Mitch McConnell

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday, when the Senate confirmed the nomination of Professor Amy Barrett to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, we took another important step to ensure that the Federal judiciary fulfills its role in our constitutional system. Now we have an opportunity to confirm another well-qualified woman to the bench, Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan Larsen. President Trump nominated her to serve on the Sixth Circuit, and she will be a strong addition to that court and a benefit to our Nation. After graduating first in her class from Northwestern's law school, Justice Larsen served as a law clerk for Judge David Sentelle of the DC Circuit Court and then for Justice Antonin Scalia. These clerkships honed Justice Larsen's legal abilities and respect for the rule of law, preparing her for a distinguished career. Joan Larsen also served as the Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Former government officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations wrote in strong support of her nomination, each of them holding her in the highest regard. Joan Larsen later joined the law faculty at the University of Michigan, teaching there for many years. She excelled in academia, earning the praise of her students and the esteem of her colleagues. In fact, more than 30 of Michigan's deans and law professors wrote to support her nomination. They wrote that Justice Larsen's ``commitment to the rule of law and her capacity for top-flight legal analysis are both of the first order, and her personal integrity and decency are exceptional.'' Even when they disagreed, her colleagues praised Justice Larsen's generous manner, her personal integrity, as well as her legal acumen. In 2015, Larsen was appointed to the Michigan Supreme Court. The next year, she won election to a full term, winning every single county in the State. Her fellow justices--even those with different ideologies-- praised her intellect and her commitment to apply the law as it is written to every case before them. Joan Larsen's time on the Michigan high court has shown a record of independence and of fairness. Here is how one practitioner put it in a letter to the Judiciary Committee: ``I am not a Republican,'' he wrote. ``Justice Larsen approaches cases with an open mind and an independence from party affiliation. . . . I believe that . . . Justice Larsen has had a very positive influence on the Michigan Supreme Court. In my view, she would be a deserving addition to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.'' Another lawyer wrote the committee, advising that he ``has practiced law in Michigan for 39 years'' and is ``a past president of the Michigan Association for Justice (formerly the Michigan Trial Lawyers Association).'' He goes on to say that Justice Larsen ``has demonstrated on the bench that she is precisely who she is in person, a genuine, thoughtful individual who respects precedent, the common law and the role that lawyers and judges play in society. . . . I have no hesitation in telling you that Justice Larsen will make an excellent judge on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.'' In conclusion, President Trump continues to nominate smart, well- qualified, and impartial individuals to our Nation's Federal courts. Justice Larsen, like each of the other nominees before her, was nominated on the basis of her belief in the rule of law and her commitment to apply the law fairly to everyone who enters her courtroom. Once again, I would also like to thank Chairman Chuck Grassley for his leadership on the Judiciary Committee, tirelessly working to bring the President's nominees to the floor. I look forward to voting to confirm Joan Larsen today, and I urge all of my colleagues to join me.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, after 8 years of sluggish growth and missed opportunities for the middle class under 8 years of the Obama administration, the American people elected a new President and Congress dedicated to getting our country moving again after so many years of failed leftwing policies. We are working hard on joint legislative initiatives on tax reform. We have also undertaken what has been described as ``the most ambitious regulatory rollback since Reagan.'' The administration has the ability to take serious action on its own, and it has. The Congress has taken important action many times as well. We have used the tools contained in the Congressional Review Act, which allows us to overturn certain regulations with a majority vote in Congress and the President's signature. The President signed all of the many CRA resolutions we passed already, which overturned regulations that threatened everything from job creation to economic growth. The President will sign another CRA resolution today, one that will overturn a regulation that threatened to drive up costs for millions of Americans who carry a credit card. It is a regulation dreamed up by a government agency, the CFPB, that claims to protect consumers but seems to have found a way to actually harm them. The Treasury Department released a study showing how this regulation has little to do with consumer protection and everything to do with lining the pockets of trial lawyers. This unaccountable agency ignored that study and issued its regulation anyway. We passed this Congressional Review Act resolution to protect consumers from wrongdoing while avoiding frivolous lawsuits that will only drive up costs for the millions of Americans who have a credit card. The CFPB continues to be one of the most unaccountable bureaucracies in Washington, and this Congress will continue to stand up for consumers even when the CFPB will not.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday's attack in Manhattan was sickening, twisted, and heartbreaking. The suspect appears to have been inspired by ISIL. We know that in the days ahead, our intelligence community will make every effort to learn more about him and whether he had any connection to this terror group and its hateful ideology. But today we are thinking of everyone affected by this tragedy. We are praying for the victims and their families. We are thinking of our fellow Americans in New York. We are expressing our gratitude for the critical work of our first responders. To them we say: Thank you for your courage. Thank you for all you do, especially in the face of such a terrible tragedy like we witnessed yesterday.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, that at 3:30 p.m. today, there be 30 minutes of postcloture time remaining on the Barrett nomination, equally divided between the leaders or their designees; that following the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the confirmation of the Barrett nomination; and that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the opioid crisis is hurting communities across our country. Its challenges are complex and its causes are many. As I said last week, no single bill or program is going to solve this crisis on its own. Only a sustained, committed effort can do that. That has been my view over the many years that I have been involved in this issue, from the first time I invited the White House drug czar down to Eastern Kentucky to see the challenges posed by prescription drug abuse firsthand to my work on other initiatives, such as helping pass a law to help address the tragedy of babies born addicted to drugs. It is also what I believed as the Republican-led Senate worked hard to pass important legislation such as Jessie's Law, the 21st Century Cures Act, and the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act in the last Congress. I believe President Trump took the same view as he announced another important step last week by declaring a public health emergency for opioids. I would like to, once again, thank the President for his commitment to confronting this crisis. We all know there is much further to go, and as we move forward, Republicans and Democrats, the House and the Senate, the States and the White House, we should remain committed to working together on policies and programs that actually deliver results. About an hour ago, the Government Accountability Office released a report I requested about the Federal Government's response to opioid use disorders. The Government's chief watchdog recommends that as the Department of Health and Human Services expands access to medication- assisted treatment, it should also develop clear measures to gauge performance. This GAO study will help to ensure that dollars are spent wisely to fight the crisis of opioid abuse taking lives in communities all across our country. The announcement of GAO's conclusions will help us as we continue to build a comprehensive approach to combating heroin and prescription drug abuse. It is another step in the right direction. As government officials review this morning's report and as agencies develop new plans to fulfill its objectives, I will continue to work with partners in Washington and Kentucky to address this important crisis. The goal, of course, is that one day we can finally put the pain of opioid abuse behind us once and for all.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday the Senate advanced the nomination of Professor Amy Barrett, President Trump's impressive nominee to be a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. She is the first of four strong nominees to our Nation's circuit courts that the Senate will confirm this week. Professor Barrett's experience as a distinguished law professor at the University of Notre Dame shows her qualifications to serve our Nation on the Federal bench. She is going to be an asset to our judiciary. Of course, some on the left have tried to invent any reason to prevent this President's nominees from advancing. For an outstanding nominee such as Professor Barrett, their task was not easy. They can't attack her credentials, which are truly impressive; they can't attack her belief in the rule of law--Professor Barrett's writings and her testimony clearly show a nominee who will uphold our Constitution and our Nation's laws as they are written--as they are written--not as she wishes they were. Unbelievably, some on the political left, including some of our Democratic colleagues, are actually criticizing Professor Barrett for a law review article she cowrote back in law school by saying it says the opposite of what it actually says. They claim Professor Barrett wrote that a judge should put her personal beliefs ahead of the rule of law, when, in fact, she said a judge should not do that--exactly the opposite. She wrote that if a judge's personal views were to impede that judge's ability to impartially apply the law, then the judge should recuse herself from the case. As the coauthor of that article and current president of Catholic University recently put it, ``The case against Prof. Barrett is so flimsy, that you have to wonder whether there isn't some other, unspoken, cause for their objection.'' It does make you wonder. To those using this matter as cover to oppose Professor Barrett because of her personally held religious beliefs, let me remind you, there are no religious tests--none--for public office in this country. That is not how we do things here. Our government and our Nation are made better through the service of qualified people of faith. That will surely be true of Professor Amy Barrett. I look forward to voting to confirm this accomplished law professor and devoted mother of seven later today, and I would urge our colleagues to join me. Once we do, the Senate will advance another of President Trump's well-qualified circuit court nominees, Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan Larsen, to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Justice Larsen is the second of three accomplished women whom the Senate will consider this week for appointment to our circuit courts. I assume that all three of these impressive women will receive strong support from our Democratic colleagues who never seem to miss an opportunity to talk about the war on women. Here is what nominees such as Larsen and Barrett and the others we will consider this week represent for our Federal judiciary: equal justice under the law for all and a fair shake for every litigant. What a refreshing departure from President Obama and his so-called empathy standard for selecting judicial nominees--really just another of the left's ideological purity tests and one that was anything but empathetic for individuals on the other side of the case. If you are the litigant for whom the judge does not have empathy, you are in a tough position before such a judge. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude, once again, to Chairman Chuck Grassley for his continued work to bring these outstanding nominees to the Senate floor.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of Senators Casey and Sanders.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Wednesday, November 1; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; finally, that following leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the Larsen nomination under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, that at 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday, November 1, there be 30 minutes of postcloture time remaining on the Larsen nomination, equally divided between the leaders or their designees, and that following the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on the confirmation of the Larsen nomination; and that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following Senate resolutions which were submitted earlier today: S. Res. 315, S. Res. 316, and S. Res. 317.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 244, S. Res. 245.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today I remember the life of a great Kentuckian, Ted Cook, who passed away on October 1, 2017, at the age of 70. He was a great friend, a local businessman, and a fixture of Laurel County. Passing away after a battle with cancer, Ted's loss will be felt by many. A veteran of the U.S. Air Force, Ted was driven by a sense of patriotism and community service. He was a generous man and a strong supporter of the Kentucky High School Athletics Association. Ted made it a priority to watch every basketball game he could, and he was an ideal role model for the next generation of Kentuckians. Ted loved the outdoors, spending time hunting, fishing, and raising quail. He tried to instill that passion in young people, especially his children and, later, his grandchildren. Ted also helped lead local, State, and national organizations dedicated to the service of others. Ted rarely sought any recognition for his good works, instead always caring primarily for others. Those he impacted with his love and friendship, however, will always remember him. Elaine and I send our condolences to Ted's wife, Debbie, their children, their family, and friends. I hope that their fond memories of Ted will help ease their grief. Mr. President, the Corbin Times-Tribune recently published an article on Ted's life and career. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the article be printed in the Record.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Executive Calendar Nos. 443 through 454 and all nominations placed on the Secretary's desk; that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following Senate resolutions which were submitted earlier today: S. Res. 312, S. Res. 313, and S. Res. 314.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, for the past 8 years, we had a President who selected nominees for our Nation's judiciary based upon what became known as the ``empathy standard,'' an ideological litmus test designed to find judicial nominees who would favor certain groups or individuals over others. It is a great standard if you are the party in a case for whom the judge has empathy. It is not so great if you are the other person. Not only does this standard deny every litigant a fair shake, but it also disregards our Nation's bedrock legal tradition of dispensing equal justice under the law. President Trump, on the other hand, selected nominees who would help ensure that the judiciary is true to its role in our democracy. Later today, the Senate will vote to confirm one of those nominees, Trevor McFadden, as a district court judge for the District of Columbia. His nomination was approved by the Judiciary Committee without a single vote in opposition. Democrats needlessly delayed his vote on the floor anyway. We have seen many delay tactics from them already this year. We have pushed through every time. We are going to push through again today. We are going to confirm the impressive judicial nominee before us, and we are going to confirm more judicial nominees in the coming days as well. Our effort to confirm qualified judicial nominees this year would not be possible without the tireless work and effective leadership of our Judiciary Committee chairman, Chuck Grassley. To build on the excellent work of his committee, I filed cloture last week on four well-qualified circuit court nominees. These nominees understand that their role as a judge is to put aside their personal preferences and instead decide cases based on what the law says. We will confirm all of them this week, no matter how long that takes. The first of these four circuit court nominees that we will confirm this week is Professor Amy Barrett, who was nominated by the President to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. A mother of seven, Professor Barrett began her legal career by clerking for Judge Laurence Silberman of the DC Circuit and then for Justice Antonin Scalia. These prestigious clerkships gave her the opportunity to work closely with two giants of the legal field. Today, she is a respected professor at the University of Notre Dame, where, by the way, she was honored as Distinguished Professor of the Year twice. Professor Barrett will bring a wealth of knowledge to the bench. Professor Barrett happens to be a Catholic. Her faith is important to her. She has spoken freely about it and its impact on her life. But she also understands the role of a judge, which is not to let personal beliefs dictate how cases are decided. Unbelievably, some on the political left, including some of our Democratic colleagues, are criticizing her because as a law student she cowrote a law journal article that argued just that. Her coauthor of the article, John Garvey, is now the president of Catholic University. He recently wrote the following: Amy Barrett, a law professor at Notre Dame, was grilled on Wednesday by Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee about an article she and I wrote together in 1998 when I was a law professor and she was my student. In that article we argued that the death penalty was immoral, as the Catholic Church teaches (in common with Quakers, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and the 38 member communions in the National Council of Churches). We went on to say that a Catholic judge who held that view might, in rare cases, have to recuse herself under . . . [the] federal statute that asks a federal judge to step aside when she has conscientious scruples that prevent her from deciding a case in conformity with the facts and the law. President Garvey went on to write: Perhaps the Alliance for Justice, which has mounted a campaign to discredit Professor Barrett, didn't get that far in reading the article. Its website says this: ``Stunningly, Barrett has asserted that judges should not follow the law or the Constitution when it conflicts with their personal religious beliefs. In fact, [this group claimed] Barrett has said that judges should be free to put their personal views ahead of their judicial oath to faithfully follow the law.'' President Garvey noted, however: Barrett (and I) said no such thing-- No such thing-- We said precisely the opposite. This opposition to Professor Barrett is so upside down that it leaves people like President Garvey wondering whether there is something else going on here. President Garvey concluded: The case against Prof. Barrett is so flimsy that you have to wonder whether there isn't some other, unspoken, cause for their objection. The president of Notre Dame also weighed in about these criticisms of Professor Barrett. Here is some of what he said in his letter to the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee: Your concern, as you expressed it, is that ``dogma lives loudly in [Professor Barrett], and that is a concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for years in this country.'' I am one in whose heart ``dogma lives loudly,'' as it has for centuries in the lives of many Americans, some of whom have given their lives in service to this nation. . . . It is chilling to hear from a United States Senator that this might now disqualify someone from service as a federal judge. I ask you and your colleagues to respect those in whom ``dogma lives loudly''--which is a condition we call faith. A condition we call faith. For the attempt to live such faith while one upholds the law should command respect, not evoke concern. Professor Barrett has made it clear that she would ``follow unflinchingly'' all legal precedent and, in rare cases in which her conscience would not allow her to do so, she would recuse herself. I will say that again: . . . in rare cases in which her conscience would not allow her to do so, she would recuse herself. I can assure you that she is a person of integrity who acts in accord with the principles she articulates. Let me remind colleagues that article VI of the Constitution provides that ``no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office.'' That is the U.S. Constitution. According to the Founders, this was done to ensure that ``the people may employ any wise or good citizen in the execution of the various duties of the government.'' Professor Barrett of Notre Dame is just such a wise and good person, and when the Senate confirms her to the Seventh Circuit, our judiciary and our Nation will be better off. I strongly support her nomination and would urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of Senator Reed.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Tuesday, October 31; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; further, that following leader remarks, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the Barrett nomination postcloture; further, that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly conference meetings; finally, that all time during morning business, recess, adjournment, and leader remarks count postcloture on the Barrett nomination.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I have 2 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, October 30, 2017, at 5 p.m., to conduct a hearing on the Authorization for the Use of Military Force. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, October 30, 2017, at 5:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing on the nomination of: Emily Webster Murphy, of Missouri, to be Administrator of the General Services Administration.