[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 170 (Wednesday, September 29, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6765-S6769]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



             Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar

  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, in a few minutes, I will put forward the 
unanimous consent request that the Senate take up and approve a highly 
qualified and unquestionably noncontroversial nominee. I am going to 
take just a few minutes to talk about Jonathan Davidson, nominated to 
be the next Deputy Under Secretary for Legislative Affairs at the 
Treasury Department.
  To do this briefly, there are a few key points to make about this 
important nomination. To start, Jon isn't just a person off the street 
being nominated for a new job in the Biden administration. In fact, my 
guess is, virtually every Member of this body, Democrats and 
Republicans alike, have worked with Jon at one point or another.
  From 2011 until he was nominated this past spring, Jon served as 
chief of staff to another Finance Committee colleague, Senator Bennet. 
He is known as somebody who is honest, who is hardworking, and who is 
committed, most importantly, to bringing people together to tackle big 
challenges, and he has been doing it a long time.
  Before his work with Senator Bennet, Jon served as chief of staff to 
Senator Paul Sarbanes. He spent time in the office of Representative 
John Sarbanes, and he was later chief counsel to our friend and 
colleague, Senator Mark Warner. You don't have to take it from me that 
Jon knows his way around the Congress. All of those Members trusted Jon 
as a right-hand man.

  The second issue: I can't find any controversy with respect to his 
nomination. He cleared the Senate's Finance Committee on a 28-to-0 
vote.
  Let me repeat that: 28-to-0 vote.
  In fact, the Finance Committee reported out several nominees this 
Congress without any Republican opposition, none at all. Normally, that 
would be enough to pave the way for prompt and full Senate 
consideration, but I think we all understand these are not normal times 
here in the U.S. Senate.
  It used to be the case, at the end of July, the two sides would come 
together and look to pass a package of noncontroversial nominees by 
unanimous consent. My Finance Committee team thought this would be the 
case this year. Unfortunately, that did not take place. Senate 
Republicans were just in no mood to clear even the most uncontroversial 
nominees.
  This is an extraordinary level of obstruction beyond what you saw 
when the previous administration was staffing up. For example, let's 
take the previous two nominees for the same position Jon is up for.
  Drew Maloney was the first Trump nominee for Legislative Affairs at 
Treasury. The Finance Committee held a hearing on this nomination on 
June 7, 2017. The committee voted on his nomination a week later, 
favorably reported by a vote of 25 to 1. A few weeks after that, the 
full Senate passed his nomination by unanimous consent, along with 
several other nominations for roles in the Trump Treasury Department. 
That is how the process generally unfolds.
  Two years later, Brian McGuire was nominated to replace Mr. Maloney. 
His hearing was held July 24, 2019. The Finance Committee approved his 
nomination a week later. He was confirmed to serve in the Trump 
administration on September 24.
  In both cases, these two nominees, colleagues, were confirmed 2 
months after their hearings.
  Jon Davidson has been waiting 4 months since his hearing on May 25--
nearly twice as long as Trump nominees waited for the same job.
  I think we all understand that it is essential to have qualified 
individuals heading up offices of Legislative Affairs. They help to 
make sure administrations follow the laws, just as the Senate passes as 
intended. They help Members write legislation. They make sure that all 
Members get responses to their questions with respect to oversight.
  Setting everything else aside, you would think Senate Republicans 
would be especially interested now in making sure the Senate can 
perform that essential oversight. I myself am looking for some straight 
answers to a number of oversight requests I had posed to the Treasury 
Department, and having Jon installed in his new role as Treasury would 
sure help to move that process along. Federal Agencies and the Congress 
need these legislative point guards in order for Agencies to run as 
smoothly as possible.
  This isn't a policy position, nor is Jon Davidson a nominee who 
raises any major concern from anybody. I have yet to hear even anything 
resembling a substantive reason from Senate Republicans for opposing a 
nominee like Jon Davidson, who got a 28-to-nothing vote out of 
committee to lead this office. There is no reason for delaying any 
longer.
  Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
following nomination: Calendar No. 168, Jonathan Davidson, to be Deputy 
Under Secretary of the Treasury; that the nomination be confirmed, the 
motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no 
intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to 
the nomination; and that the President be immediately notified of the 
Senate's action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hickenlooper). Is there objection?
  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Reserving the right to object. Mr. President, this 
continues a discussion we have been having for days and indeed weeks 
and indeed months. Joe Biden is being flagrantly

[[Page S6766]]

lawless, in that he is refusing to impose mandatory congressional 
sanctions passed by Congress in the Countering America's Adversaries 
Through Sanctions Act, also known as CAATSA.
  CAATSA was designed for precisely the purpose of taking away the 
President's discretion to impose sanctions on Russia in cases where 
Congress deemed it necessary to mandate them.
  CAATSA passed Congress overwhelmingly. The vote was 98 to 2. Indeed, 
in September 2020, my colleague Senator Wyden wrote a letter that was 
joined by 10 other Democrats about Russian malign activities.
  Senator Wyden's letter stated: ``Congress has mandated a broad range 
of sanctions tools, and it is long past time for the administration to 
send a direct message to President Putin.''
  The letter continues, specifically citing the ``sanctions mandated 
provided for in'' CAATSA.
  President Biden is legally obligated to Nord Stream 2 AG, the company 
responsible for the planning, the construction, and the eventual 
operation of Putin's Nord Stream 2 Pipeline.
  Nord Stream 2 AG has committed acts that require the imposition of 
these mandated sanctions under CAATSA Section 228. Section 228 mandates 
sanctions on any company that conducts any ``significant 
transactions,'' including ``deceptive transactions,'' for Russian 
companies that are already sanctioned.
  In May, the Biden State Department sent Congress a certification 
confirming that Nord Stream 2 AG had engaged in those actions. It is 
clear that Nord Stream 2 AG falls under the mandatory sanctions of 
CAATSA. Nobody, not even the Biden administration, denies that the 
Biden State Department sent that certification confirming those 
actions. Nevertheless, President Biden and, in particular, the 
Department of Treasury is refusing to implement the law.
  I have spoken directly with Secretary Yellen. I have spoken directly 
with the Deputy Secretary of Treasury. The law is clear and 
unequivocal. And because of the political agenda of the Biden White 
House, because of President Biden's desire to surrender to Vladimir 
Putin and to give him a multibillion-dollar pipeline, weakening 
America, weakening Europe, and giving vast resources to Putin to hold 
Europe subject to energy blackmail, Treasury is refusing to follow the 
law.
  Nevertheless, I have been willing to offer a compromise. I have 
placed holds on nominees to the State Department and some of the 
nominees to the Treasury Department. And I have offered a compromise to 
lift the holds on this nominee and other nominees to the Treasury 
Department, and also to lift the holds on career nominees to State if 
either the Biden administration follows the law in CAATSA and impose 
sanctions. That is option A. That would be the best option.
  Or option B, if they decide because, for whatever political reason, 
they believe surrendering to Putin is a good idea notwithstanding 
America's national security interest, there is a second option that I 
have offered to lift those holds, which is they could impose the 
sanctions under CAATSA and then immediately delist Nord Stream 2 AG. 
That would prevent the sanctions from going into effect, but it would 
also trigger an automatic vote here in this Congress to override that 
decision.
  I have made that offer, along with Senator Toomey, in writing months 
ago. It is a reasonable compromise, and yet the Biden administration 
won't take it. They won't take it because they are terrified, if and 
when Congress votes on that override, that an overwhelming bipartisan 
majority of Congress in the Senate and the House will vote to override 
Joe Biden's indefensible decision to surrender to Vladimir Putin.
  Nonetheless, in the spirit of reasonableness, I am happy to offer the 
Senator from Oregon the same deal or a similar deal, at least, right 
here and right now.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2894

  Mr. President, there is a bill that I filed that imposes CAATSA 228 
sanctions on Nord Stream 2 AG. Every Democrat in this Chamber has 
supported sanctions on Nord Stream 2.
  In a moment, I am going to ask for unanimous consent to pass the 
legislation simply mandating that the Biden administration, that the 
Treasury Department--and this is a Treasury nominee that we are 
discussing--follow the law.
  If the Senator from Oregon will agree to my unanimous consent request 
and that bill passes the Senate, I will not object to this nominee if 
the Senator from Oregon is willing to accept that, because that will 
move the process along. The objective is to stop this pipeline that 
strengthens Putin, weakens Europe, and weakens America.
  And, indeed, if we pass the legislation mandating the CAATSA 
sanctions, I won't object to this nominee. When that legislation passes 
the House, I will lift my hold on another Treasury nominee. And when 
the President does the right thing and signs it into law, I will lift 
my holds on all the Treasury nominees.
  So it is a reasonable, incremental step forward that gives the 
Senator from Oregon the chance to demonstrate that when Democrats give 
speeches about how Nord Stream 2 is bad for America, bad for Europe, 
bad for the environment but good for Russia and Putin, we can now 
discover whether or not Democrats actually believe what they have said 
in speeches so many times.
  Therefore, I ask that the Senator modify his request so that in 
addition to confirming the nomination and, as if in legislative 
session, that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 
2894, which is at the desk; that the bill be considered read a third 
time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made 
and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator so modify his request?
  Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, let's understand exactly what is at issue 
here. Jonathan Davidson has been nominated to be the Deputy Under 
Secretary for Legislative Affairs. In that particular role, he would 
not be directly involved in decisions over sanctions, No. 1.
  No. 2, when it comes to Nord Stream 2, the Biden administration, to 
their credit, has recognized the threat from Russia, but also that the 
pipeline is nearly complete and the Trump administration failed to stop 
the construction.
  Everything my colleague from Texas is raising in his concerns about 
Nord Stream 2 is already happening with another pipeline--Turk Stream 
2--and my colleague is aware of this. He has been briefed repeatedly.
  Now, for those who don't have access to the same kind of information 
that my colleague has, gas is already being diverted from Ukraine into 
Europe through Turk Stream 2 because the past administration did 
nothing about that pipeline either.
  The Biden administration has actually put a plan forward to mitigate 
the effects of Nord Stream 2 and has received concrete agreements from 
the Germans to move Ukraine toward energy independence and address 
Russian threats.
  I am just going to close with just another dose of good government. 
The 9/11 Commission specifically warned about the need to have senior, 
confirmed individuals in place to avoid a threat to the homeland. And, 
by the way, we did that during the Trump administration. We have far 
less people confirmed today than we did in 2001, before 9/11.
  In my view, this has got to end. For these reasons, I object to the 
UC.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection to the modification is heard.
  Is there objection to the original request?
  The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. I recognize 
that my friend from Oregon has been busy with affairs on the Finance 
Committee and so has not been involved in the now 2 years of debate 
over Nord Stream 2 on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. But, 
unfortunately, that has resulted in the Senator from Oregon being given 
talking points--perhaps from the administration, perhaps from 
colleagues--that are simply factually incorrect. I am sure that is 
inadvertent.
  The Senator from Oregon just said that there is no way to stop this 
pipeline, and that the Trump administration failed to impose sanctions 
to stop

[[Page S6767]]

the pipeline. Both of those statements are factually wrong.
  I was the author of two separate pieces of legislation that passed 
into law concerning Nord Stream 2. Both were bipartisan legislation. 
Both, I authored with Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat, in the 
Senate. Both passed with overwhelming bipartisan support from both 
Houses of Congress.

  The first bill passed in December of 2019. Nord Stream 2 at the time 
was more than 90 percent complete, and the argument then that was being 
pushed by Russian disinformation and that, sadly, has been echoed by 
the Biden administration and was just echoed by the Senator from 
Oregon--the argument from Russian disinformation was, the pipeline 
can't be stopped; it is too late.
  We know that was Russian disinformation because it was conclusively 
disproved. Putin stopped building the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline the very 
day that the Cruz-Shaheen bipartisan sanctions were signed into law--
not the next day, not the next week. That day, we stopped the pipeline 
in its tracks.
  But, Mr. President, it was not only stopped for 1 day; it was stopped 
for more than a year. For December of 2019, for January, February, 
March--every month in 2020, the pipeline lay dormant. It was a piece of 
metal at the bottom of the ocean. So the claim that we cannot stop this 
pipeline is flat-out false because we did.
  By the way, when the Senator from Oregon said the Trump 
administration couldn't stop this pipeline, that, again, is just 
incorrect. When the President signed the legislation, the pipeline was 
stopped that day. It remained stopped for over a year.
  When did Putin return to building this pipeline? The date is 
important. Putin returned to building the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline on 
January 24, 2021, 4 days after Joe Biden was sworn into office. And he 
did so because Joe Biden and his team had already conveyed weakness 
that they would not enforce U.S. sanctions law and that they would roll 
over and give Putin and Russia a generational geopolitical gift. The 
only reason Putin began building again is because the Biden White House 
defied U.S. law to surrender to Putin.
  Now, Joe Biden is entitled to believe that is a good policy idea. 
What he is not entitled to do is ignore U.S. law. And the Senator from 
Oregon suggests this nominee has nothing to do with that. Well, it is 
the Department of the Treasury that is ignoring the CAATSA law, that is 
refusing to follow the policy.
  Sadly, this moment marks a new threshold in that debate. Up until 
this point, it has only been the Biden White House that has been 
surrendering to Russia. Sadly, now we have a Democratic Member of the 
Senate objecting to legislation to stop the Biden White House from 
surrendering to Russia. That is a move in the wrong direction.
  That being said, my offer of reasonable compromise remains if we can 
come together as we have repeatedly, Republicans and Democrats, to 
force the President to obey the law and to stop surrendering to Russia 
in a way that hurts America, hurts Europe.
  By the way, the European Parliament--my friends on the Democratic 
side of the aisle like to consider themselves lovers of our friends in 
Europe. The European Parliament voted on Nord Stream 2. The vote was 
roughly 500 to 50 against Nord Stream 2 because it makes our European 
allies subject to energy blackmail by Putin and his successor 
dictators.
  This is bad for America, bad for Europe, bad for peace, bad for the 
environment, but good for Vladimir Putin and for Russia. Joe Biden is 
mistaken to be committing this surrender, and my friend from Oregon 
errs in joining Joe Biden in that surrender to Russia.
  I hope the Senator from Oregon reconsiders. I hope Congress comes 
together again. But as long as that does not happen, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection was heard.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am going to be very brief and then make a 
unanimous consent request.
  Again, we have a difference of opinion with respect to the facts. 
That is what the Senate is all about--real debate. In a moment, I am 
going to ask unanimous consent to put into the Record at this point an 
article from just a few days ago from the Wall Street Journal that 
makes the truth about Nord Stream 2 AG very clear.
  In effect, in the Wall Street Journal article that we are going to 
put into the Record, the pipeline owner said last week that 
construction on the pipeline has been completed.
  There is no reason to object to this very talented individual, John 
Davidson, to head this important post after he got a 28-to-0 vote in 
the Senate Finance Committee.
  I think this article in the Wall Street Journal that I have just 
asked to be printed in the Record at this point in the debate, so we 
can make sure the facts are correct, supports our basic proposition on 
this side of the aisle.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                [From the Wall Street Journal, Sept. 13]

Senate Republicans Vow To Block Treasury Nominations Until Nord Stream 
                         II Firm Is Sanctioned

                   (By Ian Talley and Brett Forrest)

       Washington.--Senior Senate Republicans on Monday threatened 
     to indefinitely hold up the nominations of five top Treasury 
     Department officials if the Biden administration doesn't 
     blacklist the firm managing Russia's Nord Stream 2 pipeline 
     project.
       Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.) and Ted Cruz (R., Texas) said 
     they are prepared to approve the nominations, including two 
     national security posts that oversee sanctions and 
     counterterror finance, if the Treasury Department blacklists 
     Russia-owned Nord Stream 2 AG.
       The Biden administration has implemented sanctions against 
     several firms that have provided support to the project but 
     not against Nord Stream 2 AG, saying that it would irritate 
     relations with critical ally Germany and do little to stop 
     the project, given that it was near completion. Gazprom, 
     Russia's state-controlled gas-export monopoly and the 
     pipeline owner, said last week that construction on the 
     pipeline had been completed. But there are still bureaucratic 
     hurdles that have to be overcome to get it running.
       Nord Stream 2 is designed to accommodate the transmission 
     of 55 billion cubic meters of gas annually, the company said.
       Republicans say they are concerned the pipeline project 
     bolsters Europe's reliance on Russian energy and gives Moscow 
     leverage over Washington's trans-Atlantic allies. By holding 
     up the five top Treasury nominations, they hope to pressure 
     the administration into sanctioning the managing firm and 
     stymie the pipeline's startup.
       ``The administration's so-called `deal' with Germany hands 
     Vladimir Putin a geostrategic victory, entrenches corrupt 
     Russian influence in Europe, and drastically weakens the 
     security of Ukraine, Poland, and other states on the 
     frontline of Kremlin aggression,'' Mr. Toomey, the ranking 
     member of the Banking Committee, and Mr. Cruz said in a 
     letter to the chairmen of the Senate Banking and Foreign 
     Relations Committees.
       A Treasury spokeswoman said that while the department has 
     experienced career staff who are experts in their fields, 
     ``The Senate should move quickly to confirm these nominees 
     who are integral to disrupting illicit finance, combating 
     terrorism, and administering sanctions.''
       Nord Stream 2 AG officials didn't respond to a request for 
     comment.
       The Banking Committee is scheduled to vote Wednesday on the 
     nominations of Brian Nelson as the Treasury's undersecretary 
     for terrorism and financial intelligence and Elizabeth 
     Rosenberg for the role of assistant secretary for terrorism 
     financing.
       Without Republican support in the committee, Democratic 
     lawmakers face long odds getting the nominations approved.
       That could leave empty the post responsible for overseeing 
     U.S. sanctions policy, extending a vacancy that has already 
     lasted nearly two years. The nominations of Jonathan Davidson 
     as deputy undersecretary, Lily Lawrence Batchelder as 
     assistant secretary for tax policy and Benjamin Harris as 
     assistant secretary for economic policy all have been 
     committee-approved, but full Senate ratification has been 
     held up by Mr. Cruz.
       The Texas Republican said he's prepared to lift his holds--
     as well as those he has on nearly two dozen State Department 
     appointments--if the administration commits to sanctioning 
     the Russian project management firm.
       Sen. Robert Menendez (D., N.J.), the chairman of the Senate 
     Foreign Relations Committee, didn't immediately respond to a 
     request for comment. The chairman of the Banking Committee, 
     Sen. Sherrod Brown (D., Ohio), directed questions to the 
     State Department and White House. ``Decisions on sanctions 
     regarding the NS II pipeline are made by the 
     administration,'' a spokeswoman for Mr. Brown said.
       The Republican senators say a federal law called the 
     Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, 
     signed into law in 2017, mandates blacklisting companies or 
     individuals involved in evasion of the act's sanctions. They 
     say the provisions allow for the administration to delist the 
     company, but that opens the door for Congress to vote on the 
     issue.

[[Page S6768]]

       Republican aides said the law mandating sanctions had 
     bipartisan support, fueled by concern the Trump 
     administration would treat Moscow too favorably. Given that 
     some Democratic lawmakers opposed the Biden administration's 
     Nord Stream 2 decision, those aides said Congress could vote 
     to keep the firm on Treasury's blacklists.
       The risk of sanctions, the aides said, could dissuade 
     companies from providing certification.
       In November, Norwegian certification company DNV suspended 
     its work on Nord Stream 2 after assessing that its activities 
     could expose the company to sanctions under Protecting 
     Europe's Energy Security Act, a 2019 U.S. law specific to the 
     pipeline, a company spokesman said.
       Last week, Germany's energy regulator Bundesnetzagentur 
     received Nord Stream 2 AG's application for an operating 
     license. The company has four months to engage an independent 
     certification company to complete an assessment of the 
     pipeline's operational integrity.
       Once a certification is complete, the German regulator 
     would send its decision to the European Commission, but this 
     isn't the final hurdle to gas flows. Initial deliveries could 
     face additional, unrelated delays. Last month, a German court 
     rejected Nord Stream 2 AG's bid to bypass a European Union 
     pro-competition regulation mandating that a gas producer and 
     the company that transports the gas be separate entities.
       One of the congressional aides said the Biden 
     administration, besides worrying about creating diplomatic 
     friction with allies, may also be concerned about setting 
     precedent regarding sanctions, because Treasury officials 
     also could have to sanction other companies.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I don't have objection to the article being 
included in the Record, but I would note that, once again, the Senator 
from Oregon is limited by the fact that he has not participated in the 
debate on this in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the last 2 
years, because what he stated in his first remarks was that there was 
no way to stop the pipeline initially and the Trump administration 
failed to do so. That was factually incorrect.
  We stopped the pipeline the day President Trump signed the bipartisan 
Cruz-Shaheen sanctions into law. That was December of 2019, and the 
pipeline was stopped for over a year. As I mentioned, on January 24 of 
2020, 4 days after Joe Biden was sworn into office, Putin began--
returned to building the pipeline because Biden had already telegraphed 
his surrender to Russia.
  Now, what my friend from Oregon just said is--he repeated news 
coverage that the pipeline is now, today, complete. That is, in fact, 
correct, that because Biden surrendered on this point, Putin went all 
in and finished the pipeline. But this is where being part of the 
Foreign Relations Committee discussion matters, because even though the 
pipeline is now physically complete, it does not mean it is operative. 
After the pipeline is physically complete, there are months of 
certifications required and multiple authorities.
  The legislation that Congress passed as a bipartisan matter also 
imposes sanctions on any entity, any company that certifies the 
pipeline. Indeed, the position of the Biden State Department has been 
that even when the pipeline is complete, we can stop it from ever going 
online by stopping certification.
  So the legislation that I just asked for consent would do exactly 
that--it would stop certification, and it would leave it as a hunk of 
metal rather than an operating pipeline enriching Putin at the expense 
of Europe and America. So we still have time to stop this.
  One final observation. This morning, I spent a couple of hours in a 
classified briefing on this topic, on Nord Stream 2. A question that I 
posed to the Biden State Department--I said: What exactly did Joe 
Biden, did the administration get in exchange for surrendering to 
Russia in a way that will impact this country and Europe for decades to 
come?
  The answer, I will say, was altogether unsatisfactory. The only thing 
the Biden White House got was good will from Angela Merkel, whose party 
was just defeated resoundingly this past weekend in the election. So 
Angela Merkel is on her way out. We got good will from someone who will 
very soon no longer be the leader of Germany.
  Instead, the German people voted in--elevated the Greens, who were 
vocally opposed to the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline. So the new government in 
Germany is not going to appreciate Biden surrendering to Putin in a way 
that hurts the environment and hurts Germany. But we have alienated the 
Ukrainians; we have alienated the Poles; we have alienated Eastern 
Europe. The European Union voted 500 to 50, roughly, against Nord 
Stream 2. We got nothing, and we hurt U.S. jobs.
  This is foolhardy, and I am hopeful that the Senate will exercise our 
historical role over foreign policy and prevent a President and an 
administration from making this mistake.
  I would note, Secretary of State Blinken and the State Department 
argued vociferously in the interagency process to sanction Nord Stream 
2 AG, and it was the political operatives at the Biden White House who 
overrode the State Department. They should not have done so, and today 
the Department of the Treasury should follow the law and impose 
sanctions under CAATSA or delist them and trigger a vote in this 
Congress.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  (The remarks of Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Lee 
pertaining to the introduction of S. 2895 are printed in today's Record 
under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2895

  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I 
ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate 
consideration of S. 2895, introduced earlier today. I ask unanimous 
consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and 
that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the 
table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Ms. CANTWELL. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, Senator Scott's bill would prohibit the 
Department of Transportation, Amtrak, Transportation Security 
Administration, or other Agencies from requiring passengers in 
interstate transportation to show proof of COVID-19 in order to travel.
  I appreciate my colleagues--all of whom I serve with on the Commerce 
Committee. I know that they know well--we have had a lot of discussions 
about the impacts of COVID-19 on our transportation sector. They know 
very well that we had to spend a lot of resources keeping our 
transportation sector moving.
  Why?
  Because we have to move goods and services and products. During 
COVID-19, we had to move essential workers, and we had to move product.
  There is no doubt our transportation system needs to have keen 
oversight as it relates to moving in even a pandemic. That is what we 
did. I am proud of the work that we did. But it is not lost on anybody 
that COVID-19, the deadliest pandemic in U.S. history--as of September 
28, there have already been 700,000 COVID-19-related deaths in the 
United States and over 43 million infections. In my State, 7,586 deaths 
and 652,000 cases.
  So the point is here, we have been fighting this pandemic with all of 
these tools and no one has ever suggested the one--that Senator Scott 
nor my colleagues from the Commerce Committee are saying what the 
President might do. That is not what he has suggested.
  In fact, I was very involved in an area of transportation where we 
wanted to get cruise ships back in service to Alaska at a critical 
moment--both for Alaska and a critical moment during the pandemic. Not 
everybody was ready to have that happen; not everybody was ready to 
move. And yet it meant so much to Alaska that we all worked together. 
And in some instances, those cruise ships said: We are going to require 
the vaccine.
  So the point is here, we are not trying to mandate this. Now, if the 
President and the industry feel that it is important to have a 
workforce so that that workforce continues to serve us and conserve the 
growing response to the pandemic--which I mean responding to the 
aftermath of the pandemic--that is why we spent money. That is why we 
are trying to take off. That is why we are trying to return a 
workforce. That is why we are returning

[[Page S6769]]

kids to school. That is why we are trying to get our hospitals staffed. 
That is why we are doing things.
  That is the only thing the President said, is that those people 
should get a vaccine. He has not said, if you want to get on an 
airplane, you have to get vaccinated--maybe if you are flying overseas 
and have to work with another country.
  My colleague from Florida knows all too well because he and I are 
working together to try to get temperature checks in a very broad way 
established at airports through the U.S. We have agreed that is a smart 
thing to do. It has been done on an international basis for a long time 
and it prevents people from getting on a plane who are sick. The 
President has not said this.
  To now put a bill through that might have prohibited the cruise ship 
industry reestablishing service up to Alaska because now, all of a 
sudden, you are going to have all of these things is not the way I want 
to go.
  I like what we have been able to achieve. It has taken hard work and 
working together. It does not take us passing this bill by Senator 
Scott.
  I object, and I hope my colleagues understand that we are willing to 
work on anything related to the transportation sector so it can keep 
our U.S. economy moving.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. First off, I am disappointed my colleague 
objected. I think No. 1 is this is unconstitutional. First off, 
President Biden promised he wouldn't be doing this. This is 
unconstitutional.
  Here is what it is going to do. If you talk to businesses around this 
country, they are already struggling to get people back to work because 
of excess funding that has been provided. And now we are going to tell 
a bunch of people that you can't come back to work because you haven't 
been vaccinated. We are going to tell people, you can't get on an 
airplane because you haven't been vaccinated.
  This is wrong. This is not what the Federal Government ought to be 
doing. They ought to do what I did when I was Governor. You give people 
the information and feel comfortable that the American public will make 
a good decision.
  I think this is a mistake. I hope my colleague will change her mind. 
And I hope this President will not continue down the path of requiring 
Americans to get vaccinations, because I don't think it is fair to 
Americans and I think it is unconstitutional.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.