Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. I have objected.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I don't know how anything could be more political, more repugnant to our system of government than what has happened with Merrick Garland. The senior Senator from Iowa came here, and I waited for him--came to the floor to talk for a long time and in the process took credit for a bill that was Senator Shaheen's bill. It was her bill. He took it and put his name on it. That was interesting. In the same setting, he complained that I had objected to some bills advanced by Republican Senators. I have to say that the Senator from Iowa has a lot of nerve to complain about our side blocking legislation. The Republican Senate has written the book on obstruction, filibustering 644 times in the time I was leader. That is a lot. It is so far out of the norm that it is not worth trying to be able to state more than what I did yesterday. Lyndon Johnson was the majority leader for 6 years. There is some dispute over how many filibusters he had to overcome. We know it was one, and some say two. So two compared to 644 shows how outrageous is the conduct of the Republicans. The Senator from Iowa has written the book on obstruction of nominations. He singlehandedly blocked Judge Garland's nomination, and doing so is unprecedented. Never has a Judiciary Committee acted in this manner. To use Senator Grassley's own words, Senator Grassley's action is ``pure, unfiltered partisanship. It is election-year politics at its very worst.'' That was a quote from my friend, Senator Grassley. If the senior Senator from Iowa is looking for pure, unfiltered partisanship, the next time he combs his hair or shaves, he should look in the mirror. I yield the floor.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I reluctantly voted to sustain President Obama's veto of the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, JASTA. It is essential that we honor families of the 9/11 victims. I am supportive of their efforts to pursue justice and hold accountable foreign powers that support terrorism in the United States. However, I am concerned that JASTA erodes longstanding international immunity protections that are essential to the security of the United States. As President Obama explained in a letter to me, ``Enacting JASTA into law . . . would neither protect America from terrorist attacks nor improve the effectiveness of our response to such attacks. . . . JASTA sweeps much more broadly than 9/11 or Saudi Arabia, and its far- reaching implications would threaten to undermine important principles that protect the United States, including our U.S. Armed Forces and other officials overseas, without making us any safer.'' In its current form, JASTA undermines the principle of sovereign immunity in U.S. courts, which could have significant reciprocal ramifications. If JASTA becomes law, other countries will likely follow suit and enact laws that threaten U.S. interests and jeopardize the United States' ability to operate internationally. As Secretary of Defense Ash Carter noted, ``[JASTA] is likely to increase our country's vulnerability to lawsuits overseas and to encourage foreign governments or their courts to exercise jurisdiction over the United States or U.S. officials in situations in which we believe the United States is entitled of sovereign immunity. U.S. Servicemembers stationed here and overseas, and especially those supporting our counterterrorism efforts, would be vulnerable to private individuals' accusations that their activities contributed to acts alleged to violate a foreign state's law.'' As the Senate Democratic leader, I feel an obligation to support my President. Although I am voting to sustain the President's veto, I would be supportive of follow-on efforts to modify the JASTA bill in a way that would allow victims to secure justice while protecting core U.S. interests.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Republican leader just said: What are the Democrats trying to do, have built-in dysfunction? During the 8 years I was majority leader, we had to overcome 644 filibusters led by the Republicans--644. A comparable time: Lyndon Johnson, who was the majority leader for 6 years, had to overcome one and, arguably, two filibusters. Two compared to 644, so don't lecture us on building dysfunction. They have invented it in the modern Senate. This afternoon the Senate will vote on cloture on the CR proposed by the Republicans. I appreciate the good work done by appropriators, on our side lead by Senator Mikulski. They have done good work, and tremendous progress has been made. The Republican proposal will likely fail to get cloture this afternoon, and for good reason. The Republican legislation misses the mark. It seeks to keep in place the status quo with regard to undisclosed, unaccountable dark money that is flooding our political system. On the way to work this morning, I learned that the National Rifle Association is placing another $1 million of TV ads in Nevada. We all know that the National Rifle Association was really good at direct mailing. They raised that money from their members. That is not how it works now. Most of the NRA money comes from the Koch brothers. We are fortunate there are not two Trumps. That is the dark money we are talking about. Those ads will say NRA, but it is not NRA money. The ads will say the Chamber of Commerce, but it is not Chamber of Commerce money. It is all Koch money. It is how it works with the dark money, nondisclosed money. And the provision my friend the Republican leader has to have in this resolution is this: The Securities and Exchange Commission will be powerless to tell corporations that they have to disclose their campaign contributions. They have to disclose everything else at their shareholders meeting, but not that; oh, no, that would be terrible, any type of disclosure. We want to keep all of this money out there dark, secret--no one knows. All of these phony names they advertise are just so unfair. The Republican bill includes a rider to the government funding bill that prevents shareholders from knowing how their money is being used in political campaigns. Again, the Republican leader is trying to shut the door on disclosure. The Republican continuing resolution also ignores the 2\1/2\-year crisis in Flint, MI. Lead has poisoned all 100,000 people--almost 10,000 children, some of whom are babies. Lead is a killer for children. After a short period of time--a month, a few weeks--a child who ingests lead in any way, whether they are eating paint off the floor but certainly drinking water, will be affected the rest of their lives. They will not be as smart as they could be; they will not be as agile as they could be. It really hurts them. And it is not good for adults. So after 2\1/2\ years, don't those people deserve something? The Republican leader said there is a water resources development bill, and I acknowledge that. I think good work was done to get that passed. I said yesterday, and I will say again today, that I appreciate the work of Senator Inhofe. He has worked with one of the most liberal Members of the Senate, Barbara Boxer, and he is one of the most conservative, and they did good work and I appreciate it very much. But would it be asking too much for the Speaker of the House and the Republican leader of the Senate to stand and say: We are going to get that thing done. We are going to pass it; we are going to make sure that the bill that passed overwhelmingly here in the Senate is going to become law. But they ignored that. They ignored the people of Flint. We are happy to help with the disaster that took place in Louisiana. Since the Republican leader is here, we have been happy to help with all of the problems, the emergencies they have had in Texas. We stepped up to the plate, and we took care of that. We were happy to do that in Louisiana. This will not be the reason I will not support this legislation, but I think Louisiana deserved more than what is in this bill. The emergency declaration for them is $2.8 billion, and in this bill there is $500 million, and they will get most of that. A little bit will go to West Virginia, and some--a little bit, even less--will go to Maryland. It will be distributed on a proportionate basis. But couldn't they help Flint? Here was the response of the junior Senator from Louisiana: That is someone else's grief. That is what he said: That is someone else's grief. Louisiana wasn't someone else's grief when the hurricanes struck. It was our grief. The junior Senator from Louisiana should understand that he is a U.S. Senator, not a State senator from Louisiana. It is not someone else's grief; it is our grief. The Republicans are essentially saying that disasters in our States are more important than disasters in your State. It is unfair and it is wrong. This morning my leadership team sent a letter to the Republican leader. Durbin, Schumer, and Murray--they sent a letter to the Republican leader encouraging the Republicans to come back and give us a solution for the people of Flint. After the vote on the Republican CR this afternoon, I encourage my Republican colleagues to help us have some degree of certainty that the people of Flint will be helped. It is not deficit spending even though it is an emergency. I believe it should be taken care of just like we had taken care of Louisiana. It is paid for. In fact, I commend Senators Stabenow and Peters for taking money from a program they have in Michigan to pay for this. It is not deficit spending. Why can't we do it? The reasons are apparent, and that is too bad. This doesn't need to be a manufactured crisis. We know the Republicans know how to close the Senate. They did it for 17 days, and they have done it another time. We don't need to have this manufactured crisis. We want to make sure that Flint has some degree of certainty that after 2\1/2\ years they would get some help. We need to work together to keep our government properly funded and the people of Flint protected. Certainly, we should be able to do that.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, last night the Republican nominee for President failed to give any assurance of any kind or a coherent explanation as to why he refuses to release his tax returns--because there is no coherent reason. It is hard to give one when there isn't one. He said he couldn't release his tax information because the Internal Revenue Service hasn't certified it. Everyone debunks that--everyone, except Donald Trump. But even as Trump tried to say nothing about his tax returns, he revealed at least one shocking truth: Donald Trump thinks that paying taxes is a fool's errand. People shouldn't pay taxes. He said--and it was reported at least five times in three decades--that he paid nothing in Federal income taxes, and Secretary Clinton alluded to that fact in last night's debate. Donald Trump's response was this: ``That makes me smart.'' So what does that make the rest of us--suckers, unintelligent, dumb? He is smart; so does that make us dumb because we pay our taxes? He knows that refusing to pay taxes makes him, as we have come to learn, a scam artist. He is good at that. Every day that he refuses to release his tax returns is another slap in the face to the American people. People running for office for scores of decades have released their income taxes. That may be a little bit of an exaggeration, but let's say that for the last 70 years, they have released their income tax returns. So why won't he release his? Why doesn't he do this? Because the tax returns would show that he is not the rich guy he thinks he is. Tax returns would show he is a spoiled, rich brat who inherited his daddy's money and hasn't done so well with it. After $14 million, he hasn't done that well with how much his dad gave him. Trump's tax returns would show he isn't as generous as he claims to be and that he uses charities as his personal slush fund. Did you see this morning's news? He had an appearance on a TV show, and they owed him money. They paid that into his charity so he can then say that he gave this away. Trump's tax returns would show that, in spite of getting over $1 billion of assistance from New York, in New York City alone Donald Trump is a failed businessman who is buried under a mountain of debt. They would show that he refuses to pay his Federal income taxes. So I would hope that Donald Trump would release those tax returns the way Hillary Clinton has released 40 years of hers and her husband's. Mr. President, I ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, Bob Dole, whom we all knew and still know and who is a wonderful man, said: ``As we all learn around here, if you don't keep your word, it doesn't make much difference what agenda you try to advance.'' So it is very difficult for me to allow Senator Thune's bill to advance today. I have great respect for him, and that is without any question. I am still waiting, though, on Republicans to keep a promise they made nearly 18 months ago on the Senate floor. They came to me and said: It is so important to John Kyl, whom I also like, from neighboring Arizona. They had somebody whom they wanted to put on a very important commission. I didn't want to do it because I thought it was fair that we had somebody to pair with him. That is what we do around here. That is what Senator McConnell has done, and I respect that. But I said: Give me your word, and we will go ahead and do this. No problem, I got their word--Senator McConnell and Senator Thune. They said they would do it as soon as the new Congress started. That is almost 2 years ago, and this woman is in limbo. There is an extremely important vote now before the Commission dealing with top boxes on television sets, and she has not been confirmed in that job. It is wrong. I brokered that agreement between McConnell and Thune. I didn't want it. It wasn't my idea--it was theirs--to confirm Republican Commissioner Michael Riley, the Kyl person, to a 5-year term in the FCC. In return, I repeat, Senators Thune and McConnell assured me they would confirm Jessica Rosenworcel--I have been working on that name for 2 years--to a new term when they were in the majority. They got in the majority just a few months after that. This was in December. She spent many years in public service. No one questions her qualifications. The Senate confirmed her unanimously in 2012. Her credentials and integrity are unquestionable. There is no doubt that she will continue to serve the FCC well. Yet Republicans have refused to keep their promise and hold a vote on her nomination. That is breaking someone's word. As Bob Dole said: ``As we all learn around here, if you don't keep your word, it doesn't make much difference what agenda you try to advance.'' John Thune, from the great State of South Dakota, knows that when Senators make agreements, they should be honored. The American people also expect Congress to do its job. They are not doing their job because of what we are facing every day with Republicans. Here is something from one of the major newspapers in America, the Washington Post. I will only read part of it: With no budget resolution or regular appropriations bills ready to go, Congress is now merely trying to extend current funding levels for a few more months. This would allow legislators to return to the campaign trail and delay the hard decisions until after Election Day. So far they still haven't even been able to execute that second-rate plan, though, because legislators have repeatedly tried to tuck poison-pill provisions into this must-pass bill. The result is that with a little more than a month before the election, Congress is again flirting with a shutdown. And a year into the worldwide Zika epidemic, Congress still hasn't successfully appropriated a cent toward the crisis, nor has it passed any funding to help families affected by emergencies in Louisiana or Flint, Mich. It can't get anyone confirmed, either. Merrick Garland, President Obama's Supreme Court pick, famously can't get a hearing, but he's hardly the only nominee being snubbed. The Republican-led Senate has confirmed just 22 federal judges this Congress, putting it on pace for the lowest number of confirmed judges . . . [in almost 70 years] according to the Alliance for Justice. For context, the Senate had confirmed more than three times as many judges by this point in the final Congresses of previous two-term presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan. In all these cases, mind you, presidents had also faced Senates controlled by the opposing party. But it is not just that. Continuing: This Congress, the Senate has confirmed the fewest civilian nominees in modern history. . . . As of mid-September, just 248 nominees had been confirmed. That's, again, half the average. . . . It is a shame that we are at a point here where I have to come to the floor--I have been in Congress for 34 years--and talk about people not keeping their word. Let somebody deny what was done. It is unfair, and I object.

Mr. REID. How do you feel about the American people? How do you feel about how they are being treated, with case after case hung up in the Supreme Court? We cannot even get a hearing on Merrick Garland. Why? Because they know the appearance he will make will be a good one. After a public hearing, they will be even more embarrassed by not voting for this man. Even though a couple of Senators didn't keep their word--and it wasn't just me and them. We have staff here who would be willing to vouch for what I just said. Even if it weren't two Senators not keeping their word, at the very least, shouldn't they be concerned about the Supreme Court, what is not going on there? So I have no reservations whatsoever. It is unfair to come and ask for legislation to pass when we have a Supreme Court that is stymied and is working shorthanded. It is incredible that justice is not being served well in our great country. As indicated in this article of which I read only part, Congress is dysfunctional. As I mentioned this morning, my Republican friend, the leader, said that, well, he can't understand what is going on. There seems to be some dysfunction here. Talk about dysfunction, during the time Lyndon Johnson was leader, we had one or perhaps two filibusters. The second was arguable. As for me, for my first 8 years, there were 644 filibusters--how is that for dysfunction--led by the Republican minority, trying to embarrass Barack Obama and bring this country to its knees. So I do not apologize to anybody for objecting to this legislation. He can bring it out every other day, and I will object to it every other minute, every other hour. It is wrong that Republicans are treating the American people the way they are.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, this Republican Senate that had such promise, according to the Republicans, has been a flop. The Senate hasn't kept its word to the Nation. When Republicans assumed the majority in the Senate, the Republican leader made grand promises to the American people. He pledged bipartisanship. He promised to bring an end to the Senate's dysfunction, which he spearheaded. As I mentioned this morning on the floor, how many filibusters Lyndon Johnson overcame in his 6 years as a majority leader is debatable-- there was one for sure and maybe two--but it is easy to figure out as far as when I was majority leader for 8 years. There were 644 Republican filibusters. The Republican leader pledged that the Senate would do its work. For all his lofty rhetoric, the Republican leader has failed to fill his promises time and time again. There is no better example than the Senate Republicans' refusal to consider the nomination of Merrick Garland to be a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. Chief Judge Merrick Garland was nominated by President Obama 195 days ago. For 195 days, Republicans have blocked this good man from getting a hearing or a vote in spite of the fact that Merrick Garland is extremely qualified. Some ask, why wouldn't they hold a hearing? It is obvious. Merrick Garland would show the American people what kind of a man he is, what kind of a judge he would be, and it would be very hard for the Republicans to vote against him. So they decided to double down and not even allow a hearing. Even Republicans can't dispute his qualifications. The senior Senator from Utah, who formerly chaired the Judiciary Committee, said that there was ``no question'' that Garland could be confirmed and that he would be a ``consensus nominee.'' No one questions Judge Garland's education, his qualifications, his judicial temperament, his experience, or his integrity, but Senate Republicans refuse to give this person a hearing. It is shameful. So I ask, where is the bipartisanship? The Republicans and Democrats agree that this man is exceptionally qualified. Yet his nomination languishes day after day, week after week, now month after month. Where is the end of the dysfunction? Where is the regular order? There is no bipartisanship. There is a lot of dysfunction. There is no end to it. Where is the regular order? It doesn't exist. No Supreme Court nominee in modern times has waited this amount of time without at least getting a hearing. This is unprecedented. As legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin has noted, there is only dysfunction to be found in the Republican leader's actions. This is what he said: ``Such premeditated obstruction by a Senate leader, aimed at a President with nearly a full year remaining in his term, [is] without precedent.'' Where is the hard-working Senate? With Republicans acting as they are, we have established that bipartisanship is really elusive. We have established that the dysfunction hasn't ended. We have established that there is no regular order. Now we have established that we are not working hard, and that is an understatement. The Senate isn't attending to one of its basic constitutional duties--providing its advice and consent on the President's Supreme Court nomination. Instead, this Senate has worked the fewest days of any Senate in modern history. After we have this next 10-week break, it will be the longest break in some 80 years. How about that? Chief Judge Garland deserves a hearing; he deserves a vote. Across the street from where we are standing now, at the Upper Senate Park, at 5 o'clock, Democratic Senators will be gathering at a rally in support of Merrick Garland. The people there are of good will, only interested in our country. At that time, they are going to call on Republicans, as we will, to heed their constitutional duty and act on Garland's nomination. Republicans have another chance to keep the promises they made to the American people. Republicans should right this historic wrong on Judge Garland. They should give him a hearing and a vote, and they should do it right now.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I want to make a few comments on the CR. Senator McConnell has given a great statement, but about whom? It is a straw man argument. We don't oppose the Zika legislation. We don't oppose helping flood victims. But we want more. We think it should be taken care of, but it hasn't been in this bill, that is for sure. On opioids, we think it should be really funded, not this pitter path that doesn't do anything. What it does is allow you to spend money that is not here. We think we should do the Shaheen legislation and pay for it. We do believe we should not leave Flint behind, though. The CR proposed by the Republicans is short on a number of issues, and I will talk only about two of them this afternoon. I was especially disappointed to see the Republicans' proposal regarding another disaster--a disaster that has been ongoing for well over a year. This CR, this funding measure, does not put a single penny toward Flint, MI--not a penny. The people of Flint, MI, have been waiting for emergency assistance to clean up poison water for more than a year. There are 100,000 people--children--lead-poisoned already. Senate Republicans claim they will address the needs of Flint when we return after the election. Well, we have heard that before, haven't we? That has been the Republicans go-to move in stalling funding for Flint--they always claim they will do it at a later time. Flint has heard this and heard this and heard this. In the meantime, the people of Flint, if they are fortunate, can take a drink of water out of a bottle and bathe in bottled water. We ran out of time months ago. We ran out of time when the Republicans decided to take a 7-week vacation, which is something that was remarkable in history, in more than 60 years. With the time we are going to have off before December 9 with the funding resolution, it will be the longest break the Senate has had going back, we believe, to before the Depression--the Great Depression, not the Bush depression. The crisis has been going on for a long time. Two and a half years ago, Flint learned that its water was not safe. Nine months ago, Republican Governor Snyder and President Obama declared the Flint, MI, water crisis an emergency. Five months ago, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed water infrastructure legislation with a bipartisan aid package for Flint. I commend the chairman of that committee, Senator Inhofe, over and over for agreeing to do the fair thing. That package was voted out of the Senate less than 2 weeks ago on a vote of 95 to 3 as part of the so-called WRDA Act, but the House Republicans made it clear they have no intention of putting funding for Flint in that bill. Still the people of Flint wait for assistance. I have heard all the happy talk: Well, the Republicans are going to take care of this. Call and tell me you are going to take care of it. Give me some assurances that you are going to take care of it because 100,000 Flint residents continue to struggle with having safe water to drink. In fact, 40 percent of the people of Flint live below the poverty line. Flint, MI, is a community of color--African Americans. The junior Senator from Louisiana was especially callous in dismissing the people of Flint. It is hard to acknowledge what he said, but I am going to do it. He called the residents of Flint ``other people's grief.'' Well, using his analogy, the things we have done over the years with all the problems that Louisiana has had--hurricanes, floods, wind storms, and this latest ravaging rain they got--in Nevada, I guess that is somebody else's problem--the people of Louisiana. The many problems we have had in Texas over the last decade--they are everybody's problem, but not by the definition of the Senator from Louisiana. They are not other people's grief. I would suggest the relatively new Senator from Louisiana needs to figure out what the name of his job is. It is United States Senator-- not State senator from Louisiana, United States Senator. He can look out for the people of Louisiana and yet turn a cold shoulder to fellow Americans in Michigan. Congress must act to address emergencies whenever and wherever they occur, especially to help vulnerable Americans, because every one of these emergencies is creating lots of vulnerable Americans. The people of Flint deserve justice, and 90,000 children who have been lead-poisoned deserve justice. But instead of helping the people of Flint, they promise to use this government funding measure to feed their addiction to undisclosed and unaccountable dark money. What the Republican leader stuck in this funding resolution is a provision to prevent the Securities and Exchange Commission from telling corporations that they must disclose campaign contributions. If ever there were legislation contained in a resolution that didn't deserve to be there, it would be that. Shadowy interest groups are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on trying to elect handpicked political candidates. What is this dark money? It is all these advertisements with all these phony front groups, most of which are funded by the Koch brothers. You won't see their name on anything other than something to divert your attention--a public service announcement about how good Koch Industries is for creating jobs. Well, Koch Industries is great for trying to get richer and richer and trying to enrich these two wealthy, Republican, rightwing men who are doing everything they can to buy America. They are doing pretty well, I have to give them credit for that. If they continue the way they are, they are going to be first in line. They are going to be the No. 1 oligarch in America, and they can match to see if they are entitled to be even a notch higher than the No. 1 oligarch in Russia. Russia is an oligarchy, and because of the Koch brothers, America is turning into one. And what does the Republican leader do? He sticks a provision in this legislation to protect them even further. Current Federal law requires publicly traded corporations to disclose financial details on their annual report to shareholders, such as how much they are paying their executive officers and others, but shareholders--the true owners of corporations--have no idea how much money is being spent on politics, being directed by a few in the corporations. The Securities and Exchange Commission does not require this to be reported. Last August, 44 Democratic Senators sent a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission in support of adding political disclosures in their annual shareholder reports. The Republican leader wants to stop this. He wants to do everything he can to protect the Koch brothers. But the Securities and Exchange Commission received 1 million public comments in support of disclosure because it protects the interests of investors--1 million comments. That is unheard of. The Republicans in the Senate are opposed to disclosure. That is why the Republican leader has attached this so-called rider to the government funding bill to prevent shareholders from knowing how their money is spent and being used in the political process. Republicans are holding the government hostage because they want to keep the political system awash in dark money. They want to give contributions to the Chamber of Commerce, the National Rifle Association, and on and on-- millions and millions of dollars. The Senate Republicans need to rethink their priorities. Republicans need to spend less time worrying about the balance in their campaign accounts and more time protecting their fellow Americans, especially those in Flint, MI. Madam President, I see my friend the senior Senator from Iowa on the floor. Before he speaks, will the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, virtually every time Donald Trump says or does something discriminatory--and that is often--the media relies upon a catalog of buzzwords to describe his actions. The press uses words like hateful, intolerant, bigot, extremist, prejudice, to name but a few. Yet there is always one word that many of the press conspicuously avoid: Racist. They never label Trump as a racist, but he is a racist. Donald Trump is a racist. ``Racist'' is a term I don't really like. We have all, with rare exception--I don't know who it would be--said things that are not politically correct, but I don't know of anyone, when that happens, who doesn't acknowledge it and, if necessary, apologizes quickly, but Donald Trump doesn't believe the racist things he does and says are wrong. He says them with the full intent to demean and to denigrate. That is who he is. Each time Trump is given a chance to apologize and make amends, he refuses, and then he doubles down on what he said before. The media is not holding Donald Trump accountable at all. He is not being held accountable. So why do reporters and pundits abstain from calling Trump what he is--a racist? It is not as if Trump's racism is new. His bigotry has been on display since the early days of his business career. When Donald Trump was still working at his father's side as second in command, the Department of Justice slapped their company with a civil rights lawsuit. Why? Because they deserved it. Undercover Federal officers in New York found that the Trumps discriminated against potential tenants by rejecting applications for housing from African Americans and Puerto Ricans. Trump has even had a secret system for discriminatory practices. As the Washington Post reported: Trump employees have secretly marked the applications of minorities with codes, such as `No. 9' and `C' for colored. . . . The employees allegedly directed blacks and Puerto Ricans away from buildings with mostly white tenants and steered them toward properties that had many minorities. In the 1980s, Trump took his racism to Atlantic City. This is Donald Trump at his best. He cheated, coerced, filed bankruptcy, did anything he could to cheat people out of money. In the process, his racism came to the forefront in Atlantic City. Trump was accused of making his African-American employees move off the casino floor when he didn't want to see them, which was any time he came to the casino. One employee, Kip Brown, said: When Donald and Ivana came to the casino, the bosses would order all the black people off the floor. It was the eighties, I was a teenager, but I remember it: they put us all in the back. Trump was later fined $200,000 by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission for that act of disgusting racism. In the 1990s, John O'Donnell, the former president of Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino, wrote a book about his time working with Donald Trump. O'Donnell reported that Trump frequently denigrated African Americans. He remembers a lot, but he specifically remembers Trump saying of his accountants: I've got black accountants at Trump Castle and Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. How about that? I've got black accountants at Trump Castle and Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. Those are words from Donald Trump's mouth. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. That is what he said. Speaking of another African-American employee, Trump told O'Donnell: I think the guy is lazy. And it's probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is. I believe that. That is Donald Trump. He thinks that Blacks are lazy and that they can't help it because it is one of their traits. Trump didn't deny it. He later admitted: ``The stuff O'Donnell wrote about me is probably true.'' But since Donald Trump became involved in Presidential politics, his racism has reached even new heights. Trump led the so-called birther movement to delegitimize our first African-American President. Last year, announcing his candidacy for President, Trump denounced Mexican immigrants as ``criminals, drug dealers, rapists.'' Consider all of the despicable racist things he has done this year alone. He has repeatedly called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States. Trump attacked a Gold Star dad and a Gold Star mother. They are Muslims. Their son, CPT Humayun Khan, was killed in battle, but Donald Trump didn't only question Mr. Khan, he questioned Mrs. Khan. She was sitting there, and he said: I guess she is not talking because she is forbidden to speak by Islam. Donald Trump refused to condemn former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who is still in politics. Donald Trump has retweeted messages from Nazi sympathizers and White supremacists. Donald Trump launched a racist attack on U.S. District Court Judge Curiel, a man born in Indiana, but Trump didn't like that because his mom and dad were of Mexican heritage. He said he should be disqualified from hearing the case. Speaker Ryan called Trump's offensive attack ``a textbook definition of a racist comment.'' This is the U.S. House of Representatives Speaker, who acknowledges that his Republican Presidential nominee is a racist. Yet here we are, 7 weeks from election day, and the Speaker of the House and the Senate Republican leader are both endorsing this racist man. Republicans should not support a man for President who by their Speaker's own admission is the textbook definition of a racist. Think of the example Republicans are setting for our Nation's youth. Republicans are normalizing this racist behavior. This will be their legacy--one of them. They have plenty to add to that. Those who refuse to denounce Donald Trump's actions as racism are complicit in propagating and normalizing his hate. It is time for reporters and journalists to be honest with the American people. They owe Americans the truth: Through his words and deeds, Donald Trump is a racist.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I reserve my right to object. It is stunning that my friend from Pennsylvania would come to the floor and abandon all the principles we have heard the new Republican majority wants in the Senate. First of all, how about having a hearing? There has not been a hearing on this bill. I would put my support of animals and fighting animal abuse with anyone's. The Humane Society has supported me every time I have run for office. PETA has supported me, as have all of the animal rights groups. Wouldn't it be a good idea to follow what the Republican leader said about how we are going to proceed in this new Senate? He said that we were going to have hearings, and they would not bring a bill to the floor unless there has been a hearing. Well, that hasn't worked out so well. We have recently been out of session for 7 weeks. We had a lot of time to do all kinds of things, but we have done nothing. This has been the longest recess since 1956, and with the break that is anticipated by my Republican colleagues, we will break all records going back to-- we don't even know when. We haven't been able to determine that. It could go as far back as the Depression or World War I. All of this sadness about not getting something done on this legislation cries for relief--relief for the American people that we start working again. We have not only had months to deal with legislation like this, but we have had more than 6 months to deal with something that is vitally important to America. It is important everywhere in America. It is important in Nevada, Pennsylvania, Kentucky--everyplace. What is that? How about having a full Supreme Court? The man who opened the Senate today, Orrin Hatch, the President pro tempore of the U.S. Senate, said publicly so everyone could hear that Merrick Garland would be a consensus nomination for the President. We satisfied his consensus appetite, and we brought forward, through the President of the United States, Merrick Garland on March 16. We waited and waited. Initially no one would even meet with him--no Republican would meet with him. Finally, a few Republicans trickled into a few meetings, but there was no hearing, and, of course, no vote. We are happy to consider all kinds of legislation, but to pick and choose what they are going to do, leaving volumes of work undone here in the Senate, is something that leaves me incredulous. Before we rush ahead on legislation that has had no hearing, I think it would be a good idea that we have a hearing and a vote on Merrick Garland. If Republican Senators want to vote against Merrick Garland, let them do it, but let's go through the process. I ask through the Chair whether the Senator from Pennsylvania would be willing to modify his unanimous consent request so that following a vote on confirmation of the nomination of a consensus nominee, Merrick Garland, to be a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court so we would have nine members on the Court--nothing too unusual--the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of this legislation, S. 1831.

Mr. REID. Yes, it was.

Mr. REID. I object to the initial request.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I could direct a question to my friend through the Chair.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I came to the floor at his convenience. I am busy, and I am sure he is busy. I came to the floor to be a gentleman, and I allowed him to go first. I have a speech to give. I came here, and I agreed to the Republican leader's request. I didn't need to agree. I said I would be willing to do this right now so the Republican leader could give his speech later. I think it is rude, to say the least, for him to give a speech here and prevent me from giving a speech to the Senate. I think that is not being very collegial, and I am disappointed that he would do this. He can go ahead and talk as long as he wants. I will wait.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, just so the record is very clear, I have been asked to come to the floor on two or three different occasions to meet his schedule, and I was here; he wasn't. Make sure the record reflects that. Mr. President, for almost 2 years the Senate has been run by the Republicans. The schedule is set by the Republicans. I don't set the schedule anymore. To have my friend, the Senator from Pennsylvania, come here and say: Well, this is really important--I have indicated how I feel about animal cruelty. I have spoken out about all kinds of animal cruelty for more than three decades. But I also have some concern, as do the American people, that Senators like my friend from Pennsylvania have helped block a simple hearing and a vote on a man who is a consensus nominee to be a Supreme Court Justice. That is wrong. I am not a big fan of polling, but you could take a poll in your front room, in a mall, or have one of these professionals come in and claim they know what they are doing. Overwhelmingly, it would show that the American people want a vote on this. The Supreme Court being short one member has stopped work from being done for the good of this country. Important cases that should have been determined haven't been determined. Now they have to go along with whatever the lower courts say. That is not our system of justice. So I hope everyone understands that it would be extremely fair and important to have a hearing and a vote on Merrick Garland. I can't understand the lack of courage of my Republican friends such as the Senator from Pennsylvania. If they don't like Merrick Garland, vote against him, but don't block him. For the longest time in the history of America, a Supreme Court Justice has been stopped--stopped-- from even having a hearing. It has never happened before--never in the history of this country. I will speak on my subject a little later. I yield the floor. I ask that the Chair announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 100th anniversary of the American Red Cross, Northern and Southern Nevada Chapters. The Northern and Southern Nevada Chapters of the American Red Cross were established during World War I, when a small group of women came together to knit sweaters, socks, and caps for troops overseas. Since then, the American Red Cross in Nevada has provided invaluable support and services to those in need. For instance, during the Great Depression, the American Red Cross provided temporary housing, nutritious meals, and clean drinking water. The American Red Cross also provided disaster relief after the 1999 Clark County flood that caused extensive property damage. For 100 years, the American Red Cross in Nevada has served numerous people in our community, Nation, and throughout the world. Today 650 volunteers facilitate essential programs for Nevadans, including services for the Armed Forces, community preparedness training, youth services, and international programs to reconnect families. Through these programs, the American Red Cross transforms the lives of individuals and families across the Silver State. The American Red Cross in Nevada has made many noteworthy contributions to our community. Its services ensure that Nevadans receive relief during their most difficult times. The American Red Cross's work is appreciated and admired, and I wish them continued success.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the 25th anniversary of the Las Vegas Natural History Museum. For a quarter century, the museum has inspired curiosity, appreciation, and responsibility for the natural world and its resources. It is my great pleasure to recognize the institution, its employees, and its board members before the U.S. Senate today. The Las Vegas Natural History Museum began as a culmination of efforts by dedicated Nevadans, including executive director and founder Marilyn Gillespie, to protect the State's collection of wildlife and prehistoric exhibits. Through cooperation with the Las Vegas City Council and partnerships within the Las Vegas area, the museum was soon able to officially open its doors to visitors in 1991. Since then, the museum has expanded to include a multibillion dollar collection of regional and global artifacts, as well as a variety of interactive scientific exhibits and educational resources. In 2002, the Smithsonian Institution granted affiliate membership to the Las Vegas Natural History Museum, further enhancing its exhibits and impact on visitors. Early collaborations within the Las Vegas area provided the framework for a history of community engagement that continues to define the institution to this day. Last year, more than 23,000 educational tours were provided to students from Clark County, each of which were designed to meet State educational requirements. The museum also continued its Open Doors Program, allowing more students from at- risk or economically disadvantaged schools to visit the museum. At a time when environmental stewardship is more important than ever, I am proud to join my fellow Nevadans in celebrating this important milestone. As we look back on 25 years of scientific exploration and discovery, we look forward to many more in the future.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, my entire caucus got the message. We understand Einstein's definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and the over and over again, my friend should understand, is the fact that Republicans have voted 70 times to repeal ObamaCare, each time with the same result. My friend should know that every one of my Senators got the memo, as he said. If someone would spend a minute each day flipping through the newspapers about health care, they would understand that ObamaCare has changed America for the better. Twenty million people now have the opportunity to go to the doctor when they are sick or to the hospital when they are hurt. That wasn't the way it used to be, and the American people are beginning to realize that the constant carping about ObamaCare from the Republicans is wrong. It is wrong for a number of reasons. The American people are beginning to realize that with just a little bit of help, ObamaCare could be made even better. A report came out yesterday that premiums for ObamaCare are still less than employer programs. It is about 3 percent lower than the company-run plans. The marketplace is what it is all about, and that is what is determining what is happening with ObamaCare. The disabled can get insurance, young men and women can stay on their parents' insurance until the age of 26. Insurance companies are limited in how they can punish people, as they did in the past. They can't set an arbitrary limit as to how much insurance they would provide. If somebody was hurt in a serious accident, they would just terminate them from the insurance, not to mention all of the other things. We were at their mercy. Obviously Republicans want to go back to that same system, and it is not a good system.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I learned a long time ago here in the Senate that the rules of the Senate do not allow pictures, graphs, and things of that nature to go in the Congressional Record, and that is really too bad. I wish I had the time this morning--I read the paper this morning--to blow up this cartoon by the syndicated cartoonist of the Washington Post, Tom Toles. I have talked to him a couple of times over the past many decades because he is really good, and today's cartoon is about as good as it gets. This is a picture that Tom Toles sketched of Donald Trump. I would like everyone to take a look at it. I wish I could put it in the Record. It is a cartoon of Donald Trump, and he is saying: ``Maybe we need to start `profiling' huckster haircuts, beady eyes, blowhard lips, unhealthy orange glow, obvious self-dealing''--and he has money pouring out of his pockets--``overweight, underhanded, ever-shifting positions.'' And, as Toles always has in every cartoon, there is a little person down in the bottom generally making some snide remark about the cartoon, and what that little person says today is that there is a ``body of evidence''--the body of Donald Trump, and he is the one who should be profiled, not the people he wants to have profiled. A little more about Donald Trump--Mitt Romney and I agree on one thing, and that is one thing for sure. There are other things we would agree on, but let's talk about one thing that Mitt Romney and I agree on, and that is that Donald Trump should release his tax returns. But Trump will not release his tax returns. He refuses to release his returns, and he comes up with one excuse after another to not release his tax returns. It is a little odd because the Donald Trump we are talking about is not known for cautionary restraint; he is the most unhinged and reckless Presidential candidate ever. Let's consider just a little bit of his track record. We have seen Trump refer to women in the most crude and derogatory manner. We have seen Trump call immigrants murderers and rapists. We have seen Trump fearmonger against Muslim Americans, even the parents of one of our proud soldiers who lost his life fighting for our country. We have seen Trump mock someone with a disability on more than one occasion. We have seen Trump impugn a Federal judge. Why? Because his parents were Hispanic. We have seen Trump continue to question President Obama's country of origin. We have seen Trump casually raise the specter of an assassination against Hillary Clinton on more than one occasion. This is the Donald Trump we know. Donald Trump will do and say anything regardless of the consequences. Why does Trump refuse to produce his tax returns? Why is this the one time in his life that he exercises caution? Why does he maintain absolute silence on his taxes? The answer is very simple--because Trump's tax returns would further destroy his Presidential candidacy. Production of his tax returns would again prove that he is a fraud. If the American people had access to Donald Trump's tax returns, they would show he is not the billionaire he claims to be. Trump wants us to believe that in spite of all of his bankruptcies and litigations that have been going on for decades, he is the incredibly wealthy, successful businessman that he portrays himself to be. But he is not, and his tax returns will prove he is far from a wealthy Trump. Donald Trump's tax returns will also prove that he avoids paying his fair share of taxes. On the rare occasion that Donald Trump's tax returns have been made public--that was on one occasion some time ago-- they showed that he paid nothing in income taxes. As the Washington Post reported earlier this year: The last time information from Donald Trump's income-tax returns was made public, the bottom line was striking: He paid the federal government $0 in income taxes. Donald Trump is afraid that if his supporters discover that he has avoided paying taxes, they will see him for what he is--someone the IRS should charge with a crime and investigate, or at least do something. He deserves all the scrutiny he can get because he doesn't want us to see what he has in his so-called income. Perhaps the most damning evidence of Trump's tax records would be that he lives off the American taxpayer. Donald Trump is a freeloader. Even though Trump refuses to pay his share of taxes, he is content to use other taxpayers' hard-earned money. Yesterday we learned that his charity--they don't put money in it. He gets other charities to donate to his charity, and then he goes out and tries to be a big shot by donating other people's money. Even though Trump refuses to pay his share of taxes, he is content to use other taxpayers' hard-earned money. One news outlet has reported that over the last three decades Donald Trump has received $885 million in tax breaks. Let's put that in perspective. In 2014, the entire State of Ohio received $686 million in Federal funding to provide benefits for needy families. That money helped almost 120,000 people in Ohio. Trump received $885 million, and the entire State of Ohio received only $686 million. There is no question about it: Donald Trump is a welfare king, but the welfare king doesn't want voters to see that he doesn't pay taxes even as he uses a billion of taxpayer dollars to keep his bankrupt companies afloat. Trump doesn't want Americans to see that he claims middle-class tax credits. This is a report in the New York Daily News: The flame-throwing Republican contender for the White House appears to be the only New York City billionaire who snagged a tax break aimed at middle class homeowners, raising even more questions about his alleged billions. Continuing to quote: An analysis of property records for 38 Big Apple billionaires on the `Forbes 400' list conducted by Crain's New York Business found Trump was the only one to receive the STAR tax credit. That credit . . . gives those entitled to around $300 off their tax bill. So is he a billionaire? I doubt it. Donald Trump, this self-purported billionaire, has been falsely claiming a $300 tax break for years. He has done it for a number of years. Like a sponge, Donald Trump soaks up all the taxpayer money he can find while at the same time not paying his fair share of taxes. Remember, the same Donald Trump, who once said: The problem we have right now, we have a society that sits back and says we're not going to do anything. And eventually the 50 percent cannot carry, and it's unfair to them, but cannot carry the other 50 percent. I think Donald Trump is confused about who is carrying whom. He is the one relaxing, playing golf at his golf courses, many of which are largely paid for by taxpayer dollars, and depending at the same time on the American taxpayer to bankroll his company and his golf game, but Trump doesn't seem to care. In fact, he brags about how he uses other people's hard-earned money. Here is what he said yesterday: It's called OPM: Other people's money. There's nothing wrong with doing things with other people's money. That's what I do. How could Speaker Ryan, Senator McConnell, and other congressional Republicans endorse this man for President or endorse him for anything? How can they continue to support Donald Trump as he shuns transparency and refuses to release the most basic information about his taxes and income? Hillary Clinton has posted all of her tax records for the last four decades for the world to see. Donald Trump shows us nothing. He is afraid to. Mr. Trump, prove to every American that you are the wealthy, successful man you claim to be. Mr. Trump, prove to every American that you have paid your fair share of taxes. Mr. Trump, prove to every American that you are not mooching off the American taxpayer. Mr. Trump, release your tax returns. Prove me wrong. Prove Mitt Romney wrong. I dare you to come clean and show us your tax records. But he won't. Mr. President, I see my good friend, the Senator from Illinois, the assistant Democratic leader, on the floor. I now ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the Republican-led Senate recently returned from the longest summer recess in more than a half a century. It is depicted here in the chart I wish to share with my colleagues. The black lines are when we are not working. Where there are not black lines is when we work, keeping in mind that many of our work days are not the work days of the people we represent. Some work days are 3 or 4 hours at the most. The Republican Senate just simply doesn't work. The chart represents the fewest working days since 1956. Our country has grown since then. But here it is. A picture is worth a thousand words. I won't say a thousand words this morning, but I will say a few more things. We are here today when the Republican-led Senate is on track to work fewer days in 2016 than in any year since 1956, when I was in high school. Republicans owe the taxpayers who fund their paychecks an apology--and they really do--for showing up to work fewer days this year than any Senate in all those many decades. One would think the Republicans would be embarrassed by their indolence--but apparently not. Instead of apologizing for their absenteeism, Republicans are demanding even more time off. Today I read in the newspaper--there are news accounts all over the country--that Republicans are whining about being asked to show up to do their jobs. They are asking for more weeks of recess. They are saying that Democrats are holding up what we are doing in Congress--how about that. We are so far down the road here that not much can be done because we are in what we call postcloture procedure in almost everything we do around here. We are going to vote in just a few hours, and it will be another time when we can't do anything because we are postcloture. But that is the calendar the Republican leader set. We didn't. That is the calendar we should stick to, I guess, is what we are being told. Let's black off a few more days. It is scary, but that is what they want. If we take more time off, the Senate will not have just worked fewer days in any year since 1956, but we may have to go back further in history to find a Senate that worked as few days as this one--a long time back. So I have a short answer for the Republicans who complain about being asked to earn their paychecks. Cry us all a river. Stop complaining about not having enough time off. People out there who are watching this work different kinds of jobs. Some are retired, but they worked. They know what it is like to work. They never gave themselves extra weeks of vacation whenever they felt like it and neither should Senate Republicans.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, working people in our great country are tired of being ripped off by really rich people--some who are billionaires and some who claim they are billionaires. During the financial crisis, Wall Street took Main Street to the cleaners. Oh, did it hurt the State of Nevada--all of Nevada: Reno, Las Vegas--and it clobbered rural Nevada. American families lost their savings, their livelihoods, and their businesses because of the greed of a few. The last thing the American people want or need is a President who will run another financial scam on each of them. If elected, Donald Trump would be the scammer in chief. Trump is a fraud. That is the word that I chose. He was born with an inheritance, but he lost his daddy's wealth. That is why Donald Trump won't release his tax returns. That is certainly one of the reasons, of course. He is not worth nearly as much as he claims to be. That is the secret he doesn't want anyone to know. He wants everyone to think he is the big, rich, rich man. We know that Trump lies about his money. I am not making that up. He once admitted he assesses his net worth on a whim. This is what he said during one of his many, many depositions, which is a court proceeding where you gather evidence, and he has appeared before many for his depositions. This is what he said on one occasion in his many sworn statements. I keep stressing that this is one of a multitude of lawsuits to which he has been a party. This is Donald Trump talking: ``My net worth fluctuates, and it goes up and down with markets and with attitudes and with feelings, even my own feelings.'' Simply put, Trump is faking his net worth because he doesn't want us to know that he is not a good businessman and he is not as rich as he would have us believe. Donald Trump's business record speaks for itself. He has ruined company after company, hotel after hotel. Over the last couple of decades, we know of at least six of his companies that have gone into bankruptcy. There are Trump's other business ventures, such as Trump Steaks. Yes, that was really one--Trump Steaks, those things you eat. There was Trump Magazine, those things you read, and Trump University, those places where you are supposed to get educated. They were all flops. Trump claims to be a titan in the real estate industry, but the Washington Post has reported that he doesn't crack the list of major real estate buyers in New York City, let alone the country. Earlier this year, the New York Times reported that Trump has such a bad business reputation that banks do not wish to lend him money. In lieu of real business success, Donald Trump resorts to scams like Trump University. That is a doozy, but that is one of the best scams. Now, with Trump University, he ripped off everyone from students interested in real estate to retirees looking to invest their savings. Trump University is under investigation by the New York Office of the Attorney General, and he is the defendant in two other class action lawsuits. Why? Because he cheated people. He cheated them. Litigation is nothing new to Donald Trump. Over the last decade and a half, Trump and his companies have been sued in Federal court 72 times. That doesn't take into consideration the many times he has been sued in State courts. There have been 72 Federal cases and many more times in State courts. But Trump, being the flimflammer that he is, just moves on to another scheme. He even cheats charities. He has a charity--using a broad definition of a ``charity''--called the Trump Foundation. Trump started his charity because he is desperate to get invited to fancy parties and be seen with people who give their own money. He seeks acceptance among the wealthy. Since 2008, Trump has not donated a single penny to his own charity, the Trump Foundation. Does he have the money to donate? Well, he says he should, but he doesn't. Americans are far more generous, even though they are of modest means, but they contribute generously to charities every day--not the Donald. No, instead, he goes to other individuals and charities and asks them to donate to his foundation. The Trump Foundation isn't as much of a charity as it is Donald Trump's personal ATM machine. Trump uses the money he gets from other charities to buy himself gifts. Four years ago, Trump paid $12,000 of charity resources to buy a football helmet signed by Tim Tebow. Tim Tebow, I am sure, is a fine man. His college career was terrific. He is a Heisman award winner. His professional career wasn't so good, but everything I know about the man indicates he is a good person. He is now 29 years old, and with his great physical attributes, he is trying baseball. He hasn't played baseball since he was in high school, but he hit almost .500 his last year in high school, and I hope he does well. Here is the deal with the helmet. If Trump wants to buy Tim Tebow's helmet or Willie Mays' bat or Ernie Banks' glove--whatever he wants to buy--that is his right. But shouldn't he use his own money? Not Donald Trump--no, he didn't use his money to buy Tim Tebow's helmet. He didn't use his checkbook to buy that memorabilia. Instead, he used the Trump Foundation charity money--money that was supposed to be given to somebody that needed help. So for $12,000, a big shot was bidding on a helmet, not with his own money but with the charity's money. The Internal Revenue Service calls this sort of thing self-dealing. Self-dealing is when a person spends charity money on themself. It is against the law. It is illegal. But Trump doesn't care about what the law is. If he doesn't have the money himself, which obviously he doesn't, then he uses other people's money--other people's money that is put into his charity, and he spends it on himself. This is who the Republicans want to be our President. This is who Republicans--Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan want this man to prepare a budget for our country? Trump can't be trusted with his own charity. Are we supposed to believe he can manage the Nation's Treasury or provide money for our armed services or for Homeland Security? This is a man who uses charities to bilk even police officers. In 2009, Donald Trump asked the Charles Evans Foundation for a donation to his charity, the Trump Foundation. Trump told them he needed the money to donate to the Palm Beach, FL, Police Foundation. They gave Trump's charity $150,000. Donald Trump took that money and gave it to the Palm Beach Police Foundation. He didn't match it with a dime of his own. Trump took the Charles Evans Foundation money, and he donated it as if it were his own. Here is where the story gets even more absurd--even worse. What kind of man is this person running for President? Well, here is a slight indication. When the Palm Beach Police Foundation wanted to use Trump's South Florida resort to honor him for his gift--remember, the gift was from somebody else, but he claimed credit for it--Trump charged them for the event, for the room, and for the food. It is estimated that the Palm Beach Police Foundation paid Trump and his hotel operation $200,000 to honor himself. Donald Trump ran a hustle on many different charities and netted his resort money, and he didn't spend a penny of his own money along the way. Trump never worries about being caught because he financially rewards the people who would investigate the racket he perpetuates. In 2013, the attorney general of Florida, Pam Bondi, announced she was joining the New York investigation into Trump University. Four days after announcing the probe, Donald Trump sent $25,000 to her campaign. The attorney general's office announced almost immediately that it would not be investigating Trump University and would not join with the State of New York. Guess what money Trump used to persuade the attorney general to change her mind. Was it his money? Oh, no. Was it money from his charity? You got it. Of course, that is illegal, but he did it anyway and got credit from the attorney general of Florida. How can Senator McConnell and Speaker Ryan continue to endorse this man? How can Republicans close their eyes to the fact that this swindler is running for President and he is ripping off the American people and our government? This Republican Congress has spent millions of your tax dollars on political hit jobs masquerading as investigations. They have spent untold amounts of money on Benghazi, on emails, and they found nothing, of course--zero--and they have acknowledged that. So I have another job for them. Why don't they investigate Donald Trump? They can do it quickly. They are all set to do this. They don't mind spending taxpayer dollars. All these investigations of the Clinton operation have always been taxpayer dollars. They should take a cue from the attorney general of the State of New York and hold Trump accountable for scamming charities, the IRS, and the American people. Donald Trump desperately wants people to believe that he is a brilliant, rich, rich businessman. In reality he is a silver-spoon- toting fraud who would never make it in the real world without his father's money. That is why Trump's entire business career has been one scam after another, such as in Atlantic City where he cheated everybody and got rich at the expense of others. If there is one reason Atlantic City has gone downhill--and it has--it is Donald Trump. He is always looking for a mark, some victim for one of his scams, because he is incapable of making money honestly. Now our country is Trump's next target. He wants this to be the biggest payoff ever. Mr. President, I think it is time to announce the business of the day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, many Americans are taking the news about this weekend's terror attacks in New Jersey, New York, and even Minnesota very seriously. As a country, we are always stunned when these violent acts occur, and we are absolutely sickened by the acts of violence of this terrorist activity. We grieve with the victims, their families, and their loved ones. I had a long, thorough briefing today by the FBI. I appreciate their good work always. They have a difficult job doing everything they can to make sure we are safe. I am aware of the many people injured in these cowardly attacks, including police officers. I wish them all a full and complete recovery. Despite the many injured, we are very grateful that no one was killed in these attacks. It is a credit to both law enforcement and America's terrific, good, brave first responders. Earlier today, the suspect wanted in connection with these cowardly attacks was shot and apprehended by police officers, but, of course, not before he wounded two of these police officers. These officers' quick response most likely kept Americans safe. These events remind us of these brave men and women who risk their lives every day to protect the American people. First responders in New York, New Jersey, and Minnesota rushed into danger this weekend to protect innocent people. They certainly saved lives. Now we must do everything we can to ensure justice is served and law enforcement gets the support needed to conduct their investigation. It is not enough to simply offer help after these heinous attacks take place. Congress must do more to prevent these acts of terrorism altogether. There are things we can do, and some of them are really easy. Right now, as we speak, there is a loophole in our law that allows potential FBI terror suspects to legally purchase guns and explosives. Stop and think about that for just a moment. A person with suspected ties to terrorism can walk into a store now and buy all of the explosives, all the guns, and all the ammunition they want. In Nevada, a man who has been so charitable has set up a camp for children every summer. It costs him lots of money. It is in a beautiful part of the mountain area right outside of Las Vegas. We have, within 10 minutes of Las Vegas, a 12,000-foot mountain. At the foot of those mountains, he has a beautiful camp. Here is what they are doing now. You can go to a gun store in Las Vegas, and you can buy explosives. They put them up in the trees. We don't have that many trees in Nevada. They will put explosives up in a tree, and they shoot at it, and it blows up. It blows up the tree and anything around it. That is for sport. Anyone can walk into a gun store and buy explosives. It doesn't matter who it is. You can also be a terrorist and do the same thing. Again, I ask everyone to think about that. A person with suspected ties to terrorism can walk into a store now and buy all of the explosives they want. They can buy all the guns they want. The so-called terror gap is outrageous and terribly reckless. How can something like this go unaddressed in modern-day America? Democrats have tried repeatedly for the past year to close that loophole, but we have been prevented from doing that by the Republicans. We can argue from now on about whether this bill could have prevented this weekend's attacks, but one thing is for sure: It could prevent the next attack. But we know this loophole shouldn't exist. We know terror suspects shouldn't be given a free pass to buy all the guns and all the explosives they want, and we know the American people want this loophole closed. Eighty-five percent of the people in Indiana, in Nevada, in Kentucky--85 percent of the people in America--support legislation keeping explosives and guns out of the hands of suspected terrorists. If you can't fly, why should you be able to buy a gun? If you can't fly, why should you be able to buy explosives? The only reason the FBI terror suspects are allowed to buy guns and explosives is simply because of Republican opposition. That is the reason. This state of affairs defies belief. It is hard to believe that in America today an FBI terror suspect who cannot fly on an airplane can walk into a gun store in Las Vegas, New York City, or anyplace and legally purchase explosives and assault weapons. But it is true because Republicans refuse to close the terror gap loophole. In the aftermath of these attacks, our constituents are looking for us to help. They want to feel safe. They want to be safe. We can help provide that safety by closing the terror loophole, but Democrats can't do it alone. We need help from the Republicans. Mr. President, I see no one seeking recognition, so I ask the Chair to announce the business of the day.