Congressional Record, Volume 170 Issue 188 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)

[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 188 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7121-S7131]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

LEGISLATIVE SESSION

______

WILDLIFE INNOVATION AND LONGEVITY DRIVER REAUTHORIZATION ACT--Continued

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the unfinished
business.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

House message to accompany H.R. 5009, a bill to reauthorize
wildlife habitat and conservation programs and for other
purposes.

Pending:

Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House to
the amendment of the Senate to the bill.
Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House to
the amendment of the Senate to the bill, with Schumer
amendment No. 3317 (to the House amendment to the Senate
amendment to the bill), to add an effective date.
Schumer amendment No. 3318 (to amendment No. 3317), to add
an effective date.

Recognition of the Majority Leader

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Welch). The majority leader is recognized.

Government Funding

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, so last night, I think as everyone knows
by now, congressional leaders released the text of bipartisan
legislation that will keep the government open, deliver critical
disaster relief, extend vital healthcare programs, and protect our
farmers.
With this agreement, we are now on our way to avoiding a government
shutdown. The sooner Congress acts, the better. As always, bipartisan
cooperation must lead the way.
We can't have last-minute delays or grandstanding or else the
American people won't get the funding they deserve or else we could
risk a shutdown.
Now, there are many good things in this bill that Democrats worked
hard for and achieved. Democrats have insisted these agreements must
not have cuts, and this bill has no cuts.
Democrats have warned we can't have poison pills, and this bill has
no poison pills. And Democrats pushed hard to make sure this agreement
included millions for childcare, workforce training, job training,
funding to rebuild the Key Bridge, and more.
There are three things in particular that I pushed hard--very hard--
for and that I am glad to see in the bill. Policies to outcompete
China, including outsourcing, policies on artificial intelligence, and
policies to bring manufacturing back to America, including chip
production.
The package includes new restrictions I pushed for to restrict the
flow of U.S. investment to CCP development of technologies like AI and
chips. I am also very pleased this agreement helps alleviate supply
chain disruptions, alleviates price spikes, and increases chip
investment in the United States.
I also pushed especially hard to get a strong disaster relief package
into the bill, and I am really glad we got that done too. Federal
disaster relief programs are about exhausted, and I have warned that
doing nothing would come back to haunt us. Communities across the
Southeast, across the Northeast, and, in fact, across America still
need help rebuilding from the aftermath of hurricanes, flooding,
wildfires, and other acts of Mother Nature that have grown far more
powerful because of climate change. So it is very good news this
disaster package got into the bill.
And there are other good things in the bill too. We permanently
secured 9/11 responder and survivor health funding. We secured
important provisions related to Haiti, extended protection for farmers,
dealt with the nature of lithium ion batteries that might explode on
bikes, and much, much more.
Now, clearly, this CR isn't perfect. It does not include everything
Democrats

[[Page S7122]]

called for and includes some provisions we wouldn't have added. But
this CR is a sound and bipartisan and necessary compromise that will
keep the government open and deliver many, many good things for the
American people.
So now time is of the essence. The sooner Congress acts the better.
If we want to avoid an unnecessary government shutdown right before
Christmas, Republicans must work with Democrats to pass this CR
quickly.

H.R. 5009

Mr. President, now on the NDAA, later this morning, the Senate will
hold a vote to pass the annual Defense authorization bill, the NDAA.
Congress has passed the NDAA on a bipartisan basis for over six
straight decades, and this year will be no different. Many feared that
it would be, given the polarization, given the late date, but, no, we
are passing the NDAA, and that is a very good thing.
The NDAA isn't perfect, but it still includes some very good things
that Democrats fought for. Just like in the CR, it has strong
provisions to stand up against the Chinese Communist Party, here on a
national security basis. It boosts our use of AI for national defense.
This is one of the things our forums on AI talked about early on, and
it is now in the bill. And it expands tech innovation here at home by
expanding money to tech hubs.
I am particularly glad that the NDAA expands the Tech Hubs Program
that I created with Senators Young, Cantwell, and others in the
bipartisan Chips and Science Act. And these funds are going to
transform communities in Upstate New York, the Midwest, and across the
country that hadn't been focused on tech and are now going to become
the epicenters of innovation and of manufacturing--high-end
manufacturing. This is something these rural areas, these smaller
cities across Upstate New York and the Midwest, needed, and they are
getting some more. They are getting some more dollars in this regard so
there will be more tech hubs.
Again, I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for the good
work on the NDAA, especially Chairman Reed and Ranking Member Wicker.

Drones

Mr. President, on drones, this afternoon, I will come to the Senate
floor to stand with Senator Peters to take up legislation to respond to
the recent reports of unusual drone activity.
I am proud to cosponsor this bipartisan legislation, which the FBI,
DHS, DOD, and FAA all support. Let me say that again. This legislation
is supported by just about every group--every Federal group--concerned:
the FBI, the DHS, the Department of Defense, and the FAA. The Senate
should pass our bill without delay.
Our bill, among other things, explicitly authorizes State and local
authorities to conduct drone detection and helps them better coordinate
with Federal law enforcement Agencies to keep communities safe. The
utter confusion surrounding these drone sightings shows that the Feds
can't respond all on their own. The Federal Government needs help from
local officials detecting these drones.
But, right now, the locals have neither the authority nor the
resources to act. Our bill will fix that. All the Federal Agencies
involved say they need local help. Drones are relatively new, but they
are all over the place. And many of them--you don't want to tell people
they can't fly drones for recreational use and many other commercial
uses. So it is a difficult area, and we don't have broad-reaching
Federal legislation on drones, even though we do say they can't be near
airports and be near military facilities and can't fly below 4,000
feet. That is about it.
So there is a desperate need, until the Federal Government does more
on this new issue of drones, for the locals to participate. The Feds
want the locals to participate. There is no reason they shouldn't. So I
hope the Senate will pass our bipartisan drone legislation later today.

Social Security Fairness Act

Mr. President, on Social Security, finally, before I pay tribute to
two of our retiring colleagues, the Senate will take a very important
vote this afternoon to ensure that no American who has chipped into
Social Security is wrongly denied well-earned benefits.
This afternoon, we will vote on whether or not to take up the Social
Security Fairness Act, a bill repealing two flawed policies that eat
away at the benefits of many Americans who, at some point or another,
worked as teachers, firefighters, postal workers, and other public
sector workers. When we vote today, retirees deprived of their benefits
will be watching closely. Every Senator will decide who will vote to
secure their benefits and who will stand in the way to waste this
golden opportunity to make a law.

Tribute to Kyrsten Sinema

Mr. President, now, two of our departing colleagues will deliver
their farewell addresses on the floor, Senator Bob Casey and Senator
Kyrsten Sinema.
I will start with a few words about Senator Sinema. I was proud to
work with her on many different issues. And whenever we did team up
together, it was a potent team, and we got a lot of good things done.
But as I am sure Kyrsten would be the first to say, we also disagreed
a lot. Kyrsten is independent. That is how she has always been. I
respect that.
So whether we agreed or disagreed, I never questioned two things:
one, that she cared deeply about her work; and, two, that she would
always stay true to herself and to the people of Arizona who elected
her.
During her time in the Senate, Kyrsten has had a hand in passing some
of this majority's biggest accomplishments--the bipartisan
infrastructure law, the Chips and Science Act, the PACT Act, the gun
safety act, and the Respect for Marriage Act, and others as well.
She was also a trusted negotiator. She had a keen ability to find
consensus, even on the toughest issues, when it wasn't easy, but she
always kept at it. Our caucus, on numerous occasions, partnered with
her--usually at crunch time--to work with Republicans to help get bills
over the finish line. And that is when Kyrsten was at her best, when it
was time to reach an agreement.
I will always respect Kyrsten for her excellent work in these hard
moments. I know many Senators on both sides will feel the same.
So we thank Senator Sinema for her service, her contributions, her
commitment to Arizona, and wish her well in whatever comes next.

Tribute to Robert P. Casey, Jr.

Mr. President, this afternoon, our dear friend Bob Casey will also
come to the floor to deliver his farewell speech after many, many
distinguished and very successful years serving the people of
Pennsylvania.
Now, with a career as distinguished as Bob's, there are many things
you can say about what he meant to his beloved home State. And he loved
and breathed Pennsylvania. It is a big, diverse State, and he knew
every corner of it and was loved and respected in every corner of it.
Here is what his people called him: ``a champion for Pennsylvania
workers,'' ``a champion for middle class families,'' ``a champion for
children,'' ``a champion for seniors,'' ``a champion for disability
rights,'' ``a champion for clean energy and the environment,'' ``a
champion in the fight against corporate gouging.'' These are just some
of the ways that people described Bob.
During his 18 years in the Senate, there are very few issues that he
didn't champion. It is not hard to understand where he got such a
strong work ethic. Like Joe Biden, he is from Scranton, where hard work
is the rule, not the exception. If you combine that work ethic with an
innate sense of public service, as the son of a Governor, as somebody
who deeply cares about the people he represents and is genuine--and it
comes out of every pore of his body--you will get a fighter who works
as hard as the people he represents; you will get Bob Casey.
When Pennsylvania coal miners suffering from black lung disease
needed help, he successfully fought to get their benefits and made sure
they got medical help.
He was an amazing advocate for our Nation's children, always making
sure that they had the support they needed to reach their full
potential.
He championed efforts to expand access to early childhood healthcare,
childcare, child nutrition, family tax benefits; and was one of the
biggest advocates for extending the CHIP, or the Children's Health
Insurance Program, which kept so many kids healthy--millions of poor
kids healthy.

[[Page S7123]]

And he will go down as one of the Senate's greatest champions ever,
in all of history, when it comes to disability policies. When our
former colleague Tom Harkin retired, many people wondered who would
carry on as the voice for Americans with disabilities? Without
hesitation and with amazing success, Bob stepped up to the plate. In
the years since, he has been instrumental in passing legislation to
advance the rights of people with disabilities and help them live free
from discrimination.
He didn't have any connections--personal connections--to the
disability community, nor was he trying to score political points. He
did it all simply because it was the right thing to do.
And he was one of the most beloved Members of our caucus. People love
Bob--everybody. No one ever said a bad word about Bob Casey. Why? Why?
Because he cared so much, was so hard working, was so effective, and
was one of the most genuine people that we have ever, ever seen in this
Senate, not just now but throughout history.
He leaves a deep impression on every one of us. He does. And the guy
had it all, and in such a nice way.
He got things done. He was hard working. He didn't take no for an
answer. But when he came back at you, time and time again, because he
was so committed, so well prepared, so sincere, and so nice, you always
said yes. It is one of the reasons he was so effective.
So that sums up the man, Bob Casey.
And let's not forget he always did the right thing, even in difficult
political situations. I would talk to him: We need your help here, Bob.
We need your vote there.
He would struggle with it. He knew it might have bad political
consequences, but he inevitably did the right thing.
He is as good, as decent, as honorable as any Senator I have worked
with in this Chamber.
He has a beautiful wife Terese. To the entire Casey family, I say to
all of them: Thank you for sharing Bob with us all these years. Thank
you for backing him up, despite some tragedies your family has had.
And, Bob, thank you. Thank you for your leadership. Thank you for
your friendship, and, simply, thank you for being you.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

Unanimous Consent Agreement--Executive Calendar

Mr. SCHUMER. I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII,
the cloture votes with respect to the Cheeks and Murillo nominations
occur upon the disposition of the motion to proceed to H.R. 82.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
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. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Recognition of the Minority Leader

The Republican leader is recognized.

WRDA

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, last week, the House passed the Water
Resources bill with broad bipartisan support. Today, it is the Senate's
turn to act.
Thanks in large part to the leadership of Ranking Member Capito and
her team, the sensible legislation before us will strengthen our
Nation's water infrastructure from the Everglades, to the Port of Los
Angeles, to the inland waterways that course through Kentucky.
It is good news for communities across the country. From clean
drinking water, to ecosystem maintenance, to storm resiliency, to
navigable waterways for trade and commerce, the bill before us takes a
comprehensive approach. Because our communities understand their
challenges better than any bureaucrat in Washington, this bill will
provide the flexibility to tailor solutions to each community's unique
needs.
I am also pleased it will authorize several projects important to the
health and well-being of Kentuckians. One will build out infrastructure
for water and wastewater treatment in Appalachia--always a concern of
rural communities across America's heartland. Another will help secure
safe and reliable drinking water for the growing number of families in
Scott County. Finally, another will update Greenbrier Lake Dam, which
supplies water for Kentuckians across Montgomery County.
So far, an impressive, broad coalition has thrown their support
behind this bill, from ports and shippers, to farm groups and unions,
to dozens of industry leaders who rely on our waterways to move goods,
protect jobs, and keep costs low for the American people.
I appreciate the House's work to move this must-pass bill forward in
bipartisan fashion. Obviously, I hope the Senate will do the same
today.

Biden Administration

Mr. President, President Biden's decision earlier this month to
pardon his son may well have set a unique and unfortunate precedent.
But abuse of the Presidential pardon doesn't stop there.
Last week, the President went on to commute 1,500 sentences, and the
way liberal activists see it, he should have done even more.
More than 20 liberal, retired judges--including the Boston radical
who recommended the disgraced, pro-crime U.S. attorney Rachael
Rollins--have now urged the President to turn his eye to Federal death
sentences. They claim that the Federal death penalty is ``rife with
fundamental problems,'' including race discrimination and poor
representation of defendants.
But this is not just some theoretical recommendation about systemic
injustice. If the President heeded these former judges' call, it would
mean commuting the death sentences of the mass murderer who slaughtered
Black churchgoers at Mother Emanuel in Charleston and the perpetrator
of the massacre at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. Are these
men the victims of systemic racism? Did they have inadequate counsel?
Of course not. They are mass murderers, guilty beyond any doubt
whatsoever.
Let's be clear what commuting these sentences would mean. It would
mean that the laws passed by Congress and applied by our judges and
juries have no value. It would mean that progressive politics is more
important to the President than the lives taken by these murderers. It
would mean that society's most forceful condemnation of White supremacy
and anti-Semitism must give way to legal mumbo jumbo.
The irony of claims of systemic racism causing the President to spare
Dylann Roof is ludicrous--ludicrous--to the point of tragedy.
This is no legacy a President should seek.

Tribute to Kyrsten Sinema

Now, Mr. President, on an entirely different matter from the
President's unfortunate legacy, I would like to close with just a few
words about another of our departing colleagues, the senior Senator
from Arizona. It is, perhaps, unconventional for the leader of one
party to pay formal tribute to a departing Senator who caucused with
the other side, but then Kyrsten Sinema has never had trouble with
bucking a trend.
For one thing, she has spent her 6 years in this body earning levels
of influence, respect, and command of policy that are uncommon among
Senate freshmen. She has thrown herself into worthwhile projects, done
the heavy lifting of legislation, and kept at it when longer tenured
colleagues might have thrown in the towel. Needless to say, Senator
Sinema's maverick streak extends to her efforts to broaden the Senate's
fashion horizons as well.
But the cornerstone of our colleague's legacy in this Chamber will be
her willingness to defend the Senate, the Senate itself, when saying
nothing would have been a great deal easier. Arizona's senior Senator
stood up in the face of a grave threat to this institution's defining
characteristic, and she said no--no--and in doing so, she sent a
message that will resonate long after her departure from the Chamber.
I admire our colleague for the courage, wisdom, and clarity that have
guided her service for the people of Arizona and for the entire Nation,
and I wish her the very best in her next chapter.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.

Senate Committee on the Judiciary

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, our country demands much of the Senate

[[Page S7124]]

Judiciary Committee on which the Presiding Officer serves, and it has
been my honor to serve as chair of that committee for the last 4 years.
We have worked hard to defend freedom, advance justice and equality,
and balance our Federal judiciary.
During my time as chair these last 4 years, we have held 145 full
committee hearings, 88 subcommittee hearings, and 86 executive business
meetings. We advanced 373 Executive and judicial nominees, and we
reported 56 bills out of committee. We confirmed highly qualified,
diverse judicial nominees who will be a frontline defense of the rule
of law for a generation. Our efforts over the last 4 years have filled
the vacancies of one-fourth of the members of the Federal judiciary. We
also revitalized the committee's critical oversight rule over the
executive branch Agencies under our jurisdiction. We made progress on
issues critical to Americans, including protecting children online,
supporting women who have faced sexual harassment and assault in the
workplace, and implementing critical gun violence prevention reforms.
I want to thank all of the Senate Judiciary members, particularly the
Democrats, for their hard work in ensuring equal justice for all and
defending our democracy.
I would be remiss not to acknowledge our former colleague, the late-
Senator Dianne Feinstein of California. Dianne was a trailblazer and
champion for LGBTQ Americans, reproductive rights, and gun violence. We
honor her legacy by continuing our efforts on those critical issues.
I am also particularly thankful for the Republican ranking member,
Lindsey Graham, and my Senate Judiciary Republican colleagues who were
willing to work across the aisle to advance judicial nominees and
bipartisan legislation. Over 80 percent of all of the judges approved
by the Senate, reported out of the committee, have been approved by a
bipartisan rollcall.
Perhaps our most impactful work has been in confirming these highly
qualified, independent, and evenhanded judges. Aside from their
exceptional qualifications and respect for the rule of law, they
represent historic demographic and professional diversity.
Under President Biden's leadership, the Senate has confirmed more
Black women to the Federal circuit courts than all prior Presidents of
the United States combined, including the first-ever Black woman to
serve on the Supreme Court--Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. We have
confirmed a historic number of Asian Americans, Latinos, and LGBTQ
judges. We have also confirmed more circuit judges who have experience
as public defenders than all prior Presidents combined.
During the last 4 years, Senate Democrats have confirmed 233 judges
to lifetime positions, and if we confirm 2 more to the Federal bench
this week, which is our plan, we will have surpassed the previous
administration's record. The confirmations of these highly qualified,
diverse judges will help ensure the fair and impartial administration
of justice in our Nation. These judges are already making significant
contributions to protecting freedoms and democracy.
Since becoming chair of the committee in 2021, I have also made it a
priority to revitalize our tradition of oversight of executive branch
Agencies within the committee's jurisdiction. We need to make sure
these Agencies are serving the interests of the American people, and we
have regularly scheduled hearings for this type of oversight. We have
had meetings with the Attorney General, officials in the Department of
Justice, the FBI, the Bureau of Prisons, and the Department of Homeland
Security, making sure that every member on both sides of the table had
a chance to question the leaders of these Agencies on a regular basis.
Over the past 4 years, we have made progress in advancing key
legislation. Important bills we enacted into law include legislation
barring forced arbitration for sexual assault and sexual harassment
cases; legislation I authored to sustain the Federal Crime Victims
Fund; legislation that I also authored to eliminate the Federal statute
of limitations for child sex abuse cases; and my legislation with
Republican Senator Grassley to allow the Justice Department to
prosecute war criminals. We showed that, when we are willing to come
together on a bipartisan basis, we can make progress.

We also unanimously reported several bills to help stop the
exploitation of kids online. Earlier this year, I held a full committee
hearing to demand that the CEOs of social media giants Discord, Meta,
Snap, TikTok, and X--formerly known as Twitter--come before the
hearing. It highlighted the ongoing risks that social media poses to
our kids and the immediate need for Congress to act. We didn't get it
done in this session, and we must get it done in the next. I believe
that Senator Graham, who will continue to serve on the committee, will
join me in that effort.
The committee has also led the effort to address the Supreme Court's
ongoing ethics crisis. This troubles me. It used to be that issues of
ethics before the Court were bipartisan issues in the Senate--not so
anymore. At a time when the worst reports are coming out of the Supreme
Court of lavish gifts for Supreme Court Justices, this has become a
partisan issue--the Democrats calling for change and the Republicans
resisting.
I don't know what happened to that bipartisan consensus on ethics,
but in looking at the evidence that we have uncovered through committee
staff work and subpoenas, it surely is demanding of us to do something.
Ensuring that all Supreme Court Justices are subject to an enforceable
code of conduct is critical to establishing the American people's trust
in the Court.
More than 12 years ago, I asked, in writing, Chief Justice Roberts to
adopt a binding code of conduct for all Supreme Court Justices--12
years ago. Last year, the Judiciary Committee reported the Supreme
Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act to the full Senate. It is a
work product of one of our members, Sheldon Whitehouse. It is an
excellent bill, and I was happy to support it. The bill would require
Justices to adopt an enforceable code of conduct so that the highest
Court in the land--the Supreme Court--doesn't have the lowest ethical
standards of all courts in America.
Our work didn't stop there. We worked on defending reproductive
healthcare, curbing gun violence, and dealing with the major issues
that are on the minds of the American people.
Finally, I want to acknowledge the work of the Senate Judiciary
Committee's eight subcommittees, which held dozens of hearings on
matters under the committee's jurisdiction. I want to thank Chairs
Blumenthal, Booker, Butler, Coons, Klobuchar, Ossoff, Padilla,
Whitehouse, and Senators Hirono and Welch for their hard work and
leadership in this effort.
Once again, thanks to all the members of the Senate Judiciary
Committee for their cooperation. It has been the honor of a lifetime.

Polio Vaccine

Mr. President, I want to make one other short statement.
I remember polio. I remember it as a kid. It scared the hell out of
us. Nobody knew what was happening. A kid could wake up in the morning,
go to school, look as healthy as could be, and die before dinner. That
is what polio was all about--iron lungs, scary results, crippling kids,
and we didn't know where it came from. Every conscientious mom had a
theory. My mom said playing in rainwater from the freshly fallen rain
in our neighborhood was dangerous for polio. That was her
interpretation. No one really knew.
Then came the amazing news that someone had developed a vaccine to
deal with polio. We couldn't believe it. No kid wants to take a shot,
but to be protected from polio, you did it, and you were happy to do
it. I did it when I was a kid in the 1950s. As a result of it, we
brought polio under control in this country--a vaccine by Dr. Jonas
Salk, from Pittsburgh--a man I will always revere because of the
comfort that he brought to families who were concerned about polio.
Can you believe that we are now debating the polio vaccine again in
this country; that the nominee proposed by President Trump for the
Health and Human Services Department has raised questions about the
efficacy and safety of vaccines, including the polio vaccine?
This morning, in the Chicago Sun-Times, a reporter named Neil
Steinberg wrote an article about this issue. He quoted a statement that
was made very recently by Katie Miller. She is

[[Page S7125]]

the transition spokesperson for RFK, Jr., Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who
is President Trump's nominee for HHS, which has jurisdiction over many
health Agencies and certainly has the lion's share of responsibility
when it comes to vaccines.
Here is what Steinberg wrote:

Mr. Kennedy believes the Polio Vaccine should be available
to the public and thoroughly and properly studied--

His spokesperson said. ``Thoroughly and properly studied,'' what a
great idea--

Let's look into it! How about taking 1,349,135 [kids across
America] and submitting them to a blind trial at 244
[different] test areas around the country. [Half will
receive] the cherry-red vaccine, and half a placebo, or
nothing. [Then we can really find out. We can really study
and see if this vaccine is any good, the polio vaccine.]
Oh, wait. [That is exactly what we did] in the spring and
summer of 1954--[70 years ago]. To this day, it's the largest
medical experiment in the United States history. Thousands of
doctors, nurses, principals, teachers, parents, and other
volunteers banded together, working for free--the government
wasn't paying because that smacked of socialized medicine.
Gosh, Neil--

Neil Steinberg--

--you might ask, being yourself an inquisitive sort, just
like me, why did thousands of doctors, nurses, principals,
[and others], all supposedly with busy lives, drop everything
to help run this giant medical test [in America] for no
compensation? Possibly because polio was scything through
their children: more than 57,000 cases in 1952, with over
3,000 deaths. A child could be healthy at breakfast and dead
by dinner. That catches the attention of the neighbors and
dials up public spiritedness.

For RFK, Jr., to say that we have to study the polio vaccine at this
point is not only sad, it is shocking--shocking that a person seeking
the highest level Cabinet position under the Trump administration is
willing to be so fast and loose with the scientific truth--1,300,000-
plus cases. We were administering it, testing it before we moved
forward with it 70 years ago--nothing in the meantime to suggest it be
otherwise. It is safe and efficient and effective.
What about all the other vaccines? Polio is the one I am focusing on
today. What about all of the other vaccines that have spared children--
measles and rubella and so many other diseases and problems that can be
dangerous to them? Now we are going to debate those all over again in
the 21st century because RFK, Jr., has his own theories on vaccines?
Listen, I am willing to meet with RFK, Jr., and ask him, point blank,
what his position is. And I will tell you this: If he is going to be
the scourge against vaccinations across America, he is in for a fight,
because what is going to happen, sadly, is a lot of innocent children
and innocent people are going to be hurt as a result of it.
Coincidentally, just before the 1954 test began--1.3 million people--
radio commentator Walter Winchell went on the air to warn the vaccine
may be a killer and that the authorities were stockpiling little white
coffins just in case. The next week, 10 percent of the kids were pulled
out of the experiment by worried parents. We have been through this
before, and, thank God, cooler heads and smarter minds prevailed. If we
have to go through it again, it is worth the fight.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this article be printed
in the Congressional Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

[From the Chicago Sun-Times]

Kennedy Calling for Study of Polio Vaccine Isn't Skepticism, It's
Rejectionism

(By Neil Steinberg)

Study! I love to study. A pot of coffee, a comfortable
chair and a deadline that isn't today--nothing makes me
happier than to dive into a subject, stacks of books around
me, obscure databases on the screen. It's perhaps the most
appealing aspect of my job.
One day, I'm digging into the circumstances behind Oscar
Wilde's famous line about the Water Tower (``a castellated
monstrosity with pepperboxes stuck all over it''--not a quip,
as commonly described, but premeditated provocation). The
next, I'm exploring solar eclipses (if you are ever stumped
as to where helium was first detected, remember helios is
Greek for ``the sun,'' where the gas was noticed
spectrographically during an eclipse in India in 1868).
So study is good. However. I also know that ``study'' can
be a code word for wanton dismissal of facts that don't serve
your personal narrative, and I'll give you an example. If
someone says they are studying the Holocaust, trying to
determine what really happened, then you can be sure you are
not dealing with a scholar, but an antisemite. Your immediate
answer should be along the lines of: ``Well, I hope your
`study' involves reading a few of the thousands of
meticulously documented books outlining the precise enormity
of the crime, you odious bigot. Sticklers for bookkeeping,
those Germans were. Fifteen minutes in a library should lay
it out pretty clearly.''
With anti-vax advocate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. up for the
role of secretary of the Department of Health and Human
Services, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, whose spine
occasionally stiffens before going soft again, warned that
nominees hoping for Senate approval should ``steer clear'' of
undermining the polio vaccine.
Prompting a classic weasel response from Katie Miller, RFK
Jr.'s transition spokesperson.
``Mr. Kennedy believes the Polio Vaccine should be
available to the public and thoroughly and properly
studied,'' she said.
Proper study! What a good idea. Let's look into it! How
about taking 1,349,135 children and submitting them to a
blind trial at 244 test areas around the country, with half
getting the cherry-red vaccine, and half a placebo, or
nothing. Then we'll really find out if this vaccine is any
good.
Oh wait, we did that. In the spring and summer of 1954. To
this day, it's the largest medical experiment in United
States history. Thousands of doctors, nurses, principals,
teachers, parents and other volunteers banded together,
working for free--the government wasn't paying because that
smacked of socialized medicine.
Gosh Neil, you might ask, being yourself an inquisitive
sort, just like me, why did thousands of doctors, nurses,
principals, etc., all supposedly with busy lives, drop
everything to help run this giant medical test for no
compensation? Possibly because polio was scything through
their children: more than 57,000 cases in 1952, with over
3,000 deaths. A child could be healthy at breakfast and dead
by dinner. That catches the attention of the neighbors and
dials up public spiritedness.
The vaccine worked. Now that kids don't die of polio, alas,
we've forgotten they ever have. Society has atomized into a
buzzing cloud of random individuals, bouncing off one
another. Respect for authority that isn't Donald Trump has
evaporated, and many in our country are deciding: Screw this
medical authority business, I alone will determine what is
good for my children. Ignorant rejectionism has put on the
trappings of genuine academic skepticism and wanders the
land, gaining converts.
Nor should we overlook the first part of Miller's sentence:
``Mr. Kennedy believes the vaccine should be available to the
public . . .''
Well gosh, that's big of him, considering that he's spent
years urging gullible people to swallow the lie that vaccines
cause autism.
People are sheep. The recent election proved that. After
Kennedy soft-pedaled a measles outbreak in American Samoa in
2019 and cast doubt on the efficacy of vaccines, he was
accused of causing dozens of people to die needlessly.
Baseless undermining of medical advances is nothing new.
Just before the 1954 test began, radio commentator Walter
Winchell--the Fox News of his day--went on the air to warn
the vaccine ``may be a killer'' and that the authorities were
stockpiling ``little white coffins'' just in case. The next
week, 10% of children were pulled from the experiment by
worried parents.
They were worried about the wrong thing. The vaccine wasn't
the killer; polio was. That's as true today as it was in
1954. History will some day gape in shock that a leader could
try to lure us back into the past. Actually, we don't have to
wait for history to pass judgment. It's pretty shocking right
now.

Mr. DURBIN. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican whip.

Tribute to Ryan Nelson

Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to pay tribute to
my longtime chief of staff Ryan Nelson, who has decided to step down in
the new year.
It is difficult to know where to start to pay tribute to a man who
has been indispensable to everything I have ever done in Congress; so
perhaps I should start at the beginning, back in 1996, during the
Republican primary for South Dakota's lone House seat.
I was a green candidate running on a shoestring budget, and one
morning, a campaign volunteer showed up at my door and announced that
he was my driver. His name was Ryan Nelson. That day, we headed to an
event in Arlington, SD. Unbeknownst to me, my new driver proceeded to
lock his keys in the car. This might have caused some campaign
volunteers to panic, but not Ryan. He made his way over to a filling
station, found someone who could get into the car and retrieve the
keys, all without my knowing that anything had ever happened. That
resourcefulness turned out to be a pretty

[[Page S7126]]

good indicator of what was to come--not the ``locking the keys in car''
part but the seeing a problem and solving it before I even had a chance
to become aware of it.
Ryan kept driving me around the State, and we ended up winning the
primary. Ryan came to a crossroads, both metaphorical and literal. You
see, Ryan was originally just filling time on the campaign. He was
scheduled to leave for the Kansas City police academy the day after the
primary. He was driving out of his hometown in Gettysburg, SD, when he
came to that literal crossroads. You would have to go one way for the
police academy and the other way to stay with the campaign. He chose to
stay with the campaign. And among the many blessings I have been given
over the course of my career, I have to count that as one of the
greatest.
Ryan has now been with my team for 28 years. He has helped build my
staff and guide my operations, mentored generations of Thune employees,
and been a constant source of insight and wisdom. There is no one that
I trust more.
Ryan's knowledge is deep and broad. He has an intuitive understanding
of politics and an encyclopedic knowledge of South Dakota, and he is
deeply connected to the needs of our State.
I relied on those qualities throughout my career, and not just on
those qualities but on his character. Ryan is someone who got into
politics for all the right reasons. He is not interested in personal
glory. In fact, I think everyone who knows Ryan would agree that there
is no one who more persistently dodges the spotlight. He got into
politics to serve. He cares about our State. He cares about our
country. And he has done everything he can throughout his career to
ensure a brighter future for both.
I suppose Ryan is, technically, my employee--for a few more days, at
least--but that is not a word I think of when I think of Ryan. I think
of words like ``ally,'' ``partner,'' and ``friend,'' and not just to me
but to my whole family. Ryan has cared as deeply for the well-being of
my wife Kimberley and of our daughters Brittany and Larissa, as he has
for mine.
When I think back to long days on the campaign trail when our family
was young, I think of Ryan joking with the girls, jollying them along,
and keeping an eye out for when they needed a break.
The long days on the trail used to sometimes wear on my younger
daughter Larissa especially, and Ryan used to keep up her spirits by
promising her her favorite chicken alfredo at the end of the day. And,
of course, being Ryan, he never failed to deliver. In fact, ``chicken
alfredo'' is still a family joke.
I know some of my daughter's favorite memories are of days spent with
Ryan and his wife Carmen, on the campaign trail or at the lodge then
run by Ryan's dad. We used to regularly spend time there as a family,
and the girls loved nothing more: doing puzzles, watching movies,
riding on the four-wheelers, hunting, and then all gathering for a good
meal at the end of the day.
Ryan always made sure the girls' favorites were on the menu. Of
course, as devoted as Ryan has been to the Thune family, his greatest
devotion is to his own family--to Carmen and to their sons Parker and
Mitchell. When I decided to run for leader this year, he said that he
would do everything he could to help--as he always has--but that he
wouldn't miss his son's football games. And he hasn't.
I am fairly sure that he has only missed one of his son's games in
all the time they have played.
While it is hard to think of his not being my chief of staff, I am
happy that he will have more time to spend with Carmen and with their
boys.
There is so much more that I could say about Ryan. It is hard to give
a speech about him without mentioning his love of football. Between his
own days as a standout high school and college player and his son's
time playing the game, Ryan brings a wealth of football knowledge to
the table.
Then, there is his dry sense of humor and love of a prank or two, his
deep faith, his loyalty, and his work ethic. It is hard for me to
believe that his time in my office is drawing to a close.
The Apostle Paul says, in 1 Corinthians 4:

It is required that those who have been given a trust must
prove faithful.

There is no one who has been more faithful to his trust than Ryan
Nelson. I am more grateful than I can ever say for his service, and I
pray that God will richly bless him and his family in the new days
ahead.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hickenlooper). The Senator from Arizona.

Farewell to the Senate

Ms. SINEMA. Mr. President, I stand here today, closing out my time in
Congress, and I am reminded of the gravity of this place, the storied
history of the Senate, one in which we are all honored to contribute,
and the guardrails that serve as the foundation of this body and our
democracy. Those guardrails--the Constitution, our oath of office, the
rules of the Senate, and the norms of collegiality, integrity, and
respect--these are the pillars that have ensured our democracy could
endure. They exist for a reason: to cultivate relationships so we can
move history forward, to temper the excesses of greed, and to curb the
hunger for power.
As our country has become more and more divided and as our politics
has devolved into a constant series of all-or-nothing battles, we find
ourselves bumping into these guardrails with more frequency. In recent
history, both parties have wrestled with the importance of norms and
rules, and both parties have viewed these norms and rules as outdated,
constraining, or simply obstacles to their short-term victories. Many
now blame these guardrails for blocking critical progress instead of
recognizing that it is us--our actions, our words, our incivility, and
ultimately our unwillingness to compromise--that prevent reasonable
solutions from advancing.
When holding political power and feeling the hunger and pressure for
an immediate partisan win, it is easy to view the legislative
filibuster as a weapon of obstruction. It is tempting to prefer
elimination of the filibuster to compromise. It certainly feels faster,
easier, and more satisfying--at least in the short term, that is--but
there are dangers to choosing short-term victories over the hard and
necessary work of building consensus.
To give in to the temptation of the short-term victory means giving
in to the chaos caused by the constant ricocheting of laws or it means
you labor under an illusion that by eliminating the filibuster, you
will maintain political power forever, effectively ending our two-party
system. That is a fallacy, and worse, it is scary. One-party rule is
not democracy; that is autocracy. That is not the system our
forefathers envisioned, and it is not what our country deserves.
The beauty of America is in the push and the pull. Our democracy
ensures that no one person, no one party, has too much control. The
checks and balances built into our government protect us all. When we
work together, listen, compromise, and forge moderate movements
forward, we are doing exactly what our forefathers intended: We are
crafting solutions with broad support to protect against those wild
ricochets of policy changes and the whiplash that could be caused by
the overreach of a temporary partisan majority.
Over the past 6 years, I have had the honor of serving with lawmakers
on both sides of the aisle who chose to do the hard work and who took
the time to build relationships and build that consensus. Together, we
accomplished real results for the constituents we serve across this
great country.
I am so grateful for the colleagues who took those risks with me. Not
many are willing to step out of their comfort zones and risk political
capital for the sake of a deal that may not pay off immediately, but to
those who did, thank you. And to their staff, thank you for your
dedication and your service and for answering random calls from a
Senator, even though it was a little unorthodox, when I was just
looking to get a deal done and solve a problem or two.
Beginning with my good friend and our former colleague Senator Rob
Portman and the other Members of our bipartisan group of 10, including
the wonder women of the Senate--Senators Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski,
Jeanne Shaheen--and our guys--Senators Mitt Romney, Jon Tester, Bill

[[Page S7127]]

Cassidy, Mark Warner, and Joe Manchin--we painstakingly crafted a
historic infrastructure law, delivering Americans better broadband, new
roads and bridges, cleaner air and water, and more job opportunities.
Later, working with Senators Mitt Romney, Tammy Baldwin, Susan
Collins, and Thom Tillis, we passed the Respect for Marriage Act,
giving Americans of all backgrounds peace of mind, protecting marriage
and religious freedoms.
Teaming up with Senator Todd Young, we saved the Chips and Science
law spearheaded by Senators John Cornyn, Maria Cantwell, and Roger
Wicker. We saved it from partisan collapse, and now America and Arizona
can lead the way in semiconductor manufacturing, and our country is
safer and more secure.
Bringing Senators John Cornyn, Chris Murphy, and Thom Tillis together
to tackle the intractable issue of gun violence, we not only saved
lives; we improved our country's mental health care.
As everyone involved in each of those deals knows, the results
weren't easy. It was a product of months of hard conversations, many
tough decisions, many tradeoffs, and constant back-and-forths that
pushed us toward those solutions and that progress.
While those are the highlights, we have also witnessed what happens
here in this Chamber when we give in to the temptation of taking the
easy way out and abandoning those guardrails.
In 2013, judicial nominees weren't confirmed at a fast enough pace
for the majority, so one party lowered the 60-vote threshold to a
simple majority. And while one political party started it, the other
finished it, and now all Federal judges, including Supreme Court
nominees, are confirmed with just 51 votes.
Just 9 short years after that, half the country was shocked and
disappointed when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. But it was
no surprise at all. It was a foreseeable, predictable result of
eliminating the Senate standard that requires broad bipartisan support
for judicial nominees. No longer is the majority party required to
nominate mainstream judges who earn support from across the global
spectrum. Now it is just a race to get your guys into the spots while
you have power. Yet some wonder why public trust in our judiciary is at
an alltime low.
Even still, with the consequences of those shortsighted decisions
clear for all to see, the clamor to similarly destroy the Senate's
process of passing legislation persists. Surely I am not the only one
to see the absurdity in all of this.
The political winds have now shifted, and yet the filibuster endures
to ensure that the tyranny of the majority does not overrule the rights
of the minority, regardless of who sits in the seat of power.
Now, as we approach the 119th Congress, Republicans will control the
Presidency, the Senate, and the House. Sadly, I am already hearing
rumors of a hunger to subvert these norms--indeed, to use
reconciliation as a tool to circumvent the filibuster. But the end
result of that shortsighted action would be the same. As history has
shown, abusing or eliminating one tool for short-term gain means the
other party will do the same when it regains political power. It is a
devolution, and I can't think of anything more dangerous to our dear
democracy than the unwillingness to question our own preconceived
ideas, to examine our own biases, or to learn from those who think
differently from ourselves.

What I have tried to demonstrate in these 6 years is that you don't
have to burn down the rules and the norms to achieve what you want. You
can just do the hard work. You can build relationships. You can choose
to focus on consensus, not division. You can be an independent thinker
and put your State, your constituents, and your country ahead of party
leaders and activists--because you can get it done.
Over my time in the Senate, I have partnered with more than a few
unlikely allies--from the very most progressive to the very most
conservative--to break through gridlock and find some solutions. While
I can't detail each and every one of those unique relationships here
today, I will highlight a few:
My infamous Barbenheimer partner, Mike Lee--I know we are a bit of an
odd couple, but we have gotten a lot done together. My dear friend
James Lankford, whom I had the honor of sharing the Border Subcommittee
with throughout my last 6 years in the Senate and with whom I spent
many, many hours working on a solution that, while it isn't law today,
perhaps parts will become law one day. Senator Rand Paul. Cynthia
Lummis. The list goes on and on. And at the very, very dear risk of
damaging their careers: Chris Murphy, Brian Schatz, Patty Murray.
I hope I haven't ruined your careers.
(Laughter.)
It has been an honor to work with so many incredible people in the
U.S. Senate over these last 6 years.
One thing I learned early on in my very first days--actually, Senator
Jim Risch taught me this--is that we don't have to agree on everything;
we just have to agree on some things. It is not worth getting angry
about the things with which you disagree; it is better to focus on
those areas where you can agree.
So over these last 6 years, I have been grateful to embrace the
diversity of opinions in this body, to find solutions that reflect the
complexity of our country and our democracy, and to deliver meaningful,
measurable results: to bridge divides between Tribes and Federal
stakeholders to designate land around the Grand Canyon; to secure
historic resources, strengthening western water, safeguarding Arizona
families, and making sure that all of us throughout this country can
grow and thrive for generations to come. We have worked together and
cleared the way for historic settlements, land transfer deals, water
deals, providing economic certainty, all by listening to one another--
not to debate or to rebut but to understand.
It is this very marketplace of the diversity of ideas that makes our
country great, the knowledge that with dialogue and competition, we are
driven to be more thoughtful and more creative. That is why, despite
the challenges facing our country, I remain hopeful.
America is still the freest, most creative and innovative place in
the world. We are the birthplace of emerging technologies in medicine,
artificial intelligence, energy, and robotics, all revolutionizing our
global economy. And the opportunities created by American ingenuity are
limitless.
We must not let our politics hold us back, for America is still the
shining city on the hill, and it is up to each of us to protect it and
to strengthen it. We cannot afford to let political differences stand
in the way of what tomorrow may bring. We must hold firm to those
guardrails, our shared commitment to the principles that our
forefathers built this great country upon, and the ability and the
willingness to see the decency in each other, our fellow citizens. We
must choose the better angels of our nature.

Speaking of the better angels, over the past 12 years, I have had the
honor of working with some incredible people in both the House and the
Senate. I don't mean the Senators and Members of Congress I served
alongside, although that has been an incredible privilege. I have the
deepest respect and gratitude for my current and former colleagues. But
I speak now of our staff. From the minority and majority floor staff to
the cloakrooms, the Sergeant at Arms, the cafeteria workers, the
Parliamentarians, the police officers, the elevator operators, the
Architect of the Capitol employees, who never, ever fail to give a kind
word in the basement of this building--you all are the unsung heroes of
the Capitol. You are here long before we arrive each day. You are here
long after we head home for the night. So thank you.
To my own staff, many of whom are here today, from my very first days
in the House to my very last days here in the Senate, thank you. You
are the backbone of everything that we have delivered for Arizona and
for this country. I am so grateful that all of you chose to serve
alongside me and help us deliver real results for my beloved State and
our country. I could not be more proud of what we accomplished.
As I leave this floor after 6 years in the Senate, I cannot help but
continue to think of President Abraham Lincoln's words as he closed his
first inaugural address. He called for unity in a deeply divided
country, and his words ring true today:

[[Page S7128]]

I am loathe to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We
must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it
must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of
memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave
to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad
land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again
touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our
nature.

Thank you. I yield the floor.
(Applause, Senators rising.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.

Tribute to Kyrsten Sinema

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to recognize the truly
extraordinary contributions to the U.S. Senate, to her home State of
Arizona, and to our country of my friend and colleague Senator Kyrsten
Sinema.
The qualities that took Kyrsten from a difficult childhood to
college, law school, the Arizona Legislature, and the U.S. Congress are
evident to all of us who have had the privilege to work alongside such
a remarkable leader. Her strength, courage, and fierce independence are
inspiring. Her belief in the power of hard work and the importance of
lending a hand to those in need guides her approach to public service.
Most of all, I will never forget her persistence in forging
compromises that benefit the American people. It truly is remarkable.
Kyrsten always puts country over party.
I had the privilege of working with Kyrsten on consequential
legislation. She was the negotiator of the Electoral Count Reform and
Presidential Transition Improvement Act to ensure the orderly
transition of Presidential power. She was the lead Democratic
negotiator of the bipartisan infrastructure act, the most significant
investment in our infrastructure since the Interstate Highway System in
the fifties.
Kyrsten's work to craft the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act is yet
another example. She coauthored the provisions to better prevent
domestic abusers from having access to firearms.
She was vital to the success of the Respect for Marriage Act, which
defends same-sex marriages while at the same time strengthening and
respecting religious liberties.
Kyrsten also believes in protecting our institutions, and she spoke
eloquently today of the importance of the filibuster and made such a
compelling case. Standing up to intense pressure, her strong defense of
the filibuster preserved the rights of the minority.
I have been here when Republicans have been in the majority and when
they have been in the minority. She reminded us that working together
across party lines inevitably produces better legislation that is more
carefully thought out and drafted.
In a powerful speech that Senator Sinema gave to a college on a
college campus, 2 years ago, she said this:

Imagine what more we could accomplish for our country if,
rather than staying in comfortable partisan corners, more
leaders reached out in a genuine desire to craft durable,
bipartisan solutions to our country's most difficult
challenges.

That is exactly what Kyrsten Sinema has done. She is that kind of
leader. I thank her for her service, for making such a difference in
the U.S. Senate, for her country, for the Senate, and for her home
State. And I wish her all the best in her next endeavor.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. ROMNEY. Mr. President, I don't think I have had a better friend
in the U.S. Senate than Senator Kyrsten Sinema. We are best friends. I
would not have predicted that at the outset. By all appearance, we are
about as different as we can be. But actually, our roots are very much
in the same soil. We have grown up with the kinds of values that have
shaped our lives and our public service.
When she first came to the Senate floor, her appearance was quite
striking and her personality was, in a similar vein, highly noticeable.
And I turned to one of my Senate colleagues, and I said: What do you
think about that new Senator from Arizona?
And he said: I can tell you right now, she is going to be trouble.
She obtained the nickname ``Trouble'' at that point and has carried
it ever since, at least in my lexicon.
The truth is, she has been so far from trouble, it is hard to imagine
a less appropriate name. Why is that? One, I believe she has been the
most productive U.S. Senator in the last 6 years of anyone in this
body.
Now, there may be a competition, here and there, from other people,
but I don't think so. If you look at all the legislation of
significance that has been passed over the last 6 years, she has been
critical to it, generally leading it, at least a co-chair, in virtually
all of that legislation.
At the same time, she gets along with everybody. I think those are
related. There are some Members of my own caucus which I believe are an
acquired taste--which I haven't acquired yet--and yet she has, from the
outset, been able to make friends with people who are dramatically
different in politics but also different in personal style. She likes
some very difficult-to-like people. As a result of those friendships,
she has been able to get people to come across the aisle, from time to
time, when it was critical to get things done.
But if I had to say what has distinguished her most as a Member of
this body--not just the fact that she has been the most productive and
has been able to get people on both sides of the aisle to work through
tough issues and to make the Senate work when we were stalled--what I
think sets her apart most is the degree of her principle and character.
She is an individual who was raised in a home with principles, went to
institutions, including my alma mater, Brigham Young University. She
graduated a lot faster than I did and made it through that university
in a short period of time.
But, at one point, my colleagues asked me: Is she going to be able to
stand up to the pressure that is going to be placed on her for
preserving the institution of the Senate, because there is going to be
enormous political pressure rained upon her, and will she be able to
resist that pressure? I volunteered at our caucus lunch to go sound out
whether she would have the capacity to overcome what was a groundswell
on her side of the aisle to take action which would have devastated, in
my view, the institution of the Senate.
I approached her and said: Kyrsten, will you be able to vote no? Will
you be able to defend the principle that has made the Senate work over
these decades?
And she said: Mitt, you ought to know me by now. I was raised with
the same values you have. I am a person of principle, and I stand by my
principles.
And I have watched her time and again do that very thing.
I spoke with one of the leaders in my party, and I said: How is the
Senate going to work without Kyrsten Sinema to bridge the divide that
often exists between us? And he said: I am not sure it will be able to
work without her. How in the world she is not coming back as a United
States Senator is one of the great mysteries to me. She should be
coming back. We need her in this body. She has been an essential Member
of this body.
I will just close with this: I used to love reading books by Louis
L'Amour. He writes about the American West. I read them all; I probably
still love them. I am getting old enough to forget his earlier books,
so I could read them again and still love them. But he had an
expression about people that were just really individuals you could
count on, rely on, people of character and capacity and principle. He
said they had ``sand.''
And if there is someone who has sand in this body, it is Kyrsten
Sinema. She is going to continue to make a huge imprint on the United
States of America. It has been an honor to serve with her.
I feel we have been blessed by having her in this body.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, one of my jobs in this Congress is chair
of the Senate Judiciary Committee and considering hundreds of nominees
for lifetime appointments to the Federal bench. It has been quite a
process. About 80 percent of those who have gone through have been on a
bipartisan basis, which is a good thing, but there have been ups and
downs.
There is only one Senator who is able to bring two nominees from her
State through the committee without the usual waiting periods because
she asked on the other side for permission to move forward. They
trusted her;

[[Page S7129]]

they liked her; and they gave her an exception. In both instances,
Kyrsten Sinema has delivered for the State of Arizona when it comes to
Federal judges on an expedited basis, pure and solely by her
personality and charm and ability, I might add.
I also want to say a word, I have invested a large part of my Senate
career on the immigration issue, and I thank her for her valiant effort
trying to put together a bipartisan effort on that whole immigration
issue. I know it was a hard break for you not to be able to do that,
and I think you really held the key to bringing together both sides in
a way that I have never seen in the Senate.
So thank you for trying, thank you for your effort. Congratulations
on your achievements. I wish you the very best.

H.R. 5009

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, the National Defense Authorization Act
under consideration by the Senate today provides crucial resources to
our Armed Forces and our national defense. This year's defense bill
invests directly in the men and women in uniform through a significant
pay raise for junior enlisted members along with improvements in
housing, healthcare, and support for all servicemembers and their
families. The bill also provides funding authorization for the many
Federal Agencies in Maryland whose missions support our national
defense, including resources for critical projects taking place at Fort
Meade and Aberdeen Providing Ground, as well as the construction of a
contained burn facility at Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head,
protecting air quality in our local communities. I also worked with my
colleagues to expand the scope of the SERVE Act, which I helped pass
into law in the FY22 NDAA, by ensuring that high school students
applying to attend the Merchant Marine Academy do not lose the
opportunity to be nominated because of a vacancy in the office of one
of their U.S. Senators or Representative in the U.S. House. The bill
also includes the State Department Authorization Act and takes
meaningful steps to improve the quality of life for our diplomatic
corps and their family members, such as greater flexibility for foreign
service families' housing arrangements and fairer pay for locally hired
foreign service staff.
There are many important provisions in this legislation, and I
support funding a robust national defense that meets the challenges of
emerging threats and an increasingly unstable world. Maryland is the
proud home of tens of thousands of military personnel and civilians
working in the defense sector, as well as critical military
installations, and I am glad that this legislation invests over $200
million in our State's critical assets to address the security
challenges of today and tomorrow. Maryland's bases are innovating in
fields from cybersecurity to energetics and are conducting critical
research to protect our military.
Protecting our national security goes hand-in-hand with advancing
U.S. innovation and competitiveness. Maryland has a key role to play in
developing the technologies of the future that will keep our Nation at
the cutting-edge. Today's bill authorizes the Department of Commerce to
utilize up to $500 million from spectrum auction proceeds for the
Regional Technology and Innovation Hubs (``Tech Hubs'') program, which
was established in the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, to
fund designated Tech Hubs and to expand the program. In 2023, the
Baltimore Region Tech Hub was designated as one of the 31 inaugural
Tech Hubs, and this funding could further its efforts to become a
global leader in advancing biotech and equitable artificial
intelligence to improve national health outcomes.
While I support important investments in our national defense, I
remain concerned about the continued growth in defense spending,
especially when the Pentagon as a whole continues to fail independent
audits, with only half of the Department's 28 Agencies passing their
own individual audits. While I do not believe that across-the-board
cuts are the best way to reduce spending, I do believe we need to put
our defense dollars to much more strategic use and make the hard
choices necessary to right-size our defense spending. As we discuss
ways to achieve greater government efficiency, we must apply the same
standard to the Department of Defense, which represents over half of
total Federal discretionary spending.
Today's bill also includes harmful language unfairly targeting
transgender youth and their families. It is not Congress's place to
decide what health decisions our military families make; these
decisions should be left to servicemembers, their families, and their
doctors. It is especially galling that this bill restricts some
healthcare and fails to expand access to IVF to help military members
struggling with infertility. We should be supporting our military
families, not limiting their access to care. Given these concerns, I
supported Senator Baldwin's amendment to remove section 708 entirely,
and I am disappointed this language remains in the final bill.
In addition, despite promises to the contrary, the new definition for
what is considered an ``electronic communications service provider''
that was included in the April 2024 reauthorization of section 702 of
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was not amended in
this bill. This new definition, while intended to clarify the term to
account for changing technology, broadly includes ``any other service
provider who has access to equipment that is being or may be used to
transmit or store wire or electronic communications.'' This overly
broad definition, among other reasons, is why I voted against the
reauthorization of section 702 of FISA. While I accept the
representations from proponents that this language is not intended to
open the door to requiring a slew of service providers to comply with
government demands to intercept communications, its plain language is
very broad. I, along with other Members who were concerned with this
provision, were told by our colleagues that this language would be
altered in the final bill. I appreciated that the Senate's version of
the Intelligence Authorization Act included revised language addressing
this concern, but that provision unfortunately wasn't included in the
final NDAA, and I am deeply disappointed with this outcome.
Ensuring that our men and women in uniform have the tools they need
to defend the United States is critical. Like any bill, this package
isn't perfect, but overall, I believe it will meaningfully advance our
national security goals, support our defense workforce, and invest in
crucial priorities for Maryland. That being said, I have serious
concerns with several important issues within this legislation. We must
right-size our defense spending. We must protect our military families
and their access to healthcare. And we must protect Americans from the
possible misuse of surveillance authorities. I will continue to work
with my colleagues in the next Congress to address these serious
concerns.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Reed,
Senator Schumer, and I be allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each
prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WICKER. Mr. President, the Senate will soon consider the National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2025.
The NDAA is among the most important bills Congress considers each
year. It is a primary way of fulfilling our most solemn obligation: our
constitutional duty to provide for the common defense.
Congress has come together to pass the NDAA each year for more than
six decades--63 years to be precise. Today, we continue our streak of
earned success.
In our best moments, we worked out the NDAA in an open and aboveboard
process. Here I must say that I am frustrated with the majority
leader's decision to thwart that regular order this year. He did not
bring the bill to the floor, thus denying Americans the opportunity to
witness their elected representatives make decisions in the open on
critical national security issues.
Still, we continued in the spirit of honesty and collegiality. The
numbers bear that out. The Armed Services Committee considered nearly
3,000 requests submitted by all Senators. We considered 618 amendments
at markup, adopting 327 of those amendments. We

[[Page S7130]]

then processed over 90 amendments during the informal conference
process.
These statistics tell the story of the hard work and professionalism
that characterized the construction of this bill.
We are currently experiencing the most dangerous national security
moment since World War II. One need only scroll through the headlines
summarizing this year's world events. Congress needed to respond in
kind. At every possible opportunity, we should be sending a signal of
peace through strength of strong deterrence.
Accordingly, the Senate Armed Services Committee took an honest look
at growing capability and aggression by our adversaries. We decided
that this year was the time to change our course and move our military
toward the generational defense investment it deserves.
That vital committee action included an upgrade of $25 billion for
our missile defense, shipbuilding, and counter-drone technology, among
other modernization programs--$25 billion.
This should have been part of the bill today. Regrettably, we missed
an opportunity to strengthen the President-elect's hand as he takes
office in a precarious world situation.
I hope and expect we will see bipartisan support for much-needed
investment early in 2025. And yet as I note what is missing from the
bill, I am happy to recognize the immense accomplishments that Members
have included in NDAA. We secured a significant 14.5 percent pay raise
for our junior enlisted servicemembers, as well as a 4.5 percent
increase for all other servicemembers.
We made investments in junior ROTC and recruitment capabilities, both
of which will help solve the military's manpower crisis.
This bill stops the Department of Defense from paying for puberty
blockers and hormone therapies for children.
We blocked the teaching of critical race theory in military
programming, and we froze diversity, equity, and inclusion hiring at
the DOD. In fact, we defunded DEI.
The NDAA authorizes critical investments across the board. We
accelerated ongoing nuclear deterrence efforts; we moved forward in
shipbuilding programs for our destroyers and submarines; finally, we
learned from the wars going on around us today, using real world
experience, we found ways to strengthen security assistance for
frontline allies in the Pacific, the Middle East, and in Europe.
So let me say again, this is a good bill. It is a piece of
legislation in which I take pride. As always, I am grateful to have the
opportunity to advance our national security. And as I speak of
gratitude, I want to extend special thanks to my friend, Chairman Jack
Reed. I also want to thank his team on the Armed Services Committee,
ably led by staff director Liz King.
I thank my Republican and Democratic colleagues on the committee as
well; each made important contributions to the bill. This is especially
true of our subcommittee chairs and ranking members, and I will
recognize those on my side of the aisle: Senator Tom Cotton, ranking
member of Airland; Senator Deb Fischer, ranking member of Strategic
Forces; Senator Mike Rounds, Cybersecurity ranking member; Senator Joni
Ernst, Emerging Threats and Capabilities ranking member; Senator Rick
Scott ranking member of Personnel; and Senator Dan Sullivan, ranking
member of Readiness.
I also want to thank my Armed Services Committee staff. These
patriotic individuals burned the midnight oil for months, literally.
They delivered a product that this body can be proud of, one that does
much to advance American interests.
The American people would be astounded to see how hard and how long
these staff members work. And I can hardly mention my staff without
thanking my intrepid staff director John Keast. John and his superb
team know how to get the job done, and I want to recognize John Keast
and his staff by name.
They are Rick Berger, Brendan Gavin, James Mazol, Greg Lilly, Adam
Barker, Zach Barnett, Kristina Belcourt, Jack Beyrer, Cody Emerson,
Isaac Jalkanen, Kevin Kim, Eric Lofgren, Katie Magnus, Jonathan Moore,
Sean O'Keefe, Brad Patout, Katie Romaine, Eric Trager, Adam Trull and
Olivia Trusty.
This year's NDAA will further the cause of our national defense, but
it cannot do all that we need. This bill--this will be the final vote
on this bill. It has passed the House. We have invoked cloture, and
this vote will send this bill to the President.
Let this piece of legislation be an exhortation that Congress can no
longer leave the job of national defense half finished. We have no
choice but to move ahead and to move ahead early next year with a
generational investment in our military.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise to express my support for the fiscal
year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act. I am glad that we will
soon be voting on final passage of the bill, and I expect it to pass
with strong support.
First, I would like to acknowledge the great work and leadership of
my colleague Senator Roger Wicker; also our colleagues in the House,
Chairman Mike Rogers and Representative Adam Smith. Their partnership
has been crucial for the success of this bill. The hallmark of the
Senate and House Armed Services Committee has long been bipartisanship,
and I am glad that we have continued that tradition for the 64th
consecutive year.
I would also like to thank the Members of the Senate and House Armed
Services Committees who helped produce this bill, as well as Leader
Schumer, Leader McConnell, Speaker Johnson, and Leader Jeffries, who
facilitated a thorough debate and enabled all Members to engage in the
process.
We were able to negotiate hundreds of bipartisan provisions between
both Chambers over the past 2 months. This is a strong, forward-looking
bill that we can all be proud of. This NDAA is laser-focused on the
threats we face.
First and foremost, it recognizes the urgent challenge that China
poses to our national security. Beijing continues to escalate its
aggressive behavior both militarily and economically against the United
States and our allies, and we must respond with resolve.
This NDAA makes strong progress in that regard. Among many other
efforts, it authorizes $15.5 billion for the Pacific Deterrence
Initiative. It establishes a joint force headquarters in Japan, and it
strengthens a number of our regional networks, including AUKUS, the
Quad, our trilateral partnership with South Korea and Japan, our
alliance with the Philippines, and our partnership with Taiwan. These
are momentous accomplishments.
The NDAA also addresses the evolving threats from Russia, Iran, North
Korea, and transnational criminal organizations.
It authorizes full funding for the European Deterrence Initiative,
provides support for our security cooperation missions with Israel, and
improves our counterdrug capabilities in the Western Hemisphere.
Importantly, the bill authorizes record-level investments in key
technologies, like hypersonics and artificial intelligence, and
significantly increases resources for uncrewed systems and counter-UAS
development.
Indeed, our drone capabilities, both defensive and offensive, must be
improved quickly as we are seeing every day.
The bill also makes substantial progress toward modernizing our
ships, submarines, aircraft, and combat vehicles.
Most importantly, this NDAA provides a historic level of support for
our troops and their families. We have included the largest pay raise
for junior enlisted servicemembers in decades, expanded eligibility for
the Basic Needs Allowance, and authorized increased funding to repair
barracks around the world.
Now, I acknowledge the concerns that some of my colleagues have about
the bill. A number of Senators hoped to see a higher top line to match
the threats we face around the world. Their concern is well-reasoned.
However, I would point out that the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023,
which was demanded by House Republicans, clearly set forth the top-line
cap and the budgetary consequences that would result from breaking it.
The top line we ultimately negotiated adheres to that law. Nonetheless,
I am confident that this bill will provide robust capabilities for the
Department.

[[Page S7131]]

In addition, I share many of my colleagues' frustrations that the
bill includes a provision that would prohibit gender-affirming
healthcare for minors in certain circumstances. I voted against this
provision in committee, and I disagree strongly with including such a,
frankly, I think misguided provision in the Defense bill. We will
continue to work to ensure the healthcare rights of all military
personnel and their dependencies.
Ultimately, though, we have before us a very strong National Defense
Authorization Act. I am confident it will provide the Department of
Defense and our military men and women with the resources they need to
meet and defeat the national security threats we face.
Now I would like to take an opportunity to recognize the staff who
have made this bill possible. Senator Wicker has already pointed out
the extraordinary members of his staff and rightfully commended them
for their excellent work. I specifically want to recognize, first, the
director of the Democratic staff Elizabeth King and the director of the
Republican staff John Keast. They did a superb job. They have led their
staffs with professionalism and skill.
I would also like to thank members of the Armed Services Committee
staff on my side of the aisle: Jody Bennett, Carolyn Chuhta, Jon Clark,
Jenny Davis, Jonathan Epstein, Jorie Feldman, Kevin Gates, Creighton
Greene, Chad Johnson, Gary Leeling, Maggie McNamara Cooper, Mike
Noblet, John Quirk, Andy Scott, Cole Stevens, Meredith Werner, Alison
Warner, Isabelle Picciotti, Leah Brewer, Sean Jones, Joe Gallo, Ryan
Bates, Sean Jones, Brittany Amador, Sofia Kamali, Noah Sisk, and
Zachary Volpe.
Also, I want to thank the floor staff and the leadership. We can't
get anything done around here without the floor staff and the
leadership.
Thank you, Senator Schumer.
Mr. SCHUMER. In that order of importance, in my opinion.
Mr. REED. As the majority leader points out, the floor staff is the
most important component of what we do.
You have been part of this process for the last several weeks and
have done a remarkable job getting us to this point, and I thank you
very much.
Mr. SCHUMER. Thank you.
Mr. REED. Finally, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Heinrich). The Democratic leader.
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, first, let me commend Jack Reed for his
great leadership as head of the Armed Services Committee. He is an
amazing leader. He knows the military like no one, from his service
there. He is a West Point graduate--great New York institution. Sorry
they lost. I was on their side. He can explain things. He has just done
an amazing job, and he is steadfast and intrepid and on the merits, and
everyone respects him. That is why we have gotten--this was a difficult
year to get this bill done. Some thought we wouldn't be able to with
the polarization, the late hour, and everything else, but because of
this man, we did, and he deserves all of our thanks.
I want to thank Senator Wicker as well. He is a big, strong fighter
for the military and did a great job as well.
So I thank both of you. This is the kind of bipartisan way we should
do this.
Now, today, for the 64th consecutive year, the Senate passes a
bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act to protect the American
people and strengthen our security--64th year. Pretty good. Pretty
good.
The NDAA is not perfect, but it still makes several important
advances Democrats fought for to secure America's national defense and
take a strong stand against the Chinese Communist Party. I am
particularly glad that the NDAA expands the Tech Hubs Program that I
created in the bipartisan Chips and Science Act, along with Senators
Young, Cantwell, and others, and I thank our leaders for understanding
the importance of that issue. It will help make tech innovation more
achievable in the Midwest, across the country, and--near and dear to
me--in Upstate New York.
The NDAA will also strengthen America's leadership on AI by expanding
our AI infrastructure within the Department of Defense--something that
our bipartisan AI forums from last year stressed was critical, and now
we are getting it passed into law.
The NDAA gives our troops a raise, authorizes funding for military
families to pay for childcare, extends programs for military spouses to
find good-paying jobs, and expands mental health services for parents.
Again, I thank the staffs as well. They are great, professional, and
excellent. I thank Senator Reed. I thank Ranking Member Wicker and the
members of the Armed Services Committee.
This is a good day for the strength of America.

Motion to Concur with Amendment No. 3317 Withdrawn

Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending
motion to concur with amendment No. 3317 be withdrawn.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.

Vote on Motion

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to
concur.
The yeas and nays were previously ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from Ohio (Mr. Vance).
The result was announced--yeas 85, nays 14, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 325 Leg.]

YEAS--85

Barrasso
Bennet
Blackburn
Blumenthal
Boozman
Britt
Brown
Budd
Cantwell
Capito
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Cassidy
Collins
Coons
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Duckworth
Durbin
Ernst
Fetterman
Fischer
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hassan
Hawley
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Kaine
Kelly
Kennedy
King
Klobuchar
Lankford
Lujan
Lummis
Manchin
Marshall
McConnell
Moran
Mullin
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Ossoff
Padilla
Peters
Reed
Ricketts
Risch
Romney
Rosen
Rounds
Rubio
Schatz
Schmitt
Schumer
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shaheen
Sinema
Smith
Sullivan
Tester
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Whitehouse
Wicker
Young

NAYS--14

Baldwin
Booker
Braun
Kim
Lee
Markey
Merkley
Paul
Sanders
Schiff
Stabenow
Warren
Welch
Wyden

NOT VOTING--1

Vance

The motion was agreed to.
(Mr. HICKENLOOPER assumed the Chair.)

____________________