Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consideration of S. Res. 755, submitted earlier today.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that 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 when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, June 2; that 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, morning business be closed, and the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Lane nomination; further, that at 11:15 a.m., the Senate execute the order in relation to the Lane nomination; that following the disposition of the cloture motion with respect to the Kuhlman nomination, the Senate recess for the weekly conference meetings until 2:15 p.m.; and that if cloture is invoked on the Kuhlman nomination, the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination at 2:15 p.m.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the provisions of S. Res. 755.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, the Democrat Party has gone off the rails.

It is no secret that the Democrat Party has drifted sharply leftward in recent years and that it has become increasingly divorced from the concerns of ordinary Americans.

``Many Americans Say the [Democrat] Party Does Not Share Their Priorities''--that was a headline noted last year from the New York Times. But it is remarkable just how extreme Democrats have become.

Everyone remembers the Democrat Party's flirtation with ``defund the police'' a few years ago. But when it rapidly became apparent that we actually need the police, Democrats seemed to rein things in. But no more. In today's Democrat Party, ``defund the police'' is back and more strongly than ever.

The reason we are here today, I would say the sole--sole--reason we are here today is because we are considering this reconciliation bill because Democrats refuse to fund law enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security. They refuse to fund Border Patrol, and they refuse to fund Immigrations and Customs Enforcement--at all. They wouldn't agree to provide a single dollar for either of these Agencies--not a single dollar for a physical presence at our border, not a single dollar to take criminal illegal aliens off of our streets.

Really think about that for a minute. Is there any country in the world that doesn't have officers to protect its borders? Well, if Democrats had their way, that would now be the United States of America.

The public record provides ample evidence of the fact that among those who try to make their way illegally across the border, there are bad actors whose presence in this country would endanger Americans. Democrats don't want there to be a single individual at the border to stop those individuals from entering our country, and they don't want there to be a single individual to enforce immigration law in this country.

The various women who were murdered by illegal immigrants who entered the country under the open borders Biden administration--what about them? Well, Democrats apparently don't think that even one of those individuals should have been deported.

If what I am saying sounds extreme, let me confirm: It is. But it is also an accurate description of the Democrats' position.

If this were about making reforms to the way ICE or Border Patrol does business, then Democrats would have accepted the robust package of legislative reforms they were offered by the White House or engaged in serious negotiations to tweak the package, but they didn't. They put up a good show for a little while. But it rapidly became clear that Democrats were not interested in actually reaching any kind of agreement, and eventually they just walked away presumably because they felt that it was more valuable for them to have a political issue than to actually agree to any reforms.

Of course, I am not sure what political constituency they were appealing to because I don't think mainstream Americans believe in, for example, completely defunding our Nation's Border Patrol. But then again, I am not too sure the Democrat Party really understands or thinks about mainstream Americans. They are in the pockets of the far left, and so they embrace positions guaranteed to appeal to the far left, no matter--no matter--how out of step those positions are with those of mainstream Americans.

In recent days, perhaps realizing just how extreme ``defund the police'' could seem to mainstream American, the Democrat leader has attempted to obfuscate what is happening here by suggesting that Republicans' consideration of this bill somehow means that Republicans are not concerned with the challenges facing ordinary Americans. To which I say: Give me a break.

This from the same Democrat leader who oversaw passage of legislation that plunged our country into an inflation crisis. From legislation to drive down the cost of prescription drugs at the pharmacy counter to our signature Working Families Tax Cut, which permanently cut American taxes and put more money in workers' pockets, Republicans have been focused--focused like a laser--on making life easier for hard-working Americans.

But, remarkably, it is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. And we can protect Americans by protecting our borders and continue to pass legislation that will alleviate some of the pressures facing hard-working Americans. We not only can do both; we have a responsibility to do both. Republicans are going to fulfill that responsibility.

As long as we are in charge, there will be agents at our borders to prevent terrorists, traffickers, and other dangerous individuals from making their way into our country, and there will be agents to take criminal illegal immigrants off of America's streets. Our Nation's security demands nothing less.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 736.

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

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

Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 743.

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

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

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.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all Members of the Republican conference be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions from May 21 through June 1.

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

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. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 676.

Mr. President, 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.