[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 148 (Wednesday, September 14, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4596-S4605]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                    Railway Labor Management Dispute

  Madam President, well, unfortunately, we are also told that there is 
a looming rail strike that will have a tremendously negative impact on 
our economy. Our economy, as we all know, depends on a network of 
tractor-trailers, planes, trains, and cargo ships to transport products 
around the United States and beyond. These are the very same 
transportation modes that make sure that your grocery store is fully 
stocked, that the manufacturing plants have inventory they need in 
order to make their products, and that, yes, our packages that we order 
show up on our front door step on time.

  But a massive disruption in rail transportation is likely to occur in 
less than 2 days' time. The unions that represent more than 115,000 
rail workers have not been able to reach a contract agreement with 
railroad companies. Unless they reach a breakthrough soon, rail workers 
will go on strike this Friday, causing a national rail shutdown.
  If you don't think that will have a negative impact on our economy on 
top of what we have already mentioned, think again. The rail system 
carries nearly 30 percent of America's freight, everything from 
agriculture to retail products, heavy equipment, automobiles, coal, 
lumber. We are talking about the critical products that impact 
virtually every sector of the economy.
  It is tough to overstate the negative impact this will have. Just 
look at agriculture. On the front end of production, farmers and 
ranchers need fertilizer, seed, animal feed, and heavy equipment, all 
of which are likely to travel by rail at some point. Then, at harvest 
time, our producers rely on

[[Page S4597]]

timely rail service to transport their products to processing plants 
and then communities across the country.
  If this strike goes into effect, all of those shipments will be 
stalled, and this comes right as we are heading into the fall harvest. 
Farmers and ranchers will be left with huge amounts of products they 
can't even transport or sell, many of these perishable products, which 
will simply spoil. The consequence for consumers is we will continue to 
see empty shelves at the grocery stores, along with higher prices due 
to inflation and short supply.
  But this won't just impact us in the United States. Railroads move 
roughly a third of U.S. grain exports, which are desperately needed in 
global markets, particularly with what is happening in Ukraine, with 
Russia impeding the growing and transportation of grain to places like 
Africa, where people are literally starving for lack of food. The war 
in Ukraine has exacerbated this food insecurity. If this shutdown here 
in America goes into effect, the squeeze will be compounded and will be 
even tighter.
  Of course, this is just a snapshot of the impact a shutdown will have 
on one sector of the economy, but the same struggles will play out when 
it comes to energy, rail, manufacturing, automotive, and literally just 
about every other sector of the economy.
  This massive logjam will take a serious toll on our economy on top of 
inflation and the recessionary pressures we are already feeling. The 
freight industry estimates that a rail shutdown could cost the U.S. 
economy more than $2 billion a day--$2 billion a day.
  Our country is hurtling toward a logistical nightmare, and 
unfortunately the Biden administration appears to be frozen and 
undecided about what to do. For years, our Democratic colleagues who 
depend on organized labor for a major part of their political support 
have put the demands of labor unions ahead of the needs of consumers 
and the rest of the American people. They have romanced the powerful 
labor lobby at every turn, and one of the fiercest union defenders now 
occupies the Oval Office.
  Now, I am not opposed to people joining unions. They are entitled to 
collectively bargain and try to advance their livelihood and their 
family's way of life. But to let one special interest group basically 
create a logistical nightmare with this looming rail strike is just 
indefensible.
  Well, we are seeing the consequences of this kowtowing to organized 
labor above the interests of any and all other Americans.
  To hopefully prevent this looming crisis, President Biden has 
established an emergency Board to help reach a resolution and prevent 
this strike, if possible. The Board released its recommendations to 
resolve this dispute nearly a month ago, but a deal is still nowhere in 
sight.
  In recent weeks, a number of administration officials have joined the 
unions and freight companies at the negotiating table. The Secretaries 
of Labor, Transportation, and Agriculture have all tried to help 
resolve the impasse, but they have not moved the needle at all.
  I don't know how much havoc is in store, but it is not looking good. 
Many shipments have already stopped out of fear that the operations 
will stop midjourney. I read that even commuter trains like Amtrak have 
already canceled some of their routes because they know what sort of 
impact this strike will have if no deal is reached by Friday.
  Inflation has already sent prices to an untenable high. The supply 
chain breakdown is sure to send those prices even higher.
  Families can anticipate product shortages across the board from 
grocery stores to car lots. Shoppers can expect packages that they have 
ordered to be delayed for days or even weeks on end. And drivers should 
expect to see more trucks on the highway to fill the gap when the 
railroad shuts down.
  This is just another example of the failure of the Biden 
administration to anticipate and to address the problems that the 
American people are facing. It seems there is a huge disconnect between 
what is happening here in Washington among our Democratic friends and 
the Biden administration and what I hear from my constituents back 
home. And I think that is true largely across the Nation; that the 
elites in Washington have become completely decoupled from the rest of 
the country.
  What that produces is special interest legislation that pleases some 
constituents: labor unions, climate activists, and open borders 
advocates.
  The Biden administration and our Democratic majority have used their 
power in Washington to spend trillions of dollars on things that the 
American people don't want while compounding the problems that they are 
facing day in and day out: inflation, a recession, a paralyzing supply 
chain shutdown on the horizon, a spike in crime, and then, of course, 
an open border, which has allowed enough illegal drugs to be imported 
into the United States that it took 108,000 American lives last year. 
And 71,000 of those 108,000 lives were as a result of synthetic opioids 
like fentanyl.
  Synthetic opioids are raging like a brush fire across the entire 
country, and we are seeing, for example, at middle schools and high 
schools in places like Hays County, right outside of Austin, TX, where 
I live, that young people, unbeknownst to themselves, ingest small 
amounts of this fentanyl and ultimately end up overdosing and dying 
from it.
  So there are huge challenges facing our country. We need to do our 
job. We need to work together. No one is suggesting that we give up our 
principles. Republicans are Republicans and Democrats are Democrats for 
a reason--because they view the role and the size of the government 
differently. Our Democratic colleagues seem to think that Washington 
and government is the answer to every problem. Republicans and 
conservatives, on the other hand, tend to favor individual initiative 
and entrepreneurship and investment to create jobs and an opportunity 
for people to get jobs and provide for their family and pursue their 
dream.
  But there is plenty of overlap where we can agree, but we have to 
fight inflation. We have to deal with things like the paralyzing supply 
chain and the threat from a rail strike that appears now to be 
imminent.
  We have got to do more to support our men and women in uniform--the 
police--as they battle crime in our neighborhoods and our communities, 
which seems to have gone up exponentially in recent years.
  And then, of course, there is the one big, gaping, open sore that our 
Democratic colleagues have ignored completely, and that is our open 
border.
  I mentioned the drugs, but in addition to the drugs, we have seen 2.3 
million migrants show up at the border just since President Biden 
became President because they know they are going to be able to get 
into the country.
  And they are probably going to be able to stay because the Biden 
administration simply does not have any plan in place to decide asylum 
claims--who has legitimate claims and who does not--so they engage in a 
program of catch-and-release. With the litigation backlogs in our 
immigration courts, it is no surprise that when years go by and your 
ticket comes up and you are told to show up in immigration court, that 
people simply fade into the great American landscape and avoid 
detection.
  The only people benefiting from this, beyond the occasional migrant, 
are the drug cartels and the transnational criminal organizations that 
network people from around the world.
  I know of many people who aren't from a border State like I am who 
think that these migrants are just from Mexico or Central America. But 
if you talk to the Border Patrol sector chiefs in Del Rio or the Rio 
Grande Valley, they will tell you they are detaining people from as 
many as 150 different countries.
  Now, surely, the majority are from Mexico and Central America, but it 
ought to cause us a lot of concern when somebody can get to our back 
door from another country and then falsely claim asylum only to be 
released into the interior of the United States and never heard from 
again.
  These are all fixable problems if we will work together, but so far, 
while the American people may have thought they elected Joe Biden, a 
moderate, they basically have seen Bernie Sanders' agenda.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.

[[Page S4598]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that 
the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                   Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4483

  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Madam President, have you ever gone out to eat 
at a restaurant with a group of people, but your order was cheaper than 
everyone else's? Maybe you weren't as hungry or the restaurant the 
group picked was more expensive than you could afford so you were 
selective about what you ordered. Then, when the check comes, someone 
suggested the group split it evenly.
  Now, what is your immediate reaction? You are upset, of course, 
because you ordered the salad not the filet mignon or you drank water, 
not the expensive bottle of wine. You ordered what you wanted, and they 
ordered what they wanted; you shouldn't be on the hook for their cost.
  Sadly, this illustration is far too real, as last month, Joe Biden 
announced that he would cancel billions of dollars in student loans.
  Now, let's be clear. He isn't canceling student debt. No, he is 
transferring that debt to every American taxpayer. Now a construction 
worker in Florida is having to foot the bill for the loans of a Harvard 
grad, which they voluntarily accepted for an education they received.
  So here is what Democrats are trying to say to that construction 
worker: You didn't go to college; Democrats don't care. You will pay 
the debt of lawyers and doctors, and you will pay for those who want 
Ph.D.s in poetry. Talk about poetic injustice. You went to community 
college or a State school and worked to graduate debt-free. Tough luck. 
Joe Biden wants you to pay for the advanced degrees of the privileged 
few. Your tax dollars are now the money pot for other people's student 
debt.
  Of course, Joe Biden's plan doesn't even begin to address the real 
reason for rising higher education costs. That is universities' 
decades-long practice of unnecessarily raising tuition.
  As Governor of Florida, I addressed that problem and challenged our 
universities to keep education affordable.
  Look at the University of Florida. Undergraduate tuition and fees for 
this academic year are less than $6,500. It is the fifth best public 
university in the country. You will get a fantastic education 
there. Meanwhile, at Harvard, tuition fees for an academic year cost 
more than $57,000.

  There are ways to make education affordable, but the Democrats and 
elites aren't interested in those solutions. That is why Joe Biden is 
engaging in this reckless move even though it doesn't solve the real 
issue and even though he lacks the proper constitutional authority.
  Everybody knows this. That is why, in July of last year, Nancy Pelosi 
herself denied that the President had such power.
  She said:

       The president can't do it . . . That's not even a 
     discussion.
       Yet now the Department of Justice is engaging in 
     interpretive gymnastics to co-opt legislation that was passed 
     to help our servicemembers in the aftermath of 9/11. It is a 
     desperate attempt to stretch a good law well beyond its 
     intent so that Joe Biden can give handouts to his liberal 
     voters and Harvard pals.

  Biden wants to spend money that Congress has not appropriated for a 
loan forgiveness that Congress has not authorized. It is illegal. It is 
unconstitutional. It is a gross abuse of authority, and I won't stand 
for it. Congress must assert its authority here. We have the power of 
the purse, not the President.
  That is why I have introduced the Debt Cancellation Accountability 
Act. My bill would require the Department of Education to get an 
express appropriation from Congress before they could propose waiving, 
discharging, or reducing student loan debt to two or more borrowers in 
an amount greater than $1 million. If we want to transfer the debt of 
some and make everyone pay for it, then Congress has to make that 
decision.
  We should simply put it up for a vote. Of course, the Democrats here 
in the Senate won't do that. Surely, they could have passed a bill by 
now if they had really wanted to, but they wanted Biden to do it alone. 
It is easy to see why. In just the past few weeks, we have heard 
families from across the country speaking out against Biden's unfair 
and disastrous proposal. I am hearing about it from Floridians every 
day, and I know my colleagues are too.
  I would like to thank Senators Barrasso, Lummis, and Braun for 
supporting my Debt Cancellation Accountability Act and for choosing to 
stand with me against Biden's overreach.
  Let's pass this bill today to reverse Joe Biden's unlawful decision 
and force Congress to decide this issue.
  Before I ask for unanimous consent, I would like to turn to my 
colleague Senator Braun from the great State of Indiana.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hickenlooper). The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. BRAUN. I thank Senator Scott.
  Mr. President, President Biden's student loan debt transfer does not 
cancel or forgive anything. These debts will still be paid. It is not 
like they go away.
  What else does it say about the whole idea that, when you take on an 
obligation and you agree to it, you can just shirk it or get rid of it? 
There are many people across the country who would want to be in on 
that gambit as well. He has simply shifted the cost of repayment on to 
everyone, including to the 65 percent of American workers who chose not 
to get a college degree. What about the aspiring plumber or electrician 
who borrowed $20,000, $30,000, or $40,000 for his or her own business? 
There would be no end to it.
  We should focus on getting more value out of colleges rather than 
giving them another reason to hike prices. Sadly, the only place where 
that has been focused on is in my own home State, where Mitch Daniels, 
the ex-Governor of Indiana, froze tuition into 10 years. That is 
getting more value out, and that is why their enrollment has gone way 
up.
  With a national debt of nearly $31 trillion, we can't continue to 
pile on more debt. When Senator Scott and I got here just a little over 
3\1/2\ years ago, we were $18 trillion in debt. We throw ``trillions'' 
around now like we used to ``hundreds of billions,'' and it is on the 
backs of our kids and grandkids every time we do it.
  Today, Federal Student Aid owns $1.6 trillion in outstanding Federal 
assets--in other words, student loans. The loan program needs to be 
completely redone so that colleges will be motivated to lower costs. 
This is an excuse to do the opposite.
  Finally, President Biden's actions are illegal in the first place. 
The President doesn't have the authority to cancel all of this debt. I 
am hoping it gets taken to court, because what does it say, again, for 
future generations or anyone who makes a commitment to take on debt who 
can shirk it with the stroke of a pen?
  Even Speaker Pelosi agreed on this point, saying she didn't think it 
was legal. Yet it doesn't make any difference in this day and age as we 
plow forward.
  This is why the Debt Cancellation Accountability Act requires the 
Department of Education to get express appropriation from Congress to 
pay for any Federal student loan the Department proposes to waive, 
discharge, or reduce.
  I yield the floor to Senator Scott.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. I am so thankful for Senator Braun's support on 
this bill and for all of the work he has done to raise awareness about 
Biden's reckless spending agenda and to stand for fiscal sanity.
  Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent 
that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be 
discharged from further consideration of S. 4483 and that 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 Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, this is a 
shameful attempt by the Republicans to keep working Americans buried 
under mountains of student debt.

[[Page S4599]]

  President Biden's decision to cancel up to $20,000 of Federal student 
debt for as many as 43 million Americans with incomes under $125,000 a 
year is a historic step to delivering life-changing relief to working 
families and to helping rebuild America's middle class.
  Senator Scott's bill is just one of the Republicans' desperate 
efforts to block cancelation for millions of Americans. Now, the 
Republicans are happy to pass out tax breaks and regulatory loopholes 
for billionaires and giant corporations, but they are fighting tooth 
and nail to keep working families from getting a penny of relief.
  Evidently, Senator Scott believes that $2 trillion in Republican tax 
cuts that were not paid for is fine so long as those tax cuts are aimed 
mostly at millionaires, billionaires, and giant corporations. But a 
program that costs a fraction as much and for which 90 percent of its 
benefits go to people earning less than $75,000 a year is now somehow a 
moral outrage.
  Today, he claims to worry about those taxpayers who he says will 
shoulder student loan cancelation, but where was Senator Scott, or 
then-Governor Scott, when Donald Trump and the congressional 
Republicans handed out $2 trillion in tax breaks to billionaires and 
giant corporations, not a penny of which was paid for? Where was he 
then?
  Well, he endorsed the Trump administration's plan to cut taxes for 
corporations, and he celebrated those tax breaks for the richest among 
us. He wasn't worried about how taxpayers would pay that off--not a 
word about the fairness for all of the people who would bear that 
burden, so long as the benefits went mostly to the rich and powerful.
  Senator Scott has basically laid it all out there for America to see, 
and that difference--helping billionaires or helping working families--
pretty much sums up Republican and Democratic differences across the 
board. If we are cutting a break for the rich and the powerful, the 
Republicans are on board. If we are trying to help out working people, 
congressional Republicans take to their fainting couches and claim to 
be so worried about the national debt.
  Student loan cancelation is very popular in America, including with a 
majority of people who have no student loan debt. That is because there 
is scarcely a working person anywhere in America today who does not 
know someone who is choking on student loan debt. Yet, evidently, the 
Republicans in Congress live in bubbles that prevent them from meeting 
any of the millions of people out there who have busted their tails, 
who have worked multiple jobs, who have made their payments, and who 
still watch their debt loads continue to climb.
  So let me just set the record straight here. I want to repeat an 
earlier point. Nearly 90 percent of relief dollars from President 
Biden's cancelation will go to Americans earning less than $75,000 a 
year, and none--none--of the help goes to people making more than 
$125,000 a year.
  Now, actually, those numbers shouldn't be shocking. Think about who 
owns student loan debt. Senator Scott talked about Harvard multiple 
times in his speech, but it is not the wealthy people who go to Ivy 
League schools who end up with the student loan debt. It is middle- and 
working-class Americans who were born into families who couldn't afford 
to pay out-of-pocket. In fact, 99.7 percent of borrowers did not attend 
an Ivy League school. So that would mean--what?--three-tenths of 1 
percent of people who went to Ivy League schools borrowed money.
  By comparison--I just looked it up while the Senator was speaking--at 
the University of Florida, 15 percent have to borrow in order to make 
it through to graduation. At Florida State, 26 percent--that is one in 
every four people at Florida State--has to take out money in order to 
be in college. At Florida A&M, the numbers are even higher: 68 percent. 
More than two-thirds of the people who are in school have to take out 
money in order to make it through college. This is true across the 
country. At State schools, about half of all students have to borrow to 
make it through. At historically Black colleges and universities, the 
number is about 90 percent.

  So let's be really clear about who exactly congressional Republicans 
are trying to take relief away from. It is not Ivy Leaguer doctors and 
lawyers. Who are the people the Senate Republicans say aren't worthy of 
the kind of help that billionaires and giant corporations could get in 
their big tax package? Who do Senate Republicans think should be 
squeezed harder? Who do Senate Republicans say should simply be left 
behind?
  Well, the Senate Republicans want to leave behind the 42 percent of 
borrowers who do not even have a 4-year college diploma. These are 
folks who took out money--loans--in order to become a nurse's aide, to 
become a mechanic, to go to beauty school, to get a commercial driver's 
license to drive a truck, and, too often, the wages that they were 
promised never materialized.
  Senate Republicans say: Let them struggle. Leave them behind.
  Who gets the most help under President Biden's cancelation? Senator 
Scott said this is all about doctors and lawyers. Let's take a look at 
that.
  The share of student loan borrowers who earned a cosmetology 
certificate is about double the share of borrowers who got professional 
degrees in law and medicine combined.
  Senate Republicans say: Let those cosmetology certificate holders 
struggle. Leave them behind.
  Similarly, there are more student loan borrowers who took out debt to 
earn a certificate for driving trucks and working on the railroad than 
those who did so to become dentists and optometrists.
  Senate Republicans say: Let those truckdrivers and railroad workers 
struggle. Leave them behind.
  It is not just the people who have 2-year degrees or certificates who 
get help under President Biden's cancelation. It is the people who 
don't have any degree at all. These are people who did everything our 
country asked them to do by graduating from high school and advancing 
their educations, but life happened: They got pregnant or they had to 
take care of a sick family member, and they had to leave before 
finishing their degree.
  Senate Republicans say: Let them struggle. Leave them behind.
  Who gets help? It is women, who hold nearly two-thirds of all 
outstanding student loan debt. Black women, in particular, shoulder a 
disproportionate amount of the student loan debt burden--Black women, 
who hold more debt than any other group.
  Senate Republicans say: Let them struggle. Leave them behind.
  Who gets help? It is Black Americans, who borrow more money to go to 
college, borrow more money in college, and have a harder time paying it 
off after college. They are the ones who will see their debt eliminated 
under President Biden's cancelation plan. Senate Republicans say: Let 
them struggle. Leave them behind.

  Who gets help? It is the 50 percent of Latino borrowers with debt who 
will see their student loan debt completely eliminated. Senate 
Republicans say let them struggle. Leave them behind.
  Who gets help? It is the millions of people who couldn't save for 
retirement, or buy their first home, or start a family because of 
student debt. Senate Republicans say let them struggle. Leave them 
behind.
  We are living in a moment when the President of the United States has 
reached out, literally, to tens of millions of families and said: I am 
putting government on your side. But the congressional Republicans are 
determined to make this country work even better for the rich and the 
powerful. That is why they are trying to pass the bill that Senator 
Scott has advanced.
  These Republicans are all for giving handouts to giant corporations 
and billionaires. But the minute--the minute--that our country creates 
a little breathing room for the millions of hard-working people whose 
biggest sin is they tried to get an education and they grew up in a 
family that just couldn't afford to pay for it, those Senate 
Republicans are right here on this Senate floor trying to undo it.
  I want to take a minute and just look at the bigger picture to see 
how we got here.
  We have a student debt crisis because our government stopped 
investing in higher education and began shifting the costs of college 
onto working families.
  I went to a great public university that costs $50 a semester--a 
price I could pay for on a part-time

[[Page S4600]]

waitressing job. I got to become a teacher, a law professor, and a U.S. 
Senator because higher education opened a million doors for a kid like 
me. But that opportunity no longer exists in America.
  Today, college costs thousands, even tens of thousands, of dollars. 
And instead of investing taxpayer dollars to help bring down those 
costs, the State governments reduced their financial support, and the 
Federal Government told everyone to borrow the money they needed to 
cover the rising costs of going to school. That has left millions of 
Americans drowning in student loan debt.
  What is worse, families have had to navigate a broken student loan 
system riddled with bad actors who are trying to take advantage of and 
profit off keeping them in debt.
  During the Trump years, Betsy DeVos, the Secretary of Education, 
threw in with the for-profit schools. And when students who had been 
cheated asked for some help, she turned her back.
  I have long pushed for more accountability and more oversight to 
bring down the cost of college and to make higher education and 
training programs more accessible. I have a plan for that. In fact, I 
have more than one plan for that, and I welcome any Republican to join 
me in helping make any of these options reality.
  But cancellation is the first step to fixing a broken student loan 
system and to delivering relief to families who have been trapped in it 
for far too long.
  One final point: The President's plan to cancel student debt will 
make a huge difference for tens of millions of Americans in their day-
to-day lives. But it will do so much more. Debt cancellation is about 
strengthening our whole economy. Better educated workers make us a 
wealthier nation and one with more opportunity, not just for those at 
the top but more opportunity for everyone.
  Just consider one example. Following World War II, a grateful nation 
said to returning GIs that taxpayers would pick up the cost of college 
and technical training. More than 2 million veterans went to college or 
graduate school and nearly 6 million used this opportunity to pursue 
vocational training to become construction workers, electricians, 
mechanics, and other careers. Together, these men--and they were nearly 
all men--built America's middle class.
  Taxpayer investments in post-high school education meant that 
millions of people were better educated, and they helped fuel an 
economic boom that lasted for decades and lifted this entire Nation. 
And it was a bargain. Every dollar that was spent on educating our 
veterans generated $7 to taxpayers. That is not even counting for the 
significant boost to productivity from a more educated population. Just 
think about that: a 7-to-1 payoff for investing in higher education for 
all our people.
  President Biden saw something that he could do to help tens of 
millions of Americans struggling under the weight of student debt and 
invest in the future of our economy, so he did it. Debt cancellation 
was the right thing to do. That is why the majority of Americans--with 
or without loans--support cancellation.
  I am celebrating because cancellation will provide life-changing 
relief for working families across this country. That is why I object 
to the Senate Republican's shameless attempt to deny people the relief 
they need.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
  The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. BRAUN. So the plan that the Democrats are going to give you, not 
only on this, was put out clearly in President Biden's blueprint for 
our country to put us $45 trillion in debt in 10 years, where we will 
be paying as much on interest as we do on discretionary spending 
domestically or the military budget. That is no business plan.
  How do you think they are going to pay for the debt forgiveness? They 
are going to borrow the money to do it, to backfill to pay the people 
who are owed the money.
  One other point of clarification. When you had a practical bill--the 
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which was done before Senator Scott and I got 
here--it was a plan to grow economic activity, a way to pay for it. Had 
COVID not come along, the CBO was ready to say that it was paying for 
itself because we were growing the economy at 3 percent. And the $150 
billion per year over 10 years, which is chump change now compared to 
the $3 trillion the Democrats have put us in debt over the last year 
and a half, was growing the economy with zero inflation, raising wages 
in the toughest spots for those wage earners. We have always tried to 
do it without borrowing it from our kids and our grandkids.
  I yield back the floor to Senator Scott.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, so let's remember what we are 
talking about here. We are not canceling debt; we are transferring 
debt. We are transferring the debt because this obligation doesn't go 
away. Somebody still owes this money.
  What we are saying is, people who decided--they made the choice--to 
go to college or go to some higher education, they are not going to 
have to pay their debt. And people who didn't and already paid off 
their debt, they are going to pay for it.
  My colleague from Massachusetts never acknowledged the example. We 
all remember when we went out to dinner and we didn't spend the most 
money and how somebody suggested that, oh, let's just share it. So we 
paid for the expensive wine, and we paid for the expensive meal. That 
is not fair.
  When you talk to Americans around the country, and they say: Would 
you like to forgive all the debt? Absolutely. Free is great.
  But when you say: You are going to pay for it, they say: Absolutely 
not. Why would I pay off the debt for somebody else?
  Let's remember just what my bill does. It doesn't say we can't 
forgive student loans; it says that Congress ought to decide if we do 
it. This is going to cost up to $1 trillion.
  I don't think we ought to, so-called, transfer this debt, but my bill 
will at least give us a chance to have a debate on it. But that is not 
what my colleague wants to do.
  I hope my colleague understands that her objection is absolutely a 
slap in the face to all those workers in Massachusetts and around the 
country who didn't go to college: construction workers, small business 
owners, chefs, flight attendants, firefighters, landscapers, and so 
many other groups of people who have made the decision not to pursue a 
higher education for whatever reason.
  There are many others who worked hard to get scholarships or those 
who worked part time to afford college or plenty others who took the 
time to pay off their loans. I am going to stand with those people, 
working-class people--people who are responsible, hard-working 
Americans who absolutely are willing to pay off their obligations.
  I think about people like my dad. My dad had a sixth grade education. 
He was a truckdriver. He worked his tail off. I can't imagine what he 
would think about working hard every day, then being forced to pay for 
some other person's degree as a doctor or a lawyer. He would be beside 
himself. He would think it was so unfair.
  It is not how the real world works. It is a Democrat fantasyland that 
Joe Biden is trying to turn into reality.
  People used to take pride in paying off their debts and working hard 
to see their commitments come through. Democrats want to destroy that 
and destroy ideas of fiscal responsibility. They want to forget that we 
are $30 trillion in debt. They want to forget that we still have 
record-high inflation as a result of wasteful spending.
  My colleague wants to pretend that we are in this fantasyland because 
objecting to my bill is an endorsement of Biden's reckless plan and his 
unconstitutional debt transfer, from the overachiever, to the Harvard 
grad, to the working class.
  As Members of Congress, we should be interested in checks and 
balances and the separation of powers. We should guard the powers of 
the Constitution that is especially reserved for the legislative 
branch. Spending a trillion dollars with no congressional oversight is 
wrong. That is not exactly how our Constitution was set up. This 
shameless decision to block my bill is just another example of how far 
Senate Democrats will go to appease the radical left.

[[Page S4601]]

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. So I am still waiting for an answer to the question: 
Where were these Republicans who were talking about fiscal 
responsibility and what is fair in terms of transferring costs, when it 
was the billionaires and the giant corporations who were getting a $2 
trillion tax break?
  Let us remember--because I was here when that happened--even the 
conservative economists and think tanks were saying this is going to go 
on the debt balance because it is not paid for.
  No. At that moment, they were willing to say: But it is going to 
produce all kinds of wonderful benefits--which, of course, did not come 
to pass.
  What about the example I gave, the example about the investment that 
we made as a country in our returning veterans; the fact that we 
invested so 2 million of them could get college diplomas, so that 
millions more could get technical degrees? What about the fact that the 
numbers show American taxpayers got a return on that investment of 7 to 
1? This really is about who we invest in.
  It seems that what Senator Scott is saying is people shouldn't go to 
school. If you are in a family that you can't guarantee that you are 
going to have some assets to back you up, if you ever have to think 
about the fact that you might get sick, you might fall down, you might 
get hurt, and you might not be able to finish, or you might not be able 
to turn that degree into a high-paying job, or you might graduate at a 
moment when the economy is in a slump, what Senator Scott seems to be 
saying is: Don't order off that menu. Don't go to school. Don't try to 
get a post-high school certificate in cosmetology. Don't try to get a 
certificate for truckdriving school. Don't try to get a 2-year diploma. 
Don't try to get a 4-year diploma. That is not going to make America a 
better or richer country. That is not going to be an America that is 
going to open opportunities.
  The next time Senator Scott or any other Republican talks to me about 
fair, I would ask them to explain to me what is fair that the daughter 
of a janitor a half a century ago could go to a good 4-year college on 
$50 a semester? Why? Because American taxpayer invested in those public 
colleges and universities. And today that opportunity is not there for 
a single one of our kids.

  When you want to talk about who has college debt, instead of talking 
about the three-tenths of 1 percent of Ivy League grads who have 
college debt, look at the 68 percent of Florida A&M grads who have 
college debt. That is shameful. We need to be an America that is about 
creating more opportunities, not closing them off for tens of millions 
of people.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, first off, my colleague never 
addressed the issue that this is a transfer of obligation. I mean, you 
can have a conversation about what we should have done with regard to 
tax cuts in the past, but this is a transfer of obligation. This is a 
transfer of obligation of people who decided to go to school.
  We should do everything we can to help people, but we are not 
addressing the problem here. I addressed it when I was Governor. When I 
became Governor in January of 2011, tuition in Florida was going up 15 
percent a year, plus inflation. I stopped it. We didn't see tuition 
increase while I was Governor, and we became the No. 1 higher education 
system in the country according to U.S. News & World Report.
  We solved the problem of the cost of higher education to make sure 
people could afford education. We did it because we invested, we kept 
tuition low, and we paid our universities based on three things: do you 
get a degree, how much money you make, and what does it cost to get a 
degree. So, guess what, all of our universities became more efficient 
and more accountable.
  That is how you fix the problem. This does not fix the problem. This 
does nothing to reduce tuition. This does nothing to hold our 
universities accountable. This does nothing to stop our universities 
from raising tuition. This does nothing to require our universities to 
make sure our kids get a job. This does nothing to make sure our kids 
get good-paying jobs.
  So I am very disappointed in my colleague in that she would still not 
address the issue that that is a complete transfer of obligation from 
some people who decided to go get a higher education to people who 
decided not to.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, would the Senator yield for a question?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Would the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. I yield the floor.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I want to ask the Senator if he believes 
that the 68 percent of students at Florida A&M University who have 
student loan debt should never have gone to college because it turns 
out their families couldn't afford to pay for college in Florida.
  Should they just never have tried?
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Are you finished?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Absolutely. I did everything I could to make 
sure all of our students had the opportunity to go to school. We made 
sure that they could afford to go to school.
  What I have said in my bill today is this ought to be done by 
Congress. And let's don't just do some blanket transfer of obligations 
here. Congress should be doing this. This is going to cost us up to $1 
trillion, and we are going to have people like my dad, if he was still 
alive--a truckdriver with a sixth-grade education--pay for some Ivy 
League kid to go to school, and that is wrong.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, can I ask for a clarification of that 
answer?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. So, among the 68 percent of Florida A&M students who have 
student loan debt--I believe I heard the Senator say he made it 
possible for them to afford college, and I am wondering if he could 
explain how they could have afforded college without taking on that 
whole student loan debt.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, I am not suggesting you 
shouldn't borrow money, but what I am suggesting is, if you do borrow 
money, you made that decision, all right? You shouldn't transfer it to 
somebody like my dad, who had a sixth-grade education, couldn't afford 
to go to school, didn't go to school. There shouldn't be a transfer to 
make sure they pay off your debt. That is a decision you make. You 
should pay it off.

  Now, if you have an issue because you can't pay it, let's deal with 
that issue. That is not what this does. This says, whatever your 
issues, Joe Biden says, by himself, without any act of Congress--he 
gets to make a decision by himself: Poof, your debt goes away; somebody 
else picks it up. That is not right.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I am really delighted that my colleague 
from Florida is suddenly concerned about transfers of wealth--I really 
am--because, as he may or may not know, over the last 30 years, there 
has been a massive transfer of wealth. The problem is, it has gone in 
the wrong direction.
  We are talking about the shrinking of the middle class. We are 
talking about trillions of dollars going to the top 1 percent. And we 
are ending up in a situation today where you have billionaires and you 
have large corporations that don't pay a nickel in Federal taxes.
  I always find it interesting that whenever Congress does something--
ever so rarely--that benefits working people and low-income people, 
there is an uproar: Oh my God, you are helping young people and working 
people; you are helping poor people. What a terrible thing to do.
  But there is massive silence when you give gigantic tax breaks to the 
1 percent or large corporations that are now doing phenomenally well.
  So my colleague from Florida is interested in the transfer of wealth? 
Let's work together. Let's make sure that the working class in this 
country--not just the billionaires--get a fair shake. Let's help young 
people. Let's start canceling the student debt that we should have done 
years ago.

[[Page S4602]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, well, first off, let me make 
sure my colleague from Vermont knows my background. I actually grew up 
in public housing, born to a single mom. I do care about people, making 
sure you can get an education. That is why I did exactly what I did in 
Florida. I made sure people had the opportunity to get ahead.
  The 4 years before I became Governor of Florida, the State lost 
832,000 jobs. By cutting taxes and reducing the regulations and 
streamlining things, we added 1.7 million jobs so people all over my 
State could get a job. That is how people get ahead. You don't get 
ahead by just somebody transferring obligations from one person to 
somebody else. That improves a few people's lives, but that is 
completely unfair. That is not how this country was set up, that some 
people are going to pay for somebody else's obligation that they 
decided to pick up, and that is all I am talking about.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, you know, I really do think about this 
transfer question, and I find myself asking: Who paid for Jeff Bezos's 
yacht? Is it the taxpayers who said: Now, we--America's middle class, 
America's working class--are actually going to have to pick up the 
slack. And they will be the ones who have to pay to keep the military. 
They are the ones who will have to pay for roads and bridges. They are 
the ones who will pay for investment in science. But the billionaires 
can get richer and richer and richer and pay little or nothing in 
taxes. That is a giant transfer, and yet none of our Republican 
colleagues seem interested in talking about that transfer and just 
putting a stop to the outflow from hard-working, middle-class families 
over to the billionaires and the giant corporations.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
  Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, I think who paid for Jeff 
Bezos's yacht is all the people who bought packages from Amazon. And by 
the way, if you do get one that says ``Made in China,'' I hope 
everybody will send it back.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.


               Unanimous Consent Request--- S.J. Res. 61

  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, in a few minutes, I am going to ask 
unanimous consent for the passage of the bill. In the interim, I would 
like to yield some time to my good friend Senator Wicker.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I seek recognition to speak on the same 
matter that Senator Burr has raised and will raise on the unanimous 
consent request.
  Think of the economy right now, Mr. President. Inflation is at 8.3 
percent or higher, our GDP is shrinking, and supply chains have not 
recovered from the pandemic. The last thing we need is a shutdown of 
this Nation's rail service, both passenger and freight. Yet that is 
what we are facing in less than a day and a half from this moment: a 
massive rail strike that will virtually shut down our economy.
  Now, this didn't have to happen, but I will tell you, it has been 
going on since 2019. So we are in our third year of this matter. There 
has been negotiation among the rails, some 37 companies--including 7 
major freight carriers--and 12 unions. They reached an impasse. So, 
pursuant to statute, the President of the United States, President Joe 
Biden, appointed a PEB, a Presidential Emergency Board, to help resolve 
this issue. They brought the parties together and have worked with the 
suggestions from both sides--both labor and management--and come up 
with their recommendation, which the President of the United States has 
endorsed in full.
  We are now at the point where we are asking both labor and management 
to agree to this recommendation of the PEB. One hundred percent of 
management has agreed to this recommendation of the Biden-appointed 
Presidential Emergency Board. Of the 12 unions, 8 of the unions have 
agreed. So we have an overwhelming majority of the unions agreeing to 
this and 100 percent of management agreeing to it, but under the law 
that Congress, in its wisdom, passed years and years ago, we have to 
have 100 percent of the 12 unions, and there are 4 holdouts at this 
point.
  Pursuant to the statute, when we get to a situation like this, 
Congress can step in, and that is what my friend is going to ask us to 
do in just a few minutes. Congress can pass the recommendation of the 
PEB in full. The Senate can pass it, send it over to the House, send it 
to the President, who has endorsed the recommendation in full, and we 
can avoid this strike. And that is what we ought to be doing.
  So I want to commend my friend from North Carolina for his leadership 
in this case. If the trains stop running, our economy grinds to a halt. 
And that is the very reason this law is in place, and it is the very 
reason why it is incumbent on us as Senators and Representatives to 
pass a resolution implementing the PEB.
  I yield to my friend.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Mississippi.
  There are going to be some who say this is unprecedented by the 
Congress. In fact, under the Railway Labor Act, Congress is allowed to 
intervene. In fact, Congress has intervened 18 times in the past, 
imposing PEB recommendations in whole or in part 4 times.
  If we don't do it, if we do not force this issue, at 12:01 tomorrow 
night, the railroads will shut down, and the economic impact on the 
American people is $2 billion a day--$2 billion.
  The Senator from Mississippi and I have introduced a bill that will 
adopt the Biden administration recommendations--recommendations that 
include a 24-percent increase in pay, paid retroactively to 2020; 
annual bonuses of $1,000; and additional paid leave. This is what has 
been negotiated by the PEB board, but, as Senator Wicker said, there 
are holdouts from a standpoint of some of the major unions even though 
eight have agreed to it.
  Now, as I said, Congress has taken this action 18 times to intervene 
in 12 different rail disputes. It spans back to 1982, and the latest 
was in 1991. So I dare say there are only a few that are in this body 
who were here when that happened.
  Now, Senator Sanders is on the floor, and I know he is going to 
object. I know he is going to object because I read his tweet this 
week. It said this:

       Congress shouldn't stand in the way of railroad workers 
     going on strike. The rail companies have avoided bargaining, 
     abused their workers, and allied with the same forces who 
     killed the Biden agenda in 2021. Now they want Congress to 
     support their greed. Don't.

  It sounds similar to the argument he was just making to Senator Scott 
about student loans. It sounds very similar to every argument he uses. 
It is that there is this thing in America where nobody is speaking up 
for something.
  Listen, this is the President's bipartisan emergency Board that he 
set up that came back with a recommendation to the Biden administration 
and said: Here is the solution to this. It should be adopted.
  This is really weird that Senator Wicker and I were on the floor 
introducing legislation that supports the President's position and 
supports the position of the Presidential Emergency Board.
  Now, here is the key thing. This is the takeaway. We don't have to be 
here. Senator Schumer at any point can place this legislation on the 
floor. Clearly, Senator Sanders would object then. But let me make a 
promise. If Senator Schumer needs votes, I can deliver 48 Republican 
votes to implement the PEB recommendation and the Biden-endorsed 
position.
  Let me say that again because I want to make sure Senator Schumer's 
staff understands. This is about how you get to 60. I don't want to 
give a 101 of the U.S. Senate, but 60 votes, as the President knows, is 
required. I am offering him 48. He only needs to get 12 on his side to 
have 60 votes, take this up, pass it, to have this over with. And there 
is no interruption.
  Not only is it $2 billion a day in economic impact; this is 160,000 
trainloads of agricultural product at a time of harvest to cross this 
country.

[[Page S4603]]

  There are some who say: Well, this isn't going to affect me. They 
haul coal. They haul gas. They haul petroleum. They haul gases like 
helium that are required for manufacturing businesses. They haul auto 
parts, which means you are going to see auto assembly plants that shut 
down not because of China but because we let the railroad workers go on 
strike and did not support the President's position.
  This is not political. This is Republicans supporting the President's 
position and only asking 12 Democrats to support this action.
  I ask my colleagues: Drop this concern that you are representing one 
side or the other. Ask yourself what is best for America.
  We just got a report that inflation is 8.3--8.3; food up 7; housing 
up 6; gasoline was down, and I think everybody expected inflation 
numbers to go way down. So 8.3 percent--wages aren't keeping up with 
that.
  Every American family is losing money every month. And now you are 
going to tell them you are going to be paying more because food is 
going to be scarce. Commodities are going to be scarce. Some things 
aren't going to be delivered.
  If we thought that the port chaos that we saw last year was bad, we 
are going to see a complete shutdown of rail, and we are just a matter 
of months away from Christmas, when most retailers are counting on that 
product to come in.
  There are ports like Seattle and L.A., what are they going to do with 
the containers? You talk about ships staying out at ocean. Amtrak 
canceled their east-west rail coverage today going forward. Carriers 
have already stopped hauling hazardous waste because they didn't want 
to get halfway down a line and not be able to secure the hazardous 
waste.
  We are at a real tipping point on this. And this can all be solved by 
either no objection to the unanimous consent request or by Senator 
Schumer bringing this to the floor, knowing that he has 48 Republicans, 
and he only needs to produce 12 to get to 60. This is a really easy 
thing. It is an easy lift.
  Well, my hope is that we will take one of the two paths. But do 
understand that in less than 48 hours, at 12:01 Friday morning, the 
likelihood is that without action by Congress, there will be a strike, 
and rail traffic will stop. Period, end of sentence.
  At this time, Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask 
unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions be discharged from further consideration of S.J. Res. 61 and 
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the 
joint resolution 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?
  Mr. SANDERS. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. SANDERS. And I will object. Let me thank Senator Burr for 
actually reading my tweets. Much appreciated.
  Just a correction of the record. I think Senator Wicker mentioned 
before that a number of unions had approved this agreement. As I think 
everybody knows, there cannot be an approval of a union agreement 
unless the workers themselves vote on it. They have not voted on it. 
So, in fact, there has been no approval by any union of the agreement. 
But before I go to the rail situation, I did want to say a few words 
and put this issue into a broader context, and then I will get to the 
rail situation.
  As I think most Americans know, today we have more income and wealth 
inequality than at any time in the history of our country. People on 
top are doing phenomenally well while working people are struggling to 
keep their heads above water.
  During the pandemic, while essential workers, like those employed at 
the railroads--while these people put their lives on the line and died 
by the thousands, the billionaire class--the people on top--saw a $2 
trillion increase in their wealth. Workers died by the tens of 
thousands. People on top became much richer.
  Further, as healthcare costs soar, we have over 70 million Americans 
who are either uninsured or underinsured, and, in addition, the United 
States remains the only major country on Earth not to guarantee paid 
family and medical leave. That is the broad issue that we have got to 
look at as we look at the situation in the rail industry.
  As I understand it, it is not accurate to say that the President of 
the United States has agreed to what the PEB has come up with. They 
have come up with a proposal. But right now, as we speak, Labor 
Secretary Marty Walsh is currently meeting with the rail union's end 
management in trying to forge an agreement. And I happen to wish them 
well. And I hope that those meetings lead to an agreement that is fair 
and that is just.
  But let us make no mistake about what is happening in the rail 
industry right now--and I did not hear one word of that from my 
Republican colleagues--and that is that the rail industry has seen huge 
profits in recent years and last year alone made a recordbreaking $20 
billion in profit. Last year, the rail industry made $20 billion in 
profit.
  And let me also mention that the CEOs of many of these rail companies 
are enjoying huge compensation packages. For example, last year, the 
CEO of CSX made over 20 million in total compensation while the CEOs of 
Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern made over $14 million each in total 
compensation.
  In other words, what is happening in the rail industry is what is 
happening all over this country. Corporate profits are soaring, and 
CEOs are making incredibly large compensation packages.
  I would also add that the parent company of BNSF--one of the largest 
freight rail companies in America--is Berkshire Hathaway, owned by 
Warren Buffett. Mr. Buffett is the fourth wealthiest man in America, 
worth nearly $100 billion. During the pandemic, as railworkers risked 
their lives to keep the economy going, Mr. Buffett became $33 billion 
richer.

  In the midst of all of those profit increases for the industry, in 
the midst of huge compensation packages for the CEOs of the industry, 
in the midst of increased wealth for those who own these companies, 
what is going on for the workers? I think that is a fair question to 
ask, if we are in the midst of negotiations. What is going on for the 
workers? How are they doing?
  It turns out that the key issue in the current negotiations is not 
about salaries. Apparently, there is an agreement on that. The key 
issue that is being contested is about the working conditions in the 
industry which are absolutely unacceptable and are almost beyond 
belief.
  Right now, if you work in the freight rail industry--one of the most 
grueling and dangerous jobs in America--you are entitled to a grand 
total of zero sick days.
  In case you missed it, let me repeat it: You are entitled to zero 
sick days.
  What that means is that if you as a worker get sick, if your child 
gets sick, if your spouse gets sick and you need to take time off of 
work, not only will you not get paid, you actually could get fired. And 
that is precisely what is happening today in the rail industry. How 
crazy is that?
  Let me remind you of what you undoubtedly know, that hundreds of 
Americans are still dying every day from COVID and tens of thousands 
are being hospitalized as a result of this deadly virus. What the 
freight rail industry is saying to its workers is this: It doesn't 
matter if you have COVID. It doesn't matter if you are lying in a 
hospital bed because of a medical emergency. It doesn't matter if your 
wife just gave birth to your child. It doesn't matter. If you do not 
come into work, no matter what the reason, we in the industry, we the 
bosses, have the right to fire you.
  Really? Do these conditions really exist in the United States of 
America, the wealthiest country on Earth in the year 2022?
  I do wonder if the CEO of the railroad or other top executives at 
that railroad--I wonder if they would get fired if they got sick or if 
they had a medical emergency in their families. I doubt very much that 
they would get fired.
  Further, I should add, that quite sensibly the Federal Government 
guarantees 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave to its workers. 
That is what we do as a Federal Government. So if you are an employee 
at the Department of Transportation in the United

[[Page S4604]]

States, sitting behind a desk, you are, appropriately--I believe in 
this very much--guaranteed 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave. 
That is if you work at the Department of Transportation. But if you are 
an engineer running a train with tons of freight behind you--a very 
dangerous job--you get zero sick leave.
  Now, that may make sense to somebody, but it doesn't make sense to 
me. As a result of this reactionary policy of denying workers sick 
time, rail conductors, engineers, and other rail employees are coming 
into work sick and exhausted, which is a danger not only to themselves 
but to their coworkers and everyone else who is around them.
  As part of the contract negotiations, the railworkers are asking for 
15 paid sick days. This is not a radical idea. We are the only major 
country on Earth that does not guarantee paid sick days.
  In Germany, workers are entitled to 84 weeks of paid sick leave at 70 
percent of their salary. In Norway, workers are entitled to 1 year of 
paid sick leave at 100 percent of their salary. In the UK, workers are 
entitled up to 28 weeks of paid sick leave.
  The railworkers in the United States are not asking for 1 year of 
paid sick leave. They are not asking for 6 months of paid sick leave. 
They are asking for 15 days--15 days. The rail industry has said, as I 
understand it, that they just cannot afford to do that, just don't have 
the money. They say it would cost too much money to provide their 
workers with any paid sick days. They just can't afford to do it. Well, 
let's see. They made over $20 billion in profits last year, and they 
provide their CEOs with huge compensation packages.
  And here is something else that everyone should know who is getting 
involved in this issue: Last year, the rail industry spent over $18 
billion, not to improve rail safety, not to address the supply chain 
crisis in America, but to buy back its own stock and hand out huge 
dividends to its wealthy stockholders. In fact, since 2010, the rail 
industry has spent over $183 billion on stock buybacks and dividends.
  So here is where we are. It turns out that guaranteeing 15 paid sick 
days to rail workers would cost the industry a grand total of $688 
million a year. That is less than 3.5 percent of their annual profits. 
It seems to me if four major rail carriers can afford to spend over $18 
billion a year on stock buybacks and dividends, please, please don't 
tell me they cannot afford to guarantee 15 paid sick days to their 
workers and allow these workers to have a reasonable quality of life, 
which they don't enjoy today.
  If the Burr-Wicker resolution passed, railworkers would be entitled 
to zero paid sick days and zero unpaid sick days. That is clearly 
unacceptable.
  The outrage over the lack of paid sick leave is not the only issue 
being negotiated. The railworkers of this country are sick and tired of 
unreliable scheduling, which is having a horrendous impact on their 
personal and family lives. In America today, railworkers are on call 
for up to 14 consecutive days, 12 hours a day. In fact, it is not 
uncommon for many railworkers to be on call virtually 24 hours a day 
with the requirement to report to work within 90 minutes for shifts 
that can last nearly 80 hours.
  My office has heard from railworkers who received calls from 
management at 2 in the morning requiring them to show up for work at 4 
a.m. Again, this is not only unacceptable; it is dangerous, and it has 
led to a substantial increase in the rate of injuries in the freight 
rail industry.
  If the Burr-Wicker resolution were to pass, these unfair and unsafe 
working conditions would be allowed to continue, threatening the safety 
not only of the workers, but of passengers, as well.
  Finally, the Burr-Wicker resolution could allow the freight rail 
industry to substantially increase the cost workers would have to pay 
for healthcare.
  Let us be clear. We are talking about an industry that not only made 
$20 billion in profits last year and spent over $18 billion on stock 
buybacks and dividends, we are talking about an industry that has 
slashed its workforce by nearly 30 percent over the last 6 years, 
leaving its remaining workforce woefully understaffed and overworked. 
We are talking about an industry that has seen its profit margins 
nearly triple over the past 20 years.
  Today, what Congress should be doing is not passing the Burr-Wicker 
resolution and forcing railroad workers back to work under horrendous 
working conditions. What we should be doing is telling the CEOs in the 
rail industry: Treat your workers with dignity and respect, not 
contempt. Do not fire workers for the ``crime'' of going to a doctor 
when they are sick. Make sure that your workers have 15 paid sick days 
and adequate time off to rest and spend with their families. At a time 
when you, the industry, are making recordbreaking profits, do not 
increase the cost of healthcare for your employees.
  The CEOs in the freight rail industry need to understand that they 
cannot have it all. The rail industry must agree to a contract that is 
fair and that is just, and if they are not prepared to do that, it is 
time for Congress to stand on the side of workers for a change and not 
just the head of large multinational corporations.
  Railworkers have a right to strike for reliable schedules. They have 
a right to strike for paid sick days. They have a right to strike for 
safe working conditions. Railworkers have a right to strike for these 
benefits. The Burr-Wicker resolution would take these fundamental 
rights away from workers. We cannot allow that to happen. Therefore, I 
object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Smith). Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Madam President, the objection has been heard and the 
Senator from Vermont has that right.
  I wonder if the Senator would yield for a question concerning some 
assertions that he has made. It is my understanding--and the Senator is 
correct in this regard--only two of the unions have actually voted in 
favor of this plan. Six others have--their leadership has agreed, and 
we have tentative agreements with six of those. So six plus the two is 
the eight I mentioned.
  Also, the Senator, I think, is mistaken in saying that there is no 
sick leave policy. That would be unbelievable for the rail industry in 
this day and age. It works a little differently for the rail. Railroad 
employees operate trains and have a leave policy under which they first 
indicate unavailability for work, and when that unavailability is the 
result of illness, then they receive sick pay through a sickness 
benefit under a statutory scheme.
  The Presidential Emergency Board heard arguments on both sides, 
recommended an additional paid leave day. And, again, I would stress 
that this comes on top of a 24-percent wage increase.
  But the thing that really strikes me about what my friend from 
Vermont said is he seems to cast doubt on whether President Biden is 
actually for this PEB recommendation, and that needs to be cleared up. 
If the Senator from Vermont is suggesting that President Biden is not 
behind this, then the White House needs to let us know immediately 
because when the PEB report was issued, the clear message from the 
White House is that President Biden was in favor of this and endorses 
this.
  So if there are people in the White House listening to this, if the 
President of the United States is following this debate, then he needs 
to clarify this. If he is backing out on his support for the PEB, we 
need to know that.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. SANDERS. My understanding, I say to my colleague from 
Mississippi, is that as we speak, the Secretary of Labor is in a room--
or has been today, with management and labor in trying to forge an 
agreement. So what is going on right now is they are trying to reach an 
agreement which is amenable to both sides, so that is a work in 
process.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. BURR. Madam President, it is clearly apparent by listening to 
this debate, if Senator Sanders had been on the PEB board, the PEB 
board wouldn't be making a recommendation and the President wouldn't be 
behind it. But that is where we are, short of a breakthrough in the 
negotiations that are occurring and going on.
  I grew up listening to Paul Harvey. Paul Harvey had a show, the rest 
of the

[[Page S4605]]

news, the stuff you didn't hear. Let me do Paul Harvey on Senator 
Sanders.
  The railroad workers today get 3 weeks paid leave on average, plus 11 
paid vacation days. PEB made a recommendation that they get 1 
additional paid leave day. We will add that in. That is almost a month 
of paid leave. Regardless of what you call it, there is a month there.
  You now mentioned this wasn't as lucrative as Germany and UK. I was 
home all of August. Nobody was asking: Geez, can you pass legislation 
that makes us look more like the UK or Germany or the rest of Europe? 
And I would be willing to bet that 27 paid leave days probably is more 
than some of the European countries.
  Mr. SANDERS. Would you like to bet on that?
  Mr. BURR. I will turn to you when I finish, how about that? I gave 
you a gracious amount of time.
  The PEB board determined this was a good solution. And Senator 
Sanders says he is here looking out for the middle class because nobody 
does that. Tell me this: How are you looking out for the middle class 
when you are risking losing $2 billion a day in economic activity? Some 
of those people that you are talking about standing up for, if this 
rail strike continues, they are going to lose their job because of you. 
They are going to lose their job because the President took a position 
and you didn't support him.
  I have been amazed with this administration. I find it pretty 
difficult sitting up here taking the President's position because the 
CDC today, 78 percent of the CDC workforce does not show up at the 
office more than 2 days a month. We are in the middle of COVID. We have 
a monkeypox national medical emergency, and 78 percent of CDC 
employees--Centers for Disease Control--do not go to the office in 
Atlanta. As a matter of fact, by, I think, the New York Times report, 
even the Secretary doesn't go into the office. At a time where you 
ought to have leadership, the leadership is gone.
  Let's give the President a little bit of credit. He is showing some 
leadership. He realizes this is not good for every American. It doesn't 
matter whether you are rich or poor or in the middle. Having $2 billion 
a day of negative economic impact is not good. It will ruin people's 
lives, just like COVID, just like monkeypox has done to some Americans.
  I am not sure how in good conscience you can roll the dice and say: 
Boy, 24-percent increase in pay retroactive to 2020--not 2022, 2020--
$1,000 bonus, and 27 paid leave days per year, somehow we are cheating 
them. It is beyond me.
  But an objection has been heard, and now it means this is in Senator 
Schumer's hands. He is the majority leader. He can bring this 
legislation up on the floor. All he needs is 60 votes because I am 
convinced, after hearing Senator Sanders, he is not going to have an 
epiphany tonight and wake up tomorrow and say: I was wrong, I am for 
this.
  But here is the promise I will make to Senator Schumer. If he will 
bring it to the floor, I will produce 48 Republican votes for it. That 
means Democrats only need to produce 12 people to support it to keep 
the American people from having a $2 billion-a-day economic impact 
negatively impacting them. It will keep the flow of goods from the east 
coast to the west coast, and Amtrak will open up again. Christmas that 
comes in from overseas will hit L.A., Seattle, everywhere, and it will 
make it to its retail location where my wife can buy it. You could 
probably squeeze 12 Democratic votes just out of coastal communities 
that have ports that are going to be the real loser in this.
  Remember, not long ago we had a port problem. We had ships that were 
sitting off L.A. that couldn't unload, and we felt the impact of it. 
Well, if you thought that was bad, wait until there are no trains 
because then they will be unloading no ships. They are all going to sit 
off the shore. When they back up like that, that backs up further and 
further when these goods are going to come in because once they unload 
here, they are going to go back and get more.
  It also means that what we export in this country, there are no 
containers and no ships coming in to export those goods. If you are in 
agricultural territory at harvest time, this is going to be devastating 
to you. There are 160 million freight cars of agriculture transported 
every year, and it happens in this period.

  So I say to my colleagues, let's all hope that Senator Schumer will 
bring this up, that he will take Republicans up on their position of 
supporting the President and a solution to this problem, and that all 
he needs to do is produce 12 folks, and at any point, we can pass this 
legislation.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. SANDERS. I was not aware Senator Burr was a railroad worker, so 
let me, just to set the record straight, tell you what the railroad 
workers themselves understand the situation is. We might want to listen 
to those who live the experience. So let me very briefly quote you a 
statement from Jeremy Ferguson, president of SMART Transportation 
Division, and Dennis Pierce, president, Brotherhood of Locomotive 
Engineers and Trainmen, Teamsters Rail Conference.
  This is what they say about their working conditions:

       Penalizing engineers and conductors for getting sick or 
     going to a doctor's visit with termination must be stopped as 
     part of this contract settlement. Let us repeat that, our 
     members are being terminated for getting sick or for 
     attending routine medical visits as we crawl our way out of a 
     worldwide pandemic. No working-class American should be 
     treated with this level of harassment in the workplace for 
     simply becoming ill or going to a routine medical visit.

  That is from the unions themselves.
  So let us be clear. I don't think anybody wants a strike or wants a 
lockout. We hope that a settlement will be reached in the next day. 
But, in my view, if we are going to reach a settlement, I would hope 
that the railroads, which are making huge profits, start treating their 
workers with the respect that they deserve.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. WICKER. Madam President, I appreciate the debate on this. Here is 
where we are on this issue. We are going to have a nationwide strike 
within a day and a half from now, midnight, 12:01 a.m., Friday.
  There are two things that could stop this. The distinguished majority 
leader can bring this PEB recommendation to the floor, and we will 
produce the Republican votes to get President Biden's administration's 
recommendation enacted. Send it to the House. The other thing that can 
happen is for President Biden to do as I have called on him to do just 
a few moments ago--to make it clear that this is, in fact, his 
recommendation, his endorsement of the plan that has been put forward 
by the Board he appointed; make that clear and exercise the 
Presidential leadership that is needed at this point to persuade his 
friends and the four holdout unions that this is what needs to be done.
  But that is where we are. If we don't have one of those two actions, 
then we will have done nothing, and we will see a strike and the 
economic devastation that the distinguished Senator from North Carolina 
has described. It is really up to the Democratic leader and the 
President of the United States.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.