Chuck Schumer

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I enter a motion to reconsider the failed cloture vote.

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I just want to explain what happened on the floor very briefly. At the end of the vote, I changed my response to a no so that I may move to reconsider this vote at a future time. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceedings.

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk that is due for a second reading.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, on another matter, right now, there is a fire burning in Oregon the size of New York City. A heat wave recently rolled through the Pacific Northwest that melted power lines and cracked roadways in two. Hurricanes and flooding in the East have battered one community after the other. Earlier this year, a snowstorm engulfed the typically scorching State of Texas and claimed the lives of hundreds--hundreds--of people. And, of course, we saw what happened in Europe with the flooding. These extreme, once-in-a-century weather events are now commonplace. The dangers of climate change are here, and they are real. Fighting climate change will take not only new technologies and new ways of thinking but something more basic: It will take people--people, lots of people--working together to fight climate change from the ground up. This morning, I joined with my Democratic colleagues from the House and Senate to push a bold, new approach to fighting climate change that will help create thousands of good-paying jobs in the process: the Civilian Climate Corps, CCC. The idea at the core of the Civilian Climate Corps harkens back to the New Deal, when hundreds of thousands of Americans were put to work on conservation and infrastructure projects across the country. During the Great Depression, President Roosevelt needed ways to put Americans to work and to do it fast, and he found a way to do it while having those workers do something enormously productive for their country: building public works and dams and bridges and airfields and flood and forest-fire prevention. The Civilian Conservation Corps, as it was called at the time, was a brilliant idea--a success--that should be harnessed once again, this time to fight climate change. The bottom line: We need a CCC for the 21st century. We can put Americans to work on climate and resiliency projects. We can put Americans to work on clean energy initiatives across the country. We can put Americans to work helping poorer and more disconnected communities handle the challenge of climate change. And we can create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs, particularly focusing on the poorer communities, the communities of color that have been left out in the past. The Civilian Climate Corps can be one of the largest employment projects and one of the largest environmental projects at the same time. I believe the Senate should work to make this a reality this year. I believe the CCC, the Civilian Climate Corps, should be one of the pillars of the American Jobs and Family Plan. As majority leader, I will ensure that CCC will be included in the upcoming budget reconciliation package in as big and bold a way as possible.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, finally, later, the Senate will pass a long-overdue fix to the Crime Victims Fund to help Americans stitch back their lives after falling victim to violent crime. As hard as it is to suffer the trauma of a violent crime, survivors almost always face enormous financial hardship in the immediate aftermath. Just think about healthcare or mental health services for victims of human trafficking or sexual assault, emergency housing for victims of serious domestic abuse, legal fees for those who try to pursue justice for the crime committed against them. Those services can cost tens of thousands of dollars. So for nearly 35 years, the Justice Department has operated a Crime Victims Fund that uses money from Federal convictions and fines to help survivors of violent crime. It is a simple idea. It has helped thousands and thousands of Americans during the most challenging moments of their lives. But today, this popular and effective program is in danger of going into the red. Compared to 5 years ago, the Crime Victims Fund could fall to less than one-twentieth--one-twentieth--of its former size by the end of the next fiscal year. Well, the Senate is not going to abandon Americans who survived violent crimes. Today, the Senate will pass legislation to replenish the Crime Victims Fund and set it on a path toward long-term stability. The Crime Victims Fund has been a beacon of hope and healing for countless survivors over the decades. With today's vote, survivors of violent crime can rest assured that it will continue to be that beacon of hope and healing for decades more to come.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, for decades, both parties have shared a desire to invest in our Nation's infrastructure. It is one of the few issues here in Washington where our two parties can consistently work together, and it has been years since Congress passed a significant stand-alone investment. We are hoping to change that this year. Nearly a month ago--a month ago--a bipartisan group of Senators came together, along with the White House, and agreed on a framework for a bipartisan infrastructure bill. So last night I moved to set up a process for the Senate to consider that bipartisan framework. On Wednesday, the Senate will take the first procedural vote on a shell bill, merely a vehicle to get the whole process started. It is not a final deadline for legislative text. It is not a cynical ploy. It is not a fish-or-cut-bait moment. It is not an attempt to jam anyone. It is only a signal that the Senate is ready to get the process started, something the Senate has routinely done on other bipartisan bills this year. All a ``yes'' vote on the motion to proceed means is simply that the Senate is ready to begin debating a bipartisan infrastructure bill--no more, no less. We have waited a month. It is time to move forward. My colleagues have heard me speak for months about making progress on two different tracks of infrastructure. After the group of Senators reached a deal with the White House, I endorsed it and I announced I wanted to put their agreement on the floor of the Senate in July. This week's vote is an honest attempt to get something done, to get the ball rolling on the Senate floor. That is why I am giving the maximum amount of flexibility to our Senate colleagues who are negotiating this bill. If the bipartisan group can finalize the text of their agreement by Thursday, I will offer it as the pending substitute amendment. If, for whatever reason, the bipartisan group isn't ready with their final text by Thursday, I will offer an amendment consisting only of the bipartisan infrastructure bills that have already gone through our Senate committees and are actually the core of the bipartisan infrastructure framework. They are the water bill, the highway bill, the rail and safety bill, and the energy bill. All of them are bipartisan, all of them have gone through committee, and all of them received overwhelming Republican votes. Why wouldn't our Republican colleagues want to move to proceed to debate that bill, at the very minimum, even if we don't have agreement on the broader bipartisan bill? Just to go over the record, the Environment and Public Works Committee reported the water bill, passed by voice vote, unanimous, in committee and then 89 to 2 on the Senate floor. The Environment and Public Works Committee reported the highway bill, passed by 20 to 0. The Commerce Committee reported the rail and safety bill, passed by 25 to 3. And the Energy and Natural Resources Committee report of the energy bill passed 13 to 7. So once again, to repeat, this week's vote is an honest attempt to get something done, to get the ball rolling on the Senate floor, after a month, after the agreement was reached by the bipartisan group and the White House. That is why I am giving the maximum amount of flexibility to our Senate colleagues who are negotiating the bill. If the bipartisan group can finalize their agreement by Thursday, I will offer it as the pending substitute amendment, as I mentioned before. I just wanted to repeat that so people hear it loud and clear. The bills I mentioned are the lowest common denominator and the most agreeable starting point, a package of bipartisan bills that nearly all the Senators have already supported this year, a package of bills that the bipartisan group is using as the basis of their framework. And once it is on the floor, we can then debate, amend, and work from there. It is not the final word. There will be no doubt many Senators would want to offer additional items from the bipartisan framework or other issues: from transit to broadband, to resiliency, and more. And, of course, if the bipartisan group finalizes their product over the weekend, Senators can offer it as an amendment at that point, and I will make sure that that amendment is in order. Let me repeat. Even if the text of the bipartisan framework isn't ready by Thursday and we agree to make the package of bipartisan bills that I mentioned the starting point, Senators can still work on the bipartisan framework and offer it as an amendment later on. The bottom line is very simple. If Senators agree to start debate, there will be many, many opportunities for the bipartisan group to make their agreement the base of the bill. But if Republican Senators refuse to start debate, they would be denying the Senate an opportunity to consider the bipartisan amendment. And this is not a new process. We have used it regularly here in the Senate, on the anti-Asian hate crimes bill, the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act. On both of those, the Senate agreed to start debate, just to proceed on a base bill, a shell bill. It took several weeks of amendments before everyone was ready to move forward, eventually and successfully. Both measures passed with significant bipartisan support. If we did it there--on the anti-Asian hate bill, on the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act--we can do it here. There is no reason we can't do it here with infrastructure. Look, Senators of good will on both sides want to finish the bipartisan infrastructure bill before the August recess. That is certainly my goal. But in order to finish the bill, we first need to agree to start. Let me repeat that. But in order to finish the bill, we first need to agree to start. That is the first step. Let's all agree to start. That is what this week's vote is about, and I hope my Republican colleagues will join us in beginning debate.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I have 2 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet dring today's session of the Senate: Subcommittee on Cybersecurity The Subcommittee on Cybersecurity of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, July 19, 2021, at 6 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Strategic Forces The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, July 19, 2021, at 5:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. 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. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Tuesday, July 20; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Polite nomination; further, that the cloture motions on the Polite and Abruzzo nominations ripen at 11:30 a.m.; that if cloture is invoked on the Polite nomination, the Senate immediately vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the Abruzzo nomination; that the Senate recess following the cloture vote on the Abruzzo nomination until 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings; that if cloture is invoked on the Polite nomination, all postcloture time expire at 2:30 p.m. and that, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; finally, that if cloture is invoked on the Abruzzo nomination, all postcloture time be immediately expired and the Senate vote on the confirmation of the nomination at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader on Wednesday, July 21.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, July 19, be waived.

Mr. SCHUMER. I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 100, H.R. 3684.

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 142.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, for the past several months, both Democrats and Republicans have been hard at work putting together two major infrastructure bills to meet the challenges of the 21st century. We have proceeded along two tracks. The first track is a bipartisan infrastructure framework that has been agreed to by a group of Democrats and Republican Senators and the White House. The second track is a budget resolution with reconciliation instructions that will allow the Senate to take up the American Jobs and Families Plan and make historic investments in jobs, family support policies, and initiatives to fight climate change. This week, the Senate aims to make even more progress on these tracks. Tonight, in a few minutes, I will file cloture on a shell bill, which will act as a legislative vehicle for the bipartisan infrastructure framework. That vote on cloture will take place on Wednesday. Again, that vote on Wednesday will be a vote on cloture simply to the motion to proceed to a debate on a bipartisan infrastructure bill. I want to be clear about what these steps mean. There has been some confusion. What we are talking about this week is a vote on whether to proceed to debate on the bipartisan infrastructure framework. The motion to proceed on Wednesday is simply about getting the legislative process started here on the Senate floor; it is not a deadline to determine every final detail of the bill. All a ``yes'' vote on the motion to proceed simply means is that the Senate is ready to begin debating and amending a bipartisan infrastructure bill; no more, no less. It is important to remember that even after the Wednesday cloture vote, there are up to 30 hours of debate before we can adopt the motion to proceed and offer amendments. So let me be very clear about what I am committing to the Senate as majority leader. If the bipartisan group of Senators reaches a final agreement on legislative text by Thursday, I will make that agreement the pending substitute amendment for debate once the motion to proceed is adopted. If for some reason the group does not finalize the legislative text to the agreement in time for Thursday, then I will offer an amendment consisting only of the elements of the bill that have already been put through committee on a bipartisan process. This will allow this Senate to begin debate and amendments on the bipartisan base bill, which has four main components: First, the Environment and Public Works Committee report of the water bill. This bill passed by a voice vote in committee and then 89 to 2 on the Senate floor. Second, the Environment and Public Works Committee report of the highway bill. This passed by 20 to nothing. Third, the Commerce Committee report on the rail and safety bill. This bill passed by 25 to 3. Fourth, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee report of the Energy bill. This passed 13 to 7. Again, if the text of the bipartisan deal is ready on Thursday, I will offer it as the first substitute amendment. If for some reason it is not, I will offer an amendment that consists only of the elements of the bill that have gone through committee with substantial bipartisan support, the four pieces that I mentioned just a second ago. Now, I have spoken with the five leading Democratic negotiators: Senators Sinema, Warner, Tester, Shaheen, and Manchin. They support this approach. I would remind my colleagues, moving to proceed to a legislative vehicle, a shell bill, for bipartisan legislation, even while the negotiators finalize the text of that legislation, is a routine process in this Chamber. We have done it repeatedly. It is a sign of good faith from both sides that negotiations will continue in earnest and both sides are committed to reaching an outcome. Earlier this year, the Senate moved forward on a vehicle--a legislative vehicle--for what became the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act. In fact, we went through the same process when the Senate moved to proceed to the legislative vehicle for what ultimately became the United States Innovation and Competition Act. In that legislation, our Senate committees were working on various bills that all had to do with American innovation and competition. The Commerce Committee reported out the Endless Frontier Act. The Foreign Relations Committee reported out the Strategic Competition Act. And the Homeland Security Committee reported out additional pieces of legislation. We put them together once we voted to proceed to debate on the topic. The same thing--the very same thing is happening on the bipartisan infrastructure bill. I understand that both sides are working very hard to turn the bipartisan infrastructure framework into final legislation, and they will continue to have more time to debate, amend, and perfect the bill once the Senate votes to take up this crucial issue. But they have been working on this bipartisan framework for more than a month already, and it is time to begin the debate. We must make significant progress on both the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the budget resolution before the end of the work period. There is no reason we can't get the ball rolling this week on both elements of the Senate's infrastructure agenda.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 195.

Mr. SCHUMER

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and the distinguished Republican leader, Mr. McConnell, I send to the desk a resolution authorizing representation by the Senate Legal Counsel and ask for its immediate consideration. Mr. President, this resolution concerns a lawsuit filed in Federal court in Florida that names a range of local, State, and Federal defendants, including Senator Rubio. Plaintiff's sole allegation against Senator Rubio is that he did not respond to plaintiff's request to introduce legislation that plaintiff urges him to present to Congress. Plaintiff's claims against the Senator based on this allegation are subject to dismissal on jurisdictional grounds and for failure to state a claim. This resolution would authorize the Senate Legal Counsel to represent Senator Rubio in order to seek dismissal of the claims against him.