>> as again the legislative session notwithstanding rule 22 i ask ow nan-- i ask unanimous consider-- and that the bill read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. >> is there objection? >> i object. >> objection is heard. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington, live and on demand. keep up with the biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearing from the u.s. congress. the white house events, court campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. you can stay current with the

latest episodes of washington journal and by scheduling information by c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of complex, download it free today c-span.org/c-span now. c-span now your front row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> ...

the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. our chaplain, the reverend dr. barry black, will open the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. holy god who inhabits eternity, lead our lawmakers with your might. help them to not run ahead of you or ignore your wisdom. restore their spirits with trust and hope and order their steps toward your desired destination. lord, keep them calm in the

quiet center of their lives so that they may be serene, even in life's swirling stresses. fill them with the peace that comes from keeping their focus on you. help them to listen to others as attentively as they want others to listen to them. and, lord, please bring peace to our troubled world. we pray in your great name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the 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. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., april 16, 2024. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable raphael g. warnock, a senator from the state of georgia, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patty murray, president pro tempore. 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 to consider the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, ramona villagomez manage lone take of the northern mariana islands to be judge for the district court for the northern mariana islands.

>> provided in a funding for eight times that number. the budget only was for 34,000 i spent by comparison in fy 2021, the previous admission is

requested 60,000 eyes beds. someone illegal crossings were at the lowest in decades. your targus removal illegal aliens are abysmal. in 2020 amid the covid-19 pandemic ice removal and 85,884 illegal aliens while in fiscal year '19 ice removed, , removal exceeded 267,000. master despite more than 3.2 million and admissible encounters at our border yuliyau only a concert in 143,000 removals. budget your only targeting 100.5 thousand. at that. at that rate it would take 16 years to remove just the roughly 2,000,000 gotaways on your watch. say nothing of the more than 9 million encounters many of whom have also been released. meanwhile the chinese congress party continue to carry out multifaceted covert espionage and inputs missions against the united states. beijing has shown if we give an inch they will take a mile. mr. secretary to come you've

given them all 1951 miles of our southern border. while we deeply appalled by handling of the board security and integration issues this committee does hope to work with the department to key issues. this best-of-breed business session issued executive order providing for more stringent cybersecurity at our ports as well as an emphasis on supply chain security. we support these initiatives. your proposal recognizes our cyber workforce is vital to the protection of her homeland. strengthening our cyber workforce pipeline will be one of the top priorities for the remainder of this year and is imperative the 419 full-time employees you requested for cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency are utilized effectively. to that end we messenger cisa authority and resources aligned with its mission. secretary mayorkas the world is only growing more dangerous. our adversaries in china, russia, iran and elsewhere are expanding their capabilities and seeking to undermine our interest even within our homeland. all parts of this budget request do with some of those threats the request as a whole fails to

meet the important time we have. i now recognize the ranking member the gem of the mississippi mr. thompson for his opening statement. >> thank you very much, mr. cha. good morning. i want to begin by thanking secretary mayorkas for being here today. mr. secretary, your testimony before the committee despite unfounded extreme make attacks against you, speaks to your character, integrity, and commitment to the department of homeland security, its mission and its people. in what seems like a split screen day, this morning the committee is holding its annual hearing on the department of homeland security budget request this afternoon. revoking members will deliver to the senate their baseless articles of impeachment, and perhaps the most politicized partisan stunt this committee

has ever engaged in. from the moment the secretary took office in february 2021, members of the other side of the aisle have unfairly targeted him for the own political gain. chairman green promised donors at a campaign event that he would bring an impeachment case against secretary mayorkas. he told his contributors to get the popcorn, and promised it's going to be fun. according to an internal republican memo, republicans had already scheduled a committee vote to impeach the secretary prior to holding a hearing. this entire thing was a sham from the start. after two hastily thrown together so-called impeachment hearings, that provided that even a shred of evidence of an impeachable offense, republicans short-circuited their own markup

and refused to let democrats offer amendments in the rush to the house floor. in advance of the vote the secretary, who is jewish and his mother survived the holocaust, was referred to using language the american jewish community has included in its glossary of anti-semitic terms. mr. chairman, i asking in this consent to insert into the record an article describing this incident. >> so ordered. >> the impeachment vote failed. in another embarrassing miscalculation of house republican leadership, on a second try republicans limped their share of impeachment across the finish line. over two months later republicans are still transmitting their impeachment articles to the senate, having waited until they thought the timing was politically advantageous. so much for the claims of

urgency about the border. they waited, they wanted to have a dog and pony show march into the senate, showing yet again what deeply unserious people they are. the senate should dismiss the basis impeachment articles without delay. to make matters worse, in their zeal to impeach secretary mayorkas, republicans have shirked their responsibility to conduct meaningful oversight of dhs and advance its many critical missions. republicans have not yet hailed a single full committee oversight hearing on cybersecurity -- held -- domestic terrorism, aviation security, disaster preparedness, and response, or election security this congress. shocking for a committee born out of 9/11 attacks which once had a reputation for rising above the partisan politics to help secure the homeland on

behalf of the american people. the committee's legislative work has suffered, to. sperate need o leadership. russia's invasion of ukraine, iran's attack on israel, and the chinese government's encroachments on the south pacific threaten world peace, threaten america's prosperity, and threaten the very future of western democracy. that's why two months ago the senate passed a bipartisan national security supplemental with aid for ukraine, for israel, for the south pacific, and for humanitarian assistance. we have called on the house of representatives repeatedly to move our bill because the fastest way, the surest way for congress to get desperately needed aid to our allies is for house republicans to put the supplemental on the floor. it would pass. that was two months -- that was true two months ago. it's still true today.

yesterday evening, speaker johnson laid out a process for house consideration of the supplemental that would break it up into separate parts. i am reserving judgment on what will come out of the house until we see more about the substance of the proposal and the process by which the proposal will proceed. hopefully we will get details of the speaker's proposal later today. again, time is of the essence. israel was attacked for the first time in its history directly by iran. the people of ukraine are now in all-out dispefr ration -- desperation. the ahead of the european command testified that russia's army is now 15% larger than it was at the start of the war. and in a matter of weeks, russia will outgun ukraine by 10-1, 10-1. that's not a very good prospect for ukraine's survival.

anyone -- and anyone who thinks that the war in ukraine will stay in ukraine, remember the warning of japanese prime minister kishida. ukraine today may be east asia tomorrow. around the world civilians caught in the cross fires of war wait for disper rattly needed humanitarian assistance. so the time for delay is over. democrats have shown repeatedly our willingness to compromise to get important things done. i would remind everyone of what i said from the beginning of this congress. the only way to get things done is in a bipartisan way. so again, we await to see more details of the speaker's proposal. i arming him to -- i urge him to keep working in a bipartisan way to ensure this vital aid gets to our friends abroad as quickly as possible. now, on senate business, last night, i moved to place the house-passed fisa reauthorization bill on the

legislative calendar. the senate must pacifiesa -- fisa reauthorization by the deadline. we don't have much time to act. i will file cloture on the motion to proceed to the ho house-passed bill. democrats and republicans have to work together to meet the april 19 deadline. if we don't cooperate, fisa will expire. so we must be ready to cooperate. on another matter, this afternoon we expect the house will deliver the articles of homeland security -- articles of impeachment of homeland security secretary alejandro n. mayorkas. i urge all my colleagues to be in their seats when the articles are presented later today. once we receive the articles, senate will convene on wednesday as a court of impeachment, and senators will be sworn in as jurors. senate president pro tem, patty murray, will preside. as i have said repeatedly, we

want to address this issue as expeditiously as possible. impeachment should never be used to settle a policy agreement -- policy disagreement. let me say that again. impeachment should never be used to settle a policy disagreement. talk about awful precedence. this would set an awful precedent for congress. every time there's a policy agreement in the house, they send it over here to tie the senate in knots to do an impeachment trial? that's absurd. that's an abuse of the process. that is more chaos. nevertheless, when the house is ready to send us the articles, the senate will act. now, on chips, yesterday the biden administration announced a preliminary deal with samsung to provide over $6 billion in funding for chips and science to build a new semiconductor manufacturing and research center in texas. the administration's deal with samsung supports over

$40 billion of investment. that is expected to create over 17,000 new construction jobs and over 4,000 new manufacturing jobs. all made possible by chips and sci science. thanks to the investments made in chips and science, i'm proud to say that the u.s. is well on its way to our goal of producing 20% of the world's leading-edge chips by the end of the decade. the chips and science investment is bringing manufacturing back to america, it's shoring up our supply chains to prevent the kinds of chips shortages that raised prices during the pandemic, and creating good-paying jobs to grow the middle class. we still have a lot of work to do, but these announcements are proofer that the democrat -- proof that the democratic agenda is providing real results for american people and our economy. on credit card fees, last month, the biden administration announced a new $8 cap on late fees to help millions of americans save up to $10 billion

a year. the biden administration's push to cut down excess late fees is great news for the people who have been taking -- of the people who have been taken advantage of by the big credit card companies for years and years. now, if you can believe it, republicans are pushing a bill to overturn the biden administration 's rule. and let big credit card companies get richer at the expense of hard-working americans. the republican bill argues that even allowing big credit card companies to charge americans absurdly high late fees will, quote, promote financial discipline and responsibility. whose side are they on? it's hard to believe republicans are actually trying to increase credit card fees. let me say that again so all americans can hear this. republicans want to let big credit card companies increase

credit card fees in the name of fiscal discipline and responsibility. give me a break. by introducing a bill to block the administration's -- the biden administration's rule, republicans are doing the bidding of big credit card companies and leaving the american people out to dry. let me be clear -- democrats will not allow the republicans' bill to become law. i yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

>> and only congress can deliver on our need for more border patrol agents, , a silo offices and immigration judges, facilities and technology. our administration work close with the by produce a group of senators to reach agreement on a national security supplemental package, one that would make the system changes that are badly needed, and give dh is the tools to meet today's border security challenges. we remained ready to work with you to pass this tough, their bipartisan agreement. finally, extreme weather continues to devastate communities. last year fema response to more than 100 disasters. our budget provides $22.7 billion to assist community leaders and help survivors in the aftermath of major disasters. an additional funds to invest in resilience strategies that will save lives and taxpayer money in the decades to come.

essential to our success across all mission sets is our departments ability to recruit and retain a world-class workforce. in addition to the front-line border workforce i mentioned, the present budget includes $1.5 billion to maintain our commitment to fairly compensate tsa workforce. the recently passed 2024 budget welcome and helpful to many of our operations was enacted to like to implement and appreciable hiring surge. it reduced by 20% much-needed support for cities even with migrant related challenges and a cut critical research and development funding. i and eager to work with you to address these and other shortfalls in the weeks ahead. as i am eager to deliver the sustained funding, resources and support that the extraordinary talented and dedicated public servants of dhs need and deserve.

>> thank you, mr. secretary. members want to wreck it is for organizing jordi for the five minutes of questioning. i would like to say the secretary has i think a hard out today, and that hard out is going to come up much faster than we would want or desire. i understand he's got a busy schedule. typically my policy is to let people go be on for five minutes if they're making a question and continuing a train of thought. unfortunately today we are not going to be able to allow that i do hate that. but as applied to the rule evenly to both sides, i will not apply for today's hearing the five minutes with the gavel for both sides of the aisle. so it's five minutes and five minutes only because we want to love everyone here to get an opportunity to ask questions of the secretary. i would like to ask the staff on both sides if they would communicate this change for today to the individuals who are not present right now. i now recognize muscle for five minutes for questioning.

mr. secretary, you've issued guidance that directed dhs personnel to essentially disregard the i&a shall detain language, meaning disregards laws passed by callista gingrich pathways for tens of thousands of migrants from a a specific countries to enter the united states directly without any law passed by congress and in violation of the i&a. the solicitor general and arguments before the supreme court arguing on your and your bosses behalf as well as yourself in testimony to congress have said you were profitable discretion i think is a term that keeps getting cues. is it to guard those laws when resources are overwhelmed. it's essentially been the argument that you know shall detain language cannot be adhered to because the resources were overwhelmed. is that generally correct? >> no, it is not. mr. chairman, let me assure you that we enforce the laws that

congress has passed, and that is the direction i have given to the workforce throughout my tenure. >> during the hearing or the court trial, texas versus try to come solicitor general a very clear the reason the policies that you've written haven't written the way the been written is because there is some form of discretion allowed to make the choice that we are not going to follow the shall detain, and we can get thousands and thousands of examples of where that didn't happen. we have a memorandum from you that basically says just because it says this doesn't mean that the reason to not, or to detain someone. i want to ask this question. do you know how many i.c.e. detention beds were empty on average during your tenure? >> mr. chairman, let me be very clear that we maximize the use of detention beds that are available. sometimes we are curtailed by using detention beds by reason

of -- fma, mr. chairman, speedy but do you know the number? i just want the number. >> by orders of court. short restrictions were used in terms of space and availability of beds by reason of the covid-19 pandemic. >> let me just share what has been put up in documents from your department. in each of your tenure there been i would submit thousands, well, thousands of beds available per day, roughly 9000 on average in fy '22. 3000 a day in fy '23. meaning while you assert that shall detain is what you want to do, what you agree the law says, we are leaving thousands of bedt empty every day. and this is not objection. mr. mcconnell: this afternoon, the senate will be called for just the 19th time in our history to rule on the

impeachment of a senior official of our government. it's a responsibility to be taken seriously. as i said last time the senate convened as a court of impeachment, it's a power congress must not exercise frivolously. today, the senate will hear house managers charge secretary mayorkas with serious darrell ex of -- deriliction of duty. that the systematic refusal to enforce our nation's immigration laws, and with lying to congress about the extent of the border crisis that unfolded on the biden administration's watch. the facts of the crisis are

well well-known. since january of 2021, cbp has recorded more than 7.5 million illegal crossings at our southern border. while observers estimate over 1.5 million known got-aways. and last december saw the highest daily and monthly numbers ever recorded. in the two months since the house impeached secretary mayorkas, the border crisis has only continued, with excruciating consequences for innocent americans. on february 22, an illegal alien was arrested in virginia for sexually assaulting a minor. the very next day, another

illegal alien from venezuela was arrested for the murder of laken riley, a young college student in georgia. in the same month, yet another was charged with first and second-degree murder for the shooting of a 2-year-old in maryland. and for the americans living right near the border, things are not improving. in february, one man working in arizona recounted watching cartel guides lead over 170 people from around the world through one such opening in a matter of hours. the house managers will make the case for secretary mayorkas' role in knee gekting and ex --

neglecting and exacerbating that crisis. and as events of such solemn and rare responsibility as convening a court of impeachment, i intend to give these charges my full and undivided attention. of course, that would require that senators actually get the opportunity to hold a trial, and this is exactly what history and precedent dictate. never before has the senate agreed to a motion to table articles of impeachment. not for an officer of either party. not once. instead, every single time we've been called upon to render judgment, we've done so. we've convened a trial or we've

appointed a trial committee to dig into the facts and make a recommendation. it would be beneath the senate's dignity to shrug off our clear responsibility and fail to give the charges we'll hear today the thorough consideration they deserve. i'll strenuously oppose any effort to table the articles of impeachment and avoid looking the biden administration's border crisis squarely in the face. now on an entirely different matter, months ago the senate passed a national security supplemental that reflected the clear links between the challenges we face. that was by design. america's adversaries from beijing and moscow to tehran are all working together. they are reinforcing one

another's efforts to stop our resolve, shatter our influence and remake the rules of the road on their own terms. and anyone pretending that we can address these challenges individually at our lee sure is only -- leisure is only kidding themselves. the truth is plainly evident. if you want to see the world the way our adversaries do, trace the trade of chinese cash for sanctioned iran energy. watch the trainloads of north korean artillery arrive at the front lines of putin's onslaught in ukraine. follow the flows of drones of the russian military.

they're the same ones that iran launched at israel this past weekend. or pay attention to the words and actions of america's friends. listen to the way our indo-pacific allies describe the stakes of ukraine's defense for the prospects of deterrence in their own region. and watch the war they invest their resources in modernizing that you are capabilities and helping ukraine beat back aggression halfway around the world. now, america can choose, as it has nearly done before over the course of our history, to stick our head in the sand, to refuse to invest seriously in our own defense and in the alliances and partnerships that underpin it.

to deny that a century of prosperity was purchased by american leadership and vigilance. but to do that now would be to ignore the basic fact that expanding america's defense industrial base, equipping our friends to resist and deter aggression are not competing policies but complementary ones. helping ukraine has accelerated important programs to arm our allies and partners in the indo-pacific. it has called the attention of pentagon officials, defense industry leaders and members of congress clean airing caps in -- declean airing caps in our own capability. and the supplemental would further expand the capacity of the arsenal of democracy. of course, this isn't a one-off

responsibility. the supplemental will not magically fix decades of underinvestment and the administration and congress will need to commit to taking our military capabilities and other critical capabilities much more seriously. but to continue to neglect the task in front of congress right now would only compound the problem. hesitation and indecision have prevented ukraine from taking the fight aggressively to putin's invaders. and if our friends are digging new defensive fortifications today, it is because they're starving for the munitions that would have helped them hold the arms they have already built on another own front lines.

addressing the threats to america's national security interests isn't about cooking up bogus justifications. it's about dealing with the world as it actually is. our house colleagues will soon record whether they're prepared to do exactly that. now on one final matter, last week cumulative inflation since president biden took office hit 19.4%. since january of 2021 gas prices are up 47.8%. car repair costs have increased 6.7%. and in barely two years car insurance premiums have increased -- listen to this -- 45.8%. americans know that stable prices and basic safety shouldn't be much to expect from their new leaders. as one woman recently told

reporters, what can you do? you need insurance. you can't have a vehicle or a house without them. so you have to figure out where you can cut other things to make sure you can drive around. of course, the soaring costs of inssuring a -- insuring a car has a lot to do with soft-on-crime policies let violent offenders run free. today drivers are more likely than ever to become victims of crime. 2023 saw new rates of car chef click up by 29% in 34 cities across the country, more than double since 2019. and 2023 was also the second year in a row that car thefts passed one million in the united

states. here in washington, local residents and members of congress alike have fallen victim to an unchecked surge of carjacking and the city' response -- hand out free tracking devices. millions of americans are waiting eagerly for this fever of incoherent policy to break. they're recalling woke prosecutors, and i suspect they plan to fire many more of their local, state, and national leaders this fall. bidenomics isn't working, and neither is soft-on-crime radicalism. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

and to even refuse to consider the senate bipartisan border bill. in the last few months my colleagues on the site of the aisle have repeatedly threaten to shut down government over the homeland security budget. secretary mayorkas, can you please explain to us in plain terms what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, their refusal to pass emergency supplemental requests, how does that put our country's also security in danger? >> congressman, with the additional resources we would be provided in the presence supplemental budget request, we would be able to advance significantly the security of the border. we would have additional equipment, additional technology, additional personnel into every facet of border security.

>> you talk about additional personnel. do we have a shortage of personnel right now at our borders? >> we do, congressman. we need additional field operations personnel to met our ports of entry. we need additional border patrol agents -- >> let me talk about that. our ports of entry, that's for most of the fentanyl coming to this country interest reports of entry. accounts about 70% of all fentanyl coming into our country. yet you are telling me we are short of personnel in these critical junctures, is that what you're telling me? >> we are. we need additional field personnel to equip those ports of entry with the staff that we need to enforce our laws. >> let me go back and we ask a question that you did not finish answering those asked by my colleague, which is the thousands of 90 beds, how do you explain that?

>> congressman, you know recently we have been overcapacity in our i.c.e. detention facilities. there are court cases that impose restrictions on our ability to use the beds that we have been funded. >> so if the laws were to change maybe some of those court cases would not apply, would that be the case? >> i would want to get back to you on that, congressman. i will share with you that the president, i'm sorry, forgive me. a bipartisan senate legislation would have funded the department of homeland security with 50,000 detention beds, far more than we are resourced this year, and even more so than we were resourced last year. >> so how would that affect the situation that my colleagues on the other side and i were talking a, all these individuals that could be essentially held at these empty beds, so to speak, adding to these empty beds?

talk about all these people being released. with a be held at these beds? >> as everyone recognizes the more detention beds that we are funded for, the more individuals that we would be able to detain and the supreme court is right clearly recognize the fact that detention bed capacity for which we have been funded is an adequate to comply to the letter of the law. >> beyond that, the bigger picture is processing individuals at our borders that may or may not be eligible for asylum. we are critically short in his resources there. i do hope this would move for an we could address that issue. i'm out of time. mr. secretary, thank you reveal your. >> gentleman yield. i now recognize a gentleman mr. higgins in louisiana the chair of the subcommittee on port security and enforcement for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. over the past year i found that

many members of congress failed to grasp the founders true meaning regarding the constitutional writ of impeachment proceedings. impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. and may include violations unwritten law. it was 17 to be bound by specific criminal violations and statutes. in many ways impeachment proceedings are intended to be guided by principles of conduct that our far more deeply etched upon human history been in written law could ever be. embezzlement of money by an employee is a criminal act and is a betrayal of trust. but betrayal of trust is not a statute. the house committee on homeland security advanced articles of impeachment against department of homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas. he has been impeached by the people's house. these articles do not impugn the secretaries character nor list

dissenting views on how to handle the crisis at our border. instead, the impeachment articles against secretary mayorkas carry the charge of high crimes and misdemeanors. it's important that all americans recognize the true meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors. while some of my colleagues have claim that this charge is confined to specific violations of criminal statute, let us not fail to recognize the founders original intent and well-documented debate regarding the origin and meaning of this term. article ii, section four of our constitution reads the president, vice president and all civil officers of the united states shall be removed from office on impeachment four and conviction of treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors. our founding fathers used this phrase high crimes and

misdemeanors having 400 years of british parliament historical precedent, which did not limit itself to direct criminal misconduct, or more importantly, congress neglected duty and abuse of power. this is not funny, mr. secretary. literally, mr. meaning the office and high authority that had been entrusted enshrined in this phrase in the constitution, the founding fathers put explicit trust in congress to determine what constitutes an impeachable offense and what encompassed in high crimes and misdemeanors. impeachment was never intended to be a criminal proceeding. but instead of review by the american people of iraq executive and a mechanism for accountability when all else has failed. secretary mayorkas has no one betrayed the trust of the

american people, his service as secretary has left a scar on our nation soul that may never be removed. the articles of impeachment brought against secretary mayorkas past the house and had now been delivered this afternoon to the senate. it is vital that the scent uphold its constitutional obligation to hold a fair impeachment trial. the american people deserve accountability of the gross misconduct of the secretaries handling of our borders. it is incumbent upon members of congress to enforce the authority outlined why the founding fathers for impeachment. under secretary mayorkas america has suffered. over 300,000 americans have died from cartel drug poisoning. our communities are crushed under the weight of 12 million illegal aliens in the span of

three years. and crime has reached unprecedented levels within american communities across the country. secretary alejandro mayorkas disregard for the security and sanctity of the american people has brought congress to this point. he has brought unspeakable pain upon the nation. his service as secretary will forever be shrouded in shameful failure, and generational trauma. alejandro mayorkas has been impeached by the house. he must now be tried by the senate and removed from office. mr. chairman, i yield. >> gentleman yields. i now recognize mr. carter from louisiana and the ranking member on the subcommittee counterterrorism law enforcement intelligence for five and. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ranking member thompson. thank you, secretary mayorkas for joining us today. as we review our fiscal year fy

25 budget request. president biden's siskiyou 235 budget request with dhs reflects democrats commitment to put politics aside and work in good faith to address security challenges facing our nation. today's review is important so we can continue to find solutions, not politics, solutions come solutions that we as americans should, while we often have different approaches but what we see here in the impeachment is nothing more than a witch hunt and an opportunity to cloud the issue. and evidenced either fact that the senate has measures that would bring us to a measure of success, , to move the ball forward. but my colleagues in the house,

because of a directed by the form resident to quote-unquote not get present by the victory. our jobs are not together presidents victories. our job is to give the american people victories. our jobs are to make sure that we have a secure border are our jobs are you to make sure that we see things through a lens not as republicans or democrats but as americans and to do what is right. unfortunately, that has not and is not happening. i will go on record as predicting that the united states send will not even take up these articles of impeachment. why? because they are meritless. because they are baseless and because they are purely political in nature and you're not rooted in the fairness, justice for the american way. so am going pivot a little bit if we might because i've come we talked about this quite a bit some going to pivot to flood

insurance. mr. secretary, last time you were here before this committee i relayed my concerns about 2.0 and that it will leave many in my district especially in low and moderate income communities priced out of their homes by premium increases. you stated that you are reviewing and need to continue to review risk rating 2.0 given the concerns that of an express. since then i have always seen flood insurance prices get worse. given the urgency of the situation and the impact on vulnerable communities can you provide the committee with an update on how the department is taking steps to help communities that are struggling with fema risk rating 2.0? >> congressman, i will follow up with you and provide you an update on flood insurance 2.0. i can assure you that we are taking extraordinary measures

with fema to reach otherwise disenfranchised populations. we have issued guidance and change our policies to make sure that minority and underserved communities have greater access to our grant programs, the individual assistance, and other resources that fema provides in the wake of natural disasters, and to strengthen and protect communities. i will provide you with an update with respect to flood insurance 2.0 specifically. >> and one of the things that we've repeatedly asked for both in this committee as well as in transportation infrastructure for which i also serve, and individual meetings in my office and in the office of the fema administrator, is the formula. what algorithm, what formula is used to derive these rates? would have consistently said it

some algorithm but we have yet to be shared what that is, what does it look like? how to weeks later the the people in our districts how these rates are developed when we get a vague answer to that? mr. secretary, i would greatly appreciate if you can drill down and share with the american people what this formula is, how it is derived, and more importantly how we can adjust it to make sure that people are not be forced to make a decision about being able to live in a home that they have now paid for and they can no longer afford to ensure. because the rates are higher than the note was when they had a a mortgage. this is untenable and i would ask that you look into that and share some meaningful answers. >> i will do so, congressman, here. >> thank you. my time is up. >> i now recognize mr. guest,

jumping from mississippi and the vice chair on the committee for homeland security 45 minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, i want to point out what a highlight last week when you testified. you came in your opening statement and he you talked t your budgeting insufficient, and you seek to place the blame on caucus that we are not giving you the resources in your department the resources that you need. but last year in the fy '24 budget which we just passed congress appropriated $61.8 billion in discretionary spending, which is more than you asked for. and so congress is giving you more money than to asking for but you are repeatedly coming in to these hearings and you're trying to say that you don't have the financial resources that you need to carry out the job. chairman green mention the detention beds, the detention that you and i talked about last week are incredibly troubling and the fact that you come in and you once again you ask for less detention beds, significantly less detention

beds then we find it in fy '24 budget. you told me at that hearing last week that you agreed with the scented 50,000 detention beds but yet you come and ask congress only to find 34,000 when we currently are funding 41. -- 41,500. you continue to seek to place the blame on us. i'm reading from the physical report 2023 i.c.e. annual report. in that annual report, mr. secretary, a report which is issued by your agency, on page 17 it says congressional funding for er oh, detention beds have remained relatively static for several years and the detained population is limited as a result. and that's a question of mr. kariya talk about the fact that the court said there's been an adequate funding for detention beds. and so how do you come near and ask for less detention beds but

yet every time you testified that the place to place back on congress? because we are funding more detention beds every year than you're asking for. and at a time which we see a record search of emigrants coming across the border at a time which you have at least now finally admitted that there is a crisis on the border when we're seeing reports every day in the media about violent crimes committed by immigrants who are not in custody, who are not staying but released and the interior and yet you come in here and as as a key part ofr budget you are asking for substantially less detention beds. and i find that especially troubling, mr. secretary, as a look at this continue to look at the report that was provided by i.c.e. in which according to the fy '23 year end report that the nine detained, the docket for shows the number of nine detained individuals who you've allowed in the country has now

reached over 6.2 million people. 6.2 million. i spoke just yesterday with the isa director, director light later come and in my conversations i follow up with the fact most in this report. and he told me, mr. secretary, that that number as to over 7 million, that that report is old. the number is more than 7 million. several weeks ago by the end of this fiscal year fy '24 for october 1 that number is expected to grow 8 million. so we see this record number of immigration, the record number of people that you as the secretary allowing to come into the country but yet we are seeing you do nothing to ask for more detention beds. and i find that troubling and have to believe that i'm not the only member of this committee that finds it troubling that

when asking for a sufficient number of detention beds. and mr. secretary, i also had the opportunity as to last week when you testified before the appropriations committee about this news article, reported by fox news, i provide you some of the content willamette last week i want to show this to you. and this is from an article dated january 8, 2024 2024. says mayorkas tells border patrol agents that above 85% of illegal immigrants have been released into the united states. it goes on in the first paragraph and says homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas on monday admitted to border patrol agents that the current rate of release for immigrants apprehended at southwest border is about 85%. mayorkas made the statements when beating privately with agents and that there were sources in the room who heard that. it goes onto say that there were at least three agency verified the fox news that you made that

statement. so mr. secretary, did you make the statement that was report on january 8 to 1.4? >> congressman, as an agency last week i do not recall that exchange in an interim beating with a workforce. let me assure you that the southern border is -- >> the time of the gentleman has expired. i now yes, we are. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, this weekend iran and its proxies in syria, yemen and iraq fired a barrage of missiles and drones against israel. the direct attack was a marked escalation on iran's part, and it's time for the united states, our allies, and nations that support peace and freedom to make it clear to iran we're not going to stand idly by while iran threatens israel and foments

the middle east. this was a notable escalation on iran's part, because weapons were fired from iran and not just by iran's proxies. iran has been threatening israel and undermining peace in the middle east for decades. hezbollah, the houthis, shi'ia militias in iraq and syria, palestinian islamic jihad, and of course hamas. hamas gets approximately 90% of its military budget from iran. there's reason to wonder whether hamas would even have had the capability to carry out its october 7 attack without the support it receives from iran. there is certainly reason to wonder what the middle east would look like today if iran hadn't spent decades funding an a army tryst organizations. mr. president -- army terrorist organizations. mr. president, enough is enough. there have been a lot of red

lines drawn for israel lately. it's past time to draw some for iran. unfortunately, the u.s. posture toward iran under president biden has too often been one of appeasement. there was president biden's attempt to reinstate the obama administration's flawed iran nuclear deal. then there was the biden administration's attempt to unfreeze $6 billion in iranian assets as part of a deal to free american prisoners. thankfully, the administration ultimately refroze those funds in the wake of hamas' october 7 attack against israel. unfreezing them in the first place was a serious mistake, and just last month for the second time since the october 7 attack on israel by iran-backed hamas, president biden renewed a sanctions waiver, giving iran access to $10 billion from energy sales. and now, this week, president biden was quick to take options off the table for what u.s.

assistance to israel might look like in the wake of iran's bold attack. this only suggests to iran there are limits to the u.s.-israel partnership at the very time we must be making good on our ironclad relationship with israel, not telling our ally it has to go it alone. it's alarming when president biden seems more intent on preventing israel from responding to iran's attack than making it clear to iran that there can be no more of these attacks, and that iran needs to cease all of its terrorist operations. unless president biden wants to continue to see israel in danger, american troops threatened, and commerce through the red sea disrupted, he's going to have to find a much stronger posture when it comes to iran. the united states should be making it clear to iran that the united states will not allow another iranian attack like the one that occurred this weekend,

and that we will not tolerate any more aggression from iran. it shouldn't be just the united states drawing this red line. as i said, it's time for the united states, our allies, and nations that support peace and freedom to resoundingly reject iran's maligned agenda. the united states has an important role to coordinate action to back up the g-7 statement and to press members of the u.n. security council to take a position on iran's flagrant attack. the united states must also press forward to broker a deal for the normalization of israel and saudi relations, the prospect of which normalization many believe motivated the october 7 terrorist attack by iran-backed hamas. of course, the united states must iron to -- must continue to push for the return of all hostages in gaza and help israel

in its vital mission to dismantle the threat of hamas. mr. president, there may be no easy solution to peace in the middle east, but standing up to iranian aggression would be a good start. iran spends at least $800 million per year supporting terrorist groups in the middle east. i ask again, what would the middle east look like without the terrorist funding? i suspect it would look more peaceful and prosperous, and that our ally israel, and innocent people around the middle east, would be able to sleep more easily at night. so it's time for president biden to step up. continued appeasement and half measures on iran will only

prolong the cycle of violence in the middle east and increase the risk of large-scale attacks against israel, like the barrage over the weekend. president biden steps forward with strength, perhaps the legacy of his presidency can include something more than an inflation crisis and a national security disaster at our southern border. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin.

over straining the workforce of the department and i hope crystal 25 will be different. running the home and security is critical because our nations

increased threat from the rise of domestic, extremism. we've heard from you and director right last november during the worldwide cap directs the terrorism threat we face continues to be from racially and ethnically motivated government motivated, extremism. organize groups engaged in the group that kidnapped the capital and obama attempt election. the individuals like all pelosi and many of these individuals are inspired by members of the congress and vice president trump. domestic terrorism increased dramatically years so this

alarming thing, what is the homeland security seeing with respect threat of domestic violence particularly as we grow closer to the election and what steps are the department taking address any potential threat government bodies officials and the public at large? >> director right and i expressed crimes environment might indeed divisionals crime because of ideologies false narratives, antigovernment sentiments significant concern we disseminate information to territorial law enforcement contribute grant constant

gleeful of the funds we need to enable communities to guard themselves. i mentioned in my opening statement we have a terrorism pension program that enables communities to employ best practices individual may be trying violence and intervene before a tragedy occurs. >> thank you for and local state agencies as we saw often what enforcement and uniform on the receiving end we need to do everything we can to support them so thank youl: very much ad i'm out of time so i yield you back. >> i now recognize the gentleman

committee. >> i find it amazing always throwing money at the issue money, money, money sets up the real culprit has been over for actions by the executive branch that caused the problem at the border. not once have i heard democrat colleagues asked for why not reinstituting the remaining mexico policy. i believe in fiscal year 21 at a record number of encounters of the border and only surpassed by fiscal year 22 and another encounter of the border bypass again in 2023 with another record of the border. you expect the record in 2024? >> i strongly encourage congress to pass bipartisan legislation

would make a significant difference. >> have you ever asked the president to reconsider? around the world -- with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cornyn: mr. president, i had a like to speak about the most important law that most americans have never heard of, and that is section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. last week the house of representatives passed legislation to reauthorize this important law before it expires at the end of this week. fy is a, as its -- fisa, the foreign intelligence surveillance act, and section 702 in particular, is one of the most important and consequential

laws that we use to keep our law safe from adversaries overseas. congress enacted section 702 in 2008 in response to the threats posed by terrorist groups in the wake of 9/11. it tore down some of the walls with respect to information-sharing used to keep our country i have a safe, and there is no question it's been a success. information acquired through section 702 has helped identify threats against u.s. troops and to thwart planned terrorist attacks abroad and here at home. it's enabled the federal government to stop components of weapons of mass destruction from reaching foreign actors. it's also helped disrupt our adversaries' efforts to recruit spies on american soil and send

their operatives to the united states. it's helped to understand and combat fentanyl trafficking, identify foreign ransom-ware attacks and uncover war crimes and gruesome atrocities in ukraine. from virtually every national security threat that america faces, section 702 is an invaluable asset. there's a reason why it is known as the crowell jewel of -- the crown jewel of america's intelligence-gathering capability. the president is briefed daily in something called the president's daily brief on these intelligence threats, this collective for the president's briefing, as i said, on a daily basis. a full 60% of the information contained in the president's

daily classified intelligence brief is derived from section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. now everyone knows that this authority has not been without controversy. in recent years the public has learned about extremely concerning uses of this authority that go far beyond what congress has authorized. but i want to make clear that targeting of american citizens here in the united states is expressly prohibited under 702, so any targeting of an american citizen is illegal and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. just to be clear, this authority grants the intelligence community -- and by that i mean

the cia, the nsa, the dia, fbi -- it grants authority to the department of justice and our intelligence community to get intelligence on foreigners located outside of the united states. in other words, if there's important nationals inside the united states, you cannot use section 702. but, more importantly, foreigners outside of the united states who are deemed to be a threat to our national security, agents of a foreign power, for example. it cannot be lawfully used to target u.s. citizens whether on american soil or elsewhere. but this is where the issue gets a little bit thorny, and sometimes there's misunderstanding about how exactly this works. so let me go through some of the detailings -- details.

where this becomes a little bit confused is where there is incidental collection of u.s. persons. for example, if you're targeting a foreigner overseas and they're communicating with a u.s. person in the united states, that could be a citizen, that could be a lawful permanent resident. well, if it's a lawful communication -- a lawful 702 targeting of the foreign national and they're talking too a u.s. person -- to a u.s. person, inraichably there's going to be -- invariably, there's going to be information known as incidental collection involving the communication with that u.s. person. in other words, both sides. conversation will be revealed in that lawful targeting of a foreign person overseas. here's an example. let's say the intelligence community is monitoring the communications of a hamas terrorist in gaza who's believed to danger to our national

security. he's not an american. he's not on u.s. soil. but he's using u.s.-based communication networks. let's say in this example one of the people the hamas terrorist is communicating with is an american on u.s. soil. even though the american is not a target of the data collection, his side of the conversation would be visible because he's the one communicating with this foreign target. let me be clear, the intelligence community cannot target anyone they believe to be a u.s. person, nor can they target a foreigner with the pretext of getting american citizens' data. for that you need a warrant, you need to go to court and show probable cause because that's a constitutional right granted to americans under the fourth amendment to the united states constitution. the fourth amendment of the

constitution protects our people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, and an unchecked surveillance authority would directly violate that right. that's why we have guardrails, that's why we have protections to minimize the chance of that happening. i know there's been some confusion. some of it is from a misunderstanding. some of it is people frankly just misrepresenting exactly what this authority does and does not do. but section 702 does not violate the fourth amendment. every court that has considered the lawfulness of the 702 program has found that it complies with the fourth amendment. so when people stand up and say, well, section 702 allows the government to spy on americans, that's frankly not true. if they say it violates the

fourth amendment, well, you have at least three courts that have considered the issue and they've said, no, it doesn't. so they need to comet up with another -- they they need to -- so they need to come up with another argument. to be clear, this is very targeted, very narrow surveillance authority. and, as a matter of fact, under the reforms passed in the house bill, there are very few circumstances under which the fbi, for example, can exploit or query the 702 information. so once the information is lawfully collected -- targeting a foreign national overseas, that's lawfully collected -- it is in a database which can then be queried by the fbi, for example. but there are very limited circumstances where that can happen. they can only search that database if they believe that the query -- or question --

would return foreign intelligence information or evidence of a crime. the agency does not have carte blanche authority to probe or go fishing in 702 information. unfortunately, there have been some mistakes made by the fbi due to a lack of the guardrails and reforms that are in the current bill passed by the house of representatives. i applaud the house for passing important reforms that will minimize the chances of this inadvertent collection of u.s. persons' information. because it's a violation of the law. in response to some of these reports of inadvertent collection of u.s. person information, in 2021 fbi director chris wray instituted

significant reforms to prevent inadvertent queries and improve compliance. and virtually all of those reforms, which have been enormously successful, have now been incooperated in the -- incorporated with the statute that the house passed last week. well, here's an example. when fbi personnel conduct a query now, rather than having access to this database of lawfully collected 702 information, they're required to opt in to include that information. they have to affirmatively choose to search that database. previously that was not the case. section 702 data was included in every search by default, and most of the time it was completely unnecessary. multiple reviews have shown that these reforms have made a dramatic difference for the better.

since 2021, since these reforms have been put in place, the total number of u.s. person queries have decreased by 98%. that's a dramatic improvement. it's not 100%, it's not perfect, we still have work to do, but 98% improvement strikes me as pretty dramatic. on top of that, doj conducted a review last year and found that 98% of the fbi's 702 queries were fully compliant with these requirements. and this has been reviewed by the foreign intelligence surveillance court, which is three members of the federal judiciary appointed by the chief justice of the united states. these reforms combremented by the fbi -- implemented by the fbi now included in the house reform bill are working, and that's why it's so important that we should codify those

changes. we need to make clear that these heightened standards are not simply agency policy but the law. and that's exactly what the house fisa bill does. it turns the fbi 702 reforms into law to enshould you are that the agency's 702 query policies cannot be neglected or loosened in the future. once they become the law of the land, it would be indidn't with that law -- it would be inconsistent with that law and be illegal. the house bill also extend this authority for aered pooh of two years, so our intelligence community can continue to identify threats to our national security. and prevent them from materializing. when we talked about 702 several years ago, fbi director chris wray said the fact that we have not suffered another 9/11-scale attack is not just luck.

noted it's a product of -- he noted it's a product of diligence, information-sharing, dot connecting, and much of that dot connecting is made possible by 702. so i appreciate speaker johnson in the republican-leafed house for taking action on this bill before this critical authority expires at the end of the week and i look forward to voting for it in the united states senate. i yield the floor, mr. president. : # # mr. cornyn: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

quorum call: the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cornyn: i'd ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the question occurs on the nomination. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn.

the clerk: ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz.

mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan.

mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. the clerk: mrs. hyde-smith.

mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer.

mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young.

the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- barrasso, blackburn, casey, cornyn, cortez masto, cotton, duckworth, hyde-smith, king, mendendez, merkley, murphy, padilla, ricketts, rubio, schmitt, scott of south carolina, van hollen, vance, welch. no senator voted in the

negative. mr. hagerty, aye. mr. romney, aye. the clerk: mr. crapo, aye. mr. schumer, aye.

the clerk: ms. hassan, aye.

ms. warren, aye. ms. lummis, aye. ms. hirono, aye. ms. stabenow, aye.

the clerk: mr. scott of florida,

aye. the clerk: mr. cardin, aye.

the clerk: mr. marshall, no. the clerk: mr. daines, aye.

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye.

the clerk: mr. risch, aye. mr. graham, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy, aye. mr. shaheen, aye. -- mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye.

mr. tuberville, aye. the clerk: mrs. capito, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye.

the clerk: mr. peters, aye.

mr. lee, aye.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. booker, aye. vote:

the clerk: mrs. fischer, aye. arms. test. test.

the clerk: mr. wyden, aye.

the clerk: ms. murkowski, aye. mr. durbin, aye.

the clerk: ms. ernst, aye. mr. coons, aye.

mr. hoeven, aye. ms. collins, aye. mr. schatz, aye.

the clerk: mr. carper, aye. ms. rosen, aye. mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. mr. fetterman, aye. mr. johnson, aye.

the clerk: mr. rounds, aye.

the clerk: mr. paul, aye. mr. lankford, aye.

the clerk: mr. kennedy, aye. ms. butler, aye.

the clerk: mr. reed, aye. the clerk: mr. brown, aye. mr. budd, aye. mr. heinrich, aye.

the clerk: mr. mullin, aye. the clerk: mr. grassley, aye.

ms. smith, aye. mr. sanders, aye. the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye.

the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. markey, aye.

the clerk: mr. moran, aye. mr. thune, aye. mr. bennet, aye.

the clerk: mr. young, aye.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye. mr. tester, aye.

the clerk: mr. sullivan, no. mr. hickenlooper, aye.

the clerk: mr. braun, aye. the clerk: mr. boozman, aye.

the clerk: mr. cramer, aye.

the clerk: mrs. britt, aye.

the clerk: mr. manchin, aye. mr. tillis, aye. the clerk: mr. cruz, aye.

the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, aye.

the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. hawley, aye.

the presiding officer: the ayes are 96. the nays are 2. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to legislative -- he looked in the other direction. it's not going to happen. don't worry. i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote: mrs. capito. mr. cardin. the clerk: ms. baldwin. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mr. braun. mrs. britt. mr. brown. mr. budd. ms. butler. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cardin. mr. carper. mr. casey.

the clerk: mr. he camed. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer. mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty.

ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin.

mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio.

mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden.

mr. young. the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative -- collins, graham, hassan, heinrich, hickenlooper, hirono, manchin, schatz, schumer, and smith. senators voting in the negative -- boozman, britt, budd, cramer, cruz, hawley, merkley, moran, paul, thune, and tuberville.

the clerk: ms. cantwell, aye. mrs. shaheen, aye.

the clerk: mr. rubio, no. mr. lankford, no. mr. young, no. ms. duckworth, aye. mr. cornyn, aye.

the clerk: mr. mcconnell, no. mrs. fischer, no. mr. sullivan, no. the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye.

mrs. capito, no. mr. grassley, no.

the clerk: mr. carper, aye. the clerk: mr. mullin, no.

vote:

the clerk: ms. rosen, aye. mrs. hyde-smith, no. mr. hagerty, no. mrs. murray, aye.

the clerk: ms. lummis, no.

the clerk: mr. durbin, aye. mr. padilla, aye.

the clerk: ms. cortez-masto, aye. the clerk: mr. cornyn, no. ms. ernst, no. mr. king, aye.

mr. brown, aye. mr. ricketts, no. the clerk: mr. rounds, aye.

mr. whitehouse, aye. mr. kennedy, no. mr. braun, no.

the clerk: mrs. blackburn, no.

the clerk: mr. fetterman, aye. mr. casey, aye.

the clerk: mr. wicker, no. mr. marshall, no. the clerk: mr. johnson, no.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye. mr. reed, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye. mr. cotton, no. mr. barrasso, no.

mr. bennet, aye.

mr. lee, no. mr. crapo, no. mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, aye. mr. scott of florida, no. mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: ms. baldwin, no. mr. schmitt, no. the clerk: mr. menendez, aye.

the clerk: mr. tillis, no. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye.

the clerk: mr. cassidy you no. mr. cassidy, no. the clerk: mr. cardin, aye.

the clerk: mr. daines, no. the clerk: mr. peters, aye. mr. risch, no. mr. romney, no.

the clerk: mrs. gillibrand, aye.

the clerk: mr. vance, no. the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

mr. ossoff, aye. the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. mr. blumenthal, aye.

the clerk: mr. markey, no. the clerk: mr. wyden, no.

the clerk: mr. welch, aye.

the clerk: ms. butler, aye. ms. murkowski, aye.

the clerk: mr. hoeven, no.

the clerk: mr. sanders, no.

vote: the clerk: mr. scott of south carolina, no.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. #

the clerk: ms. warren, no. the clerk: mr. murphy, aye.

the clerk: mr. tester, no.

the clerk: mr. coons, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. lankford, aye.

the clerk: mr. romney, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. rubio, aye.

the presiding officer: the yeas are 50. the nays are 49. the motion is agreed to. mr. schumer: mr. president, i move to proceed to calendar 365, h.r. 7888. the presiding officer: the clerk

will report. the clerk: motion to proceed to calendar number 365, h.r. 7888, an act to reform the foreign intelligence surveillance act of 1978. mr. schumer: 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 motion to proceed to calendar number 365, h.r. 7888, an act to reform the foreign intelligence surveillance act of 1978 signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. schumer: i ask that further reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask the senate stand in recess until 2:10 p.m. the presiding officer: without objection. the senate stands in recess

the house is slated to present articles of basement to the senate. housing project managers will walk the articles from the door of the house through the capital over to the senate. chuck schumer democratic new york that he would want to move expeditiously on articles of impeachment meaning you can offer motion to do away with the trial. republicans countered they want to see full file charges against the home and security secretary.

anthony, political congress reporter for politico. once these articles are presented to the senate, what happens next? >> i think about all eyes will be on and expose as possible. we seen republicans the last couple days which correct roadblocks to function.

their tactics to slow down the process. they stay together, they have the 51 seat majority, think can carry on and dispose of the articles relatively quickly. >> what motion happening today? >> i believe the motion would tomorrow and will have to see what happens there. i think the senators will be up for reelection, interesting to see the divide within the democrat, no mention of west virginia who's retiring has been about looking and has wanted to do away. others like chester of -- blumer shook respect so we will have to see what happens once the motion is made but i think most want to do away with it quickly. >> articles of impeachment will

be walked over by 11 impeachment managers. defined this group. >> it's an interesting mix of both but the most interesting one is marguerite taylor green who obviously has expressed intention to offer to vacate against speaker mike johnson so it will be interesting to see how that dynamic is played out as republicans continue to grapple entirely with their leadership and questions on those. >> they come over the senate today and present articles what they will read the articles. will senators be doing one that is happening? >> they have to be sworn in. they will have questions of imprisonment and be sworn in and

be elected jurors in this process so it will be interesting but a lot of these things are important but that will be doing a whole lot as we await to see what leadership does with these articles. >> chuck schumer does move to quickly take these charges, what tools do republicans have to respond and what other warnings on this? >> they are having a press conference this afternoon to discuss after articles are delivered, they have procedural hurdles. i think it's the best leverage your calling for a full trial and boozing people that might be

more open to acquitting the secretary more people like mitt romney wanting to hear the arguments so i think that is the popes watching and see how they want to dispose of these articles. >> you think democrats have the votes? how many do they need? >> simple majority, they theoretically have the votes so the popes to watch other folks up for reelection this year, but would not heard a lot so far in the senate but anything unforeseen, i would imagine they

would go through pretty quickly. a large number of things on their plate, i don't think they want to spend more time than they have to on this trial. >> thank you very much. >> thanks for having me. >> let's get you involved in this debate george in louisiana, george, what you say? impeachment charges against the homeland security? >> based on what i know and what i've read, i think they should proceed and in my opinion, he spent negligent in upholding the laws of the land and rally millions upon millions to come through and just willfully turning a blind eye if you will to the american people into the country.

... but i think he took an oath to uphold the constitution and the laws of the land. and the law basically says that shall, not will not maybe but shall be either held or deported certainly if they have committed a crime or they are on a watchlist or they've done

something illegal besides just enter the country. in the mayorkas case they have allowed these people to come on in and maybe give them a trial date which is proven i mean what, one or 2% ever show up? you've got millions of people that have decided this is a way to enter the country because the administration will allow it. >> host: plots in louisiana. on his articles of impeachment which will be read when impeachment managers bring them over to the senate today, article one the refusal to comply with the law as registered george talk aut house republicans accuse e secretary of willful unsystematic refusal to uphold the nation's immigration laws. article two is a breach of public trust. th charges to the secretary told congress u.s.-mexico border was secure amid record surge of

migrants. kurt in roswell, new mexico, democratic caller. >> caller: i think it's really, it should be done before both the house and the senate to get a complete vote. i think the borders should be closed until further notice, and that everyone in line as seen on the national news somehow or another be ushered back to the own countries. >> host: kurt, you want to the evidence. he won a full trial in the senate because you want to the evidence against the homeland

security secretary? >> caller: well, we just need to have our own, we need to get our own stuff in order, do you know what i mean? we are just -- >> host: are you for a trial, and impeachment trial? >> caller: no. no. i just think that the existing laws should be and should have been all this time regardless of party obeyed and followed okay. john in texas, republican. >> caller: hello. yes, i want to see the full trial. i believe it he needs to be impeached. i live in a state of texas. i came from south texas. i know that border real well. what this man has done, he has allowed and invasion into the united states of illegal immigrants. they are not properly vetted. you want another crime? he allow the guy that killed

that young lady in georgia jogging. he allowed that guy here. if he was to port, brought them back, he led them to stay. he's got blood on his hands. number two and i'll make this one quick. it's always been said that biden can't shut the border down. george w. bush shut it down on 9/11. and he didn't get congress to do it. so if you could do it, biden could shut it down today. they appoint politics politics with american's lives because mayorkas is on tape saying he is tired underpowered proud of what he did with doing away with everything trump put in place. >> host: john, and the homeland security secretary was on capitol hill again today testifying about the president's request, budget request for his agency. he was on capitol hill doing that just recently, in recent weeks, and impeachment of course has come up while he's been testifying before lawmakers. all of our coverage of the

homeland security secretary in this debate, over southern border was not to impeach him can be found on our website c-span.org. and you can also scan the qr code to find the coverage. remember, the house voted to impeach the only security secretary in february by a one-vote margin. new jersey, democratic caller. let's hear from you. >> caller: yes. good afternoon. you know i'm a democrat. i appreciate -- look, they need to leave that got alone and work with them. he was doing his job. republicans intend to do their jobs. they could've passed that bill that all of the republicans and democrats worked on together, but no, donald trump said shut it down. that's, they did that.

[inaudible] when he done his job. that's not fair. they need to do the job. they know they're going to lose. that's not a voting deal. these young folks who are watching them done that. >> host: talking about a group of bipartisan group of senators who worked to try to come up with some sort of deal on the border situation, , right, exacy and it was not brought up. it was rejected by republicans. we are just a few minutes away from the senate reconvene today ahead of the articles of impeachment brought over my house managers. before we see all of that here on c-span2, we want you to tell on the cushion washington what you think should happen in this

debate over whether or not you have full trial or not to impeach homeland security secretary and on impeachment itself. christine in holland, michigan, republican your turn. >> caller: good afternoon. i was calling to say that i've watched most of all the hearings about mr. mayorkas and i do not think that they should impeach him because donald trump we all know that he broke his oath and we all know that he swore on the bible that he would uphold the constitution and he hasn't and he is not been impeached so mr. mayorkas he's trying but he has his hands tied by the republican party. i just hope and pray that they will come to their senses and leave the man alone to do his job and give him the funds he needs to do his job.

>> host: are right, christine. thanks for calling in. edward in lasalle illinois democratic caller. edward. >> caller: hello? >> host: edward, your turn. >> caller: i just wanted to say that i think are wasting the taxpayers money and you should leave the man do his job and just -- [inaudible] just what the guy do his job and let, you do, quit wasting taxpayers money on this impeachment crap. >> host: got it, you know, i mean the guy, all he can do is what he can do, you know? you just cut a let them do what he can do. he is only one guy and you know -- >> host: i'm going to leave it there and remind you and others you have to mute your television when you call in some just listen and talk through your phone. and to his point and that is a point the democrats have been making is that an impeachment

trial in the senate would tie up their legislative work for days, and have some pressing matters to deal with. and one of them is reauthorization of that foreign intelligence surveillance act which expires on friday. the senate right before the recess move to that piece of legislation, a procedural move that would allow them to bring it up and vote on it this week. over on the house they are talking about aid bills to israel, taiwan and ukraine, the would-be votes on that and if they're able to pass that over a knauss, the senate would then have to act on that legislation as well. so will not of legislative this is happening here in washington today right now here on c-span2. getting your thoughts on an impeachment trial, impeachment charges against the homeland security