[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 29 (Monday, February 14, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S653-S666]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
POSTAL SERVICE REFORM ACT OF 2022--Motion to Proceed--Resumed
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will
resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 3076, which the
clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 266, H.R. 3076, a bill to
provide stability to and enhance the services of the United
States Postal Service, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Hirono). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Recognition of the Majority Leader
The majority leader is recognized.
Tribute to Ben Ray Lujan
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, now, at the beginning, before I speak
on the business of the day, I would like to add that yesterday we were
all overjoyed, just thrilled, to hear from our colleague, our dear
friend, Senator Ben Ray Lujan.
Through his first public video message shared on social media, Ben
Ray reiterated yesterday that his recovery is going well; that his
office continues to work serving the people of New Mexico; and that he
expects, praise God, to make a full recovery.
I have been able to get on the phone with him in recent days. He was
chipper. He sounded like the same Ben Ray we have come to know and
love, and I can report he is in very good spirits, raring to go.
From now until his return, all of us in the Senate miss him greatly.
We are rooting for him. We cannot wait to see him walk through the
doors of this Chamber once again to get back to work.
Business Before The Senate
Madam President, now on Senate business, on Postal, last week, as you
know, the House passed, with overwhelming bipartisan support--I believe
a majority from each party--the most important update to the U.S.
Postal Service in decades.
The Postal bill is the definition of legislation that should sail
through the Congress. Both sides support it. It had diligent work by
both Democrats and Republicans, with major input from
[[Page S654]]
both parties. Everyone knows we need it, and the American people so
strongly support action to put our Postal Service on sustainable
footing.
Our incredible postal workers give us their very best every single
day they are on the job. They deserve no less in return.
So many people depend on the mail. You could be a veteran; the VA
sends your prescriptions through the mail. About one-fifth of Social
Security recipients, as I understand, don't have the internet and
depend on the mail. Small businesses depend on the mail. Rural areas
depend on the mail. Just about everybody does. People don't want snail
mail.
It has been no fault of the workers at the post office that postal
delivery is slow. They don't have the resources they need, and, in
part, they don't have the resources they need because they have a
crazy, antediluvian-type system of how they calculate pensions and
healthcare.
We have to change all this. We have been waiting a long, long time.
Later today, I am going to move to have the Senate approve a few
technical fixes to the bill so we can move closer to final passage. The
House made these fixes on their end through unanimous consent last
week. Not a Democrat nor Republican in that whole body blocked it, and
anyone could have. We want to do the same here in the Senate.
I hope my Republican colleagues will give consent to allow these
necessary fixes to go through, just as it happened in the House. As I
said, Members from both sides worked very, very hard to put this bill
together. It commands strong, bipartisan support, and we should move
forward with it as soon as we can. Bipartisan postal reform already has
enough support to become law. I hope it happens quickly.
Let me just say this once again so people understand what is going on
here. All we are asking for is to fix a small clerical error made by
the House of Representatives when they sent their bill to the Senate.
It has nothing to do with the substance of the bill. As I mentioned,
this fix--this small, little, immaterial change that is technical--
received unanimous consent, every Democrat and every Republican, in the
House. So let's have the same outcome here in the Senate tonight. Let's
move forward on this proposal.
At the end of the day, it is about making sure the post office can
fulfill its obligations to its workers and to the American people. We
all know how many of us--millions of us--depend on the mail. We all
know how we have been disappointed that mail service has slowed down.
We all know that we should get together, Democrats and Republicans, to
fix it.
The bipartisan reform bill will make sure Americans can continue
relying on the post office the same way they have relied on it all
their lives.
I hope that here in the Senate, we will keep working on this bill
with the same bipartisan spirit we have seen for the past week.
Government Funding
Madam President, our other priority this week will be approving
legislation to keep the government open until March 11 so we can give
appropriators from both parties more time to draft the yearlong omnibus
funding bill.
This is another place where we are making bipartisan progress. Led by
Senators Leahy and Shelby and their counterparts in the House,
Representatives DeLauro and Granger, we have come to good agreements on
top-line numbers, and we can move forward--not with a CR, which simply
just reenacts what was in place last year despite the need for changes,
in many ways--but we can enact what we call an omnibus, which is what
we should be doing.
We have had positive conversations, and Democrats are united to keep
the government open so we can achieve this omnibus. We will continue
working with the Republican leadership to move forward on a CR before
the deadline later this week.
Supreme Court Nomination
Madam President, on SCOTUS, the Supreme Court of the United States,
well, one of the most solemn responsibilities entrusted to the U.S.
Senate is offering our advice and ultimately our consent on the
President's appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is a
responsibility that stands apart from just about all others. Those whom
we approve sit on the Court, and they will render judgment and exert
influence on the most consequential legal matters for years and
potentially for decades. The impact of any one Supreme Court nominee is
often felt long after the work of a single administration comes to an
end.
Very soon, this will be precisely the task the Senate will be asked
to take up once again when President Biden announces his choice to
replace Associate Justice Breyer. I have no doubt President Biden will
name someone who can not only bring Members of this body together but
someone with a proven record for excellence and evenhandedness. When
President Biden makes his announcement, I intend to have the Senate
move quickly to take up and confirm his nominee.
The President has promised he will nominate a Black woman to serve as
a Justice for the first time ever. This will not only be one of the
most important moments in the history of our courts but of our entire
country. Precious few have held the title of ``Justice'' in American
history--only 115 to date--and none of them has been a Black woman. So
the President's announcement is truly historic and potentially game-
changing for the future of Supreme Court nominees.
Imagine the impact the President's pick will have on countless young
people who look up to the Nation's courts and see men and women who
better reflect our country's makeup. Imagine how that will inspire the
next generation to pursue their own interests in public service and law
and government. The judges and Justices of the future have their eyes
on this body right now in the present.
If our democracy is to prosper in this century, we need people from
all walks of life to see that they have a place at the table when it
comes to public service. The President's promise is a big step in that
direction.
The Democratic-led Senate has already played an important role in
bringing balance and diversity to our courts with highly qualified
nominees. It has been one of our highest priorities from the moment we
entered the majority.
Under President Biden, the Senate has confirmed 46 judges to serve
lifetime appointments to the Federal Bench. Indeed, this majority has
confirmed the most judges in the first year following the President's
inauguration since the time of John F. Kennedy. Three-quarters of these
new judges have been women--three-quarters. Two-thirds have been people
of color. More than a quarter of all of President Biden's appointees
have been Black women, who are still too far underrepresented in our
Federal Judiciary.
It is not just their demographic diversity that makes them
remarkable, although that is unquestionably important; the new judges
are also diverse because of their professional backgrounds. We have
confirmed more Federal defenders in the President's first year than any
President in modern history. We have confirmed more civil rights
lawyers, election lawyers, more individuals with deep experience in
public service.
I want to emphasize one other thing. These nominees are also
extremely qualified. We are not sacrificing qualifications and
excellence for diversity. President Biden's nominees are both more
diverse and more qualified, in my judgment, than any President's in
recent history.
So Senate Democrats are proud of this record, and we are going to
keep going. Diversity in all of its forms matters. It is good for the
justice system, and it is vital to the health of our democracy.
When the President announces his historic pick, the Senate will be
ready to move quickly and fairly to confirm her to the Supreme Court.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam 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 Republican leader is recognized.
Mask Mandates
Mr. McCONNELL. About 2 weeks ago, I spoke on this floor about the
[[Page S655]]
state of the pandemic 2 years in, about letting American families get
back to normal. The current science clearly supports the 70 percent of
Americans who believe we must accept this virus is here to stay, trust
the science, and proceed with normal life.
At the time, this was not a universal sentiment. The next day, across
the river, liberals tried to shame Virginia's new Governor for forgoing
a mask in an incredibly vaccinated area where cases had been falling
for weeks.
The top Democrat in the Virginia State Senate criticized the Governor
and backed ongoing school mask mandates as ``common sense.'' But, my
goodness, how quickly things can change.
A few days ago, I understand the same State senate leader did a 180-
degree turn and voted for an amendment to end school mask mandates. A
dam had begun to break nationwide. A week ago, leaders in Democrat-run
New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware, and Oregon announced they would ax
or relax their mask and/or vaccine mandates in the near future. By the
end of the week, States, including California, Illinois, Nevada, New
York, and Rhode Island had followed suit to varying degrees.
Now, obviously, the scientific facts have not changed in the last few
weeks. We have known for many weeks that this variant is significantly
milder, and we have known for many months that the universally
available vaccines reduce the odds of hospitalization or death down to
the level of many routine risks that we all face constantly in our
daily lives. The only science that has changed in the last 2 weeks is
the political science. The only data that has changed in the last 2
weeks is the Democrats' polling data.
The Washington Post put it like this: The ``abrupt end to mask
mandates reflects a shifting political landscape.''
Ah, but there is a problem.
While Democratic leaders are stampeding to finally follow the science
and end burdensome mandates on adults in many places, America's
children are still being left behind. States like New York and
California are rolling back restrictions on adults but have yet to
provide any end date or off-ramp for mask mandates in K-12 schools.
This is completely backward since we have known for well over a year
that COVID poses far lower risks to children than to adults.
Officials in Illinois and the District of Columbia have embraced the
same double standard, winding back general public mandates while
leaving the schools with no end date in sight. In other words, here in
Washington, the Mayor's office will be lifting mandates next week in
all kinds of adult establishments, from bars to fitness studios, while
keeping kids in classrooms, masked up for at least--at least--another
month.
Even as Democrats permit grownups to get back to normal, they are
clinging onto their emergency powers over K-12 classrooms. The
ultrarich, ultrapowerful teachers unions that have been antagonists of
normal childhoods at each step of the pandemic are continuing to drag
their heels.
For 2 years now, Democrats at the local, State, and Federal levels
have let a labor executive named Randi Weingarten become something of
an unelected national classroom czar, holding millions of kids' fates
in her hand. Science has proven over and over again that in-person
schooling is safe for kids, but Big Labor has sought to move the
goalposts every time, and Democrats have mostly gone along with it.
Last year, Ms. Weingarten bragged publicly that the Biden
administration had invited her own hyperpolitical teachers union to
basically author the scientific guidelines for school reopenings. The
Biden administration took the pen away from doctors and experts and
handed it to Big Labor. She boasted:
They asked us for language and we gave them language.
Reporters found multiple instances where the union's words were
copied and pasted directly--directly--into the final CDC document.
Now the same Ms. Weingarten is trying to move the goalposts again on
America's kids to an even more extreme and unscientific place. She
asserted last week that little kids should have to keep covering their
faces in schools until there is ``no dissemination and transmission in
schools.''
With respect, that is completely bonkers, absolutely bonkers. There
is no credible scientist or doctor in America who believes that we are
headed toward zero COVID. We are not going to magically eradicate this
virus; it is heading endemic. So Ms. Weingarten's latest made-up
standard would have K-12 kids covering their faces literally forever.
Little kids in masks forever? That is the upshot of this top Biden
administration's ally's public demands. This is utter madness.
Two years ago, the American people accepted temporary disruptions to
their daily lives in order to prevent our hospitals from collapsing and
to buy scientists time to invent vaccines and therapeutics. Check,
check, and check. Our healthcare system endured. We have remarkable,
safe, and effective vaccines; we have therapeutics; and we know that,
thank God, none of these variants have posed a medical emergency for
the vast majority of children--period.
Americans who watched the Super Bowl saw rich celebrities having a
grand time with hardly a mask in sight, but under the Democrats'
policies, first graders who watched that big, maskless party last night
had to wake up this morning and cover their own faces in order to go to
school. America's classrooms seem to be the last places where local,
State, and Federal Democrats will accept that cost-benefit calculations
exist, and zero transmission is simply not possible.
For 2 years now, the Democratic Party has allowed some of the most
powerful special interests in our country to profoundly--profoundly--
disrupt children's lives. The political left has put kids last. That is
simply not acceptable. American families deserve normalcy; they deserve
it right now; and this side of the aisle, the party of parents, has
their back.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Russia
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Madam President, it is no secret that Vladimir Putin
longs to restore and rebuild part of the old Soviet Union. Putin wants
Russia to be a superpower, and he knows what he is lacking.
Russia is a one-trick pony with a lot of energy. It offers little
except that. Its population is a tenth of the size of China's. Putin
knows he needs to strengthen his military, economy, and position in the
world, and he has been ruthless in that pursuit.
We should not, then, be surprised that he is escalating his actions.
It is a quest he has been on for many, many years. In 2008, Russia
invaded the country of Georgia; in 2014, Russia invaded Ukraine to take
the region of Crimea; and last year, Russia began to gather troops
along the Ukrainian border.
Putin rejects Western ideals; he toys with sovereign nations; and he
plays by an entirely different set of rules--his own. And when
President Biden signals that our words are hollow or that we will
disregard our allies, our adversaries, like Putin, take notice.
In September of last year, the world watched as our military was
ordered to retreat from Afghanistan; we abandoned our allies; and we
left civilians at the mercy of the Taliban. In October, Russia further
built up its invasion force along the Ukrainian border. Last month,
North Korea, once again, tested missiles. Iran is, perhaps, a few weeks
away from building its own nuclear bomb; and today, as I speak, China
struts at the Olympics while it tortures its citizens.
The Chinese Communist Party seeks to dominate its neighbors and
devour our ally, Taiwan. Communist China's navy has more ships than the
U.S. Navy's, and their weapons grow more sophisticated than ours every
day. Here is just an example: The Chinese successfully tested a
hypersonic missile in December while we are still at the drawing board.
Dictators and bullies zero in on weakness like a homing beacon. In
the absence of our inaction, our adversaries will move with a level of
decisiveness President Biden could only dream of.
[[Page S656]]
Putin does not want a war with the United States and our allies in
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. This would be foolish.
Putin's goal is to deter Ukraine from joining NATO. He wants their pro-
democracy government to collapse, for Ukrainians to abandon their
resolve, and wants to take over the country that largely despises
him. He wants a buffer between him and the West, and he wants the
United States to step aside and let him do this.
To be clear, we do not--we do not--want American bloodshed in
Ukraine, but neither do the Ukrainians.
Last year, I traveled to Ukraine with several other Members of
Congress and met with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine. The Ukrainian
President told me, ``Ukrainians do not want Americans' boots on the
ground.'' Ukrainians are willing and ready to fight their own fight.
All they ask is for support; not blankets and helmets, but weapons--
weapons that can help them fight off the aggression.
While Ukrainians have been sounding an alarm, our President has been
asleep at the wheel. When Russia was amassing troops along the
Ukrainian border, President Biden was giving a blistering speech about
voting rights, saying anyone who disagrees with him wants to destroy
our country. Instead of studying war plans on Afghanistan or addressing
the growing threats from Russia and China, our servicemembers were
forced to spend hours upon hours on ``woke'' training, not on readiness
and becoming a first-class soldier.
But the missed opportunities don't stop at this administration. The
Senate already missed a chance to hit Putin where it hurts.
A few weeks ago, Senate Republicans voted in support of sanctions on
Russia's pipeline through Europe, the Nord Stream 2. Senate Democrats
refused to support these sanctions. Who are they more afraid of,
President Biden or Putin?
President Biden has spent a year deploying a diplomacy-first
strategy--the same page out of the same playbook from when he was our
Vice President. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over
and over, expecting different results.
Flawed decisions leads to failed outcomes. And weak leadership leads
to bullies pushing the boundaries, like Vladimir Putin. It is time for
President Biden to step up. Aggression must be met with resolve.
We need to bring the full might of sanctions and squeeze Russia's
economy so tight it chokes Putin's wealth. This includes sanctions on
Nord Stream 2 and actions like delisting Russian companies in our
capital markets, hopefully, to devalue their currency, the ruble.
We need to show Putin that it is shortsighted to take Ukraine and
think it is a victory. This may be another effort in a decades-long
pursuit, but it will be met with fury and a fury of sanctions.
Looking forward, the question becomes this: When our adversaries like
Russia and China test our resolve again, will they be met with meekness
or might? Standing on this floor, lobbing advice to our President to be
stronger, to get tough, is not enough and is not going to work. That is
too simplistic of a view. This moment requires more than that.
The answer is not to simply project strength; it is to be strong. We
have to be a strong nation that impresses and scares the bullies--not a
weak country but a country that is strong. We need to get back to what
makes this country so great in the first place, and that is the
following:
First, practice peace through strength. That means we make the
necessary investments to modernize our military. The highest possible
percentage of money we spend at the Department of Defense should go to
building a killing machine. We are a superpower; we are not trying to
be one. But our adversaries are outpacing us.
Second, return our economic strength. We have to get our physical
house in order, and it starts in Congress. Inflation has engulfed our
economy. Families face bare grocery shelves and gas that is more, in
some places, than $5 a gallon. Our national debt just crested at $30
trillion, amounting to almost $100,000 per citizen in our country
alone, just their debt themselves. We need to return to a free market
enterprise with less government intervention.
And, third, regain our political strength by anchoring in our
American strength of character. That is what this country is about.
In the past year, the administration has shown our borders and our
laws are not important. Over 2 million immigrants entered our country
illegally day by day, and that figure increases as we speak.
Additionally, COVID's winter surge caught the administration flat-
footed, leaving the most vulnerable among us short of tests and of
therapeutics.
Our country is divided on issues ranging from education to public
health. The administration has attacked the policies and beliefs that
made our country so great. But we have to return to champion that
spirit of American resolve and determination in all facets of life. The
strength of our Nation depends on it. The future of our Nation depends
on it.
After this dark year marked by uncertainty, Americans are ready to
return to the path of American independence. Americans across the
country want to reignite the American dream and rekindle American
ingenuity. We should all--this is something all of us--from Members of
Congress to our President--should want.
Putin thinks that because our President has projected weakness,
America is weak. How wrong he is.
To Russia and China, I say, betting against the United States and
rolling the dice against Ukraine or Taiwan is a losing game.
We need to show the world that the United States is still the
brightest beacon of freedom, hope, and democracy. Again, I do not want
American blood to be shed in Ukraine, but we should support a democracy
against any tyrant.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Fourth Anniversary of Parkland School Shooting
Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I am here today to take a moment and
remember the tragedy that occurred 4 years ago at Marjory Stoneman
Douglas High School in Parkland, FL. And I want to discuss some
legislation that I have introduced that results from that. But remember
that day.
On that day, we lost 17 innocent souls from this globe of ours, and
it was at the hands of a troubled and evil young man who entered the
school and opened fire.
This tragedy can't be forgotten and should not be forgotten, not by
the survivors of this attack, not by the families who lost loved ones,
and then, eventually, not by this Congress because we can do something
about it. We must continue finding solutions to prevent these attacks.
In this spirit, today, I am back here on the Senate floor pushing for
passage of my bipartisan and bicameral EAGLES Act.
My bill is supported by over 40 State attorneys general, along with
several groups, including Stand with Parkland, the Fraternal Order of
Police, the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and,
lastly, the Major County Sheriffs of America.
Passing the EAGLES Act is very vital in our fight to protect our
schools and to promote a safe and healthy learning environment for our
children.
Just this month, the National Institute of Justice published an
article discussing common traits of people who engage in mass
shootings. This study covers the years between 1966 and 2019.
Their analysis showed that the people who commit these acts were
commonly troubled by personal trauma before the shooting, nearly always
in a state of crisis at the time they committed their awful acts, and
in most cases even engaged in leaking their plans before they opened
fire. Every single one of those findings applies to the shooter at
Parkland, FL.
It is clear that we need to ramp up prevention efforts. We need the
EAGLES Act because that act would achieve these aims, and it would do
it by reauthorizing and expanding the U.S. Secret Service's National
Threat Assessment Center to proactively identify and manage threats
before they result in more tragedies. The National
[[Page S657]]
Threat Assessment Center studies targeted violence and proactively
identifies how to manage threats before they result in more tragedies.
The bill that I introduced, the EAGLES Act, also establishes a Safe
Schools Initiative to look at school violence prevention and expands
research on school violence.
My bill also provides funding to hire social scientists with
expertise in child psychological development to support the National
Threat Assessment Center's work. This is important to make sure that
proven and evidence-based policies will continue to support everyone in
the school environment and do it positively.
Students need more support from Congress for a safe, positive, and
inclusive learning environment. The EAGLES Act delivers just that by
providing resources and training to school personnel, which will enable
them to identify troubled youth and give them the intervention and
treatment they need, hopefully long before an intervention is needed by
law enforcement.
While we cannot undo the tragedies of the past, we must continue
working on ways to prevent future tragedies.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Duckworth). The Senator from West
Virginia.
Nomination of Robert McKinnon Califf
Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I rise today to once again express my
extreme disbelief and disappointment that the U.S. Senate will vote to
confirm Dr. Robert M. Califf to yet again lead the Food and Drug
Administration. My opposition is nothing new. In fact, it was exactly 5
years ago next week that I came to the Senate floor to urge my
colleagues to oppose Dr. Califf's nomination to serve under then-
President Obama in this same role.
In the 5 years since Dr. Califf was confirmed, more than 400,000
Americans and 5,000 West Virginians have died from a drug-related
overdose. And 2020 was the deadliest year on record for drug-related
overdoses, when 1,386 West Virginians and nearly 95,000 Americans died
from a drug-related overdose. That number is just increasing, with over
100,000 Americans having died from overdoses between April 2020 and
April 2021. Let's not beat around the bush: Dr. Califf bears a great
deal of responsibility for these deaths.
We have a luxury with this nomination that we are not usually
granted. Because Dr. Califf has already served as the FDA Commissioner,
we have insight into how he will lead the Agency.
During Dr. Califf's previous tenure, drug-related overdoses went up.
Five years later, they are up again--and this time at record numbers.
In fact, despite his pledge to overhaul the FDA's policy, during his
tenure and immediately following it, the FDA approved five new opiates
for market. In that same time, they removed only one.
The wise Dr. Maya Angelou famously said, ``When someone shows you who
they are, believe them.'' Well, Dr. Califf has shown us who he is, and
he has shown a complete lack of interest in actually making the
difficult decisions that we need the leader of the FDA to make. Nothing
that Dr. Califf has said or done has led me to believe he will operate
the FDA any differently than he did during his previous tenure.
As if this is not enough, reports have circulated that Dr. Califf
intends to keep Dr. Janet Woodcock on board as a senior advisor at the
FDA if confirmed. Dr. Woodcock bears more responsibility for the opiate
epidemic in our country than any other person at the FDA because of her
oversight role in the approval of every single one of the opiates that
went on to ravage communities like ours in West Virginia.
She was in charge in 1995 when the FDA approved OxyContin--what we
know now to be the tip of the spear of the opiate epidemic. In 2014,
she ignored the advice of the FDA advisory committee that voted
overwhelmingly, by a vote of 11 to 2, against approving Zohydro. She
decided to approve Zohydro anyway at a time when we needed less
opiates, not more. Zohydro is a questionable, pure hydrocodone drug
with a strong risk of overdose and death. Experts estimated that just
two pure pills can kill an individual.
The pharmaceutical industry has greatly benefited from the status quo
that people like Dr. Califf and Dr. Woodcock have established at the
FDA. In fact, Dr. Califf himself joined the board of directors for a
pharmaceutical company immediately following his tenure at the FDA. He
prospered financially in that position as thousands more died of
overdoses.
Due to the continued negligence of the FDA, more than 400,000
Americans have died since Dr. Califf first served. Among those
Americans was Lauren Cole from Morgantown. Her father Michael Cole
graciously allowed me to share Lauren's story with all of you.
Lauren was the definition of the girl next door: a person who is
approachable, dependable, and who everyone saw as their best friend.
She was also a fierce competitor with a strong will to be the best.
The little girl who became a competitive athlete was swimming at 2,
she was tumbling at 3, and she was skiing at age 4. In college, she
represented West Virginia University at the National Cheerleaders
Association collegiate cheer nationals 2 years in a row. Everything
Lauren did looked effortless. After completing her bachelor's degree in
social work, she worked with foster care and recovering addicts while
pursuing her master's degree in social work. She had a true helper's
heart.
This life story sounds like a girl who had it all, a girl who was
happy and content. She was beautiful, smart, funny, athletic, well
liked by her friends, and loved deeply by her family. She appeared to
not have a care in the world, but Lauren had been facing an epic battle
since she was 16. One evening, she experimented with prescription
opiates with her boyfriend and a few friends. She did not plan to be an
addict. Lauren said once that she thought it was recreational like
marijuana.
She was embarrassed and fought this disease alone for 2 years while
maintaining good grades, excelling in sports, and taking college
courses while in high school. She kept this secret from her family, her
teachers, her coaches, and her friends.
Toward the end of her first semester of college, she had to swallow
her pride and ask her parents for help. They immediately sent her to a
prestigious rehab facility and committed to helping her recover. They
were willing to try every option available to them.
Lauren was in it for the long haul. She had a lot to live for. She
was constantly making good choices about what she wanted her life to
be. After all, she was working on her master's degree in social work
and knew that she could make a difference in the world.
On July 5, 2020, after a 10-year battle with substance use disorder,
Lauren learned that her gym workout partner had tested positive for
COVID-19. This meant that Lauren had to self-quarantine until she could
be tested. She could not work. She could not go to the gym. She could
not volunteer. She could not even visit her family and friends.
She contacted her dad and asked him to find a COVID test as soon as
possible. Unfortunately, there were none to be found until that
Thursday, July 9. Her dad Michael texted and called Lauren all morning
and midafternoon that day but could not reach her. He left work to go
to her apartment to tell her that he had located COVID tests.
When he pulled into the parking lot, he saw her slumped over in her
car. He immediately called 9-1-1. He rushed over and pulled her out of
the car. He tried to resuscitate her, but it was too late. Lauren had a
slipup that took away her chance to live up to her full potential. It
was a sunny afternoon on July 9, 2020, when she died of fentanyl
poisoning at the age of 26--fentanyl, which is another approved opiate
under the FDA. She was alone in her car, hiding from the stigma of
addiction. Her ability to recover was stolen from her.
Approximately 3 weeks before Lauren relapsed, she came home to talk
to her dad. She said: Dad, there are so many people suffering from
addiction who need and want help, but they just don't have the
resources or a family like mine to get it. Do you think that, when you
retire, we can do something to help them?
Her parents took that wish to heart and have created Lauren's Wish,
an organization working to establish a long-term women's residential
substance use disorder treatment facility in West
[[Page S658]]
Virginia. Lauren may no longer be with us, but her story will continue
to inspire action and change in West Virginia and across our Nation.
Dr. Califf's nomination is an insult to Lauren's memory and to the
millions of families who have lost a loved one at the hands of this
epidemic. I cannot for the life of me understand why this
administration is so committed to asking each of us in the Senate to
reconfirm a person who had the opportunity to make a difference but
showed us who he really was. Do not expect a different outcome if he is
given another opportunity to lead the FDA. That won't happen.
I will vote no on Dr. Califf's nomination, and I have never been more
profoundly confident of a vote I am going to cast than I am right now.
I strongly urge my colleagues to examine the devastation the opiate
epidemic has wreaked in your home State and on your loved ones and
those whom you know and those of your constituents and the lives lost
and all the families who are left heartbroken and join me in voting
against Dr. Califf's confirmation to serve as the Commissioner of the
FDA and send a message to this administration, to our President, that
we need a new direction at the FDA. We need people who want to protect
us, not people who allow drugs to destroy us.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Issues Facing America
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, today--I should say, these days--the
United States is breaking all kinds of records and all the wrong kinds.
In 2021, illegal border crossings hit a new high, with more than 2
million border encounters along our southern border, 1,200 miles of
which is the U.S.-Texas border with Mexico.
Other numbers: the worst inflation in the last 40 years, 7\1/2\
percent--meaning that your paycheck is worth 7\1/2\ percent less than
it was before this inflation rocket took off. A number of major cities
are experiencing their deadliest year as the murder rates have spiked.
A combination of inflation, open borders, and rising crime rates is a
dangerous combination.
Drug overdose deaths reached a grim new milestone as well. For the
first time on record, more than 100,000 Americans died of drug
overdoses during a 12-month period. That is 100,000 families who lost
their children, parents, siblings, and loved ones to an entirely
preventable cause.
Our country has been fighting this scourge of the opioid epidemic for
years now. In 2018, we celebrated incremental progress, as overdose
deaths dropped 4 percent--dropped 4 percent--from the previous year,
the first decrease in three decades. Unfortunately, that trend did not
last. Overdose deaths increased in 2019, and they absolutely
skyrocketed in 2020. We are still waiting for complete data for 2021,
but it is not looking good.
The isolation, the anxiety, and the financial stresses of the
pandemic have taken their toll on virtually every American, but our
most vulnerable friends and neighbors are the ones who have been hit
particularly hard. On top of the physical and financial struggles of
the pandemic, many individuals are battling substance use disorders and
lost access to treatment centers and outreach facilities.
There has never been a more important time for us to examine our
response to the opioid epidemic and to take decisive action to stem the
tide.
Last week, the Commission on Combating Synthetic Opioid Trafficking
released its report, which analyzed the state of the synthetic opioid
crisis and offered recommendations. The Commission referred to illicit
synthetic opioids as ``a slow motion weapon of mass destruction in pill
form.'' Now, that may sound a little dramatic until you consider how
much death and destruction this crisis has created. Since the Centers
for Disease Control began collecting overdose data in 1999, more than 1
million Americans have died from drug overdoses. If you combined the
number of servicemen who died in battles throughout our country's
history, the number of overdose deaths would still be higher.
We all know there is no silver bullet when it comes to addressing
this crisis. But it is not a matter of diverting illicit drugs or
stopping overprescription or breaking the cycle of addiction; it is all
of the above. But one of the most important places to start is by
addressing the flow of illegal drugs across our border. Reducing the
supply of drugs that eventually reach our streets is critical.
As we have discussed the crisis at the border that has been going on
in its current form for a year now, I have talked about the cascading
impact of the migration surge.
Customs and Border Protection deserves a lot of credit for their good
work. The Agency plays a major role not just in migration or
intercepting illegal immigration but also a major role in stopping
illicit drugs. But when thousands of migrants flood our borders each
and every day, their anti-drug mission stumbles because, frankly, the
cartels know that if they flood the zone with so many migrants that the
Border Patrol has to manage those, it leaves open avenues, veritable
avenues and expressways across the border into the United States to
bring in illegal drugs. If Border Patrol is changing diapers and
passing out meals, as they have done throughout this humanitarian
crisis, they can't be on the frontlines combating illegal drug
smuggling; they can't interdict dangerous drugs or deter the cartels
from moving their poison across our borders.
One of the most effective ways to avoid overdose deaths is to prevent
those drugs from entering the country in the first place, and Customs
and Border Protection is literally on the frontlines of that fight.
In recent years, Customs and Border Protection has seen an alarming
amount of drugs coming across our border, one of the most concerning of
which is fentanyl. Fentanyl is a uniquely dangerous drug because it is
so potent; it is so strong. Depending on a person's body size, 2
milligrams can be lethal. A kilogram of fentanyl, 2.2 pounds, could
kill 500,000 people--2.2 pounds of fentanyl could kill half a million
people.
A few years ago, CBP seized about 2,800 pounds of fentanyl in a year.
The next year, it jumped to 4,800 pounds. The following year, Customs
and Border Protection seized more 11,200 pounds of fentanyl, enough
to wipe out the entire U.S. population many times over. That is how
potent it is.
Once it reaches the United States, this synthetic opioid, fentanyl,
often makes its way into other substances, such as in combination with
methamphetamine and heroin, which, too, can also lead to deadly
consequences.
Cities across America are experiencing waves of overdose deaths
caused by counterfeit opioids laced with fentanyl. In Texas,
authorities recently seized more than 100,000 counterfeit pills laced
with fentanyl--a haul with a street value of more than a million
dollars.
Mexico, our neighbor to the south, is the principal source of illicit
fentanyl, and unfortunately the Biden administration has made it
incredibly easy for the drug cartels to ply their trade. Now, it is
true that many of the precursors to make that fentanyl come from places
like China, but ultimately it ends up ending in Mexico and making its
way into the United States.
As the border crisis has grown to unprecedented proportions, it has
become easier for fentanyl, heroin, and other illicit drugs to cross
the border and reach communities throughout our country. There is a
beyond-urgent need for the administration to address the border
crisis--not just to stem illegal immigration, not just to stop
criminals from preying on our country by mixing among economic migrants
and making their way into the country; it is also about stopping the
trade in illegal drugs that are literally killing men, women, and
children in communities all across our country.
Until action is taken to alleviate the humanitarian crisis and get
the Border Patrol back on the frontlines, we are not going to make a
lot of progress. We have to stop the drug cartels and criminal
organizations in their tracks, and we can't do that if law enforcement
officers are on diaper duty.
We need a comprehensive approach to address this crisis and address
additional support for those who are already struggling with addiction.
Last year, the Senate passed a bipartisan bill that I introduced with
Senator Whitehouse, the Senator from Rhode Island, called the
Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment Act in order to help
incarcerated individuals break the cycle of addiction and
[[Page S659]]
transition safely and productively back into society. This legislation
updates the residential substance abuse treatment program and expands
access to treatment in jails and prisons across the country. The
program already provides incarcerated individuals with access to
treatment for substance use disorders. That treatment is coupled with
programs to prepare them for reentry and provide community-based
treatment once they are released. The changes included in this current
legislation will give incarcerated men and women the best possible shot
at living healthier and more productive lives once they are released.
I am sure it is no surprise that this bill has strong support both
here in the Senate and among outside organizations that do a lot of
good work in this area. More than two dozen organizations have endorsed
this bill, including those in law enforcement, criminal justice, and
behavioral health.
The bill passed the Senate with unanimous support last year, but it
is still lingering on the House calendar. It is unclear when or if
Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats will allow this bill to pass so we
can invest crucial resources in the fight against drug abuse.
There are a number of challenges that we face that transcend politics
here in Congress and inside the beltway, and this definitely is one of
them. Fighting the opioid epidemic is a cause everyone in this Chamber
should get behind because each of our States and indeed the entire
country have been impacted. Families across my State and the rest of
the 49 States have lost children, parents, siblings, and friends to the
opioid epidemic. In 2020 alone, we lost more than 4,000 of my fellow
Texans to drug overdoses. Unless we take action to thwart the slow-
motion weapon of mass destruction, our communities will face even more
suffering and more deaths.
I am tired of the pain and suffering the opioid epidemic has
inflicted on families across the country. I am angry. I am fed up. And
I believe we need a call to action because there is an urgent need to
address drug addiction in America. I am committed to being part of the
solution, and I would hope every Member of Congress in the House and
the Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike, would join us in becoming
a part of the solution.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
For-Profit Colleges And Universities
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I have come to the floor of the Senate
many times over the last several years to discuss an aspect of higher
education only few people even know exists. The so-called for-profit
colleges.
This disgraceful industry enrolls 8 percent of all postsecondary
students in America--8 percent--and yet accounts for 30 percent of all
Federal student loan defaults. Those two numbers tell the story. For-
profit colleges get 8 percent of the students and are responsible for
30 percent of the student loan defaults. Why? For obvious reasons. They
are too expensive. They charge a higher tuition than community colleges
or even many private colleges. Secondly, the students don't end up
finishing because they get mired in debt. And third, if they end up
with a degree, it turns out to be virtually worthless.
When I think of cases that we have looked into in Illinois, in
Chicago, of the exploitation of well-meaning students, sometimes the
first in their families to go to college, who are lured in by the siren
song of the marketing of for-profit colleges--they sign up, sign all
the papers, turn over all their Pell grants, then sign up for Federal
student loans and other private loans and have a disastrous experience
where they can't even finish. They are so deeply in debt or, if they
finish, they find their degree was worthless.
How many of those young people I remember coming to me and saying: I
was majoring in law enforcement, and I was getting this degree from one
of the local for-profit colleges to go into law enforcement. And you
know what, Senator? They laughed at me when they saw the name of the
school: That isn't a real school; that isn't a real degree.
Senator--they tell me--it is a real debt.
And that is the reality of these for-profit colleges.
I have called for greater oversight of this industry, as they exploit
these students and their families. We have called out some of the most
vicious predatory players in the industry like Corinthian, University
of Phoenix, DeVry, ITT Tech, Westwood--institutions that are more
likely to lead students into a lifetime of debt rather than a lifetime
of opportunity.
Now, just imagine, if you will, that one of the leading architects of
this fraudulent industry was chosen to be one of its watchdogs by the
Federal Government. Well, that is the situation we have today. Dr.
Arthur Keiser, who embodies the worst of the for-profit industry, is
the chairman of the board of for-profit Southeastern College. He is
also chancellor and CEO of Keiser University, a so-called nonprofit
university that he converted from for-profit status in the year 2011.
This so-called conversion to not-for-profit is misleading. The overlap
between Southeastern College and Keiser University is well established.
For example, multiple executives at Keiser University are also
executives at Southeastern.
An IRS filing shows that executives at Keiser University, a
supposedly nonprofit school, are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars
each year. You know when you hear the term ``not-for-profit,'' you
think of charitable institutions, people just barely making enough to
get by, service to principles and values. Well, Mr. Keiser and his gang
have turned that upside down. They make hundreds of thousands of
dollars each year, a hefty salary for part-time employees working for a
nonprofit college.
Arthur Keiser is also notorious for shady dealings. I am not making
this up or going to a source of fake news for it. These were detailed
in a GAO report last year. For example, in the year after Keiser
University was converted into a not-for-profit college--not-for-
profit--the school paid out more than $34 million to members of Mr.
Keiser's family--$34 million? That is right, to Arthur Keiser's family.
Not bad for a not-for-profit venture.
Arthur Keiser's financial misdeeds are so grave, so serious, that his
own mother has filed a lawsuit against him over shifty financial
handlings of the colleges that they cofounded. This would be a dramatic
situation comedy were it not for the victims, the students.
Rather than being chastised by this GAO report and lawsuit by his
mom, Mr. Keiser is now seeking to dramatically extend his influence
within the for-profit college industry. How exactly is he planning to
do this? Lucky for Arthur, the power is already in his hands.
Today, Arthur Keiser serves as chair of the National Advisory
Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, also known as NACIQI.
I have never heard of it, but those in the industry know it quite well.
NACIQI is the Department of Education's Federal advisory board that
approves the creditors who act as gatekeepers for Federal student
dollars. So in order to offer a Federal student loan, the Department of
Education has to first establish that you are a real school--I mean, a
real school with real teachers and classrooms or some other means of
teaching students and that your degree is being presented to you in
real terms, whether it is really going to help your life. This NACIQI
is the watchdog of all the Federal watchdogs when it comes to for-
profits. And guess who is the Chair: Arthur Keiser.
As Chair of NACIQI, Arthur Keiser poses a systematic threat to
student borrowers. His chairmanship is a major conflict of interest in
NACIQI's vital role of maintaining integrity of Federal student aid.
For-profits are already one of the most heavily subsidized sectors in
America. I took a look at what these companies, these for-profit
colleges, were taking out of the Federal Treasury. They put some of the
worst Federal contractors to shame. And of course, they often leave
students saddled with debts they will never be able to pay for
worthless degrees.
Now, naturally, you may wonder, how do these for-profits spend all
the Federal dollars sent their way?
[[Page S660]]
Well, this is what it is all about. They spend millions on
advertising their worthless degrees to underprivileged students.
There was an ad that was running out here a couple years ago, one of
my favorites from the for-profits. It showed this young lady; she
couldn't have been more than 19 years of age. And she was lounging in
her bedroom with her laptop on the bed next to her, talking about how
she was going to college in her pajamas. I am not making this up.
They spend millions of dollars just like that, advertising to young
people who may not know any better that you have to put in a real
effort to get an education. It pays off, but it doesn't come to you
sitting in your pajamas.
Instead of reforming the for-profit advertising model, Dr. Keiser is
expanding it. He likes this marketing. He has applied some of the same
predatory practices to the so-called nonprofit college space.
In 2017, Keiser University--aptly named after himself--which Dr.
Keiser claims is nonprofit, racked up the second largest advertising
bill of any private nonprofit institution.
Keiser University spent nearly one-fifth of its entire budget on ads
and marketing--more than $82 million.
We found some of the colleges that have been investigated in the past
were spending more money on advertising than they were on faculty
salaries. And it showed.
For the sake of comparison, other nonprofit colleges--real nonprofit
colleges--are estimated to spend 1.5 percent to 6 percent of their
budget on marketing. Dr. Arthur Keiser, his university spent almost 20
percent.
Southeastern College, Dr. Keiser's for-profit school, reported in
2018 to the IRS that 87 percent of its annual revenue came from student
aid. That is close to the 90-percent cap imposed by the 90-10 rule.
What does that mean in the big picture? It means this is just a
conduit. Follow, if you will, the process. The student sits in the
admissions office, and the admissions officer says, We are ready to
launch. We are ready to put you in the courses. All you have to do is
sign this. Here is your contract, the contract where you are going to
seek Federal student aid.
The student signs it, naturally. Got my Pell grant. Got my Federal
student aid. It is all going to the for-profit school. Then what
happens next? Well, the student has got the debt to pay back for the
loan. The school gets the cash. The school turns around--Dr. Keiser
turns around and has a big distribution party, and the student finds
out 6 months later it is a worthless undertaking, but they have still
got the debt to pay.
And unless some action is taken by the Department of Education that
proves up fraud and releases that student from his obligation, that is
going to be a debt he is going to carry for years. It is going to
change his life.
Do Dr. Keiser and his gang care? They have got their money. They have
distributed it among themselves. Dr. Keiser has also demonstrated
questionable conduct as chair of NACIQI, namely, protecting his own
interests at the expense of students and taxpayers. This is a real fox
in the chicken coop.
In 2020, under Dr. Keiser's leadership, NACIQI wrongfully penalized
the Higher Learning Commission, an accreditor that tried to rescind
accreditation from two fraudulent for-profits. Just last year, Dr.
Keiser was forced to recuse himself from the review of Accrediting
Commission of Career Schools and Colleges--or ACCSC.
Why exactly did he have to recuse himself? Because this organization
accredited his college, so he was putting the pressure on that entity.
And in Dr. Keiser's absence, the other NACIQI members rightly
considered student outcomes in determining whether they would continue
as an accreditor. But when Dr. Keiser returned from recusal, he
chastised the same members for having the gall to prioritize the needs
of students.
So even when he was forced to recuse himself, Dr. Arthur Keiser found
a way to use his position as Chair to advance his own interest. This
week, I am going to lead a letter with Sherrod Brown, my colleague from
Ohio, requesting the Department of Education finally take a hard look
at Arthur Keiser's Chairmanship and his obvious conflicts of interest.
It is worth noting that we are not alone in raising these concerns
about Dr. Arthur Keiser.
Earlier this month, the House Education and Labor Committee chairman,
Bobby Scott of Virginia, also raised the issue of Keiser's
manipulative conversion of his for-profit college to nonprofit status.
Time and again, Arthur Keiser has put his own personal priorities
over the needs of the students and taxpayers he is supposed to serve.
His conflicts of interest have become abundantly clear, and now it is
time for the Department of Education to put an end to this party.
Last month, Secretary Cardona announced the Department of Education's
priorities. One of them is holding postsecondary institutions
accountable for taking advantage of kids.
Right now, the Department of Education has an opportunity to uphold
that priority by bringing Arthur Keiser's nefarious conduct to an end.
We are going to be watching. On behalf of those students and their
families, on behalf of colleges and universities that do a good job, we
have got to put an end to this rip-off.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
Biden Administration
Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam President, last week, most of my friends on the
left pretended to be shocked by a new CNN poll that proved what a lot
of Tennesseans have known for quite a while, and it is that Joe Biden
and his agenda with the Biden administration is truly upside down with
the American people.
Here is what we found out: Fifty-eight percent of the American people
disapprove of the way he is handling his job as President. That alone
is really an indictment on what they have been putting forward, but it
gets a little bit worse. Sixty-two percent disapprove of how he has
mishandled the economy.
Fifty-seven percent think his approach to fighting crime is not
working. They believe that because they are seeing it in their streets
in their hometowns.
Fifty-five percent don't like how he is responding to Xi Jinping.
Fifty-six percent are worried about how he is handling Putin, and I am
sure that number, in particular, will go up before the next poll comes
out.
These numbers are brutal, but here is the cherry on top. Fifty-seven
percent believe Biden's first year in office has been a total failure;
and when asked whether or not Joe Biden's government represents the
views of people like themselves, 68 percent of the people polled said,
No, Joe Biden and his administration do not represent my views.
It is pretty simple--the American people are not buying what Joe
Biden and this administration are selling. And the people in the White
House seem to put their hands up, and they just cannot figure this out.
They can't understand why the people won't just shut up and do what
they are told.
Here is the secret: It is because when the people look at
Washington--when Tennesseans look at Washington, and they look at who
is in charge of our government--and Democrats have control of the
House, the Senate, the White House--all they see is an empty suit with
an agenda.
There is no vision, but there is agenda. They have got the to-do
list. They have got the list of boxes they need to check off. We killed
the Keystone Pipeline. We put mandates in place. We have got people in
masks. We have got people in lockdowns. They are going to lose their
job if they don't go get a jab. They have got an agenda.
For all of his bluster about fundamentally transforming our way of
life, all Joe Biden has managed to do is to alienate his fellow
countrymen.
Now, his allies are trying to turn the tide by revamping their
talking points. But here is the problem: It won't work, because this
administration--the Biden administration--does not have a messaging
problem. Their problem is their agenda that they have that is
lackluster with no vision.
But the American people are paying attention to this. And you know
what they are seeing? I have to tell you, it really frightens them. It
frightens them.
Doesn't matter if I go to one of the grandkids' ballgames, go to
church, go
[[Page S661]]
to the grocery store, run some errands, I am hearing from people what
they see happening. The cramdown, the control, it frightens them.
And there is no distracting them from the fact that the President is
weaponizing this liberal wish list against what they have as the vision
for their future, for their children, for their family.
For the past year, Tennesseans have watched Biden dodge and weave and
ignore what the people are telling him--the people are telling him.
Democrats in Washington have treated their political rivals like
enemies and accused them of racism, treachery, all for the crime of
drawing a line in the sand and saying no.
It is amazing. I wish some of my colleagues did want to stand up for
freedom. The people deserve better than that. And I will tell you what,
they know it. No talking point is going to convince them to tolerate
the intolerable from their government. And, yes, inflation, mandates,
lockdowns, the open border, crime in the street, the debacle of
Afghanistan, problems with Russia, the situation with Russia, Ukraine,
China, Iran, the list grows every single day--every single day.
It is the wrong agenda. As I said, it lacks vision. At the beginning
of these remarks, I said that the liberals pretended to be shocked by
Biden's terrible poll numbers, and I stand by that statement because
the truth is the White House, my Democratic colleagues, and their
allies in the media know that they are kind of circling the drain when
it comes to what they are pushing forward on the people.
But for some reason, they think that just one more power grab is
going to do the trick. It will be the magic bullet. That certainly is a
tactic, but it also will fail because the people know that it is the
people of this country that have built this country. And it is built on
a foundation that treasures faith, family, freedom, hope, and
opportunity.
And if you have got an agenda and a checklist and a to-do list, but
you have no vision for a better future, the American people will not
buy what you are selling.
I yield the floor.
Unanimous Consent Agreement--Executive Calendar
Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture
motions filed on Thursday, February 10, ripen at 5:45 p.m. today.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 2497
Mr. LEE. Madam President, on February 19, 1942--and that will be 80
years ago this coming Saturday--President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued
Executive Order 9066, authorizing the blatantly racist mass
incarceration of essentially all Japanese Americans inside the United
States at the time. This was an indefensible move--one that resulted in
locking up about 120,000 decent, hard-working, innocent people based on
nothing other than their race.
Two years later, in one of the most shameful moments in America's
judicial history, the U.S. Supreme Court deferred to the Roosevelt
administration's blatantly racist and equally unconstitutional
imprisonment of Japanese Americans. Writing for the majority in a case
called Korematsu v. United States, Associate Justice Hugo Black, a
Justice with a history of bigotry, unconscionably glossed over the
countless constitutional violations built into the race-based interment
of innocent American citizens, who the Court acknowledged ``were loyal
to this country overwhelmingly,'' based on the fact that ``[t]here was
evidence of disloyalty on the part of some'' Japanese Americans and
``military authorities considered that the need for action was great.''
In a moment one might expect from someone like Justice Black, who had
a history of bigotry, he cavalierly dismissed the blatant racism
inherent in this action, reasoning that ``[t]o cast this case into
outlines of racial prejudice, without reference to the real military
dangers which were presented, merely confuses the issue.''
Tragically, Justice Black, blinded perhaps by his own intolerance and
bigotry or perhaps by his loyalty to the President who had appointed
him just a few years earlier, missed the obvious point: Racial
prejudice was the issue. That was the whole point. I agree with the
characterization later provided by now-Chief Justice Roberts, just a
few years ago, in 2018, when he noted that ``Korematsu was gravely
wrong the day it was decided, [and] has been overruled in the court of
history, and--to be clear--'has no place in the law under the
Constitution.'''
No person should ever be in prison solely due to their race. It
shouldn't be even a factor in anyone's imprisonment--certainly not in
the United States of America.
Japanese internment is one of the very worst examples--one of the
very worst examples--of our government rejecting its founding
principles. It is something that should be remembered so that it can
never be repeated. Despite this mistreatment by government, Japanese
Americans served faithfully in many capacities during World War II and
have continued to serve our Nation and their communities in
irreplaceable ways. Their contributions are worthy of remembrance and
celebration.
Regrettably, the United States has failed to meet other, admittedly,
far less fundamental obligations it has made to individuals and to
States. One of those obligations is relevant here, ironically arising
in the context of an effort to honor victims of FDR's internment of
Japanese Americans. The Federal Government has neglected commitments
made by Congress to Western States at the time of their admission to
dispose of large swaths of Federal land. Similar promises had been made
to most States that were admitted into the Union ever since the
Louisiana Purchase. But for the fact that Congress honored such
promises with respect to a lot of these States, including States like
Illinois and Missouri, the Federal Government would still, to this day,
own around 90 percent of those States. The same could be said of many,
many others.
Although Utah received such assurances from Congress prior to its
admission into the Union in 1896, using essentially identical language,
Utah is still waiting for the Federal Government to honor its end of
the bargain. However, unlike States like Illinois and Missouri, which
received the benefit of the Federal bargain, Utah did not. The Federal
Government still owns more than two-thirds of all the land in my State,
resulting in an extraordinary amount of environmental, economic, and
educational consequences that hurt Utahns, particularly those Utahns in
poor and rural communities.
In fact, in a blatant insult to the people whose families settled and
developed much of the rural West and their communities, the Federal
Government continues to limit and restrict access, commerce, mining,
drilling, and grazing on land it had promised to relinquish. Rural
farms, industries, and communities are shrinking and dying because of
this continually broken promise.
To add insult to injury, the Feds routinely fail to care properly for
the land in their portfolio. The maintenance backlog in the National
Park System is years long and $12 billion in the hole. The Bureau of
Land Management controls vast swaths of the Western United States, and
it controls them from Washington, DC, with little interest or regard
for the people whose livelihoods and way of life depend on that land.
This relationship remains a vexing problem for everyday life in Utah.
Businesses are shuttered because the Federal Government capriciously
halts mineral extraction authority. Ranches go bankrupt because the
Bureau of Land Management ends grazing rights in areas where families
have raised cattle for generations. And just last week, Federal land
managers damaged an exquisite collection of dinosaur fossils and would
have continued doing so but for the intervention of a noble citizen
named Jeremy Roberts, who was willing to call them out on it.
At a time when the Federal Government already owns far more land than
it can manage, Congress should be really cautious about decreasing
Federal land holdings. It should be going out of its way to decrease
its Federal land holdings and doing that rather than increasing them.
Recognition of sites like the Amache camp deserve better than Federal
management. However, if
[[Page S662]]
those representing the State of Colorado think the Federal Government
can do better or, for whatever reason, just want it to be under the
National Park's jurisdiction rather than subject to local control, then
I am not inclined to argue with them.
What I would like to ask is that this land not continue to be
acquired by the Federal Government with no plan in sight for dealing
with the size of the Federal footprint. It is the size of the overall
Federal land estate that worries me because the Federal Government has
not proven a good steward of what it has got. So if we keep adding to
that, it is only going to perpetuate some of these problems.
Now, I have been wrongfully portrayed by some in the media as being
somehow against this historical recognition and against commemorating,
as a warning to future generations and to honor the victims of the
past, one of this Nation's and its government's most tragic missteps. I
continue to negotiate in good faith to find a way forward with this
bill. I have been in communication with the lead sponsor in the House,
and I think there are ways that we can address this--to address both
goals at issue.
I think we need to be able to commemorate these events and we also
need to do so in a way that won't lead to the unfettered expansion of
the Federal land footprint.
So, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed
to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 255, H.R. 2497. I
further ask that the Lee amendment at the desk be considered and agreed
to; that the committee-reported amendments be agreed to; that the bill,
as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the
motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. BENNET. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I
strongly disagree with Senator Lee's proposal amending what has been
agreed to--not agreed to but what has gotten every single Member of the
Senate but for one. I want to also say that I was on the floor about 10
days ago, I think, on the subject of this. I want the Chair and the
Senator from Utah to know I didn't even mention who had objected while
I was here, but it was 1 out of 100 Senators. This bill passed the
House of Representatives with all but two votes. It passed with every
single vote from the Colorado delegation, and we have this gamut of
people in from Colorado.
The bill is strongly supported by my friend Ken Buck, whom I ran
against in 2010. And if Ken were here, he would say there is very
little upon which we agree. I hope there is more than he thinks we
agree on, but we definitely agree on this.
So let me just explain why we wrote this bill. In 5 days, as the
Senator from Utah has said, we are going to mark the 80th anniversary
of Executive Order No. 9066, which began the forced dispossession and
internment of over 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II. Two-
thirds of them were citizens of this country, American citizens, forced
out of their homes into camps by our own government--by their own.
One of those camps was Amache on the Eastern Plains of Colorado,
where the Federal Government detained nearly 10,000 Japanese Americans
against their will. Most of them had less than a week--most of them had
less than a week--to get rid of virtually everything they owned and
crowd onto buses and trains with no idea where they were going or what
was going to happen to them.
Some of the first arrivals at Amache were kids younger than the pages
who are on the floor here today with us, who were forced to build the
camp where their own families were interred during the duration of the
war. The conditions were horrible. Walls didn't always reach the
ceilings. The windows weren't always sealed. It meant that snow blew in
during the winter, and dust blew in during the summer.
This is what our government did to our fellow Americans, to children,
forced to work in the fields to grow their own food in the jail that
the United States of America had committed them to. And what is even
more remarkable is that despite this treatment, 1 out of 10 of the
people at Amache still volunteered to serve during the war--a higher
rate than any other camp in America. Think about that. They were
willing to defend the very government that was detaining them, that had
locked up their children. That is how much they believed in America,
even when America turned our back on them.
And I had the opportunity to visit Amache a few years ago with John
Hopper, a high school principal in Grenada who worked with his students
to create the Amache Preservation Society. They have been taking care
of this site themselves all of these years, collecting items from all
over the world that former prisoners have sent back because they want
people to remember. They want a memorial to their captivity. Year after
year, these high school students and their teacher have worked to
restore this site so that the next generation of Coloradans can learn
about what happened there.
If it were up to me, every student in Colorado and throughout the
American West would go there--throughout our entire country--and learn
about the Americans of Amache, the men and women who held on to hope
year after year, who supported one another, who forged a community
behind the barbed wire of this site, who never gave up on the United
States of America, even as it was interning them on their own soil.
After I visited this site, I introduced a bill with Senator
Hickenlooper to make Amache a part of the National Park System so it
would have the resources and recognition it deserves for years to come.
We have to get this done because the survivors of Amache are growing
fewer and fewer in number each year, and we have to keep the memory of
what they went through alive for the next generation.
That is what Colorado wants. I have a list of over 70 groups that
support it, from the Asian Chamber of Commerce to the Colorado Council
of Churches, to the town of Grenada, which owns the site today.
So, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have this list
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
List of Organizations Endorsing the Amache National Historic Site Act
Endorsing Organizations
National Veterans Network; Japanese American C1t1zens
League (JACL); Colorado Municipal League; Colorado School of
Public Health; Interfaith Alliance of Colorado; Colorado
Council of Churches; Japanese American National Museum;
Japanese American Confinement Sites Consortium (JACSC)
Japanese American Services Committee; National Trust for
Historic Preservation; Anti-Defamation League Mountain States
Region; Fred T. Korematsu Institute; Asian and Pacific
Islander Americans in Historic Preservation National Parks
Conservation Association (NPCA); Amache Preservation Society;
The Nikkeijin Kai of Colorado; Friends and Family of Nisei
Veterans; University of Denver Amache Project; History
Colorado; Colorado Community College System; Coalition to
Protect America's National Parks; Sand Creek Massacre
Foundation; Sakura Foundation; Outdoor Asian Colorado
Chapter; Canyons & Plains of Southeast Colorado; Colorado
Preservation, Inc.; Japan-America Society of Southern
Colorado; Southeast Colorado Enterprise Development, Inc.
Southeast Colorado Business Retention Expansion &
Attraction; The Wilderness Society; National Japanese
American Historical Society; Japanese American Resource
Center of Colorado; Amache Alliance; Simpson United Methodist
Church; Densho; Amache Historical Society II; Defiende
Nuestra Tierra; Change Matrix; Colorado Asian Culture and
Education Network; Japanese Arts Network; Continental Divide
Trail Coalition; High Country Conservation Advocates; Rocky
Mountain Wild; Canyons & Plains of Southeast Colorado No Ke
Aloha; Great Old Broads for Wilderness; San Luis Valley
Ecosystem Council; Asian Avenue Magazine; Nathan Yip
Foundation; Friends of Minidoka; Asian Chamber of Commerce;
Action 22; Colorado Next 100 Coalition; Asian Pacific
American Bar Association of Colorado; CORE: Community
Organizing for Radical Empathy; Lamar Community College;
Trinidad State Community College; Bent County Historical
Society; Otero Junior College; Colorado Dragon Boat Festival.
Endorsing local government entities
Town of Granada; Baca County Commissioners; Crowley County
Commissioners; Otero County Board of Commissioners; City of
La Junta; Kiowa County Board of Commissioners; Prowers County
Board of Commissioners; Mayor's Office: City & County of
Denver.
Mr. BENNET. Madam President, this bill wasn't controversial in
Colorado,
[[Page S663]]
and it wasn't controversial in the House, where Republican Congressman
Ken Buck, whose district this is, took up the bill with Joe Neguse,
a neighboring Congressman. Amache is in the 10th District in Prowers
County, and I said that the bill passed the House by 416 to 2.
It wasn't controversial in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee, where it passed with bipartisan support from the chairman
and ranking member, and that is why I came here 2 weeks ago to pass the
bill by unanimous consent. But now there has been an objection.
And I should mention, by the way, that this site is less than 1
square mile. It is a tiny, tiny fraction of even the county that it is
in. It seems to me that if we believe in federalism at all, we
shouldn't be blocking Colorado's right to preserve less than 1 square
mile the way we see fit; that we shouldn't have to reduce the public
lands of the United States by an equal amount. And I will say, in that
connection, that I formally object to the Senator from Utah's motion
for this reason. The land here is owned by Grenada. It is already
public land. The town has said it wants to donate it to the National
Park Service.
I have a letter from the town making this intention perfectly clear.
So it is not even private land that is becoming public. It is public
land transitioning from a local government to the Federal Government at
the request of the community.
And they are not asking for anything in return. And I think that is
an important point that the Senator from Utah has raised. And we have
worked with the town to show that they are not asking for an exchange.
They want to donate the land as their patriotic contribution to America
to protect this part of our history.
I would think all of us here should agree that, unless it is hurting
somebody else, the town can do whatever it likes with its own land,
just like a private landowner can do with their own land.
Let me stop there and see whether the Senator from Utah has any
reaction to that.
I will formally object to his motion, and I will stop there. I have
got other things to say, but I hope that maybe we can get to an
agreement based on what I would offer. So I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. LEE. Madam President, I have a couple of points, and I don't
think we are far off in where we are on this.
It is true that it is not an expansive land that is as big as some
other land transfers we see--1 square mile. On the one hand, a lot of
people would regard that as large--640 acres. It is the acreage
equivalent of 1 square mile.
I would note here that I wouldn't call it a federalism argument in
that we have to allow this. There are Federal implications to this that
extend far beyond what a local unit of government might want to do.
What happens is, when you transfer it into the Federal estate, we do
incur additional obligations to make sure that that land is maintained
and managed appropriately. It does cost money, and it takes an expense
off the books of those who would otherwise be maintaining it. So it is
not without any consequence at all. In other words, it is a matter of a
simple operation of federalism to say that we should allow this in this
circumstance.
I would note, moreover, that we have come closer on this. The
amendment that I offered a moment ago that my friend and colleague, the
Senator from Colorado, objected to is one that would allow this to
happen but would require an offset to be made by the appropriate
Federal land managers within 1 year of the transfer of this land.
There is nothing about that that strikes me as being particularly
objectionable, particularly given the fact that the Federal Government
owns and manages about 30 percent of the land mass in the United
States. In my State and in Colorado, it is much more than that. There
is nothing about that that should be particularly objectionable.
With that said, the Senator from Colorado has shaped this legislation
in a meaningful way, and because I have a desire to honor those victims
of this horrific event in American history and the Senator from
Colorado has offered up a separate solution, one that would involve
donation rather than acquisition by the Federal Government, although
that also raises some concerns--over time, I think we have to watch
this because the more we enhance the Federal land footprint, the more
difficult it will be for the Federal Government to keep up with the
maintenance backlog.
But given that this doesn't directly impact concerns quite the way
those same concerns might be implicated if we were having to purchase
it at the outset, I would be inclined, if my friend from Colorado were
interested in offering that amendment, to withhold any objection from
that while noting that it is my hope and expectation that, in moving
forward, we could be more aware of these issues and that, as we see the
Federal land footprint increasing, we can take steps as a body to make
sure that there is some natural stopping point even before we turn to
what I believe we have still got to turn to, which is the commitment
made at statehood that still needs to be honored.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. BENNET. I thank, through the Chair, the Senator from Utah.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to
the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 255, H.R. 2497. Further, I
ask that the Bennet amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to;
that the committee-reported amendments be agreed to; that the bill, as
amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the
motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. BENNET. Madam President, this is all happening on the fly right
now, so I am actually going to withdraw that in the spirit of what
Senator Lee has said. Hopefully, we can do this later today. We need to
make sure that everybody has the benefit of seeing the language, and
then we will be back later to do this.
I thank the Senator from Utah, and I will spare him the rest of my
speech except that I think he deserves to hear this, and I think
everybody here deserves to hear this, which is, when the ENR Committee
took this legislation up this fall, here is what the survivors from
Amache wrote to the committee, and I just want to put their words into
the Record before I withdraw:
During World War II, we were forced to live as prisoners in
our own country. Along with our parents, we were forced from
our homes, tagged like animals, and sent to the desolate
prairie of southeast Colorado, where we lived in trauma, a
constant presence of armed guards, barbed wire, and suffering
too large to describe in one correspondence. Our families
suffered a loss of jobs, homes, property, and businesses, and
many of us lost family members. Many of our parents went to
their graves without even an apology from their country. Our
nation still has a long way to go to learn from this mistake,
and our community, both old and young, continues to suffer
from anti-Asian hate crimes, increasing to this day. Our
national parks and the stories they honor reflect our values
as a nation. Adding Amache to the National Park System would
allow us to protect a unique story that has largely been
forgotten and can only be told through the power of place.
With each year that passes, there are fewer of us. We are
counting on you to see us through.
Because of the discussion we have had tonight, we are going to have
the chance later to be able to do that.
I thank my friend from Utah.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Order of Business
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that after
Senator Scott speaks and blocks the proposal, that I speak, Senator
Peters speaks, and then Senator Murray speaks on the Califf nomination
and that then we move forward on the cloture vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The majority leader.
Return of Papers
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate
agree to the request of the House to return the papers with respect to
H.R. 3076 and that when the Senate receives from the House the
corrected engrossment of the bill, it be in the same procedural posture
as it was at the time of the granting of this request.
[[Page S664]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Florida.
Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Madam President, reserving the right to object,
let me first say that I care deeply about fixing the problems with the
U.S. Postal Service. The Postal Service provides an essential service
and touches the lives of nearly every American. The Postal Service also
consumes billions in taxpayer and consumer money every year, meaning
that it has to be accountable to taxpayers and consumers not only in
how effectively it delivers but in how it spends the dollars it
receives. So I absolutely support getting something done to reform the
Postal Service and ensure it is more accountable to taxpayers and
consumers.
I also support provisions of this bill, like its focus on enhanced
services for rural communities, which will benefit many families across
my great State, and I like the fact that it maintains the current 6-day
mail delivery schedule. Unfortunately, there are also pieces of this
bill that set us back and block the opportunity for us to achieve our
shared goal of responsibly reforming the Postal Service.
What I am asking for here is not unreasonable. I simply want the
Senate to have the opportunity to work on this, improve it, and deliver
a bill that truly works.
The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has
jurisdiction over the Postal Service. I am actually very proud to serve
on this committee. Unfortunately, the committee has not held one
hearing or member meeting on the bill, nor has the bill even been
considered at a markup.
We aren't here considering just a simple resolution. This is a
massive, multibillion-dollar bill that has huge impacts on Medicare
recipients, and the Democratic majority skipped the committee process
and rushed the bill to the floor.
Despite the rushed process throughout the bill, a few details need to
be highlighted, and they are not pretty.
First, as I said before, this bill does not fix the underlying issues
with the Postal Service, nor does it make it profitable. I don't
understand why the Postal Service loses money and cannot be profitable.
I don't think many Americans understand why.
America is more than $30 trillion in debt. We can't afford to add
more stress on our already enormous national debt with poor financial
planning, which I think this bill absolutely does. In fact, this bill
simply shifts risk to Medicare recipients by adding billions in new
costs to Medicare.
I am not sure why the Democrats are so eager to threaten the
viability of Medicare or the benefits for Medicare recipients. The
Democrats triggered billions in Medicare funding cuts in 2021 in
Florida and other States in their wasteful, partisan COVID spending
bill. Now they are putting even more stress on Medicare and the
benefits of Medicare recipients by shifting billions in new costs onto
the program.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, between just 2025 and
2031, this bill would increase costs to Medicare by more than $1.9
billion for Part B and $4.2 billion for Part D. This will hurt Medicare
recipients. And even that score is based on the limited number of
future budget years that were covered in the CBO's review.
We must have a long-term CBO score on this bill so that Congress can
clearly review the future impacts to Medicare recipients. That is why I
sent the director of the CBO a letter earlier today asking for more
information about this bill.
Over 60 million seniors across our country, including more than 4.5
million seniors in Florida, rely on Medicare. It is unconscionable to
add further expenses to them and place the future care of postal
workers on the line when Medicare is already on the road to insolvency.
The retiree health benefits for the Postal Service are partially
unfunded. This bill provides no new funding for the retiree health
benefits of postal workers. It doesn't solve the problem.
Now, I heard that my Democrat colleagues say this bill will address
the massive supply chain crisis that millions of American families have
suffered from. I could not disagree with them more on this point. And,
frankly, I am shocked that they are willing to unfairly stick our
postal workers with the blame for the failures of the Biden
administration that have created and worsened our supply chain
problems. This bill does nothing to address this supply chain problem.
I know that the hard-working men and women of the Postal Service are
not the ones causing this crisis; but if my colleagues insist that they
are, that is even more of a reason to make sure this bill is heard in
committee so we can really dig into the problem and make sure we come
with up a sustainable solution.
There is no looming deadline that would necessitate rushed action by
the Senate. This bill perfectly captures everything that is wrong with
the way Washington solves problems. Instead of taking the time to craft
a sustainable, affordable, and accountable solution that serves the
interests of taxpayers, Medicare recipients, consumers, and postal
workers and achieves our policy goals, Congress rushes bills into law
so that politicians can send out a press release saying they did
something, even if that something actually makes the problem worse.
If any business operated like this, it would absolutely fail. We have
to stop this insanity. Given the scope of the legislation, the
potential negative impact to postal workers, taxpayers, consumers,
Medicare recipients, and seniors, the Senate should carefully and
thoughtfully consider this bill. We should take all appropriate steps
to make sure that we get this right. The Senate has simply not been
afforded the opportunity to do that; therefore, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The majority leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, what we heard is why people really are
frustrated and angered at the U.S. Senate. This is a broad, bipartisan
bill months and months in the making, with large amounts of discussion,
has the support of the Democratic chair of the committee, the
Republican chair of the committee, was voted in the House with a
majority of Democrats and a majority of Republicans, and would finally
fix the post office.
I wonder if my colleague from Florida has ever heard his colleagues
in Florida, his voters, talk about snail mail, about everything coming
late--prescription drugs coming late, Social Security checks coming
late, birthday cards arriving weeks after the birthday occurred.
Finally, both parties come together in a bipartisan way in the House
and Senate to pass this legislation, and the Senator from Florida is
using a technical detail to hold us up.
It is the same bill that was on the floor Thursday, where we had
agreement to move to vote on it tonight. But the House sent us a bill
with a technical change. Five times in the past, this has happened; and
each time, no Senator had the temerity to get up and block it on a
technical issue. It just passed by UC, and we went and moved forward.
Our constituents want us to fix the post office. An overwhelming
majority of Democrats and Republicans want us to fix the post office.
All the postal workers are for this bill.
My colleague from Florida says he is defending postal workers. Ask
the people who represent them. I dare say, it is the head of the letter
carriers and the head of the postal workers and the head of the mail
handlers who represent the postal workers more than the Senator from
Florida; and they are overwhelmingly for the bill, as is the
Postmaster--an appointee of President Trump.
So everyone tries to come together and get something done, and the
arcane rules of the Senate allow one person to stand up--on a bill that
has been out there and discussed repeatedly--at the last minute and
raise objections. It is regrettable, and it is sad.
There is good news, though. Even though this will delay the bill, we
will pass it. We will have to just go through this elaborate process--
the old-fashioned and often discredited rules of the Senate that the
Senator from Florida is employing--we will have to use them, but we
will pass this bill because America needs it. Rural people need it.
Senior citizens need it. Veterans need it--80 percent of veterans'
prescriptions are sent through the mail. Nobody should be standing in
the way of this bill. It is a sad day that just one Member has.
[[Page S665]]
I yield the floor to Senator Peters.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. PETERS. Thank you, Leader Schumer.
Madam President, I stand in support of this bill.
This bill is absolutely essential to make sure that the Postal
Service is on sound financial footing.
As Leader Schumer mentioned, Americans all across our country rely on
the Postal Service to deliver critical items to their home--things like
medicines, which go via the Postal Service. They expect that service to
provide it 6 days a week and to do it on time. But, unfortunately, the
Postal Service has been saddled with rules that may make it very, very
difficult.
The legislation before us is an attempt to fix those rules that make
it more difficult for the Postal Service to deliver essential services
and do it in a cost-effective way.
It is something that has been discussed here in Congress for a decade
or more--a decade or more. This is not an issue that just came out of
nowhere. This is something we have been trying to fix for nearly a
decade.
Over the last year and a half, we have been working on bipartisan,
bicameral legislation, bringing people together and saying, Let's just
focus on what is common sense.
Now, let's see, what is common sense? Right now, the Postal Service
has had to prefund retirement healthcare for decades. No other company
in America needs to do that. No other Federal agency in the government
does that. No one does it, but the Postal Service is saddled with this
requirement, which has billed tens of billions of dollars. It is common
sense to treat the Postal Service like every other business and every
other government agency in the Federal Government.
Also, it makes sense to have retirees integrated into Medicare. Like
every single company in America, it will be integrated into Medicare.
And let's be clear: Those postal workers have been paying into Medicare
their whole working career. They are paying into Medicare. They should
have the ability to actually get Medicare.
This will also help the Postal Service be able to function in an
efficient and effective way.
The bipartisan, bicameral work that we did--I worked with my ranking
member, Senator Portman. We have been working with our counterparts in
the House, and both the Democratic chair and the Republican ranking
member came up with an agreement, got wide consensus from folks
throughout Congress. In fact, the bill that I introduced here in the
Senate, which is basically the bill that is before us from the House,
has 28 cosponsors--14 Republicans, 14 Democrats. How many bills do we
have here on the floor that have that much support from both sides?
This is bipartisan. This is common sense. It addresses a critical
issue for the American people, and they want us to come together and
solve it. But instead, we have a procedural blocking technique to slow
this down. And every day we wait, it puts the Postal Service in more
jeopardy. It is time for action now.
As the leader mentioned, since 2000, there have been similar kinds of
mistakes by the transfer of a bill; five times--five times in 20 years.
And every time, it has been settled quickly because people say it is
just a mistake; let's move on with the business of the people. Let's
not play games. I would hope we could do that now.
Five times, it went quickly. In fact, three of those times, the bills
that came over had less bipartisan support than this bill. This bill
had 120 Republicans support it in the House.
It is time to move this forward. Let's stop playing games. Let's help
the Postal Service. Let's help the American people, and let's show that
the U.S. Senate knows how to get a job done.
Mr. SCHUMER. And I dare say, the Senator from Michigan speaks for the
vast majority of Members in this Chamber and in the House of either
party.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate lay before
the body a message from the House with respect to H.R. 3076 and that
the Senate vote on the request without further intervening action or
debate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Florida.
Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Madam President, reserving the right to object,
I notice neither of my colleagues addressed the fact that, still, why
didn't this go to committee? Why wouldn't we go through a process? This
massive, billion-dollar bill, why wouldn't we go to a committee? They
did not address that.
And, by the way, they talk about a technical error. I was here when
my colleague from Florida had a technical change where the number was
wrong, and my Democratic colleagues blocked the amendment. So this is
not unheard of.
On top of that, they never addressed the fact that this puts our
Medicare recipients and our Medicare Program at further risk because
the program is not fully funded, and this is nothing to fix it. On top
of that, with our retiree benefits in the Postal Service, their funding
is underfunded. This doesn't do anything to improve their funding.
So I am not going to object, but let's make sure we clear up the
facts here.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the request is agreed to.
Message
The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message
from the House of Representatives:
Ordered, That the Clerk be directed to request the Senate
to return to the House of Representatives the bill (H.R.
3076) entitled ``An Act to provide stability to and enhance
the services of the United States Postal Service, and for
other purposes.''
Vote on Return of Papers
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on agreeing to the request
of the House to return the papers.
The request is agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Nomination of Robert McKinnon Califf
Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I come to the floor tonight to urge my
colleagues to vote here in a minute to confirm Dr. Robert Califf to
serve as Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration. He was
confirmed to this role previously with strong bipartisan support. I
hope to see that again this evening.
At this critical moment, we need a trusted hand to lead the FDA, and
Dr. Califf's previous service in this role, his career as one of the
Nation's leading research scientists, give him the experience to take
on this challenge.
Families across the country count on the Food and Drug Administration
every day to follow the science and the data to keep them safe, and
COVID-19 has put its work in the spotlight like never before.
This pandemic has been incredibly hard on our Nation. It has killed
over 900,000 Americans. And throughout this crisis, as people have
sought to keep their families safe, they have looked to the FDA and
depended on the tireless work of FDA scientists to confirm the safety
and effectiveness of treatments and vaccines, ensure we have high-
quality masks, and review tests to make sure they give us accurate
results and more.
Parents across the country are continuing to wait anxiously for the
FDA to greenlight safe, effective vaccines for kids under 5--something
I know we all want to see as quickly as the science allows.
But while the COVID-19 pandemic remains one of the most urgent
challenges we face, there are countless other ways the FDA works that
matters to families.
Every day, people put the well-being of themselves, their families,
and even their pets in the FDA's hands. When we sit down for a meal, we
count on the FDA's efforts to ensure the safety of our food supply and
provide us with the information we need to make healthy choices. When
we get our prescriptions filled or rely on medical devices to stay
healthy, we count on the FDA's work to uphold the gold standard of
safety and effectiveness.
The FDA needs strong leadership to continue that work and to address
other pressing challenges: challenges like the opioid crisis, which
recently claimed over 100,000 lives in a year--that is a new record;
challenges like youth tobacco use--according to the CDC, 2 million of
our youth use e-cigarettes; challenges like antimicrobial
[[Page S666]]
resistance, which could make common procedures more dangerous by making
current infection treatments ineffective; challenges like skyrocketing
drug costs and pharmaceutical companies who game the FDA approval
system to keep more affordable drugs off the market; and challenges
like improving health equity.
I have repeatedly raised the need for the FDA to improve diversity in
clinical trials because, when women or people of color or others are
left out of the clinical trials, this undermines people's health by
delaying information they and their healthcare providers need to
understand how a treatment will affect them specifically--for example,
whether it is safe during pregnancy--and by making it hard to identify
differences in the safety and effectiveness of treatments for those
populations.
As the hard-working staff at the FDA continues to tackle these
challenges, they deserve a Senate-confirmed leader with experience on
these issues to lead those efforts. Dr. Califf worked on these
challenges before, when he was previously confirmed to lead FDA in an
overwhelming bipartisan vote, and he demonstrated in his hearing with
the HELP Committee that he is ready to take them on again and return as
Commissioner.
So I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting to confirm Dr.
Califf and working with him to ensure that the FDA continues to protect
our families, uphold the gold standard of safety and effectiveness, and
put science and data first.
I yield the floor.
____________________