Mitch McConnell

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged of the following resolutions: S.J. Res. Nos. 27 through 48 and the Senate proceed to their en bloc consideration; further, that the Senate debate the resolutions concurrently, and that at 11:30 on Thursday, June 20, the Senate vote on passage of the resolutions in the following order: S.J. Res. 36, S.J. Res. 38, and then vote on the remaining resolutions en bloc with no intervening action or debate. Finally, if the Senate receives a veto message with respect to any or all of the enumerated joint resolutions of disapproval, then, not withstanding rule XXII, consideration of the veto message be limited to 30 hours of concurrent debate for all messages and the Senate vote on passage of the joint resolutions, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding, in the following order if a veto message is received: S.J. Res. 36, S.J. Res. 38, all remaining joint resolutions en bloc. I further ask that the en bloc votes on passage and with respect to the override vote be shown separately for each resolution when printed in the Record.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, for years American administrations of both parties have properly labeled Iran as the world's most active state sponsor of terrorism. This assessment is based on the cold hard facts of Tehran's behavior. Iran's support for terrorism knows few bounds, sectarian or geographic. Iran has provided support to Sunni, Shia, and secular terrorists. It has conducted or sponsored attacks around the world, including a plot right here in Washington, during the Obama administration, to blow up a local restaurant and kill the Saudi Ambassador to the United States. We know that Tehran is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American servicemembers in Iraq and Afghanistan--Americans murdered by Iran's proxies. So while it should be shocking that Iran is now conducting more attacks against civilian shipping vessels in international waters, unfortunately, it really isn't all that shocking. This is the kind of behavior we have witnessed over the years. Until recently, the United States spent years failing to hold Iran sufficiently accountable for its terrorism, proxies, and ``gray zone'' tactics. Tehran was emboldened to tread all over international law. Now things are different, and Iran's corrupt, moribund economy is feeling the pressure of U.S. sanctions. So it is not surprising that the mullahs now resort to their favorite tool--violence. The President has said he does not seek conflict with Iran, and neither does the Senate. Nevertheless, the risks of a conflict are real. But make no mistake. They are being driven by Tehran's decision to resort to violence, and that includes what the Secretary of State has described as a ``blatant assault'' on international shipping, threatening the freedom of navigation in international waters. Tehran must not be rewarded for terror and intimidation. The United States and our partners need to stand firm and apply concerted, coordinated diplomatic and economic pressure until Tehran changes its behavior. Acting Secretary Shanahan, at the request of his military commanders, has ordered additional forces to the Middle East for purposes of defense and deterrence. As he made clear when announcing this deployment, the United States does not seek conflict with Iran. I support these prudent efforts to respond to Iranian intimidation. Defensive military deployments will help us to protect American interests in the region and deter Iranian aggression. I encourage the administration to continue working closely with our partners across the globe to encourage Iran's leaders to cease their aggression. I hope Iran's leaders will listen to the demands of their people, who continue to protest against the stifling authoritarianism of the Islamic Republic for a better, more prosperous, more peaceful life. I also appreciate the administration's efforts to keep Congress apprised of the latest intelligence, deployments, and diplomatic efforts. I understand committee staff received a classified briefing just yesterday. I look forward to hearing from the State Department's top career diplomat at the Republican lunch today. I hope my colleagues across the aisle rethink their decision to turn down his offer to brief them. I understand the administration will be sending up interagency teams this week to brief the oversight committees in a classified setting, as well. For our part, the Senate will consider several measures in the coming days that will directly impact our presence and influence in this troubled region, including arms sales to key regional partners, as well as the NDAA. I urge every one of my colleagues to keep these deadly serious developments at the top of our minds as we attend to our business in the days ahead.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, on a related subject, all of these events I have discussed, from Iran's misbehavior to China's aggressiveness, underscore one thing very clearly: The United States needs to remain engaged, prepared, and powerful. We need to leave zero doubt among our friends and allies, our most violent foes, and everybody in between that while the United States does not seek conflict, we must be prepared to decisively defeat our adversaries if conflict is forced upon us. That is called deterrence. The growing global unrest should be a lesson to us as the Senate gets ready to turn to the National Defense Authorization Act later this week. I know my colleagues on both sides share my hope that this year's NDAA can build on the successes of the past 2 years. Our first obligation to the American people is to ensure for their defense. It is essential that we continue rebuilding our military by authorizing sufficient support to modernize and sustain the advantages that America's all-voluntary Armed Forces have over our adversaries. Working with the Trump administration in recent years, we have been able to end a chapter of harmful spending cuts that have left military leaders less able to address emerging challenges. As a result, last year's legislation--named for our dear colleague, the late John McCain--authorized the largest year-on-year increase in defense spending in 15 years. The bill introduced last week is a step further toward implementing our important new national defense strategy, toward renewing the readiness and lethality of our forces, and toward making sure that we never ask brave American men and women to step into harm's way without all possible tools and training to help them succeed. This crucial legislation has a chance to be a major bipartisan success story of this Congress. It is already off to an encouraging start, having been voted out of the Armed Services Committee by an overwhelming bipartisan margin. And it is easy to see why. As great-power competitors like Russia and China continue to challenge U.S. interests, this NDAA will help to maintain and expand our alliances and partnerships, along with our ability to stand firm. The bill puts readiness front and center. In recent decades, our most formidable competitors have taken every opportunity to deploy new technological threats. Keeping American and allied servicemembers out of harm's way means keeping up with these developments and outpacing them. The bill takes steps to expand oversight and increase efficiency at the Pentagon. It honors the tremendous sacrifices made by servicemembers and their families by securing the largest pay raise in a decade, along with several other important reforms.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, on one final matter. I want to celebrate another legislative accomplishment the Senate notched last week. On Thursday, the Senate passed the Taxpayer First Act and sent it to President Trump's desk to become law. This legislation is the most thorough package of reforms to the Internal Revenue Service in 20 years. Let me say that again. The Senate just passed the most significant reforms to the IRS in two decades. It will create a new, independent process for appeals to ensure taxpayers receive fair treatment. During dispute resolutions, taxpayers will now get access to the same information the IRS has. There will be more accountability within the IRS when it comes to cyber security, careful management of technology, and overall efficiency. There will be a new streamlined system for addressing identity theft. There will be better procedures for advance notification in the event of an audit or an asset seizure, and there will be new steps to make it easier to file your taxes and supporting documents online. So this is a significant accomplishment. These reforms will make one of the least appealing annual tasks for hard-working Americans a little bit less painful. A year and a half ago, the Republican Members of this body joined with House Republicans and President Trump to deliver historic tax cuts and tax reform to the American people. Middle-class families, parents, small business owners, farmers, and job creators across the Nation are keeping more of what they earn and sending less to the IRS. Now, thanks to this latest achievement, the IRS will be just a little bit easier to deal with as well. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, last week I spoke about the people's uprising in Hong Kong. Over the past several days, millions of residents have taken to the streets to defend their autonomy and the rule of law from continued encroachment of the communist government of mainland China. After days of tension, this past weekend brought some good news. In a sign that the people's demonstrations had sent a clear message, Hong Kong officials now said that the government will suspend consideration of the proposed ``extradition'' bill indefinitely. The fate of Hong Kong and its special status is a subject I have watched carefully for decades. Early on in my Senate tenure, I introduced the legislation that still governs our relationship with Hong Kong, the U.S.-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, which President Bush 41 signed into law. On the day I introduced that legislation, I said it was heartening to see that ``democracy is finally gaining a tenuous foot hold in Hong Kong.'' Well, the nearly 30 years since then have shown us all just what the people of Hong Kong can do when the terms of their independence and freedom are respected. We have seen Hong Kong thrive, in large measure due to the political and economic freedoms and stable rule of law that Hong Kong's special status has enabled, but we have also seen clearly in recent days that freedom's foothold in the shadow of mainland China is not a given. It remains tenuous even now. I wanted to again express my admiration for the people of Hong Kong and their strong but peaceful response to this proposed encroachment. I am glad to see their leaders respect their willingness to stand their ground, and I hope the city's authorities will continue to respect the clear will of the people on these issues moving forward.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in recess following the remarks of myself, Senator Collins, and Senator King.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to recognize a remarkable event that this institution was fortunate enough to witness just a few minutes ago. During the vote we just concluded, our distinguished colleague, the senior Senator from Maine, cast her 7,000th rollcall vote. It is a great milestone for Senator Collins which bears witness to her dedication to this work and most especially to the people of Maine. It is actually even more impressive than that. This wasn't just Senator Collins' 7,000th vote; it was her 7,000th consecutive vote. From the moment she was sworn in, she has not missed a single vote. Difficulties with travel or bad weather? She plans around them. Personal challenges? She adapts and overcomes. Other priorities, like political events or speaking engagements? All that takes a back seat to her day job. No sick days. No getting caught in meetings. No losing track of time in committee. No excuses. Just days and months and years of peerless preparation and remarkable dedication to her Senate duties and to the Members she is so proud to represent. Senator Collins learned from her parents, Donald and Patricia, who each had a turn as mayor of Caribou, ME, among other achievements. We know our friend Senator Collins deeply admires her predecessor, Senator Margaret Chase Smith--another legendary Maine Republican. Among her achievements, she stood boldly against McCarthyism and insisted on independent thought and fair treatment. But as remarkable as Senator Margaret Chase Smith was, Senator Collins has surpassed her distinguished predecessor in at least one way: Senator Smith's own impressive string of consecutive votes ended just shy of 3,000; Senator Collins has 7,000 and counting. She is always prepared, always thoroughly well informed, and always present. That is what today's milestone tells us, and that is exactly who Senator Collins is every single day. She is a valued colleague. She is a friend. And frankly, she is an inspiration. Thank goodness she isn't stopping any time soon.

Mr. McCONNELL

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

Mr. McCONNELL

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

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, all of God's children are blessed with certain gifts, and we are each called to put them to work to glorify Him. Today, it is my sincere privilege to pay tribute to my friend who has answered this call and used his considerable gifts with compassion and grace. At the end of May, Dave Stone stepped down as the senior pastor of Southeast Christian Church in Louisville, KY. I would like to take a moment to honor his years of pastoral leadership and to sincerely thank him for his care and dedication to our church family. Elaine and I have been attending Southeast for nearly two decades, drawn by the moving preaching and the warm community. Dave has been an integral part of that spiritual life for 30 years, and there are so many of us in Louisville who have been made better by his friendship and leadership. Throughout his 13 years as senior pastor, Dave was our shepherd and used his many talents to point tens of thousands to the Lord. When Dave first joined Southeast, his devotion to Christ and His church instantly became clear. Dave came not only with an inspirational vision, but also with a deep sense of humility. To anyone who walked into this church, he made a point to welcome them like a lifelong friend. In both the easy and the difficult times, Dave shared his sense of joy in everything he did for the church. His warmth and humor made a positive and tangible impact on me and many other members. Dave assumed the responsibility of senior pastor after the retirement of Bob Russell, who had served the church community in leadership roles for 40 years. The next year, Southeast announced the establishment of a second location, a remarkable sign of growth and a testament to Dave's leadership. Southeast has continued adding more campuses to the church, and now it reaches believers on TV, on the radio, and at seven locations. Through this development, Southeast has become the largest church in Kentucky and the seventh largest in the entire country. Southeast's impressive growth also brought more responsibilities for Dave, his team, and his family. Whatever challenge presented itself over the years, Dave's skilled ministry helped the community thrive. Thousands of people have watched Dave preach, relied on his mentorship, and enjoyed his friendship. Dave admitted that he hates the word ``retirement,'' but he also knew it was time to pass the baton. When he announced his departure, Dave expressed his deep gratitude to the church leadership, staff, and all the faithful. He once again showed himself the humble pastor who fulfilled his mission from God. Now that he has officially stepped down as Southeast's senior pastor, Dave is looking for his next calling. I am confident he will continue using his many gifts to draw the faithful to the Lord. He will also get to spend more time with his wife Beth, his children, and his grandchildren. Although Elaine and I will certainly miss his Christian spirit and good humor, we wish Dave and his family all the best on their next adventure.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. For the information of all Senators, at 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, June 19, the Senate will vote on confirmation of the following nominations in the order listed, and if confirmed, the motions to reconsider shall be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action: Executive Calendar Nos. 22, 28, 50, and 118. Under the previous order, the cloture motion on the motion to proceed to S. 1790 will ripen following disposition of Executive Calendar No. 118.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I have 8 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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: Thomas Peter Feddo, of Virginia, to be Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Investment Security, Ian Paul Steff, of Indiana, to be Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Director General of the United States and Foreign Commercial Service, Michelle Bowman, of Kansas, to be a Member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Paul Shmotolokha, of Washington, to be First Vice President of the Export- Import Bank of the United States, and Allison Herren Lee, of Colorado, to be a Member of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at 10:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, 1t 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a closed hearing. Subcommittee on Security The Subcommittee on Security of the Committee on Commerce is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on the Constitution The Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, June 18, 2019, at a time to be determined, to conduct a hearing.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 235 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I further ask that the resolution be agreed to; the Booker amendment to the preamble at the desk be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, 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. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, June 19; 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, morning business be closed, and the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the Kacsmaryk nomination under the previous order.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam 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. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.J. Res. 60, which was received from the House.

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the joint resolution be considered read a third time and passed, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, this week the Senate has been remarkably productive in confirming more of the President's well- qualified nominees. We have confirmed nine newly minted judges to fill vacancies on the Federal bench. Today we will turn to the executive branch and confirm David Stilwell to serve as Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and Edward Crawford to serve as Ambassador to Ireland. Remember, earlier this spring, we put in place a modest reform to Senate rules so we could consider these uncontroversial, lower level nominations at a more reasonable pace. That had been the Senate's normal tradition until very recently, and so we restored it. At the time, I recall my friends across the aisle insisting that the majority would use these more efficient procedures to push through all kinds of polarizing and controversial people. That is what they argued--if we made this modest rule change, we would be pushing through all these polarizing and controversial people. Well, here are a few of the rollcall votes the Senate has taken on nominations this week: 91 to 5, 62 to 34, 77 to 19, 85 to 11. Yesterday afternoon, on a procedural vote for Mr. Stilwell, it was 93 to 4. A pretty controversial bunch. So virtually all of us can remember a time when nominations of this sort would have passed the Senate on a voice vote. These days, Democrats are making us file cloture and spend floor time on each, but at least our new Senate rules are helping us get these thoroughly bipartisan nominees through at a more efficient pace.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Now, on another matter, later today the Senate will vote on two resolutions that would undermine U.S. influence and credibility in the Middle East and ultimately make the region a more dangerous place. Some of our colleagues seek to block arms sales to two of the closest partners of the United States in the region--Bahrain and Qatar. These resolutions are misguided. They would make the United States a less reliable partner, weaken the influence we have with our friends, and open the door to other more unscrupulous powers like Russia and China. There is this small matter that neither of these resolutions would even solve the problem that seems to have motivated them. I understand many Members of this body are genuinely concerned about some of the actions of our Saudi partners in Yemen. Fortunately, the Senate has repeatedly expressed these concerns directly through our legislative and oversight authority. As I stated in the past, Members should share their concerns and discuss these matters directly with members of our administration or with Saudi officials. If Senators are upset about the State Department's recent invocation of a national emergency to advance arms sales to Saudi Arabia, they will have an opportunity to vote on that matter later. So the Senate has ample opportunity to make our voice heard about Riyadh's behavior, but the two resolutions we vote on today are not that opportunity. It is something else. Whatever frustrations my colleagues may feel with the course of the conflict in Yemen, taking swipes at our relationships with Bahrain and Qatar is certainly not the response. Bahrain's involvement in the Yemen conflict has been limited to defensive border security operations and, for the past 2 years, Qatar has been completely uninvolved. Moreover, both Bahrain and Qatar provide absolutely essential support to our military operations in the region, without which our ability to project power and protect U.S. interests would be severely challenged. I assume everyone knows Qatar is home to the U.S. Central Command's forward headquarters in the region, with 10,000 U.S. personnel and upward of 100 aircraft. It is the hub for many of our ongoing efforts against ISIS and other regional threats. In Bahrain, you will find the headquarters of the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet. That is another 7,000 U.S. personnel, plus assets, responsible for command and control of over 3 million square miles of international waters. So I would remind our colleagues of the briefing we received recently about the growing Iranian threat in the region. I would encourage them to reflect on recent attacks, probably by Iran or its proxies, against civilian vessels in UAE, against civilian airports in Saudi Arabia and UAE, and near our Embassy in Baghdad. In fact, literally just hours ago, two more commercial shipping vessels were apparently attacked off the coast of Oman. These attacks may appear directed at the countries that use them to export petrochemicals or at the international owners of the vessels, but the fact is, they threaten the very underpinnings of the global trading system and customary Law of the Sea that ensures freedom of transit on the seas. We don't know who is responsible for these latest attacks--not yet, anyway--but it is not unreasonable to suspect an Iranian hand in them. I hope, in coming days, we have clarity about who is responsible, but what is clear is the growing tension and instability in that region. So at a time of growing threats to U.S. personnel, interests, and partners posed by Iran, do we really want to send this kind of signal to our partners? If we turn our back on them, can we continue to count on the significant support they provide us or the freedom of maneuver our large presence in their countries affords us? As the State Department has announced, the proposed sales that are at issue today would provide each of these host nations with important enhanced security capabilities, including antiaircraft systems and support equipment. They will also tie these nations closer to the United States at a time when our adversaries would happily--happily-- sell comparable weapons at less cost and with fewer restrictions. In recent years, we have seen both Republican and Democratic administrations seek to reduce the U.S. military footprint in the region and have our partners assume more responsibility for their own security. So it is curious that Senators would want to not only sever security ties with these partners but also limit their ability to defend themselves. In each of these cases, the U.S. arms sales in question have followed normal procedures; they have been properly screened and vetted; and they have been reviewed and approved by both the chairmen and ranking members of the Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Let me say that again: The chairman and ranking members of these committees reviewed and approved these arms sales. That is bipartisan, bicameral support. So in sum, I would ask my colleagues who support these resolutions whether they have even spoken to the Bahraini or Qatari Ambassadors to discuss any concerns. I would encourage them to visit Doha and Manama to confer with the leaders of these countries and speak with thousands of American sailors and airmen based there. I would encourage my colleagues to ask our own senior military officials whether we will be better off if our partners purchase Russian or Chinese military systems instead of ours. I would encourage them to ask our diplomats whether America will have more or less influence with our partners if we capriciously block their purchase of American weapons. I strongly urge each of our colleagues to reject these resolutions.

Mr. McCONNELL

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, all this week, I have been calling attention to the fact that the Democrats over in the House spent 6 weeks ignoring the urgent need for more funding on the crisis on our southern border. I have recited one quotation after another from the administration leaders who are responsible for securing our Nation and caring for individuals while they are detained. They are pleading with us to act. ``We are at a full-blown emergency. . . . The system is broken.'' That is the Acting Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection. It couldn't be more clear. ``We are running out of money. We are functionally out of space.'' That one is from the Secretary of Health and Human Services. I have also run down the underlying statistics. The flood of people attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border has continued at historic levels. Our border agents are overwhelmed. Our facilities are filled beyond capacity--in some cases, with more than seven times more men, women, and children than their intended capacity. This is a full-fledged crisis, and everybody knows it. The status quo cannot hold. Already, the Department of Homeland Security is having to move people and money away from other important efforts to triage more help toward the border. The administration has been saying this is a crisis. The officials on the ground have been saying this is a crisis. My Republican colleagues and I have been saying repeatedly this is a crisis. And lest anyone think this is some partisan exercise, the New York Times editorial board has been saying it is a crisis. There were two editorials over the last several weeks. The first headline says: ``Congress, Give Trump His Border Money,'' and ``When Will Congress Get Serious About the Suffering at the Border?'' Those are headlines in the New York Times, not frequently allied with this administration. Everybody seems to understand that, except Democrats over in the House. It is not as if our House colleagues are too busy working on pragmatic, bipartisan legislation with any shot at becoming law. No, here is what they are up to. One House committee spent yesterday holding a hearing on pathways to single-payer health insurance--in other words, barking up the tree of Medicare for None, their big proposal to take away every American's private health insurance, to take away Medicare as we know it, and force everyone into a new, untested, one-size-fits-all government system. That is what they are up to over there. That is the score. They have no time for the border crisis but plenty of time for socialist daydreams. Even my colleague the Democratic leader has admitted the Democratic- controlled House is the problem here. We have even heard it from House Democrats themselves. One told reporters that his progressive colleagues weren't convinced the emergency funding was necessary. One Democratic Congressman says progressive colleagues were not convinced that emergency funding was necessary. So it seems ``the resistance'' has convinced Washington Democrats that they need to come down to the left of the New York Times editorial page. There is not much space over there to the left of the New York Times editorial page. But Senate Republicans are not going to be deterred. The crisis at the border hasn't gone anywhere, and neither has our resolve to address it. Next week, the Senate is going to move forward. The Appropriations Committee will vote again. I hope Democrats in the House of Representatives will finally realize ``the resistance'' doesn't pay the bills. No more political posturing, no more automatic knee-jerk opposition to absolutely everything the administration asks for--it is way past time for action.

Mr. McCONNELL. Will the Senator from Texas yield for a question?

Mr. McCONNELL. As a member of the Judiciary Committee involved in this, is there any indication there might be bipartisan support for authorizing this legislation that you all are working on in committee?

Mr. McCONNELL. I would say to my friend that the answer here is not just the money but an actual adjustment of U.S. law to more directly affect the crisis that we have. We need to do both, correct?

Mr. McCONNELL. Would it be safe to characterize this as a situation in which we are actually getting more cooperation from the Mexicans than we are from the Democrats in Congress?