data_type stringclasses 2 values | dog_whistle stringlengths 2 26 | dog_whistle_root stringlengths 2 98 ⌀ | ingroup stringclasses 17 values | content stringlengths 2 83.3k | date stringlengths 10 10 ⌀ | speaker stringlengths 4 62 ⌀ | chamber stringclasses 2 values | reference stringlengths 24 31 ⌀ | community stringclasses 11 values | __index_level_0__ int64 0 35.6k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
formal | EST | null | white supremacist | The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate the letter of resignation of Senator Kamala D. Harris of California, which became effective at 12 noon yesterday, January 18, 2021. Without objection, the letter is deemed read and spread upon the Journal and will be printed in the Record. The letter follows: U.S. Senate, January 18, 2021. Governor Gavin Newsom, Sacramento, CA. Dear Governor Newsom: I hereby resign as Senator from the State of California, effective January 18, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. EST. As I assume my duties as Vice President of the United States, I would like to thank the people of California for the honor of serving them in the U.S. Senate over the past four years. Sincerely, Kamala D. Harris, U.S. Senator. | 2020-01-06 | The PRESIDENT pro tempore | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS49-6 | null | 2,100 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. McCONNELL. Now, Mr. President, on a related matter, a great deal has already been said about the disgraceful events of January 6. More will be said in the weeks ahead. I understand the FBI has already made at least 100 arrests, and the Justice Department reports more than 275 persons under investigation--a number that is climbing fast. I want to commend the work of the Department to swiftly investigate and bring offenders to justice. As I have stated, January 6 saw failures of institutions, protocols, and planning. Those failures did not just leave Congress itself exposed; they also left the courageous men and women of the Capitol Police themselves in a totally untenable situation. So today, I want to reaffirm the huge respect and gratitude that I have--and I believe all Senators have--for the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police who put their own safety on the line every single day that they clock in and stand guard. Neither the institution of Congress nor the American people will ever forget the bravery and the valor of Officer Brian Sicknick, who sacrificed himself to protect this place and those inside it. We will not forget our friend Officer Howard Liebengood. And we will never forget our debt to all the brave CP officers and their families. It is more than just comforting to come to work in a place protected by such fine men and women, at risk to themselves. It is also very humbling. We are also grateful to the local officers from DC, Virginia, and Maryland, to Federal law enforcement officers, the National Guard, the Secret Service, and all the other professionals who helped subdue the criminals and secure the Capitol on the 6th and are working together to protect peace and order this week. Tomorrow, a new President and Vice President will swear their oaths of office. They will also do so safely and securely because so many brave men and women have sworn their own oaths to support and defend our Constitution. We salute you all. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS50 | null | 2,101 |
formal | job creator | null | conservative | Mrs. LOEFFLER. Mr. President, it has been the honor of my lifetime to serve Georgia in the U.S. Senate. There has never been a day that I don't walk through the hallways of the Capitol when I am not awestruck by the magnitude of this job and of this place and of my duty. I want to thank my colleagues, especially those who welcomed me from the start, who worked with me, and who even across the aisle worked with me to get things done for our country in such a consequential year. I want to thank the people of Georgia who showed me the very best of our great State. My goal as Senator was clear: to work every single day to make Georgians' lives better and to make ours the very best State to work, to live, to worship, and to raise a family. I never stopped working to meet that goal and was energized and humbled every single day by the opportunity to serve. In between weeks spent in Washington, I crisscrossed our great State nonstop, going from southeast coastal Georgia in Camden County to northwest mountain Georgia in Catoosa County. Time with Georgians are my fondest memories. One of my earliest visits was in Homerville, GA, population 2,400. I carried the people of Homerville with me every day as I approached my work. Having grown up on our family farm, where the nearest small town had a population of 600, my calling to public service was, in large part, to be a voice--an outsized voice--for those who feel they didn't have a voice in Washington. Many Georgians inspired me each day to bring results to every corner ofour State. In that spirit, I want to thank Governor Kemp for appointing me and entrusting me with the important work of being a voice for our State and a servant to our citizens. I was proud to serve alongside my friend and colleague Senator David Perdue. I want to recognize Senator Johnny Isakson and Senator Saxby Chambliss for their shining example of what it meant to be a Senator, and, most importantly, a public servant. I also want to recognize and thank my incredible husband, Jeff, whose love and support encouraged me every single day. And I want to thank my family for instilling the values of faith, family, and hard work. You all have my deepest love and gratitude. As importantly, I want to recognize my very talented and hard-working staff, many of whom are with me today. Together, our work here and in Georgia has made a tremendous difference in our State. Let me tell you about just some of that work, because in one significant year in the Senate, I am so proud of all we have accomplished together. We delivered more than $47 billion in relief to Georgia during the pandemic--to farmers, to family, to small businesses, hospitals, and schools. And, as a freshman Senator, I introduced and passed six pieces of legislation. We secured funding for rural hospitals. We increased telehealth access, and we sped the delivery of PPE to the frontlines. I championed and we passed legislation that increased funding to help homeless veterans get back on their feet, and I was proud to champion agriculture, our State's leading industry, as well as our military, law enforcement, small businesses, and school choice. I stood up for innocent life, the Second Amendment, and all of our constitutional rights. I was able to use my business experience to develop four wide-ranging plans to drive economic security, keep our Nation safe, modernize our healthcare system, and increase opportunities in minority communities. In 2020 alone, our office helped over 5,200 Georgians with casework, including nearly 1,000 Georgia veterans and Active-Duty service men and women navigate their VA benefits in VA medical centers. I am incredibly proud of all the work we accomplished together for our State and for our country. There is much more work to do. I had hoped to pass a piece of my legislation to bring back to the United States from China the manufacturing of our critical medical supplies, including prescription drugs, over-the-counter medicine, and medical equipment. I want to wish my successor well in his work serving Georgia. Now, most farewell speeches urge colleagues to put country before party or to fix what is broken here in the Senate. My message is slightly different. In all of the events of recent weeks, I want to urge my colleagues to remember why we are here, whom you serve, and to recall the greatness of the American experiment, as well as the fragile nature of our freedoms. I spent 30 years in the private sector chasing the American dream. I worked on our family's farm. I waitressed. I lived paycheck to paycheck. I moved around the country and worked hard to overcome setbacks and to build a respected career in business. I came to Georgia two decades ago as a job seeker, and I became a job creator, helping to grow a small startup company into a Fortune 500 company. And, like many Georgians, part of that work is giving back in our communities and supporting others in achieving their dreams. I have done that now in business, in philanthropy, in sports, and now in public service. That is the American dream. It gives everyone, regardless of their background, the freedom to make the most of their life, chase their passions, build their family and their career, and thrive in the greatest country in the world. Protecting that dream for all Americans should be our common cause, regardless of political party. As I served over the last year, it has become clear that we need more outsiders, more business people, and fewer--with all due respect--fewer politicians. Americans have high expectations for us. They are looking for leadership. They want results, and, right now, they want their lives back. They are looking for us to restore America and protect their dreams, not to take advantage of a crisis and expand the government. They certainly don't want their way of life overwhelmed by radical change and costly policies that will push them out of their job, limit their children's educational opportunities, and threaten their right to worship and speak freely. At the same time, while those on the left feign a desire for unity, they say they cannot tolerate it without accountability. In essence, there can be no unity without conforming to their views. Disagree, and you will be canceled, and not just your social media account but your job, your family, your educational opportunities, and even your God-given rights. Only those who meet the ideological purity test can claim moral superiority and maintain their voice. Over the last year, I experienced this firsthand many times. Yes, I have been a proud champion of conservative values, but I always put Georgia first ahead of politics. As the pandemic began to unfold, I worked around the clock to deliver relief across Georgia, yet the mainstream media, including my own hometown newspaper, flooded its pages not with serious coverage of my relief efforts but with completely false stories about stock trades fabricated by a leftwing blog. When this political attack was thoroughly debunked, that fact was largely omitted from subsequent coverage to fit their narrative. The truth is, the mainstream media and Big Tech increasingly care only about advancing their political ideology and protecting only the speech that fits into their specific narrative. The double standards, disdain, and contempt that elites and institutions of influence have for conservatives is increasingly being revealed. For the sake of our discourse, this cannot continue. As a starting point, we must hold accountable those who limit our free speech and the loss of our civil discourse in this country. The American people are alarmed by the effort to censor conservative voices. We are witnessing a constitutional crisis that threatens to erode the First Amendment and silence people across our country. As a Republican and a conservative American who still believes in the Constitution and the core principles on which our country was founded, I refuse to be intimidated by the cancel culture and its dangerous narratives. However, not every American feels free to speak up. Their voices are being lost. This is why this Senate is so important. For 230 years, the U.S. Senate has been the central venue for voicing dissenting views, and it has celebrated the deliberation of issues confronting our Nation. You must be the voice for those who can't use theirs. Now is the time. The urgency weighs on our country. If we are serious about uniting, it must be out of respect for diversity, not despite it. Diversity of belief is not monolithic. In 1964, a future President Ronald Reagan spoke to his fellow Americans saying: You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. These sage words echo today. These words are timeless. To my colleagues in the Senate, I urge you to address the dire threats to our First Amendment rights in order to restore every American's faith in our democracy and to help restore our trust in each other. It is the only way to ensure that America, the world's shining city on the hill, a republic admired for centuries, can endure for future generations. I encourage each of you to uphold our uniquely American values and preserve the American dream, and I will continue to champion our party's values from whatever position I occupy. America depends on it. Americans are counting on us to be their voice. For a shy farm girl who was the first in her family to graduate from college, who could never have imagined that one day I would serve as the U.S. Senator from the great State of Georgia, thank you all. It has been my deepest honor. May God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. I yield the floor. (Applause.) | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. LOEFFLER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS51 | null | 2,102 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mrs. LOEFFLER. Mr. President, it has been the honor of my lifetime to serve Georgia in the U.S. Senate. There has never been a day that I don't walk through the hallways of the Capitol when I am not awestruck by the magnitude of this job and of this place and of my duty. I want to thank my colleagues, especially those who welcomed me from the start, who worked with me, and who even across the aisle worked with me to get things done for our country in such a consequential year. I want to thank the people of Georgia who showed me the very best of our great State. My goal as Senator was clear: to work every single day to make Georgians' lives better and to make ours the very best State to work, to live, to worship, and to raise a family. I never stopped working to meet that goal and was energized and humbled every single day by the opportunity to serve. In between weeks spent in Washington, I crisscrossed our great State nonstop, going from southeast coastal Georgia in Camden County to northwest mountain Georgia in Catoosa County. Time with Georgians are my fondest memories. One of my earliest visits was in Homerville, GA, population 2,400. I carried the people of Homerville with me every day as I approached my work. Having grown up on our family farm, where the nearest small town had a population of 600, my calling to public service was, in large part, to be a voice--an outsized voice--for those who feel they didn't have a voice in Washington. Many Georgians inspired me each day to bring results to every corner ofour State. In that spirit, I want to thank Governor Kemp for appointing me and entrusting me with the important work of being a voice for our State and a servant to our citizens. I was proud to serve alongside my friend and colleague Senator David Perdue. I want to recognize Senator Johnny Isakson and Senator Saxby Chambliss for their shining example of what it meant to be a Senator, and, most importantly, a public servant. I also want to recognize and thank my incredible husband, Jeff, whose love and support encouraged me every single day. And I want to thank my family for instilling the values of faith, family, and hard work. You all have my deepest love and gratitude. As importantly, I want to recognize my very talented and hard-working staff, many of whom are with me today. Together, our work here and in Georgia has made a tremendous difference in our State. Let me tell you about just some of that work, because in one significant year in the Senate, I am so proud of all we have accomplished together. We delivered more than $47 billion in relief to Georgia during the pandemic--to farmers, to family, to small businesses, hospitals, and schools. And, as a freshman Senator, I introduced and passed six pieces of legislation. We secured funding for rural hospitals. We increased telehealth access, and we sped the delivery of PPE to the frontlines. I championed and we passed legislation that increased funding to help homeless veterans get back on their feet, and I was proud to champion agriculture, our State's leading industry, as well as our military, law enforcement, small businesses, and school choice. I stood up for innocent life, the Second Amendment, and all of our constitutional rights. I was able to use my business experience to develop four wide-ranging plans to drive economic security, keep our Nation safe, modernize our healthcare system, and increase opportunities in minority communities. In 2020 alone, our office helped over 5,200 Georgians with casework, including nearly 1,000 Georgia veterans and Active-Duty service men and women navigate their VA benefits in VA medical centers. I am incredibly proud of all the work we accomplished together for our State and for our country. There is much more work to do. I had hoped to pass a piece of my legislation to bring back to the United States from China the manufacturing of our critical medical supplies, including prescription drugs, over-the-counter medicine, and medical equipment. I want to wish my successor well in his work serving Georgia. Now, most farewell speeches urge colleagues to put country before party or to fix what is broken here in the Senate. My message is slightly different. In all of the events of recent weeks, I want to urge my colleagues to remember why we are here, whom you serve, and to recall the greatness of the American experiment, as well as the fragile nature of our freedoms. I spent 30 years in the private sector chasing the American dream. I worked on our family's farm. I waitressed. I lived paycheck to paycheck. I moved around the country and worked hard to overcome setbacks and to build a respected career in business. I came to Georgia two decades ago as a job seeker, and I became a job creator, helping to grow a small startup company into a Fortune 500 company. And, like many Georgians, part of that work is giving back in our communities and supporting others in achieving their dreams. I have done that now in business, in philanthropy, in sports, and now in public service. That is the American dream. It gives everyone, regardless of their background, the freedom to make the most of their life, chase their passions, build their family and their career, and thrive in the greatest country in the world. Protecting that dream for all Americans should be our common cause, regardless of political party. As I served over the last year, it has become clear that we need more outsiders, more business people, and fewer--with all due respect--fewer politicians. Americans have high expectations for us. They are looking for leadership. They want results, and, right now, they want their lives back. They are looking for us to restore America and protect their dreams, not to take advantage of a crisis and expand the government. They certainly don't want their way of life overwhelmed by radical change and costly policies that will push them out of their job, limit their children's educational opportunities, and threaten their right to worship and speak freely. At the same time, while those on the left feign a desire for unity, they say they cannot tolerate it without accountability. In essence, there can be no unity without conforming to their views. Disagree, and you will be canceled, and not just your social media account but your job, your family, your educational opportunities, and even your God-given rights. Only those who meet the ideological purity test can claim moral superiority and maintain their voice. Over the last year, I experienced this firsthand many times. Yes, I have been a proud champion of conservative values, but I always put Georgia first ahead of politics. As the pandemic began to unfold, I worked around the clock to deliver relief across Georgia, yet the mainstream media, including my own hometown newspaper, flooded its pages not with serious coverage of my relief efforts but with completely false stories about stock trades fabricated by a leftwing blog. When this political attack was thoroughly debunked, that fact was largely omitted from subsequent coverage to fit their narrative. The truth is, the mainstream media and Big Tech increasingly care only about advancing their political ideology and protecting only the speech that fits into their specific narrative. The double standards, disdain, and contempt that elites and institutions of influence have for conservatives is increasingly being revealed. For the sake of our discourse, this cannot continue. As a starting point, we must hold accountable those who limit our free speech and the loss of our civil discourse in this country. The American people are alarmed by the effort to censor conservative voices. We are witnessing a constitutional crisis that threatens to erode the First Amendment and silence people across our country. As a Republican and a conservative American who still believes in the Constitution and the core principles on which our country was founded, I refuse to be intimidated by the cancel culture and its dangerous narratives. However, not every American feels free to speak up. Their voices are being lost. This is why this Senate is so important. For 230 years, the U.S. Senate has been the central venue for voicing dissenting views, and it has celebrated the deliberation of issues confronting our Nation. You must be the voice for those who can't use theirs. Now is the time. The urgency weighs on our country. If we are serious about uniting, it must be out of respect for diversity, not despite it. Diversity of belief is not monolithic. In 1964, a future President Ronald Reagan spoke to his fellow Americans saying: You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. These sage words echo today. These words are timeless. To my colleagues in the Senate, I urge you to address the dire threats to our First Amendment rights in order to restore every American's faith in our democracy and to help restore our trust in each other. It is the only way to ensure that America, the world's shining city on the hill, a republic admired for centuries, can endure for future generations. I encourage each of you to uphold our uniquely American values and preserve the American dream, and I will continue to champion our party's values from whatever position I occupy. America depends on it. Americans are counting on us to be their voice. For a shy farm girl who was the first in her family to graduate from college, who could never have imagined that one day I would serve as the U.S. Senator from the great State of Georgia, thank you all. It has been my deepest honor. May God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. I yield the floor. (Applause.) | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. LOEFFLER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS51 | null | 2,103 |
formal | Reagan | null | white supremacist | Mrs. LOEFFLER. Mr. President, it has been the honor of my lifetime to serve Georgia in the U.S. Senate. There has never been a day that I don't walk through the hallways of the Capitol when I am not awestruck by the magnitude of this job and of this place and of my duty. I want to thank my colleagues, especially those who welcomed me from the start, who worked with me, and who even across the aisle worked with me to get things done for our country in such a consequential year. I want to thank the people of Georgia who showed me the very best of our great State. My goal as Senator was clear: to work every single day to make Georgians' lives better and to make ours the very best State to work, to live, to worship, and to raise a family. I never stopped working to meet that goal and was energized and humbled every single day by the opportunity to serve. In between weeks spent in Washington, I crisscrossed our great State nonstop, going from southeast coastal Georgia in Camden County to northwest mountain Georgia in Catoosa County. Time with Georgians are my fondest memories. One of my earliest visits was in Homerville, GA, population 2,400. I carried the people of Homerville with me every day as I approached my work. Having grown up on our family farm, where the nearest small town had a population of 600, my calling to public service was, in large part, to be a voice--an outsized voice--for those who feel they didn't have a voice in Washington. Many Georgians inspired me each day to bring results to every corner ofour State. In that spirit, I want to thank Governor Kemp for appointing me and entrusting me with the important work of being a voice for our State and a servant to our citizens. I was proud to serve alongside my friend and colleague Senator David Perdue. I want to recognize Senator Johnny Isakson and Senator Saxby Chambliss for their shining example of what it meant to be a Senator, and, most importantly, a public servant. I also want to recognize and thank my incredible husband, Jeff, whose love and support encouraged me every single day. And I want to thank my family for instilling the values of faith, family, and hard work. You all have my deepest love and gratitude. As importantly, I want to recognize my very talented and hard-working staff, many of whom are with me today. Together, our work here and in Georgia has made a tremendous difference in our State. Let me tell you about just some of that work, because in one significant year in the Senate, I am so proud of all we have accomplished together. We delivered more than $47 billion in relief to Georgia during the pandemic--to farmers, to family, to small businesses, hospitals, and schools. And, as a freshman Senator, I introduced and passed six pieces of legislation. We secured funding for rural hospitals. We increased telehealth access, and we sped the delivery of PPE to the frontlines. I championed and we passed legislation that increased funding to help homeless veterans get back on their feet, and I was proud to champion agriculture, our State's leading industry, as well as our military, law enforcement, small businesses, and school choice. I stood up for innocent life, the Second Amendment, and all of our constitutional rights. I was able to use my business experience to develop four wide-ranging plans to drive economic security, keep our Nation safe, modernize our healthcare system, and increase opportunities in minority communities. In 2020 alone, our office helped over 5,200 Georgians with casework, including nearly 1,000 Georgia veterans and Active-Duty service men and women navigate their VA benefits in VA medical centers. I am incredibly proud of all the work we accomplished together for our State and for our country. There is much more work to do. I had hoped to pass a piece of my legislation to bring back to the United States from China the manufacturing of our critical medical supplies, including prescription drugs, over-the-counter medicine, and medical equipment. I want to wish my successor well in his work serving Georgia. Now, most farewell speeches urge colleagues to put country before party or to fix what is broken here in the Senate. My message is slightly different. In all of the events of recent weeks, I want to urge my colleagues to remember why we are here, whom you serve, and to recall the greatness of the American experiment, as well as the fragile nature of our freedoms. I spent 30 years in the private sector chasing the American dream. I worked on our family's farm. I waitressed. I lived paycheck to paycheck. I moved around the country and worked hard to overcome setbacks and to build a respected career in business. I came to Georgia two decades ago as a job seeker, and I became a job creator, helping to grow a small startup company into a Fortune 500 company. And, like many Georgians, part of that work is giving back in our communities and supporting others in achieving their dreams. I have done that now in business, in philanthropy, in sports, and now in public service. That is the American dream. It gives everyone, regardless of their background, the freedom to make the most of their life, chase their passions, build their family and their career, and thrive in the greatest country in the world. Protecting that dream for all Americans should be our common cause, regardless of political party. As I served over the last year, it has become clear that we need more outsiders, more business people, and fewer--with all due respect--fewer politicians. Americans have high expectations for us. They are looking for leadership. They want results, and, right now, they want their lives back. They are looking for us to restore America and protect their dreams, not to take advantage of a crisis and expand the government. They certainly don't want their way of life overwhelmed by radical change and costly policies that will push them out of their job, limit their children's educational opportunities, and threaten their right to worship and speak freely. At the same time, while those on the left feign a desire for unity, they say they cannot tolerate it without accountability. In essence, there can be no unity without conforming to their views. Disagree, and you will be canceled, and not just your social media account but your job, your family, your educational opportunities, and even your God-given rights. Only those who meet the ideological purity test can claim moral superiority and maintain their voice. Over the last year, I experienced this firsthand many times. Yes, I have been a proud champion of conservative values, but I always put Georgia first ahead of politics. As the pandemic began to unfold, I worked around the clock to deliver relief across Georgia, yet the mainstream media, including my own hometown newspaper, flooded its pages not with serious coverage of my relief efforts but with completely false stories about stock trades fabricated by a leftwing blog. When this political attack was thoroughly debunked, that fact was largely omitted from subsequent coverage to fit their narrative. The truth is, the mainstream media and Big Tech increasingly care only about advancing their political ideology and protecting only the speech that fits into their specific narrative. The double standards, disdain, and contempt that elites and institutions of influence have for conservatives is increasingly being revealed. For the sake of our discourse, this cannot continue. As a starting point, we must hold accountable those who limit our free speech and the loss of our civil discourse in this country. The American people are alarmed by the effort to censor conservative voices. We are witnessing a constitutional crisis that threatens to erode the First Amendment and silence people across our country. As a Republican and a conservative American who still believes in the Constitution and the core principles on which our country was founded, I refuse to be intimidated by the cancel culture and its dangerous narratives. However, not every American feels free to speak up. Their voices are being lost. This is why this Senate is so important. For 230 years, the U.S. Senate has been the central venue for voicing dissenting views, and it has celebrated the deliberation of issues confronting our Nation. You must be the voice for those who can't use theirs. Now is the time. The urgency weighs on our country. If we are serious about uniting, it must be out of respect for diversity, not despite it. Diversity of belief is not monolithic. In 1964, a future President Ronald Reagan spoke to his fellow Americans saying: You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. These sage words echo today. These words are timeless. To my colleagues in the Senate, I urge you to address the dire threats to our First Amendment rights in order to restore every American's faith in our democracy and to help restore our trust in each other. It is the only way to ensure that America, the world's shining city on the hill, a republic admired for centuries, can endure for future generations. I encourage each of you to uphold our uniquely American values and preserve the American dream, and I will continue to champion our party's values from whatever position I occupy. America depends on it. Americans are counting on us to be their voice. For a shy farm girl who was the first in her family to graduate from college, who could never have imagined that one day I would serve as the U.S. Senator from the great State of Georgia, thank you all. It has been my deepest honor. May God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. I yield the floor. (Applause.) | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. LOEFFLER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS51 | null | 2,104 |
formal | school choice | null | racist | Mrs. LOEFFLER. Mr. President, it has been the honor of my lifetime to serve Georgia in the U.S. Senate. There has never been a day that I don't walk through the hallways of the Capitol when I am not awestruck by the magnitude of this job and of this place and of my duty. I want to thank my colleagues, especially those who welcomed me from the start, who worked with me, and who even across the aisle worked with me to get things done for our country in such a consequential year. I want to thank the people of Georgia who showed me the very best of our great State. My goal as Senator was clear: to work every single day to make Georgians' lives better and to make ours the very best State to work, to live, to worship, and to raise a family. I never stopped working to meet that goal and was energized and humbled every single day by the opportunity to serve. In between weeks spent in Washington, I crisscrossed our great State nonstop, going from southeast coastal Georgia in Camden County to northwest mountain Georgia in Catoosa County. Time with Georgians are my fondest memories. One of my earliest visits was in Homerville, GA, population 2,400. I carried the people of Homerville with me every day as I approached my work. Having grown up on our family farm, where the nearest small town had a population of 600, my calling to public service was, in large part, to be a voice--an outsized voice--for those who feel they didn't have a voice in Washington. Many Georgians inspired me each day to bring results to every corner ofour State. In that spirit, I want to thank Governor Kemp for appointing me and entrusting me with the important work of being a voice for our State and a servant to our citizens. I was proud to serve alongside my friend and colleague Senator David Perdue. I want to recognize Senator Johnny Isakson and Senator Saxby Chambliss for their shining example of what it meant to be a Senator, and, most importantly, a public servant. I also want to recognize and thank my incredible husband, Jeff, whose love and support encouraged me every single day. And I want to thank my family for instilling the values of faith, family, and hard work. You all have my deepest love and gratitude. As importantly, I want to recognize my very talented and hard-working staff, many of whom are with me today. Together, our work here and in Georgia has made a tremendous difference in our State. Let me tell you about just some of that work, because in one significant year in the Senate, I am so proud of all we have accomplished together. We delivered more than $47 billion in relief to Georgia during the pandemic--to farmers, to family, to small businesses, hospitals, and schools. And, as a freshman Senator, I introduced and passed six pieces of legislation. We secured funding for rural hospitals. We increased telehealth access, and we sped the delivery of PPE to the frontlines. I championed and we passed legislation that increased funding to help homeless veterans get back on their feet, and I was proud to champion agriculture, our State's leading industry, as well as our military, law enforcement, small businesses, and school choice. I stood up for innocent life, the Second Amendment, and all of our constitutional rights. I was able to use my business experience to develop four wide-ranging plans to drive economic security, keep our Nation safe, modernize our healthcare system, and increase opportunities in minority communities. In 2020 alone, our office helped over 5,200 Georgians with casework, including nearly 1,000 Georgia veterans and Active-Duty service men and women navigate their VA benefits in VA medical centers. I am incredibly proud of all the work we accomplished together for our State and for our country. There is much more work to do. I had hoped to pass a piece of my legislation to bring back to the United States from China the manufacturing of our critical medical supplies, including prescription drugs, over-the-counter medicine, and medical equipment. I want to wish my successor well in his work serving Georgia. Now, most farewell speeches urge colleagues to put country before party or to fix what is broken here in the Senate. My message is slightly different. In all of the events of recent weeks, I want to urge my colleagues to remember why we are here, whom you serve, and to recall the greatness of the American experiment, as well as the fragile nature of our freedoms. I spent 30 years in the private sector chasing the American dream. I worked on our family's farm. I waitressed. I lived paycheck to paycheck. I moved around the country and worked hard to overcome setbacks and to build a respected career in business. I came to Georgia two decades ago as a job seeker, and I became a job creator, helping to grow a small startup company into a Fortune 500 company. And, like many Georgians, part of that work is giving back in our communities and supporting others in achieving their dreams. I have done that now in business, in philanthropy, in sports, and now in public service. That is the American dream. It gives everyone, regardless of their background, the freedom to make the most of their life, chase their passions, build their family and their career, and thrive in the greatest country in the world. Protecting that dream for all Americans should be our common cause, regardless of political party. As I served over the last year, it has become clear that we need more outsiders, more business people, and fewer--with all due respect--fewer politicians. Americans have high expectations for us. They are looking for leadership. They want results, and, right now, they want their lives back. They are looking for us to restore America and protect their dreams, not to take advantage of a crisis and expand the government. They certainly don't want their way of life overwhelmed by radical change and costly policies that will push them out of their job, limit their children's educational opportunities, and threaten their right to worship and speak freely. At the same time, while those on the left feign a desire for unity, they say they cannot tolerate it without accountability. In essence, there can be no unity without conforming to their views. Disagree, and you will be canceled, and not just your social media account but your job, your family, your educational opportunities, and even your God-given rights. Only those who meet the ideological purity test can claim moral superiority and maintain their voice. Over the last year, I experienced this firsthand many times. Yes, I have been a proud champion of conservative values, but I always put Georgia first ahead of politics. As the pandemic began to unfold, I worked around the clock to deliver relief across Georgia, yet the mainstream media, including my own hometown newspaper, flooded its pages not with serious coverage of my relief efforts but with completely false stories about stock trades fabricated by a leftwing blog. When this political attack was thoroughly debunked, that fact was largely omitted from subsequent coverage to fit their narrative. The truth is, the mainstream media and Big Tech increasingly care only about advancing their political ideology and protecting only the speech that fits into their specific narrative. The double standards, disdain, and contempt that elites and institutions of influence have for conservatives is increasingly being revealed. For the sake of our discourse, this cannot continue. As a starting point, we must hold accountable those who limit our free speech and the loss of our civil discourse in this country. The American people are alarmed by the effort to censor conservative voices. We are witnessing a constitutional crisis that threatens to erode the First Amendment and silence people across our country. As a Republican and a conservative American who still believes in the Constitution and the core principles on which our country was founded, I refuse to be intimidated by the cancel culture and its dangerous narratives. However, not every American feels free to speak up. Their voices are being lost. This is why this Senate is so important. For 230 years, the U.S. Senate has been the central venue for voicing dissenting views, and it has celebrated the deliberation of issues confronting our Nation. You must be the voice for those who can't use theirs. Now is the time. The urgency weighs on our country. If we are serious about uniting, it must be out of respect for diversity, not despite it. Diversity of belief is not monolithic. In 1964, a future President Ronald Reagan spoke to his fellow Americans saying: You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. These sage words echo today. These words are timeless. To my colleagues in the Senate, I urge you to address the dire threats to our First Amendment rights in order to restore every American's faith in our democracy and to help restore our trust in each other. It is the only way to ensure that America, the world's shining city on the hill, a republic admired for centuries, can endure for future generations. I encourage each of you to uphold our uniquely American values and preserve the American dream, and I will continue to champion our party's values from whatever position I occupy. America depends on it. Americans are counting on us to be their voice. For a shy farm girl who was the first in her family to graduate from college, who could never have imagined that one day I would serve as the U.S. Senator from the great State of Georgia, thank you all. It has been my deepest honor. May God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. I yield the floor. (Applause.) | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. LOEFFLER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS51 | null | 2,105 |
formal | echo | null | antisemitic | Mrs. LOEFFLER. Mr. President, it has been the honor of my lifetime to serve Georgia in the U.S. Senate. There has never been a day that I don't walk through the hallways of the Capitol when I am not awestruck by the magnitude of this job and of this place and of my duty. I want to thank my colleagues, especially those who welcomed me from the start, who worked with me, and who even across the aisle worked with me to get things done for our country in such a consequential year. I want to thank the people of Georgia who showed me the very best of our great State. My goal as Senator was clear: to work every single day to make Georgians' lives better and to make ours the very best State to work, to live, to worship, and to raise a family. I never stopped working to meet that goal and was energized and humbled every single day by the opportunity to serve. In between weeks spent in Washington, I crisscrossed our great State nonstop, going from southeast coastal Georgia in Camden County to northwest mountain Georgia in Catoosa County. Time with Georgians are my fondest memories. One of my earliest visits was in Homerville, GA, population 2,400. I carried the people of Homerville with me every day as I approached my work. Having grown up on our family farm, where the nearest small town had a population of 600, my calling to public service was, in large part, to be a voice--an outsized voice--for those who feel they didn't have a voice in Washington. Many Georgians inspired me each day to bring results to every corner ofour State. In that spirit, I want to thank Governor Kemp for appointing me and entrusting me with the important work of being a voice for our State and a servant to our citizens. I was proud to serve alongside my friend and colleague Senator David Perdue. I want to recognize Senator Johnny Isakson and Senator Saxby Chambliss for their shining example of what it meant to be a Senator, and, most importantly, a public servant. I also want to recognize and thank my incredible husband, Jeff, whose love and support encouraged me every single day. And I want to thank my family for instilling the values of faith, family, and hard work. You all have my deepest love and gratitude. As importantly, I want to recognize my very talented and hard-working staff, many of whom are with me today. Together, our work here and in Georgia has made a tremendous difference in our State. Let me tell you about just some of that work, because in one significant year in the Senate, I am so proud of all we have accomplished together. We delivered more than $47 billion in relief to Georgia during the pandemic--to farmers, to family, to small businesses, hospitals, and schools. And, as a freshman Senator, I introduced and passed six pieces of legislation. We secured funding for rural hospitals. We increased telehealth access, and we sped the delivery of PPE to the frontlines. I championed and we passed legislation that increased funding to help homeless veterans get back on their feet, and I was proud to champion agriculture, our State's leading industry, as well as our military, law enforcement, small businesses, and school choice. I stood up for innocent life, the Second Amendment, and all of our constitutional rights. I was able to use my business experience to develop four wide-ranging plans to drive economic security, keep our Nation safe, modernize our healthcare system, and increase opportunities in minority communities. In 2020 alone, our office helped over 5,200 Georgians with casework, including nearly 1,000 Georgia veterans and Active-Duty service men and women navigate their VA benefits in VA medical centers. I am incredibly proud of all the work we accomplished together for our State and for our country. There is much more work to do. I had hoped to pass a piece of my legislation to bring back to the United States from China the manufacturing of our critical medical supplies, including prescription drugs, over-the-counter medicine, and medical equipment. I want to wish my successor well in his work serving Georgia. Now, most farewell speeches urge colleagues to put country before party or to fix what is broken here in the Senate. My message is slightly different. In all of the events of recent weeks, I want to urge my colleagues to remember why we are here, whom you serve, and to recall the greatness of the American experiment, as well as the fragile nature of our freedoms. I spent 30 years in the private sector chasing the American dream. I worked on our family's farm. I waitressed. I lived paycheck to paycheck. I moved around the country and worked hard to overcome setbacks and to build a respected career in business. I came to Georgia two decades ago as a job seeker, and I became a job creator, helping to grow a small startup company into a Fortune 500 company. And, like many Georgians, part of that work is giving back in our communities and supporting others in achieving their dreams. I have done that now in business, in philanthropy, in sports, and now in public service. That is the American dream. It gives everyone, regardless of their background, the freedom to make the most of their life, chase their passions, build their family and their career, and thrive in the greatest country in the world. Protecting that dream for all Americans should be our common cause, regardless of political party. As I served over the last year, it has become clear that we need more outsiders, more business people, and fewer--with all due respect--fewer politicians. Americans have high expectations for us. They are looking for leadership. They want results, and, right now, they want their lives back. They are looking for us to restore America and protect their dreams, not to take advantage of a crisis and expand the government. They certainly don't want their way of life overwhelmed by radical change and costly policies that will push them out of their job, limit their children's educational opportunities, and threaten their right to worship and speak freely. At the same time, while those on the left feign a desire for unity, they say they cannot tolerate it without accountability. In essence, there can be no unity without conforming to their views. Disagree, and you will be canceled, and not just your social media account but your job, your family, your educational opportunities, and even your God-given rights. Only those who meet the ideological purity test can claim moral superiority and maintain their voice. Over the last year, I experienced this firsthand many times. Yes, I have been a proud champion of conservative values, but I always put Georgia first ahead of politics. As the pandemic began to unfold, I worked around the clock to deliver relief across Georgia, yet the mainstream media, including my own hometown newspaper, flooded its pages not with serious coverage of my relief efforts but with completely false stories about stock trades fabricated by a leftwing blog. When this political attack was thoroughly debunked, that fact was largely omitted from subsequent coverage to fit their narrative. The truth is, the mainstream media and Big Tech increasingly care only about advancing their political ideology and protecting only the speech that fits into their specific narrative. The double standards, disdain, and contempt that elites and institutions of influence have for conservatives is increasingly being revealed. For the sake of our discourse, this cannot continue. As a starting point, we must hold accountable those who limit our free speech and the loss of our civil discourse in this country. The American people are alarmed by the effort to censor conservative voices. We are witnessing a constitutional crisis that threatens to erode the First Amendment and silence people across our country. As a Republican and a conservative American who still believes in the Constitution and the core principles on which our country was founded, I refuse to be intimidated by the cancel culture and its dangerous narratives. However, not every American feels free to speak up. Their voices are being lost. This is why this Senate is so important. For 230 years, the U.S. Senate has been the central venue for voicing dissenting views, and it has celebrated the deliberation of issues confronting our Nation. You must be the voice for those who can't use theirs. Now is the time. The urgency weighs on our country. If we are serious about uniting, it must be out of respect for diversity, not despite it. Diversity of belief is not monolithic. In 1964, a future President Ronald Reagan spoke to his fellow Americans saying: You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. These sage words echo today. These words are timeless. To my colleagues in the Senate, I urge you to address the dire threats to our First Amendment rights in order to restore every American's faith in our democracy and to help restore our trust in each other. It is the only way to ensure that America, the world's shining city on the hill, a republic admired for centuries, can endure for future generations. I encourage each of you to uphold our uniquely American values and preserve the American dream, and I will continue to champion our party's values from whatever position I occupy. America depends on it. Americans are counting on us to be their voice. For a shy farm girl who was the first in her family to graduate from college, who could never have imagined that one day I would serve as the U.S. Senator from the great State of Georgia, thank you all. It has been my deepest honor. May God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America. I yield the floor. (Applause.) | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. LOEFFLER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS51 | null | 2,106 |
formal | Chicago | null | racist | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, as we begin the Congress and prepare to welcome President Biden and Vice President Harris, I find myself thinking of the words of the 13th century Persian poet, Rumi. He wrote, ``Out beyond the ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I'll meet you there.'' For the moment that we are living through, I would edit his words slightly. I would say: Out beyond the ideas of right versus left, out beyond the rigid confines of our current polarized politics, there is a field of common good and common purpose. I hope we will all find the courage to meet there, to work together in this place. At another moment of dangerous division in America, Abraham Lincoln prayed that the ``better angels of our nature'' would help us to rediscover our common bond and pull back from the brink of a civil war. Today, the Union, preserved through that war, is battered and divided. For the first time since the Civil War, thousands of Federal troops stand guard at our Nation's Capitol to protect it from attack by American citizens. Carpenters and other crafts people are still hard at work repairing the doors and windows and furniture smashed to bits less than 2 weeks ago by the insurrectionist mob. We must be better than this or we risk losing our democracy. I believe that beyond the killing field of weaponized politics, there is still a field of shared dreams, which brings me to a specific reason I take the floor of the Senate today. I come to thank a remarkable woman who has devoted countless hours over many years trying to help the Members of this Senate, Democrats and Republicans, find that field on which we can work together. Reema Dodin has been a member of my staff for more than 14 years. She started as a law school intern in my Chicago office, and over the years, she rose through the ranks: legislative assistant; research director; Judiciary Committee staff member; floor counsel; and finally my deputy chief of staff. For years, my person on the Senate floor has been this woman, this amazing woman. I am grateful for her service to the Senate and her service to the people of Illinois and to our Nation. But tomorrow Reema begins a new challenge as Deputy Director of the White House Office of Legislative Affairs. This daughter of immigrants will make history as the highest ranking Palestinian-American woman ever to work in the executive branch of the President of the United States. As the liaison to the U.S. Senate, she will continue to help the Senate search for common ground on which to build a better future; only now she will be doing it from a different office, with a much better boss. I know that she will be a tremendous asset to President Biden and the Nation. In these divided times, it is rare to find a public servant like Reema, whose excellence and integrity is so widely admired on both sides of the aisle. No one understands better than Reema--well, perhaps two people in the Chamber might understand better--how this Senate works but only two. As the saying goes, she wrote the book on it, coauthoring an insightful tome entitled ``Inside Congress: A Guide for Navigating the Politics of the House and Senate Floors,'' published in 2017 by the Brookings Institution. It came this close to being a New York Times bestseller. But maybe still, with this speech today, it will reinvigorate sales. As floor director for the Senate Democrats, Reema has worked closely with staff and Members on both sides of the aisle to whip bills and overcome hurdles. No matter how long or pitched the debate, she has always remained friendly, decent, optimistic, and dedicated. It was not unusual to find her still at her desk at midnight or 2 in the morning, sending her final whip alert or email of the day to Senate staffers summarizing the day's activities and the next day's Senate agenda. Reema acquired her political and diplomatic acumen through hard workand partly, it seems, through genetics. Her grandfather served as Social Affairs Minister for the Kingdom of Jordan under King Hussein and was involved in the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations in the 1970s. As I mentioned, Reema, like so many Americans, including myself, is a child of immigrants. Her parents both came to the United States as college students from Hebron, in the occupied West Bank. Reema was born in North Carolina and grew up in Orange County, CA. She graduated from the University of California at Berkeley, earned her law degree from the University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana, and we made her an honorary daughter of the land of Lincoln. She also is a Truman National Security fellow; a New Leaders Council fellow; an Aspen Socrates alumnus; a former term-member of the Council on Foreign Relations; and a member of the Jenkins Hill Society, a consortium of women in politics supporting women politicians. Reema loves the Senate, and she loves the challenge of this great Chamber. She loves to give tours in this Chamber to those who want to know the procedure and the history of this beautiful room in American history and the Capitol of our Nation. She cares about the people who protect and preserve this building, including the maintenance people, cafeteria workers, and everyone who works here. Even after so many years of climbing the marble staircase from the Senate floor to my office, she and I remain in awe of those time-worn steps, the colorful Minton tiles that brighten the Senate floors, and the majestic Brumidi frescos that adorn the walls. During the recent siege of the Capitol, Reema worried for the safety of Senators and their staff, police officers, and troops who were defending this building, but she also worried about the priceless paintings, statues, and other historical treasures that had been passed down from one generation to the next as part of our national legacy. Most of all, I know that Reema reveres the Senate as the place where men and women representing all of the people and all of the competing interests of the United States can reason and work together for the common good of our Nation. In her personal inscription to her book on the Senate, Reema thanked me for taking a chance on folks with only dreams and no connections. Well, Reema, tomorrow when you join the staff of the President of the United States, Joe Biden, you will have the best connections in Washington, and I know that you will use whatever opportunity presents itself on this new assignment to bridge the gaps in America and bring together the people of this country in a better, more caring nation. I will forever be grateful for your many years of brilliant, loyal service, and I wish you the best. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS53-2 | null | 2,107 |
formal | terrorist | null | Islamophobic | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, before I make my prepared remarks, I would like to note the fact that this is the first time that I am returning to the floor of the Senate since the events of January 6. It was in the early morning hours of January 7 that we concluded our business and left this Chamber to return to our homes for the interim period. We left, knowing that something terrible had happened in this building on January 6, but we didn't know the extent of it. As Members of the Senate, we were largely protected from this terrorist insurrection, which took place in this building. It was about 2:15 p.m. on that afternoon of January 6, when Vice President Pence was presiding over the Senate and most of us were in our seats, that there was a commotion at the Chair and the Secret Service came in and literally pulled the Vice President away from that podium and took him out the door. We weren't sure what was happening. It all unfolded quickly. There was an effort to make a quorum call to determine which Senators were on the floor. It was interrupted when a representative of the Capitol Police stood where the Presiding Officer is now seated and instructed us to stay in this room, in this Chamber, in the Senate, in our chairs. The staff people and surrounding offices were going to line the walls. This was going to be a safe place of refuge for whatever was going on. I remember that moment particularly because something happened, which is etched in my memory. Two plain clothes officers came down into the well of the Senate and stood there, just a few feet from where I am standing. One of them had an automatic weapon around his neck. I couldn't imagine what was going on, where, in the U.S. Senate Chamber, it was necessary to have that kind of firepower. He stayed there for a few minutes, and then we were told to leave and leave quickly. We filed out the doors and down the steps and walked across through the tunnel to the Hart building, where Members of the Senate were safely protected. That is one of the reasons I wanted to say a word this afternoon and this morning. The Capitol Police, throughout this, were heroic. They were overwhelmed by this massive insurrectionist mob. The Capitol Police, as well as the others who joined them--the DC Metropolitan Police and other law enforcement agencies, which I don't know the names of as I stand here--I want to thank them all for literally risking their lives for me, for Members of the Senate, for our staff, and visitors. It wasn't until the next day that we learned--that many of us learned--that a Capitol policeman had been killed--killed by this mob. My heart goes out to him and his family. I thank him and all of his colleagues, men and women, who each day get up in the morning, put on their uniforms, and come to this building to protect me and protect the other Members of the Senate and the House and all of the staff who work here. We will never be able to repay them in any words for what they sacrificed and risked on January 6, but let us never, never demean what happened that day. It was a terrorist attack--homegrown American terrorist attack. I know we are going to spend some time discussing who provoked that attack. The Republican majority leader laid the blame, as he should have, at the feet of the President, who invited this group to Washington and then urged them to come march on Capitol Hill. I know we will go into this matter with more detail at a later point. But the fact of the matter is, we endured a great travesty and a great violation of our Republic on that day. To think that in this building--this building that we value so much--so many people came in hell-bent on death and kidnapping and destroying this great Chamber and the building around it. It is inconceivable that this happened in America, and we have to come to grips with it in honest, truthful terms and not say: Oh, that was yesterday's newspaper, and we have to move on. But there is good news--good news in light of the bad news that I have just recounted. The good news is that by this time tomorrow, we will have a new President and a new Vice President of the United States. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS53 | null | 2,108 |
formal | extremists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, in the Christian faith, there is a saying: ``Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'' I rise today to talk about that kind of sacrifice, that kind of love, and ultimately that tragedy in the death of a man who is a hero. Officer Brian David Sicknick was many things. He was a loving son to his parents, Gladys and Charles Sicknick; a loving brother to Ken and Craig Sicknick; and a loving partner of 11 years to Sandra Garza. He loved his two dachshunds, Sparky and Pebbles, and he took great care of them. Many of us got to know Officer Sicknick because he served in the Capitol Police Department. He was someone who loved his job and understood that every day when you put on that uniform, when you come to the Capitol of the greatest power on the planet, the United States of America, that wearing that uniform, wearing that badge, you had a sacred duty to protect this sacred space. I am proud to say that Officer Sicknick was a Jersey guy through and through. He was born in New Brunswick, NJ, raised in South River, and he lived a life committed to the greatest calling you can have, which is to serve others, to protect others, to defend not just your Nation but her citizens. He was a member of the New Jersey Air National Guard. He loved his country. And I am proud to say he loved Jersey too. He was a New Jersey Devils fan. He proudly, in his work and commitment, served his country in the 108th Security Forces Squadron in Saudi Arabia and Kyrgyzstan. Officer Sicknick was a reliable and cherished colleague. If you talk to those who knew him, they knew that he was a man of honor and decency and kindness. They knew he loved this job. He loved being a Capitol Police officer. He loved serving this Nation. He loved helping people. He loved his work. That love is evident in so many stories shared by his family and friends, people who, in this time of painful grief, are still celebrating the life he lived even though it was cut short by hate. People speak to his character and the qualities, the values that made him so special. He was kind. He was patient. Like many of those who rise in their service to this country, he was humble. And he was selfless. You talk to people who knew him really well, and they remember him as the kind of officer who would go out of his way, not just in his service to those of us who frequent the Capitol but to make sure that his colleagues, his fellow Capitol Police officers, were also doing OK. He was not just a leader; he was a servant. And they remember him living with that sense of honor and that sense of duty. They remember him as the kind of person who would stand courageously in the face of a colleague, who would sacrifice for them, who believed that service meant commitment, meant bringing your grit and your guts and your love. And that is what he did. On January 6, 2021, when a violent mob attacked this Capitol, Officer Sicknick stood for America. He stood for this Capitol and all of its inhabitants. He was steadfast. He was courageous. He stood in the breach to protect the lives of the Members of this body, their staffs, personnel. He faced down terrorist attackers and sacrificed himself, his own safety, his own security, and ultimately his life in the name of love of country and of the countrymen and--women. Officer Sicknick is the very definition of a hero, and he deserves to be remembered for the richness of his life, the way that he loved, and the devotion that he gave this Nation. That he is no longer with us today is a grievous tragedy, and it is also a crime. This great man was murdered. This crime demands the full attention of Federal law enforcement officials. Anyone who still harbors doubt about what happened here on January 6 should think of him. On January 6, when extremists, when terrorists, when White supremacists attacked our Nation's Capitol, they took the life of one of our officers. They spilled his blood. They took a son away from his parents. They took a sibling away from his brothers. They committed this treachery while waving flags, claiming solidarity--some of them--with law enforcement, but it was hate--it was hate; it was hate--that brought terror to our Capitol and the death of one of our sons. So many of the words that led up to that day, the lies that were told, the incitement and the encouragement, came from the highest office of our land to dotted members of authority across our country--these collective actions that led to the moment, the terrorists who are directly responsible as well. In the aftermath, a hero, a Capitol Police officer, is dead-- a champion, a hero. This is a senseless tragedy, an awful crime. I am not alone when I say to Officer Sicknick's family and loved ones that we--that I vow to hold those responsible for this heinous crime accountable. We must honor Officer Sicknick's heroism and sacrifice not just with our words but by what we do here in the coming days, what we do as a nation, how we all take responsibility in the aftermath of a horrific moment. Officer Sicknick died for this country. He did not die in vain. We, the living, must--must--continue with his level of courage as we tell the truth, as we hold others responsible and for account, as we try to live in the spirit that he lived: with humility, honor, courage, kindness, love, decency. May Officer Brian Sicknick always be remembered for his service to the country he loved, and may we rise to his example and honor him. All those who have fallen in defense of this Nation, may we honor them in how we live for this country. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BOOKER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS54 | null | 2,109 |
formal | terrorist | null | Islamophobic | Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, in the Christian faith, there is a saying: ``Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'' I rise today to talk about that kind of sacrifice, that kind of love, and ultimately that tragedy in the death of a man who is a hero. Officer Brian David Sicknick was many things. He was a loving son to his parents, Gladys and Charles Sicknick; a loving brother to Ken and Craig Sicknick; and a loving partner of 11 years to Sandra Garza. He loved his two dachshunds, Sparky and Pebbles, and he took great care of them. Many of us got to know Officer Sicknick because he served in the Capitol Police Department. He was someone who loved his job and understood that every day when you put on that uniform, when you come to the Capitol of the greatest power on the planet, the United States of America, that wearing that uniform, wearing that badge, you had a sacred duty to protect this sacred space. I am proud to say that Officer Sicknick was a Jersey guy through and through. He was born in New Brunswick, NJ, raised in South River, and he lived a life committed to the greatest calling you can have, which is to serve others, to protect others, to defend not just your Nation but her citizens. He was a member of the New Jersey Air National Guard. He loved his country. And I am proud to say he loved Jersey too. He was a New Jersey Devils fan. He proudly, in his work and commitment, served his country in the 108th Security Forces Squadron in Saudi Arabia and Kyrgyzstan. Officer Sicknick was a reliable and cherished colleague. If you talk to those who knew him, they knew that he was a man of honor and decency and kindness. They knew he loved this job. He loved being a Capitol Police officer. He loved serving this Nation. He loved helping people. He loved his work. That love is evident in so many stories shared by his family and friends, people who, in this time of painful grief, are still celebrating the life he lived even though it was cut short by hate. People speak to his character and the qualities, the values that made him so special. He was kind. He was patient. Like many of those who rise in their service to this country, he was humble. And he was selfless. You talk to people who knew him really well, and they remember him as the kind of officer who would go out of his way, not just in his service to those of us who frequent the Capitol but to make sure that his colleagues, his fellow Capitol Police officers, were also doing OK. He was not just a leader; he was a servant. And they remember him living with that sense of honor and that sense of duty. They remember him as the kind of person who would stand courageously in the face of a colleague, who would sacrifice for them, who believed that service meant commitment, meant bringing your grit and your guts and your love. And that is what he did. On January 6, 2021, when a violent mob attacked this Capitol, Officer Sicknick stood for America. He stood for this Capitol and all of its inhabitants. He was steadfast. He was courageous. He stood in the breach to protect the lives of the Members of this body, their staffs, personnel. He faced down terrorist attackers and sacrificed himself, his own safety, his own security, and ultimately his life in the name of love of country and of the countrymen and--women. Officer Sicknick is the very definition of a hero, and he deserves to be remembered for the richness of his life, the way that he loved, and the devotion that he gave this Nation. That he is no longer with us today is a grievous tragedy, and it is also a crime. This great man was murdered. This crime demands the full attention of Federal law enforcement officials. Anyone who still harbors doubt about what happened here on January 6 should think of him. On January 6, when extremists, when terrorists, when White supremacists attacked our Nation's Capitol, they took the life of one of our officers. They spilled his blood. They took a son away from his parents. They took a sibling away from his brothers. They committed this treachery while waving flags, claiming solidarity--some of them--with law enforcement, but it was hate--it was hate; it was hate--that brought terror to our Capitol and the death of one of our sons. So many of the words that led up to that day, the lies that were told, the incitement and the encouragement, came from the highest office of our land to dotted members of authority across our country--these collective actions that led to the moment, the terrorists who are directly responsible as well. In the aftermath, a hero, a Capitol Police officer, is dead-- a champion, a hero. This is a senseless tragedy, an awful crime. I am not alone when I say to Officer Sicknick's family and loved ones that we--that I vow to hold those responsible for this heinous crime accountable. We must honor Officer Sicknick's heroism and sacrifice not just with our words but by what we do here in the coming days, what we do as a nation, how we all take responsibility in the aftermath of a horrific moment. Officer Sicknick died for this country. He did not die in vain. We, the living, must--must--continue with his level of courage as we tell the truth, as we hold others responsible and for account, as we try to live in the spirit that he lived: with humility, honor, courage, kindness, love, decency. May Officer Brian Sicknick always be remembered for his service to the country he loved, and may we rise to his example and honor him. All those who have fallen in defense of this Nation, may we honor them in how we live for this country. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BOOKER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS54 | null | 2,110 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, in the Christian faith, there is a saying: ``Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'' I rise today to talk about that kind of sacrifice, that kind of love, and ultimately that tragedy in the death of a man who is a hero. Officer Brian David Sicknick was many things. He was a loving son to his parents, Gladys and Charles Sicknick; a loving brother to Ken and Craig Sicknick; and a loving partner of 11 years to Sandra Garza. He loved his two dachshunds, Sparky and Pebbles, and he took great care of them. Many of us got to know Officer Sicknick because he served in the Capitol Police Department. He was someone who loved his job and understood that every day when you put on that uniform, when you come to the Capitol of the greatest power on the planet, the United States of America, that wearing that uniform, wearing that badge, you had a sacred duty to protect this sacred space. I am proud to say that Officer Sicknick was a Jersey guy through and through. He was born in New Brunswick, NJ, raised in South River, and he lived a life committed to the greatest calling you can have, which is to serve others, to protect others, to defend not just your Nation but her citizens. He was a member of the New Jersey Air National Guard. He loved his country. And I am proud to say he loved Jersey too. He was a New Jersey Devils fan. He proudly, in his work and commitment, served his country in the 108th Security Forces Squadron in Saudi Arabia and Kyrgyzstan. Officer Sicknick was a reliable and cherished colleague. If you talk to those who knew him, they knew that he was a man of honor and decency and kindness. They knew he loved this job. He loved being a Capitol Police officer. He loved serving this Nation. He loved helping people. He loved his work. That love is evident in so many stories shared by his family and friends, people who, in this time of painful grief, are still celebrating the life he lived even though it was cut short by hate. People speak to his character and the qualities, the values that made him so special. He was kind. He was patient. Like many of those who rise in their service to this country, he was humble. And he was selfless. You talk to people who knew him really well, and they remember him as the kind of officer who would go out of his way, not just in his service to those of us who frequent the Capitol but to make sure that his colleagues, his fellow Capitol Police officers, were also doing OK. He was not just a leader; he was a servant. And they remember him living with that sense of honor and that sense of duty. They remember him as the kind of person who would stand courageously in the face of a colleague, who would sacrifice for them, who believed that service meant commitment, meant bringing your grit and your guts and your love. And that is what he did. On January 6, 2021, when a violent mob attacked this Capitol, Officer Sicknick stood for America. He stood for this Capitol and all of its inhabitants. He was steadfast. He was courageous. He stood in the breach to protect the lives of the Members of this body, their staffs, personnel. He faced down terrorist attackers and sacrificed himself, his own safety, his own security, and ultimately his life in the name of love of country and of the countrymen and--women. Officer Sicknick is the very definition of a hero, and he deserves to be remembered for the richness of his life, the way that he loved, and the devotion that he gave this Nation. That he is no longer with us today is a grievous tragedy, and it is also a crime. This great man was murdered. This crime demands the full attention of Federal law enforcement officials. Anyone who still harbors doubt about what happened here on January 6 should think of him. On January 6, when extremists, when terrorists, when White supremacists attacked our Nation's Capitol, they took the life of one of our officers. They spilled his blood. They took a son away from his parents. They took a sibling away from his brothers. They committed this treachery while waving flags, claiming solidarity--some of them--with law enforcement, but it was hate--it was hate; it was hate--that brought terror to our Capitol and the death of one of our sons. So many of the words that led up to that day, the lies that were told, the incitement and the encouragement, came from the highest office of our land to dotted members of authority across our country--these collective actions that led to the moment, the terrorists who are directly responsible as well. In the aftermath, a hero, a Capitol Police officer, is dead-- a champion, a hero. This is a senseless tragedy, an awful crime. I am not alone when I say to Officer Sicknick's family and loved ones that we--that I vow to hold those responsible for this heinous crime accountable. We must honor Officer Sicknick's heroism and sacrifice not just with our words but by what we do here in the coming days, what we do as a nation, how we all take responsibility in the aftermath of a horrific moment. Officer Sicknick died for this country. He did not die in vain. We, the living, must--must--continue with his level of courage as we tell the truth, as we hold others responsible and for account, as we try to live in the spirit that he lived: with humility, honor, courage, kindness, love, decency. May Officer Brian Sicknick always be remembered for his service to the country he loved, and may we rise to his example and honor him. All those who have fallen in defense of this Nation, may we honor them in how we live for this country. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BOOKER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-19-pt1-PgS54 | null | 2,111 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I need to catch my breath, so much has happened. A few hours ago, on the West Front of this citadel of democracy, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were administered the oaths of Office to the Presidency and Vice Presidency of the United States. We have turned the page to a new chapter in the history of our democracy, and I am full of hope. I would challenge anyone not to feel hopeful today after listening to Amanda Gorman, the amazing 22-year-old poet, wise far beyond her years, who told us that: Somehow we've weathered and witnessed a nation that isn't broken but simply unfinished The hope she spoke about--the strong and happy hope--the hope we feel today, is a hope, of course, that is tempered by reality. This was an inauguration unlike most others. The crowds that customarily line the National Mall were absent, a reminder that our Nation is still in the throes of a deadly pandemic. The presence of thousands of National Guardsmen, police, and Secret Service was a reminder that 2 weeks ago, in this very room and on those very steps where President Biden took the oath, a mob of violent criminals tried to dismantle our democracy--our sacred democracy--brick by brick and would try again if they could. But, as President Biden said a few hours ago, today, democracy has prevailed, the will of the people was heeded, and the peaceful transfer of power fulfilled. It takes a lot more than a band of hooligans to bring our grand democracy down. Let it be a message to our friends and adversaries around the world that our democracy, though it has been tried and been tested, shall long endure. And let it be a message to those terrorists who desecrated this temple of democracy that they will never prevail. Joe Biden is now the 46th President of the United States. Kamala Harris is now the 49th Vice President of the United States. But, of course, in more ways than one, she is not the 49th but the first--the first African-American woman, the first Asian-American woman, and the first woman, period, to hold the Office of Vice Presidency in our Nation's history. Today, the threat to our democracy from the Presidency itself has ended, but the challenges we face as a nation remain. In the wake of violence and division, hatred and mistruth, in the shadow of disease and economic hardship, a warming planet and unequal society, we begin the work of the 117th Congress. In his inaugural address, President Biden spoke to this moment--a moment of great challenge--and told us two simple truths: One, that our responsibilities are numerous, and, two, it will take unity--unity of spirit, unity of purpose--to fulfill them. President Biden, we heard you loud and clear. We have a lengthy agenda, and we need to get it done together. President Biden pointed the way to our Nation's recovery and renewal. He reminded us of who we are and where we need to go, but we must now turn the spirit of his words into action. The Senate must immediately set to work on the mission President Biden described--restoring the greatness and goodness of America. This will be an exceptionally busy and consequential period for the U.S. Senate. There is much to do, and we are ready to get to work. Now, not to upstage our new President and Vice President, but theirs has not been the only swearing in today. A few moments ago, the Senate welcomed three new Members to this Chamber. I can now happily and proudly call them Senator Padilla, Senator Ossoff, and Senator Warnock. They join Senators Kelly, Hickenlooper, and Lujan as part of a six-Member class of Democratic Senators and a new Democratic Senate majority. I mention the historic nature of Vice President Harris' ascendance, but let's not forget that her successor, Alex Padilla, is the first Latino Senator to represent California; that Rafael Warnock, born while Georgia was represented in this Chamber by two staunch segregationists, is now the first African-American Senator Georgia has ever elected; and that John Ossoff is the first Jewish Senator from his State, sworn in today on a book of Hebrew Scripture once owned by the rabbi, who, decades ago, formed a bond between the Jewish and African-American communities of Georgia. As President Biden said in his inaugural address, ``don't tell me things can't change.'' With the swearing in of these three Senators, the Senate will turn to Democratic control, for which I deeply thank my colleagues. We will return to Democratic control under the first New York-born majority leader in American history--a kid from Brooklyn, the son of an exterminator and a housewife, and a descendant of victims of the Holocaust. That I should be the leader of this new Senate majority is an awesome responsibility--awesome in the Biblical sense, as the angels that tremble in awe before God. Today, I feel the full weight of that responsibility, a sense of reverence and of awe at the trust placed in me. I intend to honor that trust with all of my energy and with joy. And as the majority changes in the Senate, the Senate will do business differently. The Senate will address the challenges our country faces head on and without delay, not with timid solutions but with boldness and with courage. The Senate will tackle the perils of the moment, a once-in-a-generation health and economic crisis, and it will strive to make progress on generations-long struggle for racial justice, economic justice, equality of opportunity, and equality under the law. And make no mistake, the Senate will forcefully, consistently, and urgently address the greatest threat to this country and to our planet: climate change. This Senate will legislate. It will be active, responsive, energetic, and bold. And to my Republican colleagues, when and where we can, the Democratic majority will strive to make this important work bipartisan. The Senate works best when we work together. We have no choice. The challenges we face are great. The divisions in the country are real. We have no choice but to try to work together every day to reward the faith the American people have placed in us. So let us begin. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS65-2 | null | 2,112 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, earlier today I was proud to join my colleagues in witnessing the inauguration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on the west front of the U.S. Capitol. I remembered, as I walked away from that inauguration ceremony, the experience I had 4 years ago. There was a luncheon. Traditionally there is a luncheon given for the new President and Vice President. That luncheon was my first opportunity to meet President Donald Trump. I had never met him before. I went up to him at the head table, and I introduced myself and said: I just want to tell you that I am working in the U.S. Senate for the DREAM Act. I believe that these Dreamers deserve a chance to become part of America's future. President Donald Trump, minutes after having taken the oath of office, said: Senator, don't worry about those young people. We will take care of them. That was my first conversation with President Trump. What transpired afterwards is a matter of record in the history of this country. We know also what happened in this Capitol Building just 2 weeks ago. That is why this inauguration was so different. We were battling a deadly virus and possibly a deadly attack by American terrorists. The U.S. Capitol was as closely guarded as I have ever seen it. We estimate that 25,000 soldiers--National Guard and Active-Duty soldiers--were in town to protect us from all around the United States, including 260 from the State of Illinois, I am very proud to announce. They did their job and did it well. I thank them for their service and sacrifice and separation from their families. But at the same time, we are facing a deadly virus. In the midst of a global pandemic, today's celebration had to be tempered so that people were safe from wherever they sat and from wherever they gathered. President Biden and Vice President Harris understand that our Nationfaces a unique set of circumstances. They also understand that we are a unique nation. What makes us special is that people from all over the world come to our shores to become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's values. Never before in American history have those ideals been tested as they have been in the last 4 years. A hallmark of the former administration was a relentless attack on immigrants. One of the main targets were the very Dreamers whom I spoke to President Trump about, young immigrants who came to the United States as children. It was 11 years ago that I joined with then-Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana on a bipartisan basis to call on President Obama to use his legal authority to protect Dreamers from deportation. Our argument was simple: These young people were brought to the United States as children. Their parents made the decision to come here. They grew up here, went to school here, pledged allegiance to that very flag every day in their classrooms, and believed they were part of this country. Usually sometime in their teenage years, their parents sat down with them and told them the grim reality: They have no country--not the one they left nor the one they currently live in. So I introduced legislation 20 years ago, the DREAM Act, in an effort to give them a chance, a chance to earn their way to legal status and citizenship, but I have been unable to enact that into law in both the House and the Senate in any given year. I have been stymied and stopped by the filibuster too many times. President Obama knew that. When he was a Senator here before being elected to be President, he was a cosponsor of my DREAM Act, so I knew where his heart was and I appealed to him--could he do something. And he did. He created DACA. DACA, by Executive order, provided temporary protection from deportation to Dreamers. If they register with the government, pay a fee, and pass a criminal and national security background check, they could have a temporary right to work here in the United States and be free from deportation. More than 800,000 Dreamers came forward with President Obama's DACA. DACA unleashed the full potential of these Dreamers, who are contributing to our country this very day as soldiers, teachers, and business owners. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 200,000 DACA recipients have been characterized as ``essential critical infrastructure workers'' during this pandemic. That wasn't my designation; it was the designation of the Trump administration. Among those essential workers are 41,700 DACA recipients in the healthcare industry--doctors, intensive care nurses, paramedics, and respiratory therapists. Well, on September 5, 2017, former President Trump repealed DACA. Hundreds of thousands of Dreamers faced losing their work permits and being deported to countries they barely remembered, if they remembered them at all. Last summer, the Supreme Court rejected President Trump's effort to end deportation protection for Dreamers. In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the President's attempt to rescind DACA was ``arbitrary and capricious.'' Today, in one of his first official acts, President Joseph Biden signed an Executive order to restore DACA. I am eternally grateful for President Biden's courage and commitment in keeping his word. Without DACA, hundreds of thousands of talented young people who have grown up in our country cannot continue their work and risk deportation every single day. But the resumption of DACA is just the first step toward long-overdue justice for Dreamers. Only legislation passed by Congress can provide a path to citizenship to the Dreamers. I first introduced the bipartisan DREAM Act 20 years ago, as I mentioned, and I will continue to do so until it becomes the law of the land. I am honored that I have a chance to serve as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 117th Congress. As a child of an immigrant myself, I never dreamed that I would be blessed with the opportunity to lead the committee that writes our Nation's immigration laws. To all of the Dreamers out there, I have told you many times: I have never given up on you; don't give up on me. I am going to pass the DREAM Act. Over the years, I have come to the floor with the most persuasive approach I can think of to pass the DREAM Act and make it the law of the land. I tell their stories. These stories show what is at stake when we consider DACA and the DREAM Act. It is not a theory. It is not just a law. These are real, human lives. Today I want to tell you about Hina Naveed. She is the 127th Dreamer whose story I have told on the floor of the Senate. Hina was born in Pakistan and came to the United States from Dubai when she was 10 years old. She grew up in Fall River, MA. She sent me a letter, and here is what she said about growing up: I had a pretty typical experience navigating a new country and new school system. It wasn't until I turned 16 and my peers were getting their permits and their first jobs that I really felt the impact of being undocumented. Hina was an excellent student. In high school, she was president of the National Honor Society and Key Club. She graduated as the salutatorian of her class, ranked second out of 350 students with a 4.0 GPA. She received the Outstanding Vocational Student for Health Careers Award and Overall Outstanding Vocational Student Award. She went to the City University of New York College of Staten Island, where she earned associate's degrees in liberal arts and nursing and a bachelor of science in nursing. She studied at CUNY Law School, where she graduated with a law degree. Thanks to DACA, Hina became a registered nurse. She worked as director of health services for a nonprofit, community-based organization in New York. Her department provides healthcare services for children in foster care, many of whom are victims of medical neglect. She is also a member of the New York City Medical Reserve Corps. At the height of the pandemic, she volunteered on weekends at a hospital and at a residential facility with COVID-19 patients. Hina wrote to me about her plans: I want to work on health policy reform at a local and state level in an effort to achieve health equity for all. This pandemic has highlighted health disparities that have long existed, and I want to be part of making the change I want to see and experience. Here is what Hina said about DACA and what it meant to her: DACA has been life-changing. It has allowed me to drive, work, achieve fiscal independence, continue higher education, and contribute to my community more than I would have been able to otherwise. However, it is temporary, and with the benefits it provides, it has also cast a shadow over my life, forcing me to plan my life in 2-year increments. Well, let me start by saying thank you to her, to Hina Naveed, for her service on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic. All of us are in awe of our healthcare heroes. She is an immigrant healthcare hero. She is a DACA healthcare hero. She has put herself and her family at risk to protect others. She also shouldn't have to worry about being deported tomorrow and her family facing division. Will America be a stronger country if we just up and deport her or if she became an American citizen? I think the choice is clear. Hina and hundreds of thousands of other Dreamers are counting on those of us who serve in the Senate. So here is where we stand. The Senate Judiciary Committee will soon organize--I hope very soon--and I will have an opportunity to appeal to my colleagues on both sides of the table to join me in a bipartisan effort to pass the DREAM Act. President Biden has made it his clear priority, and I share it. I want this to be the first measure that we consider in the area of immigration. But I know we live in a 50-50 Senate, and it is possible that once again I will need to muster 60 votes to pass this on the floor. So, whatever we do, it has to be bipartisan. That means it won't have everything in it that I want or everything that maybe Hina or the advocates want, but we have to take a step forward once and for all to help these young people. As long as I am a Senator, I will continue to fight for Hina Naveed and for people who have come to this country just to make it better. It would be anAmerican tragedy to deport this brave and talented healthcare professional in the midst of a pandemic. We must ensure that she and hundreds of thousands of our essential workforce are not forced to stop contributing when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become American citizens. I cannot express my gratitude enough for President Biden, in the first hours that he was in office, recognizing the needs of the DACA recipients and the Dreamers. I want to work with him and work with both parties across the aisle to make this dream come true for so many who deserve it. They have waited long enough. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS66-5 | null | 2,113 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, earlier today I was proud to join my colleagues in witnessing the inauguration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on the west front of the U.S. Capitol. I remembered, as I walked away from that inauguration ceremony, the experience I had 4 years ago. There was a luncheon. Traditionally there is a luncheon given for the new President and Vice President. That luncheon was my first opportunity to meet President Donald Trump. I had never met him before. I went up to him at the head table, and I introduced myself and said: I just want to tell you that I am working in the U.S. Senate for the DREAM Act. I believe that these Dreamers deserve a chance to become part of America's future. President Donald Trump, minutes after having taken the oath of office, said: Senator, don't worry about those young people. We will take care of them. That was my first conversation with President Trump. What transpired afterwards is a matter of record in the history of this country. We know also what happened in this Capitol Building just 2 weeks ago. That is why this inauguration was so different. We were battling a deadly virus and possibly a deadly attack by American terrorists. The U.S. Capitol was as closely guarded as I have ever seen it. We estimate that 25,000 soldiers--National Guard and Active-Duty soldiers--were in town to protect us from all around the United States, including 260 from the State of Illinois, I am very proud to announce. They did their job and did it well. I thank them for their service and sacrifice and separation from their families. But at the same time, we are facing a deadly virus. In the midst of a global pandemic, today's celebration had to be tempered so that people were safe from wherever they sat and from wherever they gathered. President Biden and Vice President Harris understand that our Nationfaces a unique set of circumstances. They also understand that we are a unique nation. What makes us special is that people from all over the world come to our shores to become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's values. Never before in American history have those ideals been tested as they have been in the last 4 years. A hallmark of the former administration was a relentless attack on immigrants. One of the main targets were the very Dreamers whom I spoke to President Trump about, young immigrants who came to the United States as children. It was 11 years ago that I joined with then-Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana on a bipartisan basis to call on President Obama to use his legal authority to protect Dreamers from deportation. Our argument was simple: These young people were brought to the United States as children. Their parents made the decision to come here. They grew up here, went to school here, pledged allegiance to that very flag every day in their classrooms, and believed they were part of this country. Usually sometime in their teenage years, their parents sat down with them and told them the grim reality: They have no country--not the one they left nor the one they currently live in. So I introduced legislation 20 years ago, the DREAM Act, in an effort to give them a chance, a chance to earn their way to legal status and citizenship, but I have been unable to enact that into law in both the House and the Senate in any given year. I have been stymied and stopped by the filibuster too many times. President Obama knew that. When he was a Senator here before being elected to be President, he was a cosponsor of my DREAM Act, so I knew where his heart was and I appealed to him--could he do something. And he did. He created DACA. DACA, by Executive order, provided temporary protection from deportation to Dreamers. If they register with the government, pay a fee, and pass a criminal and national security background check, they could have a temporary right to work here in the United States and be free from deportation. More than 800,000 Dreamers came forward with President Obama's DACA. DACA unleashed the full potential of these Dreamers, who are contributing to our country this very day as soldiers, teachers, and business owners. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 200,000 DACA recipients have been characterized as ``essential critical infrastructure workers'' during this pandemic. That wasn't my designation; it was the designation of the Trump administration. Among those essential workers are 41,700 DACA recipients in the healthcare industry--doctors, intensive care nurses, paramedics, and respiratory therapists. Well, on September 5, 2017, former President Trump repealed DACA. Hundreds of thousands of Dreamers faced losing their work permits and being deported to countries they barely remembered, if they remembered them at all. Last summer, the Supreme Court rejected President Trump's effort to end deportation protection for Dreamers. In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the President's attempt to rescind DACA was ``arbitrary and capricious.'' Today, in one of his first official acts, President Joseph Biden signed an Executive order to restore DACA. I am eternally grateful for President Biden's courage and commitment in keeping his word. Without DACA, hundreds of thousands of talented young people who have grown up in our country cannot continue their work and risk deportation every single day. But the resumption of DACA is just the first step toward long-overdue justice for Dreamers. Only legislation passed by Congress can provide a path to citizenship to the Dreamers. I first introduced the bipartisan DREAM Act 20 years ago, as I mentioned, and I will continue to do so until it becomes the law of the land. I am honored that I have a chance to serve as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 117th Congress. As a child of an immigrant myself, I never dreamed that I would be blessed with the opportunity to lead the committee that writes our Nation's immigration laws. To all of the Dreamers out there, I have told you many times: I have never given up on you; don't give up on me. I am going to pass the DREAM Act. Over the years, I have come to the floor with the most persuasive approach I can think of to pass the DREAM Act and make it the law of the land. I tell their stories. These stories show what is at stake when we consider DACA and the DREAM Act. It is not a theory. It is not just a law. These are real, human lives. Today I want to tell you about Hina Naveed. She is the 127th Dreamer whose story I have told on the floor of the Senate. Hina was born in Pakistan and came to the United States from Dubai when she was 10 years old. She grew up in Fall River, MA. She sent me a letter, and here is what she said about growing up: I had a pretty typical experience navigating a new country and new school system. It wasn't until I turned 16 and my peers were getting their permits and their first jobs that I really felt the impact of being undocumented. Hina was an excellent student. In high school, she was president of the National Honor Society and Key Club. She graduated as the salutatorian of her class, ranked second out of 350 students with a 4.0 GPA. She received the Outstanding Vocational Student for Health Careers Award and Overall Outstanding Vocational Student Award. She went to the City University of New York College of Staten Island, where she earned associate's degrees in liberal arts and nursing and a bachelor of science in nursing. She studied at CUNY Law School, where she graduated with a law degree. Thanks to DACA, Hina became a registered nurse. She worked as director of health services for a nonprofit, community-based organization in New York. Her department provides healthcare services for children in foster care, many of whom are victims of medical neglect. She is also a member of the New York City Medical Reserve Corps. At the height of the pandemic, she volunteered on weekends at a hospital and at a residential facility with COVID-19 patients. Hina wrote to me about her plans: I want to work on health policy reform at a local and state level in an effort to achieve health equity for all. This pandemic has highlighted health disparities that have long existed, and I want to be part of making the change I want to see and experience. Here is what Hina said about DACA and what it meant to her: DACA has been life-changing. It has allowed me to drive, work, achieve fiscal independence, continue higher education, and contribute to my community more than I would have been able to otherwise. However, it is temporary, and with the benefits it provides, it has also cast a shadow over my life, forcing me to plan my life in 2-year increments. Well, let me start by saying thank you to her, to Hina Naveed, for her service on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic. All of us are in awe of our healthcare heroes. She is an immigrant healthcare hero. She is a DACA healthcare hero. She has put herself and her family at risk to protect others. She also shouldn't have to worry about being deported tomorrow and her family facing division. Will America be a stronger country if we just up and deport her or if she became an American citizen? I think the choice is clear. Hina and hundreds of thousands of other Dreamers are counting on those of us who serve in the Senate. So here is where we stand. The Senate Judiciary Committee will soon organize--I hope very soon--and I will have an opportunity to appeal to my colleagues on both sides of the table to join me in a bipartisan effort to pass the DREAM Act. President Biden has made it his clear priority, and I share it. I want this to be the first measure that we consider in the area of immigration. But I know we live in a 50-50 Senate, and it is possible that once again I will need to muster 60 votes to pass this on the floor. So, whatever we do, it has to be bipartisan. That means it won't have everything in it that I want or everything that maybe Hina or the advocates want, but we have to take a step forward once and for all to help these young people. As long as I am a Senator, I will continue to fight for Hina Naveed and for people who have come to this country just to make it better. It would be anAmerican tragedy to deport this brave and talented healthcare professional in the midst of a pandemic. We must ensure that she and hundreds of thousands of our essential workforce are not forced to stop contributing when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become American citizens. I cannot express my gratitude enough for President Biden, in the first hours that he was in office, recognizing the needs of the DACA recipients and the Dreamers. I want to work with him and work with both parties across the aisle to make this dream come true for so many who deserve it. They have waited long enough. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS66-5 | null | 2,114 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, earlier today I was proud to join my colleagues in witnessing the inauguration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on the west front of the U.S. Capitol. I remembered, as I walked away from that inauguration ceremony, the experience I had 4 years ago. There was a luncheon. Traditionally there is a luncheon given for the new President and Vice President. That luncheon was my first opportunity to meet President Donald Trump. I had never met him before. I went up to him at the head table, and I introduced myself and said: I just want to tell you that I am working in the U.S. Senate for the DREAM Act. I believe that these Dreamers deserve a chance to become part of America's future. President Donald Trump, minutes after having taken the oath of office, said: Senator, don't worry about those young people. We will take care of them. That was my first conversation with President Trump. What transpired afterwards is a matter of record in the history of this country. We know also what happened in this Capitol Building just 2 weeks ago. That is why this inauguration was so different. We were battling a deadly virus and possibly a deadly attack by American terrorists. The U.S. Capitol was as closely guarded as I have ever seen it. We estimate that 25,000 soldiers--National Guard and Active-Duty soldiers--were in town to protect us from all around the United States, including 260 from the State of Illinois, I am very proud to announce. They did their job and did it well. I thank them for their service and sacrifice and separation from their families. But at the same time, we are facing a deadly virus. In the midst of a global pandemic, today's celebration had to be tempered so that people were safe from wherever they sat and from wherever they gathered. President Biden and Vice President Harris understand that our Nationfaces a unique set of circumstances. They also understand that we are a unique nation. What makes us special is that people from all over the world come to our shores to become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's values. Never before in American history have those ideals been tested as they have been in the last 4 years. A hallmark of the former administration was a relentless attack on immigrants. One of the main targets were the very Dreamers whom I spoke to President Trump about, young immigrants who came to the United States as children. It was 11 years ago that I joined with then-Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana on a bipartisan basis to call on President Obama to use his legal authority to protect Dreamers from deportation. Our argument was simple: These young people were brought to the United States as children. Their parents made the decision to come here. They grew up here, went to school here, pledged allegiance to that very flag every day in their classrooms, and believed they were part of this country. Usually sometime in their teenage years, their parents sat down with them and told them the grim reality: They have no country--not the one they left nor the one they currently live in. So I introduced legislation 20 years ago, the DREAM Act, in an effort to give them a chance, a chance to earn their way to legal status and citizenship, but I have been unable to enact that into law in both the House and the Senate in any given year. I have been stymied and stopped by the filibuster too many times. President Obama knew that. When he was a Senator here before being elected to be President, he was a cosponsor of my DREAM Act, so I knew where his heart was and I appealed to him--could he do something. And he did. He created DACA. DACA, by Executive order, provided temporary protection from deportation to Dreamers. If they register with the government, pay a fee, and pass a criminal and national security background check, they could have a temporary right to work here in the United States and be free from deportation. More than 800,000 Dreamers came forward with President Obama's DACA. DACA unleashed the full potential of these Dreamers, who are contributing to our country this very day as soldiers, teachers, and business owners. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 200,000 DACA recipients have been characterized as ``essential critical infrastructure workers'' during this pandemic. That wasn't my designation; it was the designation of the Trump administration. Among those essential workers are 41,700 DACA recipients in the healthcare industry--doctors, intensive care nurses, paramedics, and respiratory therapists. Well, on September 5, 2017, former President Trump repealed DACA. Hundreds of thousands of Dreamers faced losing their work permits and being deported to countries they barely remembered, if they remembered them at all. Last summer, the Supreme Court rejected President Trump's effort to end deportation protection for Dreamers. In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the President's attempt to rescind DACA was ``arbitrary and capricious.'' Today, in one of his first official acts, President Joseph Biden signed an Executive order to restore DACA. I am eternally grateful for President Biden's courage and commitment in keeping his word. Without DACA, hundreds of thousands of talented young people who have grown up in our country cannot continue their work and risk deportation every single day. But the resumption of DACA is just the first step toward long-overdue justice for Dreamers. Only legislation passed by Congress can provide a path to citizenship to the Dreamers. I first introduced the bipartisan DREAM Act 20 years ago, as I mentioned, and I will continue to do so until it becomes the law of the land. I am honored that I have a chance to serve as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 117th Congress. As a child of an immigrant myself, I never dreamed that I would be blessed with the opportunity to lead the committee that writes our Nation's immigration laws. To all of the Dreamers out there, I have told you many times: I have never given up on you; don't give up on me. I am going to pass the DREAM Act. Over the years, I have come to the floor with the most persuasive approach I can think of to pass the DREAM Act and make it the law of the land. I tell their stories. These stories show what is at stake when we consider DACA and the DREAM Act. It is not a theory. It is not just a law. These are real, human lives. Today I want to tell you about Hina Naveed. She is the 127th Dreamer whose story I have told on the floor of the Senate. Hina was born in Pakistan and came to the United States from Dubai when she was 10 years old. She grew up in Fall River, MA. She sent me a letter, and here is what she said about growing up: I had a pretty typical experience navigating a new country and new school system. It wasn't until I turned 16 and my peers were getting their permits and their first jobs that I really felt the impact of being undocumented. Hina was an excellent student. In high school, she was president of the National Honor Society and Key Club. She graduated as the salutatorian of her class, ranked second out of 350 students with a 4.0 GPA. She received the Outstanding Vocational Student for Health Careers Award and Overall Outstanding Vocational Student Award. She went to the City University of New York College of Staten Island, where she earned associate's degrees in liberal arts and nursing and a bachelor of science in nursing. She studied at CUNY Law School, where she graduated with a law degree. Thanks to DACA, Hina became a registered nurse. She worked as director of health services for a nonprofit, community-based organization in New York. Her department provides healthcare services for children in foster care, many of whom are victims of medical neglect. She is also a member of the New York City Medical Reserve Corps. At the height of the pandemic, she volunteered on weekends at a hospital and at a residential facility with COVID-19 patients. Hina wrote to me about her plans: I want to work on health policy reform at a local and state level in an effort to achieve health equity for all. This pandemic has highlighted health disparities that have long existed, and I want to be part of making the change I want to see and experience. Here is what Hina said about DACA and what it meant to her: DACA has been life-changing. It has allowed me to drive, work, achieve fiscal independence, continue higher education, and contribute to my community more than I would have been able to otherwise. However, it is temporary, and with the benefits it provides, it has also cast a shadow over my life, forcing me to plan my life in 2-year increments. Well, let me start by saying thank you to her, to Hina Naveed, for her service on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic. All of us are in awe of our healthcare heroes. She is an immigrant healthcare hero. She is a DACA healthcare hero. She has put herself and her family at risk to protect others. She also shouldn't have to worry about being deported tomorrow and her family facing division. Will America be a stronger country if we just up and deport her or if she became an American citizen? I think the choice is clear. Hina and hundreds of thousands of other Dreamers are counting on those of us who serve in the Senate. So here is where we stand. The Senate Judiciary Committee will soon organize--I hope very soon--and I will have an opportunity to appeal to my colleagues on both sides of the table to join me in a bipartisan effort to pass the DREAM Act. President Biden has made it his clear priority, and I share it. I want this to be the first measure that we consider in the area of immigration. But I know we live in a 50-50 Senate, and it is possible that once again I will need to muster 60 votes to pass this on the floor. So, whatever we do, it has to be bipartisan. That means it won't have everything in it that I want or everything that maybe Hina or the advocates want, but we have to take a step forward once and for all to help these young people. As long as I am a Senator, I will continue to fight for Hina Naveed and for people who have come to this country just to make it better. It would be anAmerican tragedy to deport this brave and talented healthcare professional in the midst of a pandemic. We must ensure that she and hundreds of thousands of our essential workforce are not forced to stop contributing when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become American citizens. I cannot express my gratitude enough for President Biden, in the first hours that he was in office, recognizing the needs of the DACA recipients and the Dreamers. I want to work with him and work with both parties across the aisle to make this dream come true for so many who deserve it. They have waited long enough. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS66-5 | null | 2,115 |
formal | right to work | null | anti-GMO | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, earlier today I was proud to join my colleagues in witnessing the inauguration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris on the west front of the U.S. Capitol. I remembered, as I walked away from that inauguration ceremony, the experience I had 4 years ago. There was a luncheon. Traditionally there is a luncheon given for the new President and Vice President. That luncheon was my first opportunity to meet President Donald Trump. I had never met him before. I went up to him at the head table, and I introduced myself and said: I just want to tell you that I am working in the U.S. Senate for the DREAM Act. I believe that these Dreamers deserve a chance to become part of America's future. President Donald Trump, minutes after having taken the oath of office, said: Senator, don't worry about those young people. We will take care of them. That was my first conversation with President Trump. What transpired afterwards is a matter of record in the history of this country. We know also what happened in this Capitol Building just 2 weeks ago. That is why this inauguration was so different. We were battling a deadly virus and possibly a deadly attack by American terrorists. The U.S. Capitol was as closely guarded as I have ever seen it. We estimate that 25,000 soldiers--National Guard and Active-Duty soldiers--were in town to protect us from all around the United States, including 260 from the State of Illinois, I am very proud to announce. They did their job and did it well. I thank them for their service and sacrifice and separation from their families. But at the same time, we are facing a deadly virus. In the midst of a global pandemic, today's celebration had to be tempered so that people were safe from wherever they sat and from wherever they gathered. President Biden and Vice President Harris understand that our Nationfaces a unique set of circumstances. They also understand that we are a unique nation. What makes us special is that people from all over the world come to our shores to become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's values. Never before in American history have those ideals been tested as they have been in the last 4 years. A hallmark of the former administration was a relentless attack on immigrants. One of the main targets were the very Dreamers whom I spoke to President Trump about, young immigrants who came to the United States as children. It was 11 years ago that I joined with then-Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana on a bipartisan basis to call on President Obama to use his legal authority to protect Dreamers from deportation. Our argument was simple: These young people were brought to the United States as children. Their parents made the decision to come here. They grew up here, went to school here, pledged allegiance to that very flag every day in their classrooms, and believed they were part of this country. Usually sometime in their teenage years, their parents sat down with them and told them the grim reality: They have no country--not the one they left nor the one they currently live in. So I introduced legislation 20 years ago, the DREAM Act, in an effort to give them a chance, a chance to earn their way to legal status and citizenship, but I have been unable to enact that into law in both the House and the Senate in any given year. I have been stymied and stopped by the filibuster too many times. President Obama knew that. When he was a Senator here before being elected to be President, he was a cosponsor of my DREAM Act, so I knew where his heart was and I appealed to him--could he do something. And he did. He created DACA. DACA, by Executive order, provided temporary protection from deportation to Dreamers. If they register with the government, pay a fee, and pass a criminal and national security background check, they could have a temporary right to work here in the United States and be free from deportation. More than 800,000 Dreamers came forward with President Obama's DACA. DACA unleashed the full potential of these Dreamers, who are contributing to our country this very day as soldiers, teachers, and business owners. In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 200,000 DACA recipients have been characterized as ``essential critical infrastructure workers'' during this pandemic. That wasn't my designation; it was the designation of the Trump administration. Among those essential workers are 41,700 DACA recipients in the healthcare industry--doctors, intensive care nurses, paramedics, and respiratory therapists. Well, on September 5, 2017, former President Trump repealed DACA. Hundreds of thousands of Dreamers faced losing their work permits and being deported to countries they barely remembered, if they remembered them at all. Last summer, the Supreme Court rejected President Trump's effort to end deportation protection for Dreamers. In an opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Court held that the President's attempt to rescind DACA was ``arbitrary and capricious.'' Today, in one of his first official acts, President Joseph Biden signed an Executive order to restore DACA. I am eternally grateful for President Biden's courage and commitment in keeping his word. Without DACA, hundreds of thousands of talented young people who have grown up in our country cannot continue their work and risk deportation every single day. But the resumption of DACA is just the first step toward long-overdue justice for Dreamers. Only legislation passed by Congress can provide a path to citizenship to the Dreamers. I first introduced the bipartisan DREAM Act 20 years ago, as I mentioned, and I will continue to do so until it becomes the law of the land. I am honored that I have a chance to serve as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the 117th Congress. As a child of an immigrant myself, I never dreamed that I would be blessed with the opportunity to lead the committee that writes our Nation's immigration laws. To all of the Dreamers out there, I have told you many times: I have never given up on you; don't give up on me. I am going to pass the DREAM Act. Over the years, I have come to the floor with the most persuasive approach I can think of to pass the DREAM Act and make it the law of the land. I tell their stories. These stories show what is at stake when we consider DACA and the DREAM Act. It is not a theory. It is not just a law. These are real, human lives. Today I want to tell you about Hina Naveed. She is the 127th Dreamer whose story I have told on the floor of the Senate. Hina was born in Pakistan and came to the United States from Dubai when she was 10 years old. She grew up in Fall River, MA. She sent me a letter, and here is what she said about growing up: I had a pretty typical experience navigating a new country and new school system. It wasn't until I turned 16 and my peers were getting their permits and their first jobs that I really felt the impact of being undocumented. Hina was an excellent student. In high school, she was president of the National Honor Society and Key Club. She graduated as the salutatorian of her class, ranked second out of 350 students with a 4.0 GPA. She received the Outstanding Vocational Student for Health Careers Award and Overall Outstanding Vocational Student Award. She went to the City University of New York College of Staten Island, where she earned associate's degrees in liberal arts and nursing and a bachelor of science in nursing. She studied at CUNY Law School, where she graduated with a law degree. Thanks to DACA, Hina became a registered nurse. She worked as director of health services for a nonprofit, community-based organization in New York. Her department provides healthcare services for children in foster care, many of whom are victims of medical neglect. She is also a member of the New York City Medical Reserve Corps. At the height of the pandemic, she volunteered on weekends at a hospital and at a residential facility with COVID-19 patients. Hina wrote to me about her plans: I want to work on health policy reform at a local and state level in an effort to achieve health equity for all. This pandemic has highlighted health disparities that have long existed, and I want to be part of making the change I want to see and experience. Here is what Hina said about DACA and what it meant to her: DACA has been life-changing. It has allowed me to drive, work, achieve fiscal independence, continue higher education, and contribute to my community more than I would have been able to otherwise. However, it is temporary, and with the benefits it provides, it has also cast a shadow over my life, forcing me to plan my life in 2-year increments. Well, let me start by saying thank you to her, to Hina Naveed, for her service on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic. All of us are in awe of our healthcare heroes. She is an immigrant healthcare hero. She is a DACA healthcare hero. She has put herself and her family at risk to protect others. She also shouldn't have to worry about being deported tomorrow and her family facing division. Will America be a stronger country if we just up and deport her or if she became an American citizen? I think the choice is clear. Hina and hundreds of thousands of other Dreamers are counting on those of us who serve in the Senate. So here is where we stand. The Senate Judiciary Committee will soon organize--I hope very soon--and I will have an opportunity to appeal to my colleagues on both sides of the table to join me in a bipartisan effort to pass the DREAM Act. President Biden has made it his clear priority, and I share it. I want this to be the first measure that we consider in the area of immigration. But I know we live in a 50-50 Senate, and it is possible that once again I will need to muster 60 votes to pass this on the floor. So, whatever we do, it has to be bipartisan. That means it won't have everything in it that I want or everything that maybe Hina or the advocates want, but we have to take a step forward once and for all to help these young people. As long as I am a Senator, I will continue to fight for Hina Naveed and for people who have come to this country just to make it better. It would be anAmerican tragedy to deport this brave and talented healthcare professional in the midst of a pandemic. We must ensure that she and hundreds of thousands of our essential workforce are not forced to stop contributing when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become American citizens. I cannot express my gratitude enough for President Biden, in the first hours that he was in office, recognizing the needs of the DACA recipients and the Dreamers. I want to work with him and work with both parties across the aisle to make this dream come true for so many who deserve it. They have waited long enough. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS66-5 | null | 2,116 |
formal | political correctness | null | racist | Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, at noon today, Joe Biden was sworn in as our new President. I never served with President Biden when he was a Senator, but I can tell you, from direct and firsthand experience, that he is a man of tremendous empathy. I have witnessed it. And so I pray that God will bless him with strength, with health, and with wisdom, because I don't need to tell anyone that we, in our Nation, are living in troubled times. President Trump was elected and then, in this last cycle, received 75 million votes, in part because he spoke to and was brutally honest about some of the grievances and the fears that are now dividing our country. It is important to understand that he didn't create them, and that is why his exit alone is not going to make America normal again. The troubles we face and the things that now divide us really aren't so much about politics or about ideology. If you look into them, they are really more about the things that are at the core of our identity as a nation and as a people. Our people want a country where everybody has the opportunity to find a good job, to get married, to live in a safe neighborhood, to not go into debt because they have a baby, to send their kids to a good school, and one day to retire with dignity and security. But we have millions of Americans who increasingly feel that that kind of life and those kinds of things are out of reach for them, and they are really frustrated that neither those in government or either political party seem to be doing much about them. The people need a sense of belonging and purpose, but the places that we used to get that from--our families, the community groups we joined, the synagogues, the churches--many of them are in collapse. So now you have millions of people who feel isolated or alienated and some who are turning to hyperpartisan politics and even online conspiracy cults to fill the void that those institutions once filled. The overwhelming majority of Americans reject racism and bigotry and discrimination. But they also reject identity politics, which constantly seems to want to divide us against and apart from each other on the basis of race and ethnicity and gender. We are a nation that is proud of our heritage as a nation of immigrants, but millions of Americans--I would say the majority--also believe we are a nation that has to have immigration laws. They need to be followed, and they need to be enforced. Most Americans accept that our country, our society is changing, and they understand that there are people with different views and different ways of life. What they do resent is efforts to demonize and to persecute those who hold the traditional values that are inherited from our Judeo-Christian heritage. Most Americans believe decency and morality require that everyone is entitled to dignity and to respect. But there are also many growing increasingly tired of walking on eggshells of political correctness and forced to undergo sensitivity training because everyone seems to be so easily offended these days by everything. People understand that we have to do something. It is a problem. We have do something about people who use social media to spread dangerous lies, to instigate violence. But I think they also have a right to be very troubled that five CEOs of technology companies--five people in five companies, elected by no one, accountable to no one--have the power, if they so choose, to wipe out, to silence anyone--even a President. And I would tell you that, almost without exception, they were horrified--horrified--about what happened here 2 weeks ago today. They want those people in jail. But they also wonder: Where was that outrage when this summer, in multiple cities, across a number of months, there were people setting fire to police cars and breaking into police stations and attacking courthouses and looting private property? I will tell you that they see firsthand every day the extraordinary damage being done by this terrible pandemic and the damage being done by our bitter divisions, which, frankly, I think most Americans will never understand why the first thing we are going to do here, potentially, is an impeachment trial of a President who isn't even in office anymore. What happened today was incredibly important. The pageantry, the rituals behind it--it matters. And for the 59th time in our history, we peacefully transferred power from one leader to the next. I think the fact that that happened on the very steps of this Capitol, where just 2 weeks ago on this day we saw an unimaginable attack on democracy, that should serve as a reminder to all of us in this country and a powerful message to the world that our Republic remains resilient. But now the hard work of self-government begins, and these anxieties I have just described--the tens of millions of Americans--need to be acknowledged, and they need to be addressed. If they are ignored, if they are allowed to fester, what it will do is it will leave us not just a nation that is paralyzed and can't take action on important issues; we are going to be left a nation that remains vulnerable to those who are willing to exploit and stir the most destructive impulses. Today, President Biden struck important tones of national unity, and I believe they were sincere. But pursuing a radical agenda in a country so divided does not serve the cause of unity. It will only serve cynicism that destroys trust. By the same token, continuing to fan the flames of grievances or, in the alternative, pursuing vengeance disguised as accountability will not serve the cause of unity either. That is nothing but the politics of resentment andretribution, which only leads to a fractured nation of people who literally come to hate each other. Demanding that the other side in a debate on a topic, on a principle, agree with you on everything isn't unity. That is the arrogance of believing that any of us--that we are the sole holders of the truth: Anyone who agrees with us is good, and anyone who disagrees with us is wrong--not just wrong but, actually, evil. The truth is that real unity isn't everyone having the same ideology or the same views or the same ideas. The unity we need actually comes from remembering--remembering who we actually are. We Americans are not a racist or nativist people. We are a good and compassionate people who--in an overwhelming majority, they do not ask about race when they donate unwrapped toys so that no child has to wake up on Christmas morning with no present under the tree. They don't ask where a soldier's or sailor's or airman's or airwoman's parents came from when they put together and send care packages to them halfway around the world that they defend. We Americans are a bold people. In our veins literally runs the blood of pilgrims, of settlers, of exiles, of immigrants, of people who overcame slavery and segregation. We are the descendants of people who refused to surrender to fear and to abandon the hope of a better life. We Americans are not the inheritors of an American dream that is some prize that we have to fight against one another for in some winner-take-all competition. We are the inheritors of an American dream that anyone can achieve without it being denied to someone else. This is who we were when this country inspired and changed the world, and I hope this is who we will be again: a people who disagree over principles, who argue over policies--that has to happen because our Republic depends on every view having a voice and every voice having a place to be heard--but also a people who now understand that the choice before us is, we will either find a way to share a nation and a future, or we will all share the condemnation of history and the rebuke of Americans yet to come. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. RUBIO | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS68-2 | null | 2,117 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the nomination of Avril Danica Haines to be Director of National Intelligence. I think my colleagues know that in a few minutes, the Senate will be voting on her nomination for this key position. I briefly intend to outline where I think things stand on several sensitive issues with the 18 agencies that make up the intelligence community. The Biden administration and Ms. Haines have an opportunity and a duty to turn the page on the coverups and lawlessness of the outgoing administration. That is why I asked Ms. Haines at her confirmation hearing whether she would abide by a law that I authored requiring an unclassified report on who was responsible for the killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Jamal Khashoggi was a U.S. resident who was lured to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and brutally murdered. Despite press stories that the Saudi Arabian leader was responsible for the killing, the Trump administration stayed mum, just stonewalled. For a whole year, the Trump administration just ignored the law that I wrote. So I asked Ms. Haines at our hearing whether she would follow the law and provide that unclassified report on who was responsible for Jamal Khashoggi's murder. Ms. Haines' response was straightforward. She said she would provide the report and comply with the law. That statement, frankly, as modest as it was, was a sea change, colleagues, from the obstructionism and stonewalling of the Trump administration. The Trump administration had basically taken the position on laws like this transparency measure that it was kind of optional for the executive branch to comply. So Ms. Haines' direct commitment to making that key report on the role the Saudi leaders in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, in my view, was a real step forward for the rule of law, for accountability, and for human rights. And I will say as a journalist's kid that it was a real step forward for the freedom of the press everywhere. The second subject I discussed with Ms. Haines was a particularly troubling aspect of the CIA's recent history. The CIA spied on the staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee when the staff was writing the torture report. As Deputy Director, Ms. Haines didn't hold anyone accountable. In my view, this abuse, this spying on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, basically, colleagues, turns the whole concept of oversight on its head. The U.S. Congress is supposed to do oversight on the executive branch and not visa-versa. In response to my questions at the hearing, Ms. Haines admitted that the spying on the committee was wrong. She also agreed that she supported recommendations to expand accountability and would apply that expanded accountability to the intelligence community at large. And when she was asked about the CIA's baseless efforts to have committee staff prosecuted, she agreed that there ought to be guardrails against that happening again. The third area I explored with the nominee was the need to rebuild trust in the intelligence community, which, in my view, requires a new focus on transparency and openness. For example, there ought to be transparency so that the American people know what kind of surveillance is being conducted on them. The President of the Senate knows about the important vote we had on that amendment that I offered, the bipartisan amendment with Senator Daines, because we ought to get transparency on whether the government is spying on the browsing history of the American people. So this is really a critical and growing concern because we are all seeing data brokers and others selling people's data, and it is especially important that the American people are told if the government is using a legal loophole in the law in the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment So I asked Ms. Haines about circumstances in which the government, instead of getting an order, just goes out and purchases the private records of Americans from these sleazy and unregulated commercial data brokers who are simply above the law--literally above the law. I believe this practice is unacceptable, and soon I will be introducing legislation to make it clear that the Fourth Amendment is not for sale. Now, for Congress to tackle the topic, it is vitally important that there be an informed public debate about what the government is collecting right now and what it believes is a legal basis for the collection. And I was encouraged by how Ms. Haines responded to that question I asked. She said it was critical that the American people have an understanding of when and under what authorities the government is buying their private data. Now, Ms. Haines made a number of other commitments related to transparency issues, many of which relate to a problem that I have come to describe as ``secret law.'' To my colleagues--I see our new Members here--people think when a law is written, they go to a coffee shop in Atlanta or Athens or Tucson, and they read about a law, and they think that is what the public law says. But secret law is based on the proposition that after the public law is put in place, the government often reinterprets the public law in secret and keeps the new interpretation secret under the pretext that this secrecy is just so key to keeping Americans safe. The reality is that the interpretation of public law ought to be transparent and public as well, and it comes down to a very straightforward principle. I am a strong opponent of secret law. I am a strong supporter of transparency. And I intend to remind Director Haines what she told me just a few days ago about transparency and to push hard for the public release of as much information as possible when Americans deserve to see it, and they can see it when it is consistent with the safety and well-being of their households and their loved ones. I also intend to push the Director of National Intelligence to fix a broken declassification system. For years, aflood of new, digitally classified information has overwhelmed the obsolete, paper-based declassification system. This system is so out of whack that in order to get a document declassified, government officials actually have to walk the document around Washington from agency to agency. I actually said at our open hearing that I wonder if it is getting to the point that to get a document declassified, someone who works for the government has to pack a lunch, put the document in a big black briefcase, and then make their way all over the Nation's Capital. So I have introduced with Senator Moran bipartisan legislation to authorize the Director of National Intelligence to fix the problem. Ms. Haines has acknowledged the seriousness of the problem and the DNI's role in fixing it. It is my intent to make sure that this also is not allowed to just continue as business as usual. Some of the starkest differences between the actions of the outgoing administration and the positions taken by Ms. Haines here a couple days ago relate to the crucial area of whistleblowers. The outgoing administration broke the law when it withheld from Congress the complaint of the Ukraine whistleblower, the whistleblower who identified abuses that resulted in the first impeachment of Donald Trump. This lawlessness undermined both the whistleblower system and the independence of the Intelligence Community Inspector General, who had determined that the complaint ought to be submitted to Congress. Ms. Haines has been clear--the law requires that when the inspector general determines that a whistleblower complaint is urgent, the Director of National Intelligence cannot keep it from the Congress. She made other commitments to whistleblowers. There are whistleblower protection laws--including some that have been approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee--that need to be enacted. There are procedures already required by law that the outgoing administration just didn't issue. They just stonewalled. After all the damage done by the Trump administration with respect to trampling on the public's right to know and transparency where the information can be made public to the American people without compromising sources and methods, I will state that the Biden administration has a lot of work to do to repair and improve whistleblower protections. They are going to have a lot on their plate. The country has massive cyber vulnerabilities that we saw just a couple of weeks ago. There is more to do in terms of preventing foreign interference in our elections. We have to ensure that other surveillance programs provide security without sacrificing our constitutional rights. I am going to close by way of saying I don't assume that I will always agree with the incoming administration. That has been true for me with Democrats and Republicans on these issues. When we disagree, we will have a vigorous debate--as vigorous as when I disagreed with the Trump administration. Ms. Haines as DNI and Ambassador Burns as CIA Director are beginning to shape up as a team that will be more open with the public, respect the law, and work with the Congress to repair the vast damage of the outgoing administration and respect what Ben Franklin talked about so many years ago. Liberty and security are not mutually exclusive. Smart policies get you both. Not-so-smart policies get you less of both. And that is our challenge. So tonight, because of her answers to me at the open Intelligence hearing a couple of days ago, I want to say I am going to be supporting Ms. Haines' nomination to be Director of National Intelligence. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WYDEN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS69 | null | 2,118 |
formal | right to know | null | anti-GMO | Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss the nomination of Avril Danica Haines to be Director of National Intelligence. I think my colleagues know that in a few minutes, the Senate will be voting on her nomination for this key position. I briefly intend to outline where I think things stand on several sensitive issues with the 18 agencies that make up the intelligence community. The Biden administration and Ms. Haines have an opportunity and a duty to turn the page on the coverups and lawlessness of the outgoing administration. That is why I asked Ms. Haines at her confirmation hearing whether she would abide by a law that I authored requiring an unclassified report on who was responsible for the killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Jamal Khashoggi was a U.S. resident who was lured to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and brutally murdered. Despite press stories that the Saudi Arabian leader was responsible for the killing, the Trump administration stayed mum, just stonewalled. For a whole year, the Trump administration just ignored the law that I wrote. So I asked Ms. Haines at our hearing whether she would follow the law and provide that unclassified report on who was responsible for Jamal Khashoggi's murder. Ms. Haines' response was straightforward. She said she would provide the report and comply with the law. That statement, frankly, as modest as it was, was a sea change, colleagues, from the obstructionism and stonewalling of the Trump administration. The Trump administration had basically taken the position on laws like this transparency measure that it was kind of optional for the executive branch to comply. So Ms. Haines' direct commitment to making that key report on the role the Saudi leaders in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, in my view, was a real step forward for the rule of law, for accountability, and for human rights. And I will say as a journalist's kid that it was a real step forward for the freedom of the press everywhere. The second subject I discussed with Ms. Haines was a particularly troubling aspect of the CIA's recent history. The CIA spied on the staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee when the staff was writing the torture report. As Deputy Director, Ms. Haines didn't hold anyone accountable. In my view, this abuse, this spying on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, basically, colleagues, turns the whole concept of oversight on its head. The U.S. Congress is supposed to do oversight on the executive branch and not visa-versa. In response to my questions at the hearing, Ms. Haines admitted that the spying on the committee was wrong. She also agreed that she supported recommendations to expand accountability and would apply that expanded accountability to the intelligence community at large. And when she was asked about the CIA's baseless efforts to have committee staff prosecuted, she agreed that there ought to be guardrails against that happening again. The third area I explored with the nominee was the need to rebuild trust in the intelligence community, which, in my view, requires a new focus on transparency and openness. For example, there ought to be transparency so that the American people know what kind of surveillance is being conducted on them. The President of the Senate knows about the important vote we had on that amendment that I offered, the bipartisan amendment with Senator Daines, because we ought to get transparency on whether the government is spying on the browsing history of the American people. So this is really a critical and growing concern because we are all seeing data brokers and others selling people's data, and it is especially important that the American people are told if the government is using a legal loophole in the law in the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment So I asked Ms. Haines about circumstances in which the government, instead of getting an order, just goes out and purchases the private records of Americans from these sleazy and unregulated commercial data brokers who are simply above the law--literally above the law. I believe this practice is unacceptable, and soon I will be introducing legislation to make it clear that the Fourth Amendment is not for sale. Now, for Congress to tackle the topic, it is vitally important that there be an informed public debate about what the government is collecting right now and what it believes is a legal basis for the collection. And I was encouraged by how Ms. Haines responded to that question I asked. She said it was critical that the American people have an understanding of when and under what authorities the government is buying their private data. Now, Ms. Haines made a number of other commitments related to transparency issues, many of which relate to a problem that I have come to describe as ``secret law.'' To my colleagues--I see our new Members here--people think when a law is written, they go to a coffee shop in Atlanta or Athens or Tucson, and they read about a law, and they think that is what the public law says. But secret law is based on the proposition that after the public law is put in place, the government often reinterprets the public law in secret and keeps the new interpretation secret under the pretext that this secrecy is just so key to keeping Americans safe. The reality is that the interpretation of public law ought to be transparent and public as well, and it comes down to a very straightforward principle. I am a strong opponent of secret law. I am a strong supporter of transparency. And I intend to remind Director Haines what she told me just a few days ago about transparency and to push hard for the public release of as much information as possible when Americans deserve to see it, and they can see it when it is consistent with the safety and well-being of their households and their loved ones. I also intend to push the Director of National Intelligence to fix a broken declassification system. For years, aflood of new, digitally classified information has overwhelmed the obsolete, paper-based declassification system. This system is so out of whack that in order to get a document declassified, government officials actually have to walk the document around Washington from agency to agency. I actually said at our open hearing that I wonder if it is getting to the point that to get a document declassified, someone who works for the government has to pack a lunch, put the document in a big black briefcase, and then make their way all over the Nation's Capital. So I have introduced with Senator Moran bipartisan legislation to authorize the Director of National Intelligence to fix the problem. Ms. Haines has acknowledged the seriousness of the problem and the DNI's role in fixing it. It is my intent to make sure that this also is not allowed to just continue as business as usual. Some of the starkest differences between the actions of the outgoing administration and the positions taken by Ms. Haines here a couple days ago relate to the crucial area of whistleblowers. The outgoing administration broke the law when it withheld from Congress the complaint of the Ukraine whistleblower, the whistleblower who identified abuses that resulted in the first impeachment of Donald Trump. This lawlessness undermined both the whistleblower system and the independence of the Intelligence Community Inspector General, who had determined that the complaint ought to be submitted to Congress. Ms. Haines has been clear--the law requires that when the inspector general determines that a whistleblower complaint is urgent, the Director of National Intelligence cannot keep it from the Congress. She made other commitments to whistleblowers. There are whistleblower protection laws--including some that have been approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee--that need to be enacted. There are procedures already required by law that the outgoing administration just didn't issue. They just stonewalled. After all the damage done by the Trump administration with respect to trampling on the public's right to know and transparency where the information can be made public to the American people without compromising sources and methods, I will state that the Biden administration has a lot of work to do to repair and improve whistleblower protections. They are going to have a lot on their plate. The country has massive cyber vulnerabilities that we saw just a couple of weeks ago. There is more to do in terms of preventing foreign interference in our elections. We have to ensure that other surveillance programs provide security without sacrificing our constitutional rights. I am going to close by way of saying I don't assume that I will always agree with the incoming administration. That has been true for me with Democrats and Republicans on these issues. When we disagree, we will have a vigorous debate--as vigorous as when I disagreed with the Trump administration. Ms. Haines as DNI and Ambassador Burns as CIA Director are beginning to shape up as a team that will be more open with the public, respect the law, and work with the Congress to repair the vast damage of the outgoing administration and respect what Ben Franklin talked about so many years ago. Liberty and security are not mutually exclusive. Smart policies get you both. Not-so-smart policies get you less of both. And that is our challenge. So tonight, because of her answers to me at the open Intelligence hearing a couple of days ago, I want to say I am going to be supporting Ms. Haines' nomination to be Director of National Intelligence. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WYDEN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS69 | null | 2,119 |
formal | Reagan | null | white supremacist | Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on January 11, I had the honor of administering the oath of office to Iowa's speaker of the house, Patrick Grassley, who also happens to be my grandson. It was a privilege for me and my family to participate in the opening day of the Iowa Legislature's 89th General Assembly. Pat has represented the people of house district 50 since 2007. He is in his second year serving his caucus as speaker. In addition to celebrating Pat's professional accomplishments, we were also moved by the prayer that was written and shared by our great granddaughter Reagan, alongside her siblings Indee and Chance, as the legislature convened. I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Reagan's prayer be printed in the Record following my remarks. She is 11 years old. Barbara and I are truly blessed to spend memorable days like this one together as a family. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. GRASSLEY | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS71-3 | null | 2,120 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as indicated: EC-1. A communication from the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Homeland Defense and Global Security), transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to a consolidated budget justification display that includes all programs and activities of the Department of Defense combating terrorism program (OSS-2021-0006); to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-2. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation (direct final rule)'' (RIN0790-AK47) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-3. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Assignment of American National Red Cross and United Services Organizations, Inc., Employees to Duty with the Military Services'' (RIN0790-AK50) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-4. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Civil Money Penalties and Assessments Under the Military Health Care Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program'' (RIN0720- AB74) received on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-5. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Department of Defense Policy on Organizations That Seek to Represent or Organize Members of the Armed Forces in Negotiations or Collective Bargaining'' (RIN0790-AK23) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-6. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Implementation of Government wide Guidance for Grants and Cooperative Agreements'' (RIN0790-AJ45) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-7. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Definitions for Department of Defense Grant and Agreement Regulations in Subchapters A through F'' (RIN0790-AJ46) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-8. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Award Format for Department of Defense Grants and Cooperative Agreements'' (RIN0790-AJ47) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-9. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Department Grant and Agreement Regulations'' (RIN0790-AJ50) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-10. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Policy Requirements: General Award Terms and Conditions'' (RIN0790-AJ48) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-11. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM)'' (RIN0790-AK85) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-12. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of 73 rescissions of budget authority; referred jointly, pursuant to the order of January 30, 1975, as modified by the order of April 11, 1986; to the Committees on Appropriations; Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Foreign Relations; Commerce, Science, and Transportation; Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Energy and Natural Resources; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; the Judiciary; Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; Environment and Public Works; and Rules and Administration. EC-13. Acommunication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the National Emergencies Act, and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, a report relative to the issuance of an Executive Order taking further steps to deal with the threat posed by the People's Republic of China's (PRC) increasing exploitation of United States capital which continues to allow the PRC to directly threaten the United States homeland and United States forces overseas; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-14. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to the National Emergencies Act, a report of the continuation of the national emergency that was originally declared in Proclamation 9844 of February 15, 2019, with respect to the southern border of the United States; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-15. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Economic Report of the President together with the annual report of the Council of Economic Advisors; to the Joint Economic Committee. EC-16. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to Full-Up, System Level (FUSL) survivability testing, and a Live Fire Test and Evaluation (LFT&E) on the F-15EX aircraft; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-17. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), transmitting, pursuant to law, a report entitled ``Fiscal Year 2019 Armed Forces Demographic Profile Report''; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-18. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), transmitting a report on the approved retirement of Lieutenant General Eric P. Wendt, United States Army, and his advancement to the grade of lieutenant general on the retired list; to the Committee on Armed Services. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS72-3 | null | 2,121 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as indicated: EC-1. A communication from the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Homeland Defense and Global Security), transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to a consolidated budget justification display that includes all programs and activities of the Department of Defense combating terrorism program (OSS-2021-0006); to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-2. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation (direct final rule)'' (RIN0790-AK47) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-3. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Assignment of American National Red Cross and United Services Organizations, Inc., Employees to Duty with the Military Services'' (RIN0790-AK50) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-4. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Civil Money Penalties and Assessments Under the Military Health Care Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program'' (RIN0720- AB74) received on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-5. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Department of Defense Policy on Organizations That Seek to Represent or Organize Members of the Armed Forces in Negotiations or Collective Bargaining'' (RIN0790-AK23) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-6. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Implementation of Government wide Guidance for Grants and Cooperative Agreements'' (RIN0790-AJ45) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-7. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Definitions for Department of Defense Grant and Agreement Regulations in Subchapters A through F'' (RIN0790-AJ46) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-8. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Award Format for Department of Defense Grants and Cooperative Agreements'' (RIN0790-AJ47) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-9. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Department Grant and Agreement Regulations'' (RIN0790-AJ50) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-10. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Policy Requirements: General Award Terms and Conditions'' (RIN0790-AJ48) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-11. A communication from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM)'' (RIN0790-AK85) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on January 6, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-12. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of 73 rescissions of budget authority; referred jointly, pursuant to the order of January 30, 1975, as modified by the order of April 11, 1986; to the Committees on Appropriations; Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Foreign Relations; Commerce, Science, and Transportation; Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Energy and Natural Resources; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs; the Judiciary; Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; Environment and Public Works; and Rules and Administration. EC-13. Acommunication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the National Emergencies Act, and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, a report relative to the issuance of an Executive Order taking further steps to deal with the threat posed by the People's Republic of China's (PRC) increasing exploitation of United States capital which continues to allow the PRC to directly threaten the United States homeland and United States forces overseas; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-14. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to the National Emergencies Act, a report of the continuation of the national emergency that was originally declared in Proclamation 9844 of February 15, 2019, with respect to the southern border of the United States; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-15. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Economic Report of the President together with the annual report of the Council of Economic Advisors; to the Joint Economic Committee. EC-16. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to Full-Up, System Level (FUSL) survivability testing, and a Live Fire Test and Evaluation (LFT&E) on the F-15EX aircraft; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-17. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), transmitting, pursuant to law, a report entitled ``Fiscal Year 2019 Armed Forces Demographic Profile Report''; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-18. A communication from the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), transmitting a report on the approved retirement of Lieutenant General Eric P. Wendt, United States Army, and his advancement to the grade of lieutenant general on the retired list; to the Committee on Armed Services. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-20-pt1-PgS72-3 | null | 2,122 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: EC-6. A letter from the President, transmitting a notification that the National Emergency concerning the southern border of the United States, originally declared on February 15, 2019, by Proclamation 9844, is to continue in effect beyond February 15, 2021, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1622(d); Public Law 94-412, Sec. 202(d); (90 Stat. 1257) (H. Doc. No. 117--10); to the Committee on Armed Services and ordered to be printed. EC-7. A letter from the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs, Department of Defense, transmitting the Department's consolidated budget justification display of the combating terrorism program, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 229(a); Added by Public Law 106-65, div. A, title IX, Sec. 932(b)(1), Oct. 5, 1999; (133 Stat. 727); to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-8. A letter from the President, transmitting the Economic Report of the President together with the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisers, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1022(a); February 20, 1946, ch. 33, Sec. 3(a) (as amended by Public Law 101-508; 13112(e)); (104 Stat. 1388- 609) (H. Doc. No. 117--2); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and ordered to be printed. EC-9. A letter from the President, transmitting additional steps to address the national emergency with respect to significant malicious cyber-enabled activities as declared in Executive Order 13694 of April 1, 2015, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1703(b); Public Law 95-223, Sec. 204(b); (91 Stat. 1627) and 50 U.S.C. 1641(b); Public Law 94-412, Sec. 401(b); (90 Stat. 1257) (H. Doc. No. 117--11); to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgH220-2 | null | 2,123 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, it is nice to see you back in that position. Yesterday, Mr. President, we began a new chapter in the history of our Nation. On the same steps stormed by domestic terrorists 2 weeks ago, we held a ceremony to the enduring power of our democracy. It was a symbol to the world that America is back and a message to those domestic terrorists that they will never prevail. Even as the festivities were in full swing, our new President and this new Senate commenced the work of rebuilding our country and healing its wounds. With the stroke of a pen, President Biden started the process of rejoining the United States to the Paris accords. He extended the pause on student loan payments, put an end to the Muslim travel ban, reinstalled safeguards for our Nation's Dreamers, and put a halt on the ineffective border wall. Crucially, President Biden signed a number of orders to refocus the Federal Government's efforts on fighting the coronavirus pandemic. The United States has rejoined the World Health Organization. A mask mandate has been issued for all Federal properties. And President Biden has named a new coronavirus response coordinator to manage vaccine distribution, which is so desperately needed and was such a failure under the Trump administration. Our country has suffered deeply from the chaotic, lackluster, and incompetent Federal response to COVID-19. As we cross the grim milestone of 400,000--400,000--American fatalities from COVID, the Biden administration is wasting no time in marshaling the resources of the Federal Government into action and today released a national strategy to defeat the pandemic. What a concept--a President who actually takes the defining crisis of our time seriously. What a change--and how great is the need. Here in the Senate, the first order of business is to fulfill our constitutional duty to advise and consent on the President's appointments to his Cabinet. Last night, the Senate confirmed the President's selection for the Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haines. We appreciate the bipartisan cooperation to get her confirmation done yesterday, and we should continue in that spirit today. Traditionally, the Senate has confirmed several national security nominees for an incoming administration during their first few days. Even as power changes hands from one administration to the other, the work of keeping our Nation safe must not be paused or be disrupted. Foreign adversaries will seek to exploit this period of transition, and we cannot allow America's military, intelligence, and national security policy to be disrupted by staffing delays. In 2017, President Trump had his Defense Secretary and Secretary of Homeland Security in place on Inauguration Day. President Biden deserves his national security team in place as soon as possible, as well as key officials in charge of responding to the current health and economic crises. With the cooperation of our Republican colleagues, we can and should confirm the Secretaries of Defense, State, Homeland Security, and Treasury without much delay. While national security is paramount, I would remind my colleagues that we are in the middle of an economic crisis. The sooner we confirm a Treasury Secretary, the better. And so, as we begin the process of bringing our country back together, let the first week of this Congress be a collaboration between our two parties to confirm President Biden's Cabinet. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS75-5 | null | 2,124 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, it is nice to see you back in that position. Yesterday, Mr. President, we began a new chapter in the history of our Nation. On the same steps stormed by domestic terrorists 2 weeks ago, we held a ceremony to the enduring power of our democracy. It was a symbol to the world that America is back and a message to those domestic terrorists that they will never prevail. Even as the festivities were in full swing, our new President and this new Senate commenced the work of rebuilding our country and healing its wounds. With the stroke of a pen, President Biden started the process of rejoining the United States to the Paris accords. He extended the pause on student loan payments, put an end to the Muslim travel ban, reinstalled safeguards for our Nation's Dreamers, and put a halt on the ineffective border wall. Crucially, President Biden signed a number of orders to refocus the Federal Government's efforts on fighting the coronavirus pandemic. The United States has rejoined the World Health Organization. A mask mandate has been issued for all Federal properties. And President Biden has named a new coronavirus response coordinator to manage vaccine distribution, which is so desperately needed and was such a failure under the Trump administration. Our country has suffered deeply from the chaotic, lackluster, and incompetent Federal response to COVID-19. As we cross the grim milestone of 400,000--400,000--American fatalities from COVID, the Biden administration is wasting no time in marshaling the resources of the Federal Government into action and today released a national strategy to defeat the pandemic. What a concept--a President who actually takes the defining crisis of our time seriously. What a change--and how great is the need. Here in the Senate, the first order of business is to fulfill our constitutional duty to advise and consent on the President's appointments to his Cabinet. Last night, the Senate confirmed the President's selection for the Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haines. We appreciate the bipartisan cooperation to get her confirmation done yesterday, and we should continue in that spirit today. Traditionally, the Senate has confirmed several national security nominees for an incoming administration during their first few days. Even as power changes hands from one administration to the other, the work of keeping our Nation safe must not be paused or be disrupted. Foreign adversaries will seek to exploit this period of transition, and we cannot allow America's military, intelligence, and national security policy to be disrupted by staffing delays. In 2017, President Trump had his Defense Secretary and Secretary of Homeland Security in place on Inauguration Day. President Biden deserves his national security team in place as soon as possible, as well as key officials in charge of responding to the current health and economic crises. With the cooperation of our Republican colleagues, we can and should confirm the Secretaries of Defense, State, Homeland Security, and Treasury without much delay. While national security is paramount, I would remind my colleagues that we are in the middle of an economic crisis. The sooner we confirm a Treasury Secretary, the better. And so, as we begin the process of bringing our country back together, let the first week of this Congress be a collaboration between our two parties to confirm President Biden's Cabinet. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS75-5 | null | 2,125 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am happy to be standing here today on the Senate floor during an exciting week and one that really provides us with hope for the future. I welcome President Biden and, of course, Vice President Harris to their new roles and look forward to their leadership that they will provide in these difficult times. We can never forget that America is still in the midst of a deadly pandemic. Tragically, we lost over 400,000 Americans. In my State of Illinois, we have seen more than 1 million COVID cases, and 18,398 of my neighbors and friends in Illinois have died due to this deadly virus. As we continue to try to stop the spread of this pandemic, I am glad that the vaccine rollout has been able to help some in my State--537,000 people in Illinois have received vaccines. It is a refreshing and long overdue sight to have the President and White House fully engaged in addressing this pandemic with a focus on science and racial equity. On his first day yesterday, President Biden signed several important Executive actions, including instituting a mask mandate for all Federal facilities and buildings. Secondly, he moved to rejoin the World Health Organization. This was one of the most confounding decisions by the Trump administration. In the midst of a global pandemic, President Trump opted to remove the United States from the World Health Organization, which was focusing on the spread of this pandemic and its impact on nations around the world. Finally, President Biden created an office to coordinate a national response to the pandemic. Today he is outlining a strong plan to provide a national strategy to liberate us from this threat. I must say that I was disappointed in the transition when at first President Trump refused to acknowledge that he lost the election, and then his Agencies dragged their feet when it came to informing the Biden administration of the status quo in America. Thus,today, we learn that we were not as prepared as we should have been when it came to distributing the vaccines that were being manufactured across this country. Now we almost have to start from zero to find a way to meet President Biden's challenge of 100 million Americans vaccinated in the first 100 days that he is in office. I pray that he is successful. We should do everything in our power on both sides of the aisle to give him the resources and the cooperation he needs. The fact sheet of things that will be done by the Biden administration on COVID-19 is lengthy and impressive. The President, on the first day, established a White House COVID-19 Response Office and Coordinator, as I mentioned, required mask wearing and social distancing in Federal facilities, and rejoined the World Health Organization. Today, President Biden also unveiled a national strategy to leverage Federal resources. It outlines detailed plans for a comprehensive vaccination strategy. If there was cheering--and there should have been--for the Warp Speed project developing successful vaccines in a short period of time, it was followed by some disappointment that even with these vaccines and the knowledge of how to make them, we are not producing them in the quantities necessary, and we are not addressing the logistics of spreading these vaccines across America where they are needed the most. The President is setting out to restore trust by leading with experts for public outreach, and he is relying on science. That is refreshing. It is hard to imagine something that basic is as refreshing as it is. He is providing resources and guidance to reopen most K-8 schools in 100 days. Wouldn't that be a blessing? There isn't a parent or grandparent in this country who won't cheer that particular goal. He is addressing supply gaps and State capacity. We are finding them virtually all across the United States. And he is focusing on vulnerable populations, including those in long-term care facilities and communities of color. To implement this plan, President Biden will sign Executive orders today to direct agencies to exercise all authorities, including the Defense Production Act, to accelerate the manufacturing and delivery of vaccination, testing, and medical supplies. Let me say, I have never understood why President Trump refused to use this Defense Production Act to its full capacity, to use his leadership as President to marshal the resources of production and distribution of vaccines and other absolutely necessary medical devices. President Biden also is directing FEMA to increase Federal reimbursement to States from 75 to 100 percent for emergency supplies, such as PPE, and National Guard personnel. He is establishing a Healthy Equity Task Force to provide recommendations on how to allocate and address racial and ethnic disparities that have been magnified by this crisis We know the economic damage of this virus continues to linger. Nearly one in four people in my State in renter households reports being behind on rent, and one in three households reports having difficulty just covering usual household expenses. We continue to see historic numbers of Americans filing for unemployment, including more than 100,000 people in Illinois who applied for unemployment last week. But to fully address the health and economic toll of the pandemic, Congress needs to build upon the work we did in December and heed the call of the $1.9 trillion plan that President Biden outlined last week. I was part of a bipartisan group of Senators who met several months ago. We talked about following on the CARES Act with some measure of COVID relief. We proposed a plan of $908 billion, which was then embraced by the leaders on both sides of the aisle and the White House, and they negotiated further. That resulted in the measure we passed just a few days ago. But make no mistake, that was not the end of the story, nor did we envision that it would be. This was done on a temporary emergency basis to cover the first quarter; that is, the first 3 months of this calendar year. I pray that this pandemic and all of the problems it has caused will soon be gone, but I doubt that it will happen in the next 3 months. We have more work to do, and President Biden knows it. I think we all do. We need to come together again on a bipartisan basis. The first CARES Act passed the Senate by a vote of 96 to nothing. There were no dissenting votes. The second measure, I believe, had 91 or 92 votes in favor of it. So we have shown real bipartisanship. We can't quit on this challenge. Janet Yellen has been named as the Treasure Secretary designate by President Biden. I had a conversation with her 2 weeks ago. We talked about the perilous state of the economy. It is naive for us to believe that the worst is behind us. We have to face the reality that we may have darker days ahead, and we have to be prepared to deal with them--first, with the pandemic and, second, with the economy. Even the Chairman of the Federal Reserve has encouraged us not to take our foot off the accelerator, lest we lapse into a recession or worse. Let's take this seriously. Let's help the businesses, help the workers, help the families, and do our best to get this economy back on its feet. Illinois has spent $843 million in our health departments to expand testing and vaccine delivery from the December package. But with half a million people vaccinated so far in a State of 13 million, more resources and support are needed. That means providing the $20 billion for vaccine distribution and $50 billion for testing that President Biden has asked for as part of his rescue package so we can finally, once and for all, crush this virus, get the economy back on its feet, and get our kids back in school. It also means investing in the health workforce, such as through a bill I have introduced with Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, to provide scholarship and loan repayment through the National Health Service Corps for doctors and nurses to serve in communities with a shortage of providers. I say to the Presiding Officer, I am sure you are personally aware that there are fewer African-American doctors in the United States today than there were 10 years ago. I am sorry to report that. It should be just the opposite. We should have so many more, for many reasons, not the least of which is to overcome health inequity. This scholarship program that Senator Rubio and I are proposing builds on the model of the National Health Service Corp, which tracks young doctors to come and serve in underserved areas and to help underserved populations, and then helps pay off their student loans. We take this approach: Keep that; it is good. Expand it where we can, but let's look at another aspect. What if we provided scholarship assistance and really directed it toward minority candidates to become doctors and dentists and nurses and healthcare professionals? All of those aspects would be encouraged if people knew that they had a scholarship through the National Health Service and the promise that they would serve where they were needed after they graduated. We hope this will be included in any measure that is passed in the near future. The President's plan sets out additional relief measures that will float to those in need. I am especially encouraged by making the child tax credit fully refundable. That is going to benefit 1 million kids in my State. Also, the Biden plan aims to safely open schools, businesses, and travel while protecting workers in these areas and committing to protecting our most vulnerable populations. I am ready to continue pushing for COVID relief. The job isn't finished by any means. We must provide American families and workers the tools they need to survive in this difficult economic time. As Chair Yellen said earlier this week, ``Without further action, we risk a longer, more painful recession now--and long-term scarring of the economy later.'' Let's do this, America. Let's do it together. Let's let the spirit of unity that we saw on the West Front of the Capitol yesterday bring us together here in the Senate and the House in a joint effort to help the American people with the resources they need to survive this pandemic and this lengthy financial hardship. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of the quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS80-3 | null | 2,126 |
formal | Federal Reserve | null | antisemitic | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am happy to be standing here today on the Senate floor during an exciting week and one that really provides us with hope for the future. I welcome President Biden and, of course, Vice President Harris to their new roles and look forward to their leadership that they will provide in these difficult times. We can never forget that America is still in the midst of a deadly pandemic. Tragically, we lost over 400,000 Americans. In my State of Illinois, we have seen more than 1 million COVID cases, and 18,398 of my neighbors and friends in Illinois have died due to this deadly virus. As we continue to try to stop the spread of this pandemic, I am glad that the vaccine rollout has been able to help some in my State--537,000 people in Illinois have received vaccines. It is a refreshing and long overdue sight to have the President and White House fully engaged in addressing this pandemic with a focus on science and racial equity. On his first day yesterday, President Biden signed several important Executive actions, including instituting a mask mandate for all Federal facilities and buildings. Secondly, he moved to rejoin the World Health Organization. This was one of the most confounding decisions by the Trump administration. In the midst of a global pandemic, President Trump opted to remove the United States from the World Health Organization, which was focusing on the spread of this pandemic and its impact on nations around the world. Finally, President Biden created an office to coordinate a national response to the pandemic. Today he is outlining a strong plan to provide a national strategy to liberate us from this threat. I must say that I was disappointed in the transition when at first President Trump refused to acknowledge that he lost the election, and then his Agencies dragged their feet when it came to informing the Biden administration of the status quo in America. Thus,today, we learn that we were not as prepared as we should have been when it came to distributing the vaccines that were being manufactured across this country. Now we almost have to start from zero to find a way to meet President Biden's challenge of 100 million Americans vaccinated in the first 100 days that he is in office. I pray that he is successful. We should do everything in our power on both sides of the aisle to give him the resources and the cooperation he needs. The fact sheet of things that will be done by the Biden administration on COVID-19 is lengthy and impressive. The President, on the first day, established a White House COVID-19 Response Office and Coordinator, as I mentioned, required mask wearing and social distancing in Federal facilities, and rejoined the World Health Organization. Today, President Biden also unveiled a national strategy to leverage Federal resources. It outlines detailed plans for a comprehensive vaccination strategy. If there was cheering--and there should have been--for the Warp Speed project developing successful vaccines in a short period of time, it was followed by some disappointment that even with these vaccines and the knowledge of how to make them, we are not producing them in the quantities necessary, and we are not addressing the logistics of spreading these vaccines across America where they are needed the most. The President is setting out to restore trust by leading with experts for public outreach, and he is relying on science. That is refreshing. It is hard to imagine something that basic is as refreshing as it is. He is providing resources and guidance to reopen most K-8 schools in 100 days. Wouldn't that be a blessing? There isn't a parent or grandparent in this country who won't cheer that particular goal. He is addressing supply gaps and State capacity. We are finding them virtually all across the United States. And he is focusing on vulnerable populations, including those in long-term care facilities and communities of color. To implement this plan, President Biden will sign Executive orders today to direct agencies to exercise all authorities, including the Defense Production Act, to accelerate the manufacturing and delivery of vaccination, testing, and medical supplies. Let me say, I have never understood why President Trump refused to use this Defense Production Act to its full capacity, to use his leadership as President to marshal the resources of production and distribution of vaccines and other absolutely necessary medical devices. President Biden also is directing FEMA to increase Federal reimbursement to States from 75 to 100 percent for emergency supplies, such as PPE, and National Guard personnel. He is establishing a Healthy Equity Task Force to provide recommendations on how to allocate and address racial and ethnic disparities that have been magnified by this crisis We know the economic damage of this virus continues to linger. Nearly one in four people in my State in renter households reports being behind on rent, and one in three households reports having difficulty just covering usual household expenses. We continue to see historic numbers of Americans filing for unemployment, including more than 100,000 people in Illinois who applied for unemployment last week. But to fully address the health and economic toll of the pandemic, Congress needs to build upon the work we did in December and heed the call of the $1.9 trillion plan that President Biden outlined last week. I was part of a bipartisan group of Senators who met several months ago. We talked about following on the CARES Act with some measure of COVID relief. We proposed a plan of $908 billion, which was then embraced by the leaders on both sides of the aisle and the White House, and they negotiated further. That resulted in the measure we passed just a few days ago. But make no mistake, that was not the end of the story, nor did we envision that it would be. This was done on a temporary emergency basis to cover the first quarter; that is, the first 3 months of this calendar year. I pray that this pandemic and all of the problems it has caused will soon be gone, but I doubt that it will happen in the next 3 months. We have more work to do, and President Biden knows it. I think we all do. We need to come together again on a bipartisan basis. The first CARES Act passed the Senate by a vote of 96 to nothing. There were no dissenting votes. The second measure, I believe, had 91 or 92 votes in favor of it. So we have shown real bipartisanship. We can't quit on this challenge. Janet Yellen has been named as the Treasure Secretary designate by President Biden. I had a conversation with her 2 weeks ago. We talked about the perilous state of the economy. It is naive for us to believe that the worst is behind us. We have to face the reality that we may have darker days ahead, and we have to be prepared to deal with them--first, with the pandemic and, second, with the economy. Even the Chairman of the Federal Reserve has encouraged us not to take our foot off the accelerator, lest we lapse into a recession or worse. Let's take this seriously. Let's help the businesses, help the workers, help the families, and do our best to get this economy back on its feet. Illinois has spent $843 million in our health departments to expand testing and vaccine delivery from the December package. But with half a million people vaccinated so far in a State of 13 million, more resources and support are needed. That means providing the $20 billion for vaccine distribution and $50 billion for testing that President Biden has asked for as part of his rescue package so we can finally, once and for all, crush this virus, get the economy back on its feet, and get our kids back in school. It also means investing in the health workforce, such as through a bill I have introduced with Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, to provide scholarship and loan repayment through the National Health Service Corps for doctors and nurses to serve in communities with a shortage of providers. I say to the Presiding Officer, I am sure you are personally aware that there are fewer African-American doctors in the United States today than there were 10 years ago. I am sorry to report that. It should be just the opposite. We should have so many more, for many reasons, not the least of which is to overcome health inequity. This scholarship program that Senator Rubio and I are proposing builds on the model of the National Health Service Corp, which tracks young doctors to come and serve in underserved areas and to help underserved populations, and then helps pay off their student loans. We take this approach: Keep that; it is good. Expand it where we can, but let's look at another aspect. What if we provided scholarship assistance and really directed it toward minority candidates to become doctors and dentists and nurses and healthcare professionals? All of those aspects would be encouraged if people knew that they had a scholarship through the National Health Service and the promise that they would serve where they were needed after they graduated. We hope this will be included in any measure that is passed in the near future. The President's plan sets out additional relief measures that will float to those in need. I am especially encouraged by making the child tax credit fully refundable. That is going to benefit 1 million kids in my State. Also, the Biden plan aims to safely open schools, businesses, and travel while protecting workers in these areas and committing to protecting our most vulnerable populations. I am ready to continue pushing for COVID relief. The job isn't finished by any means. We must provide American families and workers the tools they need to survive in this difficult economic time. As Chair Yellen said earlier this week, ``Without further action, we risk a longer, more painful recession now--and long-term scarring of the economy later.'' Let's do this, America. Let's do it together. Let's let the spirit of unity that we saw on the West Front of the Capitol yesterday bring us together here in the Senate and the House in a joint effort to help the American people with the resources they need to survive this pandemic and this lengthy financial hardship. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of the quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS80-3 | null | 2,127 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am happy to be standing here today on the Senate floor during an exciting week and one that really provides us with hope for the future. I welcome President Biden and, of course, Vice President Harris to their new roles and look forward to their leadership that they will provide in these difficult times. We can never forget that America is still in the midst of a deadly pandemic. Tragically, we lost over 400,000 Americans. In my State of Illinois, we have seen more than 1 million COVID cases, and 18,398 of my neighbors and friends in Illinois have died due to this deadly virus. As we continue to try to stop the spread of this pandemic, I am glad that the vaccine rollout has been able to help some in my State--537,000 people in Illinois have received vaccines. It is a refreshing and long overdue sight to have the President and White House fully engaged in addressing this pandemic with a focus on science and racial equity. On his first day yesterday, President Biden signed several important Executive actions, including instituting a mask mandate for all Federal facilities and buildings. Secondly, he moved to rejoin the World Health Organization. This was one of the most confounding decisions by the Trump administration. In the midst of a global pandemic, President Trump opted to remove the United States from the World Health Organization, which was focusing on the spread of this pandemic and its impact on nations around the world. Finally, President Biden created an office to coordinate a national response to the pandemic. Today he is outlining a strong plan to provide a national strategy to liberate us from this threat. I must say that I was disappointed in the transition when at first President Trump refused to acknowledge that he lost the election, and then his Agencies dragged their feet when it came to informing the Biden administration of the status quo in America. Thus,today, we learn that we were not as prepared as we should have been when it came to distributing the vaccines that were being manufactured across this country. Now we almost have to start from zero to find a way to meet President Biden's challenge of 100 million Americans vaccinated in the first 100 days that he is in office. I pray that he is successful. We should do everything in our power on both sides of the aisle to give him the resources and the cooperation he needs. The fact sheet of things that will be done by the Biden administration on COVID-19 is lengthy and impressive. The President, on the first day, established a White House COVID-19 Response Office and Coordinator, as I mentioned, required mask wearing and social distancing in Federal facilities, and rejoined the World Health Organization. Today, President Biden also unveiled a national strategy to leverage Federal resources. It outlines detailed plans for a comprehensive vaccination strategy. If there was cheering--and there should have been--for the Warp Speed project developing successful vaccines in a short period of time, it was followed by some disappointment that even with these vaccines and the knowledge of how to make them, we are not producing them in the quantities necessary, and we are not addressing the logistics of spreading these vaccines across America where they are needed the most. The President is setting out to restore trust by leading with experts for public outreach, and he is relying on science. That is refreshing. It is hard to imagine something that basic is as refreshing as it is. He is providing resources and guidance to reopen most K-8 schools in 100 days. Wouldn't that be a blessing? There isn't a parent or grandparent in this country who won't cheer that particular goal. He is addressing supply gaps and State capacity. We are finding them virtually all across the United States. And he is focusing on vulnerable populations, including those in long-term care facilities and communities of color. To implement this plan, President Biden will sign Executive orders today to direct agencies to exercise all authorities, including the Defense Production Act, to accelerate the manufacturing and delivery of vaccination, testing, and medical supplies. Let me say, I have never understood why President Trump refused to use this Defense Production Act to its full capacity, to use his leadership as President to marshal the resources of production and distribution of vaccines and other absolutely necessary medical devices. President Biden also is directing FEMA to increase Federal reimbursement to States from 75 to 100 percent for emergency supplies, such as PPE, and National Guard personnel. He is establishing a Healthy Equity Task Force to provide recommendations on how to allocate and address racial and ethnic disparities that have been magnified by this crisis We know the economic damage of this virus continues to linger. Nearly one in four people in my State in renter households reports being behind on rent, and one in three households reports having difficulty just covering usual household expenses. We continue to see historic numbers of Americans filing for unemployment, including more than 100,000 people in Illinois who applied for unemployment last week. But to fully address the health and economic toll of the pandemic, Congress needs to build upon the work we did in December and heed the call of the $1.9 trillion plan that President Biden outlined last week. I was part of a bipartisan group of Senators who met several months ago. We talked about following on the CARES Act with some measure of COVID relief. We proposed a plan of $908 billion, which was then embraced by the leaders on both sides of the aisle and the White House, and they negotiated further. That resulted in the measure we passed just a few days ago. But make no mistake, that was not the end of the story, nor did we envision that it would be. This was done on a temporary emergency basis to cover the first quarter; that is, the first 3 months of this calendar year. I pray that this pandemic and all of the problems it has caused will soon be gone, but I doubt that it will happen in the next 3 months. We have more work to do, and President Biden knows it. I think we all do. We need to come together again on a bipartisan basis. The first CARES Act passed the Senate by a vote of 96 to nothing. There were no dissenting votes. The second measure, I believe, had 91 or 92 votes in favor of it. So we have shown real bipartisanship. We can't quit on this challenge. Janet Yellen has been named as the Treasure Secretary designate by President Biden. I had a conversation with her 2 weeks ago. We talked about the perilous state of the economy. It is naive for us to believe that the worst is behind us. We have to face the reality that we may have darker days ahead, and we have to be prepared to deal with them--first, with the pandemic and, second, with the economy. Even the Chairman of the Federal Reserve has encouraged us not to take our foot off the accelerator, lest we lapse into a recession or worse. Let's take this seriously. Let's help the businesses, help the workers, help the families, and do our best to get this economy back on its feet. Illinois has spent $843 million in our health departments to expand testing and vaccine delivery from the December package. But with half a million people vaccinated so far in a State of 13 million, more resources and support are needed. That means providing the $20 billion for vaccine distribution and $50 billion for testing that President Biden has asked for as part of his rescue package so we can finally, once and for all, crush this virus, get the economy back on its feet, and get our kids back in school. It also means investing in the health workforce, such as through a bill I have introduced with Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, to provide scholarship and loan repayment through the National Health Service Corps for doctors and nurses to serve in communities with a shortage of providers. I say to the Presiding Officer, I am sure you are personally aware that there are fewer African-American doctors in the United States today than there were 10 years ago. I am sorry to report that. It should be just the opposite. We should have so many more, for many reasons, not the least of which is to overcome health inequity. This scholarship program that Senator Rubio and I are proposing builds on the model of the National Health Service Corp, which tracks young doctors to come and serve in underserved areas and to help underserved populations, and then helps pay off their student loans. We take this approach: Keep that; it is good. Expand it where we can, but let's look at another aspect. What if we provided scholarship assistance and really directed it toward minority candidates to become doctors and dentists and nurses and healthcare professionals? All of those aspects would be encouraged if people knew that they had a scholarship through the National Health Service and the promise that they would serve where they were needed after they graduated. We hope this will be included in any measure that is passed in the near future. The President's plan sets out additional relief measures that will float to those in need. I am especially encouraged by making the child tax credit fully refundable. That is going to benefit 1 million kids in my State. Also, the Biden plan aims to safely open schools, businesses, and travel while protecting workers in these areas and committing to protecting our most vulnerable populations. I am ready to continue pushing for COVID relief. The job isn't finished by any means. We must provide American families and workers the tools they need to survive in this difficult economic time. As Chair Yellen said earlier this week, ``Without further action, we risk a longer, more painful recession now--and long-term scarring of the economy later.'' Let's do this, America. Let's do it together. Let's let the spirit of unity that we saw on the West Front of the Capitol yesterday bring us together here in the Senate and the House in a joint effort to help the American people with the resources they need to survive this pandemic and this lengthy financial hardship. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of the quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. DURBIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS80-3 | null | 2,128 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, there have been few other times in American history when the need for economic growth through strategic, responsible, pro-business policies has been as great as it is today. Nothing is more important to a family than a good-paying job. That is where the American dream begins. Today, as our Nation fights to overcome the horrendous health and economic impacts of COVID-19, we must balance our approach. We have to protect American families and individuals who have been hurt by this crisis, support commonsense public health policies and an aggressive vaccine distribution effort, while also keeping businesses open, incentivizing future growth of businesses, large and small, and standing up to our economic adversaries, like Communist China, by reshoring our supply chain back home. We also need to continue cutting regulations to make it easier for businesses to operate and for entrepreneurs to create jobs. President Biden and his Cabinet have the important task of revitalizing our economy amid one of our Nation's worst economic crises. In my 8 years as Governor of Florida, we balanced our budget each year, cut $10 billion in taxes, paid off one-third of our State debt, and Florida companies added nearly 1.7 million jobs. But instead of looking to innovation and approving policies of States like Florida that will create jobs and help Americans and small businesses, the Biden administrations is already making promises to go in the opposite direction--promises that are being championed by his nominee for Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen. Let me be clear. I support targeted relief to help our small businesses and individuals who are hurting because of the coronavirus. With the start of a new administration, I was hoping to hear some fresh, new ideas on how to accomplish our shared goal of addressing this crisis. But that is not what we are hearing from the Biden administration. Their answer is the same as it always has been for Democrats: more government, more spending, higher taxes, no accountability. Voters are befuddled by the claim that while families cannot borrow without limits or consequences, somehow the Federal Government can. It is irresponsible, and I won't stand for it. We have to get serious about how we are spending taxpayer dollars. We already have more than $27 trillion in Federal debt. If interest rates return to their 50-year average, the interest on our Federal debt will make it impossible to fund our military, Medicare, and Social Security. President Biden wants to spend more than $350 billion to bail out wasteful, liberal States for their decades of mismanagement, and his nominees, including Ms. Yellen, support this nonsense. Andrew Cuomo has threatened the New York wealthy that if they don't help him get a Federal Government bailout, he will raise their taxes. I was elected Governor of Florida when Cuomo was elected Governor of New York. While Governor of Florida, I lowered taxes each year. Cuomo raisedtaxes. Since we were both elected, families and businesses have increasingly left New York for lower taxes, better schools, better roads, and warmer weather in Florida. Asking taxpayers to bail out failed politicians in liberal States like New York and Illinois and save them from their own bad decisions isn't fair to the taxpayers in fiscally responsible States like Florida. After all, many Florida taxpayers left New York because of Cuomo's tax policy. It makes no sense. Congress has already allocated more than $4.5 trillion to address this crisis. Think about it. We just passed a nearly $1 trillion relief package 4 weeks ago. This is all borrowed money. The Federal Government doesn't have savings for a rainy day, and we still don't know how much money is unspent from the previous coronavirus relief packages. How can we possibly justify spending more money right now? We don't even know what we might need to spend money on. And for States like California, we know they don't need it. California's tax revenues for this fiscal year is running $9 billion, or 18 percent, above projections. Personal income tax revenue in October was $1 billion--15 percent higher than in the previous October, and sales taxes were up 9.2 percent. For the last 4 months, overall revenue in California has exceeded spring forecasts and even 2019 collections. But that hasn't kept Governor Newsom and his far left buddies in Congress from keeping their hands out for more money. We cannot simply throw massive spending at this with no accountability to the current and future American taxpayer. It is shameful. We have also heard the Biden administration and its nominees call for a new national minimum wage of $15 an hour. It is clear that these folks haven't talked to business owners. Small businesses in America are struggling like never before, especially in liberal States, where repeated lockdowns have exacerbated their work to stay open. And President Biden believes now is the time to slap another mandate on their back and drive even more Americans chasing the dream of this country out of business? I am not sure how you could possibly be more detached from reality. According to the Congressional Budget Office, a federally mandated $15 minimum wage would cost as many as 3.7 million Americans their jobs. Let me tell you, I know what it is like to be poor, to live in public housing, to not have enough money to afford healthcare for a family member. I watched my parents struggle for work. I don't want any family to go through what I went through. I ran for office because I wanted to help struggling families like the one I grew up in to have the chance to live the American dream. So when I hear folks like Ms. Yellen say that job loss from a minimum-wage mandate is ``very minimal, if anything,'' it really leaves me at a loss. Watching 3.7 million Americans lose their jobs will not be minimal. Adding insult to injury, we have heard great praise for the implementation of a carbon tax. Let's remember, this was part of the Green New Deal, which would be a disaster if passed. According to estimates from the Heritage Foundation, a carbon emissions tax would cost the country 1.4 million jobs while decreasing our GDP by $3.9 trillion and reducing income for a family of four by $40,000, with disproportionate costs falling on low-income families. Again, how can this be seen as the logical step when so many in our Nation are simply trying to recover and rebuild from the devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic? If the administration has its way, Americans should prepare for higher taxes, less income, less opportunity, and more government mandates. Ms. Yellen seems to think the solution to America's economic woes is more government, more taxes, more regulation, not more individual opportunity. That is wrong and will only send us further into debt and our families further into despair. Based on what I have heard, I am concerned and, frankly, disturbed by what is being offered as the future of America's economic policy. When I ran for the Senate, I did so to fix Washington's broken way of doing things. We have to address Washington's unconscionable need to waste tax dollars on things that don't actually help or even hurt American families, especially working families and those on fixed incomes. I will never give up this fight. In 2018, Ms. Yellen was quoted speaking about the unsustainable U.S. debt and said: ``If I had a magic wand, I would raise taxes.'' We know that is not the real answer to solving our debt issue. It is simply the lazy, liberal approach. It is time to get value out of every dollar we spend and make hard choices that actually help families and ensure a strong economic future for our Nation. I cannot support the nomination of a candidate who proudly promotes Joe Biden's policies to mortgage our kids' and grandkids' futures with irresponsible and shortsighted tax spending. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCOTT of Florida | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS82-2 | null | 2,129 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, there have been few other times in American history when the need for economic growth through strategic, responsible, pro-business policies has been as great as it is today. Nothing is more important to a family than a good-paying job. That is where the American dream begins. Today, as our Nation fights to overcome the horrendous health and economic impacts of COVID-19, we must balance our approach. We have to protect American families and individuals who have been hurt by this crisis, support commonsense public health policies and an aggressive vaccine distribution effort, while also keeping businesses open, incentivizing future growth of businesses, large and small, and standing up to our economic adversaries, like Communist China, by reshoring our supply chain back home. We also need to continue cutting regulations to make it easier for businesses to operate and for entrepreneurs to create jobs. President Biden and his Cabinet have the important task of revitalizing our economy amid one of our Nation's worst economic crises. In my 8 years as Governor of Florida, we balanced our budget each year, cut $10 billion in taxes, paid off one-third of our State debt, and Florida companies added nearly 1.7 million jobs. But instead of looking to innovation and approving policies of States like Florida that will create jobs and help Americans and small businesses, the Biden administrations is already making promises to go in the opposite direction--promises that are being championed by his nominee for Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen. Let me be clear. I support targeted relief to help our small businesses and individuals who are hurting because of the coronavirus. With the start of a new administration, I was hoping to hear some fresh, new ideas on how to accomplish our shared goal of addressing this crisis. But that is not what we are hearing from the Biden administration. Their answer is the same as it always has been for Democrats: more government, more spending, higher taxes, no accountability. Voters are befuddled by the claim that while families cannot borrow without limits or consequences, somehow the Federal Government can. It is irresponsible, and I won't stand for it. We have to get serious about how we are spending taxpayer dollars. We already have more than $27 trillion in Federal debt. If interest rates return to their 50-year average, the interest on our Federal debt will make it impossible to fund our military, Medicare, and Social Security. President Biden wants to spend more than $350 billion to bail out wasteful, liberal States for their decades of mismanagement, and his nominees, including Ms. Yellen, support this nonsense. Andrew Cuomo has threatened the New York wealthy that if they don't help him get a Federal Government bailout, he will raise their taxes. I was elected Governor of Florida when Cuomo was elected Governor of New York. While Governor of Florida, I lowered taxes each year. Cuomo raisedtaxes. Since we were both elected, families and businesses have increasingly left New York for lower taxes, better schools, better roads, and warmer weather in Florida. Asking taxpayers to bail out failed politicians in liberal States like New York and Illinois and save them from their own bad decisions isn't fair to the taxpayers in fiscally responsible States like Florida. After all, many Florida taxpayers left New York because of Cuomo's tax policy. It makes no sense. Congress has already allocated more than $4.5 trillion to address this crisis. Think about it. We just passed a nearly $1 trillion relief package 4 weeks ago. This is all borrowed money. The Federal Government doesn't have savings for a rainy day, and we still don't know how much money is unspent from the previous coronavirus relief packages. How can we possibly justify spending more money right now? We don't even know what we might need to spend money on. And for States like California, we know they don't need it. California's tax revenues for this fiscal year is running $9 billion, or 18 percent, above projections. Personal income tax revenue in October was $1 billion--15 percent higher than in the previous October, and sales taxes were up 9.2 percent. For the last 4 months, overall revenue in California has exceeded spring forecasts and even 2019 collections. But that hasn't kept Governor Newsom and his far left buddies in Congress from keeping their hands out for more money. We cannot simply throw massive spending at this with no accountability to the current and future American taxpayer. It is shameful. We have also heard the Biden administration and its nominees call for a new national minimum wage of $15 an hour. It is clear that these folks haven't talked to business owners. Small businesses in America are struggling like never before, especially in liberal States, where repeated lockdowns have exacerbated their work to stay open. And President Biden believes now is the time to slap another mandate on their back and drive even more Americans chasing the dream of this country out of business? I am not sure how you could possibly be more detached from reality. According to the Congressional Budget Office, a federally mandated $15 minimum wage would cost as many as 3.7 million Americans their jobs. Let me tell you, I know what it is like to be poor, to live in public housing, to not have enough money to afford healthcare for a family member. I watched my parents struggle for work. I don't want any family to go through what I went through. I ran for office because I wanted to help struggling families like the one I grew up in to have the chance to live the American dream. So when I hear folks like Ms. Yellen say that job loss from a minimum-wage mandate is ``very minimal, if anything,'' it really leaves me at a loss. Watching 3.7 million Americans lose their jobs will not be minimal. Adding insult to injury, we have heard great praise for the implementation of a carbon tax. Let's remember, this was part of the Green New Deal, which would be a disaster if passed. According to estimates from the Heritage Foundation, a carbon emissions tax would cost the country 1.4 million jobs while decreasing our GDP by $3.9 trillion and reducing income for a family of four by $40,000, with disproportionate costs falling on low-income families. Again, how can this be seen as the logical step when so many in our Nation are simply trying to recover and rebuild from the devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic? If the administration has its way, Americans should prepare for higher taxes, less income, less opportunity, and more government mandates. Ms. Yellen seems to think the solution to America's economic woes is more government, more taxes, more regulation, not more individual opportunity. That is wrong and will only send us further into debt and our families further into despair. Based on what I have heard, I am concerned and, frankly, disturbed by what is being offered as the future of America's economic policy. When I ran for the Senate, I did so to fix Washington's broken way of doing things. We have to address Washington's unconscionable need to waste tax dollars on things that don't actually help or even hurt American families, especially working families and those on fixed incomes. I will never give up this fight. In 2018, Ms. Yellen was quoted speaking about the unsustainable U.S. debt and said: ``If I had a magic wand, I would raise taxes.'' We know that is not the real answer to solving our debt issue. It is simply the lazy, liberal approach. It is time to get value out of every dollar we spend and make hard choices that actually help families and ensure a strong economic future for our Nation. I cannot support the nomination of a candidate who proudly promotes Joe Biden's policies to mortgage our kids' and grandkids' futures with irresponsible and shortsighted tax spending. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCOTT of Florida | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS82-2 | null | 2,130 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Mr. SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, there have been few other times in American history when the need for economic growth through strategic, responsible, pro-business policies has been as great as it is today. Nothing is more important to a family than a good-paying job. That is where the American dream begins. Today, as our Nation fights to overcome the horrendous health and economic impacts of COVID-19, we must balance our approach. We have to protect American families and individuals who have been hurt by this crisis, support commonsense public health policies and an aggressive vaccine distribution effort, while also keeping businesses open, incentivizing future growth of businesses, large and small, and standing up to our economic adversaries, like Communist China, by reshoring our supply chain back home. We also need to continue cutting regulations to make it easier for businesses to operate and for entrepreneurs to create jobs. President Biden and his Cabinet have the important task of revitalizing our economy amid one of our Nation's worst economic crises. In my 8 years as Governor of Florida, we balanced our budget each year, cut $10 billion in taxes, paid off one-third of our State debt, and Florida companies added nearly 1.7 million jobs. But instead of looking to innovation and approving policies of States like Florida that will create jobs and help Americans and small businesses, the Biden administrations is already making promises to go in the opposite direction--promises that are being championed by his nominee for Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen. Let me be clear. I support targeted relief to help our small businesses and individuals who are hurting because of the coronavirus. With the start of a new administration, I was hoping to hear some fresh, new ideas on how to accomplish our shared goal of addressing this crisis. But that is not what we are hearing from the Biden administration. Their answer is the same as it always has been for Democrats: more government, more spending, higher taxes, no accountability. Voters are befuddled by the claim that while families cannot borrow without limits or consequences, somehow the Federal Government can. It is irresponsible, and I won't stand for it. We have to get serious about how we are spending taxpayer dollars. We already have more than $27 trillion in Federal debt. If interest rates return to their 50-year average, the interest on our Federal debt will make it impossible to fund our military, Medicare, and Social Security. President Biden wants to spend more than $350 billion to bail out wasteful, liberal States for their decades of mismanagement, and his nominees, including Ms. Yellen, support this nonsense. Andrew Cuomo has threatened the New York wealthy that if they don't help him get a Federal Government bailout, he will raise their taxes. I was elected Governor of Florida when Cuomo was elected Governor of New York. While Governor of Florida, I lowered taxes each year. Cuomo raisedtaxes. Since we were both elected, families and businesses have increasingly left New York for lower taxes, better schools, better roads, and warmer weather in Florida. Asking taxpayers to bail out failed politicians in liberal States like New York and Illinois and save them from their own bad decisions isn't fair to the taxpayers in fiscally responsible States like Florida. After all, many Florida taxpayers left New York because of Cuomo's tax policy. It makes no sense. Congress has already allocated more than $4.5 trillion to address this crisis. Think about it. We just passed a nearly $1 trillion relief package 4 weeks ago. This is all borrowed money. The Federal Government doesn't have savings for a rainy day, and we still don't know how much money is unspent from the previous coronavirus relief packages. How can we possibly justify spending more money right now? We don't even know what we might need to spend money on. And for States like California, we know they don't need it. California's tax revenues for this fiscal year is running $9 billion, or 18 percent, above projections. Personal income tax revenue in October was $1 billion--15 percent higher than in the previous October, and sales taxes were up 9.2 percent. For the last 4 months, overall revenue in California has exceeded spring forecasts and even 2019 collections. But that hasn't kept Governor Newsom and his far left buddies in Congress from keeping their hands out for more money. We cannot simply throw massive spending at this with no accountability to the current and future American taxpayer. It is shameful. We have also heard the Biden administration and its nominees call for a new national minimum wage of $15 an hour. It is clear that these folks haven't talked to business owners. Small businesses in America are struggling like never before, especially in liberal States, where repeated lockdowns have exacerbated their work to stay open. And President Biden believes now is the time to slap another mandate on their back and drive even more Americans chasing the dream of this country out of business? I am not sure how you could possibly be more detached from reality. According to the Congressional Budget Office, a federally mandated $15 minimum wage would cost as many as 3.7 million Americans their jobs. Let me tell you, I know what it is like to be poor, to live in public housing, to not have enough money to afford healthcare for a family member. I watched my parents struggle for work. I don't want any family to go through what I went through. I ran for office because I wanted to help struggling families like the one I grew up in to have the chance to live the American dream. So when I hear folks like Ms. Yellen say that job loss from a minimum-wage mandate is ``very minimal, if anything,'' it really leaves me at a loss. Watching 3.7 million Americans lose their jobs will not be minimal. Adding insult to injury, we have heard great praise for the implementation of a carbon tax. Let's remember, this was part of the Green New Deal, which would be a disaster if passed. According to estimates from the Heritage Foundation, a carbon emissions tax would cost the country 1.4 million jobs while decreasing our GDP by $3.9 trillion and reducing income for a family of four by $40,000, with disproportionate costs falling on low-income families. Again, how can this be seen as the logical step when so many in our Nation are simply trying to recover and rebuild from the devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic? If the administration has its way, Americans should prepare for higher taxes, less income, less opportunity, and more government mandates. Ms. Yellen seems to think the solution to America's economic woes is more government, more taxes, more regulation, not more individual opportunity. That is wrong and will only send us further into debt and our families further into despair. Based on what I have heard, I am concerned and, frankly, disturbed by what is being offered as the future of America's economic policy. When I ran for the Senate, I did so to fix Washington's broken way of doing things. We have to address Washington's unconscionable need to waste tax dollars on things that don't actually help or even hurt American families, especially working families and those on fixed incomes. I will never give up this fight. In 2018, Ms. Yellen was quoted speaking about the unsustainable U.S. debt and said: ``If I had a magic wand, I would raise taxes.'' We know that is not the real answer to solving our debt issue. It is simply the lazy, liberal approach. It is time to get value out of every dollar we spend and make hard choices that actually help families and ensure a strong economic future for our Nation. I cannot support the nomination of a candidate who proudly promotes Joe Biden's policies to mortgage our kids' and grandkids' futures with irresponsible and shortsighted tax spending. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCOTT of Florida | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS82-2 | null | 2,131 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I also want to talk about another important issue, and that is President Biden's nomination for the very important job of Secretary of Defense, Mr. Lloyd Austin. We are going to be voting on his nomination here on the Senate floor in a couple of hours. I had the honor of introducing Mr. Austin just 2 days ago at his confirmation hearing, and I thought the confirmation hearing went well. So I want to talk a little bit about Mr. Austin before we take what will essentially be two important votes for his confirmation. Now, the last time I was actually on the floor of the U.S. Senate, our Capitol was under siege, and from a foreign policy and national security perspective, America's authoritarian rivals have been gloating over what happened on that day. They have been reveling in our disunity. Democracy brings chaos, they tell their people. It is better to have a strong hand that keeps order. Well, as you know, we do live in an imperfect democracy, no doubt, and the American I was honored to introduce at the Armed Services hearing the other day, Mr. Lloyd Austin, understands our imperfections more than many. Yet, on closer inspection, the world's dictators have little to celebrate. Congress went back to work on January 6, right here on the Senate floor, to count electoral votes, and yesterday there was a peaceful transfer of power at the top of our government, as there has been since our Republic's founding. At some point--maybe sooner than we think--Chinese and Russian citizens are going to ask: Hey, why can't we do that? Why don't we have strong, resilient institutions that ensure the regular elections of new leaders and that invest in self-government and the people? When these citizens ask these questions of authoritarians like Putin or Xi Jinping, they are not going to be gloating anymore because they won't have answers to these questions. So what does this all have to do with Mr. Lloyd Austin? A lot. Mr. Austin has been nominated to lead one of America's most trusted institutions--the Department of Defense. Many of us have worked hard over the last few years to rebuild our military's strength and readiness, but I think we can all agree that there has been too much turmoil at the top at the Pentagon. As its civilian leader, I am confident that Mr. Austin will bring steadiness, leadership, and respect to this indispensable American institution. I got to know Mr. Austin in 2005 and 2006 while serving together in an Army-heavy combatant command as we conducted combat operations throughout the Middle East. We had what might be referred to today as an unequal power relationship. He was a two-star general. I was a major. He had spent years on Active Duty. I was a reservist. He was a soldier. I was a marine. I was just one of hundreds of field-grade infantry officers who had been recalled to Active Duty and deployed in the region during a challenging time for our Nation. Yet, when I asked for his time, Mr. Austin gave it. When I had a problem, he listened. When I asked for help on an important mission, he provided it. A critical hallmark of exceptional leadership, especially for organizations like the Pentagon, is not just how one treats superiors but how one treats subordinates, those down the chain of command. What I saw was respect and integrity and someone who knew how to get things done in a difficult environment. It is clear to me the core principles of Mr. Austin's life have been duty, honor, country. West Point has done its job. Now, that may sound quaint to some, but I think having individuals of impeccable character at the top of our government is more important than ever. Other than integrity, there is no singular requirement for the difficult job of Secretary of Defense, and as the former Director of the Joint Staff and as the former CENTCOM Commander, Mr. Austin certainly has insight on critical issues, such as interagency budget battles, working with allies, and congressional oversight. Mr. Austin is also fully committed to the constitutional principle of civilian control of our military--something that those who serve in uniform typically understand and revere more than those who don't. In that regard, you may recall that, about 10 days ago, we had a hearing in the Committee on Armed Services on this very important topic, but I actually thought some of the witnesses had rather simplistic views of this important issue. They had brought up topics and discussions of so-called ``military logic'' by those who wear the uniform versus ``political logic'' for those who don't wear the uniform. So let me play devil's advocate for those who participated and watched that hearing. The very nature of the confirmation hearing that we had with Mr. Austin just 2 days ago and, indeed, the very nature of the transfer of power that we saw yesterday here at the Capitol are evidence, in my view, that the civilian control of the military is not at risk inAmerica. I actually believe the related but opposite problem should be of more concern today, at this moment, and that problem is no military experience in the top ranks of our government. With the exception of Mr. Austin, no nominee on the incoming Biden administration's national security team has ever served in uniform. With regard to the entire Biden Cabinet, only one other nominee has any military experience at all. This is not wise. If confirmed, I am sure I won't agree with all of Mr. Austin's decisions, but when the inevitable budget battles occur, it will be critical for our Nation's security and, very importantly, the military members and their families who serve to have a Secretary of Defense who understands firsthand the very real morale and readiness problems that result from drastic cuts to our military--something, unfortunately, I think many of my colleagues here in the Senate will be pushing for and even members of the Biden administration will be pushing for. So let me conclude with this. Right now, a number of us are interviewing Cabinet members for confirmation for the incoming Biden administration. I anticipate opposing some, supporting others. Certainly, I anticipate opposing some if I believe they will hurt the working families of my State. But with regard to Mr. Austin, I am fully supporting his nomination. We are living through difficult times--a pandemic, racial tensions, riots, turmoil at the top of the Pentagon, and rising dangers from China, Russia, and Iran. Mr. Austin's confirmation won't solve all of these problems, but it will help. He represents the best of America--a man of integrity, humility, and character, with a wealth of relevant experience. Our allies will take comfort in his confirmation, and our adversaries will take pause. And as America's first African-American Secretary of Defense, he will be an inspiration to millions both in and out of uniform. For all of these reasons, I strongly urge my colleagues to support Mr. Austin's confirmation and the waiver in Federal law that it requires. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS84 | null | 2,132 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. PORTMAN. Madam President, I can say with certainty that General Austin has no better friend or ally in this Chamber than Senator Dan Sullivan, who has seen him as a person and seen him as a commander. Those votes will occur later today. Madam President, I rise today on the floor to talk about what happened yesterday at the Capitol and what happened 2 weeks ago at the Capitol. Yesterday, we had the 59th Presidential inauguration right here. The citadel of democracy was once again the place where a President and Vice President were sworn in for 4 years. Starting in 1789, every 4 years, America and the world have witnessed this remarkable event that provides for the peaceful transfer of Executive power and the continuity of government--something we sometimes take for granted but is rare, even today. It has happened through wars. It has happened through economic recessions. We have had our inaugurations today and during this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. What is more, the inauguration took place 2 weeks to the day on the very west steps of the United States Capitol where a violent mob stormed this building, desecrating these halls, and tried to stop our constitutionally mandated deliberations in this body. It was the ninth inauguration ceremony I have attended. I was proud to be there as President Biden and Vice President Harris were sworn in. I am here on the floor today to thank the Capitol Police and other law enforcement agencies, including the Secret Service and its Director, Jim Murray, who took the lead on this national special security event to ensure that things went smoothly and that we, indeed, had a peaceful transfer of power. I also want to give special thanks to the men and women of the National Guard, who worked to ensure this ceremony was safe and secure. Over the past 2 weeks, 25,000 National Guard troops from across the country, including all 50 States and 3 territories, answered the call, leaving their families and friends and, for most, leaving their regular jobs to help defend this sacred celebration of democracy that occurred at this place yesterday. This number of 25,000 troops includes nearly 1,000 guardsmen from my home State of Ohio. I had the opportunity to meet with a couple hundred of these citizen soldiers from Ohio yesterday. I was able to tell them how much we appreciate their commitment to the mission and what they have done, truly, to protect democracy and to help our Capitol Police during a stressful time. Because of their efforts, the ceremony was safe for everyone in attendance, and we were able to proceed with this transfer of power. When I thanked them, they all told me the same thing--they were just doing their duty. They were proud to be here. They were protecting their country and their fellow citizens I have seen this firsthand over the years when I have visited Ohio National Guard installations around our State, including the Mansfield Air Base, the Toledo Air Base, the Springfield Air Base, Rickenbacker Air National Guard. During this pandemic, when more Americans than ever are facing severe food insecurity, I have had the chance to hand out food with members of the Ohio Army National Guard who have been working around the clock at food banks I have been at, like Greater Cleveland Food Bank or Central Ohio Food Bank. They are working hard alongside volunteers to respond to a true crisis. But that is not all. The Ohio National Guard has played an essential role in providing critical assistance to our prisons and our jails when guards were out with the COVID virus. They have helped with testing. They have helped to get the COVID-19 vaccines distributed across our State, and they are continuing to do that. We can't thank them enough for what they have done during this time of crisis. As I have visited with the Guard this week, both with regard to the Ohio members and Guard from all over the country, including some conversations I had this morning, I have told them all what I have heard from the Capitol Police this week. I have heard that they really appreciated the backup at a time when shifts have been long, sleep has been rare, and the effects of the attack on the Capitol are still acutely felt. It has been a tough 2 weeks on our Capitol police officers. It has been a tough 2 weeks since the attack on the Capitol. I want to take this opportunity to also express the gratitude of all of us in this Chamber and all Americans to the Capitol Police for bravely holding the line against an illegal, violent mob that threatened this building, our proceedings, and our colleagues. In effect, the men and women of the Capitol Police Force put their lives on the line to defend democracy. It is that simple. As I said on this floor that terrible night 2 weeks ago, it was because of their courage that we were safe and because of their courage that we were able to demonstrate to the American people and the world that we were going to accomplish our constitutional duty of certifying the election. They allowed us to do that. As a Congress, we have begun a complete, impartial, and nonpartisan investigation into what went wrong that day. I am working across the Senate with the committees of jurisdiction--the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, where I will be the ranking Republican, the Rules Committee, the Appropriations Committee, and the Intelligence Committee to ensure that our Capitol Police are never put in that kind of position again. We are performing oversight to ensure they have what they need to be able to protect the Capitol going forward. Without prejudging our investigation, we must consider what reforms need to be made and take a hard look at the physical security of our Capitol Complex. While these buildings must remain accessible to the people, we need to look at incorporating the best practices in physical security, to include shatterproof windows and doors that can't be easily breached. This willcost money, but it is absolutely necessary, based on what happened on the 6th of January. I look forward to helping lead this bipartisan effort, and I urge my fellow Members of Congress to join in. Again, I don't want to prejudge our review, but I know among the findings we will make is a finding that the officers on the line were heroic, and those officers deserve our gratitude. We must never forget those who lost their lives that night, including a law enforcement officer and member of the Capitol Police, Officer Brian Sicknick, who, since 2008, had patrolled these halls and had been a familiar face to many of us. He was tragically killed defending this Capitol. He gave his life in heroic defense of us and our democracy. Only a couple of days after the attack, I learned the tragic news that we lost another officer, a friend, Officer Howard Liebengood. Howie was on duty the day the Capitol was attacked and responded to the attack just as his many brave comrades did. He experienced some difficult experiences that night. I was devastated to learn of his death the next day. Howie was someone I used to see almost every day. He was usually stationed in the Russell Building, where my office is located. He was an utmost professional--someone who took great pride in his work and had an ironclad commitment to keeping people safe. His dad was Sergeant at Arms here at one time. He brightened my day every time I saw him. The last time was a few weeks ago, when he was standing guard outside the doors to the Russell Building, alone in the cold, alert, vigilant, and good-humored. Today I reread a letter that I wrote to the Chief of the Capitol Police several years ago, commending the exceptional work of Howie and his partner, Chris Gallo, for their ``professionalism, coupled with their kind demeanor.'' Howie represented what is great and good about not just our police force but our country. Rest in peace, Officer Brian Sicknick and Officer Howard Liebengood. Through the tragedy of that day 2 weeks ago came other stories of bravery and valor too. We have heard about the heroic actions of Officer Eugene Goodman, an Army veteran whose quick thinking under intense pressure protected us here in this Senate Chamber by leading the mob away from the Chamber while many of us were still inside. He unselfishly put himself in danger and, despite the risk, handled himself with the professionalism that defines the Capitol Police, and I was pleased to see his promotion. Officer Goodman's heroic efforts are, to me, representative of the actions of all the brave officers of the Capitol Police, who, on that day of violence and lawlessness, held the line against the mob. I am proud of another member of the Capitol Police. This is the supervisor. Inspector Tommy Lloyd is commander of the Capitol division--as compared to the House and the Senate, commander of the division to protect the Capitol itself. This is a powerful photograph that I saw in TIME magazine. It is a photograph of him facing the mob, shoulder to shoulder with his line officers. The Capitol was breached, but because of the valor of these men and women, we were able to complete our job and are able to be here today, discussing the workings of our democracy, confirming members of the new administration, doing our job. The actions of law enforcement in the Capitol should serve as a reminder to all of us of the risks our police officers take every single day to keep us safe--not just here in the Capitol but around the country. On Monday, for example, the city of Toledo, OH, lost one of its own when Officer Brandon Stalker of the Toledo Police Department was killed in a standoff with a gunman. Officer Stalker, only 24 years old, was the father of two young children and engaged to be married. He had a promising life ahead of him. My thoughts are with the friends and families of Officer Stalker and the friends and families of Officers Sicknick and Liebengood during this difficult time. Even with all the threats and challenges they face, our officers of the law here and around the country carry on in their duties to protect and to serve. They are truly the best of America. Officer Stalker's fellow officers will continue to patrol the streets of Toledo to keep its citizens safe. Yesterday, despite the hardships they have faced, the Capitol Police, once again, lined the Halls of Congress, keeping watch over the inauguration of the next President and Vice President of the United States. Together, the National Guard, the Capitol Police, the Secret Service, and other law enforcement protected a Presidential inauguration that was at once like none other in recent memory, and yet also a continuation of a long and great tradition--an unbroken chain of peacefully transferring power that our Nation has cherished since 1789. They did their duty, as they do every day, in defense of the values we Americans hold dearest--democracy, liberty, rule of law--and we all owe them a debt of gratitude. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS85 | null | 2,133 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. PORTMAN. Madam President, I can say with certainty that General Austin has no better friend or ally in this Chamber than Senator Dan Sullivan, who has seen him as a person and seen him as a commander. Those votes will occur later today. Madam President, I rise today on the floor to talk about what happened yesterday at the Capitol and what happened 2 weeks ago at the Capitol. Yesterday, we had the 59th Presidential inauguration right here. The citadel of democracy was once again the place where a President and Vice President were sworn in for 4 years. Starting in 1789, every 4 years, America and the world have witnessed this remarkable event that provides for the peaceful transfer of Executive power and the continuity of government--something we sometimes take for granted but is rare, even today. It has happened through wars. It has happened through economic recessions. We have had our inaugurations today and during this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. What is more, the inauguration took place 2 weeks to the day on the very west steps of the United States Capitol where a violent mob stormed this building, desecrating these halls, and tried to stop our constitutionally mandated deliberations in this body. It was the ninth inauguration ceremony I have attended. I was proud to be there as President Biden and Vice President Harris were sworn in. I am here on the floor today to thank the Capitol Police and other law enforcement agencies, including the Secret Service and its Director, Jim Murray, who took the lead on this national special security event to ensure that things went smoothly and that we, indeed, had a peaceful transfer of power. I also want to give special thanks to the men and women of the National Guard, who worked to ensure this ceremony was safe and secure. Over the past 2 weeks, 25,000 National Guard troops from across the country, including all 50 States and 3 territories, answered the call, leaving their families and friends and, for most, leaving their regular jobs to help defend this sacred celebration of democracy that occurred at this place yesterday. This number of 25,000 troops includes nearly 1,000 guardsmen from my home State of Ohio. I had the opportunity to meet with a couple hundred of these citizen soldiers from Ohio yesterday. I was able to tell them how much we appreciate their commitment to the mission and what they have done, truly, to protect democracy and to help our Capitol Police during a stressful time. Because of their efforts, the ceremony was safe for everyone in attendance, and we were able to proceed with this transfer of power. When I thanked them, they all told me the same thing--they were just doing their duty. They were proud to be here. They were protecting their country and their fellow citizens I have seen this firsthand over the years when I have visited Ohio National Guard installations around our State, including the Mansfield Air Base, the Toledo Air Base, the Springfield Air Base, Rickenbacker Air National Guard. During this pandemic, when more Americans than ever are facing severe food insecurity, I have had the chance to hand out food with members of the Ohio Army National Guard who have been working around the clock at food banks I have been at, like Greater Cleveland Food Bank or Central Ohio Food Bank. They are working hard alongside volunteers to respond to a true crisis. But that is not all. The Ohio National Guard has played an essential role in providing critical assistance to our prisons and our jails when guards were out with the COVID virus. They have helped with testing. They have helped to get the COVID-19 vaccines distributed across our State, and they are continuing to do that. We can't thank them enough for what they have done during this time of crisis. As I have visited with the Guard this week, both with regard to the Ohio members and Guard from all over the country, including some conversations I had this morning, I have told them all what I have heard from the Capitol Police this week. I have heard that they really appreciated the backup at a time when shifts have been long, sleep has been rare, and the effects of the attack on the Capitol are still acutely felt. It has been a tough 2 weeks on our Capitol police officers. It has been a tough 2 weeks since the attack on the Capitol. I want to take this opportunity to also express the gratitude of all of us in this Chamber and all Americans to the Capitol Police for bravely holding the line against an illegal, violent mob that threatened this building, our proceedings, and our colleagues. In effect, the men and women of the Capitol Police Force put their lives on the line to defend democracy. It is that simple. As I said on this floor that terrible night 2 weeks ago, it was because of their courage that we were safe and because of their courage that we were able to demonstrate to the American people and the world that we were going to accomplish our constitutional duty of certifying the election. They allowed us to do that. As a Congress, we have begun a complete, impartial, and nonpartisan investigation into what went wrong that day. I am working across the Senate with the committees of jurisdiction--the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, where I will be the ranking Republican, the Rules Committee, the Appropriations Committee, and the Intelligence Committee to ensure that our Capitol Police are never put in that kind of position again. We are performing oversight to ensure they have what they need to be able to protect the Capitol going forward. Without prejudging our investigation, we must consider what reforms need to be made and take a hard look at the physical security of our Capitol Complex. While these buildings must remain accessible to the people, we need to look at incorporating the best practices in physical security, to include shatterproof windows and doors that can't be easily breached. This willcost money, but it is absolutely necessary, based on what happened on the 6th of January. I look forward to helping lead this bipartisan effort, and I urge my fellow Members of Congress to join in. Again, I don't want to prejudge our review, but I know among the findings we will make is a finding that the officers on the line were heroic, and those officers deserve our gratitude. We must never forget those who lost their lives that night, including a law enforcement officer and member of the Capitol Police, Officer Brian Sicknick, who, since 2008, had patrolled these halls and had been a familiar face to many of us. He was tragically killed defending this Capitol. He gave his life in heroic defense of us and our democracy. Only a couple of days after the attack, I learned the tragic news that we lost another officer, a friend, Officer Howard Liebengood. Howie was on duty the day the Capitol was attacked and responded to the attack just as his many brave comrades did. He experienced some difficult experiences that night. I was devastated to learn of his death the next day. Howie was someone I used to see almost every day. He was usually stationed in the Russell Building, where my office is located. He was an utmost professional--someone who took great pride in his work and had an ironclad commitment to keeping people safe. His dad was Sergeant at Arms here at one time. He brightened my day every time I saw him. The last time was a few weeks ago, when he was standing guard outside the doors to the Russell Building, alone in the cold, alert, vigilant, and good-humored. Today I reread a letter that I wrote to the Chief of the Capitol Police several years ago, commending the exceptional work of Howie and his partner, Chris Gallo, for their ``professionalism, coupled with their kind demeanor.'' Howie represented what is great and good about not just our police force but our country. Rest in peace, Officer Brian Sicknick and Officer Howard Liebengood. Through the tragedy of that day 2 weeks ago came other stories of bravery and valor too. We have heard about the heroic actions of Officer Eugene Goodman, an Army veteran whose quick thinking under intense pressure protected us here in this Senate Chamber by leading the mob away from the Chamber while many of us were still inside. He unselfishly put himself in danger and, despite the risk, handled himself with the professionalism that defines the Capitol Police, and I was pleased to see his promotion. Officer Goodman's heroic efforts are, to me, representative of the actions of all the brave officers of the Capitol Police, who, on that day of violence and lawlessness, held the line against the mob. I am proud of another member of the Capitol Police. This is the supervisor. Inspector Tommy Lloyd is commander of the Capitol division--as compared to the House and the Senate, commander of the division to protect the Capitol itself. This is a powerful photograph that I saw in TIME magazine. It is a photograph of him facing the mob, shoulder to shoulder with his line officers. The Capitol was breached, but because of the valor of these men and women, we were able to complete our job and are able to be here today, discussing the workings of our democracy, confirming members of the new administration, doing our job. The actions of law enforcement in the Capitol should serve as a reminder to all of us of the risks our police officers take every single day to keep us safe--not just here in the Capitol but around the country. On Monday, for example, the city of Toledo, OH, lost one of its own when Officer Brandon Stalker of the Toledo Police Department was killed in a standoff with a gunman. Officer Stalker, only 24 years old, was the father of two young children and engaged to be married. He had a promising life ahead of him. My thoughts are with the friends and families of Officer Stalker and the friends and families of Officers Sicknick and Liebengood during this difficult time. Even with all the threats and challenges they face, our officers of the law here and around the country carry on in their duties to protect and to serve. They are truly the best of America. Officer Stalker's fellow officers will continue to patrol the streets of Toledo to keep its citizens safe. Yesterday, despite the hardships they have faced, the Capitol Police, once again, lined the Halls of Congress, keeping watch over the inauguration of the next President and Vice President of the United States. Together, the National Guard, the Capitol Police, the Secret Service, and other law enforcement protected a Presidential inauguration that was at once like none other in recent memory, and yet also a continuation of a long and great tradition--an unbroken chain of peacefully transferring power that our Nation has cherished since 1789. They did their duty, as they do every day, in defense of the values we Americans hold dearest--democracy, liberty, rule of law--and we all owe them a debt of gratitude. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS85 | null | 2,134 |
formal | Cleveland | null | racist | Mr. PORTMAN. Madam President, I can say with certainty that General Austin has no better friend or ally in this Chamber than Senator Dan Sullivan, who has seen him as a person and seen him as a commander. Those votes will occur later today. Madam President, I rise today on the floor to talk about what happened yesterday at the Capitol and what happened 2 weeks ago at the Capitol. Yesterday, we had the 59th Presidential inauguration right here. The citadel of democracy was once again the place where a President and Vice President were sworn in for 4 years. Starting in 1789, every 4 years, America and the world have witnessed this remarkable event that provides for the peaceful transfer of Executive power and the continuity of government--something we sometimes take for granted but is rare, even today. It has happened through wars. It has happened through economic recessions. We have had our inaugurations today and during this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. What is more, the inauguration took place 2 weeks to the day on the very west steps of the United States Capitol where a violent mob stormed this building, desecrating these halls, and tried to stop our constitutionally mandated deliberations in this body. It was the ninth inauguration ceremony I have attended. I was proud to be there as President Biden and Vice President Harris were sworn in. I am here on the floor today to thank the Capitol Police and other law enforcement agencies, including the Secret Service and its Director, Jim Murray, who took the lead on this national special security event to ensure that things went smoothly and that we, indeed, had a peaceful transfer of power. I also want to give special thanks to the men and women of the National Guard, who worked to ensure this ceremony was safe and secure. Over the past 2 weeks, 25,000 National Guard troops from across the country, including all 50 States and 3 territories, answered the call, leaving their families and friends and, for most, leaving their regular jobs to help defend this sacred celebration of democracy that occurred at this place yesterday. This number of 25,000 troops includes nearly 1,000 guardsmen from my home State of Ohio. I had the opportunity to meet with a couple hundred of these citizen soldiers from Ohio yesterday. I was able to tell them how much we appreciate their commitment to the mission and what they have done, truly, to protect democracy and to help our Capitol Police during a stressful time. Because of their efforts, the ceremony was safe for everyone in attendance, and we were able to proceed with this transfer of power. When I thanked them, they all told me the same thing--they were just doing their duty. They were proud to be here. They were protecting their country and their fellow citizens I have seen this firsthand over the years when I have visited Ohio National Guard installations around our State, including the Mansfield Air Base, the Toledo Air Base, the Springfield Air Base, Rickenbacker Air National Guard. During this pandemic, when more Americans than ever are facing severe food insecurity, I have had the chance to hand out food with members of the Ohio Army National Guard who have been working around the clock at food banks I have been at, like Greater Cleveland Food Bank or Central Ohio Food Bank. They are working hard alongside volunteers to respond to a true crisis. But that is not all. The Ohio National Guard has played an essential role in providing critical assistance to our prisons and our jails when guards were out with the COVID virus. They have helped with testing. They have helped to get the COVID-19 vaccines distributed across our State, and they are continuing to do that. We can't thank them enough for what they have done during this time of crisis. As I have visited with the Guard this week, both with regard to the Ohio members and Guard from all over the country, including some conversations I had this morning, I have told them all what I have heard from the Capitol Police this week. I have heard that they really appreciated the backup at a time when shifts have been long, sleep has been rare, and the effects of the attack on the Capitol are still acutely felt. It has been a tough 2 weeks on our Capitol police officers. It has been a tough 2 weeks since the attack on the Capitol. I want to take this opportunity to also express the gratitude of all of us in this Chamber and all Americans to the Capitol Police for bravely holding the line against an illegal, violent mob that threatened this building, our proceedings, and our colleagues. In effect, the men and women of the Capitol Police Force put their lives on the line to defend democracy. It is that simple. As I said on this floor that terrible night 2 weeks ago, it was because of their courage that we were safe and because of their courage that we were able to demonstrate to the American people and the world that we were going to accomplish our constitutional duty of certifying the election. They allowed us to do that. As a Congress, we have begun a complete, impartial, and nonpartisan investigation into what went wrong that day. I am working across the Senate with the committees of jurisdiction--the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, where I will be the ranking Republican, the Rules Committee, the Appropriations Committee, and the Intelligence Committee to ensure that our Capitol Police are never put in that kind of position again. We are performing oversight to ensure they have what they need to be able to protect the Capitol going forward. Without prejudging our investigation, we must consider what reforms need to be made and take a hard look at the physical security of our Capitol Complex. While these buildings must remain accessible to the people, we need to look at incorporating the best practices in physical security, to include shatterproof windows and doors that can't be easily breached. This willcost money, but it is absolutely necessary, based on what happened on the 6th of January. I look forward to helping lead this bipartisan effort, and I urge my fellow Members of Congress to join in. Again, I don't want to prejudge our review, but I know among the findings we will make is a finding that the officers on the line were heroic, and those officers deserve our gratitude. We must never forget those who lost their lives that night, including a law enforcement officer and member of the Capitol Police, Officer Brian Sicknick, who, since 2008, had patrolled these halls and had been a familiar face to many of us. He was tragically killed defending this Capitol. He gave his life in heroic defense of us and our democracy. Only a couple of days after the attack, I learned the tragic news that we lost another officer, a friend, Officer Howard Liebengood. Howie was on duty the day the Capitol was attacked and responded to the attack just as his many brave comrades did. He experienced some difficult experiences that night. I was devastated to learn of his death the next day. Howie was someone I used to see almost every day. He was usually stationed in the Russell Building, where my office is located. He was an utmost professional--someone who took great pride in his work and had an ironclad commitment to keeping people safe. His dad was Sergeant at Arms here at one time. He brightened my day every time I saw him. The last time was a few weeks ago, when he was standing guard outside the doors to the Russell Building, alone in the cold, alert, vigilant, and good-humored. Today I reread a letter that I wrote to the Chief of the Capitol Police several years ago, commending the exceptional work of Howie and his partner, Chris Gallo, for their ``professionalism, coupled with their kind demeanor.'' Howie represented what is great and good about not just our police force but our country. Rest in peace, Officer Brian Sicknick and Officer Howard Liebengood. Through the tragedy of that day 2 weeks ago came other stories of bravery and valor too. We have heard about the heroic actions of Officer Eugene Goodman, an Army veteran whose quick thinking under intense pressure protected us here in this Senate Chamber by leading the mob away from the Chamber while many of us were still inside. He unselfishly put himself in danger and, despite the risk, handled himself with the professionalism that defines the Capitol Police, and I was pleased to see his promotion. Officer Goodman's heroic efforts are, to me, representative of the actions of all the brave officers of the Capitol Police, who, on that day of violence and lawlessness, held the line against the mob. I am proud of another member of the Capitol Police. This is the supervisor. Inspector Tommy Lloyd is commander of the Capitol division--as compared to the House and the Senate, commander of the division to protect the Capitol itself. This is a powerful photograph that I saw in TIME magazine. It is a photograph of him facing the mob, shoulder to shoulder with his line officers. The Capitol was breached, but because of the valor of these men and women, we were able to complete our job and are able to be here today, discussing the workings of our democracy, confirming members of the new administration, doing our job. The actions of law enforcement in the Capitol should serve as a reminder to all of us of the risks our police officers take every single day to keep us safe--not just here in the Capitol but around the country. On Monday, for example, the city of Toledo, OH, lost one of its own when Officer Brandon Stalker of the Toledo Police Department was killed in a standoff with a gunman. Officer Stalker, only 24 years old, was the father of two young children and engaged to be married. He had a promising life ahead of him. My thoughts are with the friends and families of Officer Stalker and the friends and families of Officers Sicknick and Liebengood during this difficult time. Even with all the threats and challenges they face, our officers of the law here and around the country carry on in their duties to protect and to serve. They are truly the best of America. Officer Stalker's fellow officers will continue to patrol the streets of Toledo to keep its citizens safe. Yesterday, despite the hardships they have faced, the Capitol Police, once again, lined the Halls of Congress, keeping watch over the inauguration of the next President and Vice President of the United States. Together, the National Guard, the Capitol Police, the Secret Service, and other law enforcement protected a Presidential inauguration that was at once like none other in recent memory, and yet also a continuation of a long and great tradition--an unbroken chain of peacefully transferring power that our Nation has cherished since 1789. They did their duty, as they do every day, in defense of the values we Americans hold dearest--democracy, liberty, rule of law--and we all owe them a debt of gratitude. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS85 | null | 2,135 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, on Tuesday, January 12, 2021, the 2021 General Session of the Wyoming Legislature got underway. Noticeably absent from the first day of the session was State Senator Henry H.R. ``Hank'' Coe. Hank had been present in Cheyenne for the first day of the annual legislative session for 32 consecutive years. In March of 2020, on the last day of the 2020 Wyoming legislative session, Hank announced his plan to retire. Senator Coe represented the people of Park County from 1988 to 2020. Hank was a respected and effective legislator. He earned a reputation for being a kind, thoughtful, persuasive legislator of great integrity. Hank always had a remarkable grasp of the issues facing the state and his home community. He could see short and long-term needs and offer solutions to address those needs. During his time in the legislature, Senator Coe served on numerous committees, was elected as majority floor leader, and, in 2001, served as president of the senate. For 17 years, Hank proudly served as the chair of the senate education committee. He was a strong proponent of local control and high-quality education. Hank showed students that through hard work and dedication to their studies, there was a world of opportunities within their reach. He understood the importance of investing in our young people, recognizing their achievements, and providing them with the tools needed to succeed. When I served in the Wyoming State Senate, I had the great honor of working with Hank Coe on one of our proudest legislative initiatives, the creation of the Hathaway scholarship program. We were able to create a scholarship fund with a $400 million permanent endowment. Income from the fund continues to fund scholarships for Wyoming high school graduates today. The Hathaway scholarship program allows every Wyoming student, regardless of economic background, to qualify for a merit-based scholarship to attend the University of Wyoming or any of our State's seven community colleges. Senator Coe's leadership was a driving force behind passage of this legislation. Thousands of Wyoming students without the resources to obtain a college education have benefited from this scholarship. Hank's contribution to public service extended far beyond Wyoming's capitol. He was a mentor to many in his hometown of Cody. He participated fully on local boards and committees. The Cody Chamber of Commerce, Cody Medical Foundation, Cody Yellowstone Air Service, Wyoming Air Service, Buffalo Bill Museum of the West, and the Park County Commissioners all benefited from Hank's committed service. When Hank retired, he released the following statement, which was printed in the Cody Enterprise on March 13, 2020: ``The Wyoming Legislature continues to be one of the most effective and civil deliberate bodies in the nation. It is my sincere hope that this tradition will continue and Wyoming can be an example to the rest of the nation,'' said Coe. ``Serving in the Senate has been a true honor and a privilege. I'm eternally grateful to the people of Park County who put their faith in me to represent them for so many years. To my community, friends, family, fellow lawmakers and the exceptional legislative staff, I say thank you.'' Hank had a calling to serve. He took that calling and ran with it. His life's work has made a difference in the lives of the people in Park County and in every corner of our great State. History will look kindly upon the contributions and achievements of Hank Coe. Hank passed away today, January 21, 2021. He leaves behind a remarkable legacy, and he will be greatly missed by a grateful State. To Hank's entire family, especially his children and grandchildren: son H.R. and grandson Henry, daughter Carey Coe Johnson and husband Jeff and grandchildren Madeline, Jagger, and Jrakke, and daughter Bethany Coe Boydstun and grandchildren, Jackson, Tyler and Lily--our prayers and well wishes are with you. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the remarkable life of Hank Coe. His dedication to service will have a profound impact on our state for generations. Thank you Hank. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BARRASSO | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS89-2 | null | 2,136 |
formal | election integrity | null | racist | Mr. RISCH. Madam President, along with my colleague Senator Mike Crapo, I rise today to ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the mission statement for the Citizens Committee for Election Integrity and their recommended minimum standards for fair and honest elections. Idahoans concerned about election integrity formed the Citizens Committee for Election Integrity to demonstrate the meaning of the Constitution by helping ensure the voices of ``We the people'' are heard. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. RISCH | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS89 | null | 2,137 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I come to the floor today to urge the swift confirmation for Tony Blinken to be the Secretary of State. Like we saw with Avril Haines yesterday and moving toward Lloyd Austin today, we need to hold a floor vote on Mr. Blinken's nomination urgently. Mr. Blinken is well known to the Senate, having previously been confirmed as Deputy Secretary of State, having served as the Deputy National Security Advisor and, of course, as the staff director of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before that. He is superbly qualified to be the Secretary of State, and his knowledge and thoughtfulness were on display during 5 hours of testimony earlier this week. And since then, he has been asked to respond to hundreds of questions. As a matter of fact, he has had an inordinate number of questions that have been put to him for the record. He had nearly over half a hundred before his hearing. He has had from a couple of our colleagues nearly 600 questions, including multiple parts to those questions. And to my knowledge, he has largely answered them all, notwithstanding the size, the magnitude of it. Now, I have been, since I arrived in this institution, one of the big advocates of the prerogatives of each and every individual Senator and of the institution. So I take a back step to no one, but there is a difference between prerogatives and prerogatives that are abused, which, in essence, are for the purpose of not seeking information but for the purpose of delaying a nomination. Now, I appreciate that Senator Risch, the present chairman of the committee, has been working with me to try to accelerate Mr. Blinken's nomination to the floor, but I would ask my colleagues, particularly those on the committee, to join him and I in an effort to bring one of the important national security positions in our government to the floor for a vote. I don't think we should be leaving this weekend without a vote for the Secretary of State. He is the right person to repair and restore our alliances, to rebuild and renew the State Department, to reinvigorate the relationship between the Department and Congress--somethingthat I think Republicans and Democrats alike have agreed have soured dramatically. His testimony, his opening statement, his answers to questions show that he will be a working partner with this institution. But, obviously, confirming Mr. Blinken is not just about the nominee himself. It is about doing what the American people expect and the Constitution requires--providing advice and consent to ensure that national security officials are in office in a timely manner. We are facing challenges in every corner of the world. The world is on fire--from Iran to Russia, to Venezuela, to global challenges that define our times and defy borders, like COVID, migration, and climate change. We can't afford delaying to put Mr. Blinken in office. We can't allow the State Department to be rudderless. If we don't have leadership, we can't be sure that China or Russia and others won't fill the vacuum as they have for the last several years or do something that is adverse to our national and economic security. Imagine that there is a hostage deal to be had, as I believe there is, and you can't have another country call the Secretary of State because the Secretary of State doesn't exist. Imagine if there are tensions between two countries that affect our national interests. You don't have a Secretary of State to call as counterpart in those countries to seek to ease the tension, to remove the threat. Imagine if President Biden needs to have a Secretary of State engage in some part of the world to stop a conflict, to open an opportunity, to prevent an unintended consequence. We don't have that person, and we cannot expect the President to pick up the phone in each and every instance in the world as he is trying to deal with COVID at home and an economic crisis that follows on from that. That is what the Secretary of State does. So Mr. Blinken also, finally, is not just critical to addressing challenges abroad, we have to acknowledge what the role of Secretary of State is here at home. If we remember what just happened back on the 6th, three of the first four officials in the line of succession--the Vice President, the Speaker of the House, and the President pro tempore of the Senate--were in the Capitol when domestic terrorists breached the building. Every day we learn more details about this heinous attack, including that the terrorists, some of whom were chanting ``Hang Mike Pence!'' came within a minute or so of a potential face-to-face encounter with Vice President Pence. Thank God, through the quick thinking and heroics of our Capitol Police and other law enforcement, those three remained unscathed, but if something had happened, it is the Secretary of State who is fourth in line of succession to the President of the United States. Leaving the office vacant is irresponsible. It is irresponsible in that regard. It is irresponsible in terms of something happening in the world and not having a Secretary of State who could work to deal with it so that we could preserve our national security, promote our national interests, and stop something, an unintended consequence, from happening. Mr. Blinken has the qualifications. The challenges facing our country call for him to be confirmed, and I hope the Senate does not leave here tomorrow until he is confirmed. With that, I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. MENENDEZ | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS91-7 | null | 2,138 |
formal | job creator | null | conservative | Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, we recently said goodbye to a lot of really good, hard-working men and women from the previous administration, and I want to highlight a few of them. We refer to them--some of my friends and some of my enemies refer to them as the ``Inhofe mafia.'' It comes from the committees that I have chaired, both the Armed Services Committee as well as the Environment and Public Works Committee. But anyway, they are really a great bunch of people. I am going to start with Andrew Wheeler. Andrew Wheeler was with me for a number of years--14 years--before he became the Director of the EPA. Here is a guy who was nominated to be the Administrator. At that time, I said that there is no one in America who is as qualified as Andrew Wheeler for this job. The first job he had out of law school was with the EPA. When he was nominated to be Administrator, I kind of gave his whole life history. All of my Senate colleagues know Andy and have known him for a long period of time--Democrats and Republicans. He has worked for me in the Senate as well as becoming one of my ``has-beens,'' as we refer to people who used to be with me and are still my good friends. Andy started in my personal office as chief counsel and went on to serve as the staff director and chief counsel during my time as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. He has decades of experience and is one of the most skilled energy and environmental policy experts I have ever come in contact with, and I am immensely proud of what he has been able to accomplish throughout his career, but particularly as EPA Administrator. Andy understood that the EPA's mission is to implement the laws that are passed by Congress for the American people. The EPA's job is not to legislate. A lot of people think that. That is our job, to legislate, and then he carries it out, and he did really just a great job with that. Contrary to what many on the left say Republicans want, we do want clean air and clean water and clean land, and Andy proved that he could accomplish that without burdensome overregulation. During his time at the EPA, he spearheaded a number of the rules and deregulatory actions that brought important relief to American job creators while protecting our environment. He rolled back the economy standards on cars that were created to try to force Americans to drive vehicles they don't want to drive and that they can't afford. In its replacement, Andy developed the SAFE vehicles rule, which expands consumer choice and lowers the price of vehicles. Andy also repealed and replaced the waters of the United States rule, or WOTUS. On the WOTUS rule, if you talk to any of the agricultural groups--I am talking about the Farm Bureau and other agricultural groups--they would say that was the rule we really had to do something about. States like mine don't need Washington bureaucrats imposing their radical regulations like WOTUS on people who know the waters better than they do. It is not an overstatement when I say that this was probably the greatest regulatory burden facing Oklahoma's farmers, landowners, and ranchers during the Obama administration. I was proud to see WOTUS repealed by the navigable waters protection rule, which provided a clean and lawful definition of waters of the United States and doesn't try to overregulate the arid parts of the State. Oklahoma is an arid State. If you go out to the western part of Oklahoma, the panhandle of Oklahoma, it is really arid. If you take that regulation out of the hands of the States and give it to the Federal Government, there is always a concern by our farmers and ranchers in Oklahoma and across the Nation that they would turn these arid areas into wetlands. Another of the regulatory overhauls accomplished by Andy was for the affordable clean energy or the ACE rule that replaced the illegal Clean Power Plan, which regulated emissions of coal-fired powerplants. I had long been critical of the Clean Power Plan and led the charge against it in the Senate.Like most of that era of the rules, it was a Federal power grab, and it would have sent Americans' electricity bills soaring, and we all knew that. But we made it history when we repealed and replaced the Clean Power Plan with the ACE rule. It was good. Not only did this rule help Americans' electricity costs be affordable, it is expected to benefit the environment as well. Just last month, the EPA finalized another big rule that requires EPA to prepare a cost-benefit analysis before coming up with new regulations. How is that at all unreasonable? Americans shake their heads, and they wonder why we would pass things that don't have any kind of a cost-benefit analysis. What is it going to cost? What kind of sacrifices are we going to have to make? Well, we put that into effect, and I think it is something people are very thankful for. Throughout his tenure, Andy has been focused on what is in the best interests of the taxpayers and not just the Washington bureaucrats. That is clear with this rule and countless others. You know, one of the good things about Andy, as I already mentioned, is that he knows more about the process than anybody else does--more about the EPA. He has always been a star, and he started at the bottom. When he was first put into that office and was confirmed as EPA director, he gave a speech over at the EPA. He didn't know I was there. I went over there to hear it. He had 300 people at the EPA all listening to him and looking at him and saying: There is room at the top for me. Here is a guy who started at the very bottom and ended up as director of the EPA. It didn't go unnoticed. Everybody realized that. So I would ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an E&E News article from July 2018, which details a number of the former staff people and their backgrounds | 2020-01-06 | Mr. INHOFE | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS92 | null | 2,139 |
formal | job creators | null | conservative | Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, we recently said goodbye to a lot of really good, hard-working men and women from the previous administration, and I want to highlight a few of them. We refer to them--some of my friends and some of my enemies refer to them as the ``Inhofe mafia.'' It comes from the committees that I have chaired, both the Armed Services Committee as well as the Environment and Public Works Committee. But anyway, they are really a great bunch of people. I am going to start with Andrew Wheeler. Andrew Wheeler was with me for a number of years--14 years--before he became the Director of the EPA. Here is a guy who was nominated to be the Administrator. At that time, I said that there is no one in America who is as qualified as Andrew Wheeler for this job. The first job he had out of law school was with the EPA. When he was nominated to be Administrator, I kind of gave his whole life history. All of my Senate colleagues know Andy and have known him for a long period of time--Democrats and Republicans. He has worked for me in the Senate as well as becoming one of my ``has-beens,'' as we refer to people who used to be with me and are still my good friends. Andy started in my personal office as chief counsel and went on to serve as the staff director and chief counsel during my time as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee. He has decades of experience and is one of the most skilled energy and environmental policy experts I have ever come in contact with, and I am immensely proud of what he has been able to accomplish throughout his career, but particularly as EPA Administrator. Andy understood that the EPA's mission is to implement the laws that are passed by Congress for the American people. The EPA's job is not to legislate. A lot of people think that. That is our job, to legislate, and then he carries it out, and he did really just a great job with that. Contrary to what many on the left say Republicans want, we do want clean air and clean water and clean land, and Andy proved that he could accomplish that without burdensome overregulation. During his time at the EPA, he spearheaded a number of the rules and deregulatory actions that brought important relief to American job creators while protecting our environment. He rolled back the economy standards on cars that were created to try to force Americans to drive vehicles they don't want to drive and that they can't afford. In its replacement, Andy developed the SAFE vehicles rule, which expands consumer choice and lowers the price of vehicles. Andy also repealed and replaced the waters of the United States rule, or WOTUS. On the WOTUS rule, if you talk to any of the agricultural groups--I am talking about the Farm Bureau and other agricultural groups--they would say that was the rule we really had to do something about. States like mine don't need Washington bureaucrats imposing their radical regulations like WOTUS on people who know the waters better than they do. It is not an overstatement when I say that this was probably the greatest regulatory burden facing Oklahoma's farmers, landowners, and ranchers during the Obama administration. I was proud to see WOTUS repealed by the navigable waters protection rule, which provided a clean and lawful definition of waters of the United States and doesn't try to overregulate the arid parts of the State. Oklahoma is an arid State. If you go out to the western part of Oklahoma, the panhandle of Oklahoma, it is really arid. If you take that regulation out of the hands of the States and give it to the Federal Government, there is always a concern by our farmers and ranchers in Oklahoma and across the Nation that they would turn these arid areas into wetlands. Another of the regulatory overhauls accomplished by Andy was for the affordable clean energy or the ACE rule that replaced the illegal Clean Power Plan, which regulated emissions of coal-fired powerplants. I had long been critical of the Clean Power Plan and led the charge against it in the Senate.Like most of that era of the rules, it was a Federal power grab, and it would have sent Americans' electricity bills soaring, and we all knew that. But we made it history when we repealed and replaced the Clean Power Plan with the ACE rule. It was good. Not only did this rule help Americans' electricity costs be affordable, it is expected to benefit the environment as well. Just last month, the EPA finalized another big rule that requires EPA to prepare a cost-benefit analysis before coming up with new regulations. How is that at all unreasonable? Americans shake their heads, and they wonder why we would pass things that don't have any kind of a cost-benefit analysis. What is it going to cost? What kind of sacrifices are we going to have to make? Well, we put that into effect, and I think it is something people are very thankful for. Throughout his tenure, Andy has been focused on what is in the best interests of the taxpayers and not just the Washington bureaucrats. That is clear with this rule and countless others. You know, one of the good things about Andy, as I already mentioned, is that he knows more about the process than anybody else does--more about the EPA. He has always been a star, and he started at the bottom. When he was first put into that office and was confirmed as EPA director, he gave a speech over at the EPA. He didn't know I was there. I went over there to hear it. He had 300 people at the EPA all listening to him and looking at him and saying: There is room at the top for me. Here is a guy who started at the very bottom and ended up as director of the EPA. It didn't go unnoticed. Everybody realized that. So I would ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an E&E News article from July 2018, which details a number of the former staff people and their backgrounds | 2020-01-06 | Mr. INHOFE | Senate | CREC-2021-01-21-pt1-PgS92 | null | 2,140 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I want to congratulate now-Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on his confirmation to be Secretary of Defense. I spoke yesterday about his confirmation, the two votes that had to happen. I had the honor of introducing this great American at his confirmation hearing at the Armed Services Committee. I served with him in the military many years ago. And I think he is going to be an important addition to President Biden's team. One of the things that we have been working on, over the last several years, is rebuilding our military after drastic cuts by the Obama-Biden administration. Hopefully, we are not going to see that again. One of the reasons I was strongly supporting now-Secretary Austin was because I believe--and I certainly hope this is a correct belief, and I have commitments from him--he won't agree with that, although I am sure some, unfortunately, in this body and others in the Biden administration are going to agree with drastic cuts to the military. It will hurt readiness. So one of the reasons that I think he is going to be a good Secretary is not just his exceptional character, humility, leadership but because he knows what will happen if there are dramatic cuts like there were in the second term of the Obama-Biden administration to our military. Not good. One of the things I had the opportunity to talk to him about--one of the things that has been a huge positive for America over the last decade, for so many reasons, is that we have become the world's energy superpower again--like we were, essentially, during World War II. What do I mean by that? Prior to the pandemic, we were the No. 1 producer of oil. Yes, people still need to use oil. I know some of my colleagues in this body don't believe that, but it is true; the No. 1 producer of natural gas, clean burning natural gas. We are starting to export it all around the world; No. 1 producer of renewables. So all of the above, America is the superpower of energy. This is good. It is great for the national security of our Nation, for a whole host of reasons. General Austin understands that--Secretary Austin understands that. It is great for jobs. In the 2008-2009 recession, the No. 1 sector of the economy that got us out of the great recession was the energy sector, in terms of GDP growth and jobs. It is great for the environment. Why do I say that? Some people tilt their heads. It is great for the environment because in America--certainly, in my State, Alaska--we have the highest standards on the environment of any place in the world by far. It is not even close. If you need energy, which you do, you should do it, produce it in the place that respects the environment the most--not Russia, not Saudi Arabia--America, Alaska. It is good for energy security. It is good for manufacturing low-cost natural gas throughout the country. Like I said, it is really good for jobs. These are really good jobs. Resource development jobs are really good jobs. They support working families and the middle class. Everybody knows that. That is a good thing that is happening in the United States of America. There are some fringe groups that don't like energy. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in the Senate don't like hydrocarbons. By the way, as we became the world's energy superpower, our greenhouse gas emissions declined probably more than any other industrialized economy in the world. Why? Because natural gas is clean-burning. So this is a win-win-win-win-win on so many fronts. Here is why I am speaking right now: Because it is all at risk. It is all at risk. The first few days of the new Biden Administration have seen an unprecedented assault on resource development and energy jobs, an attack on the men and women--working men and women with good wages--who produce really important resources for this great Nation and now for other countries because we export a lot of these resources. It is an assault on good energy jobs, good resource development jobs that have been the bedrock of millions of middle-class Americans for decades. Let me just give you an example, just in my State. Everybody knows about ANWR, right? This body moved in terms of legislation for leases. We did it the right way, with a law passed by the Senate and the House, signed by the President to move forward on leases. The first day on the job, the new President decides he is going to suspend everything with regard to ANWR. OK, that wasn't a surprise, to be honest, but, of course, it was a huge disappointment. I am not sure it is legal. Like I said, we did it the legal way. He is doing it the old-fashioned, ``Obama pen and phone'' way. There are probably a lot of questionable legalities there. That is one. We were expecting that. Here is the other one. We have another part of Alaska called the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, set aside by Congress for oil and gas development. It is not controversial. We have been doing it for decades. It was originally called the Naval Petroleum Reserve for America. This is not controversial. And we have a lot of energy projects in the NPRA that are ongoing. Heck, even the Obama-Biden administration allowed us to drill there because that is what Congress said for decades, and it is good for the country. We need energy. We need energy. So if we need it, shouldn't we get it from America? Shouldn't we get it from American workers? That is better than getting it from Russia. The NPRA is a really important area of America's energy production in my State--the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. It has been that way for decades. So there is a moratorium on any more permits for energy production in the NPRA yesterday. I woke up to text messages from Alaskans saying: Senator, help us. My little company is going to go out of business. I have to lay off a bunch of workers. Workers who are doing what? Producing American energy. Since when was that bad, Mr. President? Since when was that bad? One more thing, they say: Well, it is only a 60-day moratorium. In Alaska, because we have the highest standards in the world on producing energy, exploring for energy, we only do exploration in the winter. It costs more for energy companies. Why do we do that? Because it is the high standards that we have--the highest standards of any place on the planet Earth. What do I mean by that? We build what are called ice roads and ice pads on the tundra when we explore and when we drill. That means we just do it in the winter. You build these ice roads and ice pads that cost a lot of money and when you move equipment across the tundra on ice, you drill for 3 months and when the winter is over, you move it off. The ice melts, and there is not one tiny impact. It is called zero-impact drilling and exploration. I used to be in charge of this in Alaska. I am very familiar with it. We have the highest standards on the planet. So if you put a 60-day moratorium on drilling on the NPRA, guess what. You lose the whole season. You lose the whole season. That is what the Biden Administration did yesterday. I literally have people back home in my great State calling frantically saying hundreds--if not thousands--of jobs are at risk. That was day two of the Biden Administration: Let's crush every single energy job in America. Why? I don't know why. I don't know why. Since when is it bad to produce energy for your fellow Americans? We need it. We have the highest standards in the world. These are great middle-class jobs. But on day one in this administration, they are attacking themen and women who produce energy for this great Nation--shameful. Now, it is not just me who is a little bit upset. You can tell I am a little bit upset. The Keystone pipeline was canceled again--again, no idea why they would do that. There is nothing about climate change. As a matter of fact, that pipeline was going to be all union jobs, and they had it developed and worked on in a way that was going to be emissions neutral. Here is the head of the Laborers' International Union of North America--LIUNA, the laborers. Terry O'Sullivan is a great American. I know him well. His father was a marine. He served in the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean war. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a statement by Terry O'Sullivan on behalf of the Laborers' International Union of North America | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS101 | null | 2,141 |
formal | middle class | null | racist | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I want to congratulate now-Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on his confirmation to be Secretary of Defense. I spoke yesterday about his confirmation, the two votes that had to happen. I had the honor of introducing this great American at his confirmation hearing at the Armed Services Committee. I served with him in the military many years ago. And I think he is going to be an important addition to President Biden's team. One of the things that we have been working on, over the last several years, is rebuilding our military after drastic cuts by the Obama-Biden administration. Hopefully, we are not going to see that again. One of the reasons I was strongly supporting now-Secretary Austin was because I believe--and I certainly hope this is a correct belief, and I have commitments from him--he won't agree with that, although I am sure some, unfortunately, in this body and others in the Biden administration are going to agree with drastic cuts to the military. It will hurt readiness. So one of the reasons that I think he is going to be a good Secretary is not just his exceptional character, humility, leadership but because he knows what will happen if there are dramatic cuts like there were in the second term of the Obama-Biden administration to our military. Not good. One of the things I had the opportunity to talk to him about--one of the things that has been a huge positive for America over the last decade, for so many reasons, is that we have become the world's energy superpower again--like we were, essentially, during World War II. What do I mean by that? Prior to the pandemic, we were the No. 1 producer of oil. Yes, people still need to use oil. I know some of my colleagues in this body don't believe that, but it is true; the No. 1 producer of natural gas, clean burning natural gas. We are starting to export it all around the world; No. 1 producer of renewables. So all of the above, America is the superpower of energy. This is good. It is great for the national security of our Nation, for a whole host of reasons. General Austin understands that--Secretary Austin understands that. It is great for jobs. In the 2008-2009 recession, the No. 1 sector of the economy that got us out of the great recession was the energy sector, in terms of GDP growth and jobs. It is great for the environment. Why do I say that? Some people tilt their heads. It is great for the environment because in America--certainly, in my State, Alaska--we have the highest standards on the environment of any place in the world by far. It is not even close. If you need energy, which you do, you should do it, produce it in the place that respects the environment the most--not Russia, not Saudi Arabia--America, Alaska. It is good for energy security. It is good for manufacturing low-cost natural gas throughout the country. Like I said, it is really good for jobs. These are really good jobs. Resource development jobs are really good jobs. They support working families and the middle class. Everybody knows that. That is a good thing that is happening in the United States of America. There are some fringe groups that don't like energy. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in the Senate don't like hydrocarbons. By the way, as we became the world's energy superpower, our greenhouse gas emissions declined probably more than any other industrialized economy in the world. Why? Because natural gas is clean-burning. So this is a win-win-win-win-win on so many fronts. Here is why I am speaking right now: Because it is all at risk. It is all at risk. The first few days of the new Biden Administration have seen an unprecedented assault on resource development and energy jobs, an attack on the men and women--working men and women with good wages--who produce really important resources for this great Nation and now for other countries because we export a lot of these resources. It is an assault on good energy jobs, good resource development jobs that have been the bedrock of millions of middle-class Americans for decades. Let me just give you an example, just in my State. Everybody knows about ANWR, right? This body moved in terms of legislation for leases. We did it the right way, with a law passed by the Senate and the House, signed by the President to move forward on leases. The first day on the job, the new President decides he is going to suspend everything with regard to ANWR. OK, that wasn't a surprise, to be honest, but, of course, it was a huge disappointment. I am not sure it is legal. Like I said, we did it the legal way. He is doing it the old-fashioned, ``Obama pen and phone'' way. There are probably a lot of questionable legalities there. That is one. We were expecting that. Here is the other one. We have another part of Alaska called the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, set aside by Congress for oil and gas development. It is not controversial. We have been doing it for decades. It was originally called the Naval Petroleum Reserve for America. This is not controversial. And we have a lot of energy projects in the NPRA that are ongoing. Heck, even the Obama-Biden administration allowed us to drill there because that is what Congress said for decades, and it is good for the country. We need energy. We need energy. So if we need it, shouldn't we get it from America? Shouldn't we get it from American workers? That is better than getting it from Russia. The NPRA is a really important area of America's energy production in my State--the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. It has been that way for decades. So there is a moratorium on any more permits for energy production in the NPRA yesterday. I woke up to text messages from Alaskans saying: Senator, help us. My little company is going to go out of business. I have to lay off a bunch of workers. Workers who are doing what? Producing American energy. Since when was that bad, Mr. President? Since when was that bad? One more thing, they say: Well, it is only a 60-day moratorium. In Alaska, because we have the highest standards in the world on producing energy, exploring for energy, we only do exploration in the winter. It costs more for energy companies. Why do we do that? Because it is the high standards that we have--the highest standards of any place on the planet Earth. What do I mean by that? We build what are called ice roads and ice pads on the tundra when we explore and when we drill. That means we just do it in the winter. You build these ice roads and ice pads that cost a lot of money and when you move equipment across the tundra on ice, you drill for 3 months and when the winter is over, you move it off. The ice melts, and there is not one tiny impact. It is called zero-impact drilling and exploration. I used to be in charge of this in Alaska. I am very familiar with it. We have the highest standards on the planet. So if you put a 60-day moratorium on drilling on the NPRA, guess what. You lose the whole season. You lose the whole season. That is what the Biden Administration did yesterday. I literally have people back home in my great State calling frantically saying hundreds--if not thousands--of jobs are at risk. That was day two of the Biden Administration: Let's crush every single energy job in America. Why? I don't know why. I don't know why. Since when is it bad to produce energy for your fellow Americans? We need it. We have the highest standards in the world. These are great middle-class jobs. But on day one in this administration, they are attacking themen and women who produce energy for this great Nation--shameful. Now, it is not just me who is a little bit upset. You can tell I am a little bit upset. The Keystone pipeline was canceled again--again, no idea why they would do that. There is nothing about climate change. As a matter of fact, that pipeline was going to be all union jobs, and they had it developed and worked on in a way that was going to be emissions neutral. Here is the head of the Laborers' International Union of North America--LIUNA, the laborers. Terry O'Sullivan is a great American. I know him well. His father was a marine. He served in the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean war. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a statement by Terry O'Sullivan on behalf of the Laborers' International Union of North America | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS101 | null | 2,142 |
formal | middle-class Americans | null | racist | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I want to congratulate now-Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on his confirmation to be Secretary of Defense. I spoke yesterday about his confirmation, the two votes that had to happen. I had the honor of introducing this great American at his confirmation hearing at the Armed Services Committee. I served with him in the military many years ago. And I think he is going to be an important addition to President Biden's team. One of the things that we have been working on, over the last several years, is rebuilding our military after drastic cuts by the Obama-Biden administration. Hopefully, we are not going to see that again. One of the reasons I was strongly supporting now-Secretary Austin was because I believe--and I certainly hope this is a correct belief, and I have commitments from him--he won't agree with that, although I am sure some, unfortunately, in this body and others in the Biden administration are going to agree with drastic cuts to the military. It will hurt readiness. So one of the reasons that I think he is going to be a good Secretary is not just his exceptional character, humility, leadership but because he knows what will happen if there are dramatic cuts like there were in the second term of the Obama-Biden administration to our military. Not good. One of the things I had the opportunity to talk to him about--one of the things that has been a huge positive for America over the last decade, for so many reasons, is that we have become the world's energy superpower again--like we were, essentially, during World War II. What do I mean by that? Prior to the pandemic, we were the No. 1 producer of oil. Yes, people still need to use oil. I know some of my colleagues in this body don't believe that, but it is true; the No. 1 producer of natural gas, clean burning natural gas. We are starting to export it all around the world; No. 1 producer of renewables. So all of the above, America is the superpower of energy. This is good. It is great for the national security of our Nation, for a whole host of reasons. General Austin understands that--Secretary Austin understands that. It is great for jobs. In the 2008-2009 recession, the No. 1 sector of the economy that got us out of the great recession was the energy sector, in terms of GDP growth and jobs. It is great for the environment. Why do I say that? Some people tilt their heads. It is great for the environment because in America--certainly, in my State, Alaska--we have the highest standards on the environment of any place in the world by far. It is not even close. If you need energy, which you do, you should do it, produce it in the place that respects the environment the most--not Russia, not Saudi Arabia--America, Alaska. It is good for energy security. It is good for manufacturing low-cost natural gas throughout the country. Like I said, it is really good for jobs. These are really good jobs. Resource development jobs are really good jobs. They support working families and the middle class. Everybody knows that. That is a good thing that is happening in the United States of America. There are some fringe groups that don't like energy. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in the Senate don't like hydrocarbons. By the way, as we became the world's energy superpower, our greenhouse gas emissions declined probably more than any other industrialized economy in the world. Why? Because natural gas is clean-burning. So this is a win-win-win-win-win on so many fronts. Here is why I am speaking right now: Because it is all at risk. It is all at risk. The first few days of the new Biden Administration have seen an unprecedented assault on resource development and energy jobs, an attack on the men and women--working men and women with good wages--who produce really important resources for this great Nation and now for other countries because we export a lot of these resources. It is an assault on good energy jobs, good resource development jobs that have been the bedrock of millions of middle-class Americans for decades. Let me just give you an example, just in my State. Everybody knows about ANWR, right? This body moved in terms of legislation for leases. We did it the right way, with a law passed by the Senate and the House, signed by the President to move forward on leases. The first day on the job, the new President decides he is going to suspend everything with regard to ANWR. OK, that wasn't a surprise, to be honest, but, of course, it was a huge disappointment. I am not sure it is legal. Like I said, we did it the legal way. He is doing it the old-fashioned, ``Obama pen and phone'' way. There are probably a lot of questionable legalities there. That is one. We were expecting that. Here is the other one. We have another part of Alaska called the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, set aside by Congress for oil and gas development. It is not controversial. We have been doing it for decades. It was originally called the Naval Petroleum Reserve for America. This is not controversial. And we have a lot of energy projects in the NPRA that are ongoing. Heck, even the Obama-Biden administration allowed us to drill there because that is what Congress said for decades, and it is good for the country. We need energy. We need energy. So if we need it, shouldn't we get it from America? Shouldn't we get it from American workers? That is better than getting it from Russia. The NPRA is a really important area of America's energy production in my State--the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. It has been that way for decades. So there is a moratorium on any more permits for energy production in the NPRA yesterday. I woke up to text messages from Alaskans saying: Senator, help us. My little company is going to go out of business. I have to lay off a bunch of workers. Workers who are doing what? Producing American energy. Since when was that bad, Mr. President? Since when was that bad? One more thing, they say: Well, it is only a 60-day moratorium. In Alaska, because we have the highest standards in the world on producing energy, exploring for energy, we only do exploration in the winter. It costs more for energy companies. Why do we do that? Because it is the high standards that we have--the highest standards of any place on the planet Earth. What do I mean by that? We build what are called ice roads and ice pads on the tundra when we explore and when we drill. That means we just do it in the winter. You build these ice roads and ice pads that cost a lot of money and when you move equipment across the tundra on ice, you drill for 3 months and when the winter is over, you move it off. The ice melts, and there is not one tiny impact. It is called zero-impact drilling and exploration. I used to be in charge of this in Alaska. I am very familiar with it. We have the highest standards on the planet. So if you put a 60-day moratorium on drilling on the NPRA, guess what. You lose the whole season. You lose the whole season. That is what the Biden Administration did yesterday. I literally have people back home in my great State calling frantically saying hundreds--if not thousands--of jobs are at risk. That was day two of the Biden Administration: Let's crush every single energy job in America. Why? I don't know why. I don't know why. Since when is it bad to produce energy for your fellow Americans? We need it. We have the highest standards in the world. These are great middle-class jobs. But on day one in this administration, they are attacking themen and women who produce energy for this great Nation--shameful. Now, it is not just me who is a little bit upset. You can tell I am a little bit upset. The Keystone pipeline was canceled again--again, no idea why they would do that. There is nothing about climate change. As a matter of fact, that pipeline was going to be all union jobs, and they had it developed and worked on in a way that was going to be emissions neutral. Here is the head of the Laborers' International Union of North America--LIUNA, the laborers. Terry O'Sullivan is a great American. I know him well. His father was a marine. He served in the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean war. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a statement by Terry O'Sullivan on behalf of the Laborers' International Union of North America | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS101 | null | 2,143 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I want to congratulate now-Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on his confirmation to be Secretary of Defense. I spoke yesterday about his confirmation, the two votes that had to happen. I had the honor of introducing this great American at his confirmation hearing at the Armed Services Committee. I served with him in the military many years ago. And I think he is going to be an important addition to President Biden's team. One of the things that we have been working on, over the last several years, is rebuilding our military after drastic cuts by the Obama-Biden administration. Hopefully, we are not going to see that again. One of the reasons I was strongly supporting now-Secretary Austin was because I believe--and I certainly hope this is a correct belief, and I have commitments from him--he won't agree with that, although I am sure some, unfortunately, in this body and others in the Biden administration are going to agree with drastic cuts to the military. It will hurt readiness. So one of the reasons that I think he is going to be a good Secretary is not just his exceptional character, humility, leadership but because he knows what will happen if there are dramatic cuts like there were in the second term of the Obama-Biden administration to our military. Not good. One of the things I had the opportunity to talk to him about--one of the things that has been a huge positive for America over the last decade, for so many reasons, is that we have become the world's energy superpower again--like we were, essentially, during World War II. What do I mean by that? Prior to the pandemic, we were the No. 1 producer of oil. Yes, people still need to use oil. I know some of my colleagues in this body don't believe that, but it is true; the No. 1 producer of natural gas, clean burning natural gas. We are starting to export it all around the world; No. 1 producer of renewables. So all of the above, America is the superpower of energy. This is good. It is great for the national security of our Nation, for a whole host of reasons. General Austin understands that--Secretary Austin understands that. It is great for jobs. In the 2008-2009 recession, the No. 1 sector of the economy that got us out of the great recession was the energy sector, in terms of GDP growth and jobs. It is great for the environment. Why do I say that? Some people tilt their heads. It is great for the environment because in America--certainly, in my State, Alaska--we have the highest standards on the environment of any place in the world by far. It is not even close. If you need energy, which you do, you should do it, produce it in the place that respects the environment the most--not Russia, not Saudi Arabia--America, Alaska. It is good for energy security. It is good for manufacturing low-cost natural gas throughout the country. Like I said, it is really good for jobs. These are really good jobs. Resource development jobs are really good jobs. They support working families and the middle class. Everybody knows that. That is a good thing that is happening in the United States of America. There are some fringe groups that don't like energy. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in the Senate don't like hydrocarbons. By the way, as we became the world's energy superpower, our greenhouse gas emissions declined probably more than any other industrialized economy in the world. Why? Because natural gas is clean-burning. So this is a win-win-win-win-win on so many fronts. Here is why I am speaking right now: Because it is all at risk. It is all at risk. The first few days of the new Biden Administration have seen an unprecedented assault on resource development and energy jobs, an attack on the men and women--working men and women with good wages--who produce really important resources for this great Nation and now for other countries because we export a lot of these resources. It is an assault on good energy jobs, good resource development jobs that have been the bedrock of millions of middle-class Americans for decades. Let me just give you an example, just in my State. Everybody knows about ANWR, right? This body moved in terms of legislation for leases. We did it the right way, with a law passed by the Senate and the House, signed by the President to move forward on leases. The first day on the job, the new President decides he is going to suspend everything with regard to ANWR. OK, that wasn't a surprise, to be honest, but, of course, it was a huge disappointment. I am not sure it is legal. Like I said, we did it the legal way. He is doing it the old-fashioned, ``Obama pen and phone'' way. There are probably a lot of questionable legalities there. That is one. We were expecting that. Here is the other one. We have another part of Alaska called the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, set aside by Congress for oil and gas development. It is not controversial. We have been doing it for decades. It was originally called the Naval Petroleum Reserve for America. This is not controversial. And we have a lot of energy projects in the NPRA that are ongoing. Heck, even the Obama-Biden administration allowed us to drill there because that is what Congress said for decades, and it is good for the country. We need energy. We need energy. So if we need it, shouldn't we get it from America? Shouldn't we get it from American workers? That is better than getting it from Russia. The NPRA is a really important area of America's energy production in my State--the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. It has been that way for decades. So there is a moratorium on any more permits for energy production in the NPRA yesterday. I woke up to text messages from Alaskans saying: Senator, help us. My little company is going to go out of business. I have to lay off a bunch of workers. Workers who are doing what? Producing American energy. Since when was that bad, Mr. President? Since when was that bad? One more thing, they say: Well, it is only a 60-day moratorium. In Alaska, because we have the highest standards in the world on producing energy, exploring for energy, we only do exploration in the winter. It costs more for energy companies. Why do we do that? Because it is the high standards that we have--the highest standards of any place on the planet Earth. What do I mean by that? We build what are called ice roads and ice pads on the tundra when we explore and when we drill. That means we just do it in the winter. You build these ice roads and ice pads that cost a lot of money and when you move equipment across the tundra on ice, you drill for 3 months and when the winter is over, you move it off. The ice melts, and there is not one tiny impact. It is called zero-impact drilling and exploration. I used to be in charge of this in Alaska. I am very familiar with it. We have the highest standards on the planet. So if you put a 60-day moratorium on drilling on the NPRA, guess what. You lose the whole season. You lose the whole season. That is what the Biden Administration did yesterday. I literally have people back home in my great State calling frantically saying hundreds--if not thousands--of jobs are at risk. That was day two of the Biden Administration: Let's crush every single energy job in America. Why? I don't know why. I don't know why. Since when is it bad to produce energy for your fellow Americans? We need it. We have the highest standards in the world. These are great middle-class jobs. But on day one in this administration, they are attacking themen and women who produce energy for this great Nation--shameful. Now, it is not just me who is a little bit upset. You can tell I am a little bit upset. The Keystone pipeline was canceled again--again, no idea why they would do that. There is nothing about climate change. As a matter of fact, that pipeline was going to be all union jobs, and they had it developed and worked on in a way that was going to be emissions neutral. Here is the head of the Laborers' International Union of North America--LIUNA, the laborers. Terry O'Sullivan is a great American. I know him well. His father was a marine. He served in the Chosin Reservoir during the Korean war. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a statement by Terry O'Sullivan on behalf of the Laborers' International Union of North America | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS101 | null | 2,144 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. BOOKER (for himself and Mr. Menendez) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary: S. Res. 14 Whereas, every year in the United States, approximately 700 women die as a result of complications related to pregnancy and childbirth; Whereas the pregnancy-related mortality ratio, defined as the number of pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 live births, more than doubled between 1987 and 2017; Whereas the United States is the only developed country whose maternal mortality rate has increased over the last several decades; Whereas, of all pregnancy-related deaths between 2011 and 2016-- (1) nearly 32 percent occurred during pregnancy; (2) about 35 percent occurred during childbirth or the week after childbirth; and (3) 33 percent occurred between 1 week and 1 year postpartum; Whereas more than 60 percent of maternal deaths in the United States are preventable; Whereas, in 2014 alone, 50,000 women suffered from a ``near miss'' or severe maternal morbidity, which includes potentially life-threatening complications that arise from labor and childbirth; Whereas around 17 percent of women who gave birth in a hospital in the United States reported experiencing 1 or more types of mistreatment, such as-- (1) loss of autonomy; (2) being shouted at, scolded, or threatened; and (3) being ignored or refused or receiving no response to requests for help; Whereas certain social determinants of health, including bias and racism, have a negative impact on maternal health outcomes; Whereas significant disparities in maternal health exist, including that-- (1) Black women are more than 3 times as likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause as are White women; (2) American Indian and Alaska Native women are more than twice as likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause as are White women; (3) Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women with at least some college education are more likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause than are women of all other racial and ethnic backgrounds with less than a high school diploma; (4) Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women are about twice as likely to suffer from severe maternal morbidity as are White women; (5) women who live in rural areas have a greater likelihood of severe maternal morbidity and mortality compared to women who live in urban areas; (6) less than \1/2\ of rural counties have a hospital with obstetric services; (7) counties with more Black and Hispanic residents and lower median incomes are less likely to have access to hospital obstetric services; (8) more than 50 percent of women who live in a rural area must travel more than 30 minutes to access hospital obstetric services, compared to 7 percent of women who live in urban areas; and (9) American Indian and Alaska Native women living in rural communities are twice as likely as their White counterparts to report receiving late or no prenatal care; Whereas pregnant women may be at increased risk for severe outcomes associated with COVID-19, as-- (1) pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are more likely to be admitted to an intensive care unit, receive invasive ventilation, and receive ECMO treatment, compared to nonpregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19; (2) pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are at a 70- percent increased risk for death compared to nonpregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19; and (3) pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at risk for preterm delivery; Whereas more than 40 States have designated committees to review maternal deaths; Whereas State and local maternal mortality review committees are positioned to comprehensively assess maternal deaths and identify opportunities for prevention; Whereas more than 30 States are participating in the Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health, which promotes consistent and safe maternity care to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality; Whereas community-based maternal health care models, including midwifery childbirth services, doula support services, community and perinatal health worker services, and group prenatal care, in collaboration with culturally competent physician care, show great promise in improving maternal health outcomes and reducing disparities in maternal health outcomes; Whereas many organizations have implemented initiatives to educate patients and providers about-- (1) all causes of, contributing factors to, and disparities in maternal mortality; (2) the prevention of pregnancy-related deaths; and (3) the importance of listening to and empowering all women to report pregnancy-related medical issues; and Whereas several States, communities, and organizations recognize January 23 as ``Maternal Health Awareness Day'' to raise awareness about maternal health and promote maternal safety: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates January 23, 2021, as ``Maternal Health Awareness Day''; (2) supports the goals and ideals of Maternal Health Awareness Day, including-- (A) raising public awareness about maternal mortality, maternal morbidity, and disparities in maternal health outcomes; and (B) encouraging the Federal Government, States, territories, Tribes, local communities, public health organizations, physicians, health care providers, and others to take action to reduce adverse maternal health outcomes and improve maternal safety; (3) promotes initiatives-- (A) to address and eliminate disparities in maternal health outcomes; and (B) to ensure respectful and equitable maternity care practices; (4) honors those who have passed away as a result of pregnancy-related causes; and (5) supports and recognizes the need for further investments in efforts to improve maternal health, eliminate disparities in maternal health outcomes, and promote respectful and equitable maternity care practices. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS107 | null | 2,145 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. BOOKER (for himself and Mr. Menendez) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary: S. Res. 14 Whereas, every year in the United States, approximately 700 women die as a result of complications related to pregnancy and childbirth; Whereas the pregnancy-related mortality ratio, defined as the number of pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 live births, more than doubled between 1987 and 2017; Whereas the United States is the only developed country whose maternal mortality rate has increased over the last several decades; Whereas, of all pregnancy-related deaths between 2011 and 2016-- (1) nearly 32 percent occurred during pregnancy; (2) about 35 percent occurred during childbirth or the week after childbirth; and (3) 33 percent occurred between 1 week and 1 year postpartum; Whereas more than 60 percent of maternal deaths in the United States are preventable; Whereas, in 2014 alone, 50,000 women suffered from a ``near miss'' or severe maternal morbidity, which includes potentially life-threatening complications that arise from labor and childbirth; Whereas around 17 percent of women who gave birth in a hospital in the United States reported experiencing 1 or more types of mistreatment, such as-- (1) loss of autonomy; (2) being shouted at, scolded, or threatened; and (3) being ignored or refused or receiving no response to requests for help; Whereas certain social determinants of health, including bias and racism, have a negative impact on maternal health outcomes; Whereas significant disparities in maternal health exist, including that-- (1) Black women are more than 3 times as likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause as are White women; (2) American Indian and Alaska Native women are more than twice as likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause as are White women; (3) Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women with at least some college education are more likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause than are women of all other racial and ethnic backgrounds with less than a high school diploma; (4) Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women are about twice as likely to suffer from severe maternal morbidity as are White women; (5) women who live in rural areas have a greater likelihood of severe maternal morbidity and mortality compared to women who live in urban areas; (6) less than \1/2\ of rural counties have a hospital with obstetric services; (7) counties with more Black and Hispanic residents and lower median incomes are less likely to have access to hospital obstetric services; (8) more than 50 percent of women who live in a rural area must travel more than 30 minutes to access hospital obstetric services, compared to 7 percent of women who live in urban areas; and (9) American Indian and Alaska Native women living in rural communities are twice as likely as their White counterparts to report receiving late or no prenatal care; Whereas pregnant women may be at increased risk for severe outcomes associated with COVID-19, as-- (1) pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are more likely to be admitted to an intensive care unit, receive invasive ventilation, and receive ECMO treatment, compared to nonpregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19; (2) pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are at a 70- percent increased risk for death compared to nonpregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19; and (3) pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at risk for preterm delivery; Whereas more than 40 States have designated committees to review maternal deaths; Whereas State and local maternal mortality review committees are positioned to comprehensively assess maternal deaths and identify opportunities for prevention; Whereas more than 30 States are participating in the Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health, which promotes consistent and safe maternity care to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality; Whereas community-based maternal health care models, including midwifery childbirth services, doula support services, community and perinatal health worker services, and group prenatal care, in collaboration with culturally competent physician care, show great promise in improving maternal health outcomes and reducing disparities in maternal health outcomes; Whereas many organizations have implemented initiatives to educate patients and providers about-- (1) all causes of, contributing factors to, and disparities in maternal mortality; (2) the prevention of pregnancy-related deaths; and (3) the importance of listening to and empowering all women to report pregnancy-related medical issues; and Whereas several States, communities, and organizations recognize January 23 as ``Maternal Health Awareness Day'' to raise awareness about maternal health and promote maternal safety: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates January 23, 2021, as ``Maternal Health Awareness Day''; (2) supports the goals and ideals of Maternal Health Awareness Day, including-- (A) raising public awareness about maternal mortality, maternal morbidity, and disparities in maternal health outcomes; and (B) encouraging the Federal Government, States, territories, Tribes, local communities, public health organizations, physicians, health care providers, and others to take action to reduce adverse maternal health outcomes and improve maternal safety; (3) promotes initiatives-- (A) to address and eliminate disparities in maternal health outcomes; and (B) to ensure respectful and equitable maternity care practices; (4) honors those who have passed away as a result of pregnancy-related causes; and (5) supports and recognizes the need for further investments in efforts to improve maternal health, eliminate disparities in maternal health outcomes, and promote respectful and equitable maternity care practices. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS107 | null | 2,146 |
formal | urban | null | racist | Mr. BOOKER (for himself and Mr. Menendez) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary: S. Res. 14 Whereas, every year in the United States, approximately 700 women die as a result of complications related to pregnancy and childbirth; Whereas the pregnancy-related mortality ratio, defined as the number of pregnancy-related deaths per 100,000 live births, more than doubled between 1987 and 2017; Whereas the United States is the only developed country whose maternal mortality rate has increased over the last several decades; Whereas, of all pregnancy-related deaths between 2011 and 2016-- (1) nearly 32 percent occurred during pregnancy; (2) about 35 percent occurred during childbirth or the week after childbirth; and (3) 33 percent occurred between 1 week and 1 year postpartum; Whereas more than 60 percent of maternal deaths in the United States are preventable; Whereas, in 2014 alone, 50,000 women suffered from a ``near miss'' or severe maternal morbidity, which includes potentially life-threatening complications that arise from labor and childbirth; Whereas around 17 percent of women who gave birth in a hospital in the United States reported experiencing 1 or more types of mistreatment, such as-- (1) loss of autonomy; (2) being shouted at, scolded, or threatened; and (3) being ignored or refused or receiving no response to requests for help; Whereas certain social determinants of health, including bias and racism, have a negative impact on maternal health outcomes; Whereas significant disparities in maternal health exist, including that-- (1) Black women are more than 3 times as likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause as are White women; (2) American Indian and Alaska Native women are more than twice as likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause as are White women; (3) Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women with at least some college education are more likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause than are women of all other racial and ethnic backgrounds with less than a high school diploma; (4) Black, American Indian, and Alaska Native women are about twice as likely to suffer from severe maternal morbidity as are White women; (5) women who live in rural areas have a greater likelihood of severe maternal morbidity and mortality compared to women who live in urban areas; (6) less than \1/2\ of rural counties have a hospital with obstetric services; (7) counties with more Black and Hispanic residents and lower median incomes are less likely to have access to hospital obstetric services; (8) more than 50 percent of women who live in a rural area must travel more than 30 minutes to access hospital obstetric services, compared to 7 percent of women who live in urban areas; and (9) American Indian and Alaska Native women living in rural communities are twice as likely as their White counterparts to report receiving late or no prenatal care; Whereas pregnant women may be at increased risk for severe outcomes associated with COVID-19, as-- (1) pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are more likely to be admitted to an intensive care unit, receive invasive ventilation, and receive ECMO treatment, compared to nonpregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19; (2) pregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19 are at a 70- percent increased risk for death compared to nonpregnant women with symptomatic COVID-19; and (3) pregnant women with COVID-19 may be at risk for preterm delivery; Whereas more than 40 States have designated committees to review maternal deaths; Whereas State and local maternal mortality review committees are positioned to comprehensively assess maternal deaths and identify opportunities for prevention; Whereas more than 30 States are participating in the Alliance for Innovation on Maternal Health, which promotes consistent and safe maternity care to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality; Whereas community-based maternal health care models, including midwifery childbirth services, doula support services, community and perinatal health worker services, and group prenatal care, in collaboration with culturally competent physician care, show great promise in improving maternal health outcomes and reducing disparities in maternal health outcomes; Whereas many organizations have implemented initiatives to educate patients and providers about-- (1) all causes of, contributing factors to, and disparities in maternal mortality; (2) the prevention of pregnancy-related deaths; and (3) the importance of listening to and empowering all women to report pregnancy-related medical issues; and Whereas several States, communities, and organizations recognize January 23 as ``Maternal Health Awareness Day'' to raise awareness about maternal health and promote maternal safety: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates January 23, 2021, as ``Maternal Health Awareness Day''; (2) supports the goals and ideals of Maternal Health Awareness Day, including-- (A) raising public awareness about maternal mortality, maternal morbidity, and disparities in maternal health outcomes; and (B) encouraging the Federal Government, States, territories, Tribes, local communities, public health organizations, physicians, health care providers, and others to take action to reduce adverse maternal health outcomes and improve maternal safety; (3) promotes initiatives-- (A) to address and eliminate disparities in maternal health outcomes; and (B) to ensure respectful and equitable maternity care practices; (4) honors those who have passed away as a result of pregnancy-related causes; and (5) supports and recognizes the need for further investments in efforts to improve maternal health, eliminate disparities in maternal health outcomes, and promote respectful and equitable maternity care practices. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS107 | null | 2,147 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that upon the conclusion of morning business on January 25, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nomination: Executive Calendar No. 2, the nomination of Janet Yellen to be the Secretary of the Treasury; further, that the time until 5:30 be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, and that at 5:30 the Senate vote without intervening action or debate on the nomination; that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS111 | null | 2,148 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday evening, we learned that some of the National Guard forces who were helping protect the Capitol Complex were being made to rest in parking garages between their shifts. I don't think a single Senator feels that was acceptable. I am glad the situation was resolved, and I hope we learn exactly what happened. In that regard, I want to thank all the National Guard, including more than 300 Kentucky Guardsmen, and local and Federal law enforcement who helped supplement our very own Capitol Police in the wake of January 6. Your Congress and your country appreciate all you have done to secure the Capitol and the inauguration. Later today, I will have the honor of meeting a number of my Kentuckians who have been helping out here at the Capitol. It is going to be the highlight of my day. In the near future, Congress needs to smartly transition toward a more sustainable security presence. Keeping the Capitol safe cannot and will not require huge numbers of uniformed troops and vast systems of emergency fencing to remain in place forever. With the inauguration behind us, we should find the right middle ground between the unacceptable lapses 3 weeks ago and the extraordinary short-term measures that have been put in place since that time. In the meantime, we need to make darn sure that we look after the men and women who look after us. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS96-2 | null | 2,149 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. McCONNELL. Finally, Mr. President, on one final matter regarding nominees, we are considering President Biden's nominees to key Cabinet posts. On Wednesday, Admiral Haines was confirmed as Director of National Intelligence on a big bipartisan vote, including my own. We hope to be able to consider Tony Blinken to be the Secretary of State early next week. Today, we are considering GEN Lloyd Austin, President Biden's nominee to serve as Secretary of Defense. I voted to approve the waiver that would allow him to serve in this post yesterday, notwithstanding the 7-year cooling-off period after military service, and I will be voting in favor of his confirmation. I am voting yes because the nominee is clearly qualified and because Presidents should get real latitude to fill their teams with qualified and mainstream people of their choosing. At the same time, the Senate should pause and reflect on the fact that we will have begun two consecutive Presidential administrations by issuing a waiver to a four-star general and former CENTCOM commander to lead the Pentagon. The Armed Services Committee held a hearing last week to examine the waiver and the current state of civil-military relations at the Pentagon. I expect the committee will continue to pay close attention to this important issue in the months ahead and will investigate steps that Congress can take to help restore balance over at the Pentagon. The law that we keep waiving actually exists for a good reason. Civilian control of the military is a fundamental principle of our Republic. We emphatically do not want high-ranking military service to become a tacit prerequisite for a civilian leadership post over at the Department of Defense. It is not just about a simplistic fear that the military will end up running itself. To the contrary, many experts worry that military leaders' appropriate fixation on being nonpolitical may not prepare them for the job, to forcefully fight for our armed services amid the political rough-and-tumble in the executive branch and here in Congress. To put it another way, they are taught from the beginning to stay out of politics entirely. But we do want a Secretary of Defense who is willing to engage in the issue-based discussions that we have related to the Department. Nevertheless, I will vote today to confirm a clear patriot with an impressive career, but I will cast that vote with the understanding that our new Secretary of Defense specifically commits to balancing civil-military relations, empowering civilian leaders at the Pentagon, and playing an active role in the inherently political budget process to get our forces what they need. Our intensifying competition with China, Russia, and all the other threats we face demand nothing less. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS97 | null | 2,150 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, a few minutes ago, Chair Janet Yellen was approved by the Senate Finance Committee to be Secretary of the Treasury by an extraordinary 26-to-0 vote. I have seen times around here in the Senate where you come away convinced you couldn't get 26 to 0 among Senators to buy a soda. I want to thank Senators Grassley and Crapo for working very closely with me and Senate Democrats to achieve this remarkable vote this morning. The fact is, Janet Yellen has been confirmed by this body four times. She really belongs in the Senate confirmation hall of fame, and the reason that she has been confirmed all of these times is because of what we saw at her confirmation hearing on Tuesday. She did a superb job. After the hearing, she responded in a substantive way to hundreds of questions that came from colleagues and has made a real commitment to transparency. Now, I know that Senators are working on a variety of issues now, but I would like to say that I think, given the urgency of the economic challenge our country faces, in a truly perilous economic time, I would very much like to work with all of my colleagues, particularly Senators Crapo and Grassley, to find a way to, today, bring up Chair Yellen for confirmation to be our Secretary of the Treasury. I want to say I very much appreciate the conciliatory way this was discussed today, and I really hope the Senate can vote on her nomination today. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WYDEN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS99-2 | null | 2,151 |
formal | bankers | null | antisemitic | Mr. COTTON. Madam President, on Wednesday, just moments after Joe Biden took office, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs sanctioned 28 members of the outgoing administration, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien, and UN Ambassador Kelly Craft. According to Chinese State media, these Trump administration officials were guilty of ``crazy moves which gravely interfered in China's internal affairs.'' Those ``crazy moves'' include presumably condemning the Chinese Communist Party's genocidal campaign against religious minorities in Xinjiang Province or its atheistic crackdown on Chinese Christians. In addition to interfering, these officials allegedly offended the Chinese people and seriously disrupted U.S.-China relations. I guess that refers to some, such as Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, who traveled to Taiwan. Under the new sanctions, these officials are now barred from entering China, but more important and more ominous, institutions associated with them are also restricted from doing business with China. Now, it is tempting to laugh off these sanctions, as I did last summer when China sanctioned me. You know you won't have a second honeymoon in Wuhan or you will have to vacation in a nongenocidal country. But these sanctions are no laughing matter. They are not bluster. They are another step in China's long-term campaign to coerce Americans at every level of government and business. They are a direct attack on the independence of U.S. policy toward China and an attempt to blackmail the Biden administration with personal financial ruin in the future if they dare to stand up to the Chinese Communist Party. Some may start to think about the potential damage to their future, and they may start to sweat a little bit. Now, you may say: Good. I am glad that former government officials can't cash in on their service and go to influence-peddling firms like WestExec or Albright Stonebridge and sell access to the Chinese. I might even agree with that point, but consider a few other hypotheticals. The Chinese State media singled out book publishers as just one example of who could pay the price. Many public officials like to write memoirs, and these memoirs often add a lot to our understanding of current events, but Chinese State media singled out book publishers as an example of companies that would be banned from China if they associated with sanctioned individuals. In fact, China has already used American books as pawns in the trade war with the United States. So will major publishing houses really risk losing access to the Chinese market for all their other titles to strike a book deal with, say, a former Biden Cabinet official who was tough on China and ended up getting sanctioned? It is unclear but, I would say, doubtful. Other public officials practice at big law firms. And I know that we all make jokes about lawyers, but it is an honorable profession. There is nothing wrong with practicing at a big law firm, and they may plan to return to their firms after the administration is over. A lot of those firms have clients with close ties to China. And even if a former public official has no client with any business in China, will those law firms really take back their old employees if it means potentially losing valuable clients who are afraid of angering the Chinese Communist Party? Again, I would say it is unclear but, perhaps, doubtful. Once you consider these hypotheticals and others that don't involve influence peddling or anything untoward, you can begin to see the insidious consequences of these new sanctions. Beijing wants to scare the Biden administration into doing its bidding, and they want to scare U.S. businesses into blacklisting any official who irritates the Chinese Communist Party. Therefore, I call on the Biden administration to treat these sanctions as a day-one assault on the independence of its foreign policy by denouncing this intimidation in the strongest possible terms. But as the Chinese Communist Party is determined to prove, actions speak louder than words, so I also call upon President Biden to act reciprocally by sanctioning Chinese officials who are responsible for this blackmail campaign against his administration. Those officials shouldn't be able to ferret away their fortunes in the U.S. banking system the way so many corrupt Chinese oligarchs do, nor shouldtheir princeling children get degrees from our top universities or internships at prestigious Washington think tanks. President Biden should also refuse to nominate for senior positions individuals who are professionally or financially entangled with China, who could be compromised by the mere threat of sanctions. Finally, President Biden should determine whether Chinese Ambassador Cui Tiankai was involved in these sanctions, and if so, he should be expelled immediately for this egregious effort to subvert American foreign policy. And that is just for the short term. America must also begin to disentangle our economy from China, to decouple our economies. The Chinese Communist Party sanctions pose a threat only because American society is so deeply compromised by Chinese influence. American corporations, the big banks, think tanks, universities, film studios, even our sports leagues--even LeBron James--are all addicted to Chinese cash. They are all part of a new China lobby that is deeply invested in the status quo and, thus, hostile to any efforts to redefine U.S.-China relations in America's interest. This lobby makes their money in China. They make their products in China. They have made their bed in China, and now they are all vulnerable to pressure from the Chinese Government. America hasn't been in such a bind since our earliest days, when our young Republic was encircled by hostile imperial powers. Even during the Cold War, America had few entanglements of the sort we face today. The United States had very little trade with the Russians. We competed in separate lanes, like runners in a race. The new Cold War with China isn't so orderly. Communist China is wealthier and has more people than did Soviet Russia, and our economies have become deeply entangled. These new sanctions are just the latest example of how that entanglement threatens our security and prosperity. Here is how the United States can beat China in this strategic competition. First, the United States should impose restrictions on inbound and outbound investment with China. Wall Street has financed China's industrial and technological development for more than four decades and has become compromised for the bargain. That has to end. Second, the United States should move supply chains for critical goods, such as semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, out of China and back to American soil. China, today, may be the so-called factory of the world, but it was corporate America, with its Army of bankers and lawyers and consultants, who built that factory. That has got to end as well. Third, the United States must restrict the flow of knowledge and advanced technology between our country and China. American colleges, universities, and research laboratories are the finest in the world, but they allow Chinese nationalists to participate, even in cutting-edge research with military applications. This research has an alarming tendency to end up in China, in the weapons fielded by the People's Liberation Army against our own troops. That information pipeline needs to be shut off, and many of those Chinese nationalists need to go. None of these steps will be easy, but the Chinese Communist Party's punitive sanctions against Trump administration officials and his blackmail campaign against the Biden administration officials demonstrate that decoupling our economies is both necessary and urgent. The Communists in Beijing have lulled too many Americans into complacency and dependency over the course of many years. They now intend to blackmail even our government into inaction. Our intention must be different. The United States must break free of the Chinese Communist's suffocating grasp, fight back, and win. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. COTTON | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS99-3 | null | 2,152 |
formal | take back | null | white supremacist | Mr. COTTON. Madam President, on Wednesday, just moments after Joe Biden took office, China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs sanctioned 28 members of the outgoing administration, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien, and UN Ambassador Kelly Craft. According to Chinese State media, these Trump administration officials were guilty of ``crazy moves which gravely interfered in China's internal affairs.'' Those ``crazy moves'' include presumably condemning the Chinese Communist Party's genocidal campaign against religious minorities in Xinjiang Province or its atheistic crackdown on Chinese Christians. In addition to interfering, these officials allegedly offended the Chinese people and seriously disrupted U.S.-China relations. I guess that refers to some, such as Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, who traveled to Taiwan. Under the new sanctions, these officials are now barred from entering China, but more important and more ominous, institutions associated with them are also restricted from doing business with China. Now, it is tempting to laugh off these sanctions, as I did last summer when China sanctioned me. You know you won't have a second honeymoon in Wuhan or you will have to vacation in a nongenocidal country. But these sanctions are no laughing matter. They are not bluster. They are another step in China's long-term campaign to coerce Americans at every level of government and business. They are a direct attack on the independence of U.S. policy toward China and an attempt to blackmail the Biden administration with personal financial ruin in the future if they dare to stand up to the Chinese Communist Party. Some may start to think about the potential damage to their future, and they may start to sweat a little bit. Now, you may say: Good. I am glad that former government officials can't cash in on their service and go to influence-peddling firms like WestExec or Albright Stonebridge and sell access to the Chinese. I might even agree with that point, but consider a few other hypotheticals. The Chinese State media singled out book publishers as just one example of who could pay the price. Many public officials like to write memoirs, and these memoirs often add a lot to our understanding of current events, but Chinese State media singled out book publishers as an example of companies that would be banned from China if they associated with sanctioned individuals. In fact, China has already used American books as pawns in the trade war with the United States. So will major publishing houses really risk losing access to the Chinese market for all their other titles to strike a book deal with, say, a former Biden Cabinet official who was tough on China and ended up getting sanctioned? It is unclear but, I would say, doubtful. Other public officials practice at big law firms. And I know that we all make jokes about lawyers, but it is an honorable profession. There is nothing wrong with practicing at a big law firm, and they may plan to return to their firms after the administration is over. A lot of those firms have clients with close ties to China. And even if a former public official has no client with any business in China, will those law firms really take back their old employees if it means potentially losing valuable clients who are afraid of angering the Chinese Communist Party? Again, I would say it is unclear but, perhaps, doubtful. Once you consider these hypotheticals and others that don't involve influence peddling or anything untoward, you can begin to see the insidious consequences of these new sanctions. Beijing wants to scare the Biden administration into doing its bidding, and they want to scare U.S. businesses into blacklisting any official who irritates the Chinese Communist Party. Therefore, I call on the Biden administration to treat these sanctions as a day-one assault on the independence of its foreign policy by denouncing this intimidation in the strongest possible terms. But as the Chinese Communist Party is determined to prove, actions speak louder than words, so I also call upon President Biden to act reciprocally by sanctioning Chinese officials who are responsible for this blackmail campaign against his administration. Those officials shouldn't be able to ferret away their fortunes in the U.S. banking system the way so many corrupt Chinese oligarchs do, nor shouldtheir princeling children get degrees from our top universities or internships at prestigious Washington think tanks. President Biden should also refuse to nominate for senior positions individuals who are professionally or financially entangled with China, who could be compromised by the mere threat of sanctions. Finally, President Biden should determine whether Chinese Ambassador Cui Tiankai was involved in these sanctions, and if so, he should be expelled immediately for this egregious effort to subvert American foreign policy. And that is just for the short term. America must also begin to disentangle our economy from China, to decouple our economies. The Chinese Communist Party sanctions pose a threat only because American society is so deeply compromised by Chinese influence. American corporations, the big banks, think tanks, universities, film studios, even our sports leagues--even LeBron James--are all addicted to Chinese cash. They are all part of a new China lobby that is deeply invested in the status quo and, thus, hostile to any efforts to redefine U.S.-China relations in America's interest. This lobby makes their money in China. They make their products in China. They have made their bed in China, and now they are all vulnerable to pressure from the Chinese Government. America hasn't been in such a bind since our earliest days, when our young Republic was encircled by hostile imperial powers. Even during the Cold War, America had few entanglements of the sort we face today. The United States had very little trade with the Russians. We competed in separate lanes, like runners in a race. The new Cold War with China isn't so orderly. Communist China is wealthier and has more people than did Soviet Russia, and our economies have become deeply entangled. These new sanctions are just the latest example of how that entanglement threatens our security and prosperity. Here is how the United States can beat China in this strategic competition. First, the United States should impose restrictions on inbound and outbound investment with China. Wall Street has financed China's industrial and technological development for more than four decades and has become compromised for the bargain. That has to end. Second, the United States should move supply chains for critical goods, such as semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, out of China and back to American soil. China, today, may be the so-called factory of the world, but it was corporate America, with its Army of bankers and lawyers and consultants, who built that factory. That has got to end as well. Third, the United States must restrict the flow of knowledge and advanced technology between our country and China. American colleges, universities, and research laboratories are the finest in the world, but they allow Chinese nationalists to participate, even in cutting-edge research with military applications. This research has an alarming tendency to end up in China, in the weapons fielded by the People's Liberation Army against our own troops. That information pipeline needs to be shut off, and many of those Chinese nationalists need to go. None of these steps will be easy, but the Chinese Communist Party's punitive sanctions against Trump administration officials and his blackmail campaign against the Biden administration officials demonstrate that decoupling our economies is both necessary and urgent. The Communists in Beijing have lulled too many Americans into complacency and dependency over the course of many years. They now intend to blackmail even our government into inaction. Our intention must be different. The United States must break free of the Chinese Communist's suffocating grasp, fight back, and win. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. COTTON | Senate | CREC-2021-01-22-pt1-PgS99-3 | null | 2,153 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, this week, the Senate will continue confirming President Biden's highly qualified and history-making nominees. In a few hours we will hold a vote on Janet Yellen to serve as the next Secretary of the Treasury. Janet Yellen, of course, is no stranger to this Chamber. She has been confirmed by the Senate no fewer than four times and was reported favorably to the floor by a unanimous vote of the Finance Committee on Friday. The bipartisan support of Ms. Yellen's multiple nominations reflects her breathtaking range of experience and just how well suited she is to manage the economic challenges of our time. Ms. Yellen, I am proud to report, is a native of working-class Brooklyn, the daughter of a schoolteacher and physician, raised during the Great Depression. She went to Fort Hamilton High School, one of James Madison High School's rivals. A graduate of Brown and Yale, Ms. Yellen has taught economics at some of the world's most prestigious universities. Of course, Janet Yellen is best known for her tenure as Chair of the Federal Reserve, overseeing a period of falling unemployment and steady economic recovery from the global financial crisis. Few people possess the experience and expertise that Ms. Yellen would bring to the Treasury, particularly during this moment of economic crisis. At the Treasury Department, there are long hallways on the third floor where the portraits of all 77 Treasury Secretaries hang--all of them men, all the way back to Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary. I am thrilled today to vote to confirm the first woman to ever hold the position of Treasury Secretary and someday add her portrait to that hallway. On that note, I would add it was a great pleasure to read the Biden administration's announcement today that the Treasury Department plans to speed up the plans to add the portrait of Harriet Tubman to the $20 bill. This is an issue I have long championed and something that should have been done a long time ago. I feel particularly strong about it since Harriet Tubman was an Auburn, NY, resident, and our office worked for years to successfully make her home in Upstate New York a national historic monument. I am glad the Biden administration is reversing the Trump administration's foot-dragging. It is the kind of thing they did--no excuse, no reason, just didn't do it. But now the Biden administration is reversing the Trump administration's foot-dragging and will press forward with plans to circulate new currency celebrating Harriet Tubman's life and legacy. After Ms. Yellen's confirmation tonight, the Senate will continue to process nominations to President Biden's Cabinet for the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and Transportation. With cooperation, the Senate could complete both confirmations this week. Again, those are the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and Transportation, in addition to Treasury this evening. I remind my colleagues that President Trump had his Secretary of Homeland Security installed on Inauguration Day. We cannot allow our national security and our domestic security to be compromised in any way by the prolonged delay of Mr. Mayorkas' nomination | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS113-5 | null | 2,154 |
formal | Federal Reserve | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, this week, the Senate will continue confirming President Biden's highly qualified and history-making nominees. In a few hours we will hold a vote on Janet Yellen to serve as the next Secretary of the Treasury. Janet Yellen, of course, is no stranger to this Chamber. She has been confirmed by the Senate no fewer than four times and was reported favorably to the floor by a unanimous vote of the Finance Committee on Friday. The bipartisan support of Ms. Yellen's multiple nominations reflects her breathtaking range of experience and just how well suited she is to manage the economic challenges of our time. Ms. Yellen, I am proud to report, is a native of working-class Brooklyn, the daughter of a schoolteacher and physician, raised during the Great Depression. She went to Fort Hamilton High School, one of James Madison High School's rivals. A graduate of Brown and Yale, Ms. Yellen has taught economics at some of the world's most prestigious universities. Of course, Janet Yellen is best known for her tenure as Chair of the Federal Reserve, overseeing a period of falling unemployment and steady economic recovery from the global financial crisis. Few people possess the experience and expertise that Ms. Yellen would bring to the Treasury, particularly during this moment of economic crisis. At the Treasury Department, there are long hallways on the third floor where the portraits of all 77 Treasury Secretaries hang--all of them men, all the way back to Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary. I am thrilled today to vote to confirm the first woman to ever hold the position of Treasury Secretary and someday add her portrait to that hallway. On that note, I would add it was a great pleasure to read the Biden administration's announcement today that the Treasury Department plans to speed up the plans to add the portrait of Harriet Tubman to the $20 bill. This is an issue I have long championed and something that should have been done a long time ago. I feel particularly strong about it since Harriet Tubman was an Auburn, NY, resident, and our office worked for years to successfully make her home in Upstate New York a national historic monument. I am glad the Biden administration is reversing the Trump administration's foot-dragging. It is the kind of thing they did--no excuse, no reason, just didn't do it. But now the Biden administration is reversing the Trump administration's foot-dragging and will press forward with plans to circulate new currency celebrating Harriet Tubman's life and legacy. After Ms. Yellen's confirmation tonight, the Senate will continue to process nominations to President Biden's Cabinet for the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and Transportation. With cooperation, the Senate could complete both confirmations this week. Again, those are the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and Transportation, in addition to Treasury this evening. I remind my colleagues that President Trump had his Secretary of Homeland Security installed on Inauguration Day. We cannot allow our national security and our domestic security to be compromised in any way by the prolonged delay of Mr. Mayorkas' nomination | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS113-5 | null | 2,155 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, this week, the Senate will continue confirming President Biden's highly qualified and history-making nominees. In a few hours we will hold a vote on Janet Yellen to serve as the next Secretary of the Treasury. Janet Yellen, of course, is no stranger to this Chamber. She has been confirmed by the Senate no fewer than four times and was reported favorably to the floor by a unanimous vote of the Finance Committee on Friday. The bipartisan support of Ms. Yellen's multiple nominations reflects her breathtaking range of experience and just how well suited she is to manage the economic challenges of our time. Ms. Yellen, I am proud to report, is a native of working-class Brooklyn, the daughter of a schoolteacher and physician, raised during the Great Depression. She went to Fort Hamilton High School, one of James Madison High School's rivals. A graduate of Brown and Yale, Ms. Yellen has taught economics at some of the world's most prestigious universities. Of course, Janet Yellen is best known for her tenure as Chair of the Federal Reserve, overseeing a period of falling unemployment and steady economic recovery from the global financial crisis. Few people possess the experience and expertise that Ms. Yellen would bring to the Treasury, particularly during this moment of economic crisis. At the Treasury Department, there are long hallways on the third floor where the portraits of all 77 Treasury Secretaries hang--all of them men, all the way back to Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary. I am thrilled today to vote to confirm the first woman to ever hold the position of Treasury Secretary and someday add her portrait to that hallway. On that note, I would add it was a great pleasure to read the Biden administration's announcement today that the Treasury Department plans to speed up the plans to add the portrait of Harriet Tubman to the $20 bill. This is an issue I have long championed and something that should have been done a long time ago. I feel particularly strong about it since Harriet Tubman was an Auburn, NY, resident, and our office worked for years to successfully make her home in Upstate New York a national historic monument. I am glad the Biden administration is reversing the Trump administration's foot-dragging. It is the kind of thing they did--no excuse, no reason, just didn't do it. But now the Biden administration is reversing the Trump administration's foot-dragging and will press forward with plans to circulate new currency celebrating Harriet Tubman's life and legacy. After Ms. Yellen's confirmation tonight, the Senate will continue to process nominations to President Biden's Cabinet for the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and Transportation. With cooperation, the Senate could complete both confirmations this week. Again, those are the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and Transportation, in addition to Treasury this evening. I remind my colleagues that President Trump had his Secretary of Homeland Security installed on Inauguration Day. We cannot allow our national security and our domestic security to be compromised in any way by the prolonged delay of Mr. Mayorkas' nomination | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS113-5 | null | 2,156 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, as I announced on Friday, the Republican leader and I have come to an initial agreement about the timing of the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. This evening, managers appointed by the House of Representatives will deliverto the Senate the Article of Impeachment and will read the article here in the well of this Chamber. Tomorrow, Senators will be sworn in as judges and jurors in the impending trial, and the Senate will issue a summons to former President Trump. After that, both the House managers and the former President's counsel will have a period of time to draft their legal briefs, just as they did in previous trials. Once the briefs are drafted, presentations by the parties will commence the week of February 8. I want to thank the Republican leader for working with us to reach this agreement, which we believe is fair to both sides and will enable the Senate to conduct a timely and fair trial on the Article of Impeachment. The schedule will also allow us to continue the important work of the people, including confirming more members of President Biden's Cabinet. I want to be very clear about that last point. The Senate will conduct a timely and fair trial. I want to be very clear about that because some of my Republican colleagues have latched on to a fringe legal theory that the Senate does not have the constitutional power to hold the trial because Donald Trump is no longer in office. This argument has been roundly debunked by constitutional scholars from the left, right, and center. It defies precedent, historic practice, and basic common sense. It makes no sense whatsoever that a President--or any official--could commit a heinous crime against our country and then defeat Congress's impeachment powers by simply resigning so as to avoid accountability and a vote to disqualify them from future office. This is not merely a hypothetical situation. In 1876, President Grant's Secretary of War, William Belknap, implicated in a corruption scheme, literally raced to the White House to tender his resignation mere minutes before the House was set to vote on his impeachment. Then, as a matter of historical record, he burst into tears. Not only did the House move forward with the five impeachment articles against him, but a trial was then convened in the Senate. Of course, the question came up as to whether the Senate could try former officials, and guess what. The Senate voted as a Chamber that Mr. Belknap could be tried ``for acts done as Secretary of War, notwithstanding his resignation of said office.'' Those are the words of the Senate vote in 1876. Mr. Belknap was ultimately acquitted, but the record is clear. The Senate has the power to try former officials, and the reasons are obvious. A President or any official, for example, could wait until their final 2 weeks in office to betray their country, knowing they could escape accountability or merely resign moments before the Senate decides to convict and disqualify them from future office. The theory that the Senate cannot try former officials would amount to a constitutional get-out-of-jail-free card for any President who commits an impeachable offense. Now, it is certainly appropriate for the Senate to take the resignation of an official into account. After all, the House decided not to impeach Richard Nixon because, in that sense, Nixon took some responsibility for his actions. But to state the obvious, President Trump did not resign. He has not demonstrated remorse. He has not even acknowledged his role in the events of January 6, and he has never disavowed the lies that were fed to the American people by him about who actually won the election. Just to put a final nail into the coffin of this ridiculous theory, I remind my colleagues, if a President is convicted on an Article of Impeachment, the Senate holds a separate vote on whether to bar them from future office. Once a President is convicted of an impeachment charge, they are removed from office. In other words, they become a former official. If we are to believe that the Senate can't hold former officials to account, then the Senate could never proceed to that second vote of disqualification, which is provided for in the Constitution, even for a sitting President. In saying this, I am expressing the view of legal scholars across the political spectrum. Stephen Vladeck, a prominent constitutional expert at the University of Texas, wrote in the New York Times that Donald Trump is the ``poster child'' for why the conviction of an ex-President is not just constitutionally permissible but necessary. More than 150 legal scholars signed a letter last week forcefully stating that an impeachment trial of a former President is constitutional. Among the signatories, one of the cofounders of the Federalist Society, as well as one of President Reagan's Solicitors General, among other prominent conservatives. It is so obviously wrong to suggest that impeaching the President is unconstitutional--that impeaching a former President is unconstitutional. So why are some suggesting it? Well, there seems to be a desire on the political right to avoid passing judgment, one way or the other, on former President Trump and his role in fomenting the despicable attack on the Capitol on January 6. There seems to be some hope that Republicans could oppose the former President's impeachment on process grounds, rather than grappling with his actual awful conduct. Let me be very clear. This is not going to fly. The trial is going to happen. It is certainly and clearly constitutional, and if the former President is convicted, there will be a vote to disqualify him from future office. There is only one question at stake--only one question that Senators of both parties will have to answer before God and their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States? I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS113-6 | null | 2,157 |
formal | Reagan | null | white supremacist | Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, as I announced on Friday, the Republican leader and I have come to an initial agreement about the timing of the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. This evening, managers appointed by the House of Representatives will deliverto the Senate the Article of Impeachment and will read the article here in the well of this Chamber. Tomorrow, Senators will be sworn in as judges and jurors in the impending trial, and the Senate will issue a summons to former President Trump. After that, both the House managers and the former President's counsel will have a period of time to draft their legal briefs, just as they did in previous trials. Once the briefs are drafted, presentations by the parties will commence the week of February 8. I want to thank the Republican leader for working with us to reach this agreement, which we believe is fair to both sides and will enable the Senate to conduct a timely and fair trial on the Article of Impeachment. The schedule will also allow us to continue the important work of the people, including confirming more members of President Biden's Cabinet. I want to be very clear about that last point. The Senate will conduct a timely and fair trial. I want to be very clear about that because some of my Republican colleagues have latched on to a fringe legal theory that the Senate does not have the constitutional power to hold the trial because Donald Trump is no longer in office. This argument has been roundly debunked by constitutional scholars from the left, right, and center. It defies precedent, historic practice, and basic common sense. It makes no sense whatsoever that a President--or any official--could commit a heinous crime against our country and then defeat Congress's impeachment powers by simply resigning so as to avoid accountability and a vote to disqualify them from future office. This is not merely a hypothetical situation. In 1876, President Grant's Secretary of War, William Belknap, implicated in a corruption scheme, literally raced to the White House to tender his resignation mere minutes before the House was set to vote on his impeachment. Then, as a matter of historical record, he burst into tears. Not only did the House move forward with the five impeachment articles against him, but a trial was then convened in the Senate. Of course, the question came up as to whether the Senate could try former officials, and guess what. The Senate voted as a Chamber that Mr. Belknap could be tried ``for acts done as Secretary of War, notwithstanding his resignation of said office.'' Those are the words of the Senate vote in 1876. Mr. Belknap was ultimately acquitted, but the record is clear. The Senate has the power to try former officials, and the reasons are obvious. A President or any official, for example, could wait until their final 2 weeks in office to betray their country, knowing they could escape accountability or merely resign moments before the Senate decides to convict and disqualify them from future office. The theory that the Senate cannot try former officials would amount to a constitutional get-out-of-jail-free card for any President who commits an impeachable offense. Now, it is certainly appropriate for the Senate to take the resignation of an official into account. After all, the House decided not to impeach Richard Nixon because, in that sense, Nixon took some responsibility for his actions. But to state the obvious, President Trump did not resign. He has not demonstrated remorse. He has not even acknowledged his role in the events of January 6, and he has never disavowed the lies that were fed to the American people by him about who actually won the election. Just to put a final nail into the coffin of this ridiculous theory, I remind my colleagues, if a President is convicted on an Article of Impeachment, the Senate holds a separate vote on whether to bar them from future office. Once a President is convicted of an impeachment charge, they are removed from office. In other words, they become a former official. If we are to believe that the Senate can't hold former officials to account, then the Senate could never proceed to that second vote of disqualification, which is provided for in the Constitution, even for a sitting President. In saying this, I am expressing the view of legal scholars across the political spectrum. Stephen Vladeck, a prominent constitutional expert at the University of Texas, wrote in the New York Times that Donald Trump is the ``poster child'' for why the conviction of an ex-President is not just constitutionally permissible but necessary. More than 150 legal scholars signed a letter last week forcefully stating that an impeachment trial of a former President is constitutional. Among the signatories, one of the cofounders of the Federalist Society, as well as one of President Reagan's Solicitors General, among other prominent conservatives. It is so obviously wrong to suggest that impeaching the President is unconstitutional--that impeaching a former President is unconstitutional. So why are some suggesting it? Well, there seems to be a desire on the political right to avoid passing judgment, one way or the other, on former President Trump and his role in fomenting the despicable attack on the Capitol on January 6. There seems to be some hope that Republicans could oppose the former President's impeachment on process grounds, rather than grappling with his actual awful conduct. Let me be very clear. This is not going to fly. The trial is going to happen. It is certainly and clearly constitutional, and if the former President is convicted, there will be a vote to disqualify him from future office. There is only one question at stake--only one question that Senators of both parties will have to answer before God and their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States? I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS113-6 | null | 2,158 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, this afternoon, the Senate will confirm Dr. Janet Yellen, the former Chair of the Federal Reserve, to serve as President Biden's Secretary of the Treasury. Her speedy confirmation will contrast sharply with the way the Senate Democratic minority handled many of the last President's key Cabinet nominations 4 years ago. Secretary Mnuchin had to sit through a stunt where Senate Democrats literally boycotted his committee hearing. He was not confirmed until mid-February. Dr. Yellen came out of committee on a unanimous vote and will begin to work 5 days after the inauguration. That is even faster than Secretary Geithner's nomination in 2009 in the teeth of a financial crisis. This certainly isn't because Dr. Yellen's or President Biden's economic policy views have unanimous support here in the Senate. I expect we will have no shortage of spirited policy discussions with Dr. Yellen in the months ahead, especially if some Democrats keep trying to use this historic emergency as a pretext--a pretext to push through permanent far-left policy changes. The 50 Senators on our side have great confidence in our pro-job, pro-worker vision that helped build the greatest job market in living memory. But the simple fact is that, when the American people elect a President and when the President selects qualified and mainstream people for key posts, the whole Nation deserves for them to be able to assemble their team. I will be voting to confirm Dr. Yellen today. I look forward to working together on pro-growth policies that will help rebuild the thriving economy for American workers that was in place just 1 year ago. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS115 | null | 2,159 |
formal | Federal Reserve | null | antisemitic | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, this afternoon, the Senate will confirm Dr. Janet Yellen, the former Chair of the Federal Reserve, to serve as President Biden's Secretary of the Treasury. Her speedy confirmation will contrast sharply with the way the Senate Democratic minority handled many of the last President's key Cabinet nominations 4 years ago. Secretary Mnuchin had to sit through a stunt where Senate Democrats literally boycotted his committee hearing. He was not confirmed until mid-February. Dr. Yellen came out of committee on a unanimous vote and will begin to work 5 days after the inauguration. That is even faster than Secretary Geithner's nomination in 2009 in the teeth of a financial crisis. This certainly isn't because Dr. Yellen's or President Biden's economic policy views have unanimous support here in the Senate. I expect we will have no shortage of spirited policy discussions with Dr. Yellen in the months ahead, especially if some Democrats keep trying to use this historic emergency as a pretext--a pretext to push through permanent far-left policy changes. The 50 Senators on our side have great confidence in our pro-job, pro-worker vision that helped build the greatest job market in living memory. But the simple fact is that, when the American people elect a President and when the President selects qualified and mainstream people for key posts, the whole Nation deserves for them to be able to assemble their team. I will be voting to confirm Dr. Yellen today. I look forward to working together on pro-growth policies that will help rebuild the thriving economy for American workers that was in place just 1 year ago. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS115 | null | 2,160 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, this afternoon, the Senate will confirm Dr. Janet Yellen, the former Chair of the Federal Reserve, to serve as President Biden's Secretary of the Treasury. Her speedy confirmation will contrast sharply with the way the Senate Democratic minority handled many of the last President's key Cabinet nominations 4 years ago. Secretary Mnuchin had to sit through a stunt where Senate Democrats literally boycotted his committee hearing. He was not confirmed until mid-February. Dr. Yellen came out of committee on a unanimous vote and will begin to work 5 days after the inauguration. That is even faster than Secretary Geithner's nomination in 2009 in the teeth of a financial crisis. This certainly isn't because Dr. Yellen's or President Biden's economic policy views have unanimous support here in the Senate. I expect we will have no shortage of spirited policy discussions with Dr. Yellen in the months ahead, especially if some Democrats keep trying to use this historic emergency as a pretext--a pretext to push through permanent far-left policy changes. The 50 Senators on our side have great confidence in our pro-job, pro-worker vision that helped build the greatest job market in living memory. But the simple fact is that, when the American people elect a President and when the President selects qualified and mainstream people for key posts, the whole Nation deserves for them to be able to assemble their team. I will be voting to confirm Dr. Yellen today. I look forward to working together on pro-growth policies that will help rebuild the thriving economy for American workers that was in place just 1 year ago. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS115 | null | 2,161 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Nomination of Janet Louise Yellen Madam President, a few days after our first woman Vice President was sworn in, we are about to confirm the first woman to step into one of the leading roles in our economy. Janet Yellen made history when she served as Chair of the Federal Reserve. She is about to make history again as Secretary of the Treasury. She will be the first person ever to have held all three of the top positions in our economy--Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury--and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, and her appreciation for what makes this country work. As Fed Chair and as a labor economist, Janet Yellen made it clear that she understands what drives our economy. It is not the stock market. It is not Wall Street. It is people. It is workers. Janet Yellen knows our economy is built by Americans who know the dignity of a hard day's work, whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or care for children or take care of your parents. I remember in 2015 Chair Yellen came to Cleveland and toured the Alcoa plant not far from my house. She showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leaders President Biden is putting into the top jobs managing our economy--people who will get out of Washington, who will visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, and people who act on what they learn from workers in Chillicothe, in Springfield, in Youngstown and Moline, IL, where the next Presiding Officer comes from. There is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. Janet Yellen understands that. She will step into this job at a time when the contrast between the financial health of corporations and workers couldn't be starker. We are in the midst of a public health crisis and an economic crisis. You wouldn't know it if you looked only at the stock market or corporate profits. But under President Biden, under Janet Yellen, and under new leadership in the Senate, we are done measuring--we are just done measuring the economy that way. We are going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do--in terms of paychecks, whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford childcare or pay for their prescription drugs. By those measures, people are hurting. We hear a lot about what some people call the K-shaped recovery--that is one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. It was a problem before this virus, as you know. The pandemic has only made it worse, and it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequalities that have been allowed to fester for too long. We have a tax code that favors the wealthy, that gives corporations a tax break when they move manufacturing jobs out of East St. Louis or out of East Cleveland overseas. Americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. China is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten American jobs. The Internal Revenue Service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often Black and Brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. Wall Street rewards corporations that lay off employees and cut their pay and treat their workers as expendable. Risky behavior on Wall Street--like it did in the last crisis--can devastate communities in Ohio and around the country. I have confidence that Janet Yellen understands these vast challenges and that she will get to work immediately to take them on and to create a better, more prosperous, more stable economy, centered on the dignity of work. She knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts people to work at good-paying union jobs. We can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of Southeast Ohio and Southern Illinois and the Black and Brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. We can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and childcare. We can create a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with a dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. We can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. That is the vision Janet Yellen and Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are committed to--one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. Janet Yellen has the experience, the talent, and the commitment to service to deliver results. She is the right person for these tumultuous times. Shewill rise to meet this moment to help our country build back better. I ask my colleagues to support Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS116 | null | 2,162 |
formal | Federal Reserve | null | antisemitic | Nomination of Janet Louise Yellen Madam President, a few days after our first woman Vice President was sworn in, we are about to confirm the first woman to step into one of the leading roles in our economy. Janet Yellen made history when she served as Chair of the Federal Reserve. She is about to make history again as Secretary of the Treasury. She will be the first person ever to have held all three of the top positions in our economy--Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury--and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, and her appreciation for what makes this country work. As Fed Chair and as a labor economist, Janet Yellen made it clear that she understands what drives our economy. It is not the stock market. It is not Wall Street. It is people. It is workers. Janet Yellen knows our economy is built by Americans who know the dignity of a hard day's work, whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or care for children or take care of your parents. I remember in 2015 Chair Yellen came to Cleveland and toured the Alcoa plant not far from my house. She showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leaders President Biden is putting into the top jobs managing our economy--people who will get out of Washington, who will visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, and people who act on what they learn from workers in Chillicothe, in Springfield, in Youngstown and Moline, IL, where the next Presiding Officer comes from. There is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. Janet Yellen understands that. She will step into this job at a time when the contrast between the financial health of corporations and workers couldn't be starker. We are in the midst of a public health crisis and an economic crisis. You wouldn't know it if you looked only at the stock market or corporate profits. But under President Biden, under Janet Yellen, and under new leadership in the Senate, we are done measuring--we are just done measuring the economy that way. We are going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do--in terms of paychecks, whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford childcare or pay for their prescription drugs. By those measures, people are hurting. We hear a lot about what some people call the K-shaped recovery--that is one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. It was a problem before this virus, as you know. The pandemic has only made it worse, and it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequalities that have been allowed to fester for too long. We have a tax code that favors the wealthy, that gives corporations a tax break when they move manufacturing jobs out of East St. Louis or out of East Cleveland overseas. Americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. China is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten American jobs. The Internal Revenue Service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often Black and Brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. Wall Street rewards corporations that lay off employees and cut their pay and treat their workers as expendable. Risky behavior on Wall Street--like it did in the last crisis--can devastate communities in Ohio and around the country. I have confidence that Janet Yellen understands these vast challenges and that she will get to work immediately to take them on and to create a better, more prosperous, more stable economy, centered on the dignity of work. She knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts people to work at good-paying union jobs. We can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of Southeast Ohio and Southern Illinois and the Black and Brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. We can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and childcare. We can create a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with a dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. We can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. That is the vision Janet Yellen and Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are committed to--one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. Janet Yellen has the experience, the talent, and the commitment to service to deliver results. She is the right person for these tumultuous times. Shewill rise to meet this moment to help our country build back better. I ask my colleagues to support Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS116 | null | 2,163 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Nomination of Janet Louise Yellen Madam President, a few days after our first woman Vice President was sworn in, we are about to confirm the first woman to step into one of the leading roles in our economy. Janet Yellen made history when she served as Chair of the Federal Reserve. She is about to make history again as Secretary of the Treasury. She will be the first person ever to have held all three of the top positions in our economy--Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury--and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, and her appreciation for what makes this country work. As Fed Chair and as a labor economist, Janet Yellen made it clear that she understands what drives our economy. It is not the stock market. It is not Wall Street. It is people. It is workers. Janet Yellen knows our economy is built by Americans who know the dignity of a hard day's work, whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or care for children or take care of your parents. I remember in 2015 Chair Yellen came to Cleveland and toured the Alcoa plant not far from my house. She showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leaders President Biden is putting into the top jobs managing our economy--people who will get out of Washington, who will visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, and people who act on what they learn from workers in Chillicothe, in Springfield, in Youngstown and Moline, IL, where the next Presiding Officer comes from. There is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. Janet Yellen understands that. She will step into this job at a time when the contrast between the financial health of corporations and workers couldn't be starker. We are in the midst of a public health crisis and an economic crisis. You wouldn't know it if you looked only at the stock market or corporate profits. But under President Biden, under Janet Yellen, and under new leadership in the Senate, we are done measuring--we are just done measuring the economy that way. We are going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do--in terms of paychecks, whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford childcare or pay for their prescription drugs. By those measures, people are hurting. We hear a lot about what some people call the K-shaped recovery--that is one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. It was a problem before this virus, as you know. The pandemic has only made it worse, and it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequalities that have been allowed to fester for too long. We have a tax code that favors the wealthy, that gives corporations a tax break when they move manufacturing jobs out of East St. Louis or out of East Cleveland overseas. Americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. China is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten American jobs. The Internal Revenue Service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often Black and Brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. Wall Street rewards corporations that lay off employees and cut their pay and treat their workers as expendable. Risky behavior on Wall Street--like it did in the last crisis--can devastate communities in Ohio and around the country. I have confidence that Janet Yellen understands these vast challenges and that she will get to work immediately to take them on and to create a better, more prosperous, more stable economy, centered on the dignity of work. She knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts people to work at good-paying union jobs. We can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of Southeast Ohio and Southern Illinois and the Black and Brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. We can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and childcare. We can create a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with a dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. We can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. That is the vision Janet Yellen and Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are committed to--one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. Janet Yellen has the experience, the talent, and the commitment to service to deliver results. She is the right person for these tumultuous times. Shewill rise to meet this moment to help our country build back better. I ask my colleagues to support Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS116 | null | 2,164 |
formal | middle class | null | racist | Nomination of Janet Louise Yellen Madam President, a few days after our first woman Vice President was sworn in, we are about to confirm the first woman to step into one of the leading roles in our economy. Janet Yellen made history when she served as Chair of the Federal Reserve. She is about to make history again as Secretary of the Treasury. She will be the first person ever to have held all three of the top positions in our economy--Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury--and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, and her appreciation for what makes this country work. As Fed Chair and as a labor economist, Janet Yellen made it clear that she understands what drives our economy. It is not the stock market. It is not Wall Street. It is people. It is workers. Janet Yellen knows our economy is built by Americans who know the dignity of a hard day's work, whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or care for children or take care of your parents. I remember in 2015 Chair Yellen came to Cleveland and toured the Alcoa plant not far from my house. She showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leaders President Biden is putting into the top jobs managing our economy--people who will get out of Washington, who will visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, and people who act on what they learn from workers in Chillicothe, in Springfield, in Youngstown and Moline, IL, where the next Presiding Officer comes from. There is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. Janet Yellen understands that. She will step into this job at a time when the contrast between the financial health of corporations and workers couldn't be starker. We are in the midst of a public health crisis and an economic crisis. You wouldn't know it if you looked only at the stock market or corporate profits. But under President Biden, under Janet Yellen, and under new leadership in the Senate, we are done measuring--we are just done measuring the economy that way. We are going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do--in terms of paychecks, whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford childcare or pay for their prescription drugs. By those measures, people are hurting. We hear a lot about what some people call the K-shaped recovery--that is one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. It was a problem before this virus, as you know. The pandemic has only made it worse, and it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequalities that have been allowed to fester for too long. We have a tax code that favors the wealthy, that gives corporations a tax break when they move manufacturing jobs out of East St. Louis or out of East Cleveland overseas. Americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. China is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten American jobs. The Internal Revenue Service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often Black and Brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. Wall Street rewards corporations that lay off employees and cut their pay and treat their workers as expendable. Risky behavior on Wall Street--like it did in the last crisis--can devastate communities in Ohio and around the country. I have confidence that Janet Yellen understands these vast challenges and that she will get to work immediately to take them on and to create a better, more prosperous, more stable economy, centered on the dignity of work. She knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts people to work at good-paying union jobs. We can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of Southeast Ohio and Southern Illinois and the Black and Brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. We can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and childcare. We can create a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with a dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. We can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. That is the vision Janet Yellen and Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are committed to--one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. Janet Yellen has the experience, the talent, and the commitment to service to deliver results. She is the right person for these tumultuous times. Shewill rise to meet this moment to help our country build back better. I ask my colleagues to support Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS116 | null | 2,165 |
formal | Cleveland | null | racist | Nomination of Janet Louise Yellen Madam President, a few days after our first woman Vice President was sworn in, we are about to confirm the first woman to step into one of the leading roles in our economy. Janet Yellen made history when she served as Chair of the Federal Reserve. She is about to make history again as Secretary of the Treasury. She will be the first person ever to have held all three of the top positions in our economy--Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury--and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, and her appreciation for what makes this country work. As Fed Chair and as a labor economist, Janet Yellen made it clear that she understands what drives our economy. It is not the stock market. It is not Wall Street. It is people. It is workers. Janet Yellen knows our economy is built by Americans who know the dignity of a hard day's work, whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or care for children or take care of your parents. I remember in 2015 Chair Yellen came to Cleveland and toured the Alcoa plant not far from my house. She showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leaders President Biden is putting into the top jobs managing our economy--people who will get out of Washington, who will visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, and people who act on what they learn from workers in Chillicothe, in Springfield, in Youngstown and Moline, IL, where the next Presiding Officer comes from. There is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. Janet Yellen understands that. She will step into this job at a time when the contrast between the financial health of corporations and workers couldn't be starker. We are in the midst of a public health crisis and an economic crisis. You wouldn't know it if you looked only at the stock market or corporate profits. But under President Biden, under Janet Yellen, and under new leadership in the Senate, we are done measuring--we are just done measuring the economy that way. We are going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do--in terms of paychecks, whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford childcare or pay for their prescription drugs. By those measures, people are hurting. We hear a lot about what some people call the K-shaped recovery--that is one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. It was a problem before this virus, as you know. The pandemic has only made it worse, and it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequalities that have been allowed to fester for too long. We have a tax code that favors the wealthy, that gives corporations a tax break when they move manufacturing jobs out of East St. Louis or out of East Cleveland overseas. Americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. China is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten American jobs. The Internal Revenue Service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often Black and Brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. Wall Street rewards corporations that lay off employees and cut their pay and treat their workers as expendable. Risky behavior on Wall Street--like it did in the last crisis--can devastate communities in Ohio and around the country. I have confidence that Janet Yellen understands these vast challenges and that she will get to work immediately to take them on and to create a better, more prosperous, more stable economy, centered on the dignity of work. She knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts people to work at good-paying union jobs. We can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of Southeast Ohio and Southern Illinois and the Black and Brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. We can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and childcare. We can create a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with a dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. We can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. That is the vision Janet Yellen and Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are committed to--one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. Janet Yellen has the experience, the talent, and the commitment to service to deliver results. She is the right person for these tumultuous times. Shewill rise to meet this moment to help our country build back better. I ask my colleagues to support Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS116 | null | 2,166 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Nomination of Janet Louise Yellen Madam President, a few days after our first woman Vice President was sworn in, we are about to confirm the first woman to step into one of the leading roles in our economy. Janet Yellen made history when she served as Chair of the Federal Reserve. She is about to make history again as Secretary of the Treasury. She will be the first person ever to have held all three of the top positions in our economy--Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, Chair of the Federal Reserve, and Secretary of the Treasury--and now more than ever, we need her leadership, her vision, and her appreciation for what makes this country work. As Fed Chair and as a labor economist, Janet Yellen made it clear that she understands what drives our economy. It is not the stock market. It is not Wall Street. It is people. It is workers. Janet Yellen knows our economy is built by Americans who know the dignity of a hard day's work, whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge or work for tips or care for children or take care of your parents. I remember in 2015 Chair Yellen came to Cleveland and toured the Alcoa plant not far from my house. She showed the kind of leadership we need, the kind of leaders President Biden is putting into the top jobs managing our economy--people who will get out of Washington, who will visit every sort of community in the heart of the country, and people who act on what they learn from workers in Chillicothe, in Springfield, in Youngstown and Moline, IL, where the next Presiding Officer comes from. There is a lot more to our economy than a quarterly earnings report. Janet Yellen understands that. She will step into this job at a time when the contrast between the financial health of corporations and workers couldn't be starker. We are in the midst of a public health crisis and an economic crisis. You wouldn't know it if you looked only at the stock market or corporate profits. But under President Biden, under Janet Yellen, and under new leadership in the Senate, we are done measuring--we are just done measuring the economy that way. We are going to think about the economy the way workers and their families do--in terms of paychecks, whether they can make rent or pay the mortgage this month or afford childcare or pay for their prescription drugs. By those measures, people are hurting. We hear a lot about what some people call the K-shaped recovery--that is one way of saying that the rich are getting richer while the middle class and low-income families continue to struggle. It was a problem before this virus, as you know. The pandemic has only made it worse, and it is layered on top of systemic racism and inequalities that have been allowed to fester for too long. We have a tax code that favors the wealthy, that gives corporations a tax break when they move manufacturing jobs out of East St. Louis or out of East Cleveland overseas. Americans' hard-earned savings are at risk from the financial instability of climate change. China is aggressive, confident, and continues to threaten American jobs. The Internal Revenue Service wastes time and taxpayer money auditing working families, often Black and Brown families, instead of going after wealthy tax cheats. Wall Street rewards corporations that lay off employees and cut their pay and treat their workers as expendable. Risky behavior on Wall Street--like it did in the last crisis--can devastate communities in Ohio and around the country. I have confidence that Janet Yellen understands these vast challenges and that she will get to work immediately to take them on and to create a better, more prosperous, more stable economy, centered on the dignity of work. She knows we can build new, cleaner infrastructure that puts people to work at good-paying union jobs. We can invest in the country, including the small towns and industrial cities of Southeast Ohio and Southern Illinois and the Black and Brown communities in our cities that too often get left behind. We can make it easier for people to afford housing and transportation and childcare. We can create a tax code that rewards work instead of wealth, starting with a dramatic expansion of the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit. We can give people more power over their lives and their own money with options like monthly distribution of the child tax credit and no-fee bank accounts. That is the vision Janet Yellen and Joe Biden and Senate Democrats are committed to--one where the middle class is growing and everyone has the opportunity to join it. Janet Yellen has the experience, the talent, and the commitment to service to deliver results. She is the right person for these tumultuous times. Shewill rise to meet this moment to help our country build back better. I ask my colleagues to support Janet Yellen for Secretary of the Treasury. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS116 | null | 2,167 |
formal | Janet Yellen | null | antisemitic | Filibuster Madam President, our first order of business has been to fill critical positions throughout the Federal Government, and the Senate has already confirmed the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense, both of whom I supported. This afternoon, we will vote on the confirmation of Janet Yellen to be Secretary of the Treasury, whom I intend to vote for, as well, and there is a slate of other important positions that need to be filled in the coming days and weeks. I should note that voting to confirm a nominee, under the words of the Constitution--providing advice and consent--is not a rubberstamp of the administration's policies. I know there will be important issues that we will disagree on, but if elections mean anything, they mean that the prevailing party should not be knee-capped as, unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues did to the previous administration when it tried to install a new Cabinet and agency heads. Rather, I believe the tradition has been to accommodate one another when we can so the administration can carry out its duties. This morning, I had a very good conversation with Judge Merrick Garland, whom President Biden has nominated for Attorney General. Judge Garland's extensive legal experience makes him well suited to lead the Department of Justice, and I appreciate his commitment to keeping politics out of the Justice Department. That is my No. 1 criterion for who should be the next head of the Department of Justice, the Attorney General. I think both sides should support a depoliticized Justice Department, and that is what I hope Judge Garland, once confirmed, will deliver. I look forward to talking to him more during the confirmation process, but unless I hear something new, I expect to support his nomination before the full Senate. It is in the best interest of the country to have qualified, Senate-confirmed individuals leading our Federal departments and agencies. As we look beyond the confirmation process, there are many opportunities for Republicans and Democrats to work together in those places where we agree, and I know additional coronavirus relief, as it is needed, is high on President Biden's list. Approximately 1 million Americans are being vaccinated every day, and while the light at the end of the tunnel is getting bigger and brighter, we are still not in the clear. Congress has provided trillions of dollars in relief to strengthen our fight on both the healthcare and economic fronts, but we need to remain vigilant in the final, critical phase of this battle. I don't support President Biden's pandemic relief proposal in its current form, but I do believe it is a starting point for bipartisan negotiations. I will gladly support a reasonable, targeted bill as we determine precisely, as we can, where the needs truly are. We all agree we need to bolster vaccine manufacturing and distribution; that some Americans need additional financial support; and that Main Street businesses and their workforces are still struggling to survive this economic recession. I hope the administration will be willing to work with Congress to reach an agreement that receives broad, bipartisan support as each of the previous bills that we have passed has. During my time in the Senate, I have worked with folks across the aisle on our shared priorities, and I have no plans of changing that practice now, but make no mistake: I will push back, forcefully, respectfully, when the President and I disagree. One of the things I have learned, though, is that there is a difference between what some elected officials say and what they actually do, and rather than listen to what they say, I really prefer to watch what they do and see if those are consistent. Only hours after being sworn in and speaking of unifying the country, President Biden unilaterally canceled the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline, and on the same day, the administration halted all new energy leasing and permitting on public lands and waters. With these unfortunate actions, President Biden is killing thousands of well-paying U.S. jobs and kicking the U.S. energy industry while it is still struggling from the pandemic. I had hoped and still hope to work with President Biden on an all-of-the-above energy strategy that prioritizes our fossil fuels--we have 280 million cars on the road, and people are still going to need gasoline for the foreseeable future--renewables, and innovative technologies that help us harness our most prevalent and reliable energy sources. One of the things that, I think, is exciting about some of the research that is being done is on carbon capture technology, which ought to be, again, something that we can all agree on as we transition to the next forms of energy. As we begin a new Congress and welcome a new President, I am, once again, reminded of the words that were quoted from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recently deceased Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. She didn't originate it, but she did make it popular when she said, ``You can disagree without being disagreeable.'' Of course, democracy itself expects a competition of ideas but not necessarily the mudslinging and name-calling that have become all too common. I hope we can return to the respectful battles in the days and months ahead and know there is no better battleground for that to happen in than in the Senate, where sometimes--sometimes--we live up to the billing as the world's greatest deliberative body. The primary feature that separates the Senate from the House or any other legislative body is that of free and full debate. That is why it takes 60 votes to cut off debate--so that you can then vote and pass a piece of legislation with 51 votes. It forces us to do what we ought to do anyway, which is to have fulsome debate, allow minority views to be presented, and then, once the debate is concluded, have a vote on the underlying bill. Fundamentally, the Founders saw the Senate as a place that protected minority rights. I have been here long enough to be in the majority and in the minority, and we know what goes around comes around in the U.S. Senate. It is as sure as day follows night. That is why we are called a deliberative body. In the House, you have 435 Members, and in order to pass a bill, all you need is a majority. Got the votes? Jam it through. Yet there has to be someplace, somewhere, in a nation of 330 million souls, where competing ideas can be seriously debated, and that is why our Founders created the U.S. Senate. George Washington was famously said to have told Thomas Jefferson that the Senate was meant to be a saucer to cool House legislation like a saucer was used to cool hot tea. Well, if partisan bills are the hot tea, then the Senate cloture requirements are the saucer. Rather than a simple majority here in the Senate, you have to get 60 out of 100 Senators to support a bill in order for it to advance. I know we all would love to see each of our ideas passed into law without any delay or extended debate, but that is not the way the Senate is supposed to work. It forces us to do what we ought to want to do anyway, which is to do the hardwork of bipartisan negotiation and compromise, come up with an 80-20 solution that can leave the 20 percent you don't agree on for another day and another battle, but to pass into law and make progress, on behalf of the American people, the 80 percent we can agree on. Neither party has had a filibuster-proof majority since the late 1970s, and as a result, Senators from red States and blue States have had to work together, as they should, to reach agreements on nearly every piece of legislation that has moved through this Chamber in the last four decades. The only real exception is the budget reconciliation process, which, by court rules, can be done with 51 votes, but, otherwise, in the main, 60 votes--a bipartisan majority--is required in order to move legislation. When bills require bipartisan support in order to pass, they are more durable. The fact is, if you pass a partisan piece of legislation, the next time the majority flips, it can undo it. I think it is useful in terms of our comity, in terms of our relationships, and in terms of our ability to get things done for the American people to try to figure out how to do things on a bipartisan basis. While I know bipartisanship isn't necessarily popular with the political bases of either party, it is critical to our democracy. Unfortunately, some of our colleagues on the other side have expressed an interest in using their newly gained powers in the majority to blow up the filibuster and to shatter that important cooling saucer. Make no mistake: That would do irreparable harm to this institution and inflict serious damage on our democracy. Without the 60-vote cloture requirement, both Chambers would be majority-rule institutions, with a steady flow of partisan legislation moving through Congress. If the same party controls both Chambers and the White House, that party could pass strictly partisan legislation that would quickly be signed into law without a single vote from the opposing party. Does that feel good? Well, if you are on the winning side, yes. Is it good for the country? No, it is not. It is efficient, but it is not effective. It is not lasting. It is not durable. It doesn't provide the sort of stability and ability to plan that the current structure provides. All the reasons I have given for doing away with the Senate cloture requirement are why no majority has ever tried to blow it up before. During the past administrations--the Trump, Obama, Bush and Clinton administration--there was a period of time when the President's party controlled both Chambers of Congress. If you go further back in history, you will find dozens of examples. But no Senate, until now, has ever been so shortsighted as to get rid of the cloture requirement and the filibuster when it comes to legislation. If Democrats carried out their threat to do that today, they would clear the path to pass a radical agenda that would fundamentally reshape our country without a single Republican vote. As a reminder, we have a 50-50 Senate, and in the House there are 221 Democrats and 211 Republicans. In all of Congress, there are 10 more Democrats than Republicans out of 535 Members of Congress. That is far from a progressive or a radical mandate. As I said, elections happen, majorities change, and Presidents come and go, as do U.S. Senators. In 2 years, Republicans could win the majority in either or both Chambers, and in 4, a Republican could win the White House as well. If we were to do away with this restraint on snap decisions and partisan legislation, what would the succeeding Republican administration likely do? It would simply undo everything that had been done on a partisan basis. Well, would our Democratic colleagues support a rule change to blow up the filibuster when Republicans control both Houses and the White House? Would they believe the Senate minority should be silenced, as they believe now? As I say, what goes around comes around, and the shoe is always on the other foot, eventually. The good news is we don't have to wonder what the answer would be because we already know it. In 2017, there was a Republican-led Senate, House, and White House, when we held both Houses and the White House. There was fear by some folks across the aisle--actually, both sides of the aisle--that the filibuster would be eliminated in order to clear a path for a Republican agenda. That was when 61 Senators, a filibuster-proof majority, wrote a bipartisan letter to then-Majority Leader McConnell and Democratic Leader Schumer, urging them to protect the filibuster. That was 61 Senators. Among the cosigners were 27 current Democratic Senators. One of the signatures on this bipartisan letter is that of our newly sworn-in Vice President, Kamala Harris. I can promise you that Leader McConnell has no interest in eliminating the filibuster, when he was majority or now as minority leader, because he knew the institutional damage that this would cause and the damage to our democracy. Unfortunately, Leader Schumer refuses to acknowledge that most basic fact. The two party leaders are now in the process of negotiating an organizing resolution on how this new reality of a 50-50 Senate will operate. Fortunately, there is modern precedent for how this has been done, and the two leaders have shared an interest in emulating the 2001 agreement negotiated by Tom Daschle and Trent Lott. But because of the newfound obsession of some on the left with uprooting the cornerstone of the Senate, Leader McConnell has asked for assurances from Leader Schumer that the filibuster and the cloture requirement will remain intact. After all, it is not unreasonable to ask your negotiating partner to commit to not breaking the rules, which is all Senator McConnell is asking for. Senator Schumer has derided that request, calling it ``extraneous'' and saying it falls outside the bounds of the 2001 organizing resolution. But I would like to remind our colleagues that in 2001 the majority party was not threatening to blow up the Senate rules to advance a partisan agenda. That is why it wasn't the subject, explicitly, of that negotiation of the organizing resolution. There was no need to ask for assurances on the protection of the filibuster because it wasn't even a question to be answered. Our Democratic colleagues have relied on the filibuster while Republicans have held the majority. I can think of time after time after time when we have tried to pass more COVID-19 relief bills that our Democratic colleagues felt were inadequate. And time after time after time, they used the filibuster to prevent passage of those bills, which was their right--I think a mistake, a decision I disagree with, but within their rights under the Senate rules. Republicans have also relied on the filibuster while Democrats have held the majority. We all recognize that at some point the shoe is always on the other foot, which is why no one has been so foolish as to eliminate the legislative filibuster or to even seriously consider it before. I hope our colleagues on the other side will avoid making this tragic mistake in order to pursue shortsighted political goals. And in an encouraging sign on Friday, the White House indicated that President Biden does not support getting rid of the legislative filibuster either. President Biden served in the Senate for, I believe, 36 years. He understands how this institution works, how it is supposed to work, and his advice--and it is only advice, since he is the President and not a Member of the Senate anymore--is: Don't go there. I encourage our more than two dozen Democratic colleagues who have repeatedly voiced their support for maintaining the legislative filibuster to insist that this critical stabilizing force in our democracy be preserved in the organizing resolution currently being discussed by Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell. I truly believe that if we don't do that, if the legislative filibuster is eliminated, we will all rue the day. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS117 | null | 2,168 |
formal | blue | null | antisemitic | Filibuster Madam President, our first order of business has been to fill critical positions throughout the Federal Government, and the Senate has already confirmed the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense, both of whom I supported. This afternoon, we will vote on the confirmation of Janet Yellen to be Secretary of the Treasury, whom I intend to vote for, as well, and there is a slate of other important positions that need to be filled in the coming days and weeks. I should note that voting to confirm a nominee, under the words of the Constitution--providing advice and consent--is not a rubberstamp of the administration's policies. I know there will be important issues that we will disagree on, but if elections mean anything, they mean that the prevailing party should not be knee-capped as, unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues did to the previous administration when it tried to install a new Cabinet and agency heads. Rather, I believe the tradition has been to accommodate one another when we can so the administration can carry out its duties. This morning, I had a very good conversation with Judge Merrick Garland, whom President Biden has nominated for Attorney General. Judge Garland's extensive legal experience makes him well suited to lead the Department of Justice, and I appreciate his commitment to keeping politics out of the Justice Department. That is my No. 1 criterion for who should be the next head of the Department of Justice, the Attorney General. I think both sides should support a depoliticized Justice Department, and that is what I hope Judge Garland, once confirmed, will deliver. I look forward to talking to him more during the confirmation process, but unless I hear something new, I expect to support his nomination before the full Senate. It is in the best interest of the country to have qualified, Senate-confirmed individuals leading our Federal departments and agencies. As we look beyond the confirmation process, there are many opportunities for Republicans and Democrats to work together in those places where we agree, and I know additional coronavirus relief, as it is needed, is high on President Biden's list. Approximately 1 million Americans are being vaccinated every day, and while the light at the end of the tunnel is getting bigger and brighter, we are still not in the clear. Congress has provided trillions of dollars in relief to strengthen our fight on both the healthcare and economic fronts, but we need to remain vigilant in the final, critical phase of this battle. I don't support President Biden's pandemic relief proposal in its current form, but I do believe it is a starting point for bipartisan negotiations. I will gladly support a reasonable, targeted bill as we determine precisely, as we can, where the needs truly are. We all agree we need to bolster vaccine manufacturing and distribution; that some Americans need additional financial support; and that Main Street businesses and their workforces are still struggling to survive this economic recession. I hope the administration will be willing to work with Congress to reach an agreement that receives broad, bipartisan support as each of the previous bills that we have passed has. During my time in the Senate, I have worked with folks across the aisle on our shared priorities, and I have no plans of changing that practice now, but make no mistake: I will push back, forcefully, respectfully, when the President and I disagree. One of the things I have learned, though, is that there is a difference between what some elected officials say and what they actually do, and rather than listen to what they say, I really prefer to watch what they do and see if those are consistent. Only hours after being sworn in and speaking of unifying the country, President Biden unilaterally canceled the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline, and on the same day, the administration halted all new energy leasing and permitting on public lands and waters. With these unfortunate actions, President Biden is killing thousands of well-paying U.S. jobs and kicking the U.S. energy industry while it is still struggling from the pandemic. I had hoped and still hope to work with President Biden on an all-of-the-above energy strategy that prioritizes our fossil fuels--we have 280 million cars on the road, and people are still going to need gasoline for the foreseeable future--renewables, and innovative technologies that help us harness our most prevalent and reliable energy sources. One of the things that, I think, is exciting about some of the research that is being done is on carbon capture technology, which ought to be, again, something that we can all agree on as we transition to the next forms of energy. As we begin a new Congress and welcome a new President, I am, once again, reminded of the words that were quoted from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recently deceased Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. She didn't originate it, but she did make it popular when she said, ``You can disagree without being disagreeable.'' Of course, democracy itself expects a competition of ideas but not necessarily the mudslinging and name-calling that have become all too common. I hope we can return to the respectful battles in the days and months ahead and know there is no better battleground for that to happen in than in the Senate, where sometimes--sometimes--we live up to the billing as the world's greatest deliberative body. The primary feature that separates the Senate from the House or any other legislative body is that of free and full debate. That is why it takes 60 votes to cut off debate--so that you can then vote and pass a piece of legislation with 51 votes. It forces us to do what we ought to do anyway, which is to have fulsome debate, allow minority views to be presented, and then, once the debate is concluded, have a vote on the underlying bill. Fundamentally, the Founders saw the Senate as a place that protected minority rights. I have been here long enough to be in the majority and in the minority, and we know what goes around comes around in the U.S. Senate. It is as sure as day follows night. That is why we are called a deliberative body. In the House, you have 435 Members, and in order to pass a bill, all you need is a majority. Got the votes? Jam it through. Yet there has to be someplace, somewhere, in a nation of 330 million souls, where competing ideas can be seriously debated, and that is why our Founders created the U.S. Senate. George Washington was famously said to have told Thomas Jefferson that the Senate was meant to be a saucer to cool House legislation like a saucer was used to cool hot tea. Well, if partisan bills are the hot tea, then the Senate cloture requirements are the saucer. Rather than a simple majority here in the Senate, you have to get 60 out of 100 Senators to support a bill in order for it to advance. I know we all would love to see each of our ideas passed into law without any delay or extended debate, but that is not the way the Senate is supposed to work. It forces us to do what we ought to want to do anyway, which is to do the hardwork of bipartisan negotiation and compromise, come up with an 80-20 solution that can leave the 20 percent you don't agree on for another day and another battle, but to pass into law and make progress, on behalf of the American people, the 80 percent we can agree on. Neither party has had a filibuster-proof majority since the late 1970s, and as a result, Senators from red States and blue States have had to work together, as they should, to reach agreements on nearly every piece of legislation that has moved through this Chamber in the last four decades. The only real exception is the budget reconciliation process, which, by court rules, can be done with 51 votes, but, otherwise, in the main, 60 votes--a bipartisan majority--is required in order to move legislation. When bills require bipartisan support in order to pass, they are more durable. The fact is, if you pass a partisan piece of legislation, the next time the majority flips, it can undo it. I think it is useful in terms of our comity, in terms of our relationships, and in terms of our ability to get things done for the American people to try to figure out how to do things on a bipartisan basis. While I know bipartisanship isn't necessarily popular with the political bases of either party, it is critical to our democracy. Unfortunately, some of our colleagues on the other side have expressed an interest in using their newly gained powers in the majority to blow up the filibuster and to shatter that important cooling saucer. Make no mistake: That would do irreparable harm to this institution and inflict serious damage on our democracy. Without the 60-vote cloture requirement, both Chambers would be majority-rule institutions, with a steady flow of partisan legislation moving through Congress. If the same party controls both Chambers and the White House, that party could pass strictly partisan legislation that would quickly be signed into law without a single vote from the opposing party. Does that feel good? Well, if you are on the winning side, yes. Is it good for the country? No, it is not. It is efficient, but it is not effective. It is not lasting. It is not durable. It doesn't provide the sort of stability and ability to plan that the current structure provides. All the reasons I have given for doing away with the Senate cloture requirement are why no majority has ever tried to blow it up before. During the past administrations--the Trump, Obama, Bush and Clinton administration--there was a period of time when the President's party controlled both Chambers of Congress. If you go further back in history, you will find dozens of examples. But no Senate, until now, has ever been so shortsighted as to get rid of the cloture requirement and the filibuster when it comes to legislation. If Democrats carried out their threat to do that today, they would clear the path to pass a radical agenda that would fundamentally reshape our country without a single Republican vote. As a reminder, we have a 50-50 Senate, and in the House there are 221 Democrats and 211 Republicans. In all of Congress, there are 10 more Democrats than Republicans out of 535 Members of Congress. That is far from a progressive or a radical mandate. As I said, elections happen, majorities change, and Presidents come and go, as do U.S. Senators. In 2 years, Republicans could win the majority in either or both Chambers, and in 4, a Republican could win the White House as well. If we were to do away with this restraint on snap decisions and partisan legislation, what would the succeeding Republican administration likely do? It would simply undo everything that had been done on a partisan basis. Well, would our Democratic colleagues support a rule change to blow up the filibuster when Republicans control both Houses and the White House? Would they believe the Senate minority should be silenced, as they believe now? As I say, what goes around comes around, and the shoe is always on the other foot, eventually. The good news is we don't have to wonder what the answer would be because we already know it. In 2017, there was a Republican-led Senate, House, and White House, when we held both Houses and the White House. There was fear by some folks across the aisle--actually, both sides of the aisle--that the filibuster would be eliminated in order to clear a path for a Republican agenda. That was when 61 Senators, a filibuster-proof majority, wrote a bipartisan letter to then-Majority Leader McConnell and Democratic Leader Schumer, urging them to protect the filibuster. That was 61 Senators. Among the cosigners were 27 current Democratic Senators. One of the signatures on this bipartisan letter is that of our newly sworn-in Vice President, Kamala Harris. I can promise you that Leader McConnell has no interest in eliminating the filibuster, when he was majority or now as minority leader, because he knew the institutional damage that this would cause and the damage to our democracy. Unfortunately, Leader Schumer refuses to acknowledge that most basic fact. The two party leaders are now in the process of negotiating an organizing resolution on how this new reality of a 50-50 Senate will operate. Fortunately, there is modern precedent for how this has been done, and the two leaders have shared an interest in emulating the 2001 agreement negotiated by Tom Daschle and Trent Lott. But because of the newfound obsession of some on the left with uprooting the cornerstone of the Senate, Leader McConnell has asked for assurances from Leader Schumer that the filibuster and the cloture requirement will remain intact. After all, it is not unreasonable to ask your negotiating partner to commit to not breaking the rules, which is all Senator McConnell is asking for. Senator Schumer has derided that request, calling it ``extraneous'' and saying it falls outside the bounds of the 2001 organizing resolution. But I would like to remind our colleagues that in 2001 the majority party was not threatening to blow up the Senate rules to advance a partisan agenda. That is why it wasn't the subject, explicitly, of that negotiation of the organizing resolution. There was no need to ask for assurances on the protection of the filibuster because it wasn't even a question to be answered. Our Democratic colleagues have relied on the filibuster while Republicans have held the majority. I can think of time after time after time when we have tried to pass more COVID-19 relief bills that our Democratic colleagues felt were inadequate. And time after time after time, they used the filibuster to prevent passage of those bills, which was their right--I think a mistake, a decision I disagree with, but within their rights under the Senate rules. Republicans have also relied on the filibuster while Democrats have held the majority. We all recognize that at some point the shoe is always on the other foot, which is why no one has been so foolish as to eliminate the legislative filibuster or to even seriously consider it before. I hope our colleagues on the other side will avoid making this tragic mistake in order to pursue shortsighted political goals. And in an encouraging sign on Friday, the White House indicated that President Biden does not support getting rid of the legislative filibuster either. President Biden served in the Senate for, I believe, 36 years. He understands how this institution works, how it is supposed to work, and his advice--and it is only advice, since he is the President and not a Member of the Senate anymore--is: Don't go there. I encourage our more than two dozen Democratic colleagues who have repeatedly voiced their support for maintaining the legislative filibuster to insist that this critical stabilizing force in our democracy be preserved in the organizing resolution currently being discussed by Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell. I truly believe that if we don't do that, if the legislative filibuster is eliminated, we will all rue the day. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS117 | null | 2,169 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Filibuster Madam President, our first order of business has been to fill critical positions throughout the Federal Government, and the Senate has already confirmed the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense, both of whom I supported. This afternoon, we will vote on the confirmation of Janet Yellen to be Secretary of the Treasury, whom I intend to vote for, as well, and there is a slate of other important positions that need to be filled in the coming days and weeks. I should note that voting to confirm a nominee, under the words of the Constitution--providing advice and consent--is not a rubberstamp of the administration's policies. I know there will be important issues that we will disagree on, but if elections mean anything, they mean that the prevailing party should not be knee-capped as, unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues did to the previous administration when it tried to install a new Cabinet and agency heads. Rather, I believe the tradition has been to accommodate one another when we can so the administration can carry out its duties. This morning, I had a very good conversation with Judge Merrick Garland, whom President Biden has nominated for Attorney General. Judge Garland's extensive legal experience makes him well suited to lead the Department of Justice, and I appreciate his commitment to keeping politics out of the Justice Department. That is my No. 1 criterion for who should be the next head of the Department of Justice, the Attorney General. I think both sides should support a depoliticized Justice Department, and that is what I hope Judge Garland, once confirmed, will deliver. I look forward to talking to him more during the confirmation process, but unless I hear something new, I expect to support his nomination before the full Senate. It is in the best interest of the country to have qualified, Senate-confirmed individuals leading our Federal departments and agencies. As we look beyond the confirmation process, there are many opportunities for Republicans and Democrats to work together in those places where we agree, and I know additional coronavirus relief, as it is needed, is high on President Biden's list. Approximately 1 million Americans are being vaccinated every day, and while the light at the end of the tunnel is getting bigger and brighter, we are still not in the clear. Congress has provided trillions of dollars in relief to strengthen our fight on both the healthcare and economic fronts, but we need to remain vigilant in the final, critical phase of this battle. I don't support President Biden's pandemic relief proposal in its current form, but I do believe it is a starting point for bipartisan negotiations. I will gladly support a reasonable, targeted bill as we determine precisely, as we can, where the needs truly are. We all agree we need to bolster vaccine manufacturing and distribution; that some Americans need additional financial support; and that Main Street businesses and their workforces are still struggling to survive this economic recession. I hope the administration will be willing to work with Congress to reach an agreement that receives broad, bipartisan support as each of the previous bills that we have passed has. During my time in the Senate, I have worked with folks across the aisle on our shared priorities, and I have no plans of changing that practice now, but make no mistake: I will push back, forcefully, respectfully, when the President and I disagree. One of the things I have learned, though, is that there is a difference between what some elected officials say and what they actually do, and rather than listen to what they say, I really prefer to watch what they do and see if those are consistent. Only hours after being sworn in and speaking of unifying the country, President Biden unilaterally canceled the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline, and on the same day, the administration halted all new energy leasing and permitting on public lands and waters. With these unfortunate actions, President Biden is killing thousands of well-paying U.S. jobs and kicking the U.S. energy industry while it is still struggling from the pandemic. I had hoped and still hope to work with President Biden on an all-of-the-above energy strategy that prioritizes our fossil fuels--we have 280 million cars on the road, and people are still going to need gasoline for the foreseeable future--renewables, and innovative technologies that help us harness our most prevalent and reliable energy sources. One of the things that, I think, is exciting about some of the research that is being done is on carbon capture technology, which ought to be, again, something that we can all agree on as we transition to the next forms of energy. As we begin a new Congress and welcome a new President, I am, once again, reminded of the words that were quoted from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recently deceased Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. She didn't originate it, but she did make it popular when she said, ``You can disagree without being disagreeable.'' Of course, democracy itself expects a competition of ideas but not necessarily the mudslinging and name-calling that have become all too common. I hope we can return to the respectful battles in the days and months ahead and know there is no better battleground for that to happen in than in the Senate, where sometimes--sometimes--we live up to the billing as the world's greatest deliberative body. The primary feature that separates the Senate from the House or any other legislative body is that of free and full debate. That is why it takes 60 votes to cut off debate--so that you can then vote and pass a piece of legislation with 51 votes. It forces us to do what we ought to do anyway, which is to have fulsome debate, allow minority views to be presented, and then, once the debate is concluded, have a vote on the underlying bill. Fundamentally, the Founders saw the Senate as a place that protected minority rights. I have been here long enough to be in the majority and in the minority, and we know what goes around comes around in the U.S. Senate. It is as sure as day follows night. That is why we are called a deliberative body. In the House, you have 435 Members, and in order to pass a bill, all you need is a majority. Got the votes? Jam it through. Yet there has to be someplace, somewhere, in a nation of 330 million souls, where competing ideas can be seriously debated, and that is why our Founders created the U.S. Senate. George Washington was famously said to have told Thomas Jefferson that the Senate was meant to be a saucer to cool House legislation like a saucer was used to cool hot tea. Well, if partisan bills are the hot tea, then the Senate cloture requirements are the saucer. Rather than a simple majority here in the Senate, you have to get 60 out of 100 Senators to support a bill in order for it to advance. I know we all would love to see each of our ideas passed into law without any delay or extended debate, but that is not the way the Senate is supposed to work. It forces us to do what we ought to want to do anyway, which is to do the hardwork of bipartisan negotiation and compromise, come up with an 80-20 solution that can leave the 20 percent you don't agree on for another day and another battle, but to pass into law and make progress, on behalf of the American people, the 80 percent we can agree on. Neither party has had a filibuster-proof majority since the late 1970s, and as a result, Senators from red States and blue States have had to work together, as they should, to reach agreements on nearly every piece of legislation that has moved through this Chamber in the last four decades. The only real exception is the budget reconciliation process, which, by court rules, can be done with 51 votes, but, otherwise, in the main, 60 votes--a bipartisan majority--is required in order to move legislation. When bills require bipartisan support in order to pass, they are more durable. The fact is, if you pass a partisan piece of legislation, the next time the majority flips, it can undo it. I think it is useful in terms of our comity, in terms of our relationships, and in terms of our ability to get things done for the American people to try to figure out how to do things on a bipartisan basis. While I know bipartisanship isn't necessarily popular with the political bases of either party, it is critical to our democracy. Unfortunately, some of our colleagues on the other side have expressed an interest in using their newly gained powers in the majority to blow up the filibuster and to shatter that important cooling saucer. Make no mistake: That would do irreparable harm to this institution and inflict serious damage on our democracy. Without the 60-vote cloture requirement, both Chambers would be majority-rule institutions, with a steady flow of partisan legislation moving through Congress. If the same party controls both Chambers and the White House, that party could pass strictly partisan legislation that would quickly be signed into law without a single vote from the opposing party. Does that feel good? Well, if you are on the winning side, yes. Is it good for the country? No, it is not. It is efficient, but it is not effective. It is not lasting. It is not durable. It doesn't provide the sort of stability and ability to plan that the current structure provides. All the reasons I have given for doing away with the Senate cloture requirement are why no majority has ever tried to blow it up before. During the past administrations--the Trump, Obama, Bush and Clinton administration--there was a period of time when the President's party controlled both Chambers of Congress. If you go further back in history, you will find dozens of examples. But no Senate, until now, has ever been so shortsighted as to get rid of the cloture requirement and the filibuster when it comes to legislation. If Democrats carried out their threat to do that today, they would clear the path to pass a radical agenda that would fundamentally reshape our country without a single Republican vote. As a reminder, we have a 50-50 Senate, and in the House there are 221 Democrats and 211 Republicans. In all of Congress, there are 10 more Democrats than Republicans out of 535 Members of Congress. That is far from a progressive or a radical mandate. As I said, elections happen, majorities change, and Presidents come and go, as do U.S. Senators. In 2 years, Republicans could win the majority in either or both Chambers, and in 4, a Republican could win the White House as well. If we were to do away with this restraint on snap decisions and partisan legislation, what would the succeeding Republican administration likely do? It would simply undo everything that had been done on a partisan basis. Well, would our Democratic colleagues support a rule change to blow up the filibuster when Republicans control both Houses and the White House? Would they believe the Senate minority should be silenced, as they believe now? As I say, what goes around comes around, and the shoe is always on the other foot, eventually. The good news is we don't have to wonder what the answer would be because we already know it. In 2017, there was a Republican-led Senate, House, and White House, when we held both Houses and the White House. There was fear by some folks across the aisle--actually, both sides of the aisle--that the filibuster would be eliminated in order to clear a path for a Republican agenda. That was when 61 Senators, a filibuster-proof majority, wrote a bipartisan letter to then-Majority Leader McConnell and Democratic Leader Schumer, urging them to protect the filibuster. That was 61 Senators. Among the cosigners were 27 current Democratic Senators. One of the signatures on this bipartisan letter is that of our newly sworn-in Vice President, Kamala Harris. I can promise you that Leader McConnell has no interest in eliminating the filibuster, when he was majority or now as minority leader, because he knew the institutional damage that this would cause and the damage to our democracy. Unfortunately, Leader Schumer refuses to acknowledge that most basic fact. The two party leaders are now in the process of negotiating an organizing resolution on how this new reality of a 50-50 Senate will operate. Fortunately, there is modern precedent for how this has been done, and the two leaders have shared an interest in emulating the 2001 agreement negotiated by Tom Daschle and Trent Lott. But because of the newfound obsession of some on the left with uprooting the cornerstone of the Senate, Leader McConnell has asked for assurances from Leader Schumer that the filibuster and the cloture requirement will remain intact. After all, it is not unreasonable to ask your negotiating partner to commit to not breaking the rules, which is all Senator McConnell is asking for. Senator Schumer has derided that request, calling it ``extraneous'' and saying it falls outside the bounds of the 2001 organizing resolution. But I would like to remind our colleagues that in 2001 the majority party was not threatening to blow up the Senate rules to advance a partisan agenda. That is why it wasn't the subject, explicitly, of that negotiation of the organizing resolution. There was no need to ask for assurances on the protection of the filibuster because it wasn't even a question to be answered. Our Democratic colleagues have relied on the filibuster while Republicans have held the majority. I can think of time after time after time when we have tried to pass more COVID-19 relief bills that our Democratic colleagues felt were inadequate. And time after time after time, they used the filibuster to prevent passage of those bills, which was their right--I think a mistake, a decision I disagree with, but within their rights under the Senate rules. Republicans have also relied on the filibuster while Democrats have held the majority. We all recognize that at some point the shoe is always on the other foot, which is why no one has been so foolish as to eliminate the legislative filibuster or to even seriously consider it before. I hope our colleagues on the other side will avoid making this tragic mistake in order to pursue shortsighted political goals. And in an encouraging sign on Friday, the White House indicated that President Biden does not support getting rid of the legislative filibuster either. President Biden served in the Senate for, I believe, 36 years. He understands how this institution works, how it is supposed to work, and his advice--and it is only advice, since he is the President and not a Member of the Senate anymore--is: Don't go there. I encourage our more than two dozen Democratic colleagues who have repeatedly voiced their support for maintaining the legislative filibuster to insist that this critical stabilizing force in our democracy be preserved in the organizing resolution currently being discussed by Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell. I truly believe that if we don't do that, if the legislative filibuster is eliminated, we will all rue the day. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS117 | null | 2,170 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Filibuster Madam President, our first order of business has been to fill critical positions throughout the Federal Government, and the Senate has already confirmed the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense, both of whom I supported. This afternoon, we will vote on the confirmation of Janet Yellen to be Secretary of the Treasury, whom I intend to vote for, as well, and there is a slate of other important positions that need to be filled in the coming days and weeks. I should note that voting to confirm a nominee, under the words of the Constitution--providing advice and consent--is not a rubberstamp of the administration's policies. I know there will be important issues that we will disagree on, but if elections mean anything, they mean that the prevailing party should not be knee-capped as, unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues did to the previous administration when it tried to install a new Cabinet and agency heads. Rather, I believe the tradition has been to accommodate one another when we can so the administration can carry out its duties. This morning, I had a very good conversation with Judge Merrick Garland, whom President Biden has nominated for Attorney General. Judge Garland's extensive legal experience makes him well suited to lead the Department of Justice, and I appreciate his commitment to keeping politics out of the Justice Department. That is my No. 1 criterion for who should be the next head of the Department of Justice, the Attorney General. I think both sides should support a depoliticized Justice Department, and that is what I hope Judge Garland, once confirmed, will deliver. I look forward to talking to him more during the confirmation process, but unless I hear something new, I expect to support his nomination before the full Senate. It is in the best interest of the country to have qualified, Senate-confirmed individuals leading our Federal departments and agencies. As we look beyond the confirmation process, there are many opportunities for Republicans and Democrats to work together in those places where we agree, and I know additional coronavirus relief, as it is needed, is high on President Biden's list. Approximately 1 million Americans are being vaccinated every day, and while the light at the end of the tunnel is getting bigger and brighter, we are still not in the clear. Congress has provided trillions of dollars in relief to strengthen our fight on both the healthcare and economic fronts, but we need to remain vigilant in the final, critical phase of this battle. I don't support President Biden's pandemic relief proposal in its current form, but I do believe it is a starting point for bipartisan negotiations. I will gladly support a reasonable, targeted bill as we determine precisely, as we can, where the needs truly are. We all agree we need to bolster vaccine manufacturing and distribution; that some Americans need additional financial support; and that Main Street businesses and their workforces are still struggling to survive this economic recession. I hope the administration will be willing to work with Congress to reach an agreement that receives broad, bipartisan support as each of the previous bills that we have passed has. During my time in the Senate, I have worked with folks across the aisle on our shared priorities, and I have no plans of changing that practice now, but make no mistake: I will push back, forcefully, respectfully, when the President and I disagree. One of the things I have learned, though, is that there is a difference between what some elected officials say and what they actually do, and rather than listen to what they say, I really prefer to watch what they do and see if those are consistent. Only hours after being sworn in and speaking of unifying the country, President Biden unilaterally canceled the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline, and on the same day, the administration halted all new energy leasing and permitting on public lands and waters. With these unfortunate actions, President Biden is killing thousands of well-paying U.S. jobs and kicking the U.S. energy industry while it is still struggling from the pandemic. I had hoped and still hope to work with President Biden on an all-of-the-above energy strategy that prioritizes our fossil fuels--we have 280 million cars on the road, and people are still going to need gasoline for the foreseeable future--renewables, and innovative technologies that help us harness our most prevalent and reliable energy sources. One of the things that, I think, is exciting about some of the research that is being done is on carbon capture technology, which ought to be, again, something that we can all agree on as we transition to the next forms of energy. As we begin a new Congress and welcome a new President, I am, once again, reminded of the words that were quoted from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, recently deceased Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. She didn't originate it, but she did make it popular when she said, ``You can disagree without being disagreeable.'' Of course, democracy itself expects a competition of ideas but not necessarily the mudslinging and name-calling that have become all too common. I hope we can return to the respectful battles in the days and months ahead and know there is no better battleground for that to happen in than in the Senate, where sometimes--sometimes--we live up to the billing as the world's greatest deliberative body. The primary feature that separates the Senate from the House or any other legislative body is that of free and full debate. That is why it takes 60 votes to cut off debate--so that you can then vote and pass a piece of legislation with 51 votes. It forces us to do what we ought to do anyway, which is to have fulsome debate, allow minority views to be presented, and then, once the debate is concluded, have a vote on the underlying bill. Fundamentally, the Founders saw the Senate as a place that protected minority rights. I have been here long enough to be in the majority and in the minority, and we know what goes around comes around in the U.S. Senate. It is as sure as day follows night. That is why we are called a deliberative body. In the House, you have 435 Members, and in order to pass a bill, all you need is a majority. Got the votes? Jam it through. Yet there has to be someplace, somewhere, in a nation of 330 million souls, where competing ideas can be seriously debated, and that is why our Founders created the U.S. Senate. George Washington was famously said to have told Thomas Jefferson that the Senate was meant to be a saucer to cool House legislation like a saucer was used to cool hot tea. Well, if partisan bills are the hot tea, then the Senate cloture requirements are the saucer. Rather than a simple majority here in the Senate, you have to get 60 out of 100 Senators to support a bill in order for it to advance. I know we all would love to see each of our ideas passed into law without any delay or extended debate, but that is not the way the Senate is supposed to work. It forces us to do what we ought to want to do anyway, which is to do the hardwork of bipartisan negotiation and compromise, come up with an 80-20 solution that can leave the 20 percent you don't agree on for another day and another battle, but to pass into law and make progress, on behalf of the American people, the 80 percent we can agree on. Neither party has had a filibuster-proof majority since the late 1970s, and as a result, Senators from red States and blue States have had to work together, as they should, to reach agreements on nearly every piece of legislation that has moved through this Chamber in the last four decades. The only real exception is the budget reconciliation process, which, by court rules, can be done with 51 votes, but, otherwise, in the main, 60 votes--a bipartisan majority--is required in order to move legislation. When bills require bipartisan support in order to pass, they are more durable. The fact is, if you pass a partisan piece of legislation, the next time the majority flips, it can undo it. I think it is useful in terms of our comity, in terms of our relationships, and in terms of our ability to get things done for the American people to try to figure out how to do things on a bipartisan basis. While I know bipartisanship isn't necessarily popular with the political bases of either party, it is critical to our democracy. Unfortunately, some of our colleagues on the other side have expressed an interest in using their newly gained powers in the majority to blow up the filibuster and to shatter that important cooling saucer. Make no mistake: That would do irreparable harm to this institution and inflict serious damage on our democracy. Without the 60-vote cloture requirement, both Chambers would be majority-rule institutions, with a steady flow of partisan legislation moving through Congress. If the same party controls both Chambers and the White House, that party could pass strictly partisan legislation that would quickly be signed into law without a single vote from the opposing party. Does that feel good? Well, if you are on the winning side, yes. Is it good for the country? No, it is not. It is efficient, but it is not effective. It is not lasting. It is not durable. It doesn't provide the sort of stability and ability to plan that the current structure provides. All the reasons I have given for doing away with the Senate cloture requirement are why no majority has ever tried to blow it up before. During the past administrations--the Trump, Obama, Bush and Clinton administration--there was a period of time when the President's party controlled both Chambers of Congress. If you go further back in history, you will find dozens of examples. But no Senate, until now, has ever been so shortsighted as to get rid of the cloture requirement and the filibuster when it comes to legislation. If Democrats carried out their threat to do that today, they would clear the path to pass a radical agenda that would fundamentally reshape our country without a single Republican vote. As a reminder, we have a 50-50 Senate, and in the House there are 221 Democrats and 211 Republicans. In all of Congress, there are 10 more Democrats than Republicans out of 535 Members of Congress. That is far from a progressive or a radical mandate. As I said, elections happen, majorities change, and Presidents come and go, as do U.S. Senators. In 2 years, Republicans could win the majority in either or both Chambers, and in 4, a Republican could win the White House as well. If we were to do away with this restraint on snap decisions and partisan legislation, what would the succeeding Republican administration likely do? It would simply undo everything that had been done on a partisan basis. Well, would our Democratic colleagues support a rule change to blow up the filibuster when Republicans control both Houses and the White House? Would they believe the Senate minority should be silenced, as they believe now? As I say, what goes around comes around, and the shoe is always on the other foot, eventually. The good news is we don't have to wonder what the answer would be because we already know it. In 2017, there was a Republican-led Senate, House, and White House, when we held both Houses and the White House. There was fear by some folks across the aisle--actually, both sides of the aisle--that the filibuster would be eliminated in order to clear a path for a Republican agenda. That was when 61 Senators, a filibuster-proof majority, wrote a bipartisan letter to then-Majority Leader McConnell and Democratic Leader Schumer, urging them to protect the filibuster. That was 61 Senators. Among the cosigners were 27 current Democratic Senators. One of the signatures on this bipartisan letter is that of our newly sworn-in Vice President, Kamala Harris. I can promise you that Leader McConnell has no interest in eliminating the filibuster, when he was majority or now as minority leader, because he knew the institutional damage that this would cause and the damage to our democracy. Unfortunately, Leader Schumer refuses to acknowledge that most basic fact. The two party leaders are now in the process of negotiating an organizing resolution on how this new reality of a 50-50 Senate will operate. Fortunately, there is modern precedent for how this has been done, and the two leaders have shared an interest in emulating the 2001 agreement negotiated by Tom Daschle and Trent Lott. But because of the newfound obsession of some on the left with uprooting the cornerstone of the Senate, Leader McConnell has asked for assurances from Leader Schumer that the filibuster and the cloture requirement will remain intact. After all, it is not unreasonable to ask your negotiating partner to commit to not breaking the rules, which is all Senator McConnell is asking for. Senator Schumer has derided that request, calling it ``extraneous'' and saying it falls outside the bounds of the 2001 organizing resolution. But I would like to remind our colleagues that in 2001 the majority party was not threatening to blow up the Senate rules to advance a partisan agenda. That is why it wasn't the subject, explicitly, of that negotiation of the organizing resolution. There was no need to ask for assurances on the protection of the filibuster because it wasn't even a question to be answered. Our Democratic colleagues have relied on the filibuster while Republicans have held the majority. I can think of time after time after time when we have tried to pass more COVID-19 relief bills that our Democratic colleagues felt were inadequate. And time after time after time, they used the filibuster to prevent passage of those bills, which was their right--I think a mistake, a decision I disagree with, but within their rights under the Senate rules. Republicans have also relied on the filibuster while Democrats have held the majority. We all recognize that at some point the shoe is always on the other foot, which is why no one has been so foolish as to eliminate the legislative filibuster or to even seriously consider it before. I hope our colleagues on the other side will avoid making this tragic mistake in order to pursue shortsighted political goals. And in an encouraging sign on Friday, the White House indicated that President Biden does not support getting rid of the legislative filibuster either. President Biden served in the Senate for, I believe, 36 years. He understands how this institution works, how it is supposed to work, and his advice--and it is only advice, since he is the President and not a Member of the Senate anymore--is: Don't go there. I encourage our more than two dozen Democratic colleagues who have repeatedly voiced their support for maintaining the legislative filibuster to insist that this critical stabilizing force in our democracy be preserved in the organizing resolution currently being discussed by Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell. I truly believe that if we don't do that, if the legislative filibuster is eliminated, we will all rue the day. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS117 | null | 2,171 |
formal | blue | null | antisemitic | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I am going to be one of the first Senators to congratulate Dr. Yellen, now Secretary Yellen, to be Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. You saw it was a strong vote, and there is no doubt that she has the credentials, the experience, the qualifications to be Secretary of the Treasury--former Chairman of the Fed. I mean, her resume is off the charts. I know her nomination is historic for so many women across the country, including my three daughters. I am mentioning this because I certainly intended to vote for now-Secretary Yellen, and I was a ``no'' vote. I want to explain my ``no'' vote because I had a very good conversation with her just the other day. We covered a whole bunch of topics--everything from Alaska Native corporations to the strength of the dollar, to our debt and deficit--big macroeconomic issues that are important to the country, particularly as we are in a recession. It is important to my State. But we got to the topic of energy. We got to the topic of energy, and, reluctantly, I am saying this now because I was a bit shocked that despite a long, robust discussion, it was very difficult to get her, from my perspective, to commit to being a Secretary of the Treasury, the most important economic player in any Cabinet in any government--in the U.S. Government, besides, of course, the President--to commit to being a strong advocate for a robust, all-of-the-above energy sector for the U.S. economy. This is not a radical proposition. I would argue that every Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton has been a robust supporter of resource development in our energy sector--again, all of it--renewables, oil, gas. And the reason is that it has been such an important driver of economic growth and jobs for pretty much our Nation's entire existence. Now that we are in this recession--deep recession--we need good job growth, and we need a strong recovery. To me, having the Secretary of the Treasury be a strong proponent in the debates about policy for the energy sector, I thought, was a no-brainer. As a matter of fact, I think pretty much every Secretary of the Treasury has been that person. Again, in the 2008-2009 recession--the deep, great recession--the No. 1 driver of economic growth and job growth and capital formation for the U.S. economy was the energy sector, and it was supported. Democrats and Republicans, for decades, have supported a strong energy sector. But despite a long, respectful debate with now Secretary Yellen, with whom I certainly have a good relationship, I could not get that commitment, which I thought was surprising. As a matter of fact, I thought it was shocking, and it is the reason I reluctantly voted no because, again, she is very qualified. What is going on here is we are starting to see policies that I believe need a national debate. We are starting to see policies--yes, we all want renewables, clean energy, but we have a really important, strong energy sector. Prior to the pandemic, we were the world's superpower of energy again. One of the reasons we won World War II was our energy sector. The men and women who have been producing energy--``all of the above'' energy--are great patriotic workers who have been doing it for decades to the benefit of every single American. We need a debate because what I am starting to see with the new administration, unfortunately--and I have had discussions, and, hopefully, they are not going to go down this path--are Executive actions that are going to target certain sectors of the energy sector, the U.S. economy. Natural gas. We can be dominant in natural gas for 100 years. We are going to start targeting workers in the natural gas sector? Oil. I know some people don't like oil, but it is important. We can do all of this, but right now, there seems to be hostility toward the sector and the workers and no debate. We should have that debate. It is an important debate. It is really important in my State, but I think it is really important to America. Every Secretary of the Treasury for the last three, four, five, six, seven decades--since World War II--has always sought the goal of getting America back to energy independence. That is good for jobs. It is good for low-cost manufacturing. It is good to reduce the heating and energy bills of American families. It is good for our national security. It is good for our foreign policy. We are pretty much on the verge of doing this. And now we are going to start to unilaterally disarm? We have gotten to the point where I can't find anyone--and I hope I am wrong--in the Biden administration Cabinet who is going to be a proponent of a strong energy sector. Who is it? I was hoping it was going to be the Secretary of the Treasury. Maybe in our long discussion, I misinterpreted where she is going to be on this issue. Pretty much every previous Secretary--Democratic and Republican--in the history of our great Nation has really, really been an advocate for the men and women who work in the sector and for the economic growth it brings and for the help it brings to families and the good jobs it brings. So that is the rationale behind my vote. Right now, I think we are starting to see, whether with the Keystone Pipeline decision or with the men and women in the building trades, who have built this country through hard work, that they are being laid off by the thousands. We had a big scare back home in my State. All weekend, I was working this issue of these Executive orders from the Biden administration, where it looked like it was going to send hundreds of people home, unemployed--oil and gas workers in my State. Why? I hope that is not the case, especially during a recession. We need a debate on it, and I certainly hope somebody in this administration, in their principals' meetings, talk about how we get good jobs and a strong working class. I have noticed that the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, keeps talking about basing our policies on working-class families. You can't get more blue-collar, strong middle class than these energy sector jobs. I, certainly, want to have a good, constructive relationship with the Secretary of the Treasury and her team, but given the people I represent and what I am starting to see right now, I could not in good conscience vote yes when, on the basic question of ``Are you committed and will you be a strong advocate for a strong energy sector--you name it: renewables, natural gas, wind, solar--all of the above?'' I couldn't get that commitment. I reluctantly voted no on someone who has a background and experience in these other areas that are important for the country. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS123 | null | 2,172 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I am going to be one of the first Senators to congratulate Dr. Yellen, now Secretary Yellen, to be Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. You saw it was a strong vote, and there is no doubt that she has the credentials, the experience, the qualifications to be Secretary of the Treasury--former Chairman of the Fed. I mean, her resume is off the charts. I know her nomination is historic for so many women across the country, including my three daughters. I am mentioning this because I certainly intended to vote for now-Secretary Yellen, and I was a ``no'' vote. I want to explain my ``no'' vote because I had a very good conversation with her just the other day. We covered a whole bunch of topics--everything from Alaska Native corporations to the strength of the dollar, to our debt and deficit--big macroeconomic issues that are important to the country, particularly as we are in a recession. It is important to my State. But we got to the topic of energy. We got to the topic of energy, and, reluctantly, I am saying this now because I was a bit shocked that despite a long, robust discussion, it was very difficult to get her, from my perspective, to commit to being a Secretary of the Treasury, the most important economic player in any Cabinet in any government--in the U.S. Government, besides, of course, the President--to commit to being a strong advocate for a robust, all-of-the-above energy sector for the U.S. economy. This is not a radical proposition. I would argue that every Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton has been a robust supporter of resource development in our energy sector--again, all of it--renewables, oil, gas. And the reason is that it has been such an important driver of economic growth and jobs for pretty much our Nation's entire existence. Now that we are in this recession--deep recession--we need good job growth, and we need a strong recovery. To me, having the Secretary of the Treasury be a strong proponent in the debates about policy for the energy sector, I thought, was a no-brainer. As a matter of fact, I think pretty much every Secretary of the Treasury has been that person. Again, in the 2008-2009 recession--the deep, great recession--the No. 1 driver of economic growth and job growth and capital formation for the U.S. economy was the energy sector, and it was supported. Democrats and Republicans, for decades, have supported a strong energy sector. But despite a long, respectful debate with now Secretary Yellen, with whom I certainly have a good relationship, I could not get that commitment, which I thought was surprising. As a matter of fact, I thought it was shocking, and it is the reason I reluctantly voted no because, again, she is very qualified. What is going on here is we are starting to see policies that I believe need a national debate. We are starting to see policies--yes, we all want renewables, clean energy, but we have a really important, strong energy sector. Prior to the pandemic, we were the world's superpower of energy again. One of the reasons we won World War II was our energy sector. The men and women who have been producing energy--``all of the above'' energy--are great patriotic workers who have been doing it for decades to the benefit of every single American. We need a debate because what I am starting to see with the new administration, unfortunately--and I have had discussions, and, hopefully, they are not going to go down this path--are Executive actions that are going to target certain sectors of the energy sector, the U.S. economy. Natural gas. We can be dominant in natural gas for 100 years. We are going to start targeting workers in the natural gas sector? Oil. I know some people don't like oil, but it is important. We can do all of this, but right now, there seems to be hostility toward the sector and the workers and no debate. We should have that debate. It is an important debate. It is really important in my State, but I think it is really important to America. Every Secretary of the Treasury for the last three, four, five, six, seven decades--since World War II--has always sought the goal of getting America back to energy independence. That is good for jobs. It is good for low-cost manufacturing. It is good to reduce the heating and energy bills of American families. It is good for our national security. It is good for our foreign policy. We are pretty much on the verge of doing this. And now we are going to start to unilaterally disarm? We have gotten to the point where I can't find anyone--and I hope I am wrong--in the Biden administration Cabinet who is going to be a proponent of a strong energy sector. Who is it? I was hoping it was going to be the Secretary of the Treasury. Maybe in our long discussion, I misinterpreted where she is going to be on this issue. Pretty much every previous Secretary--Democratic and Republican--in the history of our great Nation has really, really been an advocate for the men and women who work in the sector and for the economic growth it brings and for the help it brings to families and the good jobs it brings. So that is the rationale behind my vote. Right now, I think we are starting to see, whether with the Keystone Pipeline decision or with the men and women in the building trades, who have built this country through hard work, that they are being laid off by the thousands. We had a big scare back home in my State. All weekend, I was working this issue of these Executive orders from the Biden administration, where it looked like it was going to send hundreds of people home, unemployed--oil and gas workers in my State. Why? I hope that is not the case, especially during a recession. We need a debate on it, and I certainly hope somebody in this administration, in their principals' meetings, talk about how we get good jobs and a strong working class. I have noticed that the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, keeps talking about basing our policies on working-class families. You can't get more blue-collar, strong middle class than these energy sector jobs. I, certainly, want to have a good, constructive relationship with the Secretary of the Treasury and her team, but given the people I represent and what I am starting to see right now, I could not in good conscience vote yes when, on the basic question of ``Are you committed and will you be a strong advocate for a strong energy sector--you name it: renewables, natural gas, wind, solar--all of the above?'' I couldn't get that commitment. I reluctantly voted no on someone who has a background and experience in these other areas that are important for the country. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS123 | null | 2,173 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I am going to be one of the first Senators to congratulate Dr. Yellen, now Secretary Yellen, to be Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. You saw it was a strong vote, and there is no doubt that she has the credentials, the experience, the qualifications to be Secretary of the Treasury--former Chairman of the Fed. I mean, her resume is off the charts. I know her nomination is historic for so many women across the country, including my three daughters. I am mentioning this because I certainly intended to vote for now-Secretary Yellen, and I was a ``no'' vote. I want to explain my ``no'' vote because I had a very good conversation with her just the other day. We covered a whole bunch of topics--everything from Alaska Native corporations to the strength of the dollar, to our debt and deficit--big macroeconomic issues that are important to the country, particularly as we are in a recession. It is important to my State. But we got to the topic of energy. We got to the topic of energy, and, reluctantly, I am saying this now because I was a bit shocked that despite a long, robust discussion, it was very difficult to get her, from my perspective, to commit to being a Secretary of the Treasury, the most important economic player in any Cabinet in any government--in the U.S. Government, besides, of course, the President--to commit to being a strong advocate for a robust, all-of-the-above energy sector for the U.S. economy. This is not a radical proposition. I would argue that every Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton has been a robust supporter of resource development in our energy sector--again, all of it--renewables, oil, gas. And the reason is that it has been such an important driver of economic growth and jobs for pretty much our Nation's entire existence. Now that we are in this recession--deep recession--we need good job growth, and we need a strong recovery. To me, having the Secretary of the Treasury be a strong proponent in the debates about policy for the energy sector, I thought, was a no-brainer. As a matter of fact, I think pretty much every Secretary of the Treasury has been that person. Again, in the 2008-2009 recession--the deep, great recession--the No. 1 driver of economic growth and job growth and capital formation for the U.S. economy was the energy sector, and it was supported. Democrats and Republicans, for decades, have supported a strong energy sector. But despite a long, respectful debate with now Secretary Yellen, with whom I certainly have a good relationship, I could not get that commitment, which I thought was surprising. As a matter of fact, I thought it was shocking, and it is the reason I reluctantly voted no because, again, she is very qualified. What is going on here is we are starting to see policies that I believe need a national debate. We are starting to see policies--yes, we all want renewables, clean energy, but we have a really important, strong energy sector. Prior to the pandemic, we were the world's superpower of energy again. One of the reasons we won World War II was our energy sector. The men and women who have been producing energy--``all of the above'' energy--are great patriotic workers who have been doing it for decades to the benefit of every single American. We need a debate because what I am starting to see with the new administration, unfortunately--and I have had discussions, and, hopefully, they are not going to go down this path--are Executive actions that are going to target certain sectors of the energy sector, the U.S. economy. Natural gas. We can be dominant in natural gas for 100 years. We are going to start targeting workers in the natural gas sector? Oil. I know some people don't like oil, but it is important. We can do all of this, but right now, there seems to be hostility toward the sector and the workers and no debate. We should have that debate. It is an important debate. It is really important in my State, but I think it is really important to America. Every Secretary of the Treasury for the last three, four, five, six, seven decades--since World War II--has always sought the goal of getting America back to energy independence. That is good for jobs. It is good for low-cost manufacturing. It is good to reduce the heating and energy bills of American families. It is good for our national security. It is good for our foreign policy. We are pretty much on the verge of doing this. And now we are going to start to unilaterally disarm? We have gotten to the point where I can't find anyone--and I hope I am wrong--in the Biden administration Cabinet who is going to be a proponent of a strong energy sector. Who is it? I was hoping it was going to be the Secretary of the Treasury. Maybe in our long discussion, I misinterpreted where she is going to be on this issue. Pretty much every previous Secretary--Democratic and Republican--in the history of our great Nation has really, really been an advocate for the men and women who work in the sector and for the economic growth it brings and for the help it brings to families and the good jobs it brings. So that is the rationale behind my vote. Right now, I think we are starting to see, whether with the Keystone Pipeline decision or with the men and women in the building trades, who have built this country through hard work, that they are being laid off by the thousands. We had a big scare back home in my State. All weekend, I was working this issue of these Executive orders from the Biden administration, where it looked like it was going to send hundreds of people home, unemployed--oil and gas workers in my State. Why? I hope that is not the case, especially during a recession. We need a debate on it, and I certainly hope somebody in this administration, in their principals' meetings, talk about how we get good jobs and a strong working class. I have noticed that the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, keeps talking about basing our policies on working-class families. You can't get more blue-collar, strong middle class than these energy sector jobs. I, certainly, want to have a good, constructive relationship with the Secretary of the Treasury and her team, but given the people I represent and what I am starting to see right now, I could not in good conscience vote yes when, on the basic question of ``Are you committed and will you be a strong advocate for a strong energy sector--you name it: renewables, natural gas, wind, solar--all of the above?'' I couldn't get that commitment. I reluctantly voted no on someone who has a background and experience in these other areas that are important for the country. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS123 | null | 2,174 |
formal | middle class | null | racist | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I am going to be one of the first Senators to congratulate Dr. Yellen, now Secretary Yellen, to be Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. You saw it was a strong vote, and there is no doubt that she has the credentials, the experience, the qualifications to be Secretary of the Treasury--former Chairman of the Fed. I mean, her resume is off the charts. I know her nomination is historic for so many women across the country, including my three daughters. I am mentioning this because I certainly intended to vote for now-Secretary Yellen, and I was a ``no'' vote. I want to explain my ``no'' vote because I had a very good conversation with her just the other day. We covered a whole bunch of topics--everything from Alaska Native corporations to the strength of the dollar, to our debt and deficit--big macroeconomic issues that are important to the country, particularly as we are in a recession. It is important to my State. But we got to the topic of energy. We got to the topic of energy, and, reluctantly, I am saying this now because I was a bit shocked that despite a long, robust discussion, it was very difficult to get her, from my perspective, to commit to being a Secretary of the Treasury, the most important economic player in any Cabinet in any government--in the U.S. Government, besides, of course, the President--to commit to being a strong advocate for a robust, all-of-the-above energy sector for the U.S. economy. This is not a radical proposition. I would argue that every Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton has been a robust supporter of resource development in our energy sector--again, all of it--renewables, oil, gas. And the reason is that it has been such an important driver of economic growth and jobs for pretty much our Nation's entire existence. Now that we are in this recession--deep recession--we need good job growth, and we need a strong recovery. To me, having the Secretary of the Treasury be a strong proponent in the debates about policy for the energy sector, I thought, was a no-brainer. As a matter of fact, I think pretty much every Secretary of the Treasury has been that person. Again, in the 2008-2009 recession--the deep, great recession--the No. 1 driver of economic growth and job growth and capital formation for the U.S. economy was the energy sector, and it was supported. Democrats and Republicans, for decades, have supported a strong energy sector. But despite a long, respectful debate with now Secretary Yellen, with whom I certainly have a good relationship, I could not get that commitment, which I thought was surprising. As a matter of fact, I thought it was shocking, and it is the reason I reluctantly voted no because, again, she is very qualified. What is going on here is we are starting to see policies that I believe need a national debate. We are starting to see policies--yes, we all want renewables, clean energy, but we have a really important, strong energy sector. Prior to the pandemic, we were the world's superpower of energy again. One of the reasons we won World War II was our energy sector. The men and women who have been producing energy--``all of the above'' energy--are great patriotic workers who have been doing it for decades to the benefit of every single American. We need a debate because what I am starting to see with the new administration, unfortunately--and I have had discussions, and, hopefully, they are not going to go down this path--are Executive actions that are going to target certain sectors of the energy sector, the U.S. economy. Natural gas. We can be dominant in natural gas for 100 years. We are going to start targeting workers in the natural gas sector? Oil. I know some people don't like oil, but it is important. We can do all of this, but right now, there seems to be hostility toward the sector and the workers and no debate. We should have that debate. It is an important debate. It is really important in my State, but I think it is really important to America. Every Secretary of the Treasury for the last three, four, five, six, seven decades--since World War II--has always sought the goal of getting America back to energy independence. That is good for jobs. It is good for low-cost manufacturing. It is good to reduce the heating and energy bills of American families. It is good for our national security. It is good for our foreign policy. We are pretty much on the verge of doing this. And now we are going to start to unilaterally disarm? We have gotten to the point where I can't find anyone--and I hope I am wrong--in the Biden administration Cabinet who is going to be a proponent of a strong energy sector. Who is it? I was hoping it was going to be the Secretary of the Treasury. Maybe in our long discussion, I misinterpreted where she is going to be on this issue. Pretty much every previous Secretary--Democratic and Republican--in the history of our great Nation has really, really been an advocate for the men and women who work in the sector and for the economic growth it brings and for the help it brings to families and the good jobs it brings. So that is the rationale behind my vote. Right now, I think we are starting to see, whether with the Keystone Pipeline decision or with the men and women in the building trades, who have built this country through hard work, that they are being laid off by the thousands. We had a big scare back home in my State. All weekend, I was working this issue of these Executive orders from the Biden administration, where it looked like it was going to send hundreds of people home, unemployed--oil and gas workers in my State. Why? I hope that is not the case, especially during a recession. We need a debate on it, and I certainly hope somebody in this administration, in their principals' meetings, talk about how we get good jobs and a strong working class. I have noticed that the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, keeps talking about basing our policies on working-class families. You can't get more blue-collar, strong middle class than these energy sector jobs. I, certainly, want to have a good, constructive relationship with the Secretary of the Treasury and her team, but given the people I represent and what I am starting to see right now, I could not in good conscience vote yes when, on the basic question of ``Are you committed and will you be a strong advocate for a strong energy sector--you name it: renewables, natural gas, wind, solar--all of the above?'' I couldn't get that commitment. I reluctantly voted no on someone who has a background and experience in these other areas that are important for the country. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS123 | null | 2,175 |
formal | working class | null | racist | Mr. SULLIVAN. Madam President, I am going to be one of the first Senators to congratulate Dr. Yellen, now Secretary Yellen, to be Secretary of the Treasury of the United States. You saw it was a strong vote, and there is no doubt that she has the credentials, the experience, the qualifications to be Secretary of the Treasury--former Chairman of the Fed. I mean, her resume is off the charts. I know her nomination is historic for so many women across the country, including my three daughters. I am mentioning this because I certainly intended to vote for now-Secretary Yellen, and I was a ``no'' vote. I want to explain my ``no'' vote because I had a very good conversation with her just the other day. We covered a whole bunch of topics--everything from Alaska Native corporations to the strength of the dollar, to our debt and deficit--big macroeconomic issues that are important to the country, particularly as we are in a recession. It is important to my State. But we got to the topic of energy. We got to the topic of energy, and, reluctantly, I am saying this now because I was a bit shocked that despite a long, robust discussion, it was very difficult to get her, from my perspective, to commit to being a Secretary of the Treasury, the most important economic player in any Cabinet in any government--in the U.S. Government, besides, of course, the President--to commit to being a strong advocate for a robust, all-of-the-above energy sector for the U.S. economy. This is not a radical proposition. I would argue that every Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton has been a robust supporter of resource development in our energy sector--again, all of it--renewables, oil, gas. And the reason is that it has been such an important driver of economic growth and jobs for pretty much our Nation's entire existence. Now that we are in this recession--deep recession--we need good job growth, and we need a strong recovery. To me, having the Secretary of the Treasury be a strong proponent in the debates about policy for the energy sector, I thought, was a no-brainer. As a matter of fact, I think pretty much every Secretary of the Treasury has been that person. Again, in the 2008-2009 recession--the deep, great recession--the No. 1 driver of economic growth and job growth and capital formation for the U.S. economy was the energy sector, and it was supported. Democrats and Republicans, for decades, have supported a strong energy sector. But despite a long, respectful debate with now Secretary Yellen, with whom I certainly have a good relationship, I could not get that commitment, which I thought was surprising. As a matter of fact, I thought it was shocking, and it is the reason I reluctantly voted no because, again, she is very qualified. What is going on here is we are starting to see policies that I believe need a national debate. We are starting to see policies--yes, we all want renewables, clean energy, but we have a really important, strong energy sector. Prior to the pandemic, we were the world's superpower of energy again. One of the reasons we won World War II was our energy sector. The men and women who have been producing energy--``all of the above'' energy--are great patriotic workers who have been doing it for decades to the benefit of every single American. We need a debate because what I am starting to see with the new administration, unfortunately--and I have had discussions, and, hopefully, they are not going to go down this path--are Executive actions that are going to target certain sectors of the energy sector, the U.S. economy. Natural gas. We can be dominant in natural gas for 100 years. We are going to start targeting workers in the natural gas sector? Oil. I know some people don't like oil, but it is important. We can do all of this, but right now, there seems to be hostility toward the sector and the workers and no debate. We should have that debate. It is an important debate. It is really important in my State, but I think it is really important to America. Every Secretary of the Treasury for the last three, four, five, six, seven decades--since World War II--has always sought the goal of getting America back to energy independence. That is good for jobs. It is good for low-cost manufacturing. It is good to reduce the heating and energy bills of American families. It is good for our national security. It is good for our foreign policy. We are pretty much on the verge of doing this. And now we are going to start to unilaterally disarm? We have gotten to the point where I can't find anyone--and I hope I am wrong--in the Biden administration Cabinet who is going to be a proponent of a strong energy sector. Who is it? I was hoping it was going to be the Secretary of the Treasury. Maybe in our long discussion, I misinterpreted where she is going to be on this issue. Pretty much every previous Secretary--Democratic and Republican--in the history of our great Nation has really, really been an advocate for the men and women who work in the sector and for the economic growth it brings and for the help it brings to families and the good jobs it brings. So that is the rationale behind my vote. Right now, I think we are starting to see, whether with the Keystone Pipeline decision or with the men and women in the building trades, who have built this country through hard work, that they are being laid off by the thousands. We had a big scare back home in my State. All weekend, I was working this issue of these Executive orders from the Biden administration, where it looked like it was going to send hundreds of people home, unemployed--oil and gas workers in my State. Why? I hope that is not the case, especially during a recession. We need a debate on it, and I certainly hope somebody in this administration, in their principals' meetings, talk about how we get good jobs and a strong working class. I have noticed that the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, keeps talking about basing our policies on working-class families. You can't get more blue-collar, strong middle class than these energy sector jobs. I, certainly, want to have a good, constructive relationship with the Secretary of the Treasury and her team, but given the people I represent and what I am starting to see right now, I could not in good conscience vote yes when, on the basic question of ``Are you committed and will you be a strong advocate for a strong energy sector--you name it: renewables, natural gas, wind, solar--all of the above?'' I couldn't get that commitment. I reluctantly voted no on someone who has a background and experience in these other areas that are important for the country. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SULLIVAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS123 | null | 2,176 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I rise to speak in support of Tony Blinken's nomination to be Secretary of State. I support Tony for Secretary of State for three key reasons. First, he has the diplomatic skills that our country needs at this pivotal moment to regain our leadership on the world stage. From 2015 to 2017, he served as Deputy Secretary of State, the Nation's second highest ranking diplomat. In that position, he helped lead U.S. efforts to combat terrorism, address rising concerns in Asia, and respond to Russian regional aggression. He is a crisis-tested leader who will hit the ground running at the State Department with critical knowledge and relationships with leaders worldwide. Second, Tony has a longstanding and trusted personal relationship with President Biden that will enable him to advise the President on key foreign policy issues. During President Obama's first term in office, he was National Security Advisor to then-Vice President Biden. Previously, Tony served as the Democratic staff director for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for 6 years when then-Senator Biden was committee chairman. It is because of his relationship with President Biden and his career as a public servant that Tony understands that the job of Secretary of State is not just to serve the American people, but to help improve the lives of people struggling all over the world. Last but certainly not least, Tony has the experience of serving at the State Department that will help him rebuild the Department, recruiting needed Foreign Service Officers and civilians, ensuring State personnel have the training they need to be effective in their mission, restoring morale throughout the Department, and empowering our diplomats to speak on behalf of him and President Biden. Tony will help our country repair the damage of the last 4 years and restore the United States as a leader and trusted ally. I look forward to working with him to advance our mutual objectives of promoting peace and security, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of his confirmation. Thank you. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. FEINSTEIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS128 | null | 2,177 |
formal | Cleveland | null | racist | Mr. BOOZMAN. Madam President, I rise today to honor the life of an outstanding Arkansan and Cleveland County leader, Judge Gary Spears. After a multiyear battle with cancer, Judge Spears passed away on January 10, 2021. Judge Spears grew up on a small farm in New Edinburg, AR, and graduated with honors from New Edinburg High School in 1987. He attended the University of Arkansas at Monticello, where he studied agricultural business before marrying his wife Melody. The couple moved to Warren, AR, where Judge Spears worked as a distributor for Big R Ice. The couple eventually returned to New Edinburg in 1996 and purchased the New Edinburg County Store, which they operated together for 10 years. In 2007, Judge Spears was elected Cleveland County Judge, marking the start of an illustrious 14-year career as the longest serving county judge in county history. His undeniable leadership while presiding over Cleveland County had ripple effects that extended beyond the county borders and brought tremendous benefit to the entire State. A few recent and notable achievements during his tenure include successful efforts to ensure an accurate 2020 census count for Cleveland County and directly overseeing the county's finances during the COVID-19 pandemic by authorizing and approving the disbursement of funds. Representing the citizens of Cleveland County was a clear passion for Judge Spears. He was also dedicated to farming. On the exact 10-acre plot that his father once farmed, Judge Spears worked diligently to continue his family's unique tradition of ``truck-patch farming.'' He grew various crops, including tomatoes, beans, peas, squash, cucumbers, watermelons, peppers, and much more. In fact, his family's agriculture operation gained deserved recognition in 2019 when they were named Cleveland County Farm Family of the Year. Judge Spears leaves behind a lasting legacy thanks to the confidence entrusted in him by his Cleveland County constituents. I am confident his selfless leadership as a Cleveland County judge, businessman, and family farmer will guide and inspire future generations of Arkansans. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BOOZMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-25-pt1-PgS129 | null | 2,178 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday, two Democratic Senators confirmed they will not provide the votes to eliminate the legislative filibuster. The senior Senator from West Virginia issued a public ``guarantee'': ``I do not support doing away with the filibuster under any condition.'' Any chance of changing his mind? ``None whatsoever.'' The senior Senator from Arizona made the same commitment. She opposes ending the legislative filibuster and ``is not open''--not open--``to changing her mind.'' Our colleague informed me directly last night that under no circumstances would she reverse course. Now, it should not be news that a few Members of the majority pledge they won't tear up a central rule, but the Democratic leader was reluctant to repeat the step I took as majority leader in unified government when I ruled out that step on principle. Rather than relying on the Democratic leader, I took the discussion directly to his Members. Basic arithmetic now ensures that there are not enough votes to break the rule. This victory will let us move forward with the 50-50 power-sharing agreement containing all the elements of the 2001 model because it will sit on the very same foundation. I want to discuss the precipice from which the Senate has stepped back. In 2013, Senator Harry Reid began the ``nuclear'' exchange over nominations. I said Democrats would regret it. A few years later, we have many Federal judges, including three Supreme Court Justices, who were confirmed with fewer than 60 votes. The back-and-forth exchange over nominations had one institutional silver lining, because, routinely, filibustering nominations was itself a modern invention pioneered by Senate Democrats in the 2000s. So, on nominations, for all the fighting, the Senate just simply circled back to the simple majority threshold that had been our longstanding norm on nominations; that is, on the Executive Calendar. Legislation is very different. When it comes to lawmaking, the Framers' vision and our history are abundantly clear. The Senate exists to require deliberation and cooperation. James Madison said the Senate's job was to provide a ``complicated check''--a ``complicated check,'' he said--against ``improper acts of legislation.'' We ensure that laws earn enough buy-in to receive the lasting consent of the governed. We stop bad ideas, improve good ideas, and keep laws from swinging wildly with every election. Our friend, Lamar Alexander, put it this way in his farewell speech. He said: ``The Senate exists to produce broad agreements on controversial issues that become laws most of us have voted for and that a diverse country will accept.'' More than any other feature, it is the Senate's 60-vote threshold to end debate on legislation that achieves this. It ensures narrow interests cannot ignore the rest of the country. It embodies Jefferson's maxim that ``great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities.'' The bar for lawmaking is high. It should be high, even if both bodies take turns at being slightly frustrated by it. If your legislation can't pass the Senate, you don't scrap the rules or lower the standards. You improve your idea, take your case to the people, or both. Four years ago, Republicans had just won unified control. President Trump and others pressured us heavily--me, in particular--to scrap this rule when it was protecting the Democratic minority. But we stood firm. I stood firm and endured many tweets on the subject. I said we would not do that to our colleagues in the minority. No short-term policy win justifies destroying the Senate as we know it, especially since laws would become so brittle and reversible. So Democratic Senators used the 60-vote threshold to shape and block legislation. They stalled COVID relief, they blocked police reform, and they stopped even modest measures to protect innocent life because I chose not to destroy the tool that allowed them to do that. That same tool that some Democrats now want to destroy, they used freely and liberally throughout their years in the minority, and I protected their ability to do that. Republicans understand you don't destroy the Senate for a fleeting advantage. Our friends across the aisle must see the same. I have talked a lot about principle. We should also make this a little more tangible. So let's take a look at what would happen if in fact the legislative filibuster were gone. If the Democratic majority were to attack the filibuster, they would guarantee themselves immediate chaos, especially in this 50-50 Senate. This body operates every day and every hour by consent, and destroying the filibuster would drain comity and consent from this body to a degree that would be unparalleled in living memory. So let's look at some examples. The Constitution requires the Senate to have a quorum to do any business. Right now, a quorum is 51, and the Vice President does not count to establish a quorum. The majority cannot even produce a quorum on their own, and one could be demanded by any Senator at almost any time. Our committees need quorums to function as well. They will also be evenly split. If this majority went scorched-earth, this body would grind to a halt like we have never seen. Technically, it takes collegiality and consent for the majority to keep acting as the majority at any time they do not physically--physically--have the majority. In a scorched-earth, post-nuclear Senate that is 50-50 like we have today, every Senate Democrat and the Vice President could essentially just block out the next 2 years on their calendar. They would have to be here all the time. It takes unanimous consent to schedule most votes, to schedule speeches, to convene before noon, to schedule many hearings and markups. As Democrats just spent 4 years reminding us, it takes consent to confirm even the lowest level nominees at anything beyond a snail's pace. None of us has ever seen a Senate where every single thing either happens in the hardest possible way or not at all. Heck, once or twice every day the majority leader reads through an entire paragraph of routine requests. Objections could turn each one into multiple, lengthy rollcall votes. None of us on either side wants to live in a scorched-earth Senate. The institution and the American people deserve a lot better. But there is no doubt--none--that is what we would see if Democrats tear up this pivotal rule. It would become immediately and painfully clear to the Democratic majority that they had indeed just broken the Senate. This gambit would not speed the Democrats' ambitions. It would delay them terribly, and it would hamstring the Biden Presidency over a power grab which the President has spent decades warning against and still opposes. Finally, at some point, the shoe would find its way to the other foot. When Republicans next control the government, we would be able to repeal every bill that had just been rammed through, and we would set about defending the unborn, exploring domestic energy, unleashing free enterprise, defunding sanctuary cities, securing the border, protecting workers' paychecks from union bosses--you get the picture. But a few years later, the Democrats would try to flip it all back. So instead of building stable consensus, we would be chaotically swapping party platforms, swinging wildly between opposite visions that would guarantee half the country is miserable and resentful at any given time. We would have inherited resilient institutions but left behind a chaotic mess. We are in a politically charged period, but when factional fever runs hot, when slender majorities are most tempted to ram through radicalism, these are the times for which the guardrails exist in the first place. Republicans said no--emphatically no--to pushing the Senate over this precipice. When I could have tried to grab the power, I turned it down. I said: ``President Trump, no,'' repeatedly, because the Nation needs us to respect the Framers' design and the Senate's structure, and because, as I said in a different context on January 6, we have a higher calling than endless partisan escalation. We have placed our trust in the institution itself, in a common desire to do the right thing. I am grateful that has been reciprocated by at least a pair of our colleagues across the aisle. I am glad that we have stepped back from this cliff. Taking that plunge would not be some progressive dream; it would be a nightmare. I guarantee it. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS134-4 | null | 2,179 |
formal | securing the border | null | anti-Latino | Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday, two Democratic Senators confirmed they will not provide the votes to eliminate the legislative filibuster. The senior Senator from West Virginia issued a public ``guarantee'': ``I do not support doing away with the filibuster under any condition.'' Any chance of changing his mind? ``None whatsoever.'' The senior Senator from Arizona made the same commitment. She opposes ending the legislative filibuster and ``is not open''--not open--``to changing her mind.'' Our colleague informed me directly last night that under no circumstances would she reverse course. Now, it should not be news that a few Members of the majority pledge they won't tear up a central rule, but the Democratic leader was reluctant to repeat the step I took as majority leader in unified government when I ruled out that step on principle. Rather than relying on the Democratic leader, I took the discussion directly to his Members. Basic arithmetic now ensures that there are not enough votes to break the rule. This victory will let us move forward with the 50-50 power-sharing agreement containing all the elements of the 2001 model because it will sit on the very same foundation. I want to discuss the precipice from which the Senate has stepped back. In 2013, Senator Harry Reid began the ``nuclear'' exchange over nominations. I said Democrats would regret it. A few years later, we have many Federal judges, including three Supreme Court Justices, who were confirmed with fewer than 60 votes. The back-and-forth exchange over nominations had one institutional silver lining, because, routinely, filibustering nominations was itself a modern invention pioneered by Senate Democrats in the 2000s. So, on nominations, for all the fighting, the Senate just simply circled back to the simple majority threshold that had been our longstanding norm on nominations; that is, on the Executive Calendar. Legislation is very different. When it comes to lawmaking, the Framers' vision and our history are abundantly clear. The Senate exists to require deliberation and cooperation. James Madison said the Senate's job was to provide a ``complicated check''--a ``complicated check,'' he said--against ``improper acts of legislation.'' We ensure that laws earn enough buy-in to receive the lasting consent of the governed. We stop bad ideas, improve good ideas, and keep laws from swinging wildly with every election. Our friend, Lamar Alexander, put it this way in his farewell speech. He said: ``The Senate exists to produce broad agreements on controversial issues that become laws most of us have voted for and that a diverse country will accept.'' More than any other feature, it is the Senate's 60-vote threshold to end debate on legislation that achieves this. It ensures narrow interests cannot ignore the rest of the country. It embodies Jefferson's maxim that ``great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities.'' The bar for lawmaking is high. It should be high, even if both bodies take turns at being slightly frustrated by it. If your legislation can't pass the Senate, you don't scrap the rules or lower the standards. You improve your idea, take your case to the people, or both. Four years ago, Republicans had just won unified control. President Trump and others pressured us heavily--me, in particular--to scrap this rule when it was protecting the Democratic minority. But we stood firm. I stood firm and endured many tweets on the subject. I said we would not do that to our colleagues in the minority. No short-term policy win justifies destroying the Senate as we know it, especially since laws would become so brittle and reversible. So Democratic Senators used the 60-vote threshold to shape and block legislation. They stalled COVID relief, they blocked police reform, and they stopped even modest measures to protect innocent life because I chose not to destroy the tool that allowed them to do that. That same tool that some Democrats now want to destroy, they used freely and liberally throughout their years in the minority, and I protected their ability to do that. Republicans understand you don't destroy the Senate for a fleeting advantage. Our friends across the aisle must see the same. I have talked a lot about principle. We should also make this a little more tangible. So let's take a look at what would happen if in fact the legislative filibuster were gone. If the Democratic majority were to attack the filibuster, they would guarantee themselves immediate chaos, especially in this 50-50 Senate. This body operates every day and every hour by consent, and destroying the filibuster would drain comity and consent from this body to a degree that would be unparalleled in living memory. So let's look at some examples. The Constitution requires the Senate to have a quorum to do any business. Right now, a quorum is 51, and the Vice President does not count to establish a quorum. The majority cannot even produce a quorum on their own, and one could be demanded by any Senator at almost any time. Our committees need quorums to function as well. They will also be evenly split. If this majority went scorched-earth, this body would grind to a halt like we have never seen. Technically, it takes collegiality and consent for the majority to keep acting as the majority at any time they do not physically--physically--have the majority. In a scorched-earth, post-nuclear Senate that is 50-50 like we have today, every Senate Democrat and the Vice President could essentially just block out the next 2 years on their calendar. They would have to be here all the time. It takes unanimous consent to schedule most votes, to schedule speeches, to convene before noon, to schedule many hearings and markups. As Democrats just spent 4 years reminding us, it takes consent to confirm even the lowest level nominees at anything beyond a snail's pace. None of us has ever seen a Senate where every single thing either happens in the hardest possible way or not at all. Heck, once or twice every day the majority leader reads through an entire paragraph of routine requests. Objections could turn each one into multiple, lengthy rollcall votes. None of us on either side wants to live in a scorched-earth Senate. The institution and the American people deserve a lot better. But there is no doubt--none--that is what we would see if Democrats tear up this pivotal rule. It would become immediately and painfully clear to the Democratic majority that they had indeed just broken the Senate. This gambit would not speed the Democrats' ambitions. It would delay them terribly, and it would hamstring the Biden Presidency over a power grab which the President has spent decades warning against and still opposes. Finally, at some point, the shoe would find its way to the other foot. When Republicans next control the government, we would be able to repeal every bill that had just been rammed through, and we would set about defending the unborn, exploring domestic energy, unleashing free enterprise, defunding sanctuary cities, securing the border, protecting workers' paychecks from union bosses--you get the picture. But a few years later, the Democrats would try to flip it all back. So instead of building stable consensus, we would be chaotically swapping party platforms, swinging wildly between opposite visions that would guarantee half the country is miserable and resentful at any given time. We would have inherited resilient institutions but left behind a chaotic mess. We are in a politically charged period, but when factional fever runs hot, when slender majorities are most tempted to ram through radicalism, these are the times for which the guardrails exist in the first place. Republicans said no--emphatically no--to pushing the Senate over this precipice. When I could have tried to grab the power, I turned it down. I said: ``President Trump, no,'' repeatedly, because the Nation needs us to respect the Framers' design and the Senate's structure, and because, as I said in a different context on January 6, we have a higher calling than endless partisan escalation. We have placed our trust in the institution itself, in a common desire to do the right thing. I am grateful that has been reciprocated by at least a pair of our colleagues across the aisle. I am glad that we have stepped back from this cliff. Taking that plunge would not be some progressive dream; it would be a nightmare. I guarantee it. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS134-4 | null | 2,180 |
formal | extremism | null | Islamophobic | Nomination of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas Mr. President, we are in the midst of a global pandemic. More than 420,000 American lives have been lost. Just 3 short weeks ago, 20 days ago, this Capitol, this age-old symbol of America, was attacked by homegrown domestic terrorists. It was overrun for the first time since the British invasion in the War of 1812. After this horrific attack on this Capitol by this mob--insurrectionist mob--I hope the United States can finally come to grips with the reality of terrorism today. I remember 9/11 very well. Who could forget it if you lived through it? I was in this building and fully expected an attack on this structure. We ran out, down the steps onto the grassy lawn, and stood, wondering what to do next. This was going to be the next target. Thank goodness for the heroism of those who came forward and took control of the plane--at least diverted it into Pennsylvania. Some would dismiss the insurrectionist mob as just another rowdy political crowd not unlike many other political demonstrations. In fact, I have heard comparisons of Black Lives Matter rallies to the terrorist attack of January 6. But there was a fundamental difference 20 days ago. That fundamental difference is the fact that five Americans died as a result of that mob invading the Capitol, including one Capitol policeman. We have heard rumors of the details of how he died. I am sure we are going to hear more as the investigation continues. But this was just not another political demonstration. It was an example of terrorism, period--American-grown, American-sponsored. The security of our Nation is still at stake. There was a demonstration yesterday in downtown Chicago by White supremacists. Over 80 of them gathered--over 80 of them--in downtown Chicago to stand up and defiantly show that they were still alive and well and ready to act. The very least we can do is to ensure that the Agency responsible for our protection against this sort of terrorism has leadership. That Agency is the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden has suggested a man to lead that Department: Ali Mayorkas. He is an extraordinary public servant. The Senate has confirmed him three times. He previously served for 7 years at this Agency. He has been nominated now to lead it Most recently, he served as the Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary, the agent second in command and chief operating officer. He was in charge of counterterrorism, cyber security, border security, emergency management, and other critical matters. He did the job and did it well. We need him again. We need his expertise and experience at the Department of Homeland Security today--today. Perhaps the Republicans have forgotten about the last 4 years of failed policy and chaos at the Department of Homeland Security. Just a little reminder: It was under President Trump that the Agency experienced an unprecedented leadership vacuum. Consider this: The Department of Homeland Security lurched from one Secretary or Acting Secretary to the next. Six--six people headed that Agency during the Trump administration. Only two of them were confirmed by the U.S. Senate. That is more Agency heads in the last 4 years than in the 13-year history of the Department of Homeland Security before the Trump administration. They couldn't keep a leader in place. The President was firing them, and they were resigning right and left. For over a year, that Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, was led by an unlawfully appointed Acting Secretary, Chad Wolf. Then, just 9 days before Donald Trump left the White House, Mr. Wolf resigned, replaced by yet another Acting Secretary. An Agency with the critical task of keeping America safe, keeping our families safe, couldn't even agree on who would head the Agency. Four former Secretaries of Homeland Security--two Republicans and two Democrats--every person who served as a Senate-confirmed DHS Secretary prior to the Trump administration, say that Ali Mayorkas is the man for the job. They said he is ``a man of character, integrity, experience, and compassion,'' and ``a proven leader to right the ship.'' In their endorsement of Mr. Mayorkas, they went on to say: The leadership vacuum and turmoil at the Department of Homeland Security may have contributed to the failure to anticipate and adequately prepare for the attack on the Capitol. That is the reality. After 4 years of disorder and disarray at the Department of Homeland Security, the security of America, including the security of this very building, suffered because of lack of leadership under the Trump administration. Over the last 4 years, we have watched the politicization of the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. We have seen some horrible things occur: Operation Zero Tolerance--2,700 infants, babies, and children separated from their parents at the border of the United States, cast into a bureaucratic system and forgotten until a Federal judge in Southern California said: Enough. I want to know who those kids are, and I want to know why they haven't been reunited with their parents. That was months after they had been separated. I went to an immigration court in Chicago, downtown in the Loop, in a big high-rise office building. I didn't expect to find a court, but I did. I got off the elevator, and the walls were lined with people. The hallways were packed with those waiting for a hearing before this immigration court. I met the judge. She had been on the bench there in the immigration court for almost 20 years. She was a good person. You could tell. She said: Senator, I wish you would stay for the docket call this morning in this immigration court. This was in the middle of this zero-tolerance separation from their parents. I want you to see the first two clients who are going to come before us. I waited. They called the docket, and they said that everyone in the courtroom should be seated. There was difficulty seating one of the persons on the docket. Marta was her name. She was 2 years old. She had to be lifted into a chair and handed a stuffed animal. Luckily, the little boy, who, coincidentally, had the name Hamilton, was enticed to climb up on the chair when they put a Matchbox car on the table--two of the children separated by the zero-tolerance policy of the Department of Homeland Security under President Trump. There was, of course, a decision to postpone any hearing on their case for 6 months. They were put back into the system. I don't know what ultimately happened in the meantime. But I can tell you this: It was months before Marta was returned to her parent. Some of these separated children would not even let their own mothers hold them after they were reunited. They felt that they had been abandoned. But they had not been abandoned by their mothers. They had been abandoned by anyone with a conscience at the Department of Homeland Security. That is what happened, and that is what happened under that Agency in a Trump administration. Is it any wonder that we need new leadership, that we need an accounting of these children? There are still reports, heartbreaking reports that more than 600 children are still adrift in the system, never reunited with their families. I will tell you, if it is within my power, the Senate Judiciary Committee will certainly investigate that. The failure of the Department of Homeland Security in that instance is going to be one of the most shameful chapters in the modern history of the United States. The failure of our Nation's national security leaders to address the threat of violent White supremacists and other far-right extremism really gives evidence as to why we need to fill this spot immediately. What is the problem? President Biden has nominated Ali Mayorkas. Ali Mayorkas has turned in his paperwork required by law, has submitted his name for a hearing, and appeared before a committee of Congress. Why isn't he being approved here? One Senator, a Senator from Missouri, has a hold on his nomination. Why? Well, he may disagree with him on some policies, he said publicly. I am sure he does. I am sure he disagrees on many policies. Is that enough? Is that enough to say that this critical Agency will not have a leader because the Senator of Missouri disagrees with him on a policy? Occasionally, I tune in to FOX to see what folks are saying there. The other night, last week, when I tuned in, there was this breathless reporting of a Brown-skinned invasion at our border--thousands in caravans destined for the United States. Over and overagain we have heard that story. What Agency is responsible for making sure that their arrival on our border is orderly, that they do not cross the border improperly? It is the Department of Homeland Security--the same Agency that is being denied leadership by one Senator on the other side of the aisle. It is time to get over it. It is time to give President Biden the leadership we need at that Agency as quickly as possible. We, in contrast, know that America is a unique nation, and what makes it special is that people from all over the world can come to our shores and become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's democratic ideals. The son of a Holocaust survivor and an immigrant from Cuba, Mr. Mayorkas knows firsthand that America can be a beacon of hope and promise to those facing persecution. Mr. Mayorkas is an experienced national security leader who can restore integrity and decency at the Department of Homeland Security. I personally appreciated the skill and dedication he showed as Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. There, in the year 2012, he implemented DACA--the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals--that allowed for more than 800,000 young people to have a chance to be part of America. As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Mayorkas oversaw a $60 billion budget and led a workforce of 230,000 individuals. He is the right man for the job, and he should be on the job today. He excelled in that role, receiving the Department's Distinguished Service Award--the highest civilian honor--the U.S. Coast Guard's Distinguished Service Award, and a special commendation from the National Security Agency for his achievements in national security and cyber security. Among his numerous responsibilities, he led the Department's response to the Zika and Ebola outbreaks--highly relevant and timely expertise we could use now in this COVID-19 pandemic. He served as a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney to California earlier in his career. The national president of the Fraternal Order of Police has enthusiastically endorsed Mr. Mayorkas and said, ``His professionalism, integrity and commitment to just and fair enforcement of the law makes him an ideal candidate to lead the department. Mr. Mayorkas has pursued criminal wrongdoers and has protected the rights of the innocent with indefatigable vigor. His work reflects all that is right in the government.'' That was the statement from the Fraternal Order of Police about this nominee. He is an outstanding nominee to be Secretary of Homeland Security. His experience, qualifications, expertise, and integrity will serve America well at a time we desperately need him. I ask the Senator who is holding his nomination to release the hold today. Let Mr. Mayorkas go to the head of this Agency where he is desperately needed and show the kind of leadership he has over and over again for this country. I urge my colleagues to expeditiously confirm Mr. Mayorkas so that he can serve as the next Secretary of Homeland Security. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS135-5 | null | 2,181 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | Nomination of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas Mr. President, we are in the midst of a global pandemic. More than 420,000 American lives have been lost. Just 3 short weeks ago, 20 days ago, this Capitol, this age-old symbol of America, was attacked by homegrown domestic terrorists. It was overrun for the first time since the British invasion in the War of 1812. After this horrific attack on this Capitol by this mob--insurrectionist mob--I hope the United States can finally come to grips with the reality of terrorism today. I remember 9/11 very well. Who could forget it if you lived through it? I was in this building and fully expected an attack on this structure. We ran out, down the steps onto the grassy lawn, and stood, wondering what to do next. This was going to be the next target. Thank goodness for the heroism of those who came forward and took control of the plane--at least diverted it into Pennsylvania. Some would dismiss the insurrectionist mob as just another rowdy political crowd not unlike many other political demonstrations. In fact, I have heard comparisons of Black Lives Matter rallies to the terrorist attack of January 6. But there was a fundamental difference 20 days ago. That fundamental difference is the fact that five Americans died as a result of that mob invading the Capitol, including one Capitol policeman. We have heard rumors of the details of how he died. I am sure we are going to hear more as the investigation continues. But this was just not another political demonstration. It was an example of terrorism, period--American-grown, American-sponsored. The security of our Nation is still at stake. There was a demonstration yesterday in downtown Chicago by White supremacists. Over 80 of them gathered--over 80 of them--in downtown Chicago to stand up and defiantly show that they were still alive and well and ready to act. The very least we can do is to ensure that the Agency responsible for our protection against this sort of terrorism has leadership. That Agency is the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden has suggested a man to lead that Department: Ali Mayorkas. He is an extraordinary public servant. The Senate has confirmed him three times. He previously served for 7 years at this Agency. He has been nominated now to lead it Most recently, he served as the Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary, the agent second in command and chief operating officer. He was in charge of counterterrorism, cyber security, border security, emergency management, and other critical matters. He did the job and did it well. We need him again. We need his expertise and experience at the Department of Homeland Security today--today. Perhaps the Republicans have forgotten about the last 4 years of failed policy and chaos at the Department of Homeland Security. Just a little reminder: It was under President Trump that the Agency experienced an unprecedented leadership vacuum. Consider this: The Department of Homeland Security lurched from one Secretary or Acting Secretary to the next. Six--six people headed that Agency during the Trump administration. Only two of them were confirmed by the U.S. Senate. That is more Agency heads in the last 4 years than in the 13-year history of the Department of Homeland Security before the Trump administration. They couldn't keep a leader in place. The President was firing them, and they were resigning right and left. For over a year, that Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, was led by an unlawfully appointed Acting Secretary, Chad Wolf. Then, just 9 days before Donald Trump left the White House, Mr. Wolf resigned, replaced by yet another Acting Secretary. An Agency with the critical task of keeping America safe, keeping our families safe, couldn't even agree on who would head the Agency. Four former Secretaries of Homeland Security--two Republicans and two Democrats--every person who served as a Senate-confirmed DHS Secretary prior to the Trump administration, say that Ali Mayorkas is the man for the job. They said he is ``a man of character, integrity, experience, and compassion,'' and ``a proven leader to right the ship.'' In their endorsement of Mr. Mayorkas, they went on to say: The leadership vacuum and turmoil at the Department of Homeland Security may have contributed to the failure to anticipate and adequately prepare for the attack on the Capitol. That is the reality. After 4 years of disorder and disarray at the Department of Homeland Security, the security of America, including the security of this very building, suffered because of lack of leadership under the Trump administration. Over the last 4 years, we have watched the politicization of the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. We have seen some horrible things occur: Operation Zero Tolerance--2,700 infants, babies, and children separated from their parents at the border of the United States, cast into a bureaucratic system and forgotten until a Federal judge in Southern California said: Enough. I want to know who those kids are, and I want to know why they haven't been reunited with their parents. That was months after they had been separated. I went to an immigration court in Chicago, downtown in the Loop, in a big high-rise office building. I didn't expect to find a court, but I did. I got off the elevator, and the walls were lined with people. The hallways were packed with those waiting for a hearing before this immigration court. I met the judge. She had been on the bench there in the immigration court for almost 20 years. She was a good person. You could tell. She said: Senator, I wish you would stay for the docket call this morning in this immigration court. This was in the middle of this zero-tolerance separation from their parents. I want you to see the first two clients who are going to come before us. I waited. They called the docket, and they said that everyone in the courtroom should be seated. There was difficulty seating one of the persons on the docket. Marta was her name. She was 2 years old. She had to be lifted into a chair and handed a stuffed animal. Luckily, the little boy, who, coincidentally, had the name Hamilton, was enticed to climb up on the chair when they put a Matchbox car on the table--two of the children separated by the zero-tolerance policy of the Department of Homeland Security under President Trump. There was, of course, a decision to postpone any hearing on their case for 6 months. They were put back into the system. I don't know what ultimately happened in the meantime. But I can tell you this: It was months before Marta was returned to her parent. Some of these separated children would not even let their own mothers hold them after they were reunited. They felt that they had been abandoned. But they had not been abandoned by their mothers. They had been abandoned by anyone with a conscience at the Department of Homeland Security. That is what happened, and that is what happened under that Agency in a Trump administration. Is it any wonder that we need new leadership, that we need an accounting of these children? There are still reports, heartbreaking reports that more than 600 children are still adrift in the system, never reunited with their families. I will tell you, if it is within my power, the Senate Judiciary Committee will certainly investigate that. The failure of the Department of Homeland Security in that instance is going to be one of the most shameful chapters in the modern history of the United States. The failure of our Nation's national security leaders to address the threat of violent White supremacists and other far-right extremism really gives evidence as to why we need to fill this spot immediately. What is the problem? President Biden has nominated Ali Mayorkas. Ali Mayorkas has turned in his paperwork required by law, has submitted his name for a hearing, and appeared before a committee of Congress. Why isn't he being approved here? One Senator, a Senator from Missouri, has a hold on his nomination. Why? Well, he may disagree with him on some policies, he said publicly. I am sure he does. I am sure he disagrees on many policies. Is that enough? Is that enough to say that this critical Agency will not have a leader because the Senator of Missouri disagrees with him on a policy? Occasionally, I tune in to FOX to see what folks are saying there. The other night, last week, when I tuned in, there was this breathless reporting of a Brown-skinned invasion at our border--thousands in caravans destined for the United States. Over and overagain we have heard that story. What Agency is responsible for making sure that their arrival on our border is orderly, that they do not cross the border improperly? It is the Department of Homeland Security--the same Agency that is being denied leadership by one Senator on the other side of the aisle. It is time to get over it. It is time to give President Biden the leadership we need at that Agency as quickly as possible. We, in contrast, know that America is a unique nation, and what makes it special is that people from all over the world can come to our shores and become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's democratic ideals. The son of a Holocaust survivor and an immigrant from Cuba, Mr. Mayorkas knows firsthand that America can be a beacon of hope and promise to those facing persecution. Mr. Mayorkas is an experienced national security leader who can restore integrity and decency at the Department of Homeland Security. I personally appreciated the skill and dedication he showed as Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. There, in the year 2012, he implemented DACA--the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals--that allowed for more than 800,000 young people to have a chance to be part of America. As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Mayorkas oversaw a $60 billion budget and led a workforce of 230,000 individuals. He is the right man for the job, and he should be on the job today. He excelled in that role, receiving the Department's Distinguished Service Award--the highest civilian honor--the U.S. Coast Guard's Distinguished Service Award, and a special commendation from the National Security Agency for his achievements in national security and cyber security. Among his numerous responsibilities, he led the Department's response to the Zika and Ebola outbreaks--highly relevant and timely expertise we could use now in this COVID-19 pandemic. He served as a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney to California earlier in his career. The national president of the Fraternal Order of Police has enthusiastically endorsed Mr. Mayorkas and said, ``His professionalism, integrity and commitment to just and fair enforcement of the law makes him an ideal candidate to lead the department. Mr. Mayorkas has pursued criminal wrongdoers and has protected the rights of the innocent with indefatigable vigor. His work reflects all that is right in the government.'' That was the statement from the Fraternal Order of Police about this nominee. He is an outstanding nominee to be Secretary of Homeland Security. His experience, qualifications, expertise, and integrity will serve America well at a time we desperately need him. I ask the Senator who is holding his nomination to release the hold today. Let Mr. Mayorkas go to the head of this Agency where he is desperately needed and show the kind of leadership he has over and over again for this country. I urge my colleagues to expeditiously confirm Mr. Mayorkas so that he can serve as the next Secretary of Homeland Security. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS135-5 | null | 2,182 |
formal | terrorist | null | Islamophobic | Nomination of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas Mr. President, we are in the midst of a global pandemic. More than 420,000 American lives have been lost. Just 3 short weeks ago, 20 days ago, this Capitol, this age-old symbol of America, was attacked by homegrown domestic terrorists. It was overrun for the first time since the British invasion in the War of 1812. After this horrific attack on this Capitol by this mob--insurrectionist mob--I hope the United States can finally come to grips with the reality of terrorism today. I remember 9/11 very well. Who could forget it if you lived through it? I was in this building and fully expected an attack on this structure. We ran out, down the steps onto the grassy lawn, and stood, wondering what to do next. This was going to be the next target. Thank goodness for the heroism of those who came forward and took control of the plane--at least diverted it into Pennsylvania. Some would dismiss the insurrectionist mob as just another rowdy political crowd not unlike many other political demonstrations. In fact, I have heard comparisons of Black Lives Matter rallies to the terrorist attack of January 6. But there was a fundamental difference 20 days ago. That fundamental difference is the fact that five Americans died as a result of that mob invading the Capitol, including one Capitol policeman. We have heard rumors of the details of how he died. I am sure we are going to hear more as the investigation continues. But this was just not another political demonstration. It was an example of terrorism, period--American-grown, American-sponsored. The security of our Nation is still at stake. There was a demonstration yesterday in downtown Chicago by White supremacists. Over 80 of them gathered--over 80 of them--in downtown Chicago to stand up and defiantly show that they were still alive and well and ready to act. The very least we can do is to ensure that the Agency responsible for our protection against this sort of terrorism has leadership. That Agency is the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden has suggested a man to lead that Department: Ali Mayorkas. He is an extraordinary public servant. The Senate has confirmed him three times. He previously served for 7 years at this Agency. He has been nominated now to lead it Most recently, he served as the Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary, the agent second in command and chief operating officer. He was in charge of counterterrorism, cyber security, border security, emergency management, and other critical matters. He did the job and did it well. We need him again. We need his expertise and experience at the Department of Homeland Security today--today. Perhaps the Republicans have forgotten about the last 4 years of failed policy and chaos at the Department of Homeland Security. Just a little reminder: It was under President Trump that the Agency experienced an unprecedented leadership vacuum. Consider this: The Department of Homeland Security lurched from one Secretary or Acting Secretary to the next. Six--six people headed that Agency during the Trump administration. Only two of them were confirmed by the U.S. Senate. That is more Agency heads in the last 4 years than in the 13-year history of the Department of Homeland Security before the Trump administration. They couldn't keep a leader in place. The President was firing them, and they were resigning right and left. For over a year, that Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, was led by an unlawfully appointed Acting Secretary, Chad Wolf. Then, just 9 days before Donald Trump left the White House, Mr. Wolf resigned, replaced by yet another Acting Secretary. An Agency with the critical task of keeping America safe, keeping our families safe, couldn't even agree on who would head the Agency. Four former Secretaries of Homeland Security--two Republicans and two Democrats--every person who served as a Senate-confirmed DHS Secretary prior to the Trump administration, say that Ali Mayorkas is the man for the job. They said he is ``a man of character, integrity, experience, and compassion,'' and ``a proven leader to right the ship.'' In their endorsement of Mr. Mayorkas, they went on to say: The leadership vacuum and turmoil at the Department of Homeland Security may have contributed to the failure to anticipate and adequately prepare for the attack on the Capitol. That is the reality. After 4 years of disorder and disarray at the Department of Homeland Security, the security of America, including the security of this very building, suffered because of lack of leadership under the Trump administration. Over the last 4 years, we have watched the politicization of the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. We have seen some horrible things occur: Operation Zero Tolerance--2,700 infants, babies, and children separated from their parents at the border of the United States, cast into a bureaucratic system and forgotten until a Federal judge in Southern California said: Enough. I want to know who those kids are, and I want to know why they haven't been reunited with their parents. That was months after they had been separated. I went to an immigration court in Chicago, downtown in the Loop, in a big high-rise office building. I didn't expect to find a court, but I did. I got off the elevator, and the walls were lined with people. The hallways were packed with those waiting for a hearing before this immigration court. I met the judge. She had been on the bench there in the immigration court for almost 20 years. She was a good person. You could tell. She said: Senator, I wish you would stay for the docket call this morning in this immigration court. This was in the middle of this zero-tolerance separation from their parents. I want you to see the first two clients who are going to come before us. I waited. They called the docket, and they said that everyone in the courtroom should be seated. There was difficulty seating one of the persons on the docket. Marta was her name. She was 2 years old. She had to be lifted into a chair and handed a stuffed animal. Luckily, the little boy, who, coincidentally, had the name Hamilton, was enticed to climb up on the chair when they put a Matchbox car on the table--two of the children separated by the zero-tolerance policy of the Department of Homeland Security under President Trump. There was, of course, a decision to postpone any hearing on their case for 6 months. They were put back into the system. I don't know what ultimately happened in the meantime. But I can tell you this: It was months before Marta was returned to her parent. Some of these separated children would not even let their own mothers hold them after they were reunited. They felt that they had been abandoned. But they had not been abandoned by their mothers. They had been abandoned by anyone with a conscience at the Department of Homeland Security. That is what happened, and that is what happened under that Agency in a Trump administration. Is it any wonder that we need new leadership, that we need an accounting of these children? There are still reports, heartbreaking reports that more than 600 children are still adrift in the system, never reunited with their families. I will tell you, if it is within my power, the Senate Judiciary Committee will certainly investigate that. The failure of the Department of Homeland Security in that instance is going to be one of the most shameful chapters in the modern history of the United States. The failure of our Nation's national security leaders to address the threat of violent White supremacists and other far-right extremism really gives evidence as to why we need to fill this spot immediately. What is the problem? President Biden has nominated Ali Mayorkas. Ali Mayorkas has turned in his paperwork required by law, has submitted his name for a hearing, and appeared before a committee of Congress. Why isn't he being approved here? One Senator, a Senator from Missouri, has a hold on his nomination. Why? Well, he may disagree with him on some policies, he said publicly. I am sure he does. I am sure he disagrees on many policies. Is that enough? Is that enough to say that this critical Agency will not have a leader because the Senator of Missouri disagrees with him on a policy? Occasionally, I tune in to FOX to see what folks are saying there. The other night, last week, when I tuned in, there was this breathless reporting of a Brown-skinned invasion at our border--thousands in caravans destined for the United States. Over and overagain we have heard that story. What Agency is responsible for making sure that their arrival on our border is orderly, that they do not cross the border improperly? It is the Department of Homeland Security--the same Agency that is being denied leadership by one Senator on the other side of the aisle. It is time to get over it. It is time to give President Biden the leadership we need at that Agency as quickly as possible. We, in contrast, know that America is a unique nation, and what makes it special is that people from all over the world can come to our shores and become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's democratic ideals. The son of a Holocaust survivor and an immigrant from Cuba, Mr. Mayorkas knows firsthand that America can be a beacon of hope and promise to those facing persecution. Mr. Mayorkas is an experienced national security leader who can restore integrity and decency at the Department of Homeland Security. I personally appreciated the skill and dedication he showed as Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. There, in the year 2012, he implemented DACA--the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals--that allowed for more than 800,000 young people to have a chance to be part of America. As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Mayorkas oversaw a $60 billion budget and led a workforce of 230,000 individuals. He is the right man for the job, and he should be on the job today. He excelled in that role, receiving the Department's Distinguished Service Award--the highest civilian honor--the U.S. Coast Guard's Distinguished Service Award, and a special commendation from the National Security Agency for his achievements in national security and cyber security. Among his numerous responsibilities, he led the Department's response to the Zika and Ebola outbreaks--highly relevant and timely expertise we could use now in this COVID-19 pandemic. He served as a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney to California earlier in his career. The national president of the Fraternal Order of Police has enthusiastically endorsed Mr. Mayorkas and said, ``His professionalism, integrity and commitment to just and fair enforcement of the law makes him an ideal candidate to lead the department. Mr. Mayorkas has pursued criminal wrongdoers and has protected the rights of the innocent with indefatigable vigor. His work reflects all that is right in the government.'' That was the statement from the Fraternal Order of Police about this nominee. He is an outstanding nominee to be Secretary of Homeland Security. His experience, qualifications, expertise, and integrity will serve America well at a time we desperately need him. I ask the Senator who is holding his nomination to release the hold today. Let Mr. Mayorkas go to the head of this Agency where he is desperately needed and show the kind of leadership he has over and over again for this country. I urge my colleagues to expeditiously confirm Mr. Mayorkas so that he can serve as the next Secretary of Homeland Security. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS135-5 | null | 2,183 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Nomination of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas Mr. President, we are in the midst of a global pandemic. More than 420,000 American lives have been lost. Just 3 short weeks ago, 20 days ago, this Capitol, this age-old symbol of America, was attacked by homegrown domestic terrorists. It was overrun for the first time since the British invasion in the War of 1812. After this horrific attack on this Capitol by this mob--insurrectionist mob--I hope the United States can finally come to grips with the reality of terrorism today. I remember 9/11 very well. Who could forget it if you lived through it? I was in this building and fully expected an attack on this structure. We ran out, down the steps onto the grassy lawn, and stood, wondering what to do next. This was going to be the next target. Thank goodness for the heroism of those who came forward and took control of the plane--at least diverted it into Pennsylvania. Some would dismiss the insurrectionist mob as just another rowdy political crowd not unlike many other political demonstrations. In fact, I have heard comparisons of Black Lives Matter rallies to the terrorist attack of January 6. But there was a fundamental difference 20 days ago. That fundamental difference is the fact that five Americans died as a result of that mob invading the Capitol, including one Capitol policeman. We have heard rumors of the details of how he died. I am sure we are going to hear more as the investigation continues. But this was just not another political demonstration. It was an example of terrorism, period--American-grown, American-sponsored. The security of our Nation is still at stake. There was a demonstration yesterday in downtown Chicago by White supremacists. Over 80 of them gathered--over 80 of them--in downtown Chicago to stand up and defiantly show that they were still alive and well and ready to act. The very least we can do is to ensure that the Agency responsible for our protection against this sort of terrorism has leadership. That Agency is the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden has suggested a man to lead that Department: Ali Mayorkas. He is an extraordinary public servant. The Senate has confirmed him three times. He previously served for 7 years at this Agency. He has been nominated now to lead it Most recently, he served as the Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary, the agent second in command and chief operating officer. He was in charge of counterterrorism, cyber security, border security, emergency management, and other critical matters. He did the job and did it well. We need him again. We need his expertise and experience at the Department of Homeland Security today--today. Perhaps the Republicans have forgotten about the last 4 years of failed policy and chaos at the Department of Homeland Security. Just a little reminder: It was under President Trump that the Agency experienced an unprecedented leadership vacuum. Consider this: The Department of Homeland Security lurched from one Secretary or Acting Secretary to the next. Six--six people headed that Agency during the Trump administration. Only two of them were confirmed by the U.S. Senate. That is more Agency heads in the last 4 years than in the 13-year history of the Department of Homeland Security before the Trump administration. They couldn't keep a leader in place. The President was firing them, and they were resigning right and left. For over a year, that Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, was led by an unlawfully appointed Acting Secretary, Chad Wolf. Then, just 9 days before Donald Trump left the White House, Mr. Wolf resigned, replaced by yet another Acting Secretary. An Agency with the critical task of keeping America safe, keeping our families safe, couldn't even agree on who would head the Agency. Four former Secretaries of Homeland Security--two Republicans and two Democrats--every person who served as a Senate-confirmed DHS Secretary prior to the Trump administration, say that Ali Mayorkas is the man for the job. They said he is ``a man of character, integrity, experience, and compassion,'' and ``a proven leader to right the ship.'' In their endorsement of Mr. Mayorkas, they went on to say: The leadership vacuum and turmoil at the Department of Homeland Security may have contributed to the failure to anticipate and adequately prepare for the attack on the Capitol. That is the reality. After 4 years of disorder and disarray at the Department of Homeland Security, the security of America, including the security of this very building, suffered because of lack of leadership under the Trump administration. Over the last 4 years, we have watched the politicization of the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. We have seen some horrible things occur: Operation Zero Tolerance--2,700 infants, babies, and children separated from their parents at the border of the United States, cast into a bureaucratic system and forgotten until a Federal judge in Southern California said: Enough. I want to know who those kids are, and I want to know why they haven't been reunited with their parents. That was months after they had been separated. I went to an immigration court in Chicago, downtown in the Loop, in a big high-rise office building. I didn't expect to find a court, but I did. I got off the elevator, and the walls were lined with people. The hallways were packed with those waiting for a hearing before this immigration court. I met the judge. She had been on the bench there in the immigration court for almost 20 years. She was a good person. You could tell. She said: Senator, I wish you would stay for the docket call this morning in this immigration court. This was in the middle of this zero-tolerance separation from their parents. I want you to see the first two clients who are going to come before us. I waited. They called the docket, and they said that everyone in the courtroom should be seated. There was difficulty seating one of the persons on the docket. Marta was her name. She was 2 years old. She had to be lifted into a chair and handed a stuffed animal. Luckily, the little boy, who, coincidentally, had the name Hamilton, was enticed to climb up on the chair when they put a Matchbox car on the table--two of the children separated by the zero-tolerance policy of the Department of Homeland Security under President Trump. There was, of course, a decision to postpone any hearing on their case for 6 months. They were put back into the system. I don't know what ultimately happened in the meantime. But I can tell you this: It was months before Marta was returned to her parent. Some of these separated children would not even let their own mothers hold them after they were reunited. They felt that they had been abandoned. But they had not been abandoned by their mothers. They had been abandoned by anyone with a conscience at the Department of Homeland Security. That is what happened, and that is what happened under that Agency in a Trump administration. Is it any wonder that we need new leadership, that we need an accounting of these children? There are still reports, heartbreaking reports that more than 600 children are still adrift in the system, never reunited with their families. I will tell you, if it is within my power, the Senate Judiciary Committee will certainly investigate that. The failure of the Department of Homeland Security in that instance is going to be one of the most shameful chapters in the modern history of the United States. The failure of our Nation's national security leaders to address the threat of violent White supremacists and other far-right extremism really gives evidence as to why we need to fill this spot immediately. What is the problem? President Biden has nominated Ali Mayorkas. Ali Mayorkas has turned in his paperwork required by law, has submitted his name for a hearing, and appeared before a committee of Congress. Why isn't he being approved here? One Senator, a Senator from Missouri, has a hold on his nomination. Why? Well, he may disagree with him on some policies, he said publicly. I am sure he does. I am sure he disagrees on many policies. Is that enough? Is that enough to say that this critical Agency will not have a leader because the Senator of Missouri disagrees with him on a policy? Occasionally, I tune in to FOX to see what folks are saying there. The other night, last week, when I tuned in, there was this breathless reporting of a Brown-skinned invasion at our border--thousands in caravans destined for the United States. Over and overagain we have heard that story. What Agency is responsible for making sure that their arrival on our border is orderly, that they do not cross the border improperly? It is the Department of Homeland Security--the same Agency that is being denied leadership by one Senator on the other side of the aisle. It is time to get over it. It is time to give President Biden the leadership we need at that Agency as quickly as possible. We, in contrast, know that America is a unique nation, and what makes it special is that people from all over the world can come to our shores and become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's democratic ideals. The son of a Holocaust survivor and an immigrant from Cuba, Mr. Mayorkas knows firsthand that America can be a beacon of hope and promise to those facing persecution. Mr. Mayorkas is an experienced national security leader who can restore integrity and decency at the Department of Homeland Security. I personally appreciated the skill and dedication he showed as Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. There, in the year 2012, he implemented DACA--the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals--that allowed for more than 800,000 young people to have a chance to be part of America. As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Mayorkas oversaw a $60 billion budget and led a workforce of 230,000 individuals. He is the right man for the job, and he should be on the job today. He excelled in that role, receiving the Department's Distinguished Service Award--the highest civilian honor--the U.S. Coast Guard's Distinguished Service Award, and a special commendation from the National Security Agency for his achievements in national security and cyber security. Among his numerous responsibilities, he led the Department's response to the Zika and Ebola outbreaks--highly relevant and timely expertise we could use now in this COVID-19 pandemic. He served as a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney to California earlier in his career. The national president of the Fraternal Order of Police has enthusiastically endorsed Mr. Mayorkas and said, ``His professionalism, integrity and commitment to just and fair enforcement of the law makes him an ideal candidate to lead the department. Mr. Mayorkas has pursued criminal wrongdoers and has protected the rights of the innocent with indefatigable vigor. His work reflects all that is right in the government.'' That was the statement from the Fraternal Order of Police about this nominee. He is an outstanding nominee to be Secretary of Homeland Security. His experience, qualifications, expertise, and integrity will serve America well at a time we desperately need him. I ask the Senator who is holding his nomination to release the hold today. Let Mr. Mayorkas go to the head of this Agency where he is desperately needed and show the kind of leadership he has over and over again for this country. I urge my colleagues to expeditiously confirm Mr. Mayorkas so that he can serve as the next Secretary of Homeland Security. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS135-5 | null | 2,184 |
formal | Chicago | null | racist | Nomination of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas Mr. President, we are in the midst of a global pandemic. More than 420,000 American lives have been lost. Just 3 short weeks ago, 20 days ago, this Capitol, this age-old symbol of America, was attacked by homegrown domestic terrorists. It was overrun for the first time since the British invasion in the War of 1812. After this horrific attack on this Capitol by this mob--insurrectionist mob--I hope the United States can finally come to grips with the reality of terrorism today. I remember 9/11 very well. Who could forget it if you lived through it? I was in this building and fully expected an attack on this structure. We ran out, down the steps onto the grassy lawn, and stood, wondering what to do next. This was going to be the next target. Thank goodness for the heroism of those who came forward and took control of the plane--at least diverted it into Pennsylvania. Some would dismiss the insurrectionist mob as just another rowdy political crowd not unlike many other political demonstrations. In fact, I have heard comparisons of Black Lives Matter rallies to the terrorist attack of January 6. But there was a fundamental difference 20 days ago. That fundamental difference is the fact that five Americans died as a result of that mob invading the Capitol, including one Capitol policeman. We have heard rumors of the details of how he died. I am sure we are going to hear more as the investigation continues. But this was just not another political demonstration. It was an example of terrorism, period--American-grown, American-sponsored. The security of our Nation is still at stake. There was a demonstration yesterday in downtown Chicago by White supremacists. Over 80 of them gathered--over 80 of them--in downtown Chicago to stand up and defiantly show that they were still alive and well and ready to act. The very least we can do is to ensure that the Agency responsible for our protection against this sort of terrorism has leadership. That Agency is the Department of Homeland Security. President Biden has suggested a man to lead that Department: Ali Mayorkas. He is an extraordinary public servant. The Senate has confirmed him three times. He previously served for 7 years at this Agency. He has been nominated now to lead it Most recently, he served as the Department of Homeland Security Deputy Secretary, the agent second in command and chief operating officer. He was in charge of counterterrorism, cyber security, border security, emergency management, and other critical matters. He did the job and did it well. We need him again. We need his expertise and experience at the Department of Homeland Security today--today. Perhaps the Republicans have forgotten about the last 4 years of failed policy and chaos at the Department of Homeland Security. Just a little reminder: It was under President Trump that the Agency experienced an unprecedented leadership vacuum. Consider this: The Department of Homeland Security lurched from one Secretary or Acting Secretary to the next. Six--six people headed that Agency during the Trump administration. Only two of them were confirmed by the U.S. Senate. That is more Agency heads in the last 4 years than in the 13-year history of the Department of Homeland Security before the Trump administration. They couldn't keep a leader in place. The President was firing them, and they were resigning right and left. For over a year, that Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, was led by an unlawfully appointed Acting Secretary, Chad Wolf. Then, just 9 days before Donald Trump left the White House, Mr. Wolf resigned, replaced by yet another Acting Secretary. An Agency with the critical task of keeping America safe, keeping our families safe, couldn't even agree on who would head the Agency. Four former Secretaries of Homeland Security--two Republicans and two Democrats--every person who served as a Senate-confirmed DHS Secretary prior to the Trump administration, say that Ali Mayorkas is the man for the job. They said he is ``a man of character, integrity, experience, and compassion,'' and ``a proven leader to right the ship.'' In their endorsement of Mr. Mayorkas, they went on to say: The leadership vacuum and turmoil at the Department of Homeland Security may have contributed to the failure to anticipate and adequately prepare for the attack on the Capitol. That is the reality. After 4 years of disorder and disarray at the Department of Homeland Security, the security of America, including the security of this very building, suffered because of lack of leadership under the Trump administration. Over the last 4 years, we have watched the politicization of the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security. We have seen some horrible things occur: Operation Zero Tolerance--2,700 infants, babies, and children separated from their parents at the border of the United States, cast into a bureaucratic system and forgotten until a Federal judge in Southern California said: Enough. I want to know who those kids are, and I want to know why they haven't been reunited with their parents. That was months after they had been separated. I went to an immigration court in Chicago, downtown in the Loop, in a big high-rise office building. I didn't expect to find a court, but I did. I got off the elevator, and the walls were lined with people. The hallways were packed with those waiting for a hearing before this immigration court. I met the judge. She had been on the bench there in the immigration court for almost 20 years. She was a good person. You could tell. She said: Senator, I wish you would stay for the docket call this morning in this immigration court. This was in the middle of this zero-tolerance separation from their parents. I want you to see the first two clients who are going to come before us. I waited. They called the docket, and they said that everyone in the courtroom should be seated. There was difficulty seating one of the persons on the docket. Marta was her name. She was 2 years old. She had to be lifted into a chair and handed a stuffed animal. Luckily, the little boy, who, coincidentally, had the name Hamilton, was enticed to climb up on the chair when they put a Matchbox car on the table--two of the children separated by the zero-tolerance policy of the Department of Homeland Security under President Trump. There was, of course, a decision to postpone any hearing on their case for 6 months. They were put back into the system. I don't know what ultimately happened in the meantime. But I can tell you this: It was months before Marta was returned to her parent. Some of these separated children would not even let their own mothers hold them after they were reunited. They felt that they had been abandoned. But they had not been abandoned by their mothers. They had been abandoned by anyone with a conscience at the Department of Homeland Security. That is what happened, and that is what happened under that Agency in a Trump administration. Is it any wonder that we need new leadership, that we need an accounting of these children? There are still reports, heartbreaking reports that more than 600 children are still adrift in the system, never reunited with their families. I will tell you, if it is within my power, the Senate Judiciary Committee will certainly investigate that. The failure of the Department of Homeland Security in that instance is going to be one of the most shameful chapters in the modern history of the United States. The failure of our Nation's national security leaders to address the threat of violent White supremacists and other far-right extremism really gives evidence as to why we need to fill this spot immediately. What is the problem? President Biden has nominated Ali Mayorkas. Ali Mayorkas has turned in his paperwork required by law, has submitted his name for a hearing, and appeared before a committee of Congress. Why isn't he being approved here? One Senator, a Senator from Missouri, has a hold on his nomination. Why? Well, he may disagree with him on some policies, he said publicly. I am sure he does. I am sure he disagrees on many policies. Is that enough? Is that enough to say that this critical Agency will not have a leader because the Senator of Missouri disagrees with him on a policy? Occasionally, I tune in to FOX to see what folks are saying there. The other night, last week, when I tuned in, there was this breathless reporting of a Brown-skinned invasion at our border--thousands in caravans destined for the United States. Over and overagain we have heard that story. What Agency is responsible for making sure that their arrival on our border is orderly, that they do not cross the border improperly? It is the Department of Homeland Security--the same Agency that is being denied leadership by one Senator on the other side of the aisle. It is time to get over it. It is time to give President Biden the leadership we need at that Agency as quickly as possible. We, in contrast, know that America is a unique nation, and what makes it special is that people from all over the world can come to our shores and become Americans, not because of their race or ethnicity but because they embrace America's democratic ideals. The son of a Holocaust survivor and an immigrant from Cuba, Mr. Mayorkas knows firsthand that America can be a beacon of hope and promise to those facing persecution. Mr. Mayorkas is an experienced national security leader who can restore integrity and decency at the Department of Homeland Security. I personally appreciated the skill and dedication he showed as Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. There, in the year 2012, he implemented DACA--the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals--that allowed for more than 800,000 young people to have a chance to be part of America. As Deputy Secretary, Mr. Mayorkas oversaw a $60 billion budget and led a workforce of 230,000 individuals. He is the right man for the job, and he should be on the job today. He excelled in that role, receiving the Department's Distinguished Service Award--the highest civilian honor--the U.S. Coast Guard's Distinguished Service Award, and a special commendation from the National Security Agency for his achievements in national security and cyber security. Among his numerous responsibilities, he led the Department's response to the Zika and Ebola outbreaks--highly relevant and timely expertise we could use now in this COVID-19 pandemic. He served as a Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney to California earlier in his career. The national president of the Fraternal Order of Police has enthusiastically endorsed Mr. Mayorkas and said, ``His professionalism, integrity and commitment to just and fair enforcement of the law makes him an ideal candidate to lead the department. Mr. Mayorkas has pursued criminal wrongdoers and has protected the rights of the innocent with indefatigable vigor. His work reflects all that is right in the government.'' That was the statement from the Fraternal Order of Police about this nominee. He is an outstanding nominee to be Secretary of Homeland Security. His experience, qualifications, expertise, and integrity will serve America well at a time we desperately need him. I ask the Senator who is holding his nomination to release the hold today. Let Mr. Mayorkas go to the head of this Agency where he is desperately needed and show the kind of leadership he has over and over again for this country. I urge my colleagues to expeditiously confirm Mr. Mayorkas so that he can serve as the next Secretary of Homeland Security. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS135-5 | null | 2,185 |
formal | Bernie Sanders | null | antisemitic | Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, this impeachment is nothing more than a partisan exercise designed to further divide the country. Democrats claim to want to unify the country, but impeaching a former President, a private citizen, is the antithesis of unity. Democrats brazenly appointing a pro-impeachment Democrat to preside over the trial is not fair or impartial and hardly encourages any kind of unity in our country. No, unity is the opposite of this travesty we are about to witness. If we are about to try to impeach a President, where is the Chief Justice? If the accused is no longer President, where is the constitutional power to impeach him? Private citizens don't get impeached. Impeachment is for removal from office, and the accused here has already left office. Hyperpartisan Democrats are about to drag our great country down into the gutter of rancor and vitriol, the likes of which has never been seen in our Nation's history. Instead of doing the Nation's work, with their new majorities in the House, the Senate, and the executive branch, Democrats are wasting the Nation's time on a partisan vendetta against a man no longer in office. It is almost as if they have no ability to exist except in opposition to Donald Trump. Without him as their boogeyman, they might have to legislate and to actually convince Americans that their policy prescriptions are the right ones. Democrats are about to do something no self-respecting Senator has ever stooped to. Democrats are insisting the election is actually not over, and so they insist on regurgitating the bitterness of the election. This acrimony they are about to unleash has never before been tried. Why? Because calmer heads have typically prevailed in our history and allowed public opinion to cast blame where blame is deserved. This sham of an impeachment will ostensibly ask whether the President incited the reprehensible behavior and violence of January 6, when he said: ``I know everyone here will soon march to the Capitol to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.'' ``Peacefully and patriotically''--hardly words of violence. But what of Democrat words? What of Democrat incitement to violence? No Democrat will honestly ask whether Bernie Sanders incited theshooter that nearly killed Steve Scalise and a volunteer coach. The shooter nearly pulled off a massacre--I was there--because he fervently believed the false and inflammatory rhetoric spewed by Bernie and other Democrats, such as: ``The Republican healthcare plan for the uninsured is that you die.'' As this avowed Bernie supporter shot Steve Scalise, nearly killing him, and shot one of our coaches and two or three of our staff, he screamed: ``This is for healthcare!'' Ask me or anyone if that is incitement. No Democrat will ask whether Cory Booker incited violence when he called for his supporters to get ``up in the face of Congress people''--a very visual and specific incitement. No Democrat will ask whether Maxine Waters incited violence when she literally told her supporters: ``If you see a member of the Trump [administration] at a restaurant, [at] a department store, [at] a gas station, or any place, you create a crowd and you push back on them.'' Is that not incitement? My wife and I were pushed and surrounded and screamed at by this same type of mob that Maxine likes to inspire. It is terrifying to have a swarm of people threatening to kill you, cursing at you, and literally holding you hostage until police come to your rescue. That night we were assaulted by the crowd, I wasn't sure if we would survive even with the police protection. But no Democrat has ever considered impeaching Maxine for her violent rhetoric. In fact, Republicans, to our credit, have never once thought it legitimate to censure or impeach these Democrats. No Republican has sought to use a government to hold these Democrats responsible for Antifa and Black Lives Matter violence that has consumed our cities all summer, resulting in over $1 billion of destruction, looting, and property damage. Not one Republican said, ``Oh, let's impeach the Democrats who are inciting this'' because it would be ridiculous. Many on the Democrat side of the aisle cheered them on. Kamala Harris famously offered to pay the bill for those who were arrested. I wonder if she will be brought up on charges of inciting violence for that now that she is Vice President. Should Kamala Harris be impeached for offering to pay for violent people to get out of jail who have been burning our cities down? No. No Republican has offered that because we are not going down the road the Democrats have decided, this low road of impeaching people for political speech. Should Republicans impeach the Democratic mayor of Seattle who incited and condoned violence by calling the armed takeover of part of her city ``a summer of love''? Did any Republicans try to impeach her? Then on June 8, the New York Post, citing U.S. Justice Department statistics, reported that more than 700 law enforcement officers were injured during the Antifa-Black Lives Matter riots. There were at least 19 murders, including 77-year-old retired police officer David Dorn. Yet Democrats insist on applying a test of incitement to a Republican that they refuse to apply to themselves. I want the Democrats to raise their hands if they have ever given a speech that says ``Take back; fight for your country.'' Who hasn't used the word ``fight'' figuratively? And are we going to put every politician in jail? Are we going to impeach every politician who has used the word ``fight'' figuratively in a speech? Shame. Shame on these angry, unhinged partisans who are putting forth this sham impeachment, deranged by their hatred of the former President. Shame on those who seek blame and revenge and who choose to pervert a constitutional process while doing so. I want this body on record, every last person here: Is this how you think politics should be? Look, we have now got crazy partisans on the other side of the aisle trying to censor and remove two of the Republican Senators for their political position. Look, I disagreed. I don't think Congress should overturn the electoral college. But impeaching or censoring or expelling a Member of Congress you disagree with--is the truth so narrow that only you know the truth? We now have the media on your side saying there is only one set of facts, one set of truths, and you can only interpret it this way. Now we have seven Senators on the other side trying to expel, censor, or impugn two Senators on this side. I defend them, not because I defend their position--I disagreed with their position--but you can't impeach, censor, or expel people you disagree with. What is this coming to? In a few minutes, I will insist on a vote to affirm that this proceeding we are about to enter is unconstitutional, that impeachment of a private citizen is illegal and essentially a bill of attainder, and that no sense of fairness or due process would allow the judge in the proceeding to be a partisan Democrat already in favor of the impeachment. A sham this is. A travesty. A dark blot on the history of our country. I urge my colleagues to reconsider this kangaroo court and move forward to debate the great issues of our day. With that, I would like to relinquish the last moment or two of my time to the Senator of Wisconsin. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PAUL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS140-3 | null | 2,186 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. LEE. Now, Mr. President, I would like to discuss another important matter. This past week, we marked the anniversary of a deadly day in American history. It has resulted in the loss of millions of innocent American lives. That is the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Since January 22, 1973, more than 60 million unborn children have been lost to the scourge of abortion. This week, we honor and remember those lives, as well as those who have been hurt by the pains of abortion. In a normal year, tens of thousands of Americans would be marching down Constitution Avenue this Friday to do so. This year, as with so many other things, the March for Life will instead be virtual. But, nonetheless, Americans will continue to march, whether virtually or in person where they can. The theme of this year's march is ``Together Strong: Life Unites!''--a fitting theme following a year ripe with division, violence, and loss. Now, more than ever, we must unite as a nation, turning with hope toward the future--hope that our Nation will heal, hope that justice will prevail, and hope that the grievous act of abortion will be forsaken. Given our country's history, in which we have stubbornly made mistakes but, thankfully, have come around in the end, there is much reason for hope. But we cannot heal and we cannot unite if we don't honor and respect all of the American people, born and unborn. So many of the deepest injustices in our country's history stem from one dark dangerous thing; that is, when we have rejected the dignity of the human person, when we have denied the humanity of our brothers and sisters, when we have discriminated against others based on the way they look, think, love, or worship, and when, because of that, we have looked at them not as people but as things and as mere objects to be acted upon. As abolitionist William Lord Garrison put it, the worst kind of oppression to be regarded with the greatest degree of indignation and abhorrence is ``that which turns a man into a thing.'' Now, we have discriminated against a whole class of people not based on the color of their skin but on their age and development. But it doesn't change the truth. The truth is that a baby inside the womb can respond to human touch by the age of 8 weeks and feel pain by the age of 20 weeks--who can recognize her mother's voice even before she is born; who has a perfect little nose, fingernails, and a beating, fully functioning heart, her own distinct unique DNA, and her own unique unrepeatable soul. Science and medicine are only confirming what we know deep down, that unborn human beings are in fact littlepersons. The evidence is only getting plainer by the day. When we deny the humanity of our brothers and sisters, as we have seen throughout our history and over the past year, the inevitable and tragic result is violence. Abortion does undeniable violence to the baby and undeniable violence to the mother. Thankfully, looking back at the past decade, we have made significant strides toward building a culture that respects, values, and even protects all human life, even in its simplest, earliest stages of development. Many States have ensured that public funds are directed toward pregnancy health centers, rather than abortion facilities, providing life-affirming alternatives to families in need. And in just the last decade alone, States have passed more than 400 pro-life laws--more than one-third of all pro-life laws that States have passed since Roe v. Wade was decided. This is indeed reason for hope. Through our laws and with our lives, we ought to affirm the truth that the lives of both the mother and the baby matter and that healthcare should heal, protect, and preserve both of those lives. I have introduced legislation to help our laws affirm that very truth. Through my bill, the Abortion Is Not Healthcare Act, we have a chance to stop the tax deductibility of abortions, which are currently categorized as ``medical care'' by the IRS, because we must be serious: Whatever else it may be, of course, elective abortion is not healthcare. That is why physicians literally take an oath to do no harm. The government should not offer tax benefits for a procedure that kills hundreds of thousands of unborn children each and every year. We also have the chance to prematurely stop the use of American foreign aid--the opportunity permanently to stop the use of American foreign aid--from funding or promoting abortions overseas and perpetuating violence against women and of children abroad, especially baby girls. The Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance Act will save countless lives across the globe, and it affirms the truth that the lives of all unborn children, regardless of where they are from, have dignity and worth. As the lyrics of a children's song in my church--a song that I sang in Sunday school as a child--say about each one of us, I am a child of God. We are all one human family, all children of God--these littlest among us, too, who cannot yet sing for themselves, but they will soon. They will soon. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. LEE | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS145-2 | null | 2,187 |
formal | activist judge | null | conservative | Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, in the 2020 elections, Americans chose an evenly-divided Senate--half Republican, half Democrat. Evenly divided. Since the Vice President is able to break a tie when it comes to specifically organizing the Senate, Democrats have the majority. Now some Democrats want to lower the threshold for all the votes so that to pass anything, all they would need to do in case of a tie vote would have the Vice President be the tiebreaker. That is the way that a majority works. When there is a tie and the Vice President is in one party, they get to break the tie in that direction, of course. What we need to make sure of, though, is that there is fairness in the process. The traditions and how this institution works are that we have a filibuster. Sixty votes is how legislation is passed. We know that the press and sometimes folks in Congress say it is hard to pass a law. Well, it is not supposed to be easy. It takes discussion. It takes negotiation. It brings people together. That is the idea of needing 60 votes--to bring people together to get a bipartisan consensus so that all the voices are heard; that there is a majority, and the minority voice is heard, and it forces us to find common ground. Frankly, I think there is too little of finding common ground in Washington already. The last thing America needs is even more divisiveness. This is a big, diverse country. We don't need 50 percent of the country plus one to run roughshod over all the others. That is why our Founders were so careful to protect the rights of the minority. That is why they created the Bill of Rights, why they created the electoral college, and why they created the U.S. Senate. The Founding Fathers didn't want the Senate to be a copy of the House. We are intended to be a check on the House. There is a story that President Washington compared the Senate to a saucer used to cool down a cup of tea. President Madison compared it to a fence. We are not supposed to be a smaller version of the House of Representatives. The Senate is supposed to cool things down. We are supposed to think things through. We are supposed to stop bad ideas and stop the House from moving too fast. Changing the rules of the Senate would make that impossible. Lowering the bar to 50 votes could also be a blatant power grab, which is 50 votes and the Vice President. The Democrats could even add States to the Union--specifically States that would elect more Democrats to the Senate. It would give them even more Senate seats, could even give them a permanent majority in the Senate. With 50 votes plus the Vice President, Democrats could also pack the Supreme Court with liberal activist judges--judges who legislate from the bench, not judges who apply the law as written. That would give them a permanent majority both in the Senate and on the Court. With a single rule change, one branch of government, one Chamber of Congress, could be under permanent Democratic control. It is no surprise that it is tempting to Senate Democrats and that the far-left branch of that party is demanding that occur. You remember that when President Trump was in office, Republicans had a chance to do exactly the same thing. In fact, former President Trump repeatedly asked us and told us that we should do just that. In one particularly memorable example, he tweeted: ``The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes.'' He said: ``Dems would do it, no doubt.'' More than 30 different times, President Trump asked that Republicans end the filibuster. We didn't. We stuck to the intentions of our Founding Fathers. We protected the rights of the minority, and we put country before party. If Democrats won't stop the power grab for the good of the country, then they should at least do it for their own good. Democrats have had 50 votes and the Vice President for only a few days. In fact, when Democrats were in the minority, 33 Democratic Senators said they didn't want to change the rules. They signed a letter, and that letter called for the preservation of the rights of the minority. Twenty-seven of those Democrats are still Members of the Senate today. One of those Democrats is now the Vice President of the United States, Vice President Kamala Harris. Even President Biden called the idea of eliminating the filibuster ``a very dangerous move.'' The White House Press Secretary told us last week President Biden still opposes changing the rules. If Democrats go down this road and break the rules of the Senate, they are doing more than just hurting the institution; they are admitting their ideas don't have broad bipartisan support. Think about that. If the Democratic agenda had the support of the American people, then they wouldn't need to change the rules. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass their tax increases, they would leave the rules alone. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass the Green New Deal and higher energy costs that come with it, they would leave the rules alone. If they could restrict gun ownership, they would leave the rules alone. They can't, and they know they can't. They know the American people have looked at their progressive agenda and said: No, thank you. President Biden's inaugural address last week talked a lot about unity. He said that ``with unity we can do great things.'' I agree. I ask my Democratic colleagues if they agree with the President's inaugural address, or do they really thinkthat they want to make the U.S. Senate more partisan, more divided. Do they really want to take power away from individual Senators and give it to whoever has 50 votes and the tiebreaker at the moment? If it is hard for Democrats to pass laws, then they should try talking with us. Propose bipartisan solutions to our Nation's challenges. Persuade your colleagues. Make progress together. As my friend, former Senator Lamar Alexander, said in his farewell address just a month ago--he said: ``We don't need a change of rules. The Senate needs a change of behavior.'' I urge my Democratic colleagues to reject this blatant power grab. Stop this rush to take more and more power. Come to the center. Reach across the aisle. Find common ground. Senate Republicans are ready to work together to help the American people, to get people back to work, to get our kids safely back to school so they don't fall further behind, and to get the virus behind us. Join us. Let's work together. Let's do what is right for the people we serve. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BARRASSO | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS146 | null | 2,188 |
formal | activist judges | null | conservative | Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, in the 2020 elections, Americans chose an evenly-divided Senate--half Republican, half Democrat. Evenly divided. Since the Vice President is able to break a tie when it comes to specifically organizing the Senate, Democrats have the majority. Now some Democrats want to lower the threshold for all the votes so that to pass anything, all they would need to do in case of a tie vote would have the Vice President be the tiebreaker. That is the way that a majority works. When there is a tie and the Vice President is in one party, they get to break the tie in that direction, of course. What we need to make sure of, though, is that there is fairness in the process. The traditions and how this institution works are that we have a filibuster. Sixty votes is how legislation is passed. We know that the press and sometimes folks in Congress say it is hard to pass a law. Well, it is not supposed to be easy. It takes discussion. It takes negotiation. It brings people together. That is the idea of needing 60 votes--to bring people together to get a bipartisan consensus so that all the voices are heard; that there is a majority, and the minority voice is heard, and it forces us to find common ground. Frankly, I think there is too little of finding common ground in Washington already. The last thing America needs is even more divisiveness. This is a big, diverse country. We don't need 50 percent of the country plus one to run roughshod over all the others. That is why our Founders were so careful to protect the rights of the minority. That is why they created the Bill of Rights, why they created the electoral college, and why they created the U.S. Senate. The Founding Fathers didn't want the Senate to be a copy of the House. We are intended to be a check on the House. There is a story that President Washington compared the Senate to a saucer used to cool down a cup of tea. President Madison compared it to a fence. We are not supposed to be a smaller version of the House of Representatives. The Senate is supposed to cool things down. We are supposed to think things through. We are supposed to stop bad ideas and stop the House from moving too fast. Changing the rules of the Senate would make that impossible. Lowering the bar to 50 votes could also be a blatant power grab, which is 50 votes and the Vice President. The Democrats could even add States to the Union--specifically States that would elect more Democrats to the Senate. It would give them even more Senate seats, could even give them a permanent majority in the Senate. With 50 votes plus the Vice President, Democrats could also pack the Supreme Court with liberal activist judges--judges who legislate from the bench, not judges who apply the law as written. That would give them a permanent majority both in the Senate and on the Court. With a single rule change, one branch of government, one Chamber of Congress, could be under permanent Democratic control. It is no surprise that it is tempting to Senate Democrats and that the far-left branch of that party is demanding that occur. You remember that when President Trump was in office, Republicans had a chance to do exactly the same thing. In fact, former President Trump repeatedly asked us and told us that we should do just that. In one particularly memorable example, he tweeted: ``The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes.'' He said: ``Dems would do it, no doubt.'' More than 30 different times, President Trump asked that Republicans end the filibuster. We didn't. We stuck to the intentions of our Founding Fathers. We protected the rights of the minority, and we put country before party. If Democrats won't stop the power grab for the good of the country, then they should at least do it for their own good. Democrats have had 50 votes and the Vice President for only a few days. In fact, when Democrats were in the minority, 33 Democratic Senators said they didn't want to change the rules. They signed a letter, and that letter called for the preservation of the rights of the minority. Twenty-seven of those Democrats are still Members of the Senate today. One of those Democrats is now the Vice President of the United States, Vice President Kamala Harris. Even President Biden called the idea of eliminating the filibuster ``a very dangerous move.'' The White House Press Secretary told us last week President Biden still opposes changing the rules. If Democrats go down this road and break the rules of the Senate, they are doing more than just hurting the institution; they are admitting their ideas don't have broad bipartisan support. Think about that. If the Democratic agenda had the support of the American people, then they wouldn't need to change the rules. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass their tax increases, they would leave the rules alone. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass the Green New Deal and higher energy costs that come with it, they would leave the rules alone. If they could restrict gun ownership, they would leave the rules alone. They can't, and they know they can't. They know the American people have looked at their progressive agenda and said: No, thank you. President Biden's inaugural address last week talked a lot about unity. He said that ``with unity we can do great things.'' I agree. I ask my Democratic colleagues if they agree with the President's inaugural address, or do they really thinkthat they want to make the U.S. Senate more partisan, more divided. Do they really want to take power away from individual Senators and give it to whoever has 50 votes and the tiebreaker at the moment? If it is hard for Democrats to pass laws, then they should try talking with us. Propose bipartisan solutions to our Nation's challenges. Persuade your colleagues. Make progress together. As my friend, former Senator Lamar Alexander, said in his farewell address just a month ago--he said: ``We don't need a change of rules. The Senate needs a change of behavior.'' I urge my Democratic colleagues to reject this blatant power grab. Stop this rush to take more and more power. Come to the center. Reach across the aisle. Find common ground. Senate Republicans are ready to work together to help the American people, to get people back to work, to get our kids safely back to school so they don't fall further behind, and to get the virus behind us. Join us. Let's work together. Let's do what is right for the people we serve. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BARRASSO | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS146 | null | 2,189 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, in the 2020 elections, Americans chose an evenly-divided Senate--half Republican, half Democrat. Evenly divided. Since the Vice President is able to break a tie when it comes to specifically organizing the Senate, Democrats have the majority. Now some Democrats want to lower the threshold for all the votes so that to pass anything, all they would need to do in case of a tie vote would have the Vice President be the tiebreaker. That is the way that a majority works. When there is a tie and the Vice President is in one party, they get to break the tie in that direction, of course. What we need to make sure of, though, is that there is fairness in the process. The traditions and how this institution works are that we have a filibuster. Sixty votes is how legislation is passed. We know that the press and sometimes folks in Congress say it is hard to pass a law. Well, it is not supposed to be easy. It takes discussion. It takes negotiation. It brings people together. That is the idea of needing 60 votes--to bring people together to get a bipartisan consensus so that all the voices are heard; that there is a majority, and the minority voice is heard, and it forces us to find common ground. Frankly, I think there is too little of finding common ground in Washington already. The last thing America needs is even more divisiveness. This is a big, diverse country. We don't need 50 percent of the country plus one to run roughshod over all the others. That is why our Founders were so careful to protect the rights of the minority. That is why they created the Bill of Rights, why they created the electoral college, and why they created the U.S. Senate. The Founding Fathers didn't want the Senate to be a copy of the House. We are intended to be a check on the House. There is a story that President Washington compared the Senate to a saucer used to cool down a cup of tea. President Madison compared it to a fence. We are not supposed to be a smaller version of the House of Representatives. The Senate is supposed to cool things down. We are supposed to think things through. We are supposed to stop bad ideas and stop the House from moving too fast. Changing the rules of the Senate would make that impossible. Lowering the bar to 50 votes could also be a blatant power grab, which is 50 votes and the Vice President. The Democrats could even add States to the Union--specifically States that would elect more Democrats to the Senate. It would give them even more Senate seats, could even give them a permanent majority in the Senate. With 50 votes plus the Vice President, Democrats could also pack the Supreme Court with liberal activist judges--judges who legislate from the bench, not judges who apply the law as written. That would give them a permanent majority both in the Senate and on the Court. With a single rule change, one branch of government, one Chamber of Congress, could be under permanent Democratic control. It is no surprise that it is tempting to Senate Democrats and that the far-left branch of that party is demanding that occur. You remember that when President Trump was in office, Republicans had a chance to do exactly the same thing. In fact, former President Trump repeatedly asked us and told us that we should do just that. In one particularly memorable example, he tweeted: ``The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes.'' He said: ``Dems would do it, no doubt.'' More than 30 different times, President Trump asked that Republicans end the filibuster. We didn't. We stuck to the intentions of our Founding Fathers. We protected the rights of the minority, and we put country before party. If Democrats won't stop the power grab for the good of the country, then they should at least do it for their own good. Democrats have had 50 votes and the Vice President for only a few days. In fact, when Democrats were in the minority, 33 Democratic Senators said they didn't want to change the rules. They signed a letter, and that letter called for the preservation of the rights of the minority. Twenty-seven of those Democrats are still Members of the Senate today. One of those Democrats is now the Vice President of the United States, Vice President Kamala Harris. Even President Biden called the idea of eliminating the filibuster ``a very dangerous move.'' The White House Press Secretary told us last week President Biden still opposes changing the rules. If Democrats go down this road and break the rules of the Senate, they are doing more than just hurting the institution; they are admitting their ideas don't have broad bipartisan support. Think about that. If the Democratic agenda had the support of the American people, then they wouldn't need to change the rules. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass their tax increases, they would leave the rules alone. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass the Green New Deal and higher energy costs that come with it, they would leave the rules alone. If they could restrict gun ownership, they would leave the rules alone. They can't, and they know they can't. They know the American people have looked at their progressive agenda and said: No, thank you. President Biden's inaugural address last week talked a lot about unity. He said that ``with unity we can do great things.'' I agree. I ask my Democratic colleagues if they agree with the President's inaugural address, or do they really thinkthat they want to make the U.S. Senate more partisan, more divided. Do they really want to take power away from individual Senators and give it to whoever has 50 votes and the tiebreaker at the moment? If it is hard for Democrats to pass laws, then they should try talking with us. Propose bipartisan solutions to our Nation's challenges. Persuade your colleagues. Make progress together. As my friend, former Senator Lamar Alexander, said in his farewell address just a month ago--he said: ``We don't need a change of rules. The Senate needs a change of behavior.'' I urge my Democratic colleagues to reject this blatant power grab. Stop this rush to take more and more power. Come to the center. Reach across the aisle. Find common ground. Senate Republicans are ready to work together to help the American people, to get people back to work, to get our kids safely back to school so they don't fall further behind, and to get the virus behind us. Join us. Let's work together. Let's do what is right for the people we serve. I yield the floor | 2020-01-06 | Mr. BARRASSO | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS146 | null | 2,190 |
formal | Federal Reserve | null | antisemitic | Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I voted against the confirmation of Janet Yellen to be Treasury Secretary. Dr. Yellen is well known as an academic, as an economic policy adviser to President Clinton, and as Chair of the Federal Reserve. In all of these positions, she has proven herself to be wrong on fiscal, monetary, and economic policy. At her confirmation hearing, she vigorously supported the additional $2 trillion stimulus package President Biden has put forward. Her argument is that this time is different--but since the great recession, big spenders have not receded from that argument, even during the times of unprecedented spending growth in the Trump administration. Moreover, we know what the problem is in our economy today: government-mandated business closures. The economy contracted by nearly one-third in the second quarter of 2020 when lockdowns were in full force, but in the third quarter, the summer, when restrictions were relaxed, the economy made nearly a full recovery. This clearly indicates that our economy is not in need of stimulus; it needs fewer tin pot dictators in Governors' mansions. Much more troubling than Dr. Yellen's call for more spending is her dismissal of the harms of continued borrowing. She has said that borrowing and spending is not a problem because interest rates are low. And the key part of her argument is that stimulus will generate more growth than interest will cost to borrow. That is the definition of ``modern monetary theory.'' She did not use that phrase because it is so obviously wrong-headed. Modern monetary theory is self-conflicted because proponents of it, like Dr. Yellen, say we can borrow in good time, but they never say we need to be austere in bad times. In fact, bad times are when they call for even more borrowing and spending. Modern monetary theory is nothing more than window dressing on a deep-seeded desire to always spend more, no matter what, and its proponents hope to reap electoral benefits now and to leave office before the bill comes due. Well, the bill is coming due. The Congressional Budget Office already estimates that interest on our current debt will begin growing at nearly 22 percent annually in just 6 years. What does that mean? Higher taxes or Venezuela-style inflation--Probably both. I simply cannot support a candidate who seeks to inflict such pain on the American people in just a few short years for an entirely unneeded stimulus today. We know what works--opening the economy. We know what does not work--modern monetary theory. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PAUL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS147-2 | null | 2,191 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. PAUL. Mr. President, I voted against the confirmation of Janet Yellen to be Treasury Secretary. Dr. Yellen is well known as an academic, as an economic policy adviser to President Clinton, and as Chair of the Federal Reserve. In all of these positions, she has proven herself to be wrong on fiscal, monetary, and economic policy. At her confirmation hearing, she vigorously supported the additional $2 trillion stimulus package President Biden has put forward. Her argument is that this time is different--but since the great recession, big spenders have not receded from that argument, even during the times of unprecedented spending growth in the Trump administration. Moreover, we know what the problem is in our economy today: government-mandated business closures. The economy contracted by nearly one-third in the second quarter of 2020 when lockdowns were in full force, but in the third quarter, the summer, when restrictions were relaxed, the economy made nearly a full recovery. This clearly indicates that our economy is not in need of stimulus; it needs fewer tin pot dictators in Governors' mansions. Much more troubling than Dr. Yellen's call for more spending is her dismissal of the harms of continued borrowing. She has said that borrowing and spending is not a problem because interest rates are low. And the key part of her argument is that stimulus will generate more growth than interest will cost to borrow. That is the definition of ``modern monetary theory.'' She did not use that phrase because it is so obviously wrong-headed. Modern monetary theory is self-conflicted because proponents of it, like Dr. Yellen, say we can borrow in good time, but they never say we need to be austere in bad times. In fact, bad times are when they call for even more borrowing and spending. Modern monetary theory is nothing more than window dressing on a deep-seeded desire to always spend more, no matter what, and its proponents hope to reap electoral benefits now and to leave office before the bill comes due. Well, the bill is coming due. The Congressional Budget Office already estimates that interest on our current debt will begin growing at nearly 22 percent annually in just 6 years. What does that mean? Higher taxes or Venezuela-style inflation--Probably both. I simply cannot support a candidate who seeks to inflict such pain on the American people in just a few short years for an entirely unneeded stimulus today. We know what works--opening the economy. We know what does not work--modern monetary theory. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PAUL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS147-2 | null | 2,192 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of Ali Mayorkas's nomination to be Secretary of Homeland Security. I believe Ali is uniquely qualified to face the challenges our Nation is facing on day one. He brings to this office a diverse background and set of experiences in both the private and public sectors that will serve him well. I have known Ali for many years and am proud to have recommended him to President Clinton for the position of U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California. I also worked very closely with Ali while he served as President Obama's Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and later Deputy Secretary of DHS. We all know that the role of Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security is challenging. Recent history has shown the threats facing the United States are diverse and ever-changing. Over my many years working with Ali, I have witnessed his intelligence, kindness, and thoughtfulness, as well as the compassion and morality he brings with him to work every day. In many ways, Ali's life story reflects the spirit of the American dream, and I would like to briefly pass along some of that story today. Born in Havana, Cuba, Ali and his family fled to the United States in 1960. He attended the University of California-Berkeley, where he earned a bachelor's degree with distinction in 1981. He went on to earn his law degree from Loyola Law School in 1985. From 1989 to 1998, he served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California where he prosecuted a wide array of Federal crimes. Ali became the first U.S. Attorney in the Central District of California to be appointed from within the office when he was appointed in 1998. He created the Civil Rights Section in the office to prosecute hate crimes; he developed an innovative program to address violent crime by targeting criminals' possession of firearms; he led the prosecution of street gangs; and he still had time to develop an afterschool program to help at-risk youth. Ali's approach to enforcing our Nation's laws demonstrates a much-needed holistic view that understands the complexity of the challenge. He further developed his sharp legal skills as a partner at O'Melveny and Myers from 2001 to 2009 where he represented companies in high-profile and sensitive government enforcement cases. He was recognized by his worldwide firm for his leadership and was named by the National Law Journal in 2008 as one of the ``50 Most Influential Minority Lawyers in America.'' When Ali took over as Director of USCIS in 2009, he worked to administer our immigration laws while preserving our legacy as a nation of immigrants. He helped ensure integrity of our immigration laws by decreasing fraud and bringing accountability to our immigration system. Significantly, under President Obama's directive to grant deferred action to immigrants who arrived in this country as children, Ali successfully implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, known as DACA. This program played a critical role for hundreds of thousands of young people who were able to get jobs, acquire driver's licenses, purchase homes and go to college. I am proud that Ali will continue to play a role in allowing these young people to pursue the American dream. When Ali became the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security under President Obama in 2013, he took on even more responsibility. He led the DHS response to the Ebola and Zika virus epidemics, as well as cybersecurity negotiations with China. He oversaw the agency's complex efforts to combat terrorism and enhance the security and management of our borders. He worked to facilitate trade and travel, and he oversaw the enforcement of our immigration laws. And he was responsible for coordinating efforts to safeguard cyberspace and oversee disaster coordination with Federal, State, local, international, and private sector partners. The United States faces new threats to our security every day. We need experienced, intelligent, and moral leadership at DHS to combat those threats. I have full confidence that Ali Mayorkas will bring all of those qualities to the role of Homeland Security Secretary. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote to confirm Alejandro Mayorkas for the position of Secretary of Homeland Security. Thank you. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. FEINSTEIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS147 | null | 2,193 |
formal | safeguard | null | transphobic | Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of Ali Mayorkas's nomination to be Secretary of Homeland Security. I believe Ali is uniquely qualified to face the challenges our Nation is facing on day one. He brings to this office a diverse background and set of experiences in both the private and public sectors that will serve him well. I have known Ali for many years and am proud to have recommended him to President Clinton for the position of U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California. I also worked very closely with Ali while he served as President Obama's Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and later Deputy Secretary of DHS. We all know that the role of Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security is challenging. Recent history has shown the threats facing the United States are diverse and ever-changing. Over my many years working with Ali, I have witnessed his intelligence, kindness, and thoughtfulness, as well as the compassion and morality he brings with him to work every day. In many ways, Ali's life story reflects the spirit of the American dream, and I would like to briefly pass along some of that story today. Born in Havana, Cuba, Ali and his family fled to the United States in 1960. He attended the University of California-Berkeley, where he earned a bachelor's degree with distinction in 1981. He went on to earn his law degree from Loyola Law School in 1985. From 1989 to 1998, he served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California where he prosecuted a wide array of Federal crimes. Ali became the first U.S. Attorney in the Central District of California to be appointed from within the office when he was appointed in 1998. He created the Civil Rights Section in the office to prosecute hate crimes; he developed an innovative program to address violent crime by targeting criminals' possession of firearms; he led the prosecution of street gangs; and he still had time to develop an afterschool program to help at-risk youth. Ali's approach to enforcing our Nation's laws demonstrates a much-needed holistic view that understands the complexity of the challenge. He further developed his sharp legal skills as a partner at O'Melveny and Myers from 2001 to 2009 where he represented companies in high-profile and sensitive government enforcement cases. He was recognized by his worldwide firm for his leadership and was named by the National Law Journal in 2008 as one of the ``50 Most Influential Minority Lawyers in America.'' When Ali took over as Director of USCIS in 2009, he worked to administer our immigration laws while preserving our legacy as a nation of immigrants. He helped ensure integrity of our immigration laws by decreasing fraud and bringing accountability to our immigration system. Significantly, under President Obama's directive to grant deferred action to immigrants who arrived in this country as children, Ali successfully implemented the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, known as DACA. This program played a critical role for hundreds of thousands of young people who were able to get jobs, acquire driver's licenses, purchase homes and go to college. I am proud that Ali will continue to play a role in allowing these young people to pursue the American dream. When Ali became the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security under President Obama in 2013, he took on even more responsibility. He led the DHS response to the Ebola and Zika virus epidemics, as well as cybersecurity negotiations with China. He oversaw the agency's complex efforts to combat terrorism and enhance the security and management of our borders. He worked to facilitate trade and travel, and he oversaw the enforcement of our immigration laws. And he was responsible for coordinating efforts to safeguard cyberspace and oversee disaster coordination with Federal, State, local, international, and private sector partners. The United States faces new threats to our security every day. We need experienced, intelligent, and moral leadership at DHS to combat those threats. I have full confidence that Ali Mayorkas will bring all of those qualities to the role of Homeland Security Secretary. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote to confirm Alejandro Mayorkas for the position of Secretary of Homeland Security. Thank you. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. FEINSTEIN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS147 | null | 2,194 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Mr. KING. Mr. President, if you ask 100 Americans what qualities they want in a public servant, I would bet there are a few common words that would come up. Smart. Dedicated. Bipartisan. Honest. Trustworthy. Humble. Simply put, they will describe Chad Metzler--my legislative director for the past 8 years and one of the finest public servants I have ever met. That is why today I rise with a heavy heart to wish Chad well as he prepares to embark on a new adventure . Each of us in this body understands that the Senate's work is not entrusted solely to Senators. Our names may be on the door, but we can't claim successes on our own. Our staffs play a critical role in our efforts to navigate the complex challenges facing the Nation and serve the American people. That is why hiring the right people is one of the most important decisions any Senator makes. If a Senator is lucky, they will find staffers who have extensive experience and knowledge of the legislative process; who aren't afraid to challenge their boss's preconceived notions in the pursuit of better policy; who are kind, level-headed public servants; who are generous colleagues; who understand the importance of the faith placed in us by the American people and work ever day to live up to this enormous responsibility. If a Senator is lucky, they will find staffers who check a few of those boxes. If they find someone who can do all of the above, they have hit the jackpot. When Chad Metzler joined my team as legislative director in 2013, I and the people of Maine hit the jackpot because he is all of those things and more. Over the past 8 years, I have had the privilege to have Chad lead my legislative team. Sadly, good fortune only lasts for so long. As Chad transitions into a new, exciting opportunity, I am confident that he will continue to make vital contributions to the American people in his new role, but before he leaves us, I want to take a moment to reflect on all his contributions to the Senate and the country. From my early days in the Senate, Chad's experience was invaluable. Prior to joining my office, he spent 17 years working for Senator Herb Kohl, from his home State of Wisconsin. Throughout that tenure, Chad spearheaded a number of important, varied responsibilities--from serving as the Senator's legislative director, to holding the position of staff director on the Senate Special Committee on Aging, tomanaging Senator Kohl's portfolio on the Appropriations Committee. That combination of skills made Chad a rare breed--an experienced Senate staffer who possessed both a generalist's understanding of the big picture and a specialist's ability to get into the weeds of thorny policy issues. Chad's background was invaluable in helping to bring me up to speed on the Senate's parliamentary procedures and the body's unique, frustrating quirks. As a former Governor, I faced the unenviable task of shifting from the executive role to being just 1 of 100. As an Independent used to relying on bipartisan coalitions, the Senate's often rigid partisanship presented its own challenges. Chad responded with creative thinking and dogged persistence, and the results were quickly apparent. Just a few short months after I came to Washington, Chad helped me lead a bipartisan compromise on student loan rates that is projected to save taxpayers $715 million over the next 10 years and an estimated $30 billion for students over the following 4 years. That legislation set the tone for our office--a focus on rolling up our sleeves, bipartisan work, coalition building, and commonsense solutions to the problems that plague the American people. In the years that followed, Chad and his legislative team helped to build on that mission through level-headed, analytical thinking. Among other successes, we have worked across the aisle to pass legislation that confronts the opioid epidemic sweeping our communities; improves America's insufficient cyber defenses; helps more working families access childcare; and addresses the $12 billion maintenance backlog at America's national parks. Each of these legislative successes came about through hard work and bipartisan discussions. More importantly, each made life better for our constituents. Obviously, Chad is a talented legislative craftsman, but somehow, he was an even better leader and person. For the past 8 years, Chad has guided my legislative team with a steady hand, helping dozens of young public servants in my office grow and thrive. He treats everyone he meets with respect and kindness, never once talking down to someone with less experience or a different perspective. Just as important, his sense of humor has remained intact through a quarter century of Senate service, ensuring that even in the midst of serious work, we don't take ourselves too seriously. When I was Governor, I said I always was looking for staff who demonstrate both competence and kindness. You can have some with one trait, some with the other, a few with neither, but when you find folks with both, you invite them onboard immediately. Chad doesn't just have those qualities; he personifies them. As you can gather from my remarks, Chad is an irreplaceable part of my team, and the Senate is poorer for losing him. But, as Chad always does, I feel the need to take a step back and analyze the entire situation. In doing so, I find a few key reasons for gratitude. I am grateful that even though Chad is moving on, he leaves behind a team that is well-educated in the Metzler School of Public Service. His years of mentorship have crafted our team into one of the sharpest, most dedicated staffs on Capitol Hill, and I know his influence and example will be felt in our office for years to come. I am grateful that although our body is losing a dedicated public servant, the country is not. In the days ahead, Chad will begin a new opportunity that will put his skills to good use. This new role will allow him to continue fighting for pragmatic, principled solutions that move our country forward. Now more than ever, we need folks like him working on tough problems. Finally, I am grateful that even though Chad will no longer be on my staff, he will forever remain a trusted adviser and friend. Chad's intellect, professionalism, and warmth are rare attributes; to possess all of these qualities, while still remaining humble and even-keeled, is even rarer. I consider myself extremely fortunate to know him and look forward to continuing that association. Mr. President, I have a simple philosophy of leadership that has guided me throughout my life: Hire good people, and take credit for what they do. When I hired Chad Metzler, I made one of the smartest leadership decisions of my life--bringing on the ideal partner to break bipartisan logjams and make life better for the people of Maine. I am saddened to say goodbye to my adviser and friend today, but I know that his best is yet to come. I can't wait to see what is next. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. KING | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS148-3 | null | 2,195 |
formal | America First | null | antisemitic | Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the nomination of Antony J. Blinken to be U.S. Secretary of State. Mr. Blinken has decades of experience in foreign policy, beginning in the early 1990s as the Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for European and Canadian Affairs. He has since risen to senior foreign policy positions on Capitol Hill and in the executive branch, including as Democratic Staff Director on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and as Principal Deputy National Security Adviser and Deputy Secretary of State in the Obama administration. I have had occasion to work with him over the years and can testify to his professionalism, diligence, and good judgment. Mr. Blinken faces an enormous task. The last 4 years have been rife with chaos, division, and ineffective unilateralism. Under the so-called slogan of ``America First,'' President Trump turned his back on allies and emboldened our adversaries, leaving the United States weakened, vulnerable, and alone. Mr. Blinken must not only reverse the damage done by President Trump; he must reinvigorate U.S. leadership in a manner that meets the challenges we face today--from the existential threat of climate change, to a more aggressive and confrontational China. To begin, Mr. Blinken must restore our alliances, rebuild our global partnerships, expand our commercial ties, and rejoin the critical international agreements and organizations recklessly abandoned by President Trump. Already President Biden has reversed Trump's Muslim ban, rejoined the Paris climate accords, and recommitted to the World Health Organization. In the coming months, Mr. Blinken must work with our allies to develop a united front to counter the threats posed by adversaries such as China, Russia, and Iran. He must reaffirm our commitment to NATO. He must reestablish U.S. leadership in providing development and humanitarian assistance around the world, reasserting U.S. values of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. As importantly, Mr. Blinken must restore the State Department itself. The Trump administration routinely undermined and smeared our dedicated career foreign and civil service officers. Rebuilding the morale of our talented public servants will be imperative for the successful execution of our foreign policy. Given the breadth of his knowledge and experience, I am confident Mr. Blinken is the right person to meet America's foreign policy challenges, and I support his confirmation as U.S. Secretary of State. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. VAN HOLLEN | Senate | CREC-2021-01-26-pt1-PgS148 | null | 2,196 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, it has been 3 weeks since a mob of domestic terrorists stormed the U.S. Capitol in an effort to thwart our democratic system of government. In the weeks since, the underlying threat of violence to our government remains of great concern. One of the most important responsibilities of the new administration--of any administration--is to protect our country and its citizens. The Senate must continue the process of confirming President Biden's Cabinet by installing Alejandro Mayorkas to serve as Secretary of Homeland Security. In truth, we should have been able to confirm Mr. Mayorkas days ago. He is supremely well qualified for the job. He is the son of immigrants whose family escaped from the Holocaust, a prosecutor, a veteran of 7 years who led the Agency's response on Ebola, cyber security, border security, counterterrorism, and domestic terrorism. Just 4 years ago, President Trump had his Secretary of Homeland Security installed on Inauguration Day. As four previous Secretaries of Homeland Security under Presidents of both parties wrote recently: After the attacks on the Capitol on January 6, it is more urgent than ever to have in place an experienced, capable, and Senate-confirmed leader. That person is Mayorkas. That was four previous Homeland Secretaries from both parties. Unfortunately, because of the objections of one Member, the Senate has not been allowed to vote on this nomination yet. It is the Senate's responsibility to make sure national security officials are on the job and keeping our country safe. My friends on the other side don't have to agree with Mr. Mayorkas on the finer points of every policy, but surely we can all agree that he knows the Department, he understands the threats to our Nation's security, and he has what it takes to lead DHS. The Senate must confirm his nomination in very short order, and we will make sure that happens. We must continue on to the rest of the President's Cabinet as well. The President's nominee for Secretary of Transportation was voted out of committee this morning on an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, 21 to 3. With cooperation, the Senate can and should confirm Mr. Buttigieg soon, as well. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-27-pt1-PgS157-5 | null | 2,197 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, it has been 3 weeks since a mob of domestic terrorists stormed the U.S. Capitol in an effort to thwart our democratic system of government. In the weeks since, the underlying threat of violence to our government remains of great concern. One of the most important responsibilities of the new administration--of any administration--is to protect our country and its citizens. The Senate must continue the process of confirming President Biden's Cabinet by installing Alejandro Mayorkas to serve as Secretary of Homeland Security. In truth, we should have been able to confirm Mr. Mayorkas days ago. He is supremely well qualified for the job. He is the son of immigrants whose family escaped from the Holocaust, a prosecutor, a veteran of 7 years who led the Agency's response on Ebola, cyber security, border security, counterterrorism, and domestic terrorism. Just 4 years ago, President Trump had his Secretary of Homeland Security installed on Inauguration Day. As four previous Secretaries of Homeland Security under Presidents of both parties wrote recently: After the attacks on the Capitol on January 6, it is more urgent than ever to have in place an experienced, capable, and Senate-confirmed leader. That person is Mayorkas. That was four previous Homeland Secretaries from both parties. Unfortunately, because of the objections of one Member, the Senate has not been allowed to vote on this nomination yet. It is the Senate's responsibility to make sure national security officials are on the job and keeping our country safe. My friends on the other side don't have to agree with Mr. Mayorkas on the finer points of every policy, but surely we can all agree that he knows the Department, he understands the threats to our Nation's security, and he has what it takes to lead DHS. The Senate must confirm his nomination in very short order, and we will make sure that happens. We must continue on to the rest of the President's Cabinet as well. The President's nominee for Secretary of Transportation was voted out of committee this morning on an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, 21 to 3. With cooperation, the Senate can and should confirm Mr. Buttigieg soon, as well. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. SCHUMER | Senate | CREC-2021-01-27-pt1-PgS157-5 | null | 2,198 |
formal | terrorism | null | Islamophobic | Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, yesterday, we confirmed Antony Blinken, our new Secretary of State. Like the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of the Treasury, it was another big, bipartisan vote here in the Senate. Four years ago, Senate Democrats subjected mainstream nominees to lead State and Treasury to a full gauntlet of partisan delay tactics. They forced cloture votes. Those were nearly party-line. So were the final votes. Neither got on the job until February. But this President's mainstream nominees to key posts are receiving fair consideration and a timely process. Republicans have no shortage of substantive policy differences with the new administration. We will be discussing them with Secretaries Austin, Yellen, and Blinken in the course of normal committee oversight. But unlike what took place 4 years ago, Republicans are not gratuitously delaying people who are mainstream and qualified whom the new President has asked to serve in key posts. If we find somebody unfit, unqualified, or outside the mainstream, you bet we will oppose them. But I have just spent 4 years arguing that Presidents deserve some latitude to assemble their team. I meant it, and I mean it now. With my vote to confirm Mr. Blinken, I wanted to reinforce the need for a true bipartisan consensus on the core objectives of our foreign policy. Yesterday, while discussing the legislative filibuster, I talked about the chaos that would ensue if every domestic policy swung wildly back and forth with every election. The same goes for our foreign affairs. American statesmen should make commitments and issue threats that can endure beyond their terms in office. To be clear, Presidents bear the primary responsibility for foreign policy, and I am not suggesting different leaders should not have different ideas. But they will be more successful and their legacies more enduring if they make the effort to build bipartisan support among Congress and the American people. Neither America nor our allies will like the world that results if the world's leading Nation starts over like an Etch A Sketch every 4 years. For starters, in several important areas, the new administration should build on bipartisan consensus that actually already exists. Let's start with China. The Trump administration helped build a longoverdue awakening to the reality that we are in strategic competition with the PRC, that Beijing will not magically conform itself to the so-called international community, and that these challenges demand fast and serious action from the United States and from our friends. President Biden and his new Cabinet must keep working with Congress to continue building a whole-of-government, whole-of-economy approach to checking China. We need Secretary Austin to keep focus on modernizing our forces, deterring Chinese threats from the Indo-Pacific to space and cyber space, sustaining robust defense spending, and investing in defense partnerships across the world. We need Secretary Yellen to keep focused on the coercive manipulation the PRC uses to ensnare the developing world in its orbit. We need Secretary Blinken to keep clarifying the China threat to our allies and European partners, to focus on contesting their growing influence in Africa and the Middle East, and to hold Beijing accountable for its unacceptable repression in places like Tibet and Hong Kong and its hostility toward Taiwan. Now, we know China is not the only great power with whom we need to hang tough. In concrete policy terms, the United States just spent 4 years developing a more clear-eyed approach to Russia. Rather than chasing naive ``resets'' with the Kremlin or worshipping arms control like a religion, we leaned into military assistance to Ukraine, serious sanctions, cyber countermeasures against meddling, and other strong steps. The Biden administration will find willing partners on Capitol Hill if it builds on this process, keeps imposing real costs on Moscow, pushes back on expansionism in the eastern Mediterranean, and, importantly, encourages our allies to join in this effort. Great power competition is key, but, of course, it does not exhaust the threats that we face. In the Middle East, I know President Biden will face political pressure from the left to rejoin Obama's Iran deal, just as President Trump faced pressure from the right to abandon it. Had President Obama not tried to circumvent Congress and pursue a partisan policy, this critical national security challenge might not have become so polarizing, but that is where we are. There is no question that Iran is the biggest threat the United States and our partners face in the region. It poses threats beyond just its pursuit of nuclear weapons: sponsoring terrorism, its sectarian agenda, its work to undermine its neighbors' sovereignty, its development of ballistic missiles and lethal drones, and its appalling--appalling--record on human rights. Confronting this multifaceted challenge will take bipartisanship at home and solidarity with Israel and our Arab partners abroad. Those things need to exist before making major changes or racing to rejoin a deal. And our new President must be ready to respond to violence with force, as the Trump administration did when they removed Soleimani from the battlefield. Speaking of the Middle East, I have consistently and vocally stood up during administrations of both parties against withdrawing our limited forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria too rapidly or without a smart plan. A supermajority of the Senate joined me last Congress in warning against abruptly abandoning battlefields recklessly on bad terms. Finally, all of this important work will require that we keep our friends close. The United States needs to be a partner that neither strains alliances unnecessarily nor hands out free passes. President Biden should continue prodding our partners to honor their promises, pay their share, and put real capabilities on the table--and reemphasize that we have their backs. One early test for the new administration and congressional Democrats will be the defense budget. If President Biden and his team are serious about contesting China, Russia, and these other threats, they will need to show it. Without continued, robust investment in a modern global force presence, American leadership would be little more than hollow rhetoric. I voted to get President Biden's top foreign policy advisers on the job swiftly. I hope and expect that our shared work will lead to frequent, close, and bipartisan work with the Senate. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-01-27-pt1-PgS158-4 | null | 2,199 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.