[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 53 (Thursday, March 24, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1757-S1760]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

   AMERICA CREATING OPPORTUNITIES FOR MANUFACTURING, PRE-EMINENCE IN 
         TECHNOLOGY, AND ECONOMIC STRENGTH ACT OF 2022--Resumed

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 4521, which the clerk will 
report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 4521) to provide for a coordinated Federal 
     research initiative to ensure continued United States 
     leadership in engineering biology.

  Pending:

       Schumer amendment No. 5002, in the nature of a substitute.
       Schumer amendment No. 5003 (to amendment No. 5002), to 
     change the enactment date.
       Schumer amendment No. 5004 (to amendment No. 5003), to 
     change the enactment date.
       Schumer amendment No. 5005 (to the language proposed to be 
     stricken by amendment No. 5002), to change the enactment 
     date.
       Schumer amendment No. 5006 (to amendment No. 5005), to 
     change the enactment date.
       Schumer motion to commit the bill to the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation, with instructions to 
     report back forthwith, Schumer amendment No. 5007, to change 
     the enactment date.
       Schumer amendment No. 5008 (to the instructions of the 
     motion to commit (amendment No. 5007)), to change the 
     enactment date.
       Schumer amendment No. 5009 (to amendment No. 5008), to 
     change the enactment date.


                   Recognition of the Majority Leader

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.


                       Business Before the Senate

  Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, well, it was another busy and 
productive evening here on the Senate floor. Yesterday, we confirmed 
another six judges to important positions on the Federal bench and all 
of them, I am happy to say, with bipartisan support. We now have 
confirmed 56--56--judges under this Democratic Senate majority, and I 
thank my colleagues for their patience and for keeping the pace moving 
here on the floor last night.
  There are two judges I am especially proud to have confirmed. First, 
we confirmed Hector Gonzalez to serve as a district judge for the 
Eastern District of New York. Mr. Gonzalez is a most deserving, most 
qualified, and most inspiring individual to serve as a judge. Born in 
Cuba, raised in Queens, he is the embodiment of the American dream.
  We also finally confirmed a judge who has inspired me for more than a 
decade--Ali Nathan, now confirmed as circuit judge for the Second 
Circuit. When I first met her, I thought, ``Here is someone who is 
truly special,'' and I still believe that to this day. And, to boot, 
she increases the diversity of the court as only the second-ever openly

[[Page S1758]]

lesbian to sit on the Second Circuit--open lesbian on the Second 
Circuit. I believe that is in the whole Federal judiciary. We will 
check that.
  The Second Circuit is one of the most consequential courts in the 
entire country, calling for only the best of the best to sit on the 
bench, and Ali Nathan fits the bill.
  I am glad both of these nominees were confirmed with bipartisan 
support.
  On the legislative front, the Senate is pressing ahead on bipartisan 
competition legislation to lower costs, boost American manufacturing, 
and fuel another generation of American scientific ingenuity.
  For the information of all Senators, last night, I moved to file 
cloture on both the substitute amendment and the underlying legislation 
for our competitiveness legislation. As I have said previously, our 
plan has been to take up the House-passed version of this legislation 
and amend it with the exact same language the Senate approved last 
summer with bipartisan support, the U.S. Innovation and Competition 
Act.
  Once we pass this amended bill, it will go back to the House, and 
they will be able to request a conference committee. As convoluted as 
the Senate process often is, the bottom line is that the train is 
moving forward when it comes to this bill.
  A lot of Senators from both parties have worked for years to see 
legislation like this reach the President's desk. If the United States 
is to thrive in the 21st century, we need to keep our competitive edge 
in science and innovation, and this bill would do just that. We must 
continue growing American jobs. We must continue to lower the price of 
critical technologies like semiconductors, and this bill would do just 
that as well.
  We have a few more steps to take before we reach a conference, but 
support of this bill is strong and bipartisan, and the process is 
moving forward.


                                 Russia

  Madam President, on PNTR, negotiations are continuing on passing 
bipartisan legislation to strip Russia of permanent normal trade 
relations with the United States. This legislation is greatly needed 
and timely as President Biden continues meeting with European allies 
regarding Putin's despicable war on Ukraine.
  The House passed PNTR by 424 to 8--424 to 8--and the Senate 
absolutely should pass it with equally strong bipartisan support. There 
is no justification to delay a popular policy that would deal a heavy, 
heavy blow on Putin's Russia, especially given that it got such strong 
Republican support, including from Leader McCarthy in the House.
  Yesterday, I am happy to say, my team and I had a productive series 
of talks with Senators Crapo, Wyden, Manchin, and the White House. We 
reached an agreement with Senator Crapo to move forward on PNTR as soon 
as we can, while addressing oil ban legislation separately. That way, 
the PNTR legislation can go right to the President's desk.

  I hope the rest of my colleagues will get with the program quickly so 
we can send PNTR legislation to the President's desk as soon as 
possible. We need a little more work, but we are close to passing this 
urgent legislation.


                  Nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson

  Madam President, finally, on SCOTUS, after 3 marathon days of 
speeches and questions and answers, Judge Jackson's public testimony 
before the Senate Judiciary Committee has concluded.
  After watching the judge weather 3 long days before the Senate 
Judiciary Committee, my respect and my admiration for her have never 
been higher. There is not a shred of doubt in my mind that she merits 
confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court.
  Once again, a handful of Members on the other side--not all, just a 
handful--tried to smear the judge with misleading and downright false 
accusations. Once again, the judge remained poised, thoughtful, and 
strong in her answers.
  As Senator Booker said yesterday, no amount of cynicism and nastiness 
could overshadow that Judge Jackson's nomination is a cause for 
celebration. She is not only a historic nominee; she is one of the most 
qualified nominees to ever come before the Judiciary Committee.
  Yesterday, Chairman Durbin announced that the Judiciary Committee 
will meet on Monday afternoon to begin the process of reporting Judge 
Jackson's nomination out of committee. There is nothing in Judge 
Jackson's record suggesting that the committee should have difficulty 
reporting her nomination out. Once the committee concludes its work, I 
will move to have her nomination come to the floor in short order. The 
Senate is on track to have Judge Jackson confirmed as Justice Jackson 
by the end of this work period.
  I commend Judge Jackson for her excellent testimony over the course 
of this week. It is not easy to endure 3 days of testimony with the 
entire Nation watching, but Judge Jackson has erased any doubt that she 
is brilliant, she is beloved, and she belongs--unquestionably belongs--
on the U.S. Supreme Court.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant 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 ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                   Recognition of the Minority Leader

  The Republican leader is recognized.


                  Nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, yesterday, I said I hoped the second 
day of Judge Jackson's responses would provide more clarity on some 
vital questions. Unfortunately, the nominee's answers trended the other 
way. Regarding the Court as an institution, the nominee continued to 
reject the examples of Justices Ginsburg and Breyer. She refused to 
denounce partisan Court packing. On judicial philosophy, the judge 
continued to deflect actually basic questions.
  The lack of candor is especially troubling since the President sent 
us a nominee with no meaningful written record on constitutional 
matters. For more than 8 of Judge Jackson's 9 years on the Federal 
bench, she was a trial judge on the district court. As the nominee 
herself explained on Tuesday, that role neither requires a particular 
talent for constitutional interpretation nor gives judges much of a 
chance to exhibit one. She deflected a question about judicial 
philosophy by explaining that such questions do not often occur to her 
on the lower court.
  District court records alone shed little light on what kind of 
Supreme Court Justice someone might be.
  Now, Judge Jackson's current post on the DC Circuit is a much closer 
analog. The problem is, she has held that position for less than a year 
and has only published two opinions. Justice Gorsuch had authored 212 
circuit court opinions before he was nominated to the Supreme Court. 
Justice Kavanaugh had written 306. Senators had an unbelievable wealth 
of writings to examine. As to Justice Barrett, in just 3 years on the 
Seventh Circuit, she had already written 91 appellate opinions, not to 
mention her many academic writings on constitutional law. Judge Jackson 
has written a total of two circuit court opinions--just two.
  The only real body of evidence before the Senate is her record as a 
trial judge. Like I mentioned, those rulings communicate very little 
about the judge's approach to big-picture questions of interpretation. 
But to make matters worse, Judge Jackson declined to answer basic 
questions about those rulings. Senators asked about clear patterns in 
the judge's criminal sentencing decisions. The nominee deflected by 
saying every case is unique. So Senators tried to examine one case at a 
time. Then the nominee said she couldn't recall details. So Senators 
tried to supply the details. Then the nominee stonewalled and said no 
one case can fully capture a judge's record.
  This made up an endless circle of evasion. Judge Jackson wouldn't 
address broad patterns in her rulings because she said it was unfair--
unfair--for Senators to zoom out, and she wouldn't discuss specific 
cases because she said it was unfair for Senators to zoom in.
  Since the only real body of evidence before the Senate is Judge 
Jackson's trial records, Senators asked why she consistently opposed 
weak sentences for certain crimes.

[[Page S1759]]

  The nominee then ducked the question over and over. She blamed 
Congress for giving her that discretion in the first place. Both the 
nominee and then Chairman Durbin kept repeating that if Senators wanted 
to guarantee harsher penalties, we could mandate them.
  That is true, but it is a non sequitur.
  Senators wanted to know why Judge Jackson used the discretion she 
actually did have in the specific ways she chose to use it. The 
Senators were trying to understand what this nominee does with 
discretion when she has it.
  But, again, the nominee would not answer. She kept blaming the mere 
existence of her discretion for her decisions to go soft on criminals, 
when she could have just as easily used that discretion to be tough. We 
basically had a nominee saying that: If Senators want me to be tough on 
crime, you will have to change the laws to force me--force me--to do 
it.
  In several egregious instances, from child exploitation to fentanyl 
trafficking, the nominee used especially unusual and creative legal 
moves that stretched the bounds of the judicial role. In the nominee's 
own words, she simply has a ``policy disagreement'' with parts of the 
sentencing law.
  Evidently, the judge's personal policy views change how she applies 
the law.
  Finally, I understand some Democratic Senators held a press 
conference yesterday to complain that Republicans' questions were too 
tough.
  Of course, nobody could have less credibility to police the fine 
details of confirmation hearings than our Democratic colleagues on the 
Judiciary Committee. The last 48 hours were a dry and friendly legal 
seminar compared to the circus that Democrats inflicted on the country 
just a few years back.
  The American people know it is not asking too much to ask a Federal 
judge legal questions about her record. I just wish the Senate had 
gotten more answers.


                                Ukraine

  Madam President, now on a different matter, today, President Biden is 
overseas meeting with America's closest European allies as Vladimir 
Putin's war in Ukraine enters its second month.
  He is engaging with a Europe that has been profoundly changed. NATO 
allies have watched a neighbor invaded by an aggressive Russia. Some, 
like Germany, are ending 30 years--30 years--of post-Cold War neglect 
for military modernization and energy security.
  I am glad that, as I urged last week, the President's itinerary will 
include not just Western Europe, but also Poland. His presence on the 
eastern flank will send an important message. Of course, the most 
concrete way to support Ukraine is with greater commitments of lethal 
aid. Ukrainian forces can win this fight.
  Let me say that again. Ukrainian forces can win this fight. But they 
need more weapons, more ammunition, more fuel, and they need it all as 
fast as possible.
  The allies and partners who are helping equip Ukraine also need 
replenishing their own arsenals. But the fight has highlighted 
shortcomings in both our current stockpiles of critical weapons and 
munitions and our industrial capacity to produce more quickly.
  As other NATO members wake up to the importance of long-term 
investments in defense, America should lead by example. We have to meet 
the military requirements that come from being a superpower facing 
growing threats to our global interests: sustained increases in defense 
spending, deeper inventories of critical weapons systems and munitions, 
less redtape, work with industry to make our development and production 
systems more nimble.
  This will not only help us meet the growing requirements of our 
military but also ensure we can be a reliable supplier of weapons and 
munitions to our allies and our partners.
  As the Washington Post reported just yesterday, recent events have 
caught our defense industrial base napping.
  Here is the quote from the Post:

       [W]eapons manufacturers weren't geared up to make antitank 
     and antiaircraft arms at a wartime pace. While the United 
     States had 13,000 Stingers in its stockpile before the 
     invasion, there were no plans to produce more en masse . . . 
     Militaries in Europe that have given their Stingers and 
     antitank missiles to Ukraine now want to refill depleted 
     stocks, creating competition for new units rolling off the 
     assembly line.

  So President Biden already has real power to address this himself. 
The Defense Production Act was created during a period of tense 
competition with Russia to bolster production of critical military 
supplies. The exact circumstance we are in right now.
  Ironically, the far left has demanded the President invoke the 
Defense Production Act for everything but--everything but--its central 
purpose. They don't want to use the Defense Production Act to bolster 
defenses, but, rather, to force taxpayer money into renewable energy 
schemes that are not ready for prime time. Democrats should be using 
the Defense Production Act to literally produce more defenses, but they 
want, instead, to use it to spin up some more Solyndras.
  Of course, the real solution for global energy concerns is not 
throwing money into finicky technologies that themselves rely on 
Russian and Chinese supply chains. It is to unshackle U.S. energy 
producers. We can help meet Europe's needs by increasing American crude 
and LNG exports, but our European friends will have to make necessary 
sacrifices to wean themselves off of reliance on Russia.

  Putin's war of aggression reminds us the so-called international 
order is not self-enforcing. The relative Pax Americana that has lasted 
for the better part of a century does not--not--sustain itself 
automatically. American leadership remains in very high demand.
  Putin's unprovoked war has further discredited the small pockets in 
both of our political parties who want America to pull back from the 
world stage, who excuse the behavior of tyrants, who think it would be 
prudent and sensible to cede vast spheres of influence to Russia and 
China. There is nothing remotely prudent or sensible about handing over 
entire regions of the world to these thugs.
  The national security interests of the United States have never 
stopped at our own borders, and they certainly do not today. We are a 
superpower with worldwide interests requiring a worldwide presence and 
a worldwide network of allies and partners. American power will not 
preserve itself. American security will not protect itself. American 
interests will not uphold themselves. And America's partners will not 
lead themselves.
  This awesome responsibility falls on the shoulders of the President 
of the United States, the leader of the free world. President Biden has 
an opportunity as soon as he returns from Europe to begin charting the 
right course for America and the West.
  On Monday, his administration will submit his budget request for the 
next fiscal year. We will see if the President finally commits to 
investing in a future of strong American leadership.
  Our global challenges are not partisan issues; they are American 
issues. I sincerely hope that the Commander in Chief of our Armed 
Forces submits a defense budget request that reflects this reality.
  The world is dangerous and getting smaller. America must not shrink 
from the challenge, but rise and meet it.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                            Border Security

  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, the Biden border crisis continues.
  In February, U.S. Customs and Border Protection encountered 164,973 
individuals attempting to cross our southern border illegally--a 63-
percent increase from a year ago and the highest February number in 
more than 20 years. Border encounters in February over the past decade 
or so have generally been low, with numbers far under 100,000--but not 
since President Biden was inaugurated. Almost from the day the 
President took office, our Nation has been experiencing an 
unprecedented border surge.
  In fiscal year 2021, the Border Patrol encountered more than 1.7 
million individuals attempting to cross our southern border--the 
highest number ever recorded. We have had 12 straight months of border 
encounters in excess

[[Page S1760]]

of 150,000. And these numbers only reflect individuals the Border 
Patrol has succeeded in apprehending. There is no question that many 
other illegal immigrants have crossed the border in the past year 
without being apprehended and have disappeared into the United States.
  The situation at our southern border is out of control--it is a 
security crisis, it is a humanitarian crisis, and it is an enforcement 
crisis. Our Border Patrol officers have done heroic work this past 
year, but they are stretched incredibly thin and are having to spend 
too much time caring for migrants and not enough time patrolling the 
border.
  This sharply increases the risk that dangerous individuals--from 
terrorists to drug smugglers to human traffickers--will slip across our 
southern border and into the country unnoticed.
  And apart from the serious security concerns that go along with not 
knowing who is entering our country, allowing this border crisis to 
continue also presents serious humanitarian concerns. There is nothing 
compassionate about encouraging individuals to undertake the dangerous 
journey to our southern border, to run the risk of exploitation and 
disease and exposure. Unfortunately, neither humanitarian nor security 
concerns have moved President Biden to meaningfully address this border 
crisis.
  Every month, we see massive numbers of individuals attempting to 
cross our southern border, and every month, the White House just 
doesn't seem to care. The President travels regularly, including 
regular weekends away from the White House, but he can't seem to bring 
himself to visit the border and see the situation firsthand.
  It is a disturbing abdication of responsibility from the man charged 
with defending our Nation's security. And let's remember, the President 
isn't just ignoring this border crisis; he is partly, if not largely, 
responsible for it. Immediately upon taking office, the President took 
steps that weakened our Nation's border security.
  On his first day in office--very first day in office--President Biden 
rescinded the declaration of a national emergency at our southern 
border. He halted construction of the border wall. And he revoked a 
Trump administration order that called for the government to faithfully 
execute our immigration laws--all on the first day.
  And the President's Department of Homeland Security also issued 
guidelines that same day pausing deportations except under certain 
conditions.
  The effect of all this was to declare to the world that the United 
States borders were effectively open. And Border Patrol numbers ticked 
up accordingly, not surprisingly.

  And the President's anti-border security efforts didn't end there. 
The President has significantly limited the ability of Immigration and 
Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection to enforce 
immigration laws. Deportations dropped precipitously during fiscal year 
2021, as did arrests in the interior of the country. And earlier this 
week, the administration rescinded a 2019 rule expanding expedited 
removal for individuals here illegally.
  The administration is also, reportedly, expected to end its title 42 
COVID-19 restrictions, which have provided for the immediate 
deportation of those who have crossed the border illegally. The result 
is almost guaranteed to be an even larger surge at our southern border, 
taking the situation from disaster to utter catastrophe.
  One media outlet reports that ``Department of Homeland Security 
intelligence estimates that perhaps 25,000 migrants already are waiting 
in Mexican shelters just south of the border for Title 42 to end.''
  And there is no sign--no sign--that the administration has any 
substantive plan for how to deal with the resulting surge or how to 
deal with the enhanced criminal activity from drug smuggling to human 
trafficking that would likely accompany this influx.
  I get that President Biden would prefer to pretend that this crisis 
at our southern border does not exist, but it does exist, and as 
President, he has the responsibility to address it. He needs to get 
serious about fulfilling that duty for the sake of our Nation's 
security and for the sake of all those who are being encouraged by his 
lax immigration policies to undertake the dangerous journey to our 
southern border.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Warner). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________