[Pages S5548-S5552]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the following 
nomination, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Robert 
A. Destro, of Virginia, to be Assistant Secretary of State for 
Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                             Appropriations

  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, defense funding is always an imperative. 
There are always going to be bad actors who threaten our country, 
whether they are major powers like China or Russia or terrorist 
organizations like ISIS or al-Qaida. We have to be prepared to counter 
those threats.
  In the United States, we are used to having the most outstanding 
military in the world. In fact, we have come to rely on it. We assume 
our military will always be the best because it has been the best for 
as long as we can remember, but we can't forget that our military 
preeminence is the result of sustained investment. While our soldiers, 
sailors, airmen, and marines constitute the most advanced and 
proficient fighting force in the world, they can't do their jobs or 
maintain our military superiority without adequate resources. That 
includes funding, not just the weapons, equipment, and technology of 
today, but also the weapons, equipment, and technology of the future. 
It is too late to modernize our military when the threat has reached 
us. We need to invest in the equipment and technology of the future now 
so that when the threats of tomorrow materialize, we will be ready. 
This means delivering platforms like the future B-21 bomber on schedule 
and making robust investments in the cyber and space domains.
  Right now, our military is rebuilding after years of underfunding and 
the strains in the war on terror. Here in the Senate, Members of both 
parties have worked together over the past couple of years to meet our 
military's funding and rebuilding needs. I hope that trend will 
continue.
  In November 2018, the bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission 
released a report that warned that our readiness had eroded to the 
point at which we might struggle to win a war against a major power 
like Russia or China, and the Commission noted that we would be 
especially vulnerable if we were ever called on to fight a war on two 
fronts. That is a dangerous situation for our country to be in, and we 
need to keep working to rebuild our military so that we are not 
trailing behind other nations.
  Other countries are certainly not holding back when it comes to 
military preparedness. Russia and China are busy investing in their 
militaries as we speak, and they have recently conducted joint military 
exercises. As the leader noted on the floor on Monday, military 
spending in China over the

[[Page S5549]]

last decade has nearly doubled. Meanwhile, these countries have 
continued to flex their military power outside the borders of their 
countries, underscoring the need for other nations to be prepared to 
deter their aggressions. Of course, while we may be in a new era of 
great power competition, we still face threats from rogue states and 
terrorist organizations. We need to be prepared to meet multiple 
threats on multiple fronts if we want to ensure the security of our 
Nation.
  Later today, the leader is planning to have the Senate vote to begin 
debate on a package of appropriations bills, including this year's 
Defense appropriations bill. Less than 2 months ago, the Democrats in 
both the House and the Senate agreed on an increased funding level for 
our military, which is reflected in the Defense appropriations bill.
  The Defense appropriations measure funds current military priorities 
and invests in the research our men and women in uniform need to be 
prepared for the future. It also provides for a 3.1-percent pay 
increase for our military, which is the largest pay increase in a 
decade. So it would be very disappointing if the Democrats chose now to 
play politics and put their personal political agenda over the security 
of our country and the welfare of our men and women in uniform.
  The military needs to be funded through regular order appropriations 
bills, not through temporary funding measures that leave the military 
in doubt about funding levels and unable to start essential new 
projects. So I hope that our Democratic colleagues will honor the 
commitment they just made and will work with the Republicans to pass 
the Defense appropriations package before the end of the fiscal year.
  Likewise, I hope the Senate Democrats will resist the temptation to 
play politics over this year's national defense authorization bill and 
will work with us to initiate a conference with the House to resolve 
our differences. Our colleagues have the opportunity to take both of 
these important steps this week.


   Recognizing the U.S. Air Force and South Dakota Air National Guard

  Mr. President, before I close, I wish a happy 72nd birthday today to 
the U.S. Air Force, most especially to the airmen of Ellsworth Air 
Force Base in South Dakota.
  I also wish a happy birthday to the South Dakota Air National Guard, 
which celebrates the 73rd anniversary of its establishment on Friday.
  The Guard's 114th Fighter Wing recently had a change of command. Col. 
Mark Morrell assumed command from Col. Nathan Alholinna on September 7.
  I wish the Fighting Lobos continued success under its new leadership, 
and I wish Colonel Alholinna the best and thank him for his many years 
of service.
  While investing in equipment and technology that are essential to our 
Nation's defense, as always, our greatest strength is found in the men 
and women of the U.S. military. It is, first and foremost, because of 
their dedication and sacrifice that all of us live in freedom.
  I hope the men and women of Ellsworth Air Force Base and the South 
Dakota Air National Guard enjoy their celebrations this week. They are 
well deserved.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                              E-Cigarettes

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it started sounding too familiar to me. 
For a long time on Capitol Hill, I have been involved in public policy 
debates about Big Tobacco, about nicotine and cigarettes, and about the 
public health consequences of smoking. It is a personal issue, of 
course, for me and for so many of us.
  Our families have been touched by tobacco-related disease and death. 
I lost my father to lung cancer. He was 53 years old. He smoked two 
packs of Camels a day. I stood by his bedside when I was just a high 
school student and saw what tobacco could do.
  When I was elected to Congress, I decided to try to take on Big 
Tobacco. It was not an easy task. Those in Big Tobacco had very many 
friends in high places, and they made it clear in both political 
parties in the House of Representatives that tobacco was untouchable.
  I offered an amendment, quite a few years ago now, to ban smoking on 
airplanes. It was really because of my irritation and strong feelings 
that the people who were on the plane who were nonsmokers shouldn't 
have to breathe in secondhand smoke. To my surprise, we passed it in 
the House by a handful of votes even though the leadership of both 
political parties opposed it. Then it came over here, and Senator Frank 
Lautenberg, of New Jersey, passed it as well. It became the law of the 
land.
  Neither Frank nor I could have predicted what would happen next, but 
as the American people noticed that secondhand smoke was taken off of 
airplanes, they started asking a lot of these questions about why you 
wouldn't take it off of trains and buses and out of offices, hospitals, 
restaurants, and on and on. The net result was that of a change across 
America when it came to standards for smoking and tobacco cigarettes.
  Then I enlisted a group that was showing extraordinary leadership in 
Washington. It was called the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. Matt 
Myers, the director, still works for that organization. We went to the 
heart of the issue, and that was the fact that Big Tobacco was doing 
its best to make teenagers its customers. It had to. It was losing too 
many of its best customers because they were dying from Big Tobacco's 
product.
  It tried to addict children, and it was successful with ad campaigns. 
The Joe Camel ads, the Marlboro cowboy, and all sorts of cartoon 
figures were really appealing to children. It worked. It was able to 
replenish its smokers with kids who started smoking at earlier and 
earlier ages.
  We went after them. Eventually, there was a national lawsuit against 
the tobacco companies. We changed the standards for selling tobacco in 
America. We made it much more difficult for kids to get their hands on 
cigarettes, and, over time, we reduced the percentage of kids who were 
using these tobacco products.
  The tobacco companies faced a dilemma. They were losing their best 
customers--the kids. What were they going to do to maintain their 
profits?
  Several years ago, it became pretty obvious that they had found an 
alternative product called e-cigarettes and vaping. What was good about 
this was they could make health claims about e-cigarettes and vaping. 
They could argue that since you were taking tobacco out of the 
equation, merely sucking in some form of nicotine vapor was preferable 
from a health perspective. Yet, when it came right down to it, there 
was no proof of that whatsoever.
  JUUL is the biggest e-cigarette/e-vapor device maker in America. Its 
full-paged ads in newspaper after newspaper have made these health 
claims that, in fact, e-vaping is a healthy alternative to tobacco 
cigarettes. Yet there is no proof--none.
  Then something else started happening. We started noticing that all 
across America, kids--the same kids who once used to be the targets of 
Big Tobacco--were now the targets of Big Vaping. Vaping targets kids. 
The numbers tell the story. As of 2 years ago, 11 percent of high 
school students in America were vaping. A year later, there were 20 
percent, and there are 27 percent today. More than one out of four high 
school students is using e-cigarettes and vaping today. Even worse, 10 
percent of middle school students--10-, 11-, and 12-year-olds--are 
vaping.
  The numbers are growing, and you wonder why. The people in the vaping 
industry know how to target kids. They target them with flavors that 
are designed just for kids--Razzleberry, Gummy Bears, Bubble Gum, 
Unicorn Milk. How many 50-year-old chain smokers can't wait to get 
Unicorn Milk flavoring for their vaping devices? It is all about kids. 
The vaping industry, despite all of its public denials, has targeted 
these kids and has, effectively, recruited our children to be the next 
generation of vaporers for life.
  How much nicotine is in that little vaping device, the one that looks 
like

[[Page S5550]]

it is a flash drive for your computer? There is an equivalent amount of 
nicotine in vaping as in a total pack of cigarettes. You get 20 
cigarettes in one hit on a vaping device. Nicotine is a very addictive 
chemical. I know from my family experience, and we all know, from those 
who try for long, long times to quit using tobacco cigarettes, that the 
nicotine draws them back time and again.
  This addiction was underway, and I started writing letters, which 
Senators do. I protested to the Food and Drug Administration, to the 
Surgeon General, and to anyone else who would listen that this vaping 
epidemic was dangerous--dangerous for our kids and dangerous for our 
future. It took the longest time to get their attention. In fact, with 
those in this new Trump administration, they initially postponed any 
action against vaping until the year 2022, which would be beyond the 
President's first term.
  Well, I went to Dr. Gottlieb, who then was head of the FDA, and said: 
You can't wait 4 years. You have to do something right now about 
vaping.
  He resisted for a while, but then he came around. He held a press 
conference, and do you know what he called this vaping situation? An 
epidemic. The head of the Food and Drug Administration, a medical 
doctor, Dr. Gottlieb, called it an epidemic.
  So then he left for family reasons, and he had a successor, Dr. Ned 
Sharpless, Acting Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. I 
appealed to him, saying: Do something. You have the power right now to 
take all of these children's flavors off of the market for vaping. You 
could do it today.
  Secondly, you could ban most of the vaping devices, which have never 
been approved by the government. He didn't want to do it. He dragged 
his feet. It went on for months.
  I will have to say, in all candor and honesty, last week there was a 
breakthrough. Last week, the Trump administration addressed this issue 
directly.
  Last Monday, the Food and Drug Administration said to JUUL, the major 
manufacturer: Stop making health claims you can't prove. Stop telling 
people your product is a healthy alternative to tobacco cigarettes. 
There are no clinical trials. There is no proof, no credible medical 
study you can point to, to make that claim, so stop saying it.
  Then, just a couple days later, they went even further, banning the 
use of these flavors that have enticed children into vaping and e-
cigarettes. They have announced that probably within 30 days, as their 
estimate, these are all going to have to come off the market, and in 
May of next year, the companies that make them can apply to bring them 
back on the market if they can prove they are good for public health.
  Well, Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, a Republican, and I have had 
a bill for several months now on this issue. I thank her for her 
bipartisan cooperation in this effort. It is great to have her by my 
side. She is a terrific ally.
  She and I believe none of these flavors should come back on the 
market until it is proven they are not dangerous to children and that 
they in fact do help adults stop smoking and can show positive results. 
I think that is a hard measure, a hard standard for them to meet, and 
it should be because the alternative is unacceptable--more children 
addicted to e-cigarettes and vaping.
  There may be a place for e-cigarettes at some point in the future. I 
am not sure where it will be, but as long as they are endangering our 
children with their products and their flavors, I am going to continue 
to fight their efforts.
  I want to say something else. Even in the midst of my battles against 
Big Tobacco, I still remember what my dad went through when he tried to 
stop smoking--dying of lung cancer, trying to stop smoking. It was so 
hard and painful, and I watched him as a young boy and saw the struggle 
he went through.
  I have always said we have to show some caring and compassion for the 
people who were once tobacco users and want to quit, and today we have 
to show the same level of caring when it comes to all of these high 
school students--5 million American high school students--who are 
vaping and using e-cigarettes and should quit. We need to give them a 
path, a recommendation.
  I wrote to the Surgeon General last week and asked him to come up 
with a plan, an educational approach, to allow these young people to 
get off this nicotine addiction before it is too late.
  What has happened in the past, sadly, is that many of the high 
schoolers who were using e-cigarettes didn't quit completely from 
anything; they moved to tobacco cigarettes with the nicotine they were 
seeking in a different form.
  So that is the challenge we face. After years of inaction and a lot 
of telephone calls and letters and meetings, the Food and Drug 
Administration has done the right thing. I hope by the end of this 
year, these flavors will be off the shelf, and I hope the Food and Drug 
Administration truly enforces what they announced last week.
  It has been 10 years since Congress gave the Food and Drug 
Administration the legal authority to regulate all tobacco products, 
including e-cigarettes. There is no doubt about their legal authority.
  Last year, 4 million children under the age of 18 were vaping in 
America. As I mentioned, today the number is 5 million.
  Over the last 2 years, we have seen a 135-percent increase in 
America's children using e-cigarettes.
  Ask any public health official what this means. If we didn't do 
something, the numbers would continue to grow unchecked. Schools are 
taking doors off of toilet stalls so kids can't sneak in and use e-
cigarettes and vape between classes. Some kids are bold enough to try 
to do it in class.
  We have now linked e-cigarettes and vaping to over 380 cases of 
confirmed and severe respiratory illness nationwide. As of last night, 
in California, the seventh young person has died from vaping.
  We have 52 confirmed cases and 1 reported death in Illinois, but I 
can tell you that on Monday morning, one of my friends, a doctor in 
Chicago, told me in private that he had visited a major hospital, and 
three young people who had been vaping were hanging on by a thread to 
life. Kids as young as 15 have been hospitalized.
  There is no specific device or substance that has been linked to all 
of these cases, but the one common denominator is e-cigarettes.
  This nicotine addiction and what it leads to--especially JUUL's 
devices, which are extraordinarily popular, with the highest levels of 
nicotine we have seen in products legally sold in America.
  Nicotine is both toxic and highly addictive. It raises blood 
pressure, spikes adrenaline, and increases the risk of heart disease. 
It can have short- and long-term negative health impacts on 
the developing brain, particularly, including increased risk of 
addiction, mood disorder, and permanent lowering of impulse control.

  Kids who use e-cigarettes are three times more likely than their 
peers to transition to traditional tobacco cigarettes, and they, of 
course, kill almost half a million Americans a year.
  So that is our problem. That is our challenge.
  I would add, too, that it is time for us to start taxing this 
product. For years, I have been sounding the alarm that the vaping 
industry is following Big Tobacco's playbook when it comes to appealing 
to our children.
  I have learned over the years, in all my battles against Big Tobacco, 
that the single most effective tool to prevent children from starting 
the use of tobacco cigarettes is to price it out of their range.
  That is why we passed cigarette taxes years ago--and many States and 
localities followed suit--and why later this week I will be introducing 
the Tobacco Tax Equity Act. This legislation will establish the first 
Federal e-cigarette tax. It will close loopholes exploited by Big 
Tobacco to avoid the taxes, and it will double the Federal Government 
tax rate and peg it to inflation so it remains an effective public 
health tool in the future.
  Studies have shown that even a 10-percent tax lowers tobacco use by 
as much as 5 percent. The Surgeon General and World Health Organization 
have called it the most effective way to reduce tobacco use. I think 
the same will be true for e-cigarettes.
  The FDA's flavor ban announcement was an important first step. Now we 
need to make sure the ban is implemented quickly and that it is 
enforced strictly.

[[Page S5551]]

  We need the FDA to better regulate e-cigarette devices, many of which 
are easily tampered with and being used in conjunction with adulterated 
and counterfeit products.
  We need the Surgeon General to come up with a plan to help the 
millions of kids who are now addicted, and we need to start taxing e-
cigarette companies who have created today's youth vaping epidemic.
  A movie we have seen before of Big Tobacco exploiting kids, finally--
finally--resulted in public action against those tobacco companies, and 
the rate of teen tobacco cigarette smoking went down dramatically. 
Let's not sit through that same movie again.
  When it comes to vaping and e-cigarettes, let's move quickly to 
protect our children.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader is recognized.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak in 
leader time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                             Appropriations

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, the appropriations process demands that 
Republicans and Democrats work together. If one party decides to go it 
alone, it can wreck the spirit of bipartisanship necessary to 
responsibly fund the government. Unfortunately, Republicans elected to 
depart from a bipartisan path early in the appropriations process this 
year.
  We had a bipartisan deal on the budget caps--the 302(a), the defense-
nondefense side. We were working on allocations to the 12 subcommittees 
when the Republicans decided, without consulting any Democrat, to 
divert funds from medical research, opioid treatment, and our military 
and their families so they could appease the President's wish to spend 
up to $12 billion extra for a border wall--a wall, by the way, that the 
President promised Mexico would pay for.
  Leader McConnell and Chairman Shelby knew it would not fly with 
Democrats, and this ruse--this stunt, as the Republican leader is fond 
of calling things that can't pass--puts the entire appropriations 
process in jeopardy.
  Somehow, in the wake of all of this, the Republican leader has been 
accusing Democrats of threatening to block military funding. That is an 
absurd statement, if there ever was one. We are simply trying to stop 
Republicans from stealing the money from our military and putting it 
into the wall, which he said Mexico would pay for.
  The outcome of the upcoming vote to proceed to defense approps is not 
in doubt. Leader McConnell knows that Democrats, as well as several 
Republicans, oppose moving funds to the President's border wall that 
have been duly allocated by Congress for other important purposes, all 
military. The fact that Leader McConnell has scheduled this vote, 
knowing it would fail, makes it nothing more than a partisan stunt. My 
friend the leader reminds us all the time that the Senate is the place 
to make laws, not engage in political theater. With the vote, Leader 
McConnell will shatter his own rule.
  At the same time, Republicans are considering having a vote tomorrow 
to instruct the NDAA conferees to backfill some of the money they want 
to divert for the President's wall. The House already voted this down. 
Democrats--myself, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Lowey, and Ranking Member 
Leahy--have been crystal clear. We are not going to bless the 
President's stealing money from the military by backfilling it later. 
This would render Congress toothless and the appropriations process 
meaningless. If the President is allowed to take money from where 
Congress allocates it and puts it wherever he wants and we just give it 
back to him, what is the point? Democrats won't vote for that 
ridiculous precedent.
  Let's remember what this is all about. The President pledged to build 
a border wall that he promised Mexico would pay for. He then broke that 
promise and demanded Congress appropriate taxpayer dollars for the wall 
instead. When Congress declined to do that, the President declared a 
legally dubious national emergency to divert already allocated military 
funds to his wall. Now he is trying yet again to appropriate taxpayer 
money for the wall, which is the same strategy that failed when he 
tried it a year ago and then threw a temper tantrum and promised the 
famous Trump shutdown.
  I know my Republican friends want to wiggle out of this, but there is 
only one way to return the money to our troops, where it belongs: 
Republicans and Democrats join together in voting to terminate the 
President's emergency declaration.


                           Election Security

  Mr. President, in the Appropriations Committee markup tomorrow, there 
will be a vote on an amendment to increase election security funding 
for the coming year. Senate Republicans blocked a similar amount last 
year, and, since then, Leader McConnell has stonewalled election 
security legislation, even the most bipartisan, sensible compromises.
  While we still greatly desire to move that legislation and believe it 
to be essential, additional funding for States to harden their election 
infrastructure and prevent Russian or Chinese or Iranian interference 
is what this amendment provides tomorrow and is a no-brainer.
  On the Senate floor yesterday, Leader McConnell said: ``As 
partisanship bogs us down here in Washington, Moscow and Beijing are 
not exactly slowing down to wait for us.'' I agree. Foreign adversaries 
are lining up to do what Putin did in 2016.
  With the Presidential campaign set to begin in earnest next year, the 
time is now to safeguard our elections from foreign interference. The 
country will be watching how Senate Republicans vote on the election 
security amendment tomorrow.


                    Environmental Protection Agency

  Mr. President, it has been reported that the Trump administration is 
planning to finalize a rule that would block any State from getting 
ahead of the Federal Government to deal with carbon pollution from 
cars. That includes revoking a waiver granted to California that allows 
the State to place more stringent limits on carbon pollution than the 
Federal Government. In the Trump era, we are frequently confronted with 
the absurd, but this is beyond ridiculous.
  The President is the leader of the self-proclaimed party of States' 
rights. Yet he is blocking States from setting their own standards. 
This President has repeatedly said that ``we have the cleanest air, the 
cleanest water,'' almost like a mantra. Yet he is trying to prevent 
California and other States from cleaning up their air pollution. The 
President's position is, very simply put, this: No, California, I 
insist you pollute more. That is in effect what the President is 
saying.
  Congress has spoken on this matter. The Clean Air Act says, in no 
uncertain terms, that California can go further than the EPA to reduce 
pollution from cars. So this is a terrible idea by the EPA, a terrible 
idea by the Trump administration, full of hypocrisy and contradiction, 
clearly illegal, and I am confident that it will be struck down.


                     Nomination of Robert A. Destro

  Mr. President, on one final issue, the Destro nomination, today the 
Senate will vote on the confirmation of Robert Destro to serve as the 
Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 
responsible for the State Department's promotion of democracy, civil 
rights, and fair working standards across the world. Typical of the 
Trump administration, they have nominated someone whose record is 
diametrically opposed to the mission of the job to which he is 
nominated.
  Mr. Destro has vocally opposed the movement for LGBTQ equality and 
has been a staunch supporter of State-level religious freedom laws that 
have acted as backdoors to discriminate against LGBTQ Americans. He has 
a long record of opposition to a woman's constitutional right to make 
her own healthcare decisions. When asked about the requirement that 
insurance plans cover contraception, his response was ``the idea that 
you're entitled to have someone pay for your birth control pill is kind 
of ridiculous.''

[[Page S5552]]

  If confirmed, Mr. Destro--this very same Mr. Destro who is opposed to 
the rights of women, who is opposed to the rights of LGBTQ people--will 
be in charge of promoting civil rights around the world. What message 
would that send to women and members of the LGBTQ community who 
struggle under intolerant and oppressive governments? The answer is 
obvious. That is why yesterday every single Democrat, and even one 
Republican, voted against proceeding to his confirmation. I urge my 
Republican colleagues to study Mr. Destro's record, consider the job he 
is supposed to do, and join us in voting no on his nomination.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Sasse).
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Destro 
nomination?
  Mr. BLUNT. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts), 
and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds).
  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. 
Alexander) would have voted ``yea.''
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker), 
the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), the Senator from Vermont 
(Mr. Sanders), and the Senator from Massachusetts (Ms. Warren) are 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 44, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 289 Ex.]

                                YEAS--49

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Burr
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     McConnell
     McSally
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Risch
     Romney
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--44

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Collins
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Jones
     Kaine
     King
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Alexander
     Booker
     Klobuchar
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Warren
  The nomination was confirmed.

                          ____________________