[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 199 (Wednesday, December 21, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9739-S9753]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


     
     
        AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2023--Continued
     
       Mr. BLUMENTHAL. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
       The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
       Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
     the quorum call be rescinded.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
       Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, we are debating, discussing, and hopefully 
     concluding our work on something called an Omnibus appropriations bill. 
     I certainly decry the method by which the committee, the Senate, and 
     the Congress work in regard to appropriations bills. I am a member of 
     that Appropriations Committee, but there is no reason--none--that we 
     could not do as we are supposed to do, as we are intending to do--12 
     separate appropriations bills, one at a time.
       It is an opportunity for the committees to have hearings with 
     witnesses to debate and discuss the content of that appropriations 
     bill, pass it out of the committee, send it to the Senate, and let 
     other Members of the Senate who are not on the Appropriations Committee 
     amend, discuss, and debate that section of what today, tonight, this 
     week becomes this large, all-encompassing bill.
       We all would be better off if we broke this down into the 12 separate 
     parts that are now combined into this one large bill. We would know 
     much more about it, the deliberations would be more forthright, and we 
     would have less likelihood of something being contained in the bill 
     that there was objection to it being there.
       I hope in the new Senate, the new Congress beginning in January, we 
     as appropriators, we as Members of the Senate, work hard to go back to 
     the way things were before I was ever in the Senate in which there is a 
     budget, 12 appropriations bills, and then fill in the spaces on that 
     budget. Then, ultimately, every Member of the U.S. Senate has input 
     into the outcome.
       I want to highlight something that is in the appropriations bill that 
     we are discussing and considering at this point in time. Before I do 
     that, I want to, again, indicate that one of the most important 
     components to me in this legislation is the opportunity for us to more 
     fully fund those who serve in our military and to better care for our 
     veterans who have served.
       There is some suggestion that we are rushing to complete this 
     legislation before the new year. The reality is, we are--again, because 
     of the process that we have failed to follow, we are behind in the 
     system. It is not that we are advancing a bill that was something to 
     take advantage of in the future. We are 3 months behind in passing an 
     appropriations bill that was due at the end of the fiscal year 
     September 30, 3 months ago.
       And if we wait to pass an appropriations bill into the new year--we 
     are supposed to have our appropriations process completed in March--we 
     will just be beginning the discussion, debate about the old bill--the 
     bill for this year--at a time in which we are supposed to be advancing 
     the conversation, debate, and outcome of a bill to fund the new year.
       And in the process of doing so, we will have left our military at 
     flatline funding. And the challenges we face in this country are so 
     significant that no additional dollars to the Department of Defense for 
     even a short period of time--months, 6 weeks, 3 months, a year--that is 
     very damaging, particularly in these days of significant defense 
     inflation. And so it is important for us to complete our work in a 
     timely fashion.
       And, unfortunately for us, that timely fashion is already 3 months 
     ago. In this bill, in a bipartisan fashion, we were successful in 
     adding a number of provisions to the bill that advanced the cause of 
     those who served our Nation. So my point, first of all, is for those 
     men and women who serve in our military today, they deserve something 
     different than old funding or no funding or continued funding at a 
     flatline level.
       And for our military men and women who have served in the past, our 
     veterans, they deserve many of the provisions that are now included in 
     the appropriations package.
       Our military, as we know, is comprised of many selfless Americans who 
     signed up, volunteered to serve. It is through their sacrifices, their 
     family's sacrifices, that they have protected and preserved the gift of 
     freedom that we have in this country and what we should always cherish.
       In asking brave people to serve, men and women, generally young, we 
     make, as a Nation, a promise to them and to their families that their 
     government will assist them in successfully returning to civilian life 
     after their service.
       Specifically, I think we promise those who serve help for them in 
     transitioning to civilian life through education, training, and 
     economic assistance, to provide them medical care for their injuries or 
     diseases incurred during their service, and to compensate them 
     financially if those injuries prevent them from meeting their full 
     earning potential.
       As we consider the fiscal year 2023 appropriations package, there are 
     a few specific veterans bills that have been included in this 
     legislation to give the Department of Veterans Affairs the tools and 
     resources they need to meet the changing needs of America's veterans.
       One is the Joseph Maxwell Cleland and the Robert J. Dole Memorial 
     Veterans Benefit Healthcare Improvement Act, long last name, honoring 
     two previous Members of the U.S. Senate--including my successor in the 
     seat I hold in the U.S. Senate, Senator Bob Dole.
       He himself, not only a Kansan but a significantly wounded veteran and 
     an individual who never stopped fighting for his fellow veterans, it is 
     an honor to name this legislation with his respect in mind.
       This legislation, described in that title, delivers new benefits and 
     improved resources for the VA, including a specific bill that I 
     introduced, one that is--we call in short words GHAPS, Guaranteeing 
     Healthcare Access to Personnel Who Served. That act builds upon 
     previous legislation and efforts to continue to lay a groundwork 
     necessary to transform the VA into a modernized innovative healthcare 
     system.
       It includes protections to safeguard veterans' access to care from 
     highly qualified providers in VA medical facilities and through the 
     VA's Community Care Network to help veterans across the country, 
     including those in rural--a significant component of my State and the 
     Presiding Officer's--and remote communities, that those veterans get 
     the care they need when they need it and where they want it.
       It would also require the VA to establish a pilot program to empower 
     veterans by letting them schedule their own appointments, just like 
     they would be able to do if they were seeking care elsewhere.
     
     [[Page S9740]]
     
       Additionally, this package includes another piece of legislation, the 
     STRONG Veterans Act, a set of mental health legislation, including the 
     REACH for Veterans Act. This legislation requires the VA to make key 
     improvements to the Veterans Crisis Line and to conduct outreach on the 
     rollout of 988 as the new suicide and crisis hotline. Additionally, the 
     STRONG Act includes my 9/11 Veterans' Mental Health Care Improvement 
     Act, which would require the VA to expand access to mental health care, 
     increase its mental health workforce, and direct the department to 
     conduct critical research on brain health.
       Lastly, this mental health package includes a bill to improve mental 
     health and suicide prevention outreach to American Indians and Alaska 
     Native veterans. We must make certain that our country is doing all it 
     can do to honor its promise to care for those who have borne the battle 
     and for their survivors.
       I urge the passage of the provisions in this bill that are so 
     important to veterans, it is included in the entire omnibus spending 
     package.
       I know that the Presiding Officer has dedicated attention to the 
     veterans that you know and care about. I look forward to working with 
     you and my colleagues as we continue this effort to make certain that 
     those who served our country receive what they were entitled to.
       This bill, in its entirety--beyond just these provisions related to 
     veterans--is a way we can help those who serve our Nation today and 
     honor, respect, and provide for those who served our Nation in the 
     past.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
       Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, millions of acres of national forest in 
     Montana and across the West are at extreme risk of catastrophic 
     wildfire, and just throwing a whole bunch of money at the problem is 
     not going to solve it.
       And one of the biggest barriers to responsible forest management is 
     the Ninth Circuit's Cottonwood decision that dates all the way back to 
     2015.
       In a nutshell, the Cottonwood decision imposed additional redtape on 
     Federal Agencies and is having a crippling effect, crippling 
     consequences, on commonsense land management.
       And that is not just what I or leaders of the wood products industry 
     believe; it is exactly what the Obama administration feared when they 
     fought against the Cottonwood decision in 2016 hoping the United States 
     Supreme Court would overturn it.
       Well, they didn't overturn it. In fact, they said: Congress needs to 
     resolve this discrepancy between the Ninth Circuit and Tenth Circuit 
     court. So for 6 years, we have been working to reverse this disastrous 
     Ninth Circuit Cottonwood ruling so we would have commonality and 
     continuity across the entire United States versus this exception that 
     is applied just to Ninth Circuit States.
       And, gratefully, for 6 years, there has been a good bipartisan effort 
     with strong support from conservation and sportsmen groups to do just 
     that. In fact, earlier this year, I had a bipartisan bill that would 
     fully and permanently fix this Ninth Circuit Cottonwood decision, and 
     it cleared the Energy and Natural Resources Committee with a very 
     strong bipartisan vote.
       In fact, it was all primed to get across the finish line this year, 
     in this Congress. And by the way, healthy forest management, what it 
     does is it improves wildlife habitat, because catastrophic wildfires 
     destroy habitat. It also restores watersheds, because when you have a 
     catastrophic wildfire, in the spring when the rains come, they silt out 
     the trout streams and affect trout habitat.
       They provide jobs for a timber industry that are needed badly in many 
     parts of Montana. When I was a kid growing up in Montana, we had over 
     30 active sawmills. Today, we are down to a handful.
       But somehow, this bipartisan urgent need of reform was left out. And 
     let me paint you a picture of the effects of that Cottonwood decision. 
     This ruling has stalled hundreds of wildfire mitigation. It has stalled 
     wildlife and restoration projects across multiple forests and in some 
     cases has shut down forests in Montana and throughout the West 
     entirely.
       And, sadly, the conditions in our national forests have deteriorated. 
     And too often, these catastrophic wildfires have occurred on the same 
     acres where management was stalled due to this Cottonwood decision. 
     And, sadly, it is only going to get worse.
       What is more, this Ninth Circuit created a split in the courts 
     creating two different standards for forest management across the 
     United States. All my bill does is it applies a common standard, the 
     same standard, across the whole country, which that would include 
     Montana and the other Ninth Circuit States. And the time to make this 
     fix is now.
       In March of 2018, Congress passed some partial reforms to respond to 
     the Cottonwood decision, but even these fixes expire in March of 2023.
       A few months ago, the Forest Service testified that the failure to 
     act by March--as in about three months from now--will have devastating 
     impacts on land management.
       In fact, according to the Forest Service in their testimony, if we 
     don't pass my bipartisan bill now, at least 100 forest plans will need 
     to go through reconsultation and redtape for no justified reason, 
     resulting in years of delays and millions of dollars wasted.
       Not to mention, it will also undermine the investments that we made 
     here in Congress in the Great American Outdoors Act, probably the 
     greatest conservation win we have seen in 50 years in Washington, DC.
       The failure to pass my Cottonwood solution is bad for wildlife. It is 
     bad for forest health. It is bad for habitat, and it is dangerous for 
     local communities.
       There is no doubt the summers are getting longer. They are warmer. 
     This is an important mitigation strategy to address the issues of 
     warmer summers and longer summers, longer fire seasons.
       I can tell you, I am deeply disappointed. After years of bipartisan 
     work and the Energy and Natural Resources Committee passed this bill 16 
     to 4 in a strong bipartisan vote, sadly, this bill has fallen through 
     the cracks during this very broken process here in DC related to 
     budgets and will fail to pass when it is so desperately needed.
       And, by the way, it doesn't cost anything. There is no need to pay 
     for it. This is a commonsense bipartisan fix. It reflects the Obama 
     administration's position from 6 years ago. It is supported by 
     mainstream conservation and sportsmen groups from the left, the center, 
     the right.
       And I will tell you, I am not going to stop fighting on this to 
     ensure that we pass these commonsense forest management policies. In 
     fact, it generates tax revenues because you get more timber harvest 
     going on by improving the landscape. And we need to finally overturn 
     this disastrous Cottonwood decision.
       This bill should have been and needed to pass this year, but we are 
     not going to give up the fight.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
     
     
                     Water Resources Development Act of 2022
     
       Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today along with my colleague and 
     partner on the Environment and Public Works Committee, Senator Shelley 
     Moore Capito, to celebrate passage of this year's Water Resources 
     Development Act, or WRDA, as it is affectionately known. And the 
     Presiding Officer and I have talked about this legislation many times, 
     as he has provided input to the bill, along with 97 other U.S. 
     Senators--all 100. All 100 Senators, all 50 States provided input to 
     this legislation.
       As our colleagues may recall, the Water Resources Development Act--we 
     call it WRDA. The Senate passed the National Defense Authorization Act, 
     known as NDAA, by a vote of 83 to 11. I will say that again. The Senate 
     passed the National Defense Authorization Act, known as the NDAA, by a 
     vote of 83 to 11. It is not often that we pass legislation with that 
     level of bipartisan support.
       Having said that, the committee that Senator Capito and I lead--we do 
     that kind of thing often--often--and I am pleased that we did 
     especially because this Defense bill included the Water Resources 
     Development Act of 2022, also known as WRDA. In fact, our WRDA bill 
     became the vehicle through which we advanced the Defense bill. That 
     doesn't happen every day, but we
     
     [[Page S9741]]
     
     are proud of that and delighted that it has worked out this way.
       The water resources bills authorize--people say: What do they do? 
     What does the water bill do? Well, it authorizes the activities of the 
     U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
       I am a Navy guy, but I have huge respect for the Army--different 
     uniform, same team--but especially for the folks at the Army Corps of 
     Engineers.
       WRDA 2022 continues the 2-year cycle for the Water Resources 
     Development Act, and our committee has had a decade--five WRDA bills in 
     a row in the last 10 years--of completing these reauthorizations on 
     time--on time.
       This year's WRDA is historic. Not only is WRDA 2022 an ambitious 
     water resource bill, but it is also the product of a steadfast 
     commitment to bipartisanship, and Senator Capito and I have sought 
     input to get every Senator involved--100 Senators--when we started 
     working on WRDA last year. The final legislation represents an 
     agreement between the two Chambers of Congress on our respective Army 
     Corps reauthorization legislation.
       Before delving into what we accomplished in WRDA 2022, let me just 
     say how proud I am to have coauthored this legislation with Senator 
     Capito, along with Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves on the 
     House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
       I also want to recognize Senators Cardin and Cramer, as well as 
     Representatives Napolitano and Rouzer, and the subcommittee chairs and 
     ranking members on the Senate EPW and House Transportation and 
     Infrastructure Committees, respectively. Their leadership was 
     instrumental in helping us develop this legislation.
       I cannot overstate just how important the Corps' work is to our 
     Nation's economic growth. The Corps is the principal steward of our 
     country's water infrastructure. The Corps' responsibilities include 
     improving our ports and waterways to enable trade with other nations, 
     restoring our ecosystems to support fisheries, to support tourism, 
     support recreation, and advancing flood management solutions to make 
     communities more resilient to climate change and to extreme weather.
       Without these WRDA bills, our Nation's economy would suffer, and our 
     future would be diminished.
       WRDA 2022 enables the Corps to continue to operate and maintain 
     America's water highway--a 12,000-mile-long system of inland waterways, 
     with 209 locks that are vital to the domestic and international 
     commerce of our Nation.
       Each year, more than 500 million tons of commodities move through 
     this system. Think about that. Over 500 million tons of commodities 
     move through this system, including 60 percent of our Nation's 
     agricultural exports. Operating and maintaining this system results in 
     economic benefit to our country of nearly $14 billion dollars each 
     year.
       WRDA 2022 also supports safe and reliable and efficient navigation at 
     our coastal ports. And as we have seen over the past 2 years, navigable 
     shipping channels are essential to keeping global supply chains moving.
       More than 99 percent of U.S. overseas trade volume moves through the 
     13,000--13,000--miles of coastal channels maintained by the Corps, 
     which, together, support over 30 million jobs across our country. WRDA 
     2022 recognizes the economic importance of our Nation's commercial 
     ports and shipping channels.
       As a recovering Governor, I often say that it is our responsibility 
     as elected officials to help create a nurturing environment for job 
     creation and job preservation. We don't create the jobs. What we do is 
     help create the nurturing environment that leads to job creation. But 
     maintaining our ports and waterways is a cornerstone of that nurturing 
     environment.
       Addressing the impacts of climate change is also essential to the 
     task of building our Nation's prosperity--economic prosperity--for all 
     of us. Climate change is fueling extreme weather, which threatens our 
     coastal and inland communities alike. WRDA 2022 makes the most 
     significant boost ever made to the Army Corps' authority to conduct 
     climate resilience work.
       Climate resilience work is urgently needed. It is not a matter of if 
     the next storm is coming, but it is a matter of when. And with this in 
     mind, the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 recognizes the 
     critical role that the Corps plays in helping communities adapt to 
     climate change.
       This bill allows the Army Corps to better design and implement 
     projects by accounting for the direct impacts of climate change. It 
     will make a big difference in States like Delaware, like Florida, like 
     Texas--just to name a few--where we continue to see extreme weather 
     like hurricanes and other storms batter our beaches and coastal 
     communities.
       In addition to overhauling the Corps' project design authorities, 
     WRDA 2022 improves the Corps' abilities to make our shorelines, our 
     riverbanks, and our streambanks more resilient to extreme weather.
       In addition to better positioning the Corps to address threats like 
     climate change in WRDA 2022, we also work to rectify historical 
     inequities for Tribal and disadvantaged communities. The legislation 
     establishes a new advisory committee to help the Corps more effectively 
     deliver projects, programs, and other assistance to historically 
     underserved communities.
       This bill also reauthorizes the Corps' Tribal Partnership Program and 
     makes a series of targeted improvements to increase opportunities for 
     Tribal communities to partner with the Corps on essential projects in a 
     more cost-effective way for the Tribe. And, finally, WRDA 2022 
     establishes a new workforce development and STEM outreach program at 
     the Corps with a priority to recruit new engineers from underserved and 
     disadvantaged communities.
       Before I yield the floor to Senator Capito, I just want to take a 
     moment to thank some of the staff members on both sides of the aisle 
     for their hard work and determination in drafting this legislation.
       Senator Capito and I, along with some of our other colleagues, have 
     the privilege of having the legislation bear our names, but she knows 
     and I know, that we are only as good as the people we have around us. 
     She has just a terrific group of men and women on her staff and in our 
     committee, and we believe--I believe--we have the same on our side.
       But on Senator Capito's staff I would especially like to recognize 
     Adam Tomlinson, a fellow West Virginian, as am I, along with Max Hyman, 
     Haden Miller--in fact, I think all three of these people are native 
     West Virginians, if I am not mistaken--and Kim Townsend, Libby 
     Callaway, Katherine Scarlett, and Murphie Barrett for their steadfast 
     dedication and partnerships.
       On my staff, I would especially like to recognize Mary Frances Repko, 
     staff director, Tyler Hofmann-Reardon, Mayely Boyce, Jordan Baugh, 
     Janine Barr, and especially John Kane, who works like a demon, like a 
     tiger, in leading our water team on our committee.
       I also want to recognize Mark Mazone and Deanna Edwards of the Senate 
     Legislative Counsel, and David Wethington, Amy Klein, and Nicole 
     Comisky of the Army Corps of Engineers Congressional Affairs staff. 
     Folks at the Legislative Counsel do a lot of the writing--the 
     legislative writing--and they are invaluable.
       The Corps and the Senate Legislative Counsel are the unsung heroes of 
     making this legislation happen, though, from filling in the need for 
     numerous project updates and helping draft the legislation to providing 
     technical assistance, and we are grateful. We are grateful. Both of us 
     are extremely grateful for the efforts of all of you.
     
       Sometimes, I know people watch television or watch the news and they 
     say: Why don't they ever find--why don't they ever work together in 
     Washington and in the Congress? And this legislation is just about as 
     clear evidence as you will ever find that we do work together. We do 
     work together. We put this bill together in a bipartisan way. We 
     debated it in a bipartisan way. We reported it out in a bipartisan way. 
     We debated on the floor, worked with the House and with the 
     administration--with the administration--in a way that I think most any 
     American could be proud of the way the democratic--this is the way the 
     democratic process is supposed to work, and right here, especially with 
     our committee. And with this legislation, we have done that.
     
     [[Page S9742]]
     
       But in this holiday season and this season of giving, the Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2022 reminds me of a saying by Winston 
     Churchill. Churchill used to say, ``Never give in except to convictions 
     of honor and good sense,'' and on this bill, I can proudly say that we 
     have acted on both convictions. We have delivered for our colleagues, 
     we have delivered for our country, and we have done so by enacting 
     important, commonsense policies.
       With that, I am delighted to yield the floor to the Senator Capito.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
       Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. President, I thank my chairman of the Environment 
     and Public Works Committee for his great statement but also for his 
     great work through the year.
       He did mention several of the bipartisan wins that we had. Many of 
     them have been unanimous through the committee because we all know you 
     can't get everything. We know you can't get everything you want. You 
     have got to give a little to get a little.
       And so I salute him and our staffs for being able to work that out.
       But today I want to also briefly talk for a few minutes about the 
     bipartisan Water Resources Development Act of 2022. The chairman 
     described it. It is kind of nice to get up here and talk about 
     something that has already passed. So we don't really have to be 
     persuasive, we are just reminding Members of how important this is in 
     their districts and across their States.
       I am grateful to my colleagues for the support of this legislation, 
     and I am pleased that it is now on the way to the President's desk for 
     his signature.
       Through WRDA, Congress authorizes water resources projects and sets 
     national policies for the Civil Works Program of the U.S. Army Corps of 
     Engineers.
       I live about a half a mile from a river that has a lot of commerce on 
     it. It is very important that the Corps is able to do their work. The 
     work of the Corps facilitates commerce throughout the country and 
     internationally.
       Projects along our inland waterways and at our ports enable the 
     movement of cargo, while also bolstering our supply chain.
       We know that natural disasters such as floods and hurricanes can 
     strike at any time and have devastating consequences on our 
     communities. But the Corps' work to protect the lives and livelihoods 
     of millions of Americans is supported by the congressional 
     authorization of flood and coastal storm risk management policies that 
     are contained within this bill.
       Since 2014, as the chairman said, we have enacted WRDA every 2 years, 
     and I am happy to say that we are carrying on that tradition.
       I want to thank again Chairman Carper for his leadership and 
     dedication, and I would also like to thank our colleagues in the House, 
     the chairman of the T and I Committee, on which I served for 12 years, 
     Chairman Peter DeFazio, and Ranking Member Sam Graves. They did great 
     work here, and we were able to work out our differences. We would not 
     be here today without their tireless efforts to reach an agreement that 
     addresses the priorities of Members from both sides of the aisle and 
     both sides of the Capitol.
       I would also like to thank two Senators from our committee, Senators 
     Cardin and Cramer. We are the four Cs, as we call ourselves--Cardin, 
     Cramer, Carper, and Capito. If you can say that quickly, you are in 
     better shape than we are going to be later on tonight, hopefully, as we 
     vote late, I think, I hope. But I would like to thank them for their 
     support and partnership during this process.
       I want to express my gratitude, as the chairman did, to the staff of 
     our committee, the staff of T and I, the staff of the Army Corps of 
     Engineers for the technical assistance, and to the House and Senate 
     Legislative Counsel for their diligence, professionalism, and 
     commitment to many long hours throughout this process.
       I am pleased that our final agreement with the House maintained the 
     vast majority of provisions that were in our Senate bill. True to the 
     Corps' tradition, this bill moves forward projects that both benefit 
     both local communities and the entire country.
       Specifically, the WRDA bill authorizes 25 new projects and 6 
     modifications to existing projects around the country, including 
     projects for navigation, flood and coastal storm risk management, and 
     ecosystem restoration. And it authorizes more than 100 feasibility 
     studies that will develop solutions to water resource challenges in our 
     years ahead. It is so smart, I think, to look to the future.
       While this bill is very much oriented toward advancing critical 
     projects and studies in our States, it also contains several policy 
     changes that will help the Corps better succeed in civil works 
     missions.
       The bill bolsters the Agency's technical assistance authorities, 
     specifically the Flood Plain Management Services and Planning 
     Assistance to States' Programs.
       Every State is different, and we know that some of these challenges 
     are vast. It authorizes the Corps to conduct outreach--and the chairman 
     mentioned this--to ensure that our communities are knowledgeable in the 
     ways in which the Agency can help them with their water resources 
     needs.
     
       The bill makes important improvements to the Tribal Partnership 
     Program and other authorities to assist our Indian Tribes. It also 
     expands existing programs and includes new authorities to assist 
     communities that are economically disadvantaged, including those 
     located in rural areas.
       It requires reporting on timelines for the environmental review 
     process for projects. We know that is essential.
       The bill directs the GAO to conduct a review of projects that are 
     over budget and delayed, as well as review of the Corps' mitigation 
     practices for these projects.
       It provides flexibility--every State is different--to our non-Federal 
     sponsors with respect to financial accounting and fulfilling cost-share 
     obligations for projects.
       It also authorizes, for the first time, a dedicated research and 
     development account for the Corps to spur innovation and provides 
     contracting flexibility in undertaking these activities.
       The bill directs the Corps to support science, technology, 
     engineering, and math--or STEM--education and recruit individuals for 
     careers at the Agency.
       The input of non-Federal interests is critical to successfully 
     solving water infrastructure challenges now and in the future. So the 
     bill establishes a new advisory committee for non-Federal interests to 
     voice their opinions on how the Corps can better meet their needs and 
     improve project delivery. We also preserve the integral role of non-
     Federal sponsors in the project delivery process by avoiding mandates 
     from Washington, DC, and ensuring that the Corps continues to evaluate 
     a full array of solutions during the feasibility study phase.
       In addition to my role as ranking member of EPW, I represent the 
     great State of West Virginia, where my chairman was born. I worked to 
     address the needs of my home State in this bill--and I will just give a 
     few highlights--that will benefit the lives of West Virginians.
       First, the legislation advances a critical flood control project in 
     the city of Milton. Authorized in the 1990s, this project is a long 
     time coming, and I am proud to have helped move it forward in these 
     recent years.
       The bill also works to support flood control studies for the Kanawha 
     River Basin and also in the city of Huntington. It continues to provide 
     environmental infrastructure assistance for drinking and wastewater in 
     our communities throughout the State. Finally, the bill will provide 
     additional critical support for river bank stabilization, such as those 
     in the Kanawha River in the capital city.
       In closing, there is a lot in this bill for both sides of the aisle 
     and for communities across the Nation. It is a culmination of true 
     bipartisan, bicameral effort and represents our shared goal of 
     addressing our Nation's water resource needs.
       I am incredibly proud of our EPW Committee as we continue to be one 
     of the most active, cooperative, and fruitful committees of this 
     Congress. And I would say as a side note, when people ask me how do we 
     get things done, how do we find the answer to something like permitting 
     reforms--you use the committee. You use the committees, like you use 
     our committee or another committee to find a solution and get the ideas 
     from both sides and hammer out the differences. That is how you get 
     things across the finish line.
     
     [[Page S9743]]
     
       Again, the chairman went through the staff, but I am going to take 
     the liberty of going through the staff, too, because I want to thank 
     them as well. They worked many long nights on this.
       From Chairman Carper's staff: Mary Frances Repko, John Kane, Jordan 
     Baugh, Mayely Boyce, Tyler Hofmann-Reardon, Milo Goodell, and Janine 
     Barr.
       From my staff: Adam Tomlinson, Murphie Barrett, Max Hyman, Kim 
     Townsend, Katherine Scarlett, and Haden Miller.
       I would also like to thank the Senate Legislative Counsel Deanna 
     Edwards and Mark Mazzone and the U.S. Corps of Engineers' engineering 
     staff of Amy Klein, Dave Wethington and countless other attorneys and 
     technical staff. We could not have done this without them, most 
     certainly, and we want them to know how much we appreciate their 
     efforts on behalf of not just the committee, but on behalf of the 
     American people.
       So thank you all--all of us here in this Chamber--for getting WRDA 
     2022 across the line. And with that, I appreciate my colleagues 
     supporting this legislation, and I am looking forward to the President 
     signing it.
       I yield the floor.
       Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, how much time do we have remaining?
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no time agreement at the moment.
       Mr. CARPER. That's good. I ask unanimous consent for another 30 
     seconds.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
       Mr. CARPER. I am reminded, Senator Capito, that we are both West 
     Virginia kids. But I am reminded of something that comes out of another 
     continent, Africa. And one of the African proverbs over there is:
     
            If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go 
          together.
     
       And we have gone together. We have gone together, not just the two of 
     us and not just our committee, but the entire United States Senate has 
     had the opportunity to work together. And we came up with a great 
     product and are grateful to everyone who has been a part of it. I am 
     looking forward to the President signing this and doing good things for 
     all of our States.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.
     
     
                        Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4294
     
       Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, the crisis at the United States 
     southern border is raging out of control. Unlike Joe Biden, I have 
     traveled down to the southern border to hear from local leaders, law 
     enforcement, and our brave Border Patrol agents. I had the opportunity 
     to talk with Border Patrol in Arizona and Texas and listened as they 
     told me about how hard their job has become thanks to Joe Biden's 
     radical open border policies.
       Let me just say, these men and women are absolute heroes. In places 
     like Yuma, Border Patrol agents are encountering illegal migrants every 
     day, some of whom are dangerous criminals, traffickers, drug cartel 
     members, and even terrorists. Others are just families victimized by 
     the cartels.
       I encountered a family from Haiti during my last visit. I watched 
     them cross the border through a massive hole in the border wall caused 
     by Joe Biden's decision not to complete the already paid-for wall. 
     These families are victims of the cartels. Once in America, many of 
     them live a life of indentured servitude and debilitating debt in which 
     they have to send nearly all of their money back to these savage 
     cartels. These people and their families are owned by the cartels, and 
     Joe Biden is letting it happen. Many of the children are trafficked, 
     made to pose as the children of people they don't even know. And we 
     know that so many women and children who make this journey are brutally 
     victimized and raped.
       But still the cartels push these families over the border. It is all 
     just money to them. Joe Biden is making the cartels richer.
       That is what our brave Border Patrol agents are up against. What 
     makes you mad is that while all of this is happening, massive piles of 
     supplies to complete the border, already paid for by the American 
     taxpayers, are just sitting in piles in the desert going to waste. The 
     Biden administration refuses to use these materials because they want 
     an open border.
       Secretary Mayorkas testified in the Homeland Security Committee that 
     the border is closed. Really? Look at El Paso. I told Secretary 
     Mayorkas that he might be the only person in America who actually 
     believes the border is secure. He is it.
       The truth is, as many of my colleagues and I know and have seen with 
     their own eyes, the border is wide open. Since Joe Biden took office, 
     more than 5 million people have illegally crossed our southern border.
       I am afraid it is going to get a lot worse with President Biden 
     allowing title 42 to end. Thank God the Supreme Court has kept title 42 
     in place, at least for now. We are hearing reports that up to 18,000 
     people a day will be illegally storming across our border every day 
     once title 42 is lifted--and Joe Biden still doesn't have a plan.
       Don't forget the Biden administration once said--the Obama-Biden 
     administration once said that just 1,000 attempted crossings a day 
     would be a crisis. So what does President Biden call 18,000 a day? It 
     is his call to make. He created this disaster.
       So that is why I am here with my good friend from Iowa, Senator Joni 
     Ernst. We think it is time to end the madness on the southern border, 
     and if Joe Biden doesn't do his job, we should let the States take care 
     of it themselves.
       I was a Governor, so I know I might be a little biased, but I think 
     Governors know what works best for their individual States way better 
     than the Federal Government does here in Washington, DC.
       Remember I mentioned the massive piles of wall material that the 
     Biden administration refuses to use? Our bill, the BUILD It Act, would 
     force the Federal Government to transfer any material associated with 
     the construction of the southern border barrier to any State upon 
     request so these States can do what Joe Biden refuses to do: finish the 
     wall.
       As Senator Ernst has noted, since President Biden's order in January 
     2021 to cease construction of the southern border barrier went into 
     effect, the Federal Government began paying contractors over $3 million 
     a day to look over unused border material. It is estimated that roughly 
     one-quarter of a billion dollars in taxpayer-funded materials are 
     sitting--just sitting--on our southern border. So instead of doing his 
     job upholding our laws and securing the border, President Biden is 
     burning $3 million of your tax dollars each and every day so people can 
     babysit wall materials that he refuses to use.
       By passing this good bill today, we are giving States the ability to 
     provide what Biden has failed to deliver: border security and a 
     fighting chance to get this massive humanitarian and national security 
     crisis under control.
       In Florida, we are proud to be an immigration State. We love 
     immigration, but it has to be legal. Illegal immigration threatens our 
     safety, undermines our legal process, and hurts those who have been 
     waiting to come through legal channels. But under President Biden's 
     system of open borders and illegal immigration, we are seeing dangerous 
     individuals trying to come into this country, and drugs are pouring 
     across the border.
       More than 100,000 Americans have died from fentanyl and opioid 
     overdoses in the last year, and more are dying every day. Doesn't Joe 
     Biden care about this?
       Our Democratic colleagues do not have the luxury of ignoring this 
     crisis any longer. American families cannot take this loss and 
     heartbreak due to the incompetence of Washington any longer. We must 
     act to secure the border now.
       Floridians and all Americans want to live in safe communities where 
     their families can thrive and prosper all across this great country. 
     Unfortunately, Joe Biden's policies have opened the borders and amnesty 
     has been a total disaster for our Nation. He has laid out the welcome 
     mat for traffickers and cartel members, and has ignored U.S. laws 
     designed to keep American families safe.
       We can't stand for it any longer because the American people deserve 
     better. I hope our colleagues will stand with Senator Ernst and me 
     today to pass this bill. Then we can work with the House to start truly 
     addressing this crisis before it is too late.
     
     [[Page S9744]]
     
       I now recognize my colleague from Iowa, Senator Joni Ernst.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
       Ms. ERNST. Mr. President, I want to thank my friend and colleague 
     from Florida for joining me today on the floor to talk about a very 
     important subject which Americans are watching unfold every single day 
     on their television.
       The Biden White House claims we have been doing the work to secure 
     the border. In fact, some in the administration have said the border is 
     secure.
       With thousands of migrants illegally crossing our southern border 
     every single day and drug cartels funneling fentanyl into our 
     communities, the Biden administration's talking points are actually a 
     bunch of malarkey.
       With the Biden administration attempting to do away with title 42--a 
     policy put in place under the Trump administration to turn away illegal 
     immigrants--the U.S.-Mexico border is going from crisis to catastrophe.
       Our hardworking Border Patrol agents are overwhelmed. They are 
     exhausted, and they are hurting. They, too, want a break for the 
     holidays. But, sadly, their Christmas will be spent dealing with the 
     drug cartels and processing migrants.
       Without title 42 in place, Biden administration officials have 
     estimated that nearly 500,000 illegal immigrants--which is almost 100 
     times the size of my hometown of Red Oak, IA, could cross our southern 
     border each month. That is on top of the over 2.2 million Border Patrol 
     encounters this year, which is half a million more than the previous 
     year. Even more concerning, 98 of those apprehended were on the 
     terrorist watch list.
       On top of this being a humanitarian and national security disaster, 
     Biden's open border policies are intensifying our Nation's drug 
     epidemic. Illicit fentanyl overdoses are now the No. 1 cause of death 
     among adults ages 18 to 45. This administration has truly turned every 
     State into a border State.
       To make matters worse, the Biden administration is telling States 
     they don't have a right to secure their own borders. Just last week, 
     the Biden Justice Department sued Arizona Governor Doug Ducey in an 
     effort to stop the State from constructing its own border barrier. 
     Arizona was simply trying to protect Americans from drug smuggling and 
     human trafficking.
       Well, Arizona, since President Biden won't help you, I do have a 
     solution.
       Instead of blocking States from installing much needed safety 
     precautions, we need to make use of the border wall materials that have 
     already been bought and paid for by American taxpayers. Some $350 
     million worth of concrete, steel, and fencing to build the barrier are 
     just sitting idle, collecting dust and rust, and taxpayers are covering 
     the costs to babysit these unused materials. This is government waste 
     at its finest.
       So I have a question: Why not let States that want to build a wall 
     access these already-paid-for materials? Not only would it save money, 
     it would deter the unprecedented number of border crossings we have 
     seen as a result of Biden's border policies.
       America is and always has been a welcoming nation, but those seeking 
     a better life here have an obligation to respect our laws, including 
     our immigration laws, and the President has a sworn duty to enforce 
     them and to protect the American people.
       That is why I am asking the Senate today to pass my Border's Unused 
     Idle and Lying Dormant Inventory Transfer--or the BUILD IT--Act, which 
     would turn over the unused materials, which have already been purchased 
     by taxpayers to construct the southern border barrier, to any State 
     wishing to finish the job. This bill won't cost a single cent. In fact, 
     it will prevent government waste, which Washington has in excess. It 
     will help end the catastrophe occurring along our border and help make 
     communities across the Nation safer from the threat of violent 
     criminals and lethal drugs.
       Folks, there is no way around it: President Biden's policies are 
     fostering illegal immigration, creating a national security nightmare, 
     and impacting the lives of far too many Americans both in Iowa and 
     across the country, all while costing taxpayers billions of dollars. 
     Here is a simple solution: Pass the BUILD IT Act, and allow States to 
     put these materials to use.
       I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 
     4294 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I 
     further ask 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 (Ms. Smith). Is there an objection?
       The Senator from Michigan.
       Mr. PETERS. Madam President, in reserving the right to object, this 
     bill seeks to continue ill-advised efforts to fund and build an 
     ineffective border wall. I agree certainly that we need to have strong 
     border security, but we need to have smart and cost-effective security 
     measures, not a wall that experts have repeatedly deemed ineffective. 
     There is no one-size-fits-all approach to this very complex issue, and 
     a wall is not the most effective way to secure our borders.
       I have long advocated for additional technology, personnel, and 
     resources to help secure the border, which are more cost-effective. 
     This is not a State-by-State issue. We need a whole-of-government 
     approach in securing our borders and addressing the arrival of 
     migrants. We need to move forward with smart, bipartisan investments 
     that secure all of our borders instead of wasting more taxpayer dollars 
     on a costly and ineffective wall.
       I urge my colleagues to oppose this misguided bill; therefore, I 
     object.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
       The Senator from Delaware.
       Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
       The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
       Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
     for the quorum call be rescinded.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
     
     
                                    H.R. 2617
     
       Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, we all know the phrase ``Justice 
     delayed is justice denied.'' It is a concept that appears in the Magna 
     Carta, and the words can be found in Martin Luther King's ``Letter from 
     Birmingham Jail.''
       Today, as I come to the floor, I am appalled at how the Senate has 
     treated the Latino community in the final days of the 117th Congress. I 
     cannot help but think that justice is being both delayed and denied for 
     millions of Americans. There is just simply no way around it.
       Every year, with its last votes before leaving town, Congress reveals 
     where its priorities lie. With so many key issues and such precious 
     little time to insert them into the omnibus, we negotiate to deliver 
     wins for our constituents before the Senate adjourns. It is only when 
     the final bill text is revealed that communities learn just how hard we 
     fought for them.
       This year, on issue after issue, Latino communities have learned that 
     some of their top priorities were forgotten or ignored, especially 
     after a Congress in which we mustered the political courage to pass 
     once-in-a-generation legislation like the American Rescue Plan and the 
     Inflation Reduction Act. It is a slap in the face to Latinos across our 
     country to exclude them from this latest must-pass legislation. It is 
     an outrage.
     
       I come to the floor today to set the record straight on how this 
     Chamber has often stood in the way of meaningful equality for the 
     Latino community.
       Take for example an issue that I have been leading for almost three 
     decades--the National Museum of the American Latino.
       Two years ago, this Chamber passed bipartisan legislation to 
     establish this museum along with the American Women's History Museum. 
     As part of that historic bill, we gave the Smithsonian a deadline of 
     next week to make final designations on where they will be built. It is 
     a deadline they were on schedule to meet after announcing two optimal 
     sites on the National Mall just a few months ago, but when the 
     Smithsonian Board of Regents indicated they would need a legislative 
     fix to proceed before meeting the deadline, Members of this body 
     decided to stall the effort in its tracks.
     
     [[Page S9745]]
     
       Let me be clear. The legislative fix requested by the Smithsonian 
     would have added zero dollars to our Federal spending--zero. It would 
     have circumvented none of the processes that we follow under regular 
     order. Rather, it would simply permit the museums to be built where the 
     Smithsonian considers to be the best location--on the National Mall.
       So I ask my colleagues: Why? Why? Why are we letting opaque, closed-
     door negotiations get in the way of finally telling the story of 
     millions of Latinas and Latinos in this country? Why are we telling 
     them they don't deserve to be on the National Mall, where our most 
     iconic monuments and museums are?
       Make no mistake, we belong on The Mall. We belong alongside the 
     National Museum of the American Indian and the National Museum of 
     African American History, and we belong in the place where millions of 
     visitors come to learn about their histories and their pasts.
       The importance of these museums and their locations cannot be 
     overstated. This is about standing shoulder to shoulder with more than 
     60 million Latinos across this country. It is about standing shoulder 
     to shoulder with the tens of thousands of Latinos who have worn the 
     uniform of the United States, like the Borinqueneers--an all-Puerto 
     Rican regiment that fought in the Korean war and earned the 
     Congressional Gold Medal--as well as many in business and science who 
     have added greatly to our national success. It is about telling them, 
     no matter their politics, their backgrounds, or their stations in life, 
     they deserve to be recognized as part of our American story.
       I, for one, simply cannot understand how it is that Congress has 
     jeopardized their museum site selections just days before the deadline.
       Another glaring omission of concern is the lack of equity in this 
     year's omnibus bill for the people of Puerto Rico.
       Throughout my 30 years in Congress, I have fought to address the 
     systemic injustices that Puerto Ricans face when they try to access 
     Federal programs. It is unconscionable that I should have to say it, 
     but the residents of Puerto Rico--3\1/2\ million of them--are U.S. 
     citizens. They are American citizens, full stop. As American citizens, 
     they deserve the equality of the same earned benefits as those on the 
     mainland.
       Particularly when it comes to Medicaid, I have repeatedly fought for 
     more than the smaller term patches that have typically funded these 
     programs. Now, I am glad we were able to include a temporary fix for 
     the next 5 years in the spending package to be considered by the Senate 
     soon, but make no mistake, it is the bare minimum of what we should do.
       As I have said before, short-term solutions do long-term damage to 
     beneficiaries, especially since Federal dollars would allow the island 
     to stabilize their healthcare system--a healthcare system that, in 
     addition to having received inadequate funding, has had to endure 
     earthquakes, hurricanes, and constant power outages.
       So if this body is going to acknowledge the reality that Puerto 
     Ricans are American citizens and if they believe that Puerto Ricans 
     should be able to retain their healthcare providers while receiving 
     high-quality care, then they will work with me to enact a permanent fix 
     to Medicaid. It should not matter whether you live on the island or on 
     the mainland. I will not rest until we have secured a full commitment--
     a permanent commitment--for the American citizens of Puerto Rico.
       I implore my colleagues to stand with me and, most importantly, to 
     support the residents of Puerto Rico when we reconvene in the next 
     Congress.
       Last but not least is an issue that for so many Latinos in the Nation 
     invokes the legacies of our own families who migrated to the United 
     States--the continuous mistreatment of migrants at the southern border 
     under title 42.
       Title 42 is a disastrous relic of the Trump administration and 
     Stephen Miller's racist immigration policies. It is grounded in the 
     callous ideology that somehow Latino refugees who come to the southern 
     border don't deserve humanitarian protections under our laws--the same 
     protections, by the way, that my family received, that some of my 
     fellow colleagues' families received, that millions of immigrant 
     families have received for generations.
       Title 42 rejects immigrants at the border under the guise of ``public 
     health,'' which we all know was a shoddy excuse by the Trump 
     administration to achieve their goal of shutting down our asylum 
     system.
       Under the Biden administration, it is as callous today as when it was 
     first enacted in March of 2020. Why? Because title 42 is an affront to 
     our Nation's values. It goes against every word that is etched on the 
     Statue of Liberty. Yet, as it works its way through the courts, I have 
     been hearing my colleagues, including some on this side of the aisle, 
     defend it. But they are wrong for two reasons: Title 42 has made border 
     security--an issue that Latino communities care deeply about--far worse 
     at our southern border. Two, it has denied access to our asylum system 
     for refugees fleeing persecution and torture.
       What are the three biggest groups that you find today at the southern 
     border? They are not Mexicans. They are not Central Americans. They are 
     Cubans, Venezuelans, and Nicaraguans. Why? Because they are fleeing 
     oppression in those countries.
       The only individuals who benefit from extending title 42 are the 
     smuggling networks that exploit migrants, predominantly Black and Brown 
     migrants whom we turn away before adjudicating why they chose to 
     migrate.
       But beyond failing the migrants themselves, title 42 is a failure by 
     the very metrics it seeks to affect. Supporters of title 42 like to say 
     that somehow we are being ``invaded'' at our southern border. It is the 
     favorite talking point of rightwing media pundits who claim that the 
     United States is facing an invasion of migrants who want to change our 
     way of life. To back it up, they point to data released by Customs and 
     Border Protection showing that there has been an increase in the number 
     of migrant encounters on the southwest land border. But what their dog 
     whistles and scare tactics ignore is the reason for this increase.
       Simply put, title 42 has become the revolving door that allows 
     migrants to try and try and try again if they are apprehended by 
     immigration authorities. It circumvents our legal asylum process, where 
     we should be adding resources and manpower to come to a final 
     determination--yes, you qualify under our law, you are welcome; no, you 
     don't qualify under our law, you are deported--and end the revolving 
     door. But all title 42 does is to push people back over the border, and 
     they go and try again. So when you see those numbers, it could be the 
     same person trying 10 times--a process that would determine if someone 
     is eligible for asylum or not, and if not, seek permanent deportation 
     instead of having them return through the revolving door.
       Considering an amendment to prolong the damage of title 42 is the 
     last thing this body should be doing in order to advance the omnibus 
     spending bill. Considering an extension of title 42 when we have 
     millions of Dreamers, young people who know only the Pledge of 
     Allegiance and the flag of the United States as their flag, who know 
     only the national anthem of the United States as their national anthem, 
     and who still cannot become U.S. citizens, and the millions of people 
     waiting to legally be reunified with their families in the United 
     States or our U.S. citizens, is the greatest failure of all.
       Finally, we come to the issue of Latino representation in our 
     leadership offices and on the Senate floor. The lack thereof shows the 
     incredible disregard for our community.
       These are just a few examples of how the Senate has failed the Latino 
     community in this last bill of the year: relegating the Latino museum 
     as something less than worthy of being on the National Mall; failing to 
     deliver equal and permanent parity for the 3\1/2\ million U.S. citizens 
     who call Puerto Rico their home; seeking to prolong title 42's harmful 
     impact on our country; and failing to have us represented in our 
     leadership operations.
       I recognize the fact that some of my colleagues may disagree with 
     some of the points I have made, but you cannot ignore them.
       For 30 years in Congress, I have been speaking up for the equal 
     opportunity, equal justice, and equal dignity that Latinos deserve. I 
     have no plans of stopping anytime soon. For as long as I am here, I 
     will be speaking truth to
     
     [[Page S9746]]
     
     power for a community that too often has been told to wait your turn, 
     wait your turn; to be thankful for whatever you are given; and to not 
     rock the boat--``basta, basta ya.'' This is not ``feliz Navidad''; it 
     is more like bah humbug.
       Latinos are a community of more than 60 million Americans strong. We 
     contribute more than $2 trillion to the gross domestic product of this 
     country. We have worn the uniform of the United States in incredible 
     numbers, disproportionate to our size of the American population, and 
     we have shed blood and given our lives for the country, and we will not 
     be cast aside and ignored by the powers that be.
       You cannot appeal to us at election time and forsake us the rest of 
     the time, not as long as I am in this seat, not as long as I have this 
     desk, with this voice, and this fierce urgency to do what is right for 
     Latinas and Latinos in this country as full citizens of the United 
     States.
       With that, I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
       Mr. CASEY. Madam President, I ask consent to speak as in morning 
     business.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
     
     
                                  Anti-Semitism
     
       Mr. CASEY. Madam President, I rise today--almost as we get to the 
     early evening--during this week when Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, 
     is being celebrated to speak about the evil of anti-Semitism and the 
     trauma and darkness it causes in all of America.
       This past November 18, I visited the site of the deadliest attack on 
     the Jewish community in all of American history: the Tree of Life 
     synagogue in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh, PA. A 
     killer, full of rage, entered the synagogue during Shabbat morning 
     services on October 27, 2018, and massacred 11 Pennsylvanians from 3 
     different Jewish congregations and injured 6 others, including 4 law 
     enforcement officers who had responded in just minutes to the site. 
     These Jewish Americans who died ranged in age from 64 to 97.
       Visiting the site 4 years later this past November was both moving 
     and disturbing as we walked through a house of worship frozen in time 
     from that awful day.
       The venomous hate that motivated the killer to take so many lives in 
     a murderous rampage was unabated when he was arrested. He was making 
     anti-Semitic statements even as he was apprehended and was being 
     treated by first responders.
       The evil that attacked the Jewish worshippers in Philadelphia that 
     day is the same evil--the very same evil--that targets Americans based 
     upon their race and gender or whom they love or how they worship. Too 
     often, unlike any other nation in the world, this evil, this hate, is 
     coupled with the easy availability of powerful weapons, which results 
     in the mass shootings we have seen in so many communities in America--
     just by way of a very small limited set of examples, Mother Emanuel AME 
     Church in Charleston, SC; Pulse nightclub in Orlando, FL; a Walmart in 
     El Paso, TX; a grocery store in Buffalo, NY; and Club Q in Colorado 
     Springs, CO.
       The following data--and these are numbers, but they tell a part of 
     the story. These numbers, this data, should alarm any American. In 
     2022, the Anti-Defamation League, which we know as ADL, published an 
     audit of anti-Semitic incidents and reported over 2,700 anti-Semitic 
     incidents throughout the United States just in 2021. This was a 34-
     percent increase from 2020 and the highest number on record since ADL 
     began tracking incidents in 1979.
       The rise of hate is further documented by congressional testimony 
     from FBI Director Christopher Wray. At a Senate Judiciary Committee 
     hearing in August of 2022, Director Wray stated that the ``top domestic 
     terrorism threat we face continues to be from [domestic violent 
     extremists] we categorize as racially or ethnically motivated violent 
     extremists.''
       Director Wray later highlighted that the number of FBI investigations 
     of suspected domestic violent extremists had more than doubled since 
     the spring of 2020. This continued an upward trend when Director Wray 
     testified in March of 2021 that investigations had also doubled since 
     2017 to more than 2,000 investigations and that the number of 
     investigations into White supremacists had tripled.
       Furthermore, on December 12 of this year, the FBI released its annual 
     hate crime report and reported over 7,200--let me say that number 
     again: 7,200--hate crime incidents just in 2021, the third largest 
     number in the past decade. And, of course, December 12 is not the end 
     of the year.
       This number is even more shocking considering the massive 
     undercounting and lack of data used to compile the report, which the 
     FBI readily acknowledged. Due to the transition to a new reporting 
     system, only about two-thirds of police departments across the Nation--
     a significant drop from last year--reported data. Some States--for 
     example, Florida and California--had already almost no reporting, with 
     only 2 jurisdictions in Florida and 15 in California sending data. 
     Unfortunately, my home State of Pennsylvania was not far behind, with 
     just 41 agencies reporting data to the FBI. Several major cities, 
     including New York, Los Angeles, Miami, and Chicago, did not provide 
     any statistics or simply reported zero.
       So while the underreporting is a concern and must be addressed, it is 
     even more concerning that we would have likely seen record-high reports 
     of hate crimes across the Nation had police departments participated at 
     similar levels as in prior years.
       This data is further reinforced by the lived experience of too many 
     Americans across this Nation.
       By way of one example, in a Wall Street Journal article from December 
     15 entitled ``Antisemitism is Rising at Colleges,'' a student at 
     Rutgers University in Newark, NJ, spoke of needing to take indirect 
     routes to class and hiding her Star of David necklace under her shirt 
     to avoid harassment from other students.
       Citing the ADL's ``Audit of Antisemitic Incidents,'' which I 
     mentioned earlier, this article noted that vandalism, threats, and 
     slurs on college campuses directed at Jewish students has more than 
     tripled--tripled--from 41 in 2014 to 155 in 2021.
       Every incident, of course, fueled by hate and extremism does not 
     result in death. Often, as evidenced by the example in the Wall Street 
     Journal, hateful acts involve vandalism, destruction of property, 
     bullying, or harassment, just to name a few. But these acts are the 
     manifestation of evil as well.
       Incidents involving such hate, deadly or not, are contrary to 
     American values, including the values inherent in the inscription on 
     our currency: E Pluribus Unum--from many, one--one country, one Nation 
     that is strengthened by our diversity. That is the source of our 
     strength: our diversity.
       People of different ethnicities, faiths, and points of view have come 
     together over generations to build our democracy and to build the most 
     powerful Nation on Earth. Any American who claims to support American 
     values that our people hold dear while engaging in acts that constitute 
     anti-Semitism is a hypocrite and a threat to all of us. It is a 
     disgusting perversion of Christianity to make anti-Semitic or other 
     hateful statements or, worse--worse--to act violently against someone 
     because they are Jewish, because they are transgender or of a different 
     race.
       From the parable of the Good Samaritan to the Sermon on the Mount, 
     Jesus taught us how to love and respect all those whom we meet on the 
     road of life.
       Anti-Semitism, racism, or other hateful ideologies are contrary to 
     our values but, also, not just contrary to American values but contrary 
     to the values inherent in all religions.
       Each of us, as citizens, has a moral and civic obligation to speak 
     out against anti-Semitism and racism. Those who are public officials or 
     public figures have a heightened obligation, a duty, to condemn 
     categorically anti-Semitic acts, rhetoric, or other conduct, whether 
     those acts, rhetoric, or conduct involve a President, a recording 
     artist, or an athlete or any other American.
       Of course, the U.S. Senate must speak with one voice against anti-
     Semitism and racism, both here at home and around the world. The Senate 
     did act in 2021 to pass the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act after the rise in 
     hate
     
     [[Page S9747]]
     
     crimes against Asian Americans during the pandemic.
       But an action like that cannot be the end of our action. That is why 
     I was proud to support the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act when 
     Senate Democrats tried to pass it in May after the racially motivated 
     mass shooting in Buffalo.
       And the leader of that effort is our distinguished majority whip, 
     Senator Durbin, who is with us here on the floor. And I appreciate his 
     work on this, trying to pass that legislation.
       I was also pleased that on December 12 the Biden administration 
     announced a new interagency task force charged with developing and 
     coordinating a national strategy to counter anti-Semitism and other 
     forms of bias and discrimination in the United States.
       This announcement followed in response to a December 5 letter that I 
     joined, along with 124 bipartisan colleagues in the House and Senate, 
     calling on President Biden to take a ``whole-of-government approach'' 
     to address the ``scourge of antisemitism,'' including establishing an 
     interagency task force.
       So I stand ready, as I know many here do in the Senate, to work with 
     colleagues in the new Congress to ensure that we are taking steps 
     necessary to combat this growing threat of hate and extremism.
       But even in these dark times, it is critical to hold up and recognize 
     those who are lighting the path forward to ending identity-based hate. 
     The Tree of Life community is not merely lighting the path for 
     Pittsburgh but for the Nation and, indeed, for the world by coming 
     together to establish the ``REMEMBER. REBUILD. RENEW.'' campaign. 
     ``REMEMBER. REBUILD. RENEW.'' That is their campaign.
       In the ``City of Bridges,'' as Pittsburgh is known throughout the 
     world, it is fitting that the Tree of Life community--that members of 
     that congregation and synagogue--is trying to connect communities 
     across the world as a leader in the fight against anti-Semitism and 
     other forms of identity-based hate.
       Rooted in honoring and remembering those who tragically lost their 
     lives on October 27, 2018, the community will repair and preserve the 
     Tree of Life building as a historic synagogue while establishing a 
     museum, memorial, and educational center to inspire and empower those 
     in that community and around the world to stand up against anti-
     Semitism.
       Never before have we seen such a transformative, multidisciplinary 
     approach under one roof and on such hallowed ground to bring people 
     together in our fight against hate and anti-Semitism.
       As Rabbi Myers shared with me, Tree of Life is striving to transform 
     the site of a tragedy into one of hope and inspiration for future 
     generations to come. It is striving to fulfill the longstanding Jewish 
     concept of tikkun olam, to repair the world. Through remembrance and 
     renewal, Tree of Life is lighting the way forward for all of us to 
     finally--finally--counter the root causes of hate and end, once and for 
     all, anti-Semitism.
       We owe it to every survivor, family member, and the community members 
     impacted to join them on this important journey. May the memories of 
     the victims at Tree of Life be for us a blessing.
     
     
                   Authorizing Appointment of Escort Committee
     
       Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the President of the 
     Senate be authorized to appoint a committee on the part of the Senate 
     to join with a like committee on the part of the House of 
     Representatives to escort His Excellency, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, 
     President of Ukraine, into the House Chamber for the joint meeting on 
     Wednesday, December 21, 2022.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
       Mr. CASEY. I yield the floor.
       I suggest the absence of a quorum.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
       The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
       Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
     order for the quorum call be rescinded.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
     
     
                                     Twitter
     
       Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam President, this past weekend, when I was home 
     and whether I was at church or at other activities, I would hear from 
     Tennesseans, and they were just so focused on what we were hearing 
     about the Twitter files. They are very concerned and disturbed about 
     the lengths to which the FBI and other government Agencies have gone to 
     suppress political free speech online.
       The document releases to date especially give them pause because it 
     shows them what it looks like when the power of Big Tech and the power 
     of the deep state work together against the American people.
       Now, most people understand that the government and law enforcement 
     sometimes work with private companies and, when it comes to removing 
     things like material depicting child sexual abuse from their platforms, 
     that is something that tech platforms should be doing. But in this 
     case, they were working together to suppress free speech on behalf of a 
     political narrative, a viewpoint that they held, and words they 
     disagreed with.
       The existence of the FBI's Foreign Influence Task Force is not a 
     secret. The Agency created it in 2017 to counteract foreign influence 
     operations targeting the United States. If you don't look too closely, 
     the task force seems like a reasonable response to an emerging threat 
     to our Nation's security. But, in reality, the entire scheme is 
     predicated on the notion that a threat is whatever the task force deems 
     it to be.
       In a batch of documents and reporting released on Sunday, we learned 
     that, in the months leading up to the 2020 election, the task force 
     became frustrated after Twitter employees indicated they hadn't seen 
     much to suggest that foreign countries like Russia were using the 
     platform to spread propaganda.
       So what did the FBI do? They went on a fishing expedition and 
     pressured decision makers within the company to abandon the notion that 
     this was about national security.
       In the end, Twitter decided to let the FBI kick the door off the 
     hinges and widen the scope of their own influence online at the expense 
     of the integrity of the platform. And I say ``widen'' because the FBI, 
     along with the Department of Homeland Security and the intelligence 
     community, had already engaged in a certain amount of mission creep 
     when it came to investigating threats online.
       Both the FBI and DHS routinely preflagged content for moderation and 
     sent the names of accounts directly to the FBI's contacts at Twitter. 
     Several of the accounts sent for review were suspended or shadow 
     banned. Yet most of them weren't foreign propaganda at all. They were 
     relatively low-engagement accounts tweeting satire and jokes--and 
     accounts of citizens. Many of them were owned by regular people who 
     were obviously on the conservative side of the political spectrum.
       The FBI responded to this reporting by claiming that they often work 
     with private companies to provide information on foreign malign 
     influence attempts. But, as we have seen in black and white, most of 
     the moderation requests made by the government didn't fall into that 
     category. Instead, they focused on low-follower accounts owned by 
     ordinary Americans who tweeted opinions that the government did not 
     agree with.
       These revelations prompt our next question: How did an allegedly 
     serious investigation into influence campaigns devolve into a 
     censorship free-for-all?
       To find your answer, you have to look all the way back to the 2016 
     Russian election interference story. These allegations were used as 
     pretext to justify the blatant censorship covered in the Twitter files 
     reporting.
       In November 2020, the FBI used that pretext to justify flagging so 
     many examples of what they called ``possible violative content'' that 
     Twitter employees were overwhelmed.
       The story still had steam in 2021, when DHS published a brief with 
     their assessment that ``Russian malign influencers probably will 
     increasingly use U.S. social media platforms that offer more permissive 
     operating environments.''
       As I said, that is their--the DHS--quote.
       And, of course, it was that pretext that led to the most infamous 
     instance of government-driven censorship in recent memory. When Twitter 
     suppressed
     
     [[Page S9748]]
     
     the New York Post story coverage of Hunter Biden's laptop, the platform 
     made it clear they had done so because the story was the product of 
     Russian meddling.
       Of course, this weekend's reporting revealed that Twitter employees 
     had repeatedly informed the FBI that they had no evidence of 
     significant Russian meddling. Twitter told the FBI repeatedly that they 
     had no significant evidence of Russian meddling.
       But under pressure from the government, they chose to buy into an 
     influence operation that originated much closer to home. The FBI had 
     primed the pump months before the laptop story broke by telling tech 
     CEOs to expect hacking operations targeting people associated with 
     political campaigns.
       They also planted seeds with elected officials and the media and even 
     hosted a tabletop exercise that mimicked one of those hacking 
     operations.
       One person they identified as a potential target? Hunter Biden. Yes, 
     it was Hunter Biden. And of course, his property had been in FBI 
     custody since December 2019.
       So when the Post broke the story, it was easy--easy--for Twitter to 
     take the easy way out and run with the FBI narrative rather than 
     relying on evidence proving the story was a real scandal and not 
     something cooked up by a Russian hacker.
       At this point in the story, it has become crystal clear that there is 
     a much bigger agenda in play.
       When DHS tried to get away with creating an official Disinformation 
     Governance Board, I almost didn't believe what I was seeing. Here was 
     an official government Agency using national security as a pretext to 
     censor political speech that was at odds with the Biden 
     administration's policies. Fortunately, that effort collapsed under 
     scrutiny.
       But they didn't need an official panel of bureaucrats to keep up the 
     pressure on these companies. Back in July 2021, I sent a letter to the 
     White House after we discovered that their staff was in regular touch 
     with social media platforms to suppress speech regarding the COVID-19 
     pandemic.
       I figured the American people had a right to know what criteria they 
     were using to ask for that level of censorship and what the legal basis 
     for this presumed authority was. Believe it or not, I never got an 
     answer to the letter.
       Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the 
     Record that letter alongside my remarks.
       There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
     the Record, as follows:
     
                                                         July 16, 2021.
          Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr.,
          President of the United States,
          Washington, DC.
            Dear President Biden: I write regarding White House Press 
          Secretary Jen Psaski's recent remarks about the White House's 
          oversight of social media posts it considers problematic or 
          ``disinformation.'' Ms. Psaski noted that the White House is 
          ``in regular touch with the social media platforms'' and is 
          ``flagging problematic posts'' that they believe should be 
          removed relating to COVID-19 and the COVID vaccine. Ms. 
          Psaski also suggested that Americans who are banned from one 
          social media platform should be banned on others.
            These revelations are deeply concerning. The blatant 
          actions by your administration to work with big tech 
          companies to censor Americans' free speech are shocking--and 
          arguably a violation of the First Amendment. Communist 
          countries such as Cuba are currently taking away their 
          citizens' right to use the internet to communicate; the U.S. 
          government should be standing up to, not looking to mirror, 
          authoritarian regimes such as these.
            Please provide more information about your Administration's 
          efforts to ``flag problematic posts'' on social media 
          platforms, including:
            1. What criteria are you directing social media platforms 
          to use to flag and remove posts?
            2. What criteria are you directing social media platforms 
          to use to ban users?
            3. In your July 15th press briefing, you stated that 12 
          people are responsible for ``65 percent of anti-vaccine 
          misinformation on social media platforms.'' Who are those 
          accounts and have they, or others, been removed at your 
          direction?
            4. What is the legal basis for your Administration's 
          decision to direct social media platforms to flag and remove 
          posts from their sites?
            5. Does the White House have staff dedicated to searching 
          social media for content to flag for removal?
            Additionally, I request a briefing on this issue by August 
          2, 2021. I appreciate your attention to this urgent matter.
                Sincerely,
                                                      Marsha Blackburn,
                                                 United States Senator.
     
       Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam President, the American people aren't going to 
     let this one go. I know Tennesseans are not going to let this go. They 
     have hard evidence that Big Tech and the deep state have repeatedly 
     suppressed legal speech to control political discourse in this country.
       These companies cannot be trusted to do what is right, and we as 
     lawmakers can no longer wait for them to regulate themselves. They have 
     proven over the past decade that they will not regulate themselves. 
     This is why I fought so hard to pass legislation requiring privacy, 
     safety, and data security protections for kids and adults.
       This year, the Kids Online Safety Act and the Open App Markets Act 
     and nationwide privacy legislation have all fallen short of the finish 
     line, which is really disappointing because these are policies that 
     have such strong bipartisan support. And I thank Senator Blumenthal for 
     his partnership on those policies.
       But I would remind my colleagues that these issues have not gone 
     away, and they are not going away. The American people are waiting to 
     see what we do next: Will we give them a toolbox to protect themselves 
     online, to protect their virtual you? Will we give them the ability to 
     control the apps that they choose to put on their iPhone or their 
     Android? Will we pass legislation to make certain that our social media 
     platforms have to establish a duty of care for our children online?
       We all know that if you give Big Tech the opportunity, they will 
     censor. We know that. They will suppress speech in order to favor a 
     narrative that they can control, and they are going to keep doing it 
     until we put them all in check.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
     
     
                        Unanimous Consent Request--S. 4036
     
       Mr. LANKFORD. Madam President, it is the 21st of December, and we 
     don't have information from the Department of Homeland Security on how 
     many people illegally crossed our border in November. What is 
     interesting about that is, Jeh Johnson, when he was the director, 
     talked openly and often about how often he got a report of how many 
     people had illegally crossed the border. In fact, he said, when he was 
     the director of DHS, that every single morning he got a report of how 
     many people illegally crossed the border the day before. They knew to 
     the day.
       I have been to a facility here in Washington, DC, where they can 
     actually track to the hour how many people have illegally crossed our 
     border every single hour of the day, 365 days a year. But it is the 
     21st of December, and we have requested how many people have illegally 
     crossed the border in the month of November, and they said they are 
     still working on it.
       Let me just tell you why that is relevant: because the Department of 
     Homeland Security is in full-on chaos mode trying to figure out how to 
     be able to manage thousands and thousands of people illegally crossing 
     our border not yearly, not monthly, daily now--daily.
       Jeh Johnson, when he was at Homeland Security under the Obama 
     administration, said he knew it was going to be a very bad day when a 
     thousand people crossed the border illegally the day before.
       Best guess, over the last 24 hours, 9,000 people illegally crossed 
     our border in the last 24 hours. I couldn't tell you that exactly, 
     though the Secretary does know because they keep records to the hour. 
     But they won't let Congress know that because they don't want the 
     American people to know what is really happening on the border right 
     now. So they are hiding facts.
       The hard part is, they can't hide the facts because even the 
     Washington Post is down on the border now looking at what is going on 
     at the southern border and saying: That is chaos.
       It is not an accident. It was by design, and it was by design over 
     several policy issues. The first of which is that, in the first days of 
     the Biden administration, they said: We are setting aside what is 
     called title 42 authority. That was a temporary authority, during the 
     pandemic, to say that individuals who
     
     [[Page S9749]]
     
     are requesting asylum can't just automatically come into the country; 
     we were turning them away.
       Now, that was designed to be a temporary authority, and everyone knew 
     it. And so that is the reason I have asked, for over a year, of the 
     Secretary: What is the plan when title 42 authority goes away? And what 
     I was told was, as recently as early this year: Oh, we have a six-point 
     plan. In fact, not only do we have a six-point plan; we have already 
     started that six-point plan.
       Just weeks ago, I asked the Secretary again: What is the plan when 
     title 42 authority goes away, because it will go away the 1st of 
     December? And I got the same response again: We have a six-point plan.
       But on their six-point plan that they are carrying out, they have 
     continued to see the rapid rise in the number of people illegally 
     crossing our border every day. It used to be 1,000. And then it was 
     2,000. And then it was 3,000. And then it jumped to 5,000. And then it 
     jumped to 7,000. And now it is up to 8 or 9,000 every day.
       Again, to put it in perspective, what is going on at our southern 
     border, even before the title 42 authority goes away--to put this in 
     perspective, during the Obama administration, the big year of the 
     largest surge that happened on our southern border during the Obama 
     administration was that just over half a million people illegally 
     crossed that year.
       The best we can tell, we have had half a million people illegally 
     cross our border in the last 2 months. This is full-on crisis.
       So what is happening with it? Of the 2 million people that have 
     illegally crossed our border in the last year, somewhere around 700,000 
     of those folks were turned around under title 42 authority. Many of 
     them were single males who were coming into the country who were turned 
     around. So of the approximately 2 million, approximately 700,000 were 
     turned away.
       This administration has asked for the courts to take away title 42 
     authority and to say we are going to ignore that, and we are just going 
     to process everyone under what they call title 8 authority.
       Let me clarify what that means. Title 8 authority is the issue of 
     processing people in the normal structure. But what is happening right 
     now with title 8 authority under this administration? Well, two things. 
     One is, they have said we are putting people under expedited--
     expedited--process. Well, that sounds great. And it is a great little 
     title in the media to say: Oh, they are in expedited removal hearings. 
     Except, when you look at this administration, they have actually 
     removed 7 percent of the people whom they put under expedited removal. 
     So they are basically giving them a title of expedited removal but not 
     actually removing them.
       Of the 1.3 million people who have illegally crossed our border in 
     just the past year who were allowed to be able to come into our country 
     under title 8 authority, 1.3 million people have come into the country. 
     ICE, whose budget has been cut and their purpose has been repurposed, 
     used to be for prosecuting individuals to be able to move out of the 
     country. Now ICE has been repurposed, and they are actually processing 
     paperwork of individuals in the country illegally. It used to be that 
     they were processing out. Now they are processing in. So 1.3 million 
     people have crossed our border illegally. Less than 70,000 people have 
     actually been deported this year. That is a record low number of people 
     that have actually been deported.
       The chaos continues on our southern border. And for whatever reason, 
     this administration chooses not to care.
       I have asked the Secretary how many of the individuals have had 
     criminal vetting from their country of origin, and his answer was: I 
     will get back to you on that. He knows the same answer that I do. The 
     answer is zero.
       The American people believe there is some kind of vetting happening 
     coming across the border. There is not. They are checked to see if they 
     are on the terror watch list. They are checked to see if they have 
     committed a crime in the United States. But we literally don't know 
     individuals crossing the border from over 150 countries so far this 
     year--we literally don't know if they are fleeing poverty or fleeing 
     justice. We have no idea because no one is checking. They are just 
     ushered into the country.
       Now they are given expedited removal, which we know now is not 
     actually removal, or, worse yet, the vast majority of those individuals 
     are given what is called parole. Why? Because parole is faster. They 
     can actually process people into the country quicker if they parole 
     them. The only thing about parole is, they actually get a work permit 
     the first day that they are in the United States.
       Help me understand this. The current policy of the Biden 
     administration--they say they are trying to stop illegal immigration, 
     but they are actually paroling people into the country as fast as they 
     can, giving people a work permit the first day they are actually here, 
     and then they are setting them up for a hearing with ICE to process 
     them in. The backlog with ICE now is 5 years long, so it is 5 years 
     until they get that done and then 10 years after that for the next 
     time. So they are currently up to 15 years that they are in the country 
     with a work permit.
       Why is title 42 such a big issue? Because title 42 is at least 
     turning away about 40 percent of the folks who are at the border. Once 
     that goes away, everyone comes in, and this accelerates even more. The 
     best evidence that we have at this point is there are tens of thousands 
     of people just south of the border right now waiting for title 42 
     authority to go away because they have been turned away in the past, 
     and they are rapidly coming in now, just waiting on the courts to be 
     able to turn this off.
       Currently, no one seems to care. The Biden administration has become 
     the administration of chaos on the border. The American people see it 
     plainly. I have to tell you, the American people are not opposed to 
     legal immigration, but they do not like this chaos.
       As much as the administration can say: We are just not going to tell 
     you the numbers, or as much as this Senate has just refused to do 
     hearings on this matter, we are still at the same spot. Tens of 
     thousands of people are illegally crossing our border in record-high 
     numbers, and there seems to be no deterrent to that.
       So I come to this floor with two requests. The first of that is to 
     keep title 42 in place. I have had a bipartisan bill that has been out 
     there since April of this year asking a very simple question: Maintain 
     the title 42 authority. Give that tool to the Secretary to be able to 
     at least turn away individuals who are illegally coming into the 
     country, to be able to say to those individuals: You do not have a 
     standard for asylum here. Turn those folks away. Stop the massive flow 
     that is coming into our country on at least that level. Don't make a 
     terrible situation even worse.
       This bill has broad support. This is a bill that will actually help 
     this administration to enforce the law and to decrease the chaos on our 
     southern border. It is not a radical idea; it is a straightforward idea 
     to say that if we are interested in securing the border, this is a way 
     to do that.
       (Mr. OSSOFF assumed the Chair.)
       Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, 
     Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration 
     of S. 4036 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I 
     further ask 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 Michigan.
       Mr. PETERS. I object.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
     
     
                        Unanimous Consent Request--S. 5350
     
       Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, if we are going to object to maintaining 
     the title 42 authority, which has been widely used, then I would ask 
     for something else that the administration is considering.
       The administration has gone back and forth in consideration on what 
     is called a transit ban for asylum; that is, for individuals who are 
     coming to our country right now from 150 different countries, literally 
     flying in on an aircraft, hopping to several different countries they 
     go to and landing in Mexico, and then the cartels shuttle them to the 
     border. They show up with luggage. If you don't believe me, there are 
     lots of video of it, of people from all over the world who are coming.
     
     [[Page S9750]]
     
       The administration has considered a transit ban to say that you can't 
     fly to four different countries and land here and walk in and say: I 
     need asylum here. That is not asylum; that is economic opportunity. 
     There is a visa process for that. The administration is considering a 
     transit ban to say you can't go through multiple countries and then 
     show up in the United States and say: Now I want asylum.
       I have a bill that deals with this. Quite frankly, it is a 
     straightforward policy that multiple other countries around the world 
     also have. This policy will help our administration to enforce the 
     border and give the tools to the Border Patrol to make decisions along 
     the border that actually help protect the safety of our Nation.
       The current process, let me remind you, is thousands of people 
     literally being paroled into our country, saying: Fifteen years from 
     now, we will figure out what to do with you. That is the current 
     process, which is incentivizing illegal immigration. It doesn't slow 
     down. This is not a matter of, it is going to one day get better. We 
     are the greatest Nation on Earth. There are billions of people who want 
     to be able to come here. So this is a simple, straightforward way to be 
     able to deal with that, and it is the transit issue, to be able to 
     resolve that issue for asylum.
       Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
     immediate consideration of S. 5350, which is at the desk. I further ask 
     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?
       Mr. PETERS. I object.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
       Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. President, this body is wearing what is happening 
     on the border right now. I know a lot of the national media decides 
     they are going to look away and say it is no big deal, but I am telling 
     you, more and more reporters, even on the far left, are looking at what 
     is happening on the border and saying this is an out-of-control 
     humanitarian crisis. If this body keeps ignoring that, America is going 
     to continue to suffer.
       May I remind you, this is the Department of Homeland Security. What 
     is more basic than actually securing our borders? Please don't tell me 
     this is not possible under current law. Four times as many people have 
     illegally crossed this border that happened under the Obama 
     administration--four times as many. It can be done. They are just 
     choosing not to. That lays on this body as well.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
     
     
                                 Child Tax Credit
     
       Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I think we can all agree we had a very 
     productive 23 months, starting about the time the Presiding Officer 
     from Georgia arrived. I am proud of the bipartisan work we have done 
     for Ohioans. We know there is still more to do.
       When we passed the Rescue Plan, I remember sitting at this table, 
     sitting at this desk. It was March 6, and after 12 hours of all-night 
     voting--it was a Saturday around noon--we passed the Rescue Plan. We 
     took care of literally 1 million union pension holders who had lost big 
     chunks of pension, 100,000 families in my State alone. In the same 
     vote, we expanded the child tax credit, 51 to 1, 51 Democrats with the 
     Vice President. Fifty Republicans voted no, denying children the 
     expanded child tax credit. Two million kids in my State--2 million 
     children in Ohio--and 60 million around the country benefited from 
     that. Their families saw more money in their pockets. It was 90 percent 
     of the children in Atlanta, in Savannah, in Cleveland, and Dayton--90 
     percent of children. Only the 10 percent wealthiest families did not 
     benefit from this.
       We saw a 40-percent reduction in the child poverty rate, and we 
     know--think if we had kept the child tax credit going. It was in effect 
     for a year. If it had kept going, think how effective it would have 
     been in blunting the effects of inflation on so many families who are 
     struggling every day, every week, every month.
       I heard from parents around my State. It was helping them afford 
     groceries, childcare, or rent or school clothes or summer camps. Many 
     parents wrote me and said: It is the first time ever I have been able 
     to send my daughter to summer camp. We know what a difference this made 
     at a time when families struggled to keep up with costs.
       Unfortunately, as we know, the child tax credit expansion ended at 
     the end of 2021. That should never have happened. We still have time to 
     get it up and running again.
       We had a chance to pass a tax package tonight. We could have passed a 
     tax package that addressed the needs of American manufacturers with 
     research and development credits and to help children and families.
       Here is what I want everyone to hear in this body and throughout the 
     United States: Democrats are willing to do it. We put it on the table 
     time and time again. We will support the research and development tax 
     provisions to Republicans--something they wanted--and they should 
     support the child tax credit. We believe we should invest in American 
     manufacturing. It would have done that. We believe we should invest in 
     American families, in American children.
       As part of a balanced package, we will make the changes businesses 
     are asking for. CEOs and small businesses and companies and executives 
     came to see me and said they wanted us to do both. Yes, do the R&D tax 
     credit, and also do the child tax credit. My friends on this side of 
     the aisle--apparently all 50 of them--said no, they are not willing to 
     do that. For whatever reason, they were not willing to do the child tax 
     credit. We offered to make these changes. We said it needed to be part 
     of a balanced tax package so working families are not left behind in 
     this new tax law the way they were with the huge corporate tax giveaway 
     of 2017.
       We are in the midst of a manufacturing renaissance, especially in the 
     Midwest, in my State, because of investments we made. We need a Tax 
     Code that supports American manufacturing and rewards investment in 
     research and development, and we need a Tax Code that supports working 
     families and their kids.
       Investing in children now, making sure these families have money in 
     their pockets to keep up with rising costs, weather a financial 
     emergency, even just to afford the basics in an economy where inflation 
     is too high, will pay off for decades. It is a smart policy. It is a 
     win-win for Georgia and Ohio and every one of our States.
       One in four kids living in rural Idaho is left out of the full child 
     tax credit. In Ohio and Kentucky, one out of three kids is left out. We 
     can fix that if my Republicans would be willing to.
       Raising kids is hard work. They say: You give this money to these 
     families, they don't work. Well, raising kids is hard work.
       After we passed the child tax credit expansion 19 months ago, I heard 
     time and again that it was making things ``just a little bit easier.'' 
     I heard that term ``just a little bit easier'' from families. They work 
     hard, sometimes more than one job, just to make ends meet.
       We can do this. We can make things a little bit easier. We can still 
     do this.
       I won't stop fighting for tax policies that help make our country 
     more competitive but also more competitive and more just. Justice 
     should be the goal not just during the holiday season but always.
       As I tried to get this deal done, I heard my colleagues on the other 
     side of the aisle say that expanding the child tax credit was a 
     partisan issue. It was a ``Democratic ask.'' That is news to American 
     families. Most families in Georgia and Ohio, they don't care if the 
     child tax credit was mostly about Democrats wanting it and Republicans 
     not wanting it; they just want a government that fights for them and 
     stands with them, not that stands against them.
       Just a few days ago, I met with faith leaders--Evangelical, Catholic, 
     Jewish, Muslim faith leaders and so many others--to fight for the child 
     tax credit. Only in Washington, DC, in this body and down the hall, the 
     House of Representatives--only here is fighting for the child tax 
     credit a partisan issue.
       I have a letter here--I have two letters. This comes from the Faith 
     and Freedom Coalition. It says:
     
            As leaders of faith organizations, social welfare 
          organizations, and others, we consider it to be an integral 
          part of our missions
     
     [[Page S9751]]
     
          to ensure families and communities have all the resources 
          they need to be fully flourishing and contributing members of 
          society.
     
       The letter goes on to say:
     
            That is why there is broad agreement [among people of 
          faith, conservative and liberal alike] that the Child Tax 
          Credit (CTC) needs to be strengthened. We believe there is an 
          urgent need for legislation that supports children and 
          families. Many of us had called for increasing the CTC to 
          $3,000 per child [back in 2017] and we remain committed to 
          that goal today. It is our hope [that] this Congress will 
          prioritize an expanded Child Tax Credit.
     
       Mr. President, I ask that this letter, which is signed by leading 
     conservatives, including a citizen in the Presiding Officer's State, 
     Newt Gingrich; Rick Santorum, Senator Casey's predecessor; Ramesh 
     Ponnuru; Kathryn Jean Lopez; and many other politicians.
       I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record.
       There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
     the Record, as follows:
     
                                                     December 16, 2022.
          Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
          Speaker of the House, Washington, DC.
          Hon. Kevin McCarthy,
          Minority Leader, House of Representatives,
          Washington, DC.
          Hon. Charles Schumer,
          Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
          Washington, DC.
          Hon. Mitch McConnell,
          Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
          Washington, DC.
            Dear Speaker Pelosi, Minority Leader McCarthy, Majority 
          Leader Schumer, and Minority Leader McConnell: As leaders of 
          faith organizations, social welfare organizations, and 
          others, we consider it to be an integral part of our missions 
          to ensure families and communities have all the resources 
          they need to be fully flourishing and contributing members of 
          society.
            There is no argument that the married family is the 
          necessary building block for healthy children, communities, 
          and a free people. However, marriage rates are at an all-time 
          low while fertility rates continue to decline. For too long, 
          we have presumed the family would always be there to 
          strengthen society while spending little effort to support 
          its health. If we do not take concrete steps to strengthen 
          the family, we'll have no chance of addressing the social 
          problems most on Americans' minds--educational failure, 
          poverty, and crime.
            That is why there is broad agreement that the Child Tax 
          Credit (CTC) needs to be strengthened. We believe there is an 
          urgent need for legislation that supports children and 
          families. Many of us had called for increasing the CTC to 
          $3,000 per child when Congress was debating the Tax Cuts and 
          Jobs Act of 2017 and we remain committed to that goal today. 
          It is our hope that this Congress will prioritize an expanded 
          Child Tax Credit in a year-end tax policy for today's 
          families and future families in development.
            Congress must squarely face the increasing cost of 
          parenthood and the declining fertility rates these costs 
          engender. Our goal must be to advance policies that make 
          having children more affordable and achievable. While there 
          are many reforms that would either remove barriers to family 
          formation or help support struggling families, none is more 
          important than increasing the CTC to $3,000 per child.
            Thank you for your consideration of our views and this 
          request.
                Sincerely,
            Newt Gingrich, Former Speaker, U.S. House of 
          Representatives; Mike Huckabee, Former Governor of Arkansas; 
          Rick Santorum, Former U.S. Senator; Timothy R. Head, 
          Executive Director, Faith & Freedom Coalition; Michele 
          Bachmann, Dean of the Robertson School of Government at 
          Regent University; Mark Rodgers, Principal, The Clapham 
          Group; Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council; 
          Penny Y. Nance, CEO & President, Concerned Women for America 
          LAC; Terry Schilling, President, American Principles Project; 
          Ryan T. Anderson, Ph.D., President, The Ethics and Public 
          Policy Center; Robert P. George, JD, DPhil, DCL, DLitt, 
          McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton Universities; 
          Brad Wilcox, Future of Freedom Fellow, Institute for Family 
          Studies; Ramesh Ponnuru, American Enterprise Institute; 
          Kristan Hawkins, President, Students for Life Action; Yuval 
          Levin, Director of Social, Cultural and Constitutional 
          Studies, American Enterprise Institute; Walter Kim, 
          President, National Association of Evangelicals; Rusty R. 
          Reno, Editor, First Things; Bishop Dean Nelson, Chairman, 
          Douglass Leadership Institute; Patrick T. Brown, Fellow, The 
          Ethics and Public Policy Center; Nadine Maenza, Senior 
          Advisor, Patriot Voices; Carlos Duran, National Hispanic 
          Pastors Alliance; Kathyrn Jean Lopez, National Review 
          Institute; Samuel Rodriguez, National Hispanic Christian 
          Leadership Conference; Rev. Dr. David Gray, Senior Fellow, 
          Niskanen Center; Carlos Campo, Ph.D., President, Ashland 
          University and Theological Seminary; Chris Bullivant, 
          Executive Director, Social Capital Campaign; Michael Hernon, 
          The Messy Family Project.
                                       ____
     
       Mr. BROWN. I ask unanimous consent that a letter written by the U.S. 
     Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catholic Charities USA, and the Society 
     of Saint Vincent de Paul be printed in the Record.
       There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
     the Record, as follows:
              Catholic Charities USA, Committee on Domestic Justice and 
                Human Development,
                                                     December 14, 2022.
            Dear Senator/Representative: On behalf of the Committee on 
          Domestic Justice and Human Development of the United States 
          Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), Catholic Charities 
          USA (CCUSA), and the United States Society of St. Vincent de 
          Paul (SVdP USA), we write to you to renew our call to 
          Congress to work in a bipartisan fashion to pass a 
          strengthened Child Tax Credit before the end of the year.
            The Child Tax Credit is a powerful anti-poverty, pro-family 
          program that we have long supported and asked Congress to 
          strengthen. To this effect, we ask you to pass, by the end of 
          this year, an expanded Child Tax Credit that is as refundable 
          as possible, for as many kids as possible, for as many years 
          as possible, and remains available to mixed-status families. 
          The most economically vulnerable children ought to receive 
          the full value of the Child Tax Credit. A strengthened Child 
          Tax Credit that benefits the poorest children should be a 
          priority in any upcoming tax policy package.
            The bishops have long stated that we must confront poverty 
          with a sense of urgency. As the USCCB wrote in the pastoral 
          document Economic Justice for All ``Dealing with poverty is 
          not a luxury to which our nation can attend when it finds the 
          time and resources. Rather, it is a moral imperative of the 
          highest priority.'' The Child Tax Credit expansion of 2021 
          demonstrated that a fully refundable Child Tax Credit is a 
          highly effective mechanism to reduce child poverty. The 
          version of the Child Tax Credit passed in the American Rescue 
          Plan lifted 2.1 million children out of poverty in 2021 and 
          helped to reduce child poverty to its lowest rate on record. 
          Without the expanded and fully refundable Child Tax Credit 
          this year, data have shown a spike in child poverty. An 
          expanded and fully refundable child tax credit is a proven 
          tool to support women and families and keep millions of 
          children out of poverty. We implore Congress to prioritize 
          passage of a substantially improved Child Tax Credit by the 
          end of the year.
            We know members of both parties share our commitment to 
          prioritizing the well-being of women, children, and families, 
          especially those who are struggling. As we approach the end 
          of this Congress, we urge you to work in a bipartisan fashion 
          to pass an improved Child Tax Credit that is as refundable as 
          possible, for as many children as possible, for as many years 
          as possible.
                Sincerely,
                                               Most Rev. Borys Gudziak,
          Archbishop of Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia, 
           U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Chairman, Committee on 
                                Domestic Justice and Human Development.
                                       Sister Donna Markham, OP, Ph.D.,
                               President & CEO, Catholic Charities USA.
                                                      Ralph Middlecamp,
             National President, National Council of the United States 
                                        Society of St. Vincent de Paul.
     
       Mr. BROWN. I would like to emphasize that the people who sign these 
     letters aren't generally supporting people like me in the Senate. They 
     are clearly conservatives.
       Let me just share, again, some names of people who signed this 
     letter. I mentioned Newt Gingrich, former Republican Speaker of the 
     House; Mike Huckabee, former Governor of Arkansas; Rick Santorum, 
     former U.S. Senator; Timothy Head, Executive Director Faith and Freedom 
     Coalition; Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council--
     nobody mistakes him for a liberal Democratic--Robert George, McCormick 
     Professor of Jurisprudence, Princeton University, one of the real deep 
     reflective thinkers in the conservative biosphere; Ramesh Ponnuru of 
     the American Enterprise Institute; Yuval Levin, director of social, 
     cultural, and constitutional studies at the American Enterprise 
     Institute; Walter Kim, president of the National Association of 
     Evangelicals; Kathryn Jean Lopez, I mentioned, National Review 
     Institute.
     
       I could go on and on--people of faith on the conservative side of 
     politics who all say we should pass the child tax credit.
       Again, this letter says: The child tax credit is a powerful, anti-
     poverty, pro-family program we have long supported and ask Congress to 
     strengthen.
       I know I went back and pointed down the hall. I really can't find 
     very many people who oppose the child tax credit. It has got 80, 90 
     percent support at home. Ninety percent of kids in my State--the 
     families of 90 percent of kids benefit from the child tax credit. All 
     of us have gotten stories, gotten letters, gotten calls from 
     constituents.
     
     [[Page S9752]]
     
       When we are walking down the street, people come up and say: You 
     know, that $300, that $550 a month--I have an 8-year-old and a 5-year-
     old. One is $300 for the one, $250 for the other. Month after month, it 
     lifted us out of poverty. It has made a difference. My daughter can go 
     to summer camp. I can buy school clothes. We are not embarrassed when 
     she goes back to school in September in old, torn--I mean, all of the 
     kinds of things that make children's lives a little better and families 
     a little happier, we can do. But, again, the only people standing in 
     the way of this are sitting over here in this body and sitting down the 
     hall. The voters, the thinkers, the political conservative thinkers 
     from those letters, religious leaders, people of faith--all support 
     this idea. The benefits of CTC are clear.
       Everyone willing to see what is right before them understands it is 
     far more than about politics. It is about kids. It is about families. 
     It is about ensuring that the hard work that families do raising 
     children, working part time--some of them not making much money at all.
       I am just so disappointed we can't get this done. But I know the 
     Senator from Georgia and I know I won't give up. We are going to keep 
     fighting for this. If we can't get it tonight, we will work on it next 
     year.
     
     
            Brycen Gray and Ben Price COVID-19 Cognitive Research Act
     
       Mr. President, before I conclude I would like to mention one other 
     piece of legislation I have been working on with my colleague Senator 
     Duckworth, a Democrat from Illinois, and Senator Cassidy, a Republican 
     from Louisiana, that we should pass without delay.
       The Brycen Gray and Ben Price COVID-19 Cognitive Research Act, named 
     after one of my constituents, Brycen Gray, and one of Senator 
     Duckworth's constituents, Ben Price, would do two things. First, it 
     would codify important research NIH is already doing to further our 
     understanding of COVID-19, including the neurological effects of the 
     virus. Second, it would require the National Academies of Science, 
     Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study and issue a report on the 
     disruption of cognitive processes associated with COVID-19.
       I would like to thank Senator Murray, a Democrat from Washington, and 
     Senator Burr, a Republican from North Carolina, for their work to 
     negotiate the text of the legislation and for their support of the 
     bill.
       I would like to thank my colleague, retiring Representative Gonzalez, 
     a Republican from northern Ohio, not far from where I live, who 
     successfully got this legislation through the House with a strong 
     bipartisan vote, 350 to 69.
       This bill would not authorize additional funding. It would not cost 
     taxpayers. It would mean the world to the Gray and Price families and 
     to all those struggling with cognitive effects from COVID-19.
       I urge Senators with holds on this bill to lift those holds--the 
     couple of Senators who are standing in the way for reasons I am not 
     really clear about--so we can pass it out of the Senate and get it to 
     the President's desk before the end of the year. These families need 
     our support. These families deserve our support.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
     
     
                              Afghan Adjustment Act
     
       Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I have come to the floor this evening 
     with Senator Moran of Kansas to take a moment, as I did last night and 
     as our colleagues Senator Lindsey Graham and Senator Coons did earlier 
     this evening, to emphasize the importance of including the Afghan 
     Adjustment Act in either the end-of-the-year spending bill or to pass 
     it on its own but to get it done as soon as possible.
       Why? Well, more than 70,000 Afghans who sought refuge in our country 
     are currently in limbo, including so many who risked their own lives 
     and their own family's safety to protect our servicemembers.
       Why do we know this? Because nearly half of them have been vouched 
     for by our own military. Because they come up to us at events with 
     members of the U.S. military. And I know every Member here has had this 
     experience where our own veterans--and I am so pleased that Senator 
     Moran, who is the ranking member on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, 
     has joined us on this bill after making some very important changes to 
     the bill to make sure the vetting process was as thorough as possible. 
     We are also joined on this vote, by the way, by Senator Wicker, the 
     incoming ranking member of the Armed Services Committee; by Senator 
     Graham, who is the lead Republican with me--who is the lead Republican 
     on this bill, a longtime member of the military himself; by Senator 
     Coons, who has been such a leader in Foreign Relations; by Senator 
     Blumenthal, who also has a long history of working on veterans issues; 
     by Senator Murkowski, who was an earlier supporter of this bill; by 
     Senator Blunt; by Senator Shaheen, who has long led efforts on these 
     issues in the Foreign Relations Committee; and by Senator Leahy. There 
     are many other Senators who are waiting to get on as cosponsors of this 
     bill, and there are many more than that who would vote to support it.
       Why? Well, after their sacrifice and after helping them to relocate 
     in the United States, it is our responsibility to provide these Afghan 
     refugees with the assurance that they can stay here and rebuild their 
     lives. My colleagues, they are already here. They are living in towns 
     and cities across this country, and they simply need to know their 
     status. They are in limbo. It makes it very difficult to start lives in 
     this country.
       Why am I involved in this issue? Well, one, like everyone else, I met 
     some of these brave refugees who had stood with our military. One was 
     an interpreter, and another worked on many other intelligence issues 
     with them. Also, in my home State, they are the second biggest 
     population among refugees from way back after the Vietnam war.
       Vietnamese Hmong came to this country and started a new life. Now 
     they are doctors. Their kids and their grandkids and their great-
     grandkids are police officers. And with their sacrifice, they rebuilt 
     their lives in the United States of America.
       This bill is about showing that our country is committed to standing 
     with people who stood with us. That is why today we filed an amendment 
     with Senators Graham, Coons, Moran, Blumenthal, supported by many 
     others whom I have mentioned, to include this important legislation in 
     the end-of-the-year spending bill, and I urge my colleagues to support 
     it.
       To be clear, this legislation doesn't just make this process make 
     sense; it also makes it more thorough. Our bill requires applicants to 
     go through vetting that is just as rigorous as the vetting they would 
     have gone through if they came to the United States during a regular 
     refugee process--a standard that eight former Trump and George W. Bush 
     administration national security officials called the ``gold standard'' 
     of vetting.
       The other cosponsors and I have worked with our Republican 
     colleagues, including Senator Moran, who is here on the floor today, to 
     respond to every issue identified by the Department of Defense and 
     Department of Homeland Security in their inspectors general reports, 
     which were very helpful for us in crafting this bill.
       Our updated bill requires the Departments of Homeland Security and 
     Defense to consult with Congress before setting the vetting 
     requirements. It also directs the Department of State and other Federal 
     Agencies to work together to come up with a strategy for future 
     evacuations to make sure that we have plans in place to vet and 
     relocate those allies who serve alongside our troops.
       This bill is supported by more than 40 organizations, including the 
     VFW. The Veterans of Foreign Wars support this bill. They have their 
     members on the Hill in their own humble ways lobbying for this bill. 
     They are not paid lobbyists; they are veteran civilian lobbyists out 
     there trying to help us.
       The American Legion supports this bill. Admirals Mike Mullen, William 
     McRaven, James Stavridis, and Generals Richard Myers, Joseph Dunford, 
     and Stan McChrystal support this bill.
       I am very, very focused on this bill because I think about people in 
     other countries that stand with our soldiers. It happens all the time. 
     If this is what we do when they come to our country and we don't have 
     their backs, what
     
     [[Page S9753]]
     
     message are we sending to people in the rest of the world who stand 
     with our soldiers, who protect them, who provide security for their 
     families, who are there to translate and to interpret for them, who 
     become their friends and close confidants? What message do we send if 
     we just allow them to be in this country in limbo with no certain 
     status ahead? We know what they will become when they stay here and 
     when they get their green card and they can work. They have shown their 
     work ethic, and they will have kids and grandkids who will go on, just 
     as the Hmong and Vietnamese did, to become those teachers and police 
     officers and farmers and bakers and nurses and doctors and builders and 
     inventors. We know what they will do but not if we don't give them that 
     chance, not if we don't have their backs like they had ours.
       I am so proud to be joined by Senator Moran here on the floor and of 
     his work on behalf of our veterans, his work with Senator Tester and 
     the Veterans' Affairs Committee.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
       Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, thank you, and I thank the Congresswoman--
     excuse me--the Senator. I am headed to the House this evening, and I 
     have served in the House.
       I join my colleague in efforts to see that this legislation, the 
     Afghan Adjustment Act, is advanced, that it moves forward.
       The chaotic evacuation from Kabul stranded thousands of Afghan allies 
     behind enemy lines. For two decades, countless Afghans stood by our 
     servicemembers and risked their lives and their families' lives to 
     support our troops in Afghanistan.
       Veterans of the Afghan war are calling for Congress to provide safety 
     and certainty for their allies and friends who assisted them in battle. 
     This includes the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Veterans of 
     Foreign Wars, the American Legion, and many others.
       The Afghan Adjustment Act will keep our promise to those who risked 
     their lives for America while also protecting our national security.
       A veteran from Kansas, Slate Deister from Leavenworth, stated the 
     following in support of the bill:
     
            This is a critical piece of legislation that supports our 
          nation's veterans and warfighters by ensuring that we honor 
          our allies during America's longest war. If Congress does not 
          act to support its allies by passing the Afghan Adjustment 
          Act, potential allies in future combat zones are going to be 
          less likely to support the U.S. mission after seeing our 
          Afghan partners abandoned.
     
       At the time in which the individuals--a number were being evacuated, 
     but many left behind. Our offices, my staff and I, received over 1,000 
     inquiries from Kansas. ``Inquiries'' really isn't the right word. 
     ``Pleas''--pleas for help.
       Over 1,000 Kansans related to us the challenges that their friends, 
     their supporters, their comrades faced as a result of being left behind 
     in Afghanistan in those frightful 2, 3, 4 weeks in which so much 
     uncertainty and our ability to evacuate was so lacking.
       Over 1,000 Kansans asked for my help. And while we were successful on 
     some occasions, so many were left behind in such tragic circumstances 
     and with such emotional appeals, emotional results from those who 
     wanted to make certain that those who helped save their lives, they 
     helped save theirs.
       My hometown pastor's daughter was a missionary--she and her husband--
     in Afghanistan. Their plea to me was: Please help get Christians out of 
     Afghanistan because we know--we know--they will be murdered if left 
     behind.
       We must answer these calls and establish a pathway for our Afghan 
     partners to begin a new life in safety.
       We worked--and Senator Klobuchar mentioned this--we worked to 
     ensure--before we sponsored this legislation, we worked to ensure--and 
     we had tremendous help and cooperation from the original sponsors, that 
     we wanted to ensure this legislation protects our national security.
       I was pleased to work with Senator Klobuchar and others to bolster 
     the vetting process for newly arriving Afghans.
       The updates outline the specific requirements, including mandatory 
     in-person interviews for all applicants and Agency briefings to 
     Congress on proposed vetting procedures prior--prior--to implementation 
     of the vetting process.
       It also mandates that the State Department develop a contingency plan 
     for future emergency evacuations, including standard practices for 
     screening and vetting foreign nationals to be relocated to the United 
     States.
       I urge my colleagues--I thank my colleagues who are sponsors and 
     advocates for this bill. I thank Senator Klobuchar for the invitation 
     to join her on the Senate floor this evening, and I urge our colleagues 
     to support this bipartisan effort to help those who helped us.
       I yield the floor.
       The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority whip.
     
                               ____________________