Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 347, S. 3613.

I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be withdrawn; that the Peters substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 333.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 532.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon table.

A resolution (S. Res. 532) was agreed to.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 625, submitted earlier today.

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

Mr. President, I understand there are three joint resolutions at the desk, and I ask for their first reading en bloc.

I now ask for a second reading, and I object to my own request, all en bloc.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming adjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to Commissions, committees, Boards, conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

Finally, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn to then convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business being conducted, on the following dates and times and that following each pro forma session, the Senate adjourn until the next pro forma session: Tuesday, March 26, 5 p.m.; Thursday, March 28 at 10 a.m.; Monday, April 1, at 10 a.m.; Thursday, April 4, at 2 p.m.; further, that when the Senate adjourns on Thursday, April 4, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m., Monday, April 8; that on Monday, following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Bazis nomination; further, that the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. on Monday.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. President, I would just like to make my morning remarks a bit later, but I want to acknowledge and thank my good friend the Reverend Adolphus Lacey of the famous Bethany Baptist Church, not too far from where I live in Brooklyn, for leading us in this morning's prayer.

It is great to see you here. You are a leader in bringing the message of the Lord down here to all of us, but also doing many good works here on Earth. You do both, as the Prophet Micah would have wanted you to do.

And I have a great relationship with Bethany Baptist Church. Bill Jones--when I ran for Congress, they were sort of running a racist campaign against me, and Bill Jones--the Reverend Bill Jones--who was a disciple of Dr. King, rallied the ministers to support me and help me win.

So the relationship with Bethany Baptist goes way back, but it has even blossomed further under the great leadership of Pastor Lacey. I am so proud he is here so all of the Nation can see why we in Brooklyn love Pastor Adolphus Lacey.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, earlier this morning, the legislative text for the final six appropriations bills was released, I am happy to say, clearing another hurdle toward our ultimate goal of funding the Federal Government. I thank the appropriators, their staffs, and everyone involved for working themselves to the bone to release these bills. I imagine some folks here in the Capitol are past the point of exhaustion.

This funding agreement between the White House and congressional leaders is good news that comes in the nick of time. When passed, it will extinguish any more shutdown threats for the rest of the fiscal year, it will avoid the scythe of budget sequestration, and it will keep the government open without cuts or poison pill riders.

It is now the job of the House Republican leadership to move this package ASAP.

Just like the funding bills Congress passed 2 weeks ago, this package avoids draconian Republican cuts on major Democratic wins that help American families, American workers, and America's national defense. We have secured an increase in childcare services. We boosted disease research and prevention. We funded school mental health programs and suicide prevention--so needed in this modern world in which we live. We are strengthening the border with new resources for frontline personnel. We are investing in safer, more secure elections. We Democrats are very proud of both. The hard right pushed for cuts that would have impacted K through 12 education and services for low-income families. Democrats stopped it. The hard right wanted to add terrible poison pill riders to attack freedom of choice. Democrats stopped that too.

Now Congress must now race to pass this package before government funding runs out this Friday. Once the House acts, the Senate will need bipartisan cooperation to pass it before Friday's deadline and avoid a shutdown.

I want to thank President Biden, Speaker Johnson, Leader Jeffries, and Leader McConnell for their leadership. I also thank Chairwoman Murray and Vice Chair Collins and their staffs, as well as my own staff, for their tireless leadership of the Appropriations Committee throughout the entire process. I don't think they got any sleep from about Saturday to today. I really thank particularly Meghan Taira and Ray O'Mara from my staff, who did such a strong job on this.

Mr. President, now on judge shopping, last week, I was very pleased that the Judicial Conference announced commonsense policy reforms limiting the practice of judge shopping, by having civil cases with statewide or nationwide implications assigned to judges at random.

Unfortunately not everyone was pleased--namely, those on the right who have made judge shopping their specialty. So today, I am sending a followup letter to the Judicial Conference encouraging them to defend their policy as it is implemented across the country.

I am also writing the chief judge of the Northern District of Texas, where judge shopping has been rampant, urging him to apply the reforms of the Judicial Conference as quickly as possible. When I wrote to the chief judge roughly a year ago about judge shopping, he said fixing the problem through random assignments presented logistical challenges.

So, in my letter today, I will ask the judge to please explain: How many civil cases with statewide or national injunctions does his jurisdiction handle? How does the district create rules for case assignment? How will they implement the Judicial Conference's rules to ensure public trust? The answers to these questions would greatly inform us in the Senate as we think about ways to strengthen our judiciary.

I must say, over the past week, I have really been troubled to hear some of my colleagues on the other side attack the Judicial Conference simply for doing its job, which Congress authorized it to do over a century ago. My Republican colleagues forget or ignore that even their side has acknowledged in the past that not only is judge shopping a problem but that the Judicial Conference itself has a role to play to address it. But now some Republicans are howling at the Moon over this announcement. My friend the Republican leader, for one, led his colleagues in writing a number of chief judges, urging them to basically ignore the Judicial Conference.

Let me say this: Judge shopping as it is practiced here in Texas distorts the entire judicial system. There is only one judge sitting in one district. Hard-right plaintiffs from across the country know they can bring their cases and get them before a judge who has views that are way over. It jaundices the fairness of the legal system. When you know there is one judge sitting and he or she has a particular philosophy and you have to get that judge when you file a case, again, it attracts hard-right plaintiffs who are so unrepresentative of America, like bees to honey, and they all flock to those one or two or three judicial districts where there is one judge or a minimal number of judges sitting.

My Republican colleagues actually refuse to explain why judge shopping is remotely defensible--because it so distorts the system and casts a cloud of unfairness over our whole judicial system, like the system is sort of rigged because you know you can get this judge, and you know what the outcome will be. The mifepristone case is the most glaring, immediate example.

Of course, my Republican colleagues don't explain why, by the way, because, of course, they can't say the quiet part out loud: Judge shopping is a key part of the hard-right's toolkit, something they have built up over the years. Just take the example of the Amarillo Division of the Northern District of Texas, where a single district judge has become the darling of extremist litigants for his outlandishly fringe opinions on everything from birth control to affordable healthcare to LGBTQ discrimination. Republicans might not want to say it openly, at least those who opposed here, but nobody is being fooled. Conservatives go to this one judge because they know he is on their side ideologically--what an abuse of the functioning of our Federal courts.

So, yes, the Judicial Conference was right to issue reforms to limit judge shopping. Neither party--no philosophy--should be able to cherry- pick judges of their choice. Random assignment is the way it works for nearly every court in the country.

I am always ready to work with Senators from either party to consider all commonsense ways to improve how our courts are administered. I wholeheartedly agree that Congress should take its role of judicial oversight seriously, particularly at a time when activist judges committed to special interests are eroding the rule of law. Congress must provide a check on the judiciary, and that is what the Founding Fathers intended in our legislation as decades, even centuries, also point out.

In this instance, it is troubling Republicans can't seem to admit the obvious: Abuses like the ones we see coming out of the Northern District of Texas should come to an end.

Mr. President, on the RSC budget, yesterday, as President Biden announced tens of thousands of new jobs to take our country forward, House Republicans released a budget plan that would take us backward. The Republican Study Committee's fiscal year 2025 budget plan reads like a wish list for Donald Trump and the MAGA hard right, and it sure is a loser for the American people.

Remember, the RSC is hardly a small group. It is made up of over 170 House Republicans--80 percent--80 percent--of the House Republicans, including Speaker Johnson and his entire leadership team. The budget plan is the Republican agenda, plain and simple.

By releasing this budget, the vast majority of House Republicans are calling for cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Do you hear that, the folks in America? The vast majority of House Republicans want to cut Social Security and Medicare. Beware of what they want. They want to threaten IVF access. They want to deny healthcare to people with preexisting conditions. They want national abortion bans, and they want to sabotage any hope of lowering prescription drug costs. The list could go on and on.

The Republican Study Committee plan is cruel; it is fringe--way out of line with what most Americans want--but, unfortunately, it is what the House Republicans envision for our country. It speaks volumes that, on the very same day President Biden and Democrats announced tens of thousands of new jobs to increase U.S. microchip production, the Republican Study Committee called for over $1.5 trillion in cuts to Social Security.

It is just like former President Donald Trump, who recently said, ``There is a lot you can do,'' regarding cuts to Social Security.

The RSC's budget also doubles down on Republican efforts to threaten in vitro fertilization access.

Republicans can pretend all they want to sound moderate on women's choice now that they have created so much backlash, but this budget plan makes it clear they are the same old anti-choice, anti-woman party, and I have no doubt--should they get into power in the House, Senate, and Presidency, which I don't think will happen and hope and pray won't happen--choice will be clearly at risk.

That is not all. The RSC's budget would gut the Affordable Care Act and CHIP, the Children's Health Insurance Program, which means ripping away health coverage for millions of American families and people with preexisting conditions. The RSC's budget, of course, includes trillions of dollars in tax cuts for the wealthiest few and large corporations, leaving working-class people--middle-class families--to pick up the tab.

The Republican agenda released yesterday is dangerous and disastrous for America and the American people. The contrast could not be clearer. While Democrats invest in the American people, the Republican agenda released yesterday is dangerous--disastrous--for the American people.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

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

In order to place the bill on the Calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceedings.