Floor Statements

I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), and the Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. Whitehouse) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague and the Democratic leader, Senator Schumer, for his statement on this Trump tax plan. I think he really has summarized in his statement the concerns many of us have.

We are concerned that the Trump tax plan will do several things. It will cut funds for education in America at a time when we need it now more than ever to prepare our people for the jobs of the future. It endangers Medicare, a program that for almost 50 million Americans is critical for the healthcare they receive. At the same time, it is going to dramatically increase the deficit. For so long, we have heard from the Republicans that their No. 1 issue was cutting the deficit, and now they come up with a tax plan that will increase the size of our deficit. Finally, of course, all of this is being done to create tax breaks for the wealthy and the biggest corporations in America.

Here are the simple facts: As a percentage of our gross domestic product, corporate profits in America have never been higher. Corporate profits have never been higher. As a percentage of the gross domestic product, corporate Federal taxes paid have never been lower. Profits never higher, taxes never lower, and the Trump tax plan says: Let's cut corporate taxes even more, and then let's cut taxes on the

wealthiest people even more. That is not a fair tax plan. It is not a fair tax reform.

The Trump tax plan sadly rewards the biggest corporations and the wealthiest individuals at the cost of cutting education, endangering Medicare, and unfortunately increasing the deficit, to be paid for by our children. The tax break for the wealthiest people in the Trump tax plan doesn't go to the rich. It doesn't even go to the very rich. It goes to the superrich--the superrich. Who am I talking about? The one- tenth of 1 percent. The highest incomes in America--way beyond the rich. It is not a person who drives a big limousine; it is a person who is never going to drive the rest of their lives and owns a big yacht. Those folks--the one-tenth of 1 percent--get 40 percent of all the tax breaks in the Trump tax plan. That may be good news for the President and his colleagues and friends and even his family; it is not good news for working Americans. To think that we would cut education, endanger Medicare, and increase the deficit to give that level of income, the wealthiest people in our country, such a tax break is hard to imagine.

Sadly, one of the provisions in the Trump tax plan creates an incentive for companies to move jobs overseas, because they will have a lower tax rate if they do. Think about that. A President who has told us over and over again that we want to ``make America great again'' creates a tax program to incentivize businesses to locate overseas and make their profits overseas. That makes no sense whatsoever, but that is the Trump tax plan. I am glad Senator Schumer brought that up.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily absent.

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

Mr. President, I have remarks that I wish to make, but I will yield at this time in order for the Republican leader to be recognized after which I will seek recognition.

Mr. President, the Rohingya are one of many ethnic groups, largely Muslim, who have been living for centuries in Burma and now in Myanmar, with the majority of them in the western coastal Rakhine State.

Deep-seated misconceptions about their roots and faith have led to decades of discrimination, about which many of us are aware because of press reports. They have been denied citizenship, had their movement restricted, and have been deprived of basic healthcare. It is no wonder that the Rohingya people are considered to be one of the most persecuted minorities in the world.

Today, as a result of a military crackdown against them in the Rakhine State--an overzealous, disproportionate response to attacks on security outposts by some militants last October and then again this August--countless Rohingya have been brutally killed, and more than 600,000 have fled to overwhelmed and desperate camps in neighboring Bangladesh.

The scorched-earth tactic by the Burmese military has left hundreds of villages literally burned to the ground, and the reports of rape, starvation, mass killing--even reports of security forces burning people, babies, alive--have been horrifying. Satellite images and maps indicate that the destruction by the Burmese military is not episodic, it is systematic.

In Bangladesh, aid groups have been unable to keep up with the influx of refugees. The unprecedented scale of the crisis and the lack of infrastructure in the makeshift camps have created significant gaps in access to food, medical care, and even safety and shelter.

The international community has condemned the violence against the Rohingya, and rightly so.

Countries around the world--reputable international human rights organizations such as the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and even the U.N.--have denounced the military's campaign against the Rohingya.

In a speech to the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva last month, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, called the Burmese military operation against the Rohingya people ``a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.''

Many of my colleagues in this Chamber joined me when I introduced S. Res. 250 to condemn these atrocities, and a large group of us also wrote to the administration recently to urge Secretary Tillerson and Administrator Green to help resolve the crisis and provide critically needed aid.

Just yesterday, in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, my friend and colleague, Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, labeled the crisis a ``genocide.'' Yet Aung San Suu Kyi, the de facto leader of Burma, the Nobel laureate, has largely done and said too little.

I have followed Aung San Suu Kyi over the years. I joined many of my colleagues in praising her struggle for democracy. After 15 years under house arrest, she and the National League for Democracy won a landslide victory in the first national vote since Burma's transition to civilian rule in 2015, more than two decades after her party was denied its victory in the 1990 election.

I admired her so much for her nonviolent struggle for political freedom and human rights. And while I recognize she still has a fragile relationship with the Burmese military, which still has considerable power, I am sadly disappointed in her lack of leadership when it comes to the plight of the Rohingya people--her fellow countrymen--men and women who are in a desperate situation.

She claims she is committed to restoring peace and the rule of law. Yet she has spoken of so-called allegations and counterallegations instead of addressing the widespread, well-documented abuses by her own country's security forces.

I was glad that Aung San Suu Kyi in 2016 appointed investigators, led by former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, who recommended this summer that Burma review a 1982 law that strips most Rohingya of citizenship. Yet the Burmese Government has yet to implement any of the Commission's recommendations and further continues to deny access to the Rakhine State to other U.N. investigators, journalists, and NGO groups. Some officials have even accused the Rohingya of faking rape and faking the burning of their own homes. What a preposterous claim.

I recognize the dramatic progress Burma has made over the years. It will take a long time to overcome many of the challenges in such a young democracy, and I understand that Aung San Suu Kyi, as State Counselor, has a limited role under the power-sharing agreement with her military, which has largely been responsible for the violence I have described. But I would urge her to live up to her own words upon delivering her Nobel Peace Prize lecture in 2012 to address the historic and brutal suppression of the Rohingya and support ethnic reconciliation in Burma. In fact, Aung San Suu Kyi quoted the following passages from the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1948, as the answer to why she fought for democracy and human rights in her home country in Burma. She said:

[D]isregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in

barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind,

and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy

freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want

has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common

people,

[I]t is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have

recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and

oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule

of law.

These are wise words used by Aung San Suu Kyi when she received her Nobel Prize. They are words that apply today to this crisis within her own country.

I am committed to doing what I can in Congress to hold those in the Burmese military personally accountable for the reprehensible human rights violations against the Rohingya.

I want to note that I have also had the opportunity over the October recess to meet with some members of the Rohingya community who have resettled in my home State of Illinois over the years.

About 1,500 Rohingya people live in the Chicagoland area. Among them is Nasir Zakaria. He helped found the Rohingya Culture Center in Chicago--the first Rohingya community center in America. The center helps provide a safe, familiar space for Rohingya people new to the country, as well as critically needed resources, such as translators, ESL and computer classes, help with paperwork, and much more.

When I met Nasir and the other members of the community about a week ago with my wife, they told me about the phone calls and photos they receive late at night from family and friends fleeing the violence, looking for safety in Bangladesh.

I also heard from community members who recently returned from a medical mission to Bangladesh. They showed me the photos they brought back. One food line to feed refugees was literally 1 mile long. Healthcare is limited. Safe drinking water is limited. Cholera is detected. It is a horrible situation for these people who have been tossed out of Myanmar and now are trying just to survive nearby Bangladesh. The stories are horrific, and they are all the same.

Here is an image of this exodus that was printed in the New York Times. It shows families fleeing Burma across the border to Bangladesh with smoke rising in the background from the villages that they lived in being burned.

The stories I heard were of helpless, poor families walking on foot through jungles, crowding in boats along the Naf River, leaving behind everything with accountings of rape, killing, and arson by the Burmese military. They arrive in Bangladesh sick, exhausted, and desperately in need of the most basic things--food, clean water, medicine, a safe space to rest their heads.

Here is another image, which is heartbreaking. It is an indication of what happens in the refugee camps when food arrives, this time in a camp known as Cox's Bazar in Bangladesh.

A UNICEF report last week stated that 58 percent of the refugees who have poured into Cox's Bazar are children, noting that they are in hell on Earth. They are acutely malnourished, they need clean water and vaccines, and they are at risk of exploitation by traffickers. This is unacceptable.

I understand that Bangladesh and Burma have discussed a repatriation plan recently, but many refugees don't have any documents. They were literally burned out of their homes. We need to call on the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. Filippo Grandi was in my office last week, and he stressed how important it is for us to speak up and to help on this issue, that we ensure the voluntary right of return and we ensure the safety of those who do return and we make sure that the paper requirements for return are reasonable for people who are literally homeless and stateless at this moment.

Many are wary of returning without an assurance of full citizenship, given the risk of further persecution or the threat of being placed in camps in Myanmar when they return. I don't blame them, because the atrocities committed against the Rohingya over the past months and weeks are not new by any means.

Nasir Zakaria in Chicago told me that more than three decades ago, when he was only 14, he was kidnapped by militants targeting the Rohingya in Burma. He never saw his parents again.

Nasir eventually escaped to Bangladesh, made his way to Malaysia, where he worked for 18 years in construction before he finally made it to the United States with a green card in 2013. He learned English, worked as a dishwasher in a hotel near Chicago, supported his wife and three children, met others in the community, and helped to create the Rohingya Center that I visited.

Here is a picture of Nasir Zakaria with his son, Mohamed, in their Chicago apartment. You can see the American flag in the background. He is very proud of this Nation that he now calls home.

The Rohingya Culture Center provides critical resources to more than 400 families in the Chicago area, one of the largest concentrations of Rohingya refugees in America. More than three decades after Nasir first escaped Burma, the Rohingya continue to be attacked and demonized.

Let me close by saying that we met today with the Myanmar Ambassador. Seven Senators sat down with him and expressed the sentiments that I have included in this statement.

First, let me give Mr. U Aung Lynn, the Ambassador, credit for coming to the meeting. He knew what we were going to raise. Yet he came, he took notes, and he assured us that he would respond to this; that we would be able to come back in a week or two for a progress report on what is being done; that he would allow or plead for access of U.N. personnel, as well as NGO groups, into the northern Rakhine area currently being denied access; that he would personally make it clear to his government we want those responsible for these atrocities held accountable. We want to make certain, as well, that those who are repatriated have a fair chance to return to a safe atmosphere in Myanmar and, ultimately, for citizenship.

It was a long list of requirements and requests that we gave to the Ambassador. He took them all in a positive way and told us he would be back to us in a matter of a week or two with a progress report.

Let me close by appealing to Aung San Suu Kyi to help resolve this crisis. I am counting on her. I do believe she is a good person. I hope that she will respond to this crisis in her own country the way she stood up with so much courage before.

I plan to meet with this Ambassador in a few weeks to chart the progress, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to end this ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya people in Myanmar. We cannot allow the Burmese military to commit these atrocities.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, this vote really gives the U.S. Senate a choice. On one side, we have the biggest banks in America, financial institutions, which are arguing that you as a consumer, as someone who uses their banks, should be basically signing an arbitration clause that denies you the freedom to go to court. On the other side, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has argued these financial institutions are misusing this power, denying people access to courts, and it should come to an end. That is the choice.

I think I know who is going to win. I am not sure if the party on the other side of the aisle would have called this issue if they didn't already have it lined up for the financial institutions. I know many on the other side, maybe most, hate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau like the devil hates holy water. The notion that this agency is going to stand up for consumers across America is something they find repugnant, something they would like to end tomorrow. I say thank goodness they are there.

There ought to be one agency in the Federal Government, at least just one, that speaks up for the little guy when it comes to these transactions. Think about the 3\1/2\ million people defrauded by Wells Fargo. These were people who had their identities stolen, had their Social Security numbers purloined for opening credit card and bank accounts that they never asked for--3\1/2\ million of them.

Let me tell you the story of one of them. It is a pretty interesting story. Her name is Tracy Kilgore. She is from New Mexico. She was not even a customer of Wells Fargo Bank, but she went in because she was the treasurer of a local chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution. She went to the Wells Fargo branch one day in 2011 to have the names on the organization's existing account changed. A few weeks later, she received a rejection letter for a Wells Fargo credit card that she had never applied for.

It turns out the bank teller at Wells Fargo had taken the information she had given and submitted a credit card application on her behalf without her knowing it. The application was rejected and hurt Ms. Kilgore's credit score for a credit card she never asked for. Ms. Kilgore is fighting for her right to hold Wells Fargo accountable in court and to join with millions like her who have been victims of Wells Fargo's misconduct.

The Republicans tonight are saying they feel sorry for Wells Fargo. They really do. To think that this company manufactured and created 3\1/2\ million phony credit card and bank accounts at the expense of customers like Tracy Kilgore doesn't seem to move them at all. Instead, they want to stand by Wells Fargo, which put in that credit card application an arbitration clause which said: Tracy Kilgore, you can't go to court. You can't have your day in court. You have given it up. You signed it away to Wells Fargo.

Would Tracy go to court anyway? Let's say she had to file a new credit report and it cost her $100. Is she likely to file a lawsuit against Wells Fargo? Probably not. Multiply that times 3\1/2\ million people who were defrauded by this bank, and you understand how a class action suit can finally hold Wells Fargo's feet to the fire, hold them accountable for literally cheating this woman and millions just like her.

The Republicans are arguing tonight that we ought to feel sorry for Wells Fargo. I don't. I don't feel sorry for them. I feel sorry for Tracy Kilgore, who, because of the arbitration clause, lost her opportunity to go to court and ask for simple justice from a judge or jury.

How about Equifax? If you think 3\1/2\ million people defrauded by Wells Fargo is a pretty awful situation, here is one dramatically worse. One hundred forty-five million--let me see. Right off the top of my head, that is about half of the people in this country. One hundred forty-five million Americans--five and one-half million who live in my State, that is almost half of our State population--had their personal data exposed in a massive Equifax data breach. In other words, if you had filed in the distant past, and there was a credit report on you, Equifax had all the information about you and your family, your banks, your Social Security numbers, and all the rest of it, Equifax ended up with a massive breach. Somebody hacked into their computer and stole your personal identity information, to the tune of 145 million Americans.

Equifax really felt bad about this. Here is what they said. Equifax, in response to this data breach, initially offered a free credit monitoring service for any customer who signed up, out of the 145 million. In other words, we will monitor to see if somebody stole your identity, they are misusing it, and hurting your credit status, but they added something: as long as the customer signed a forced arbitration

clause in fine print that prohibited them from joining a class action. Equifax wants to help you, even though they initially hurt you, as long as you will guarantee that you will never hold them accountable in court. How about that for a deal?

That is what the Republicans are defending tonight, exactly what I just described. They feel sorry for Equifax. They feel sorry for Wells Fargo. They want to make sure these banks and these credit companies really have a friend in the U.S. Senate.

We don't know if Equifax, which now claims it will no longer impose this forced arbitration on victims, will stand by that if they are ever challenged in court. We ought to ask ourselves why major groups across the United States standing up for just ordinary Americans find this Republican strategy on the floor tonight so reprehensible.

Listen to the groups that oppose this effort: the American Legion, the Consumer Federation of America, the NAACP, the United Automobile Workers, and many other consumer groups. They are saying: Why won't somebody in Washington speak up for the average American who is being defrauded by these banks, defrauded by these credit agencies? Why won't somebody in the Senate stand up for the agency that finally said enough and finally said that these financial institutions have had their way long enough?

Many of these financial institutions are hiding behind your local hometown banks. You know the ones I am talking about. I have them in my hometown of Springfield, IL. They are saying that this is all about your local community banks and your credit unions. We don't want to hurt them.

Here are the facts. Ninety percent of your community banks and credit unions do not have these arbitration clauses in their agreements. Do you know who does? The big banks. Sixty percent of the big Wall Street banks have these clauses, and they are the ones who are really behind this fight, the Wells Fargo and the other ones who want to maintain this ability to stop consumers from going to court to protect themselves when they have been defrauded by banks and credit and financial institutions.

This is a classic illustration of power in Washington. Is there any power in the hands of consumers and ordinary Americans? We will find out in the vote tonight. I am afraid it wouldn't be called on the other side of the aisle unless they figured the banks were going to win, again. It is unfortunate. We ought to live in a society where consumers have a fighting chance, and the system is not rigged against them. An arbitration clause is a way to rig a contract so a consumer is going to lose twice: lose when the bank takes advantage of them and lose when they try to go to court and they are stopped by the arbitration clause.

Consumers in this country have a battle on every single day to make a living and to get by. This is an effort to take away one of your freedoms to go to court with a group of people who have been aggrieved just like you, have your day in court, win or lose. The Republicans want to take that away and so do the banks. I hope they don't prevail.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, Wade Nelson was a friend who began his professional life as a journalist and served at many levels in public service.

He was regarded as an honest professional in all of his life's work, a father and husband truly dedicated to his family, and a joy to count as a friend.

His colleague and friend, Bob Secter, wrote a remembrance, which I include with this statement. It was given to those of us in attendance at Wade's memorial service at the Unity Temple in Oak Park, IL, on October 7, 2017. The speakers at the service included his wife, Ellen Warren, a respected journalist in her own right, and his sons, Ted and Emmett. They each shared touching stories of Wade as a husband and father. Rick Kogan emceed the celebration with his own signature style and Wade's friends Bern Colleran, Terry Kelleher, Hanke Gratteau, and musician Jon Webber each added great memories to the service.

As Bob Secter wrote:

Back in the rambunctious days of Chicago newspapers, Wade

Nelson worked for the legendary columnist Mike Royko who sent

his ``legman'' to check out a tip that Cook County judges

were issued cushier toilet paper than that stocked in public

restrooms.

The easy part for Nelson was grabbing samples from public

toilets in the Loop courthouse, now known as the Daley

Center. Obtaining tissue from a judge's inner sanctum was

trickier.

So, Nelson made up a pretense to interview Chief Judge John

Boyle, then excused himself mid-talk to use the toilet

attached to the judge's chambers. He emerged to confront the

startled judge with the incriminating evidence, and a great

column was born.

Charmin-gate was hardly the highlight of Nelson's days as a

reporter. Yet it demonstrated the resourcefulness, spunk, and

droll whimsy that propelled him on a rich career path

involving being press secretary for the late U.S. Senator

Alan Dixon of Illinois, communications director for the

federal military base closure commission, political

consultant, and chief speech writer for former Chicago Mayor

Richard M. Daley.

That resume hardly defines the sum of Nelson, however.

Friends remember him as someone with boundless curiosity and

a walking encyclopedia of knowledge about interests as varied

as Midwestern architecture, jazz, the Cubs, anything Chicago

related, the minutia of the small Southern Michigan town of

Sturgis where his ancestors were early settlers in the 1800s,

and the secret to the perfect martini.

Edward Wade Nelson Jr. grew up in west suburban River

Forest, attended Fenwick High School in Oak Park and the

University of Missouri where he graduated with a degree in

journalism.

As a young adult and beyond, his greatest devotion was

reserved for performers at Chicago's varied night club,

cabaret and piano bar scene where men and women who played

and sang there came to embrace Nelson as an honored guest and

friend. He became an audience fixture at venues, most now

long gone, like The Acorn on Oak, Toulouse, The London House,

the Green Mill, and Yvette. Nelson even came to name his

family pets after 20th Century jazz legends.

As Nelson climbed the rungs of journalism jobs, from City

News to the suburban Wilmette Life and then the Chicago Daily

News, his career tracked closely with another young reporter,

Ellen Warren, who later became a White House correspondent

for the old Knight-Ridder news service and then a columnist

for the Chicago Tribune. They eventually married and had two

sons.

Nelson moved back to River Forest, but he rejoined Dixon in

the mid-1990s when the former senator chaired a politically

sensitive federal commission charged with recommending the

closure of surplus military bases across the country.

In subsequent years, Nelson served as a spokesman for then-

Cook County Circuit Court Clerk Aurelia Pucinski, now an

appellate court judge, and the Illinois State Board of

Education and became a program officer and grant manager at

the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, a Michigan-based non-profit

specializing in education grants. Wedged in between these

jobs was a multiyear stint as the chief speechwriter for

Richard Daley, a difficult task making Chicago's notoriously

ineloquent mayor sound eloquent.

Wade is survived by his wife and sons, Ted--and his wife, Sarah--and Emmett of Chicago; a sister, Karen Nelson of Chicago; and a brother, Ted--and his wife, Terry--of Spicewood, TX.

Mr. President, earlier this month, Elaine Nekritz retired after more than 14 years of service representing the 57th District in the Illinois House of Representatives. Along with being a good friend and dedicated public servant, Elaine was a real leader for her constituents in Northbrook, Arlington Heights, Wheeling, Buffalo Grove, and across her district.

Elaine's legacy in Illinois will always be visible as people travel on high-speed rail from Chicago to St. Louis and throughout the State. As the chair of the Illinois House Railroad Industry Committee, Elaine was a leader in advocating for high-speed rail before it was popular.

During her service in the State House, Elaine championed women's

rights, the environment, and criminal justice reform as well. Because of Elaine's efforts, kids who have had run-ins with the law have a better shot at staying out of adult courts and avoiding getting caught in an endless criminal cycle.

Elaine was always willing to listen to colleagues and friends on both sides of the aisle, even when partnership was challenging. She helped craft bold legislation to rescue Illinois from its dire economic circumstances. As house assistant majority leader, she was a leader in working to reform pensions in our State. Fiscal responsibility was always her core value.

The people of the 57th District were lucky to have such a strong advocate. Her energy, creativity, and thoughtfulness will be missed.

I thank her for her service to Illinois and her friendship. I wish her the best of luck in her next adventures and salute her husband, Barry, for his strong partnership with his talented spouse.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.