[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for the quorum call be rescinded.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.

                          ____________________