US Senate LIVE: High-Stakes Confirmation Vote on Trump’s DNI Pick Jay Clayton

[0:00] In communist governments, any belief system that places moral authority and fosters independent [0:09] communities beyond government control is a challenge to the regime of the power. [0:19] This senator does not see how preaching the love of Jesus Christ is a threat to any communist [0:25] government, but they do. [0:29] That is why the Chinese Communist Party seeks to control religion through state-run religious [0:41] organizations. [0:44] Today, authorities suppress independent churches and target any individuals who worship outside [0:53] of the state-sanctioned controlled institutions. [0:58] Many Christians seeking to practice their faith free of government control have to fear their [1:04] identity being discovered and then facing punishment or even imprisonment. [1:14] This is precisely what happened to Pastor Jin. [1:18] His only offense was leading an independent Christian congregation and exercising his fundamental [1:26] freedom to worship without Chinese government interference. [1:33] In November of 2025, the Senate passed a bipartisan resolution that condemned the Chinese Communist [1:41] Party's persecution of religious groups, including Pastor Jin and the leaders of the Zion Church. [1:51] In March of this year, I joined a congressional letter to President Trump asking that he advocate [1:59] for Pastor Jin's release in a meeting that he recently had with the Chinese president. [2:08] Today, we can celebrate that Pastor Jin is finally free, but our work is not finished. [2:17] We must continue to speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves and stand firmly in defense of religious freedom. [2:28] Along this same line, not in China, but someplace in Africa, I heard yesterday in my attendance at the 105th Cedar Falls, Iowa Bible Conference, [2:42] that there has been a pastor in Africa that has been kidnapped and they wanted us to pray for him and hopefully our government is helping to some extent to free him as well. [2:59] I don't know his name. They didn't want to give out the name, but this stuff that happens in China, around the world, you can't understand how it can happen because it seems to me the peaceful approach of Christians, [3:15] is something that shouldn't be challenged or feared by any type of government, any place on this globe. [3:22] I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. [3:26] We'll call the roll. [3:27] Ms. Officer Brooks. [3:29] I ask unanimous consent the quorum call be suspended. [8:10] Without objection. [8:11] Mr. President, I move to proceed to calendar number 436, S-4784. [8:16] Motion to proceed to calendar number 436, S-4784, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities in the Department of Defense and so forth and further purposes. [8:30] Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider executive calendar number 6, S-Res 817. [8:38] Questions on the motion? [8:39] All in favor say aye. [8:41] Aye. [8:44] All opposed say no. [8:45] The ayes appear to have it. [8:46] The ayes do have it. [8:47] Motion is agreed to. [8:48] Clerk will report the executive resolution. [8:52] Executive calendar number 6, S-Res 817, executive resolution authorizing the en bloc consideration in executive session of certain nominations on the executive calendar. [9:02] Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk. [9:05] Clerk will report. [9:06] Cloture motion. [9:08] We, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the Senate, do hereby move to bring to a closed debate on executive calendar number 6, S-Res 817, [9:18] an executive resolution authorizing the en bloc consideration in executive session of certain nominations on the executive calendar signed by 17 senators as follows. [9:27] President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the names be waived. [9:30] Objection. [9:31] And I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume legislative session. [9:34] Objection. [9:36] Mr. President, this afternoon, we're going to move on the nomination of Jay Clayton to be a director of national intelligence. [9:45] Amid a heightened threat environment, having a proven leader in this role is especially important. [9:51] And Jay Clayton fits this mold. [9:53] Mr. President, during the first Trump administration, Jay Clayton served as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission for almost four years. [10:00] And under his leadership, the SEC went after financial crimes and fraud and aimed to protect Main Street investors. [10:09] He also worked with the intelligence community on national security issues that intersected with our financial system. [10:15] That included efforts to address Chinese influence and exploitation of our markets. [10:20] And, of course, he worked to maintain economic stability after the onset of the pandemic as well. [10:26] So, Mr. President, with that record, it's no wonder that President Trump wanted Jay Clayton to serve in his second administration. [10:33] This time as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, an important law enforcement post. [10:39] And for the past year and a half in that role, Mr. Clayton has been busy. [10:44] He's supervised the prosecution of terrorists and the drafting of the indictment against Nicolas Maduro on drug trafficking and terrorism charges. [10:51] And now President Trump has nominated him for a Cabinet post leading our nation's intelligence community. [10:56] Mr. President, Jay Clayton's record inspires confidence in the type of DNI that he will be. [11:02] And Democrats have previously recognized his abilities. [11:06] He's earned bipartisan support in the past. [11:09] The Democrat Vice Chair of the Intelligence Committee even said after Mr. Clayton was nominated for this position, [11:14] and I quote, [11:17] I have known and respected Jay Clayton for many years and believe he is a capable public servant, end quote. [11:23] That again, Mr. President, from the Democrat Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee. [11:28] So one might think that we'd be seeing some bipartisanship from Democrats on this nominee. [11:34] The Democrats are playing the same partisan games with this qualified nominee as they have for so many of President Trump's picks. [11:44] And Mr. President, it's a funny thing because Democrats have made no secret of their disdain for current acting director of intelligence, national intelligence, I should say. [11:55] In fact, Democrats were so worked up over the President's temporary choice for this position, [12:01] they allowed our nation's most important counterterrorism tool to go dark for the first time ever. [12:08] That's right. [12:10] Now Democrats have the opportunity to replace that acting official, [12:14] but they're in no apparent rush to confirm a permanent director of national intelligence. [12:19] They've opposed his nomination and committee. [12:22] They've delayed things here on the floor, [12:25] and I don't expect we'll see a lot of Democrat support for him in the final roll call. [12:31] It doesn't matter how qualified the nominee, Mr. President, or even that Democrats supposedly want to see the current acting director replaced. [12:43] For our colleagues across the aisle, everything, everything takes a backseat to their political games. [12:51] Well, I've run out of words, Mr. President. It's shameful. [12:56] Mr. President, we're going to move forward with the Clayton nomination this week. [13:00] We will have a permanent director of national intelligence in place shortly, [13:06] and I hope this will encourage my colleagues to stop blocking the reauthorization of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. [13:17] Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum. [13:20] There's also Brooks. [13:23] We are. Without objection. [19:21] Mr. President, you often wonder if speeches that you give on the floor of the Senate are heard by anyone. [19:27] Most of us have spent some time working with staff to prepare remarks, to state a position, to make a plea, [19:36] and you wonder if anyone is listening. [19:39] Well, every once in a while something happens which renews your faith that perhaps there are people listening who can make a difference. [19:46] Late last week, I had an amazing visit in my office upstairs here in the capital. [19:53] From China, Pastor Ezra Jin Mingri. [19:57] He had been jailed for 266 days in a Chinese prison. [20:03] His crime, he was operating a church, a Christian church, and at least eight of his congregants remained imprisoned. [20:12] Pastor Jin's daughter, Grace, and his seven-week-old grandson, also named Ezra, joined our meeting upstairs as well. [20:22] Grace had worked tirelessly to draw attention to her father's case, and it was a joy to see them reunited. [20:31] In our meeting, Pastor Jin told me that his prison conditions were very stark. [20:37] While in jail in China, he was cut off from communications with his family, and his lawyers were harassed and threatened as well. [20:44] President Trump raised the case with Chinese President Xi, and here in the Senate, Senator Cruz and I, on a bipartisan basis, [20:54] passed a resolution calling for his release and the release of several other political prisoners in China. [21:00] I welcome the Chinese government's release of Pastor Jin, and call on them to release the remaining eight members of his church as well, [21:10] as the following that I'm about to mention in my Senate resolution. [21:14] Dr. Gulshan Abbas, Jimmy Lei, Zhao Quanfu, and his wife, Pang Yu, and Epkar Asad. [21:24] All of these people are noted on this poster, which I presented on the floor several weeks ago. [21:31] Here's Pastor Jin, with a smile on his face, the same thing in my office upstairs, with his beautiful daughter and grandson. [21:39] I wish the Chinese government would release the remaining individuals here that we have spotlighted in this presentation. [21:51] Dr. Abbas, Jimmy Lei, Zhao Quanfu, and Pang Yu, and Epkar Asad. [21:58] This would be a welcome move before President Xi's visit in September, as there is simply no reason to fear these people who have done nothing, [22:07] but otherwise exercise peaceful freedom of religion and expression. [22:13] And now, on a separate note, Mr. President. [22:17] Last week, the Senate Appropriations Committee held a hearing on President Trump's supplemental request to pay for the war in Iran. [22:27] At the hearing, I asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to give us the latest accounting of the financial cost of this war. [22:36] The Secretary estimated that it would cost $37.5 billion. [22:40] I might remind those who are following this statement, [22:45] we're in the fifth month of the first year of this war in Iran. [22:49] It cost, so far, at least $37.5 billion. [22:53] I don't know how the Secretary arrived at that figure, [22:58] especially considering the fact that it does not include the cost of repairing heavily damaged U.S. bases in the Middle East, [23:06] which have been attacked by Iran. [23:09] All of this to say nothing of the cost to our service members, [23:13] who shoulder the burden of lengthy deployments, [23:16] or most importantly of the 18 brave, brave Americans who have been tragically killed in Iran. [23:23] We owe them and their families the debt of gratitude that can never be repaid. [23:29] So now the White House is coming to Congress with an $88 billion, [23:34] that's right, $88 billion requests for more money for the war in Iran and a few other items. [23:40] For those of you watching at home who don't follow the ins and outs of Congress, [23:45] this is a funding request outside the normal annual government funding process. [23:51] This is usually reserved for serious emergencies and unexpected costs. [23:56] This is despite the fact that the administration already has more than $75 million in unspent money for the Pentagon. [24:04] $75 million unspent and they're coming and ask us for another $88 billion. [24:10] They're leaving a lot of change on the dresser. [24:13] Moreover, if the funding is needed for the war in Iran, the administration at a minimum owes Congress and the American people a plan to end this self-inflicted mess. [24:23] Make no mistake, Iran is a troubling actor that has for decades threatened America and allied interests. [24:31] It terribly represses its own people and has not given up on its pursuit of a nuclear weapon. [24:36] But President Trump's war with Iran has not resolved either of these issues. [24:44] All it has done is draw us into a messy foreign entanglement with no clear endgame. [24:50] And now a growing number of American troops have been killed and wounded. [24:55] Allies in the region are facing repeated missile attacks. [24:59] The global economy has been held hostage by Iran's totally, predictably stranglehold of the Strait of Hormuz. [25:07] So before this Congress provides billions of dollars more, there are some questions that need to be answered. [25:14] And I might add, I want to return, we've lost 18 brave servicemen. [25:19] They can obviously never be replaced. [25:21] And we owe them a debt of gratitude for their service to our nation. [25:26] But the administration is virtually silent with the number of troops, our troops, who've been wounded in this war with Iran. [25:34] Some very seriously wounded. [25:36] The numbers are over 400, 400 casualties, along with the 18 who've given their lives. [25:43] This is a costly venture of a war which the President initiated without going to the American people, [25:50] or to Congress as required by the Constitution, or to our allies, or to the public at large. [25:56] The President did this on his own, believing he would be quick and over. [26:01] We're learning again what we've learned so many times in the recent past. [26:05] It is far easier to start a war than it is to end one. [26:09] And we're seeing that to this day. [26:11] Mr. President, on another unrelated topic. [26:14] Well, it is related, but it's different. [26:17] The war in Ukraine has turned a good corner for us. [26:21] With the real possibility for the first time in over four years that Russia will be finally forced to negotiate. [26:29] I was at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey earlier this month with several colleagues, [26:35] including Senator Shaheen, Kunz, the late Lindsey Graham, and Rounds, and the message was clear. [26:43] Momentum is with Ukraine, and this is the time for American and European support to step up. [26:49] But amid this shift, Ukraine desperately needs more air defenses to protect civilians from the brutal Russian attacks. [26:56] Unfortunately, too many of these air defenses have been needed in the Gulf for President Trump's other war in Iran. [27:05] And Ukraine still has not received $400 million we appropriated in the last year's appropriation bill, [27:13] signed into law by the President. [27:15] They're still waiting on it for air defense. [27:18] I asked Secretary Hegseth why the Pentagon is taking so long to send this critical aid to Ukraine. [27:25] He didn't have a good answer. [27:27] President Trump needs to send the $400 million funds immediately. [27:33] They're desperately needed in Ukraine to stop the Russian advances. [27:37] Doing so will help bring President Putin to the negotiating table. [27:41] And Secretary Hegseth also needs to move $200 million that we appropriate, and the President signed into law, [27:49] for the Baltic Security Initiative to help front-line NATO allies prepare for Russian intimidation and retaliation. [27:58] My last point is this. [28:00] It's overdue for this chamber to act on Russia and Ukraine, and legislation which Lindsey Graham was passionate about. [28:08] The last time I met with him, just three or four days before he passed away, he brought this issue up. [28:15] This idea of sanctions against Iran. [28:17] I think that, pardon me, sanctions against Russia. [28:21] I think it is a valuable investment of our time, and I'm happy to co-sponsor this measure. [28:26] Senator Graham understood the timeliness of this legislation to help force Russians to negotiate. [28:32] He worked hard to find agreement on this bill, months and months of work with Senator Blumenthal and others, [28:39] Senator Shaheen included. [28:40] I know Majority Leader cares about helping Ukraine, so I'm glad the bill is set to move this week, [28:47] and look forward to its passage. [28:49] It is truly a tribute to the kind of work which Lindsey Graham made in his career in the United States Senate, [28:55] and makes a difference in the world. [28:57] Mr. President, I yield the floor. [28:59] The Senator from North Carolina. [1:03:10] I ask unanimous consent to waive the mandatory quorum call with respect to the Clayton nomination. [1:03:14] Without objection. [1:03:15] The Democratic Leader. [1:21:14] Madam President, Trump going to Michigan today to tout his economic record is like an arsonist, [1:21:21] returning to the scene of the crime and asking for a pat on the back. [1:21:24] Trump has said over and over again that affordability is a made-up word. [1:21:29] He has said American skyrocketing costs are nothing but a hoax. [1:21:34] Hey Donald, ask any Michigander whether they think the higher costs that are crushing them are a hoax. [1:21:41] Michiganders and Americans know that rising costs are all too real, [1:21:48] and they know who's to blame, Donald Trump and the GOP. [1:21:52] Over and over again they have done things that have made it more expensive to live in Michigan. [1:21:59] If Trump wants to tout his economic record in Michigan, so be it. [1:22:04] Trump can brag about how Michiganders are forking over $4.23 for a gallon of gas on a car economy [1:22:12] because of his failed war with Iran. [1:22:15] Trump can take credit for the massive tariff tax he's forcing Michiganders to pay [1:22:21] because of the whopping 50% tariff he just slipped on Canada, the state's northern border. [1:22:28] The Michigan and Canadian economies are intertwined. [1:22:31] How stupid to impose a tariff when the two economies depend on each other. [1:22:37] Or maybe Trump wants to boast to Michigan's factory workers about the 75,000 American manufacturing jobs he has lost in his second term. [1:22:48] Everywhere you look, the Michigan economy is in shambles because of Donald Trump and his actions. [1:22:57] So that's your record, Donald. Go ahead and own it. [1:23:01] Trump thinks he's in for a warm reception in Michigan. [1:23:04] He's in for a reckoning on corruption. [1:23:09] The only people who think America's getting more affordable are Donald Trump and his cronies [1:23:13] as they cash in on unprecedented corruption. [1:23:16] We see a new con come out of the Trump administration almost every day. [1:23:20] But the scheme's always the same. Americans pay. Trump profits. [1:23:26] Last week, I announced Senate Democrats' new effort to stop Trump from turning his presidency into his personal ATM. [1:23:33] We released a report detailing how the Trump family has defrauded the American people [1:23:39] to the tune of more than $4 billion in the past 18 months. [1:23:43] We also saw Republicans vote against my legislation to prevent Trump from wasting further taxpayer dollars on upgrades [1:23:50] for his $400 million luxury jet. [1:23:54] Our work to expose and stop Trump's grift continues this week. [1:24:00] In the coming days, I plan to announce legislation, new legislation, [1:24:03] to clean up the swamp Trump promised to drain a decade ago. [1:24:07] We're unmasking the people who are swindling the American people, [1:24:12] holding their feet to the fire and advancing reforms to stop further corruption in the future. [1:24:17] The presidency isn't a product to sell, a commodity to trade, or a grift to run, [1:24:24] no matter how hard Donald Trump tries. [1:24:27] Every American who's been forced to pay more this last year and a half [1:24:34] is paying for Trump's profit margin. [1:24:36] We're done picking up his tab. [1:24:38] On the Save Act, it's a new week in Washington, but one thing remains the same. [1:24:44] The Save Act is dead on arrival in the Senate. [1:24:47] Trump keeps tiring himself out, running the same play. [1:24:51] Trump knows he can't defend Republicans' abysmal record, his abysmal record, [1:24:57] so he whines for the GOP to pass the Save Act to disenfranchise voters [1:25:01] who want to hold him accountable in November. [1:25:04] Give it up, Donald. [1:25:05] The Save Act ain't gonna happen. [1:25:07] The courts have rejected the Save Act. [1:25:10] Congress rejected the Save Act. [1:25:12] Even members of Trump's own party have rejected the Save Act. [1:25:16] Republican problems aren't gonna go away until Trump realizes how futile [1:25:21] this brazen effort to rig our elections really is. [1:25:26] Instead, Trump has said publicly, quote, [1:25:28] Republicans have to pass Save, otherwise we're gonna have a shutdown in November. [1:25:32] That's Trump. [1:25:33] He keeps threatening a shutdown. [1:25:35] Are Republicans listening? [1:25:38] Your president is threatening to shut down the government. [1:25:40] It's not Democrats doing that. [1:25:42] Donald, I keep trying to remind you the last time you bragged about shutting down the government, [1:25:49] back when Nancy and Pelosi were in charge then, didn't go so well for you, did you? [1:25:55] And it definitely won't now. [1:25:57] Republicans can either drop this frivolous and vicious effort to pass the Save Act, [1:26:02] or watch Democrats stop it dead in its tracks. [1:26:05] Yield the floor. [1:26:06] Note the absence of a quorum. [1:26:08] Ms. Ulster-Brooks. [1:26:15] The senator from Louisiana. [2:25:31] Without objection. [2:25:35] Me too. [2:25:51] The clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. [2:26:02] Cloture motion. [2:26:03] We, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 22 of the Standing [2:26:07] Rules of the Senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of Walter [2:26:11] Clayton of New York to be Director of National Intelligence, signed by 17 senators. [2:26:16] Under the previous order, the mandatory quorum call under Rule 22 has been waived. [2:26:23] The question is, is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the nomination of Walter Clayton [2:26:29] of New York to be Director of National Intelligence shall be brought to a close. [2:26:35] The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. [2:26:38] The clerk will call the roll. [2:26:39] Ms. Ulster-Brooks. [2:26:40] Mr. Armstrong. [2:26:41] Ms. Baldwin. [2:26:42] Mr. Banks. [2:26:43] Mr. Barrasso. [2:26:44] Mr. Bennett. [2:26:45] Mrs. Blackburn. [2:26:46] Mr. Blumenthal. [2:26:47] Ms. Blunt-Rochester. [2:26:48] Mr. Booker. [2:26:49] Mr. Bozeman. [2:26:50] Mrs. Britt. [2:26:51] Mr. Bud. [2:27:14] Ms. Cantwell. [2:27:24] Ms. Capito. [2:27:34] Ms. Collins. [2:28:11] Mr. Coons. [2:28:13] Mr. Cornyn. [2:28:14] Ms. Cortez Masto. [2:28:17] Mr. Cotton. [2:28:34] Mr. Kramer. [2:28:35] Mr. Crapo. [2:28:36] Mr. Cruz. [2:28:38] Mr. Curtis. [2:28:39] Mr. Daines. [2:28:40] Ms. Duckworth. [2:28:43] Mr. Durbin. [2:28:44] Ms. Ernst. [2:28:47] Mr. Fetterman. [2:29:01] Mr. Fetterman. [2:29:02] Mrs. Fetterman. [2:29:03] Mrs. Fisher. [2:29:04] Mr. Gallego. [2:29:07] Mrs. Gillibrand. [2:29:09] Ms. Graham. [2:29:10] Mr. Grassley. [2:29:50] Mr. Hagerty. [2:29:51] Ms. Hasson. [2:29:52] Mr. Hawley. [2:29:53] Mr. Heinrich. [2:29:54] Mr. Hickenlooper. [2:29:55] Ms. Hirono. [2:29:56] Mr. Hoven. [2:29:57] Mr. Husted. [2:29:58] Mrs. Hyde-Smith. [2:30:00] Mr. Johnson. [2:30:01] Mr. Justice. [2:30:02] Mr. Cain. [2:30:07] Mr. Kelly. [2:30:09] Mr. Kennedy. [2:30:11] Mr. Kim. [2:30:12] Mr. King. [2:30:14] Ms. Klobuchar. [2:30:16] Mr. Lankford. [2:30:21] Mr. Lee. [2:30:22] Mr. Lujan. [2:30:23] Ms. Lummis. [2:30:26] Mr. Markie. [2:30:27] Mr. Marshall. [2:30:28] Mr. Alexander. [2:30:30] Mr. Hogan. [2:30:33] Mr. Bailey. [2:30:35] Mr. Hackerdy. [2:30:41] Mr. Kam. [2:30:42] Mr. Kham. [2:30:43] Mr. King. [2:30:44] Mr. Klobuchar. [2:30:45] Mr. Lankford. [2:30:46] Mr. Lee. [2:30:47] Mr. Lujan. [2:30:48] Ms. Lummis. [2:30:50] Mr. Markey. [2:30:52] Herschel, Mr. McConnell, Mr. McCormick, Mr. Merkley, Mrs. Moody, Mr. Moran, Mr. Moreno, [2:31:05] Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Murphy, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Ossoff, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Paul, Mr. Peters, [2:31:17] Mr. Reed, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Risch, Ms. Rosen, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Schatz, Mr. Schiff, [2:31:32] Mr. Schmidt, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mrs. Shaheen, [2:31:41] Mr. Sheehy, Ms. Slotkin, Ms. Smith, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Thune, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Tuberville, Mr. [2:31:49] Van Hollen, Mr. Warner, Mr. Warnock, Ms. Warren, Mr. Welch, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Wicker, Mr. [2:31:59] Wyden, Mr. Young. [2:32:03] Senators voting in the affirmative. Britt, Cassidy, Crapo, Graham, Hagerty, [2:38:47] Husted, Lee, Moreno, Risch, Schmidt, Sullivan, Tuberville. Senators voting in the negative. [2:38:59] Blunt Rochester, Duckworth, Gallego, Kane, Lujan, Reed, Rosen, Slotkin, Van Hollen. [2:39:09] Mr. Ossoff, Mr. Ossoff, no. Mr. Wyden, Mr. Wyden, no. Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Kennedy, aye. [2:39:44] Mr. Rounds, Mr. Rounds, aye. Mr. Marshall, Mr. Marshall, aye. Mrs. Capito, Mrs. Capito, aye. [2:42:01] Mrs. Fisher, Mrs. Fisher, aye. Ms. Hassan, Ms. Hassan, no. Mr. Hawley, Mr. Hawley, aye. [2:42:59] Mr. Lankford, Mr. Lankford, aye. Ms. Ernst, Ms. Ernst, aye. Ms. Hirono, Ms. Hirono, no. [2:45:31] Mr. Wicker, Mr. Wicker, aye. Mr. Budd, Mr. Budd, aye. Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Whitehouse, no. [2:46:30] Mrs. Blackburn, Mrs. Blackburn, aye. Mr. Paul, Mr. Paul, aye. Mr. Grassley, Mr. Grassley, aye. [2:46:52] Mr. Kim, Mr. Kim, no. Mr. Warnock, Mr. Warnock, no. Mr. Sanders, Mr. Sanders, no. [2:48:29] Mr. Danes, Mr. Danes, aye. Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Barrasso, aye. [2:50:07] Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Murray, no. Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Cornyn, aye. Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cotton, aye. [2:50:30] Mr. Durbin, Mr. Durbin, no. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Johnson, aye. Mr. Murphy, Mr. Murphy, no. [2:51:27] Mr. Scott, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, aye. [2:51:32] Mr. Collins, Mr. Collins, aye. Mr. Scott, Mr. Scott of Florida, aye. Mr. Justice, Mr. Justice, aye. [2:52:25] Mr. Warner, Mr. Warner, no. Mrs. Moody, Mrs. Moody, aye. Mr. Thune, Mr. Thune, aye. [2:52:43] Mr. Schatz, no. Ms. Baldwin, Ms. Baldwin, no. Mrs. Hyde-Smith, Mrs. Hyde-Smith, aye. [2:53:19] Mr. Tillis, Mr. Tillis, aye. Mr. Booker, Mr. Booker, no. Mr. Coons, Mr. Coons, no. [2:54:55] Mr. Sheehy, Mr. Sheehy, aye. Mr. Banks, Mr. Banks, aye. [2:55:17] Mr. Curtis, Mr. Curtis, aye. Mr. Padilla, Mr. Padilla, no. Mr. Armstrong, Mr. Armstrong, aye. [2:55:59] Mr. Kramer, Mr. Kramer, aye. Ms. Lamas, Ms. Lamas, aye. Mr. Markley, Mr. Markley, no. [2:58:02] Mr. Heinrich, Mr. Heinrich, no. Mr. Moran, aye. Mr. Hoven, Mr. Hoven, aye. [2:59:22] Ms. Smith, Ms. Smith, no. Ms. Warren, Ms. Warren, no. Mr. King, Mr. King, no. [3:03:18] Ms. Cortez Masto, Ms. Cortez Masto, no. Mr. Bennett, Mr. Bennett, no. [3:04:23] Ms. Murkowski, Ms. Murkowski, aye. Mr. Coons, Mr. Coons, no. [3:04:31] Ms. Alsobrooks, Ms. Alsobrooks, no. Mr. Schiff, Mr. Schiff, no. Mr. Markey, Mr. Markey, no. [3:06:01] Mr. Hickenlooper, Mr. Hickenlooper, no. Ms. Klobuchar, Ms. Klobuchar, no. [3:07:06] Mr. McCormick, Mr. McCormick, aye. Mr. Young, Mr. Young, aye. [3:07:24] Mr. Schumer, Mr. Schumer, no. Mr. Cruz, Mr. Cruz, aye. Mr. Fetterman, Mr. Fetterman, no. [3:11:31] Ms. Cantwell, Ms. Cantwell, no. Mr. Bozeman, Mr. Bozeman, aye. [3:12:13] Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Blumenthal, no. Mrs. Shaheen, Mrs. Shaheen, no. [3:13:59] On this vote, the yeas are 51, the nays are 43. The motion is agreed to. [3:19:38] The clerk will report the nomination. [3:19:43] Nomination, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Walter Clayton of New York, to be a director. [3:20:05] Mr. President. [3:20:06] I recognize the senator from Ohio. [3:20:09] Thank you, Mr. President. I rise today in support of H.R. 7008, a bill that contains two common-sense reforms. [3:20:16] These are pretty easy. [3:20:18] Banning members of Congress from purchasing stocks while in office and requiring a photo ID to vote. [3:20:24] People have said that they want us to do this. [3:20:28] I've heard it for years around here. [3:20:30] It hasn't happened. [3:20:32] Now it's time to happen. [3:20:33] Tonight we have an opportunity to do it. [3:20:36] Both policies are overwhelmingly supported by Americans. [3:20:41] We want to listen to the American people. [3:20:43] Do these two things. [3:20:44] 86% of Americans support banning members of Congress from purchasing stocks while in office [3:20:49] and 83% of Americans support showing a photo ID to vote. [3:20:55] It has been seven days since I last stood in this chamber to speak about photo ID, [3:21:01] and I'm back to do it again because it's important policy. [3:21:04] I want to reiterate a point. [3:21:06] Photo ID doesn't just protect the integrity of our elections. [3:21:09] It makes our elections work better. [3:21:12] If election integrity isn't reason enough to support photo ID, [3:21:16] consider what it would mean to election administration. [3:21:19] And we've seen this in states like California where it took them over a week to count votes in recent elections. [3:21:29] Elections officials shouldn't be spending time day after day after day going through ballots [3:21:37] to see if this signature matches this signature. [3:21:41] It takes too long. [3:21:43] It's an ineffective way of determining the identification of an individual [3:21:48] when many, many states, 36 of them, have figured out a very efficient way to do this. [3:21:53] It's called photo ID. [3:21:56] It's something that everyone has. [3:21:57] It's an efficient way to do it. [3:21:59] It doesn't drag out the process. [3:22:01] It doesn't force elections officials to become handwriting experts to figure it out. [3:22:06] I can't believe, I mean, we used to do this in the 1800s before we had methods of determining someone's identity. [3:22:16] You had to rely on a signature. [3:22:19] But this is 2026 for crying out loud. [3:22:23] Everyone has a photo ID. [3:22:24] It's an easy way to do it. [3:22:26] It's far simpler. [3:22:27] It'll make our elections run more simply and effectively. [3:22:30] Americans use a photo ID every single day. [3:22:33] There's no reason they can't use it to vote. [3:22:36] As a matter of fact, in Ohio, we did this. [3:22:40] We've had photo ID for years. [3:22:41] We had a mandate in a recent presidential election that used a photo ID. [3:22:45] It didn't suppress the vote. [3:22:46] Actually, we had one of the highest voter turnouts in the history of our state. [3:22:50] Don't give me the baloney that somehow this is going to discriminate against somebody [3:22:54] and tell them and make it harder for them to vote. [3:22:57] We have evidence to the contrary. [3:23:00] We know photo ID is common sense. [3:23:02] Now, let's move on to the other provision of this bill, [3:23:04] legislation that includes stopping insider trading. [3:23:08] It's called the Stop Insider Trading Act. [3:23:10] It's another common sense reform that's long overdue in Washington. [3:23:15] People have been talking about it for years, did nothing about it. [3:23:18] Tonight, we're trying to do something about it. [3:23:20] The bill prohibits members of Congress, their spouses, and their dependent children [3:23:24] from purchasing new securities in publicly traded companies [3:23:27] or similar financial instruments while they serve in Congress. [3:23:32] It requires at least seven days public notice before anyone can sell any of these securities [3:23:39] and imposes significant legal and financial penalties for violators. [3:23:43] These safeguards ensure lawmakers and their families cannot use non-public information [3:23:49] to enrich themselves, as we know has gone on in this town for many years [3:23:56] at the expense of the American people. [3:24:00] But nobody did anything about it. [3:24:01] Tonight, we have a chance to do something about it. [3:24:03] I want to commend one of our colleagues, Senator Pete Ricketts, from Nebraska. [3:24:09] Pete has led on the Senate side of this conversation on banning the insider trading. [3:24:16] Senator Ricketts deserves credit for all of his work, [3:24:20] and I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of his Senate version of the legislation [3:24:24] and I urge my colleagues to support its swift passage. [3:24:28] Mr. President, I yield the floor. [3:24:40] I recognize the senator from Florida. [3:24:42] Thank you, Mr. President, and I appreciate the words of my colleague, [3:24:47] Senator Husted, who was sworn in on the same day as I was, [3:24:50] and we both hold very dear our responsibilities [3:24:53] that our constituents have trusted us with here in Washington. [3:24:58] And they did not send us up here to just listen to concerns. [3:25:02] They didn't send us up here to just debate about. [3:25:06] They want action. [3:25:07] And that's why I'm so proud to stand here today, [3:25:11] and in a moment I'm going to ask unanimous consent [3:25:13] for two very clear, very specific pieces of legislation [3:25:19] that have already been voted on on the House in a bipartisan way. [3:25:23] Voter ID and keeping members of Congress from purchasing stocks while in office. [3:25:28] Very simple. [3:25:30] It should pass here, and I dare someone to object. [3:25:35] Because the people of this country are tired of us talking about it, [3:25:39] they are time for us, it is time for us to do something. [3:25:43] These are two issues that I care very deeply about. [3:25:46] The voter ID portion of this, [3:25:48] I was an original co-sponsor of the Save America Act, [3:25:52] and I've introduced similar legislation to ban members from stock trading [3:25:55] through my Restore Trust in Congress Act, which is bipartisan. [3:26:01] These truly should be non-debatable, bipartisan issues [3:26:05] that we can all agree on. [3:26:08] The fact is, 83% of Americans support voter ID laws. [3:26:13] The very people that the Democrats claim will be harmed by voter ID, [3:26:18] the very people are the ones that support this. [3:26:22] 76% of black Americans, 82% of Hispanic Americans support voter ID. [3:26:29] An overwhelming majority of Americans support voter ID of all parties. [3:26:36] 86, excuse me, 88% of Democrats, 81% of independents support us banning members of Congress from trading stocks. [3:26:48] So I want it to be very clear tonight, very obvious for anyone that's watching, [3:26:55] not only here within the Senate, but at home, [3:27:00] which party is asking their colleagues to require voter ID [3:27:05] and banning the purchasing of stocks while in office. [3:27:09] I want to go back to voter ID for just a moment [3:27:13] because I know, Senator Husted, this has been very important to you. [3:27:17] Our great American experiment hinges on the sanctity and integrity of our elections. [3:27:22] And I think we need to ask ourselves, [3:27:23] why is it that so many Democratic states refuse to comply with the law now [3:27:28] and are objecting for us to require voter ID? [3:27:31] Why? [3:27:34] What could be the reason? [3:27:36] We have to fiercely safeguard our democracy, [3:27:39] ensuring that only Americans are allowed to participate in American elections. [3:27:43] The Save America Act upholds the rule of law, [3:27:47] makes sure there are stronger protections in place across the country [3:27:49] to ensure that only citizens can participate in one of the privileges of being a citizen, [3:27:54] and that is voting in our election. [3:27:57] Everyone should be outraged by what we just uncovered in New Jersey, [3:28:01] where thousands of non-citizens were registered to vote through the state's motor vehicle system. [3:28:06] So after telling us time and time and time and time again [3:28:10] that that could never happen and does not happen, [3:28:13] oh my goodness, it's happening. [3:28:15] Surprise, surprise. [3:28:18] And they'll still come here to the floor and object to voter ID [3:28:22] after blaming thousands of individuals on the voter rolls as a software error. [3:28:28] We also have to make sure that we are mindful of the fact [3:28:33] that the Democratic Socialists of America have just said in their platform [3:28:38] they want non-citizens voting. [3:28:41] They put it right out there in their platform. [3:28:44] So people ask, why now? [3:28:45] Why do we need voter ID now? [3:28:47] Maybe because we're uncovering thousands of people on voter rolls [3:28:53] that shouldn't be on voter rolls, [3:28:54] and maybe it's because you have an entire segment of the Democratic Party [3:28:58] pushing for non-citizen voting. [3:29:02] That's why now. [3:29:05] Secure elections strengthen democracy. [3:29:08] They increase participation. [3:29:10] Ben Franklin famously replied to a bystander after the Constitutional Convention [3:29:14] that we have a republic if we can keep it. [3:29:19] This is how we keep it. [3:29:24] The House passed this in a bipartisan way. [3:29:27] There is absolutely no reason that we should not pass this [3:29:32] by unanimous consent in the Senate. [3:29:35] I'm going to keep fighting to bringing more accountability to our bosses, [3:29:38] the people who are demanding this. [3:29:42] And if somebody objects to this, I wonder whose interest they're fighting for. [3:29:49] We cannot go back to our states without getting this done for them. [3:29:53] We have to restore accountability in Washington. [3:29:56] We have to show the people back home we are working in their interest. [3:30:01] So, Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding Rule 22, [3:30:08] I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 7008, [3:30:14] which was received from the House. [3:30:17] Further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, [3:30:20] and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. [3:30:27] Reserving the right to object. [3:30:29] Senator, Chair recognized Senator from California. [3:30:31] Thank you, Mr. President. [3:30:33] President, I'd like to make a few things very clear. [3:30:36] And I hope that we can actually come to a bipartisan agreement on the issue that the title of the bill [3:30:46] says this bill is about. [3:30:48] Because I agree, Democrats and Republicans, independents alike, across the country are concerned. [3:30:55] To put it simply, Americans don't like the idea of their elected leaders trading individual stocks [3:31:03] while making decisions impacting those very companies and industries in their portfolios. [3:31:12] But I'm glad my colleagues, the Senator from Ohio, the Senator from Florida, [3:31:16] have laid out what this bill is truly about. [3:31:20] Now, the title of the bill maybe makes reference to insider trading. [3:31:27] But there's a lot of passion about the SAVE Act that has been shoved into this bill [3:31:32] as it's come over from the House. [3:31:36] Back to the stock trading piece. [3:31:40] This is something that we absolutely ought to be addressing. [3:31:43] But there's two obvious reasons why this bill from the Republican House [3:31:49] is nothing more than a political gimmick that was never truly intended to become law. [3:31:57] First, it exempts the president. [3:32:02] The president, president who without a doubt is the person with the single greatest ability [3:32:09] to impact a company or an entire industry on any given day. [3:32:15] It also exempts the vice president. [3:32:18] Why not include them? [3:32:20] Why should they be exempted? [3:32:21] Well, maybe it has something to do with the fact that President Donald Trump, [3:32:27] the leader of the Republican Party, [3:32:29] has made over 21,000 stock trades across eight separate accounts. [3:32:37] And if you do the math, that amounts to 85 trades per day. [3:32:41] 85 trades per day. [3:32:44] That's not normal. [3:32:45] And certainly not indicative of somebody focused on the cost of living for hardworking Americans. [3:32:52] No, Donald Trump has earned the title of trader-in-chief. [3:32:57] His portfolio is not only constantly trading stock, [3:33:02] he's reaping huge profits and trading in stocks of companies that he's actively promoting. [3:33:10] Now, if you think that sounds bad, it gets much worse. [3:33:15] We all know that President Trump owns his own social media company, right? [3:33:21] It's the platform that he uses to post his announcements on. [3:33:25] And now it's been reported that his company is planning to sell early access [3:33:31] to those presidential statements to hedge funds, to Wall Street for $100,000 a month. [3:33:41] That's right. [3:33:43] The price of inside information is now $100,000 per month to be paid to President Donald Trump. [3:33:52] Could there be any clearer sign of corruption? [3:34:01] The American people see right through this bill. [3:34:03] They see it for what it is. [3:34:07] But that's not the only reason. [3:34:11] If the House Republicans really did want this measure to become law, [3:34:17] they wouldn't have tucked the so-called SAVE Act into it. [3:34:22] Now, let me remind you, we've been debating the SAVE Act here off and on for, what, about four months now? [3:34:26] This is the same SAVE Act that, in practice, in practice, Mr. President, [3:34:34] would make it harder for eligible voters to register to vote, to stay registered to vote, [3:34:39] to actually cast their ballot by imposing these standards across all 50 states. [3:34:44] It would ban student IDs, certain tribal IDs, other forms of government ID [3:34:49] that in some states that do have their own voter ID law, [3:34:53] people count on to be able to participate in our elections. [3:34:58] The SAVE Act would also devastate mail and absentee voting across the country [3:35:04] by requiring photocopies of your ID to be included along with your mail ballot, [3:35:11] something that the Republican Lieutenant Governor of Utah has pointed out [3:35:17] would violate their state's constitution, [3:35:20] the constitution that requires an opportunity for a secret ballot, [3:35:25] the same requirement for secret ballot that states across the country also share. [3:35:30] This is the same element, by the way, that the Ohio legislature passed [3:35:35] in the form of state legislation, a similar mail voter ID requirement [3:35:40] that the Republican Governor of Ohio vetoed because it would, quote, [3:35:46] significantly burden those who choose to vote by mail. [3:35:53] But, of course, that is this bill's intent. [3:35:56] For all the talk about stock trading, and there's a way to address that, [3:35:59] I'll get to that in a minute, [3:36:00] that the true goal here is to somehow pass the SAVE Act, [3:36:06] which, by the way, [3:36:08] not only are you not going to get unanimous consent today, [3:36:12] the Republican caucus in the Senate isn't even unified around it. [3:36:17] It's come up for votes, procedural and otherwise, [3:36:19] and keeps falling short. [3:36:24] So why are we here? [3:36:24] I believe if the proponents of the stock trading measure [3:36:30] were sincere about wanting to ban stock trading by members of Congress, [3:36:36] then they'd sit down with Democrats and negotiate, or better yet, [3:36:42] let's take up and pass the measure that would achieve just that [3:36:45] that came out of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee [3:36:49] about a year ago, [3:36:50] a bipartisan measure by Senators Ossoff, [3:36:54] Merkley, [3:36:56] Peters, [3:36:56] Cortez, [3:36:57] Masto, [3:36:58] Hawley, [3:36:59] and Moreno. [3:37:04] So why don't we try to do that? [3:37:08] Mr. President, [3:37:09] I ask that the Senator modify her request [3:37:12] to instead proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar Item 294, [3:37:18] S.1498, [3:37:20] that the committee reported substitute amendment be agreed to, [3:37:23] that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, [3:37:27] and that the motions to reconsider be considered made [3:37:30] and laid upon the table. [3:37:32] Is there an objection to the modification? [3:37:36] Cherickness, [3:37:36] Senator from Ohio. [3:37:37] The Senate says don't let facts get in the way of a good story. [3:37:44] We just heard it was a good story. [3:37:46] Let's unfortunately dissect the facts that were completely inaccurate. [3:37:53] I'm on the Homeland Security Committee. [3:37:55] My colleague from California is not. [3:37:57] That was not the bill that we sponsored. [3:38:00] The bill that we sponsored was something called the Pelosi Act. [3:38:04] You're a long-time member of Congress from California, [3:38:08] who perfected the grift of insider trading, [3:38:13] who came to Congress, [3:38:15] I think when I was born, [3:38:16] when you were born, [3:38:16] and well before our colleague from California, [3:38:19] Florida was born, [3:38:21] and has somehow managed to be worth $300-plus million. [3:38:25] That's why I thought it would be an honor of her [3:38:29] that we would introduce the Pelosi Act, [3:38:32] the ability to just stop insider trading. [3:38:37] Let me just also be clear about where we stand on this bill. [3:38:42] This was a massively bipartisan bill that came out of the House. [3:38:46] Every Republican voted for it, [3:38:48] and 13 Democrats, [3:38:51] which never vote unless every Democrat is voting together, [3:38:58] voted for this bill. [3:38:59] And if not for the objection that you just heard, [3:39:04] if not for the objection from my colleague from California, [3:39:08] tomorrow the President of the United States [3:39:11] would have signed this bill into law. [3:39:14] And what would it have meant? [3:39:15] What would the President tomorrow have signed [3:39:18] had this objection not been heard? [3:39:22] No longer could members of Congress [3:39:24] or their spouses or their adult children [3:39:27] buy stocks with inside information. [3:39:32] They would not be able to sell stocks [3:39:35] without a seven-day public announcement period, [3:39:40] which would, in effect, [3:39:41] end forever the practice of insider trading [3:39:45] that has plagued this Congress. [3:39:49] We could have gotten that done. [3:39:53] I just want you to process that for a second. [3:39:56] There's commercials 99 days before the midterm elections [3:40:00] in which Democrats, including your disastrous opponent, [3:40:05] that are talking about banning insider trading, [3:40:07] that is a guy who's here for 30-plus years. [3:40:10] My colleague from California has been here for five years. [3:40:13] The three of us have been here for 18 months. [3:40:17] And we could have passed a bill tonight [3:40:20] to ban insider trading. [3:40:25] Democrats have blocked the ability to ban insider trading. [3:40:30] Those words don't even make sense to me as I say it. [3:40:35] Why? [3:40:35] It's the classic D.C. two-step. [3:40:38] Introduce an alternative measure [3:40:40] that they know will never pass [3:40:43] so they can keep the grift operation going. [3:40:48] Be able to say, [3:40:49] oh, look, we oppose that too, [3:40:51] but this doesn't go far enough. [3:40:54] My colleagues from California worked with me diligently, [3:40:57] I might add, [3:40:58] which I appreciated, [3:41:00] to ban prediction markets [3:41:02] for the entire United States Senate. [3:41:04] We got that done. [3:41:05] It didn't touch the president. [3:41:07] It didn't even touch the House of Representatives. [3:41:09] We got it done here in the United States, [3:41:10] and I'm proud of that. [3:41:12] I'm proud that now people, [3:41:13] the American people know [3:41:14] that no member of the United States Senate, [3:41:16] or their staffs, by the way, [3:41:19] can participate in the prediction markets. [3:41:21] We got that done [3:41:22] because we advanced the ball. [3:41:25] We could advance the ball tonight [3:41:27] and ban insider trading for all of Congress. [3:41:31] The House handed us a bill. [3:41:34] We say yes, [3:41:35] the president signs it tomorrow. [3:41:38] You sent the letter, [3:41:39] my colleague from California sent the letter to the CFTC, [3:41:42] talking about the downside of insider trading among Congress [3:41:45] back in January. [3:41:47] We could avoid it. [3:41:48] We don't need to send letters. [3:41:50] We could ban insider trading tonight. [3:41:54] Democrats have refused to do that. [3:41:55] Now let's talk about voter ID. [3:41:57] By the way, it's called the Save America Act. [3:41:59] Not the Save Act. [3:42:00] It's called the Save America Act. [3:42:01] We've talked about it in this chamber [3:42:03] for hundreds of hours. [3:42:07] Let's get the name right. [3:42:09] This is not the Save America Act. [3:42:12] The Save America Act, for some reason, [3:42:14] is unanimous in its opposition [3:42:16] by the Democrat members of this chamber. [3:42:19] They are totally, completely united [3:42:22] on not passing the Save America Act, [3:42:24] which says two things, by the way. [3:42:26] You have to prove you're a citizen when you register. [3:42:28] You have to show photo ID when you vote. [3:42:30] That's it. Two things. [3:42:32] This particular measure in this bill [3:42:35] is just photo ID. [3:42:39] If you get the all-you-could-eat [3:42:41] never-ending pasta bowl at Olive Garden, [3:42:44] you have to have a photo ID [3:42:46] to get another bowl of spaghetti in California. [3:42:50] So if I go to my favorite Olive Garden [3:42:52] in Los Angeles, [3:42:54] and I have my never-ending pasta bowl, [3:42:57] I have to bring my ID. [3:42:59] But if I go vote, [3:43:00] I don't have to. [3:43:02] I think most Americans would think that's insane. [3:43:04] I think most Americans would think, [3:43:07] that's nutty. [3:43:08] Why would you not have to show your ID? [3:43:11] It has nothing to do with registrations. [3:43:13] You mentioned registering to vote. [3:43:15] It has nothing to do with registering to vote. [3:43:17] It is strictly voter ID when you vote. [3:43:20] And there's not IDs that are banned. [3:43:22] That's just not true. [3:43:23] Read the bill. [3:43:24] It's simple photo ID. [3:43:25] A government-issued, I think, [3:43:26] your picture, your name, your signature, [3:43:28] pretty straightforward. [3:43:29] 80-20 issue. [3:43:30] I think 99-1 issue, honestly. [3:43:33] But they say it's an 80-20 issue. [3:43:35] They got 13 Democrats in the House [3:43:37] voted for this. [3:43:38] They knew that if the Senate took this up tonight, [3:43:41] what they did last week would become law. [3:43:45] We could have gotten voter ID in the entire country. [3:43:48] 30-plus states already have it. [3:43:50] And we could have banned insider trading. [3:43:53] Those two things could have happened tonight. [3:43:57] And the fact that they didn't [3:43:58] is a decently sad day. [3:44:00] July 27, 2026. [3:44:03] It was the day Democrats said [3:44:06] we shouldn't have voter ID in America [3:44:08] and we shouldn't ban insider trading. [3:44:10] Let me just close with a little anecdote. [3:44:15] I was asked by the government of Columbia [3:44:16] to go down and monitor their elections. [3:44:20] That was a great honor, being born in Columbia. [3:44:22] Full circle of my life. [3:44:23] Now I'm here in the Senate. [3:44:25] Imagine the government of Columbia [3:44:26] is asking me to go down there [3:44:27] and monitor the elections. [3:44:28] By the way, I knew as much as you, Mr. President, [3:44:31] about how the elections in Columbia work. [3:44:32] Actually, I said that true. [3:44:33] You probably knew more. [3:44:34] I had no idea. [3:44:36] I go down there. [3:44:36] And what do they require in Columbia, South America, [3:44:40] a country with abject poverty, [3:44:41] dramatically less well off than the United States, [3:44:46] dramatically more ethically diverse, by the way. [3:44:50] They require every citizen of Columbia [3:44:52] to carry with them a national ID card [3:44:54] that proves they're a citizen. [3:44:55] They're not even allowed into the hall [3:44:57] where the voting happens [3:44:59] without that national ID card [3:45:01] that proves they're a citizen [3:45:02] of the country of Columbia. [3:45:04] And when they go to vote, [3:45:07] they have to get their fingerprint done [3:45:09] and their signature, [3:45:11] show that ID with their photo on it [3:45:13] before they're handed a paper ballot [3:45:16] that's counted by hand. [3:45:20] And the election results, [3:45:21] after 25 million votes, [3:45:22] takes one hour. [3:45:25] The GDP of Columbia is less than the GDP of LA. [3:45:28] And yet in the mayor's race in LA, [3:45:31] three weeks after the election, [3:45:33] they're still counting votes. [3:45:36] Now, I was in the registrar's office [3:45:38] afterwards debriefing on the election. [3:45:41] We're obviously speaking in Spanish [3:45:43] because we're in Columbia. [3:45:44] And I asked them, [3:45:45] what happens if somebody walks into the hallway, [3:45:49] they want to, into the hall, [3:45:50] they want to vote, [3:45:51] and they don't have their ID card? [3:45:53] Now, I came to the U.S. when I was five. [3:45:55] My siblings make fun of me. [3:45:56] They say my Spanish is not perfect. [3:45:58] Probably isn't. [3:45:59] So when I said that, [3:46:01] the registrar turned to his assistant and said, [3:46:03] I think the senator has lost his Spanish. [3:46:07] And the assistant said, [3:46:07] what do you mean? [3:46:08] He goes, I don't understand his question. [3:46:10] So he repeated it in perfect Spanish. [3:46:14] He turned to me and he goes, [3:46:16] what a dumb question. [3:46:19] Of course we wouldn't let somebody come in and vote [3:46:22] without their ID. [3:46:24] That would be abject idiocy. [3:46:28] His words. [3:46:30] And yet, a dozen plus states [3:46:32] in the United States of America, [3:46:33] the most rich and powerful country on earth, [3:46:35] does not have voter ID. [3:46:39] We could have gotten that done tonight. [3:46:43] And for that reason, I object. [3:46:48] Objection is heard to the modification. [3:46:50] Is there an objection to the original request? [3:46:53] I object. [3:46:55] Objection is heard. [3:46:56] I recognize the senator from Florida. [3:51:28] I ask unanimous consent [3:51:29] that the Senate resume legislative session [3:51:30] and be in a period of morning business [3:51:32] with senators permitted to speak therein [3:51:34] for up to 10 minutes each. [3:51:35] Without objection. [3:51:44] I ask unanimous consent [3:51:45] that the Committee on the Judiciary [3:51:46] be discharged from further consideration [3:51:48] and the Senate now proceed to S-Res 781. [3:51:52] The clerk will report. [3:51:53] S-Res 781 commemorating June 19, 2026 [3:51:57] as Juneteenth National Independence Day [3:51:59] in recognition of June 19, 1865, [3:52:03] the date on which news of the end of slavery [3:52:05] reached the slaves in southwestern states. [3:52:10] Without objection, [3:52:10] the Committee is discharged [3:52:11] and the Senate will proceed to the measure. [3:52:14] I ask unanimous consent [3:52:15] that the resolution be agreed to, [3:52:17] the preamble be agreed to, [3:52:18] and that the motions to reconsider [3:52:19] be considered made and laid upon the table. [3:52:22] Without objection. [3:52:23] I ask unanimous consent [3:52:26] that when the Senate completes its business today, [3:52:28] it stand adjourned until 5 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28th, [3:52:31] that following the prayer and pledge, [3:52:32] the Journal of Proceedings be approved to date, [3:52:34] the morning hour be deemed expired, [3:52:36] the time for the two leaders be reserved [3:52:37] for their use later in the day, [3:52:39] morning business be closed, [3:52:40] and the Senate proceed to executive session [3:52:42] to resume consideration of the Clayton nomination. [3:52:45] Further, that the post-closure time [3:52:46] be expired at 6.30 p.m. tomorrow [3:52:49] and the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination. [3:52:52] Finally, if any nominations are confirmed [3:52:54] during Tuesday's session of the Senate, [3:52:56] the motions to reconsider be considered made [3:52:58] and laid upon the table [3:52:59] and the President be immediately notified [3:53:01] of the Senate's actions. [3:53:03] Without objection. [3:53:04] If there is no further business [3:53:05] to come before the Senate, [3:53:07] I ask that the Senate stand adjourned [3:53:08] under the previous order. [3:53:09] The Senate stands adjourned [3:53:11] until 5 p.m. on July 28th. [3:53:13] Thanks, guys.