[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 107 (Thursday, June 23, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3104-S3108]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
JOSEPH WOODROW HATCHETT UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE AND FEDERAL BUILDING--
Resumed
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Booker). Under the previous order, the
Senate will resume legislative session to resume consideration of the
House message to accompany S. 2938, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Message to accompany S. 2938, a bill to designate the
United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111
North Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph
Woodrow Hatchett United States Courthouse and Federal
Building'', and for other purposes.
Pending:
Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House to
the bill, with Schumer (for Murphy) amendment No. 5099 (to
the House amendment), relating to the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act.
Schumer amendment No. 5100 (to amendment No. 5099), to add
an effective date.
Schumer motion to refer the message of the House on the
bill to the Committee on Environment and Public Works, with
instructions, Schumer amendment No. 5101, to add an effective
date.
Schumer amendment No. 5102 (to the instructions (amendment
No. 5101) of the motion to refer), to modify the effective
date.
Schumer amendment No. 5103 (to amendment No. 5102), to
modify the effective date.
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
concur in the House amendment to S.
[[Page S3105]]
2938, a bill to designate the United States Courthouse and
Federal Building located at 111 North Adams Street in
Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United
States Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other
purposes, with amendment No. 5099.
Charles E. Schumer, Richard J. Durbin, Christopher
Murphy, Kyrsten Sinema, Martin Heinrich, Jack Reed,
Debbie Stabenow, Jeff Merkley, Sheldon Whitehouse,
Tammy Duckworth, Richard Blumenthal, Tim Kaine, Edward
J. Markey, Patrick J. Leahy, Alex Padilla, Patty
Murray, Mazie K. Hirono.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 2938, a bill to designate
the United States Courthouse and Federal Building located at 111 North
Adams Street in Tallahassee, Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett
United States Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other
purposes, with amendment No. 5099, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer).
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 65, nays 34, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 240 Leg.]
YEAS--65
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Booker
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Capito
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cassidy
Collins
Coons
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Ernst
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Graham
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Leahy
Lujan
Manchin
Markey
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Portman
Reed
Romney
Rosen
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Stabenow
Tester
Tillis
Toomey
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
Young
NAYS--34
Barrasso
Blackburn
Boozman
Braun
Cotton
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Fischer
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
Moran
Paul
Risch
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shelby
Sullivan
Thune
Tuberville
Wicker
NOT VOTING--1
Cramer
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). On this vote, the yeas are 65,
the nays are 34.
Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
Cloture having been invoked, the motion to refer the amendments
thereto fall.
The Senator from New Mexico.
S. 2938
Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, like many of my constituents in New
Mexico, I am a gun owner. I have a sincerely held respect of law-
abiding gun ownership.
Many of my own most cherished memories involve the responsible use of
a firearm to feed my family and to forge memories with my sons and my
closest friends. But those same sons grew up doing active shooter
drills in their classrooms, something that would have been absolutely
unimaginable when I was their age. And just this spring, my son's high
school was on lockdown when I arrived, due to a nearby shooting that
actually involved students from that high school. That type of
experience has become all too common in our country.
The gun violence our communities are experiencing is appalling, and
it is unacceptable. It is evident from the unthinkable mass shootings
that we have witnessed in Uvalde and Buffalo and Tulsa and Vestavia
Hills and El Paso. And it is evident in the mounting number of gun
homicide and gun suicides that have taken tens of thousands of lives
each year.
My home State of New Mexico continues to struggle with one of the
highest rates of gun deaths in the country; and in recent years, far
too many New Mexicans have lost friends and family members to this
epidemic of violence.
I personally refuse to accept the idea that we are so divided in this
country that we can't do something to make this situation better. That
is why I join my good friend Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut and a
number of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to try and chart a
meaningful path forward. Over these past weeks, we have engaged in
challenging but productive conversations. We found areas of agreement
on real solutions that we can and we will pass here in the U.S. Senate.
Our bipartisan negotiations and the legislation that they have
produced prove that we can work together in this body. And they show
that when we set aside the vicious politics that have held us back for
too long on this particular issue, we can actually create policies that
save lives.
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act includes Federal resources to
help States and Tribes implement crisis intervention programs.
New Mexico passed a law to establish one of these programs just last
year. The goal was to ensure that deadly weapons were kept out of the
hands of those that a court, with due process, determined to be a
significant danger to themselves or others. But as of last month, New
Mexico had only used our law nine times, primarily due to a lack of
funding and resources and training.
Just last month, on Mother's Day, New Mexico tragically lost two
teens, shot and killed by a man who very likely could have had his
firearm removed using New Mexico's crisis intervention law.
The alleged suspect had been issued a temporary restraining order at
the request of his former girlfriend and the mother of one of the
victims. The restraining order showed that he was in possession of two
firearms. Unfortunately, the local sheriff's office failed to recognize
the threat that he posed and didn't use our State's law to remove the
firearms that he used to take the lives of two young New Mexicans.
If we can provide our law enforcement officers and courts the funding
and training they need to make crisis intervention laws effective, we
can protect our communities and ensure that future lives are not lost.
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act will help us do just that.
Our legislation also enhances the review process for firearms buyers
under 21 years of age. This new process will require an investigative
period to review criminal and mental health records, including checks
with State databases and local law enforcement.
Over the last 4 years, six of the nine deadliest mass shootings were
by people who were 21 or younger. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
ensures we respond to this deadly trend in a meaningful way.
Our legislation also makes clear who the Federal firearm licensing
requirements apply to, leading to more firearm sales that require a
background check.
We are finally making sure that convicted domestic violence abusers
and individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders are
included in the Federal background check database, whether or not the
abuser is married to the victim. That has long been a major failure in
Federal law, and it has allowed dangerous abusers, who are dating but
not married to their partners but whom we know pose a violent threat,
to acquire deadly weapons. This provision alone will save an enormous
number of lives.
Our legislation will also make historic investments in community
behavioral health and school-based mental health services, and it will
increase access to behavioral health services through telehealth.
The bill will help support school violence prevention efforts and
provide training to school personnel and students so that they can
recognize the signs that so often precede some of these violent
shootings events.
Over the course of our negotiations, I worked especially hard on a
few key provisions with my colleague from Maine, Senator Susan Collins.
Our provisions will crack down on straw purchasing and trafficking of
firearms. These provisions will directly reduce gun violence in our
home States and internationally. Let me take a moment to explain how.
[[Page S3106]]
Under current law, it is a minor paperwork offense to buy a gun for
someone else. And even then, that only applies if you buy the gun from
a Federal firearm licensee. Under the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act,
we are making it a serious crime to buy a gun for someone else when you
know that person will use the gun to commit a felony or that they are
not allowed to buy a gun themselves. That applies whether you buy the
gun from a Federal firearm licensee or not.
The consequences of this simple change will be real. It will keep
deadly weapons out of the hands of people who would use them to hurt
others, and it will level serious consequences for those who break the
law.
Just last year, a New Mexico State Police officer was tragically
killed during a traffic stop in Deming, NM. Officer Darrion Jarrott was
shot and killed by a convicted felon whose wife had allegedly purchased
the gun for him. She is now being prosecuted under the paperwork
offense that is currently on the books. But under the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act, she would be facing more severe and deserved
consequences for her role in the death of a State police officer.
This legislation will also stop the type of organized straw
purchasing and trafficking that we have seen too often in New Mexico
and elsewhere. Right now, law enforcement has to watch as an organized
chain of straw purchases happen one after another, intended to protect
the person most at fault--the mastermind of the operation--by keeping
them far removed from the purchase that happens at an FFL, at a Federal
firearm licensee.
Our law enforcement watched this happen, but they can only go after
the person who walked into the FFL and made the very first of that
series of straw purchases--that is usually the person least involved in
the scheme. But that is about to change. Soon, these ringleaders won't
be able to distance themselves from the law anymore.
With our new straw purchase provision, law enforcement will be able
to go after every link in the illegal chain of purchases to take down
the entire ring, not just the vulnerable individuals these rings
sometimes rely on to make the initial purchase.
There is more. While trafficking firearms into the United States is a
major Federal crime under existing law, trafficking firearms out of the
United States has not been. For years, this has meant that firearms
trafficked out of the United States are the primary supply of guns used
to commit violent crimes in Mexico, in El Salvador, in Honduras, and in
Guatemala.
It has also invited dangerous firearm trafficking into communities on
both sides of our Nation's southern and northern borders. We saw this
in my home State about a decade ago when a major firearms trafficking
ring was uncovered in Columbus, NM. This trafficking operation involved
the chief of police, the mayor, a village trustee, and an estimated 190
firearms, including large numbers of handguns and assault rifles. And
the crime they were charged with? Lying on their paperwork.
Not anymore. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act takes this violence
on with the severity that it deserves. It gives law enforcement the
tools they need to stop this activity and the violence it directly and
indirectly creates in our communities and within our borders. By taking
on the violence that families are fleeing in their home countries--
violence that our inadequate gun laws have actually contributed to--we
are also taking meaningful action to address a root cause behind so
many refugees coming to our country.
Now, I fully recognize that the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is a
compromise. Many of the parents and students who have raised their
voices to demand action on gun violence would like us to go further.
But progress has to start somewhere. The hardest part of every
negotiation is letting go of the perfect for the possible, and I am
confident that the legislation we are voting on will make a real
difference in reducing gun violence--a difference that will be measured
in lives. It will boost public safety, it will invest in mental health,
and it will keep more firearms out of the hands of those who would use
them against their communities.
The painful truth is that we can never bring back those precious
children whose lives were cut short in Uvalde, TX; in Parkland, FL; in
Newtown, CT; or Aztec High School, West Mesa High School, Deming Middle
School, and Washington Middle School in my State. We can never offer
enough words to heal the grieving families all across the country who
have lost their sons and daughters and their brothers and sisters and
their fathers and mothers to gun violence. But what we can do by voting
to pass this legislation in the Senate is to honor their memory--not
just with condolences and hopes and prayers but with concrete action.
I would encourage all of my colleagues to support the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act. Each life that we save by passing this
legislation will mean literally everything to that person's loved ones,
and that is what this is all about.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 251
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, today is a great day. Today marks the
50th anniversary of title IX. For half a century, we have witnessed the
impact title IX has had on generations of women in sports. Title IX
provided women the long-denied platform that had always been afforded
men. It ensured female athletes have the same access to funding,
facilities, and athletic scholarships, but it also gave young women the
opportunity to compete, to learn the life lessons of hard work and
perseverance, to go to college on an athletic scholarship, to overcome
obstacles in order to reach their God-given potential.
Since 1972, female participation in sports at the college level has
risen more than 600 percent, and today, 43 percent of high school girls
participate in some competitive sports, compared to 50 years ago--only
3 to 5 percent. What a turnaround.
For all these reasons, decades later, we have proof that title IX has
worked. Sports can transform lives. I have seen it. I began my coaching
career as a high school girls basketball coach just a few years after
title IX was enacted, and now, 50 years later, America's female
athletes are not only the best performing on the world stage in team
and individual sports, but they also are the leaders in our communities
and in our country.
Title IX sent an incredible--an incredible--message to female
athletes across the Nation, which is, you can compete, you can win, and
you will be afforded a fair and level playing field to do so.
I have personally witnessed how title IX protections allowed young
women to gain all the opportunities and life lessons that participating
in sports has to offer. That is why, just 3 months into my time as a
U.S. Senator, I introduced an amendment to prohibit Federal funding to
schools that allow biological males to compete in women's sports. And
I, along with 23 of my colleagues, introduced the Protection of Women
and Girls in Sports Act. This bill would make it a violation of Federal
law for a recipient of Federal funds who operates or sponsors athletic
programs to permit biological males to compete in women's sports
activities. The bill also establishes the long-needed definition of
``sex'' in title IX to be recognized based solely on a person's
reproductive biology and genetics at birth.
Democrats have turned their backs on these efforts, and by doing so,
they have turned their backs on female athletes all across our country.
Just last month, I sent a letter to U.S. Department of Education
Secretary Miguel Cardona warning the administration to rethink their
rule change.
On this 50th anniversary, we should be asking ourselves how we can
preserve title IX and preserve fairness for all female athletes across
our country, but unfortunately, women's athletics are currently under
attack by the Biden administration. Just this morning, we learned that
the Department of Education will publish a proposed rule to change
title IX to align with the administration's progressive agenda. These
proposed changes would allow biological males to compete in women's
sports. What a tragedy. It would take a wrecking ball to the five
decades of title IX success for women. The Biden administration's
proposed rule flies in the face of the so-called science that Democrats
are quick to pledge their allegiance to by ignoring the scientific
[[Page S3107]]
differences in the biological makeup of male and female athletes.
Apparently, science only matters when it conforms to Democrats'
partisan agenda.
Allowing biological males to compete in women's sports will set
women's rights back 50 years, to a time before title IX. It will
discourage young girls from entering the court, jumping in the pool, or
walking onto the field, knowing that they have to compete with the deck
stacked half against them, and the winner will already be determined.
With the proposed rule change, female athletes can only hope--can only
hope--to finish in second or third place. There is no pregame speech or
halftime talk that you can give a woman or girl who feels like they
aren't competing on a fair playing field.
The Biden administration should do the right thing and rethink their
decision to disenfranchise female athletes of the future.
This fight is far from over. The very least the Senate can do for the
future of female sports is to reinforce the protections already
afforded women in title IX.
Mr. President, that is why I call up S. 251, the Protection of Women
and Girls in Sports Act of 2021. I ask unanimous consent that the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from
further consideration of S. 251 and the Senate proceed to its immediate
consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time
and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and
laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I rise
today in opposition to S. 251, legislation that would ban transgender
women and girls from participating in sports consistent with their
gender.
My Republican colleagues falsely claim that allowing transgender
women and girls to play sports is harmful to cisgender women and girls.
They continue to hurl insulting lies about transgender girls dominating
sports, but what is true is that these bans are deeply harmful to
transgender girls, particularly transgender girls of color, girls who
are gender-nonconforming or born with intersex traits, as well as
cisgender girls.
These sex tests invade every girl's privacy and open the door to
harass anyone who is perceived as different.
If my Republican colleagues were actually worried about women and
girls in athletics, they would join in our efforts to address unequal
athletic opportunities in school, unequal pay, sexual abuse and
harassment, and more. But this isn't about supporting women and girls;
this is about discrimination.
Earlier today, I stood in Statuary Hall as we unveiled the portrait
of the late Congresswoman Patsy T. Mink on today's 50th anniversary of
title IX becoming law. Title IX, which was renamed the Patsy T. Mink
Equal Opportunity in Education Act, says:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex,
be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefit of,
or be subjected to discrimination under any education program
or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
Thirty-seven words that are just as relevant today as they were 50
years ago.
Patsy fought for equal opportunities for all, and this bill stands in
direct opposition to her work. And to listen to my colleague talking
about title IX as being that act that is going to support his bill, I
can tell you, as someone who knew and was friends with Patsy T. Mink,
she would be standing right next to me to say that title IX in no way
or shape supports what my colleague is attempting to do.
Republicans have the wrong priorities. We shouldn't be banning anyone
from playing sports; we should be fighting the discrimination that all
women and girls continue to face in athletics, in the classroom, and in
workplaces.
I am proud to stand up and oppose this harmful legislation and
continue to advance Patsy Mink's legacy of equal opportunities for all.
Mr. President, for these reasons, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
The Senator from Alabama.
Mr. TUBERVILLE. Mr. President, what I would like to say about equal
opportunity is that over the last few years, biological males playing
in women's sports have won 22 championships. The girls--other girls--
were playing for second and third.
I am disappointed that my colleague thinks this is not about equal
rights. I am disappointed that my colleague won't stand up for women
and women's rights. We should all be here fighting for the same thing.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Supreme Court Security Funding Act of 2022
Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the
Supreme Court Security Funding Act of 2022, which I introduced with
Senator Warner just last week. Yesterday evening, the Senate approved
by unanimous consent this bipartisan legislation, which provides
emergency security resources to the Supreme Court of the United States
and to the U.S. Marshals Service.
The House of Representatives must approve this bill without amendment
or delay and send it to the President's desk before adjourning this
week. The need is urgent and obvious. There is no question the Supreme
Court, its Justices, their families, and Court employees are under
unprecedented and unexpected threat. This includes recent highly
publicized threats against Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Sotomayor.
These threats may well become more acute in the coming weeks as the
Court concludes its term.
There is no question that protecting the Court from these threats
requires additional resources in Fiscal Year 2022 because unexpected
resources are being deployed. This legislation provides those necessary
resources.
More specifically, the U.S. Marshals Service has been providing
around-the-clock security for the nine Justices at their homes and
needs 10.3 million in emergency funding to cover these costs for the
remainder of this fiscal year. The Supreme Court needs 9.1 million to
cover its increased security costs for this fiscal year. These include
overtime pay for Supreme Court Police officers, mutual aid payment to
assisting law enforcement agencies, and increased physical security
around the Supreme Court Building.
If Congress doesn't immediately provide this funding, the Court and
Marshals Service may be forced to transfer funds from other critical
functions and entities, like the U.S. District Courts and U.S. Courts
of Appeal. That is an unacceptable outcome given the obvious and urgent
need for this security funding and the gravity of the threat against
one of our three constitutional branches.
Congress recently passed--and the President signed into law--
legislation by Senators Cornyn and Coons to increase the scope of
authorized Supreme Court Police protection to include the Justices'
immediate family members. Congress rightly provided this additional
security authorization to protect the Court.
These expanded authorities are important, but there should be no
question regarding whether Congress will separately provide the
resources necessary to protect the Supreme Court during its hour of
need.
I thank my colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner, for working with
me on this legislation. I also want to thank the senior Senator from
Alabama, Vice Chairman Shelby, and his staff, as well as the senior
Senator from Vermont, Chairman Leahy, for their help and their
guidance. Finally, I thank my Senate colleagues for their cooperation
in ensuring the swift passage of this legislation in the Senate.
Now, I urge the House of Representatives to promptly send this bill
to the President's desk before it adjourns later this week.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The Senator from South Dakota.
Great Outdoors Month
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, June is Great Outdoors Month. It is a theme
[[Page S3108]]
that definitely speaks to me. I am an outdoors guy through and through.
I love pheasant hunting, boating, swimming, running. I will shoot hoops
whenever I get the chance, indoors or outdoors, but this is nothing
better than doing it outdoors.
When I was a kid, my dad attached a basket to a pole in our backyard,
and there was nothing my siblings and I liked better than spending long
summer days and sometimes fall days and spring days shooting hoops in
our backyard in Murdo.
The outdoors was a huge part of my life as a kid. We spent the long
summer days outside, barring the hour every day my mother made us come
inside to read. On summer evenings, my dad would take us to get ice
cream cones, and then we would drive down to the White River to watch
the sunset.
Another outdoor pastime we embraced was hunting. My dad taught my
siblings and me to hunt, and I loved going out with him. Pheasant
hunting remains one of my favorite outdoor activities, and I get
excited every year as the third Saturday in October--the official start
to pheasant season--rolls around.
It is a tradition that I am happy to be able to share with the next
generation, as my dad shared it with me. There is nothing better than a
day spent outdoors with friends and family, followed by a communal
meal, sometimes involving pheasant.
Being in the outdoors isn't just enjoyable; I think it is a part of
the good life. The health benefits of time spent outdoors are well-
established, and I know a day--or even an hour--out in the fresh air
always clears my mind and refreshes my spirit.
With more and more of our life spent in front of screens, I think
time spent outdoors and disconnected is even more important than ever.
I am grateful for all those hours we spent as kids running around
outside and for family activities outdoors, like our summer trip to the
Black Hills. We used to go out there for Labor Day, stay in this little
non-air-conditioned cabin and just enjoy the outdoors.
We would hike, and we would visit caves. We would go to Mount
Rushmore, head to the lake--I loved and still love visiting Sylvan Lake
in South Dakota.
I loved being there with my parents and siblings, and I loved taking
my daughters there on trips like the ones I took growing up. Nobody who
visits South Dakota should miss the Black Hills.
I am not sure there is a more beautiful place on Earth--the interplay
of light and shadow on the trees and rocks late on a summer afternoon,
the endless South Dakota sky reflected in the blue of Sylvan Lake and
other lakes in the Black Hills, the Milky Way carpeting the night sky
with millions of diamonds. There is no better place to spend time in
the great outdoors than South Dakota.
Our State is filled with natural wonders, the Missouri River, Jewel
Cave and Wind Cave, two of the longest caves in the world. Together,
they offer hundreds of miles of underground passageways to explore,
filled with glimmering crystals and remarkable rock formations.
We have the magnificent Black Hills National Forest in Custer State
Park, rolling prairies, and, of course, the Badlands. If you haven't
experienced the rugged beauty of the Badlands, you are missing out--
extraordinary layered rock formations that look like they might have
come from another planet, a wealth of fossils.
Everybody should see the sunset over the Badlands at least once in
their life, turning the tops of the rocks to a sea of fiery orange.
And, of course, no mention of South Dakota's great outdoors would be
complete without a mention of Mount Rushmore, one of our national
treasures. Nature got a little help from man here, and the result is
magnificent. You can't help but be awed when you see Mount Rushmore
soaring up in front of you. And you can't help but feel a little
prouder to be a citizen of this great land.
Our Nation's great outdoor spaces need to be cared for so that we can
preserve them for future generations--from wildlife enthusiasts to
hikers and runners to farmers and ranchers. I am a longtime supporter
of the Conservation Reserve Program.
Agricultural producers are familiar with the Conservation Reserve
Program, or what we call CRP, which provides incentives for farmers,
ranchers, and landowners to take environmentally sensitive land out of
production for 10 to 15 years.
The Conservation Reserve Program helps the environment by improving
soil health and water quality and providing habitat for wildlife,
including endangered and threatened species. I pushed for an increase
in the CRP acreage cap in the 2018 farm bill, and the final bill raised
that acreage cap to 27 million acres.
Currently, I am working on further improvements of CRP that I will
work to get included in the 2023 farm bill. Based on my conversations
with farmers and ranchers, I developed the Conservation Reserve Program
Improvement Act, which I introduced in March. This legislation would
make CRP grazing a more attractive option by providing cost-share
payments for all CRP practices for the establishment of grazing
infrastructure, including fencing and water distribution.
It would also increase the annual payment limit for CRP--which has
not changed since 1985--to help account for inflation and the increase
in land value.
This would enhance the appeal of CRP for farmers and ranchers,
improving their bottom line while helping to protect the environment
and increase wildlife habitat.
Another priority of mine is improving forest management in the Black
Hills National Forest to reduce the risk of wildfires and damaging
insect infestations.
I have introduced two pieces of legislation during this Congress to
help improve management of our national forests, including the Black
Hills. Currently on-the-ground management activities, including timber
thinning, are significantly lagging in the Black Hills National Forest
and other forests throughout the country.
My Expediting Forest Restoration and Recovery Act would require the
U.S. Forest Service to expedite treatment of more than 70 million acres
of National Forest System lands to reduce the threat of insect and
disease infestations and catastrophic wildfires.
My Black Hills Forest Protection and Jobs Preservation Act is also
designed to help expedite forest management projects in the Black Hills
and elsewhere. The bill, which I introduced with my Wyoming colleague,
Senator John Barrasso, would require the U.S. Forest Service to quickly
issue National Environmental Policy Act decisions that are necessary to
carry out forest management projects, including thinning of overly
dense timber stands in the Black Hills National Forest.
Our bill would also expedite timber production projects in the Black
Hills National Forest and neighboring national forests to help maintain
the timber sale program that plays a critical role in keeping these
forests healthy while also supporting the regional economy.
I am grateful to live in a State that has so much to offer when it
comes to the great outdoors. And I will continue to work to protect and
preserve our national treasures, and I hope every American will take
advantage of Great Outdoors Month to get outside and enjoy our natural
world.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
____________________