The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“LEGISLATIVE SESSION” mentioning John Thune was published in the Senate section on pages S5197-S5201 on July 30.
Of the 100 senators in 117th Congress, 24 percent were women, and 76 percent were men, according to the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
Senators' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
INVESTING IN A NEW VISION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND SURFACE
TRANSPORTATION IN AMERICA ACT--Motion to Proceed--Resumed
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 3684, which the clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to H.R. 3684, a bill to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from California.
Mr. PADILLA. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Padilla). Without objection, it is so ordered.
Remembering Carl Levin
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, this has been a week. I spoke earlier about the loss of my good friend Senator Mike Enzi, as many other Senators have, out of respect, from both sides of the aisle.
Yesterday, another good friend, Senator Carl Levin, left us. And, again, there will be respect shown, I am sure, by both Republicans and Democrats because he was of the school that worked with both.
I had the privilege of being here throughout his decades of service, and he epitomized what the Senate should be. He was a person of complete integrity; a person who knew the issues, whatever they were, that he was going to be discussing and working on. He knew them as well as anybody else. But everybody knew, Republican or Democrat, that they could take his word for anything.
And I couldn't help but think last night, if more Senators had listened to him at the time of the major Iraq war, supposedly because Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which of course he did not; when we had been told by many in the administration they had evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, when they did not; and because he actually took the time to read the intelligence--he was one of three Senators, another one being the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee, a conservative Democrat from Florida--they would come to us and tell us specifically what parts of the intelligence we should read, as did a third Senator.
Those who actually took the time to read it, as, of course, Senator Levin did, voted against the war. They knew there were no weapons of mass destruction. They knew that this would ultimately put America at risk. And, unfortunately, by having to transfer forces from Afghanistan that were closing in on the Saudi Arabian Osama bin Laden and his followers, the people who had organized 9/11 and the strike against us, he was able to escape and stayed loose for years, until captured during the Obama administration.
But Carl Levin I remember saying: Please, do your due diligence.
He and Vice Chairman Bob Graham and a third Senator kept saying: Read the intelligence.
Those who did voted no.
But I could give hundreds of other times when we would gather around Carl Levin, Republicans and Democrats alike, and say: What do you think of this issue? What did you study?
And we would get it, chapter and verse. It was always accurate.
He was what I considered a Senator's Senator. He was the type of Senator I hoped to be able to serve with when I first came to the U.S. Senate.
I remember sitting in the Gallery up there as a young law student at Georgetown Law School. Between classes or exams, I would come here just to watch the U.S. Senate, and I would see so many giants in both parties speaking, and I thought how wonderful it would be to serve in such a body. When Carl Levin was here, that was the example--his brother in the House of Representatives; he in the Senate.
And I remember Carl, with his sense of humor, speaking of his mother, whom I also got to meet, when she was asked by the press: What do you think about one son in the U.S. House of Representatives and the other in the U.S. Senate? Does that make you proud?
And she said: Well, if it is what makes them happy, I think that is good.
And Carl would just say that with his own self-deprecating sense of humor.
I hope Senators will look at his life and realize, whichever party you belonged to, this is a person you could follow. When he did lead the Armed Services Committee, he listened to everybody in this body, from the right to the left, and studiously considered their concerns.
I would not interrupt the Senate here, but I mentioned him because this is what a Senator should be, as I said earlier with Senator Mike Enzi. Losing two people I admired, two close friends, two people who worked to make the Senate better--let us all pause and try and do the same.
I appreciate Senators coming together yesterday in the legislation that Senator Shelby and I put forward to help our Afghan translators who worked with us, to bring them to safety, and to help our Capitol Police and those who work around the Capitol to be able to recover from January 6. And it gave me hope that they came together by a 98-to-0 vote and passed that legislation.
Let's take a break, and let's think of Carl Levin. Let's try and do more of that.
I think of my days as a young student looking down on this body, and I look at it now as the dean of the Senate. I have seen the good and the bad. I prefer the good.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Recognition of the Majority Leader
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, now, for the second time this week, sadly, the Senate has lost a greatly admired former colleague. Last night, Carl Levin--Michigan's longest-serving Senator, a Harvard-
educated civil rights attorney, and former taxidriver--passed away after a battle with cancer.
Over the years, many have been called model Senators, but few have earned the title like Carl. He was no frills, hyperfocused on policy and results, and fearless in taking on entrenched powers.
When the Pentagon was profligate, you could be sure that Carl Levin was there. When large financial institutions fleeced consumers, you could be sure Carl Levin was there. And whenever and wherever the interests of assembly line employees, the shift workers, or the servicemembers were at stake, you could be sure Carl Levin was there.
He was Mr. Integrity. Like a true son of the ``Motor City,'' he punched the clock at an auto assembly plant as a young man. Decades later, he proudly carried his 1953 union membership card in his wallet, a silent reminder of where he came from and who he fought for.
He was certainly not a Senator out of central casting. As the tributes came pouring in from all corners of the country, the word most often you would see associated with Carl is ``disheveled''--the rumpled suit, the stark-white hair, the glasses perched precariously at the end of his nose.
Well, he may have been disheveled in his appearance, but there was nothing--nothing--disheveled about his mind and principles.
It reminds me of one story. In 2006--I try to teach some of my caucus members some certain Yiddish words, and one of them is ``schlumpy.'' It means disheveled, not dressed to the best.
So when Harry Reid heard that Bernie Sanders was coming to the Senate, he got up at our caucus lunch one day, and he said: Well, we will finally find somebody here in the caucus more schlumpy than Schumer: Bernie Sanders.
Carl Levin said: I object to that; I am the most schlumpy.
He had a great sense of humor. He was a fine man. His intellect was fierce, a sharpened blade designed to cut to the core of an issue, or sometimes cut through the unimpressive answers of a witness in front of his committee. To modify a well-known expression, one of the most dangerous places in Washington was the witness chair across from Chairman Levin.
And while he was not a veteran himself, the Armed Forces of the United States could not count on a better friend than Carl Levin. For more than three decades, the not-so-invisible hand of Senator Levin shaped America's defense policy. There were large and weighty issues: matters of war and peace, terrorism and national security, billion-
dollar budget decisions.
But there was also the Michigan Korean war veteran, denied a veterans' loan because his military records were destroyed in a fire. It would have been enough for Carl to set his office to the task, find the lost records, and ship them off in a manila envelope. Instead, Carl went to visit with him in person and deliver four service medals.
He was an example that inspired and one to aspire to. Because of who he was and what he accomplished, the Senate, the State of Michigan, these entire United States, and our globe, our world, are much better off thanks to Mr. Carl Levin.
Infrastructure
Mr. President, on another matter entirely, later today, we will vote on the nomination of Ur Mendoza Jaddou, of California, to be Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. This is a Department in desperate need of capable leadership after four chaotic years under the Trump administration.
The daughter of Mexican and Iraqi immigrants, Ms. Jaddou would be the first woman to ever lead the USCIS, and I am confident she has the skills, expertise, and experience to do the job well.
In a short time, the Senate will also take a procedural vote to move forward with a bipartisan infrastructure bill. I expect the vote will receive the same significant margin of support today as it did on Wednesday.
Once Senators agree to proceed to debate on the bill, it is my intention to offer the text of the bipartisan agreement as a substitute amendment, making it the base of the bill on the floor.
The Senate remains on track to reach our goal of passing both a bipartisan infrastructure bill and a budget resolution, with reconciliation instructions, before the start of the August recess. It is an ambitious deadline, absolutely, but the hard work put in by Senators and staff means that we are on the right track to get it done.
Given the bipartisan nature of the bill, the Senate should be able to process this legislation rather quickly. We may need the weekend. We may vote on several amendments. But with the cooperation of our Republican colleagues, I believe we can finish the bipartisan infrastructure bill in a matter of days.
While our job is not nearly complete, I do want to take a moment this morning to recognize the sweat that our Members and staff have already put in. Senators from the bipartisan group have worked long hours for many weeks to first reach, and then finalize, this agreement.
I want to thank Senators Sinema and Portman for taking the lead, to the entire G-22 group--as it is called--as well as the White House for helping pull all of this together.
There has been significant work behind the scenes. In order to prepare the legislative text, staff members from our committees, the group of bipartisan Senators, and the legislative counsel have worked not just long hours but endured sleepless nights to finish writing the bill.
And the work I am talking about--a massive down payment toward rebuilding our Nation's infrastructure--will benefit our economy for years and decades to come.
Unanimous Consent Agreement--Executive Session
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that upon the disposition of the Jaddou nomination, the Senate remain in executive session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cortez Masto). Without objection, it is so ordered.
The majority whip is recognized.
Remembering Carl Levin
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, this has been a sad week in the U.S. Senate.
First, we lost Senator Mike Enzi of Wyoming and last night brought news of the passing of Senator Carl Levin of Michigan.
Carl was an extraordinary Senator and an extraordinary person. I remember after I had been in the Senate a few years, my friends back home said: Well, who are the real stars of the U.S. Senate?
There were many who were as obvious as could be, Ted Kennedy, for example. I said: There are two you probably don't know much about that I would turn to time and again if I had to make an important decision, either policy or politics, that I know I would get a thoughtful, intelligent response. One was Paul Sarbanes of Maryland, and the other was Carl Levin of Michigan. Those two, more than many of the colleagues I served with, really represented the best of the U.S. Senate.
Carl Levin was brilliant, nothing short of brilliant, and he was my friend. Many times we sat together and talked. I reflected on the way he approached legislation. Many of us think about the big-picture items and leave the details to staff--not Carl. Somebody would bring an amendment to the floor. Carl would say: I would like to get a copy of that. That, in itself, is unusual. We usually trust our staff to look at copies of amendments.
Then he would say, as he read the amendment: Can I take this home tonight and read it and tell you what I think about it in the morning? You knew that wasn't a pose; that was a fact. Carl took his job that seriously.
He served in the Senate, representing his beloved State of Michigan, for 36 years. When he retired in 2014, he left a legacy in the Senate, certainly, of important and good legislation but, more importantly, of the image of a real Senator. He left a powerful example of what we can achieve in life and in politics when we choose integrity over ideology and common good over confrontation. His keen intellect, his honesty and fairmindedness, decency and unfailing civility earned him the respect of Senators on both sides of the aisle.
The list of laws that he can claim to have authored is long and historic.
If you knew his background, you understood where this man came from and what made him what he was in the Senate.
First and foremost, he was a son of Detroit, MI. He showed up in Washington in 1979. He was driving a 1974 American-made Dodge Dart with a hole in the floorboard. He was still driving that car 10 years later. That is how devoted he was to the U.S. auto industry, its workers, and unions.
He wasn't flashy. I don't think he owned a shirt of any other color than white. And when we would go on the informal weekends with our families, he would be wearing a white shirt, which he rolled the cuffs up on to merely let his hair down and be informal. He was just that humble a man.
But when General Motors and Chrysler faced potential collapse in 2008, he knew what he had to do. He pressed Congress and the new President to support those companies with billions of dollars in loans, and thank God he did. He saved jobs and saved companies that are still major players in the industry. By the time he retired 6 years later, the loans to those companies had been paid off, and the companies were earning record profits.
His work on the Armed Services Committee is known to all. For 36 years, he served on that committee. He was the champion of America's military and military families and veterans and one of Congress's most respected voices on national security and the military issues. He voted for the repeal of don't ask, don't tell when it was far from a popular thing to do anywhere, and he voted against the war in Iraq. I felt honored to be joining him in that vote. He and I were 2 of only 23 Senators who voted no on that, sadly, misguided war, and I will tell you for sure, before I made a final decision, I sat down in that seat right--I can see it from here, right next to Carl Levin--and we talked about what it meant. It was amazing. I was making that decision before an election, just a few weeks, but he was making that decision as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. It was a brave vote, and history has shown that he was right.
A Jewish publication in Detroit once wrote that Carl Levin and his brother--my pal--former Congressman Sandy Levin, both deserved what they called ``honorable menschen awards,'' with the accent on
``mensch,'' for their historic service to America. I couldn't agree more.
Loretta and I extend our deepest condolences to Sandy and the entire Levin family, especially to Carl's beloved wife Barbara, their children and grandchildren.
And to their cousin Dan Levin, my pal in Chicago, IL, I know how proud the Levin family was of their name and reputation. It was well earned in whatever they chose to do--law, politics, business. Carl Levin was a great man and a good friend. I will truly miss him.
Immigration
Madam President, last night, we had an opportunity. We sat down with the President of the United States for more than an hour. We were discussing with him and with Vice President Harris our Nation's need for immigration reform.
The Presiding Officer was there, Senator Menendez, Senator Lujan, Senator Padilla, along with our colleagues in the House. We got to speak to the President in a very informal setting.
I want to thank President Biden for taking the time to meet with us. He could have taken the whole day on a victory lap in the Senate after passing the historic infrastructure plan or at least starting the debate on it 2 nights ago. But instead President Biden said: I want to meet with you. He gave us his undivided attention for more than an hour. That is because President Biden understands that we cannot wait any longer to fix America's broken immigration system.
It has been 35 years--35 years--since we passed any meaningful immigration bill. We passed it here. It was known at the time as the Simpson-Mazzoli bill, and it was sent to President Ronald Reagan, who signed it. Critics of what was signed called it amnesty, but it was a sincere and bipartisan effort to deal with a broken immigration system. We have since learned that the immigration system is broken again in many significant ways. This effort that we are discussing now has been decades in the making.
Back when we passed that original immigration reform under President Reagan, our adversary in the world was the Soviet Union. ``Top Gun'' was the most popular movie in America. Under the last administration, our broken immigration system absolutely collapsed. Former President Donald Trump's zero-tolerance policy at the southern border was not only inhumane, it was ineffective. It made our Nation weaker and less safe.
The hatred that many people in the Trump administration had for immigrants was palpable. I can go through the list of names, but I don't want to give them any satisfaction to hear their names on the floor of the Senate. But what they think of people who were not lucky enough to be born in America is just sad, in many ways, disgusting.
Some of my Republican colleagues have tried to blame President Biden, who has been in office for 6 months, with the failure of our immigration system, but the reality is Donald Trump was the one who provoked the crisis at our border.
Do you remember the speeches when he talked about all the rapists and murderers who were coming in, wanting to live in the United States? Do you remember what he did to our Muslim friends and their families when he cut off immigration from their countries?
His administration implemented policies that blocked nearly all claims by asylum seekers. They also prevented members of law enforcement from exercising prosecutorial discretion, which made it harder for ICE and DHS to apprehend true criminals. Former President Trump's hate-based policies created a massive bottleneck at our border and a giant backlog of cases that our courts are still working through.
President Biden understands that closing our doors to families and children fleeing violence is not only cruel and inhumane, it is not good policy. And it is contrary to the values of this country. The stories are legendary about when the United States closed its borders in World War II under a Democratic President, Franklin Roosevelt, turning away people who were escaping the Nazis in Europe, sending them back to their deaths in the Holocaust.
We learned a bitter lesson during that war that that is not what the United States is all about. And we have tried to make it up ever since, trying to lead the world when it came to refugees embraced in America. And those refugees have proven over and over again that they are positive influences on this Nation.
The Biden administration is bringing order to immigration enforcement, and it will take some time, but it is on its way. Since President Biden took office, roughly 7 in 10 individuals apprehended at our border have been denied entry into the country--7 out of 10. You wouldn't know that from the speeches given on the other side. Of course, there should be exceptions to the policy, humanitarian exceptions. Our Nation has a moral obligation, a moral responsibility, to provide refuge to families and unaccompanied children fleeing gang violence, natural disasters, paramilitary violence, and other crises.
This is at the heart of our values as a nation, and under President Biden's leadership, our Nation is no longer tearing babies away from mothers' arms.
I just read a story in the newspaper yesterday about efforts that are being made in Guatemala and other countries, going deep into the forests and jungles to try to find families whose children were taken away from them by the policies of the previous administration. The lengths we are going to, to try to reunite them, were totally unnecessary if they had just kept records of the families and children, but they tore these kids away from their mothers and had no plan at all to reunite them.
President Biden also recognizes that just fixing the mess of Donald Trump is not enough. We need to provide a path to citizenship for Dreamers and others who make our economy better every day and who help over the years to add to its growth. The vast majority of Americans agree with this--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. Tens of thousands of Dreamers have been saving American lives during this pandemic as nurses and doctors and first responders. Tens of thousands more help the economy grow every day as teachers, engineers, business owners, entrepreneurs, essential workers. They even have volunteered for our military. They respect our country so much, though so many in the Senate do not respect them.
The Dreamers need to be provided a path to citizenship as well as the farmworkers who are toiling in sweltering heat right now, right now at this moment, in this terrible heat that we are witnessing across the country. They are out in the fields, picking the crops that will be on our tables today, tomorrow, and beyond.
We had a recent hearing on farmworkers in the Senate Judiciary Committee. One of the Republican Senators said: Here we are talking about mass amnesty, giving these people an automatic path to citizenship.
Automatic? Read the bill that passed the House of Representatives. Do you know what it takes to be eligible for citizenship as a farmworker under that bill? Nineteen years of back-breaking work in the fields. Automatic? Nineteen years of slaving away at jobs that Americans don't sign up for--ever--and a possibility at the end of 19 years that they can be citizens. They should be given that chance. Every day, these workers head out to the fields and do back-breaking labor, sometimes for 14 hours straight, just to put food on our tables. Giving these people a chance to become citizens is the right thing to do.
It will help our economy. Reforms of our immigration system could add
$150 billion to spending power in our economy every year and, over the next 10 years, boost our Nation's GDP by $1.5 trillion. That is enough money to pay off every student loan in America just by doing the right thing for immigrants in our country.
Providing these essential workers a path to citizenship puts more money in the pockets of every American. It will create 400,000 new jobs, increase each American's annual wage by $600. These people, when they are given some clear picture of what their future will be, can plan it, can start making decisions that in the long haul will make them better and our Nation stronger. That is what it means to bring these immigrants into the sunlight and to give them a chance to be part of America.
By nearly every measure, a path to citizenship is an investment in our Nation's future. Last night, President Joe Biden agreed. It can't wait any longer. There is going to be a bill soon called reconciliation.
In 2005, Senate Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to dramatically increase the number of green cards available to immigrants. During the Trump administration, Republicans used the budget reconciliation process to enact a $1.9 trillion tax cut for wealthy donors and corporate fat cats, and they tried to use it to repeal the Affordable Care Act. So there is ample precedent for passing important legislation through budget reconciliation.
I have tried for many years to pass a citizenship program through regular order. Senate Republicans have obstructed bipartisan immigration reform time and again, filibustering the DREAM Act five times. In 20 years, I have brought the DREAM Act to the floor five times and been stopped by the filibuster. They repeatedly blocked bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform, passing the Gang of 8 bill but never returning to it.
This year, I am convinced bipartisan immigration negotiations are not going to lead us to where we need to be. Republicans made unreasonable demands in that process to limit the path to citizenship to a number that was dreamed up by President Trump as fair--650,000 current DACA recipients. Sounds like a lot. However, that approach would exclude Dreamers who have been blocked from the program for years by President Trump. Republicans also wanted to attach partisan provisions to block innocent asylum seekers and to cut legal family immigration.
For all of these reasons, I believe the only viable option, at this time, for passing a path to citizenship is through reconciliation. The overwhelming majority of Americans support this pathway for Dreamers, many of whom have risked their lives to save Americans during the pandemic. This is a critical component of our economic recovery and rebuilding our communities. It cannot wait any longer.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senate return to regular order.
Vote on Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
Mr. MORAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kelly). Without objection, it is so ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the motion.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Marshall), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Paul), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Marshall) would have voted ``nay.''
The result was announced--yeas 66, nays 28, as follows:
YEAS--66
BaldwinBennetBlumenthalBluntBookerBrownBurrCantwellCapitoCardinCarperCaseyCassidyCollinsCoonsCortez MastoCramerCrapoDuckworthDurbinFeinsteinGillibrandGrahamGrassleyHassanHeinrichHickenlooperHironoHoevenKaineKellyKingKlobucharLeahyLujanManchinMarkeyMcConnellMenendezMerkleyMurkowskiMurphyMurrayOssoffPadillaPetersPortmanReedRomneyRosenSandersSchatzSchumerShaheenSinemaSmithStabenowTesterTillisVan HollenWarnerWarnockWarrenWhitehouseWydenYoung
NAYS--28
BarrassoBlackburnBoozmanBraunCornynCottonCruzDainesErnstFischerHagertyHawleyHyde-SmithJohnsonKennedyLankfordLeeLummisMoranSasseScott (FL)Scott (SC)ShelbySullivanThuneToomeyTubervilleWicker
NOT VOTING--6
InhofeMarshallPaulRischRoundsRubio
The motion was agreed to
____________________
Alerts Sign-up