waived. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor say aye. those opposed? the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 112, eric hargan. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor say aye. those opposed say no the the ayes appear to it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination. department of health and human services, eric d. hargan of illinois to be deputy secretary.
mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of eric d. hargan to be deputy secretary of health and human services, signed by 17 senators. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum with respect to the cloture motion be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor say aye. those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number. mr. mcconnell: the question is on the motion to proceed.
those in favor say aye. those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. of the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: nomination, federal reserve system, randal quarles of colorado to be a member of the board of governors. the clerk: we the undersigned senators in accordance with rules 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of randall quarles of colorado to be a member of the -- of 14 years from februar. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call with respect to the cloture motion be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i move to
proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion to proceed. all those in favor say aye. those opposed say no. the ayes have it conscious the ayes appear to have it, the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 266, calista gingrich. the presiding officer: the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, department of state, calista l. gingrich to be ambassador to the holy sea. mr. mcconnell: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22, do hereby bring to a close debate on on the
nomination of calista l. gingrich of virginia to be ambassador of the united states of america to the holy sea, signed by 17 senators. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum with respect to the cloture motion be waived. the presiding officer: without objection.
the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i think all of us felt a familiar knot in our stomach early this morning when we received news of what may be the deadliest mass shooting in american history. the numbers are hard to comprehend. they certainly aren't final. 58 people are dead and perhaps over 500 have been wounded either by the gunshots themselves or by the pandemonium that ensued once the thousands of concert goers in downtown las vegas figured out they were being fired upon from above.
and there is nothing wrong with sending every thought and prayer, every bit of your heart to las vegas to all of the family members that lost loved ones to those that are recovering to the first responders of the community. it really does help. i lived through one of these as a witness of sandy hook. many of those parents are my friends. many of them are the same age. while there are absolutely no words or gestures that can salve the wounds that can come with losing a child, especially a first grader, it did not hurt to know that every single person was thinking about that community, the overwhelming amount of stuff that showed up in sandy hook, the teddy bears
that piled up in the days and weeks that followed. it was a reminder to that town that they weren't forgotten. it helps. but it's not enough. it's not enough. i want to spend a few moments, i know to be preceded by a few of my colleagues, to talk about the work that we have to do here. if we are to address what i would consider to be a festering lingering paradox that exists in this country. what i mean by that is this -- this is a country that leads. almost every great magical invention in this world today whether it's open economies, par tis -- participation democracies and communication through the internet are essentially modern american inventions of the reason we were able to catapult the rest of the world in a
quarter millennial is because we saw big problems and we solved them before anybody else did and then we took those solutions and we exported them to the rest of the world. that is a definitional characterrist of -- characteristic of this country is to solve this problem and giving it to others so they can use it for themselves. the paradox lies here. we solved a lot of big problems, how to govern ourselves, how to organize our economies, how to talk to each other, how to save people from disease, and yet maybe the longest standing human concern is a very simple one, the concern for your physical safety. i can chart you a history of civilization based upon society's ability to more
consistently protect your physical body. that's, in fact, one of the original reasons humans found each other, to try to protect ourselves from physical harm that comes from the outside. and the paradox lies in the fact that when it comes to this country's ability to protect its citizens from physical harm, we are not a leader, we are a lagger. we are an outlier when compared to other industrialized first-world nations. you are much more likely to meet a violent death, especially by the hands of a firearm, in this country than you are in other first-world countries. and it's time for us to explore why this paradox exists. why are we such a leader -- why have we been such a leader over
the course of 240 years on so many different concerns and yet we are a lagger when it comes to protecting ourselves and our citizens from this violence. the scope of this problem is enormous. when you look at oecd countries, there are just a handful that have a higher rate of violence, and in particular gun violence, than the united states. i've been down on this floor, as has senator durbin, talking about the numbers over and over again. but every day approximately 80 people will lose their lives by begunfire. two -- gunfire. two-thirds of those are suicide, but still there are those who are killed by someone else and there is no other industrialized country in the world that meets
that rate of gun violence. and the mass shootings which get the most attention are epidemic -- are truly epidemic. we have become normalized and regularized to 50 people losing their lives. this is a uniquely american problem. by the way, it's not just the las vegas' and the orlando's and the sandy hook's. we've had more mass shootings than days in the year if you categorize a mass shooting of four or more people shot at any given time. if four or more people were shot in your community, that is a cataclysmic event and it happens every day in this country. because we have become so regularized to it -- only the moments like last night where the scale is truly epic -- do we
focus on it as a nation. i want my colleagues to understand the pain that comes when the victims of this kind of epidemic violence see nothing but silence from this body. the hurt is deep, the scars are wide in newtown, but they are made wider by the fact that this body in 4 and a half years has done absolutely nothing to reduce the likelihood of another mass shooting. and, indeed, because we have done nothing, the mass shootings continue. i know these are harsh words, but i believe it in my heart i believe there's an unintentional endorsement that gets sent to these mass murders when after slaughter after slaughter congress does nothing. if the greatest deliberative body in the world doesn't act in
unitsome to condemn them through policy change, it starts to look and feel like complicity. there is going to be another wave of unimaginable pain that will sweep across las vegas and the country as we learn about who these victims were and perhaps the numbers will mount. and they will become just as angry and just as furious at this body as the parents in sandy hook are today to do nothing to reduce the likelihood of this shootings. compassion is important, but it is not enough. now, i read a little passage of the bible to my 5-year-old son every night, but i am the furthest thing from a theologian. i know sprinkled throughout the bible are references to fact
that prayer has to be matched with action, with works. james says, show me your faith apart from your works and i will show you my faith by my works. thoughts and prayers need to be matched by action, and that's our job. our job, frankly, is not just to send good thoughts. the reason why we exist is to act, is to change the laws of the nation to address challenges that our constituents face, and since the beginning of time that the most important challenge that our constituents have faced, or the human race has faced, is that of physical security. so before i turn this over to my colleagues, let me just run down very quickly the arguments that are going to be used over the next few days to continue to do nothing. now, the first is already in operation today and it's a critique that i hear very often.
often lodged at me personally, which is this -- to talk about policy change in the wake of a mass shooting is to politicize it, is to cheapen it. i reject that argument in full force because the reality is every single day there's a mass shooting. every single day 80 people die from you gun violence. unfortunately the news media don't pay attention to that regular carnage. if we aren't talking about polls country change the day after a mass shooting in this country, they you are never talking about policy change because a mass shooting happens, on a average -- on average, every day, unfortunately the ones where eight or 12 people are shot do not get national attention. second, whether we like it or not, the world's attention -- the country's attention -- is positioned on this question of
how we protect our country from harm in the immediate aftermath of these mass shootings. it's an enormous gift to the gun lobby, to the forces of status quo if we cannot talk about how to change our laws to make people safer when everyone's mind is on that question. when a murder occurs, there is not a 48-hour waiting period before the police can try to investigate who did it and how to hold them accountable. so why cannot we -- can't we get immediately to the question of why these shootings are happening and try to solve it? second, others today are saying that legislation is a pointless exercise because you can't regulate away evil. well, there is truth to that. there are evil people in the world who are regularly doing very bad things and there is no way this a set of laws can stop people from doing harm, but i
would argue in some way, shape, or form at the very nature of government is an attempt to try to regulate the effect of evil on citizens. our laws against murder and askerren, rape -- askerren, rape and assault are to protect people from evil, from bad people. and so can't we have a conversation about how to make sure that people who are contemplating mass violence at the very least do the least violence possible? it is not coincidental that these epidemic mass shootings in which 50 or 60 or 40 people are dying largely have happened after the expiration of the assault weapons ban. now that it is much easier to get your hands on a gun that is much more accurate and much more lethal, the likelihood of large
numbers of people dying, like happened last night, is much greater. an ar-15 style weapon does something different to a human body than a pistol does. that's why 20 kids were shot in sandy hook and not a single one of them survived. laws do work. just look at a state like connecticut that requires universal background checks, that doesn't allow you to buy assault weapons, that requires you to get a permit before you can carry. when we passed that set of laws, it resulted in a 40% reduction in gun violence. even when you attribute -- account for other factors that could have caused that reducti reduction. that's a johns hopkins study. in places that have universal background checks, domestic homicides are much lower by a degree of 40%. laws work.
the data is irrefutable on this point. and so though you can't regulate a way evil in total -- away evil in total, you can do more to protect people, especially from this mass scope gun violence. third, people will say, well, this guy clearly was very mentally ill. you can't do anything about the fact that people are mentally ill with gun laws. well, that's true. and we should fix our broken system of mental health treatment because it's broken, but we should also recognize that this problem of mass execution is a uniquely american problem, despite the fact there's no evidence that we have a higher rate of mental illness than any other country. there are plenty of very mentally ill people in other oecd countries. but in those countries, their
mental illness is not a straight line to a gun crime. in large part because they have a different set of laws that makes it harder to get your hands on a gun and much harder if not impossible to get your hands on a weapon that does the kind of mass violence we saw last night. lastly, one of the favorite arguments is that this is just too hot an issue for the united states senate or a political body to handle, that it's controversial. well, it is controversial but it's not as controversial as people may think. in fact, the issue of background checks which i understand may not have been dispositive on what happened in las vegas last night but might have reduced the likelihood that another 80 people died from gun violence oaf the course of sunday -- over the course of sunday, background checks are supported by 80% of americans. most polls suggest that the majority of americans support the other suite of law changes i
talked about as well. in fact, many of the first steps that we would take as a body saying people on the terrorist watch lists can't buy guns, tightening up the law to make sure people who are mentally ill can't buy guns, those are supported by 80% to 90% of our constituents, no matter whether you live in the bluest state or the read estate -- red estate. the question of making sure people don't own -- why don't we start by finding the common ground and maybe after that we can find other common ground. this is going to keep happening. this is going to keep happenin g over and over again. and i know the answer can't be that we are powerless as a body to do something about it. i just personally can't bring that answer back to the families of sandy hook for another year.
and i have a feeling -- i don't want to speak for them -- but i have a feeling that the delegation from nevada is going to have a hard time bringing that answer back to the victims in las vegas as well. this is a growing fraternity. a tragic, awful fraternity. members of congress who represent states who have gone through these horrific mass executions. i had too many phone calls from senators and representatives who are already part of that club when sandy hook happened, and i got to make that call this morning as well to offer whatever advice i could on how to help a community heal. but this silence has become an unintentional endorsement, a sick simplicity. i hope in the coming days we can come together, republicans and
democrat, to start talking about at the very least some baby steps to show the people of las vegas, to show the people of orlando, to show my constituents, my friends in sandy hook, that silence is no longer an option. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: mr. president, let me thank my colleague from connecticut. he sponsored a filibuster or at least long -- last year i believe it was. i participated in it as did many members of our caucus. both he and senator blumenthal bring a special perspective to this issue of gun violence representing the state of connecticut and many of the families who lost their first graders -- i believe they were first graders who were shot down, 20 of them killed in their classroom. i remember when i heard that story and how those children
died and their teachers died, i thought to myself, this must be the moment -- this must be the moment that will motivate america to finally do something if innocent first grade children can be shot down in their classrooms in this fashion. the honest answer is, we've spoken a lot about the issue, but we've done little or nothing to change the circumstances which led to their death. if that were the only case, it would be bad enough, but the orlando nightclub, i believe 49 were killed there. some crazed person went there and killed innocent people gathered at that nightclub. as senator murphy has said, when you go through the litany, it is an endless litany of victims of gun violence. and now last night in las vegas, nevada, the worst gun crime in the history of the united states
of america, the worst. estimates as i saw as i came to the floor, 58 have died and over 500 seriously injured. i don't know what the ultimate numbers will be, but those numbers in and of themselves are incredible. mr. president, last night we witnessed what was the worst mass shooting to date in the nation. this gunman supposedly at 10:00 m&p.m. last night in las vegas local time began firing from a room on the 32nd floor of a hotel down into a crowd of people gathered for a country music festival. he supposedly was hold up in his hotel room with ten guns and obviously fired hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
as i mentioned, 58 people have been reported to have died and over 515 injured. those are staggering and horrifying numbers. there are literally hundreds of families tonight and communities who have been changed forever by this horrendous crime. our prayers obviously, naturally go out to them in this moment of loss of uncertainty. during the -- law enforcement and first responders acted like the heroes that they are, working to stop the shooter, securing the scene, helping the victims, saving lives. we are grateful to these first responders who so often are called to run to the south of gunfire to keep us safe, not to run away.
it's unthinkable that this type of shooting tragedy could happen in the united states of america, but i'm sorry to say it's becoming a regular occurrence. this was the worst, but yesterday, october 1 was also the two-year anniversary of the mass shooting in roseberg, oregon, when a gunman killed eight students and a professor at a community college. also this past weekend, at least 33 people were shot in the city of chicago. at least four died. the relentless toll of gun violence never seems to stop. the american medical association has declared that gun violence is a public health crisis in america. on an average day -- on an average day, 300 americans are shot. on an average day 300 americans are shot. about a third of them will die from that gunshot.
mass shootings, as senator murphy said earlier, have become a daily occurrence. if our critics would say please don't exploit the event of a mass shooting by speaking on the floor as senator murphy has made clear, then we wouldn't be able to speak any day of the year because they are so common. we can't let this become the new american normal. we can't just shrug our shoulders when we see over 30,000 americans shot and killed year after year after year. we can't sit back and do nothing while hundreds of our fellow americans are shot in one night simply because they went out to hear a music concert. just last week i was at a concert in nashville, tennessee, at the riman, the site of the grand old op provide.
2,000 people gathered there -- opry. 2,000 people gathered there. they love country music, many of them retired. when i heard about what happened in las vegas, i thought what if someone walked into that theater and opened fire? it could have happened. sadly it could have happened. what are we going to do about it? certainly there will be outrage at the death. there will be grief over the loss. but then what? that's what senator murphy challenges us to think about. we serve in the united states senate. we are not just casual observers of this violence. we're supposed to pass laws to make america safer. what will we do because of what happened in las vegas last night? that's the question that brings me to the floor of this evening. if we have a responsibility to keep our families in america safe, what are we prepared to do? for the gun deaths in chicago,
there's some things which i would do instantly. background checks. i don't believe you should be able to walk into a gun show and buy a firearm or more than one, incidentally, and take them out the back door without somebody asking who are you, do you have a criminal record? would you be disqualified from buying these same guns at a licensed gun dealer? currently the law is riddled with loopholes, and those loopholes lead to death, death on the streets of chicago. and we also have these purchases being made by straw purchasers. in other words, the girlfriend who has no criminal record who walks into the gun shop in the suburbs of chicago and buys the gun for her boyfriend outside in the car who is going to use it that night to shoot up a rival gang member or some other criminal activity. those are two very obvious things i would push for instantly. close the gun show loophole.
make sure that we do something about straw purchasers so that the penalties are serious enough that they'll never do it again. and there's more. this morning i was on a radio show in chicago, one of the most famous ones, i guess, and listened to. a fellow named steve cochran celebrating his 1,000th show on the air. and this was a topic that we talked about. and steve asked me, well, what happens -- what can we do? i said steve, we have to rely on people who honor the second amendment and believe it's an important part of our constitution to stand up and lead. i'm talking about members of my family who are hunters and sportsmen. i've been out hunting myself. we have to have people who are concerned about guns for self-defense to stand up and say we have to draw a reasonable line. there is no reasonable line under the second amendment which would allow what happened in las
vegas last night. to think that someone could injure, shoot over 500 people and kill 58, what kind of weaponry did he use? we'll know. we'll find out the details, but it certainly goes beyond any reasonable weapon needed for self-defense, sport, or hunting purposes. can we not at least appeal to those who honor the second amendment to join us in drawing a reasonable line so that combat and military-style weapons that can lead to such carnage are not considered to be normal or acceptable? decades ago, we did when it came to machine guns. decades ago, we said this is a weapon no one should have, period, except for the military, and perhaps law enforcement. can we return to that conversation? we're going to need the leadership from people who
believe in the second amendment to make it happen. we have seen democrats and republicans join together and pass meaningful laws to deal with public health crises like opioid addiction. we have to do the same for this public health crisis, and i'm sorry to report to you that a recent nominee for surgeon general of the united states was almost denied that opportunity because he was bold enough to say that this is a public health crisis. gun violence is a public health crisis. it certainly is. there is no single law or policy that would prevent every tragic shooting, as there is no single law or policy that would end a heroin overdose, but let's start working together to do something. we can't stop the shootings that have already happened in las vegas, chicago, roseburg, oregon, and across the nation. we failed to respond in time for those victims and their families. but if we work together, we can
stop shootings in the future. that is something we should all strive to do. we must do all that we can to spare families the unimaginable pain that so many in las vegas are feeling today in the aftermath of this horrible tragedy. i hope we will. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. casey: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: thank you, mr. president. i want to commend the words and the determination for action that were expressed by the senator from connecticut and the senator from illinois. like them and like so many people across the country, i start with both condolence and prayers and commendation. condolence for the families. the names of the families we don't know yet of this most recent tragedy, but we do know that they are not only worthy of
our expression of condolence but will be in need of our prayers. and commendation, of course, for the first responders and the law enforcement officials who responded like they always do, running towards the danger, running to help. we can't say enough about the work that they do. if we stop at expressing condolence and offering prayers and commending those who take action like first responders and law enforcement, if we stop there, i don't think that's an adequate response to this tragedy, just like it wasn't an adequate response in connection with the pulse nightclub or the tragedy in december of 2012 in newtown, connecticut. it's nowhere near an adequate response when you consider the enormity of this problem. so i believe we have got to take
action. i'll talk about that in a moment. but action must start with what happens on this floor. it's difficult to take action necessarily if there isn't time for debate, time for collaboration on legislation, and ultimately consideration of legislation here on the floor of the senate, and i would hope in the united states house of representatives. the enormity of this tragedy is almost hard to comprehend when you think about it not just in terms of the number, which at last count was 58 killed and over 500 -- over 500 injured. those numbers are almost too large to comprehend. that one person with one weapon or maybe several weapons was able to inflict that kind of carnage in one place at one time. i don't know how long it took,
but he wasn't shooting for many hours to kill that many people. he did it in a short time frame. but when you consider those numbers, i have to ask, i don't know if we went back and compared a similar day or a similar time frame and the loss of life in the context of war, but i'm sure there were plenty of days of conflict where americans were on foreign soil in a battle, in a war, where we would have lost even less lives on a particular day or a portion of a particular day. so the scale of this is almost unimaginable. and then when you consider what's been happening on our street. every state, every community has their own numbers. i can point to pennsylvania just since 2014. thousands of shootings -- by one
estimate, i think over 7,700. but then, of course, the more ominous number is the number of people killed as a result of those shootings. in pennsylvania since 2014, some 2,072 people have died in our state as a result of that -- that larger number of shootings. i think for the nation, and certainly undoubtedly for me, maybe the most important or the most seminal day in this debate was december, 2012, sandy hook elementary school in newtown, connecticut. the distinguished senator from connecticut who joins us on the floor and started the night with his remarks remembers it better than probably any other member of the senate other than his colleague in connecticut and others who lived through it.
one of the -- one of the questions i asked myself at the end of that weekend, after watching hours and hours of television coverage and reading a lot about it, and then watching a news report on sunday evening which tracked the pathway of the killer going to one classroom and killing 20 children. 6-year-olds, 7-year-olds, first graders. after he had done that, he was on his way to another classroom. so i concluded from that that if he had more time, we would have been reading about in addition to the 20 killed in one classroom and the adults who were killed, we would have been reading about potentially hundreds of children killed in one school in even less -- a lot
less than a day. maybe an hour or two or three. but that didn't happen. he took his own life. so i began to ask myself, not only what should we do in response to this -- and i had concluded at that point to support legislation, but a larger question kept coming to mind, if one person with one weapon or a few weapons and unlimited ammunition, if one person can not only kill 20 people in connecticut, i guess almost 50 people in florida and now that we know from las vegas, at least 58. i'm sure some who were injured will die. but if one person can do that, we have to ask ourselves is there nothing, is there nothing
we can do? because that becomes part of the debate, right? one side says let's take action by way of legislation, or take some action that would reduce the likelihood that you have more tragedies like this, more mass shootings, but the response immediately comes back that the other side says, well, we agree that it's tragic, we agree we want to prevent it, we agree we want to reduce the likelihood, but there is nothing we can do legislatively to reduce the likelihood or prevent it. i don't think anyone would argue that the law that passes in the aftermath of this las vegas tragedy or a law that passes even in the aftermath of sandy hook elementary school, if that -- if the law -- the proposals -- bills, really, that were voted on here in the senate in 2013, if they had passed, no one can argue with certitude or
scientific precision that if you pass this law, this many lives will be saved. but after -- after newtown and after this tragedy, i come back to the same question. is there nothing we can do legislatively, the most powerful country in the world that led the world in winning world war ii, a war that was not on its way to winning until we got involved, until we were forced to respond because we were attacked, the country that has cured disease and built the strongest republic in the history of the human race, that has the strongest military, without a doubt. has the strongest economy, without a doubt. has so much in ways that we can point to of american exceptional ism and strength and
achievement, achievements that are unmatched anywhere in the world, in almost any part of american life that you can point to. is that same country completely disabled from taking an action that would reduce the likelihood and we would hope substantially reduce the likelihood that we won't have another las vegas or another orlando or another newtown. i could go on and on from there, all these tragedies in all these places. is that really what our answer's going to be? we take action when we're attacked to fight back and to prevent it from happening again. we take action when there is an epidemic. we take action when there is a crisis. we take action when there is a disaster, a natural disaster. we're seeing some of that most
recently. we take action as a government, the congress takes action, the executive takes action. and yet, in this circumstance, what could only be described as an epidemic, that might be an understatement. we're losing more than 30,000 people a year. are we saying that there is nothing that we can do legislatively to reduce that likelihood? i just don't think that's the -- i just don't think any american, if they think about it, would conclude there's nothing we can do. so when i consider that in the context of sandy hook, i had to ask myself, are you saying to yourself that you're going to vote no on what became three bills, vote no on them because you believe that, that there's nothing we can do? that's what your vote is going to be? that's going to be your response
as a legislator with -- with the opportunity to cast a vote in a body of 100 people. you're going to say no three times, as it turned out, in 2013 to legislation because you believe that there's nothing your vote and nothing this legislative body can do. well, i decided to vote yes at least, but even that's not enough. we haven't had votes in years on these issues, and here we are almost five years later. in december, it will be five years, half a decade since newtown, connecticut, since the massacre at sandy hook. i have a page from the "wall street journal" that was principled -- printed within a couple days of that tragedy. it has very small color pictures
and very small biographies of those very small people, those 6-year-olds and 7-year-olds. and it was -- it's been on my desk all these years, and it's a very yellowed copy of a newspaper article. and i often think about what those families have gone through all these years. the great recording artist bruce springsteen had a song after september 11. the name of the congress was "you're missing." the refrain in that song, of course, is you're missing, talking about someone who lost a loved one at 9/11. he says at one point, "you're missing when i turn out the lights, you're missing when i close my eyes, and you're missing when i see the sunrise." the same could be said of those newtown families. the same could be said of those families in orlando. and you, unfortunately and
tragically, the families in las vegas area, maybe well beyond las vegas who were there for that concert. so i hope that this will be an occasion not just for speeches and expressions of condolence, commendation for those who showed such bravery in this tragedy or prayers and solidarity, but this will be a time for action, meaning action in the context of debate, action in the context of legislation. i think there are a number of steps we can take. i won't outline them all now. a number of commonsense steps we can take that are entirely consistent with the second amendment but would reduce the likelihood over time that we have more and more of these tragedies. or maybe, just maybe taking
action that will reduce the number of deaths. even that would be substantial progress. but i just cannot abide or accept the idea that there is absolutely nothing we can do legislatively to reduce the likelihood, and i would hope substantially reduce the likelihood that we can prevent tragedies, or at least reduce the number of tragedies. mr. president, i would yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senate majority leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i understand there is a bill at the desk and
due a second reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 1894 a bill to exempt puerto rico from the coastallized laws of the united states commonly known as the gens act. mr. mcconnell: in order to place the bill on the calendar number under rule 14 i will object to further proceedings. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 224, s. 396. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 224, s. 396, a bill to make technical amendments to certain marine fish conservation statutes and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceed to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the bill be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: is there
further debate on the bill? hearing none, all those in favor say aye. those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill is passed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: now, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 1616. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 1616, an act to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to authorize the national computer forensics institute, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the cornyn amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: hearing no other further debate all those in favor say aye. those opposed say no.
the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill as amended is passed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. tuesday, october 3. further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. further, following leader remarks the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the cissna nomination. finally, that the senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 to allow for the weekly conference meetings. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: if there is no further business to come before the senate i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of senators gillibrand and blumenthal. the presiding officer: without objection. mrs. gillibrand: mr. president.
the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mrs. gillibrand: i rise to speak about the horrific mass murder that happened in las vegas last night. my heart is obviously with the victims and their families, and i want to thank all of our brave first responders who acted so quickly. these senseless mass shootings must end. we cannot allow this to be the new normal, when tragedy after tragedy happens and we do absolutely nothing to address it. it's not good enough just to send thoughts and prayers and extend our condolences when people are losing their lives to gun violence every day. we still have to learn the details about what happened, but we do know this. this violence, this mass murder is one of the worst massacres we've ever seen in this country. it's yet another reminder of congress' failure to protect americans from gun violence. it's another disturbing and painful example of how congress is too weak and too cowardly to stand up to the gun industry. news reports are saying that the gun was shooting at rapid fire,
a military style weapon, specifically designed to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time, a weapon of war. we have to pass laws that protect american people from this kind of horrific violence. it should not be legal for a civilian on american soil to own and use a weapon of war like an assault weapon. our military is highly trained to use such weapons. it should not be easy for any person to go and buy a suppresser known by many people as a silencer to attach to their guns which makes it harder for police to do their jobs and catch violent criminals. when the people in nevada voted to require background checks on all weapons but the politicians are refusing to accept the will of the people. violence in las vegas is only the latest tragedy like this. mass shootings get all the news but in my home state gun violence on a smaller scale is destroying more lives. we really need to being the a. we must take gun violence as seriously as we take the threat
of terrorism wherever it is happening. we will get to the facts and the bottom of this, and when we do let's honor the lives of those we have lost by doing something about it. do everything we can to make sure this never happens again. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:
mr. blumenthal: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. blume thank you, mr. president -- mr. blumenthal: thank you. mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator will suspend. the senate is in a quorum call. mr. blumenthal: i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without
objection. mr. blumenthal: mr. president, we have been here before in the wake of virginia tech, sandy hook, orlando, and numerous other mass shootings and now las vegas. we can all agree here that our thoughts and prayers and condolences go out to the families of loved ones who have suffered this senseless, horrific violence. we can also agree that many of the details are unknown about the shooter and a lot of investigation will be done. we can can all agree that las vegas was struck by evil. call it pure evil. we know what it looks like in connecticut because we've seen it firsthand in newtown. we have lived through the
heartbreaking, unspeakable violence of that day just a few years ago when evil visited newtown and caused the death of 26 beautiful human beings, including 20 children, and america came together in support of us in connecticut and today we should come together in support of people of nevada and my hearts and prayers are with them. but thoughts and prayers not enough. we know that the evil that visited connecticut also brought forth good in other people, in
first responders, the doctors, and countless members of the community and america, who united, and i will never forget that day in newtown when the city came together in st. rosa lima church for an evening of mourning. and i said then the whole world is watching and, indeed, what the world saw was courage and resilience of truly heroic proportions, some of the good along with the evil. so when i saw those images today of las vegas, the sound of that gunfire, pandemonium rorkts of injuries -- reports of injuries and deaths, it brought back to
me that day in newtown. i wasn't there for the shooting. i came later in the day, but the memory of that day, and of the successive days and weeks and years, were brought back and my heart broke, but also my stomach churned with anger. i was frustrated and furious and i am now furious because congress has failed to act. nothing has changed since newtown. congress has been explicit when we had numerous opportunities and many reasons to make america safer and adopt commonsense measures that 90% of america support. so thoughts and prayers are not
enough, handwringing and soul searching is needed, but it is insufficient. what's needed now is action. i'm under no illusion. nobody needs to tell me where the votes are at this moment. and we need to be realistic about what the agenda is going forward. we need to be very clear eyed and realistic. but we also need to recognize that we can win fight. between the time that ronald reagan was almost as -- assassinated and the day the brady bill was passed was almost 10 years. we need to be in this fight as a
marathon, not as a sprint. and that is the determination and resolve that must be brought to this effort. it was five years ago when a man wielding a semiautomatic rifle murdered 20 children and six adults at sandy hook in newtown. there was a moment when action could have been taken. we need to seize this moment. then the vote, shamefully, failed to meet 60 for commonsense measures like background check. we needed 60, we had a majority, and our house of representatives colleagues told us that measure would have passed there. and since then, every day in
this you the country -- every day in this country an average of 92 americans do die due to gun violence, 33,000 americans every year, 59 is the death toll as of this moment in las vegas, but day after day 92 americans are killed as a result of gun violence, 60 of them are suicides, but that's no less a death, and a preventible death, with commonsense measures that will stop this carnage. i would be happy never to speak about this topic, never to complain again about congress's complicity, but our hearts break and our stomachs churn with fury and america's should as well as
newtown, aurora, blacksburg, charleston, chattanooga, lafayette, san bernardino, orlando, and now las vegas. what's needed is national resolve and for anyone who says that we should only offer condolences, let me just say very simply, let us honor those victims, keep faith with their memory so their lives and loss will not be in vain. -- in vain by taking action that makes america safer.
let us redouble our determination. the bill is ready to go, the agenda is set, the action is clear. let us honor their memories through action and if the president believes that this carnage was pure evil, let him lead if not today, tomorrow, and if not tomorrow, wednesday when he visits las vegas. if these actions were pure evil, let us all lead by our example. and let us move forward to stop this carnage in the future. we grieve these losses but we need to recognize that the measures now before congress are a travesty and a dishonor to
those lives that were lost. one of these proposals is an innocuous sounding hearing protection act. let me repeat, hearing protection act, which could come to a vote as early as this week in the house of representatives. this measure would gut regulations on begun silencers. let's be very clear. silencers are widely available to huntsmen that pay a fee. this legislation would make it terrifyingly easy to buy a gun silencer. the hunters deserve to have silencers, but only if they comply with these regulations. this measure would impose -- it
would be difficult to locate shooters and protect civilians. in one interview after another of the victims of last night's shooting, there was a common refrain, they ran and they escaped because they heard those gunshots. the only supposed reform measure before the united states congress right now given a chance at passage is a proposal to make it easier to buy gun silencers, but the only thing that led those individuals to escape, or one of the only things, is the fact of the sound of gunshot. how many more lives would have been taken last night if the shooter had a silencer?
another proposal, the concealed reciprocity act would limit the state's ability to regulate conceal carry states undermining laws that states like connecticut have placed to keep our residents safe. in the wake of newtown, charleston, orlando, las vegas, members of congress should come together to protect our lives from these senseless killings. it is not about republican or democrat, it is not about politics, it is not even about policy. it is about public safety simply. we should not be undermining protection. what a travesty and tragedy, what a dishonor to the memory of those victims in las vegas to now be on the verge of weakening rather than strengthening our
public safety laws. let's join hands across the aisle, across both houses, to stand up to the gun lobby, the n.r.a. and other special interests and release and break their grip on congress. more than thoughts and prayers are necessary, although they fulfill a vitally important function. talk must be turned into action. waiting simply means more death. delay means time and time is not on our side with 92 deaths on average every day as a result of gun violence. let us join together and combat evil. and certainly it was in las vegas, but it will visit other communities as it does every day
in those 92 deaths. and mass shootings will continue unless common sense, sensible measures like a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazine as well as mandatory background checks for all gun sales are adopted. until they are adopted, america will be more at risk. we must make america safer and that is an obligation that we share across the aisle and across the two bodies of congress. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: will the senator suspend? will the senator withhold his suggestion? mr. blumenthal: yes. the presiding officer: under the presiding officer: under
>> the senate voted to reappoint another five-year term as chair of the federal communications commission. the vote was 52 - 41. senators came to the floor to talk about the mass shooting in las vegas. more from the chamber tomorrow, live here in c-span2. >> i ask unanimous consent that the senate observe a moment of silence for the victims of the las vegas attack. >> reporter: without objection, so ordered. the senate will now observe a moment of silence for the victims of the attack in las vegas.