[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 15, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3698-S3705]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

  PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, 
  UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE 
  TREASURY RELATING TO ``CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY 
                                FUNDS''

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume legislative session and proceed to the consideration of S.J. 
Res. 57, which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (S.J. Res. 57) providing for 
     congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 
     States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of the 
     Treasury relating to ``Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal 
     Recovery Funds''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.


                       Remembering Margaret Miner

  Mr. MURPHY. Madam President, I come to the floor this afternoon to 
talk about a great friend of mine, Margaret Miner.
  My friend Margaret Miner died last week. I am really sad about it. 
Her family and her friends are really sad about it because she was a 
great friend, she was warm, and she was generous, because she was 
funny, she was kind, because she made a lot of other people's lives 
better.
  But I am also sad because Margaret was one of a kind. She was a true 
Renaissance woman. She was a polymath. She was voracious about intaking 
the world and about giving back to it.
  I have never met anybody like her. I will never meet anybody like her 
again. I will never see a partnership like the one that she had with 
her late husband Hugh Rawson. Her legacy lives on, but there is just no 
doubt that the mold was broken in two when they made Margaret Miner.
  She was born in New York City in 1938. Her parents--Tony and 
Francis--were in show business, which kind of makes sense if you knew 
her but kind of doesn't.
  In 1984, she moved from Brooklyn to Roxbury, CT--Roxbury is a 
smalltown, quintessential New England village in Northwest 
Connecticut--and there she became a fixture in the community. She began 
her life's work of fighting to protect the natural beauty of this State 
that she called home for the next 40 years.
  I first met Margaret as soon as I graduated college. So I went to 
work for a long-shot congressional candidate who happened to be 
personal friends with Margaret and Hugh.
  And Margaret and Hugh were also, at the time, pretty adept local 
political activists in Litchfield County. There were no two people who 
worked harder for that long-shot candidate, their friend, than Margaret 
and Hugh. They raised money. They knocked on doors. They put up lawn 
signs--whatever their friend needed, whatever their friend's 22-year-
old campaign manager needed. She and Hugh were selfless. I saw that up 
close. I saw what a good friend Margaret could be.
  Then, years later, when I was elected to the State legislature, I got 
to know Margaret as an advocate. She was in those legislative halls in 
Hartford, CT, nearly every single day, fighting for her cause, the 
cause of clean water and a healthy environment.
  She single-handedly made her organization, Rivers Alliance, which she 
led for 18 years, a force to be reckoned with in Hartford. Under her 
leadership, Rivers Alliance became a force in Connecticut politics.
  Her team fought for and successfully helped to pass State laws to 
create a statewide water plan to protect streamflow in water courses, 
to ban the water contaminant MTBE in gasoline, to protect funding for 
the Connecticut Council on Environmental Quality, and to restore and 
protect State funding for the U.S. Geological Survey. That is just the 
tip of the iceberg in terms of what Margaret did, in terms of what 
Margaret and the people she mentored produced in Hartford. But her work 
was always about something bigger than herself or even her 
organization, Rivers Alliance.
  She was really dedicated to building a movement around water quality, 
around water health, around the environment. She helped teach people 
all across the State how to advocate for themselves, how to advocate 
for the causes that they mutually cared about.
  She was an organizer of people at heart, encouraging countless 
individuals all around the State and all around the country to join the 
causes that she cared about. And she was just good at it. There were 
fewer people who were more inspiring or convincing than Margaret was.
  Now, Margaret wasn't a big, boisterous, loud personality, but she was 
sincere; she was genuine; and she never ever gave up. Her persistence 
was her calling card.
  Her unrelenting advocacy did not go unrecognized or unnoticed. She 
received countless awards for her work during her lifetime. She 
received the first Champion of Water Award from the Connecticut Water 
Policy Council. She received the Clyde O. Fisher Award for 
environmental achievement from the Connecticut Bar Association.
  She was the first recipient of the Dr. Marc J. Taylor Environmental 
Stewardship Award, the Rockfall Foundation's Tom ODell Distinguished 
Service Award. In 2016, I nominated her for the EPA's prestigious 
Lifetime Merit Award.
  People knew what she had done in Connecticut, and so, good for 
Connecticut that we didn't have to wait for Margaret's passing before 
singling her out for her seminal achievements in the area of 
environmental protection.
  But what made Margaret so compelling, what made Margaret so amazing 
was that in addition to being a great friend, in addition to leading 
one of the State's preeminent environmental organizations, she was 
incredibly accomplished in so many other fields.
  The rest of her life, when you say it out loud, in addition to all of 
that achievement, it kind of almost sounds implausible.
  For instance, in her free time, Margaret was a nationally known and 
celebrated author, not about the environment, but about the history of 
quotable people. She was the coauthor of five dictionaries of 
quotations, including the ``Oxford Dictionary of American Quotations'' 
with her husband Hugh. In her spare time, she wrote five anthologies of 
quotations--five books.

[[Page S3699]]

  She helped found an organization called Our Towns for Sar-E-Pol, a 
humanitarian effort through the not-for-profit Save the Children to 
help women and children in Sar-E-Pol, Afghanistan. She was an 
international philanthropist and an author and environmental advocate.
  She wrote a Consumer Reports book on allergies. I didn't even know 
that until I read the story of Margaret's life. She was an active 
member of the Roxbury Democratic Town Committee, and just before she 
passed at 86 years old, she was still serving on the local Zoning Board 
of Appeals.
  She was learning Spanish in her eighties, attending two Spanish 
classes weekly. And as often as she could, she was playing poker, 
fleecing her friends of their money whenever possible.
  Margaret Miner was an original. As her friend, I will remember her 
wit, her political savvy, her boundless heart, and on a personal note, 
I will just say I wouldn't be here if not for Margaret--and for 
Margaret and Hugh.
  When I decided to run for Congress 10 years after first meeting 
Margaret, she was, not surprisingly, one of my first calls. I planned 
the early stages of my first campaign at Margaret and Hugh's kitchen 
table in their cute house in Roxbury, CT. That is how important she was 
to me. And I am one of hundreds in Connecticut who can say Margaret 
Miner was one of the most important people in my life.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.


                      Rural Development and Energy

  Mr. WELCH. Madam President, I have good news. Senator Stabenow, 
leader, chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, has presented a bill 
that will allow us to consider an ag bill. And we have got work to do.
  But as we know, for more than 90 years, the U.S. Congress--we have 
always worked together on this to advance the farm bill. And that is 
critical to rural America, and it is critical to all of America. It is 
about our agricultural and food policy and our environment. It reaches 
far beyond farms and fields and into the lives of every American 
throughout our country.
  The farm bill, as you know, shapes the future of ag policy for every 
5 years. It is always tough to get from here to there, so we have much 
more work to do. But it has been something that is essential to give 
our farmers the support they need. And it is also the most important 
legislation that we take up to support rural America. The small towns 
across our entire country that sustain our agricultural sector do so 
much for our economy and so much for sustaining important personal and 
patriotic values.
  Vermont is a very proud rural State, and agriculture is a keystone of 
our culture as well as economy. Vermont's farmers, our dairies, our 
sugarmakers have shaped our small towns in rural Vermont for 
generations. We want to keep that going.
  We have worked to keep that culture of the small, family-sized farms 
in our State, independent farmers, with most of our farms below a 
couple of hundred acres and town populations less than 2,500 people.
  Vermont is by far not unique in this regard. America will not thrive 
if our rural communities aren't thriving. That is a commitment all of 
us have to make, and it is why as the chair of the Agriculture 
Committee's Subcommittee on Rural Development and Energy, I am urging 
my colleagues to support and work with us to improve the Rural 
Prosperity and Food Security Act. It helps our farmers keep farming. It 
keeps our families fed, something very important to our farmers, and it 
keeps rural communities strong.
  The Senate Agriculture Committee, under Chair Stabenow's outstanding 
leadership, recently unveiled the farm bill. Our bill has over 100 
bipartisan provisions and a host of policies that many of my colleagues 
across the caucus and across the aisle support. It will strengthen 
rural America in many ways.
  And by the way, Chair Stabenow included 100 bipartisan provisions, 
but she is totally open to more bipartisan provisions. Anything we can 
do to improve this with suggestions from both sides of the aisle, she 
and we want to do.
  The farm bill, as I mentioned, supports farms, families, and rural 
farming. It is going to improve the quality of life for families in 
Vermont and America, with baseline funding--that is important, as we 
know--for the first time ever, to make improvements in rural 
healthcare. Our rural hospitals are hanging on by their fingernails, 
whether it is Kansas or Vermont or Idaho.
  It is going to improve childcare availability, which is so essential 
to all families across the country but especially in rural America. And 
it is going to help our Tribes continue to have access to USDA 
programs.
  The Senate farm bill will help us more efficiently build out high-
speed rural broadband. I want to acknowledge the work on both sides of 
the aisle to build out broadband, but we have got to maintain that--
just like we built out electricity in the thirties--so that rural 
America is fully a part of the modern economy.
  This bill will invest in and it will modernize wastewater and public 
water systems and those are under enormous stress and our local 
communities don't have the tax base to do all that needs to be done. 
There needs to be some recognition on the part of the Federal 
Government, and in the farm bill, we make that recognition.
  It will help modernize our wastewater and public water systems and 
help remove in rural communities those toxic ``forever chemicals'' like 
PFAS.
  The bill will also support timber innovation and markets, including 
American wood products. The Senate farm bill focuses, too, on cutting 
energy costs for homeowners in rural America, for farms, and for small 
businesses, and helps folks who want to make that transition to 
renewable energy so they have an affordable way to do it.
  It will strengthen our energy security and support energy innovation 
in the field of bio-based chemicals and products.
  The Senate farm bill does something that I think all of our bills 
should do, invest in the middle class--in middle-class rural jobs, by 
supporting manufacturing, entrepreneurship, small businesses, and the 
rural cooperatives that have been so essential to the well-being of so 
many of our communities.
  And finally, it does all this while supporting and strengthening 
local and regional food systems. Nothing excites people in a community 
more than a farmer's market. They are excited that they are getting 
local food. They know that it is healthy. They know they are supporting 
their farmers. And all of us who are not farmers appreciate the role 
that our farmers in our communities play as custodians of the 
landscape.
  In the Rural Development and Energy titles of the bill alone, there 
is a lot to celebrate, and I am also pleased that the bill includes 
many of the priorities that I and others have championed in my role as 
the chair of the Subcommittee on Rural Development and Energy.
  This bill includes some proposals we made there. The bipartisan 
ReConnecting Rural America Act. That would strengthen USDA's ReConnect 
Loan and Grant Program and in so doing, reduce redtape and speed 
broadband development and deployment in rural America.
  It strengthens critical rural development programs like the Rural 
Innovation Stronger Economy Program, REAP Zones, and rural development 
loans and grants. Bottom line, that helps with financing of local 
businesses in our rural communities.
  One other provision is a bipartisan bill that I have sponsored with 
others, the USDA's Rural Energy Savings Program. It provides no-
interest loans to rural utilities. They have been a backbone for those 
communities to access cost-effective energy upgrades for homes and 
businesses. That lowers costs and accelerates sustainability. With 
funds from this program, rural utilities can finance projects to 
electrify household heating and cooling, increase energy efficiency, 
and assist in that transition to renewable energy.

  Another provision that really is being taken up by many Americans is 
the access to heat pumps, and the provision is the Heat Pump Energy 
Assistance and Training Act, which would create a program within USDA 
to help deploy heat pumps in rural communities across the country.
  I have to tell you, folks in Vermont, when they can get a heat pump, 
it works out on the numbers, and they

[[Page S3700]]

save money, and they stay cozy and warm in our cold winters, they like 
that. Let's have more of it.
  By the way, it helps with cooling in Texas as well.
  Now, these are just a handful of the provisions in the Rural 
Prosperity and Food Security Act that are helping our rural 
communities. So we want to keep working hard to support our farms and 
what they do, to shore up and expand the nutrition programs that so 
many families and seniors depend on.
  And, by the way, you know, the economy is doing better than ever in 
some ways. The stock market is up. But we have, like, 1 in 12 Americans 
who are food insecure, and a lot of those are folks who have jobs and 
are working really hard. So we have got to maintain our commitment to 
the nutrition and well-being of our citizens, particularly our 
children.
  Over the past hundred years, we have made a commitment to America's 
farmers and our farm communities. We want to keep that up. But the 
truth also is that, for too many years, Congress has not focused as 
much, in my view, as it should on our family and small farms that we 
have in Vermont and so many other States throughout our country. We 
have to make it possible for them to do the local agriculture that is 
so essential to the strength of local communities.
  We are working to support and deliver for some of those small farmers 
that we have in Vermont, and I will mention a few whose farms I have 
visited. And, by the way, I don't know anybody who works harder than a 
farmer. The Corse family, Leon Corse and his daughter Abbie, have the 
Corse Farm Dairy, and I visited there in my first week as a Senator. 
Their family has been farming in Whitingham, VT, for over 155 years. We 
want to keep them going for another century.
  The Choiniere Family Farm, a diversified organic dairy farm at the 
other end of the State up in Highgate Center; Jon Wagner and Karin 
Bellemare, owners of Bear Roots Farm and Roots Farm Market in 
Middlesex, in the center of our State; Justin Rich of Burnt Rock Farm, 
which is an organic produce farm in Huntington--they are doing a lot 
for us in Vermont and for those communities.
  Before I close, I want to thank Chairwoman Stabenow and her Senate 
Agriculture Committee staff for the work on the Rural Prosperity and 
Food Security Act. I also want to acknowledge what a joy it is for me 
to work with Senator Boozman, who was a colleague of mine in the House 
and is doing a great job over here in the Senate.
  This bill, in any year, is complicated--huge. And I am thankful for 
the many, many hours that staff and colleagues have invested in this 
bill and in our farming communities, and we are ready to put in more 
hours to make this bill better. We have got to make it pass.
  For the sake of communities from Vermont to California, we must pass 
this 5-year farm bill to help America's farms and rural communities. 
Let's pass the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act and keep our 
farmers farming, keep our families fed, and keep our rural communities 
strong.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.


                  National Peace Officers Memorial Day

  Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, this is National Police Week, and it is 
great to be joined by so many colleagues to show our respect and 
admiration for America's law enforcement community. Today is National 
Peace Officers Memorial Day, a time to pay tribute to law enforcement 
officials who made the ultimate sacrifice. These men and women gave 
their lives to their communities, to their State, and to their country; 
and we thank them and their families for their sacrifice.
  As we mourn the loss of so many of these heroes, this week is also a 
time to honor and thank officers who continue to keep us safe. Former 
Dallas Police Chief David Brown once said, ``We ask law enforcement to 
do too much in this country,'' and I agree. Whether it is helping 
someone experiencing a mental health crisis, a drug overdose, a medical 
emergency, or as a victim of crime, America's police officials 
constantly and consistently go above and beyond the call of duty. Their 
jobs require tremendous hours and tremendous amounts of courage and 
sacrifice, not just from the officer who wears the uniform but from 
their families as well. And I am grateful to those who selflessly serve 
their communities every day.
  The brave men and women in law enforcement deserve our appreciation. 
But more than that, they deserve our support. They deserve the 
resources, the training, the protection needed to do their jobs 
effectively. To show our support for these public servants who have 
dedicated their lives to protecting our communities, Congress should 
pass the Back the Blue Act. This legislation adds stiff mandatory 
penalties and makes it a Federal crime to kill or attempt to kill a law 
enforcement officer or a Federal judge or a federally funded public 
safety official. It makes it a Federal crime to assault a law 
enforcement officer.
  This legislation is needed because these men and women put themselves 
in harm's way every day to keep our communities safe, and we must send 
a strong message that violence directed at them will never be 
tolerated.
  The Back the Blue Act sends a strong message to the more than 800,000 
law enforcement officers serving our country that they are supported, 
and I hope Congress will move forward to advance this legislation.
  Today and every day, I am grateful for the dedicated police officers, 
sheriffs, constables, Border Patrol agents, and other law enforcement 
officials of all types who keep Texas safe. Like all my colleagues in 
Congress, I am thankful for the men and women of the Capitol police who 
safeguard this building and the Members of Congress, our staff, 
journalists, and the many visitors who walk these halls on a daily 
basis.
  There is nothing we can do to adequately thank these heroes for their 
sacrifices, but there is a lot we can do to affirm that support. My 
colleagues and I have introduced bills to boost officer recruiting and 
retention, improve training, and give law enforcement the resources 
they need to do their job safely and effectively. I hope we can advance 
these bills as soon as possible to show our appreciation for these 
heroes in blue.
  On behalf of the State of Texas, I want to thank all of those who 
serve our communities and protect them and keep them safe.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.
  Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I rise today to honor the brave men and 
women in North Carolina and across the Nation who serve in law 
enforcement. This is an emotional week for the law enforcement 
community as thousands of officers and their families come to our 
Nation's capital for National Police Week. They are paying tribute to 
brave officers who were killed in the line of duty while protecting our 
communities.
  Unfortunately, North Carolina is all too familiar with law 
enforcement officers making the ultimate sacrifice. I want to take a 
moment to recognize some of the law enforcement officers who were 
killed in the line of duty since last year's police week and memorial.
  Last September, Forsyth County Sheriff's Deputy Auston Reudelhuber 
was killed in a head-on collision while on patrol. He is survived by 
his wife and two daughters.
  Last December, we lost Sergeant Russell Jones of the Pamlico County 
Sheriff's Office. He was attempting to halt an altercation at the 
Pamlico County Detention Center, and during the encounter with an 
inmate, Sergeant Jones was punched in the face, leading him to collapse 
minutes later and die. Sergeant Jones served with the Pamlico County 
Sheriff's Office for 4 years. He is survived by his mother and two 
sisters.
  In December of last year, we lost Philip Dale Nix of the Greensboro 
Police Department. He was a sergeant in the police department. Sergeant 
Nix was off duty at a local gas station when he observed three 
individuals stealing alcohol. When he tried to intervene, they shot him 
and killed him on sight. Sergeant Nix worked for the Greensboro Police 
Department for more than 22 years. He is survived by his wife and son.
  Just a few weeks ago, on April 29, a task force of Federal, State, 
and local

[[Page S3701]]

law enforcement led by the U.S. Marshals Service attempted to serve an 
arrest warrant for a fugitive at a residence in Charlotte. Instead of 
surrendering, the fugitive shot at them; and during an hourslong 
standoff, four members of the task force were killed. It is one of the 
deadliest assaults on law enforcement in this country in nearly a 
decade.
  Police officer Joshua Eyer served 6 years with the Charlotte 
Mecklenburg Police Department. He is survived by his wife and his 3-
year-old son.
  Sam Poloche and Alden Elliott were both 14-year veterans of the North 
Carolina Department of Adult Correction. Poloche is survived by his 
wife and two sons--one graduating from college, another from high 
school in a few weeks. Elliott is survived by his wife and son.
  U.S. Marshal Deputy Thomas Weeks, Jr., was a 13-year veteran of the 
Marshals Service. He is survived by his wife and four children.
  Words alone cannot express the pain and loss each of these families 
has gone through. They lost the loving husband. They lost a parent. 
Their lives will never be the same. However, they are never going to be 
alone. Because in the wake of these tragic losses, we have seen 
communities unite and rally to support these families. In each 
instance, we witnessed an outpouring of love for the fallen officers 
and support for law enforcement.
  Congress should follow the example the communities have set. We can 
show our respect for law enforcement by taking the dangers and threats 
they face seriously, especially when they are deliberate, like the 
tragedy we witnessed in Charlotte last month.
  That is why I introduced and reintroduced the Protect and Serve Act 
this Congress. Most people would be surprised to learn that 
intentionally harming or attempting to harm a law enforcement officer 
in this country is not a Federal crime. This bipartisan language will 
change that. It sends a strong message to criminals that assaulting a 
law enforcement officer is inexcusable and will be met with the full 
weight of our Nation's criminal justice system.
  Law enforcement has our backs every single time they put on a uniform 
and go on patrol. The least that Congress can do is to signal to law 
enforcement that we have their backs, too, by passing the Protect and 
Serve Act. They need our support now more than ever.
  To the men and women in law enforcement in North Carolina and across 
this country, I want to say: Thank you for putting on the uniform every 
day to keep us safe. You deserve our gratitude.
  To the families of the fallen officers, please know that while you 
lost a loved one, your community lost a hero and we will never forget 
their service and their sacrifice. God bless them all; God bless their 
families; and God bless law enforcement across this great Nation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. MORAN. Madam President, this week, we remember--and I join my 
colleagues here on the Senate floor to do so publicly--we remember our 
law enforcement who have died in the line of duty. This week every 
year, we pay tribute to those who serve in the uniform and as a result 
of that service, come to a tragic death.
  I offer my condolences to the people of North Carolina, the families 
of the officers just described by the Senator from North Carolina.
  In my role as a Senator, I have chaired and have been the vice chair 
of the Appropriations subcommittee that funds our national law 
enforcement officers--the DEA, the ATF, the FBI, the U.S. Marshals. A 
deputy U.S. marshal was killed in North Carolina just recently.
  It is an honor, a privilege to be able to be associated with those 
who are willing to sacrifice so much for the benefit of all of us and 
particularly those in the communities in which they live. We honor that 
sacrifice, that dedication, that service to our communities. We know 
police officers put their lives at risk and their families know they 
put their lives at risk every day to protect our communities in our 
country.
  While this week is a time to remember those who have passed, it is 
also important for us to express gratitude to those who currently 
serve.
  During this week, we will memorialize 282--282--individual law 
enforcement officers, 282 heroes who during the last year gave their 
lives serving their community.
  One of those heroes was Kansas Officer Jonah Oswald. In August of 
last year, Officer Oswald was fatally shot while responding to another 
department, a neighboring law enforcement's request for help.
  Officer Oswald was just 29 years old, a husband, a father--father to 
two young boys. He had served for 4 years in the Fairway, KS, police 
department. Fairway is a small suburb of Kansas City; population, 
1,170. He knew the importance of serving his community. He knew his 
community.
  This morning, Ben Overesch spoke at the National Police Week memorial 
ceremony in Kansas, and he said this about Officer Oswald:

       Jonah understood the danger before him and without 
     hesitation he showed up, over and over again, to meet it. 
     Jonah policed with an enthusiasm that was hard to match. He 
     was always vigilant. He was always eager for opportunities to 
     help citizens of Kansas and Officers alike.
       He was employed by Fairway, but the citizens of Prairie 
     Village, Mission Hills, Westwood, Roeland Park, Mission, and 
     others around us were helped by Jonah more than they will 
     ever know.
       He was not so enthusiastic out of vanity, or want of glory, 
     or aggression. He believed in service, and in the nobility of 
     the profession. He believed in right and wrong. He was filled 
     with the hope that good will triumph over evil. We must 
     remember not only his sacrifice, but his example daily.

  Words spoken this morning in Topeka.
  Thank you, Officer Overesch, for those remarks, and thank you to 
Officer Oswald for your service.
  All too often, we forget about the many important roles that our law 
enforcement officials have within our communities. This extends beyond 
relationships between police officers and individual citizens. It is 
about relationships between law enforcement and key institutions in our 
communities--our churches, our hospitals, our schools, and our 
businesses.
  During this National Police Week and throughout the year, we must 
remember that law enforcement needs our support--and not just during 
tough times.
  It is our duty--really, we have the opportunity to be grateful, but 
it is our duty as citizens, as lawmakers, as Members of the Senate to 
support our officers, to provide them with resources and acknowledge 
the incredible sacrifice that is made every day.
  Now more than ever, it takes a special kind of person to be a law 
enforcement officer. Whether sheriff's deputies or detectives, local 
police, Tribal police, highway patrol officers, beat cops, Federal 
agents, the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, we hold up those who wear 
the badge. We honor them today, as we should every day.
  To them, we say: Our respect is for you. You represent the 
extraordinary examples of how we see America at its best.
  May God bless our law enforcement and their families. May they be 
safe from harm as they defend and protect the communities in which they 
serve and live.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Cortez Masto). The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. RICKETTS. Madam President, I join my colleagues in expressing my 
support and admiration for the women and men who put on the blue. 
Whether it is our southern border or our own backyards, these members 
of law enforcement are essential to protecting our safety and security. 
They are the guardians of our neighborhoods, protectors of our 
families. They take deadly drugs like fentanyl off of our streets.
  As we celebrate National Police Week, let's recognize the service of 
those among us and the jobs they do that require the utmost integrity, 
skill, and dedication.
  We must never forget the sacrifices that the members of law 
enforcement and their families make on our behalf. They work long hours 
in challenging conditions and dangerous areas to serve and protect us. 
Yet, despite the dangers they face, they remain steadfast in their 
commitment to our communities. They are the ``thin blue line'' that 
protects us while we sleep.
  In recent years, we have seen a disturbing trend of not just 
disrespect toward law enforcement but violence. It

[[Page S3702]]

is not just wrong, it is dangerous. It undermines the rule of law and 
threatens the safety and security of our communities.
  We must send a clear message that violence against the women and men 
in blue will not be tolerated. We must stand with them and support them 
in their vital mission in our communities.
  On Monday night, I had the opportunity to walk in a vigil, walk the 
beat, to honor the more than 149 members of law enforcement who have 
paid the ultimate sacrifice in my home State of Nebraska. Their names 
are reflected on the Nebraska Law Enforcement Memorial in Grand Island, 
NE, and they are remembered in the hearts of their fellow citizens 
today and throughout the year.
  We remember Ross Bartlett, who died last month after 30 years of 
service with the Ceresco Police Department.
  We remember Detective Kerrie Orozco, who was murdered in 2015--1 day 
before she was supposed to go on maternity leave.
  We remember Investigator Mario Herrera, who was killed trying to 
serve an arrest warrant.
  We remember all those who paid the ultimate sacrifice to keep us 
safe. They were mothers and fathers, sons and daughters. They were 
heroes, and their bravery is eternal.
  The women and men in blue are the backbone of our communities. We owe 
them a debt of gratitude that we can never repay, but we can show our 
appreciation for them, show our support for them.
  I am proud that in Nebraska, while other communities are trying to 
defund the police, we support the police. In Nebraska, we back the 
blue.
  When I was Governor, we had the largest package of pro-public safety 
and law enforcement legislation passed in years. We invested $47.7 
million in our Grand Island Law Enforcement Training Center to ensure 
that our law enforcement officers would get the highest level of 
training. We invested $16.9 million in our State Patrol Crime Lab to 
make sure we could solve crimes and give the victims of crime the 
justice they deserve.
  Instead of reducing penalties for violent crimes, my home city of 
Omaha, NE, has used community engagement, like Omaha 360, to be able to 
reduce homicides. The Omaha Police Department and the Omaha community 
have reduced homicides in each of the last 3 years. ABC News said that 
the Omaha Police Department could be a model for the rest the Nation.
  In addition, last year, Omaha police had a 100-percent clearance rate 
on homicides. There were 28 murders and 28 homicide cases cleared. When 
the national clearance rate is just over 50 percent, a 100-percent rate 
is truly remarkable.
  As usual, America can learn a lot from our proven solutions in 
Nebraska.
  The Federal Government must also back the blue. We need to secure our 
border and put an end to the scourge of drugs that are killing our 
young people here in America. We need to pass the Back the Blue Act to 
increase the penalties for criminals who target law enforcement 
officers. We need to provide new tools to officers to protect 
themselves. We need to block anti-cop, soft-on-crime policies that 
would hinder law enforcement's ability to do their jobs with 
excellence. I am committed to working with anyone who wants to make 
this happen.
  The women and men in blue have earned our respect and our gratitude--
not just during Police Week but all year round.
  Once again, thank you to the members of our law enforcement. Thank 
you to their families, who sacrifice alongside them. You are heroes, 
and we are forever in your debt. I am grateful for all that you have 
done for our communities, and I know, on behalf of all Nebraskans, we 
support law enforcement.
  God bless our law enforcement officers as they keep us safe. God 
bless the great State of Nebraska. And God bless our Nation.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I rise today to join my colleagues in 
honoring the brave law enforcement officials in North Dakota and across 
the country who work every day to keep our communities safe.
  As we mark National Police Week, we recognize the bravery and service 
provided by our peace officers and the sacrifices they make on behalf 
of all of us.
  According to the FBI, more than 79,000 officers were assaulted in 
2023, marking the highest officer assault rate in the past 10 years. 
That is concerning. Despite the certain danger these officers face, 
they take on this responsibility to protect and serve so that our 
communities remain safe and free.
  Today, on National Peace Officers Memorial Day, we have the 
opportunity to come together as a nation to remember and honor those 
who have made the ultimate sacrifice to protect our communities so that 
we may live in safety.
  I would like to honor two North Dakotans who were killed in the line 
of duty last year.
  The tragic loss of Officer Jake Ryan Wallin of the Fargo Police 
Department and Deputy Sheriff Paul Martin from the Mercer County 
Sheriff's Office reminds us of the dangers our law enforcement 
officials face every day and the enormous debt we owe them and their 
families for their sacrifices to keep our communities safe. These 
heroes will be forever remembered with their names inscribed on our 
National Law Enforcement Memorial.
  We can never fully repay our police officers, but we can continue to 
honor those we have lost and the sacrifices of their families and their 
loved ones. To honor these brave law enforcement officials, I have 
joined with others in introducing a resolution here in the Senate to 
recognize their bravery and memorialize the lives of Officer Wallin, 
Deputy Martin, and the more than 220 law enforcement officers killed in 
the line of duty in 2023.
  This dedication to community and the rule of law is characteristic of 
so many of our police men and women, without whose efforts our 
communities would not be the same. That is why our resolution also 
designates this week, May 12 through 18, as National Police Week and 
honors the bravery and good work of all law enforcement officers.
  One such example is Fargo Police Officer Zachary Robinson. Officer 
Robinson and his wife Ashley are in Washington, DC, this week. He is 1 
of 10--10 in the whole Nation--to be honored as a TOP COP by the 
National Association of Police Organizations. He was presented with the 
award for his heroic efforts last July when Fargo law enforcement 
officials were ambushed while investigating a traffic accident, 
resulting in the death of Officer Wallin and the injuries of Officers 
Andrew Dotas and Tyler Hawes.
  Fargo Police Chief Dave Zibolski summed up Officer Robinson's actions 
on that day when he stated:

       If not for the courageous efforts of Officer Zach Robinson, 
     our community would have been further devastated. He saved 
     many lives. We are extremely proud of Zach! His reaction was 
     immediate, without hesitation, and without regard for his own 
     safety--true bravery.

  He walked into a hailstorm of bullets to neutralize the situation and 
save lives. Think what that takes. Amazing.
  I had the opportunity to meet and visit with Officer Robinson--Zach 
and his wife Ashley--today. Wow, what great people. They are truly the 
kind of young people who should really serve as role models for all of 
us, young and old--truly great Americans.
  Today and always--every day--we remember the bravery and dedication 
of law enforcement to keep our communities safe. We honor them--all of 
them--and thank them for heeding the call to serve.
  May God bless our peace officers--each and every one of them--and 
their families.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I rise today during Police Week to pay 
tribute to Sergeant Nevada Krinkee.
  Here he is. He was a member of the police force in Sheridan, WY. He 
was a beloved officer in Sheridan. He was well-known for his 
selflessness. His colleagues will tell you he always put others first. 
His death in February of this year, in the line of duty, was absolutely 
tragic, and it shook our State.
  Sergeant Krinkee was the first officer in Wyoming, since 1997--the 
first one this century--to die by homicide in

[[Page S3703]]

the line of duty. It is actually the first line-of-duty death in the 
history of the Sheridan Police Department. Sergeant Krinkee made the 
ultimate sacrifice for the community he loved and the community that he 
swore to protect. He was only 33 years old.
  In March, I attended his funeral in Sheridan, WY. It was so large 
they had to move it to the community college--the great auditorium 
there, the field house. What was moving was the outpouring of folks 
from all around the community, as well as the State, as well as the 
country. They were there to honor Sergeant Krinkee but were also there 
to support his wife Karla and their young daughter Bella. More than 
1,800 people attended in the community of Sheridan, WY. They flooded in 
from across Wyoming and from across the country. Many of them who were 
there to mourn his death and honor his family had never actually met 
Sergeant Krinkee.
  It was the largest single event in Sheridan, WY in 40 years. It was 
40 years ago that Queen Elizabeth visited Wyoming and had a similarly 
sized turnout. Law enforcement officers traveled from every corner of 
our State. They came from tiny towns. They also came from big cities 
across the West. All came to pay their respects to the man and to their 
brother in uniform.
  As police cars escorted the family to the memorial service, citizens 
of Sheridan, WY, lined the streets of the community--four deep--waving 
American flags. It was absolutely beautiful to behold.
  One of the newspaper reporters asked a man from Wyoming, who drove 
over 100 miles to be there, why he came that far to attend the funeral. 
After all, this was somebody he had never met. He had never heard of 
Sergeant Krinkee before he had been killed.
  He responded:

       I stand for those who have stood for us, and I will until 
     the day I die.

  Well, that says a lot about the people of Wyoming through and 
through.
  One of the greatest blessings of our great Nation is the men and 
women of law enforcement. Police officers have one of the most 
dangerous and demanding jobs in our Nation, and they do it with 
confidence and with compassion.
  Today, officers need to deal with dangerous criminals, and they often 
do it in the face of continuous criticism. It is alarming. Police 
officers across the country are coming under attack from criminals and 
the soft-on-crime politicians who coddle them. Sadly, more police 
officers have been killed or injured by gun violence in the line of 
duty in 2023 than ever before. Politicians who support criminals rather 
than police and demonize and defund the police hold responsibility. The 
police, as a result, have been demoralized and endangered.
  We also see crime--violent crime--right now in America at a record 
high. Compared to 2019, murders are up 17 percent, and aggravated 
assaults are up 8 percent.
  Let me be clear: Defunding the police has made our communities less 
safe. For police officers, it has turned the badges on their sleeves 
sometimes into targets on their backs.
  Law enforcement officers love their communities. They love them 
enough to give their lives to protect those communities. These are 
incredible men and women. To me, each one is a hero, and we are 
grateful for each and every one of them.
  They wear the badge. They protect our communities despite all the 
risks. To me, it is the definition of selflessness.
  To the men and women of law enforcement, you are everyday heroes, and 
you are among us every day.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. MARSHALL. Madam President, this week is National Law Enforcement 
Week. So we pause here in our Nation's Capital to honor and remember 
the men and women who so proudly serve and so bravely serve our 
communities.
  I am grateful for the nearly 8,000 law enforcement officers across 
the State of Kansas who are fighting to keep our communities safe as we 
speak here today. I rise to honor these brave men and women in uniform 
and recognize the sacrifices they and their families make every day to 
keep us all safe.
  I have hosted numerous crime and fentanyl roundtables across the 
State of Kansas, and everywhere I go, the officers tell me they are 
overwhelmed--they are overwhelmed with drug trafficking, with human 
trafficking, and with fentanyl trafficking--and that the crisis is 
growing; it is exploding. What they tell me is, even if we doubled or 
if we tripled the number of officers out there, they could not arrest 
themselves out of the situation.
  They all, to a person, point and ask me: When is the Federal 
Government going to shut down our border?
  To those officers out there who are fighting the fight--fighting 
human trafficking, fighting the fentanyl poisoning--I say thank you, 
and I get it. I know you are overwhelmed.
  These officers back home are our first line of defense. They are our 
families', our children's, and our friends' first line of defense in 
these crises. Now, more than ever, it is crucial that we demonstrate 
our unwavering support for them. We need to assure them that help is on 
the way. We need leaders here and an administration that prioritizes 
law and order.
  Growing up, we were taught to follow the rules. We all respected the 
law, and we feared the consequences of breaking them. We, as a country, 
respected our law enforcement officers. And perhaps no one more than 
myself can appreciate law enforcement--the son of a career police 
officer, the son of a chief of police. What I will always remember 
about what my dad taught me about law and order is that he would apply 
the law equally. He didn't care what your last name was. He didn't care 
what side of the railroad tracks you came from. He was going to apply 
the law equally.
  I am honored to celebrate all those who have protected and served our 
communities.
  I want to close today by remembering two Kansas officers who lost 
their lives this past year: Goodland, KS, Police Chief Frank Hayes, 
Jr., and Fairway, KS, Police Officer Jonah Oswald. I am grateful for 
their service and the ultimate sacrifice they made in keeping their 
communities safe.
  I want to remember their families and let them know that we are 
thinking of you today, that we have not forgotten you or your loved 
one, and that we are going to continue to mourn with you. Again, we are 
grateful for the sacrifices you made and your loved one to keep us all 
safe.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.


                              S.J. Res. 57

  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, the Senate will take a vote shortly on a 
resolution from Senator Schmitt dealing with infrastructure funding.
  The discussion of the resolution has been pretty quiet because, on 
its face, it looks like it is an issue dealing with a lot of budgetary 
lingo and ``Washingtonese.'' Obligated funds and expenditure deadlines 
are what people hear about. But the reality is this proposal is anti-
infrastructure. It could put stop-work orders on thousands of 
infrastructure projects across the country. Some of them have shovels 
in the ground as we speak.
  (Mr. OSSOFF assumed the Chair.)
  My concern is, Mr. President, we pass this, and we would be going 
virtually from a period where folks in Georgia and elsewhere had hard 
hats to where they are facing layoffs.
  Here is the background: In 2021, Congress passed emergency funding 
for State and local governments. At the time, there was a big concern 
that their budgets would get clobbered by the pandemic, which had 
hammered our economy and put millions out of work. But State and local 
budgets fared better than expected.
  So later on, Senators were looking, on a bipartisan basis, for smart 
ways to rebuild our infrastructure--roads and bridges and highways, 
water and sewer, and also broadband projects. There was bipartisan 
agreement that Congress ought to allow that leftover State and local 
funding to be repurposed for these important infrastructure projects. 
So both sides of this Chamber--the Republican side, the Democratic 
side--passed legislation multiple times, even by unanimous consent, 
that provided what the States and localities wanted, which is more 
flexibility.
  We hear our colleagues on the other side talk a lot about wanting to 
cut redtape to get the Federal Government

[[Page S3704]]

out of the way and empower the States, the laboratories of democracy. 
Here is a case where my colleagues on the other side got exactly what 
they wanted: more flexibility for the States to use taxpayer funds on 
infrastructure.
  Have a highway that needs widening--a bridge that has passed its 
useful life, a water system with lead pipes that need replacing? 
Congress voted on a bipartisan basis to make that easier. It is a real 
head-scratcher why Republicans would now want to make this difficult.
  Some have accused the Treasury Department of playing around with the 
expiration of the program. That hasn't happened at all. It is the same 
program with the same timeline and the same rules that Democrats and 
Republicans agreed on as recently as a few short months ago.
  I mentioned at the outset that this resolution puts a stop-work order 
on thousands of projects nationwide. The numbers just really stun you 
when you walk through them.
  On the Finance Committee, we asked the Treasury Department what the 
impact could be in specific States. Here is an example: In the 
Presiding Officer's State of Georgia, 17 projects, totaling $1.4 
billion could be terminated; Michigan, 160 projects; Ohio, 342 
projects; Arizona, 50 projects; Montana, 404 projects; and West 
Virginia, 73 projects.
  Nationwide, there could be thousands of projects closed, tens or even 
hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, higher costs for families and 
businesses that had to wait far too long for Congress to get serious 
about infrastructure.
  I will just tell my colleagues, as we gear up for a vote, this one is 
one of the most unusual votes that I have seen recently, a true head-
scratcher. Bipartisanship, we all know, is a heavy lift. But the 
progress we have made on this issue, in my view, is actually a 
bipartisan highlight of the last several years.
  I have talked to my colleagues a lot about how we find some common 
ground. Here, we have, from day one, Senator Cornyn--my colleague on 
the Finance Committee--and Senator Padilla working from the outset to 
add additional flexibility for the pool of funds that would be 
available. So a Republican U.S. Senator and a Democratic U.S. Senator 
put together a proposal--now get this, colleagues--that passed by 
unanimous consent three times.
  So if the Senate were to walk back this bipartisan effort--originally 
led by a Senator from California, a Democrat, and a Senator from Texas, 
a Republican--the bottom line would be, Mr. President, that, starting 
almost immediately, those hard hats that I mentioned in States like 
yours and others could be coming off, and they would be looking at ways 
to keep a roof over their head and to pay for food for their families 
and healthcare.
  I will close by saying this. I just don't see a good reason for the 
U.S. Senate to backtrack on solid, bipartisan progress and have this 
Chamber act in a way that leaves more of our Nation's infrastructure in 
a state of disrepair.
  I urge my colleagues to preserve the bipartisan work that has been 
done on this issue--that got strong, strong votes three times. Preserve 
the work that has been done on this issue for infrastructure. Oppose 
the resolution.
  I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.

  Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise in support of my resolution that 
would overturn a rule from the Department of the Treasury that affects 
the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund.
  Treasury's attempted sleight of hand to keep the COVID spending 
spigot on is an insult to Congress and those who believe in our 
Constitution as well as a complete misuse of taxpayer dollars.
  As we vote today, we as a body must ask ourselves a couple of simple 
questions:
  First, are we going to allow funds meant for COVID recovery to be 
spent after the so-called ``emergency'' ended or are we finally able to 
install fiscal responsibility as our national debt spirals further out 
of control?
  Second, are we willing to defend the article I branch from an 
overreaching Agency of bureaucrats who want to claim more and more 
power for themselves?
  The spending in this program--which is hardly the point right now, 
actually, with this extension of the time, but it is worth noting--has 
been wasteful on many occasions.
  When Congress provided $350 billion for the Coronavirus State and 
Local Fiscal Recovery Fund, I don't think one could have imagined that 
the fund would have been used for golf courses and swimming pools and 
tennis courts--maybe to some. It also became a slush fund to 
incentivize illegal immigration, $340 million for cash payments to 
illegal immigrants in Washington State, $3.6 million in Illinois to 
help illegal immigrants apply for citizenship, and $2 million in DC to 
help turn the District of Columbia into a ``proud sanctuary city.''
  Regardless of whether you supported the spending or not, this fund 
had a specific purpose. This fund was designated to aid State 
governments and local governments with revenue shortfalls tied to the 
COVID-19 pandemic.
  When Congress created this fund, Congress provided a clear 
restriction. In statute, Congress required that all costs incurred with 
money from this fund must be incurred by December 31, 2024. That is the 
statute. That is congressional language.
  In short, recipients had over 3 years to obligate this funding or the 
funding would be returned to the Federal Treasury. Most States and 
localities understood the requirements.
  As of March of 2023--over a year ago--all States had obligated at 
least 60 percent of their funding while localities had obligated over 
54 percent. Yet, lo and behold, while most people in this body were 
celebrating Thanksgiving with our families, the Treasury Department 
tried to pull a fast one on the American people. The Treasury 
Department decided it knew better than this body and better than 
Congress, and the Department rewrote the law to fit its own needs and 
special interests.
  Even though the statute said all costs must be incurred by the end of 
this calendar year, the Treasury Department decided that States could 
still use these COVID recovery dollars way past 2024.
  This is infuriating on a bunch of different levels. First, the 
administration ended the public health emergency for the pandemic on 
May 11, 2023.
  Now, most Americans had moved on well beyond that, but even this 
administration acknowledged over a year ago that it was over.
  It is also crazy because even though this administration said COVID 
ended about a year ago, bureaucrats at the Treasury Department decided 
we should just keep spending money anyway--spending billions into 2025 
and 2026--to recover from COVID. Just think about that for a second.
  But beyond this, beyond there being no rational reason to continue 
the spending for COVID recovery, this rule does not even keep the 
spigot on in order to directly benefit our constituents. This is 
bureaucrats giving a helping hand and a paycheck to--you guessed it--
other bureaucrats.
  Earlier this week, Secretary Yellen attempted to assert that if this 
rule is overturned--and I heard this from my colleague--then 
infrastructure projects would grind to a halt. That is false. That is 
not true. This administration, once again, is using fearmongering as a 
reckless tactic for a radical agenda.
  Let's be honest with the American people and look at the text of this 
rule. Under this new Treasury rule, the funding is limited to 
administrative and legal costs, such as compliance costs and internal 
control requirements. This rule ensures that funding does not go to 
bridges or broadband but to bureaucrats.
  And this rule has real cost. This rule, if it continues, will cost 
taxpayers at least $13 billion, if not more. That boils down to about 
$1,200 for each and every American family. And around here, as I have 
learned, $13 billion doesn't seem like a lot of money to people. But we 
are $34 trillion in debt. We are spending nearly the same amount on 
interest payments on that debt as we do our national defense.
  This fiscal recklessness is unsustainable. The actions like this from 
the Treasury rule are a prime reason why we are $34 trillion in debt. 
Our constituents demand that we actually hold the line, that we stop 
spending beyond our means, especially when the

[[Page S3705]]

rules encourage spending that is wasteful.
  I ask my colleagues to join me today in supporting this resolution. 
COVID is over. Our national debt is out of control. Inflation is sky-
high. It is time to reinstate fiscal responsibility here in the U.S. 
Senate.
  I yield the floor, Mr. President, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays are ordered.
  The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am going to be very brief, but I want 
Senators to know that this is about standing up for schools that need 
to replace lead pipes. That is the kind of effort that Senator Cornyn, 
Senator Padilla, myself, and others said was essential for this 
country.
  My colleague from my Missouri--I look forward to getting to know him 
more; he is new to the Senate--sets this up that somehow this is 
unnecessary and basically just fueling more redtape. Quite the 
opposite. If colleagues go home this weekend during the recess, they 
will see people in their States having good paying jobs for a good 
day's work repairing bridges, dealing with lead pipes. And that is, 
colleague, why, on three separate occasions, the Senate Democrats and 
Republicans came together.
  My colleague--I don't ever want to be critical of someone's 
intention--has made it out that this will just be getting rid of some 
redtape and bureaucracy. I want Senators, who are going to vote in a 
little bit, to understand that this is not about that. This is about 
what it is really like in our communities where so many people are 
still hurting.
  What I have in my mirror are priorities like schools needing to 
replace lead pipes. That is what we had in mind when we started this 
effort Senator Cornyn on the other side, myself, Senator Padilla. I 
hope that the Senate won't vote here at 6 o'clock to essentially pull 
this effort up from the roots and throw it aside, because a lot of 
people will get hurt. Senators are going to hear about it pretty soon 
because these are projects that are underway today; they are underway 
now.
  Democrats and Republicans felt they would make a difference for our 
communities, and we shouldn't tear up that effort in the name of this 
resolution that tries to suggest that this is mostly about cutting 
redtape, which is not the case. It is about cutting jobs in our 
communities, and we are going to lose a lot of opportunities for some 
smart investments for the future.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, just to respond briefly, it may not have 
been his priority list, but it is worth pointing out that, again, some 
priorities of these dollars--like $340 million cash payments to illegal 
immigrants--have been spent from this fund. But be that as it may, if 
the concern from my colleague is that these projects for lead pipe 
replacement and schools--if they have been obligated, nothing is going 
to change with that. I want to make that very clear. In fact, those 
obligations are still extended through 2024, as the statute called for.
  What this is all about is one simple fact: Do we think that Treasury 
can rewrite the law to extend these bureaucratic payments that, by the 
way, are part of the submissions that these State and locals have made 
for legal fees, other compliance costs. That is all in these 
submissions. This is to get overtime for 2 more years to spend 
approximately $13 billion. And again, that is $1,200 out of the budgets 
of American families across this country.
  So we have an opportunity to restore some fiscal sanity, to stand up 
for the Article I branch. Whether you agree with that law or not, it 
said those obligations had to be incurred before the end of 2024. We 
are not changing that. We are just saying Treasury doesn't get to do an 
end run around Congress and again have $13 billion more go out the door 
to lawyers and to bureaucrats.
  With that, I yield the floor and ask for the yeas and nays.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled rollcall 
vote take place immediately.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Under the previous order, the joint resolution is considered read a 
third time.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading 
and was read the third time.


                          Vote on S.J. Res. 57

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution having been read the 
third time, the question is, Shall the joint resolution pass?
  The yeas and nays were previously ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. 
Manchin) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) are necessarily 
absent.
  Mr. THUNE. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Idaho (Mr. Crapo), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley), and the 
Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
  Further, if present and voting: the Senator from Missouri (Mr. 
Hawley) would have voted ``yea.''
  The result was announced--yeas 46, nays 49, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 168 Leg.]

                                YEAS--46

     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Boozman
     Braun
     Britt
     Budd
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Cruz
     Daines
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hagerty
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     Lummis
     Marshall
     McConnell
     Moran
     Mullin
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Ricketts
     Risch
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Schmitt
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Tuberville
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--49

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Brown
     Butler
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Fetterman
     Gillibrand
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hickenlooper
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kelly
     King
     Klobuchar
     Lujan
     Markey
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Ossoff
     Padilla
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warnock
     Warren
     Welch
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Crapo
     Hawley
     Manchin
     Menendez
     Vance
  The joint resolution (S.J. Res. 57) was rejected.
  (Mr. MURPHY assumed the Chair.)
  (Mr. OSSOFF assumed the Chair.)
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Hassan). The Senator from Connecticut.

                          ____________________