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 | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Malinowski). Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which the yeas and nays are ordered. The House will resume proceedings on postponed questions at a later time. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Malinowski) | House | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgH6278 | null | 3,500 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 796) to codify maternity care coordination programs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgH6297-3 | null | 3,501 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 147) to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to make certain improvements to transitional services for separating members of the Armed Forces and educational assistance under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgH6298-2 | null | 3,502 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bera). Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4233) to amend title 38, United States Code, to furnish Vet Center readjustment counseling and related mental health services to veterans and members of the Armed Forces using certain educational assistance benefits, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bera) | House | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgH6298 | null | 3,503 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO THE SITUATION IN NICARAGUA--MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (H. DOC. NO. 117-75) The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following message from the President of the United States; which was read and, together with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed:To the Congress of the United States: Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency with respect to the situation in Nicaragua declared in Executive Order 13851 of November 27, 2018, is to continue in effect beyond November 27, 2021. The situation in Nicaragua, including the violent response by the Government of Nicaragua to the protests that began on April 18, 2018, and the Ortega regime's systematic dismantling and undermining of democratic institutions and the rule of law, its use of indiscriminate violence and repressive tactics against civilians, as well as its corruption leading to the destabilization of Nicaragua's economy, continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13851 with respect to the situation in Nicaragua. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. The White House, November 16, 2021. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgH6301 | null | 3,504 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Mr. President, now on infrastructure, yesterday, our country took a major step forward to prepare our economy for the challenges of the 21st century. As we all know, the American people have been told for years--for years--that another infrastructure bill was coming, one infrastructure week after another. But, after yesterday, we can now tell the American people that an infrastructure law is here. The President signed it yesterday. The enactment of bipartisan infrastructure legislation is so long overdue. There isn't a community in America that doesn't have some glaring need. Crumbling roads; dilapidated schools; untrustworthy bridges; overburdened airports, seaports, and railways--the new infrastructure law will tackle these challenges head-on. I thank the President and my colleagues from both sides of the aisle--both sides of the aisle--for making yesterday possible. The President's infrastructure bill can be summarized with a four-letter word: J-o-b-s. Jobs, jobs, jobs--more local jobs, more good-paying jobs, more union jobs. Unions, as we know, have been a ladder up through the decades, and they will continue to be under this bill, as there will be more of them. And the jobs will put people to work on projects in every State and every community. In New York, my State, dependent on good transportation, major undertakings like Gateway, the Cross Bronx Expressway, the Second Avenue Subway, I-81 in Syracuse, and the north inner loop in Rochester. The list could go on and on and on. All of them will finally get going again. We have a great chance of that happening after years of paralysis. And the Federal dollars that the government is sending to the States is already having an effect in my State. Yesterday, our Governor announced that, because of the Federal dollars, there won't be fare increases or cutbacks in services on the MTA and the commuter rail. That is really good news. Well, what is happening in New York holds true in every other State in the Nation. Major projects that have been long awaited have a real good possibility of getting going. So there is great news, and jobs, jobs, jobs will rain down on every State. So there is much to celebrate with yesterday's signing, and in the weeks and months and years to come, the American people will see the benefits with their own eyes. So I want tothank President Biden for finally delivering on something that previous administrations have tried to do but have been unable to complete. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8215-9 | null | 3,505 |
formal | cutting taxes | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Mr. President, make no mistake, we will keep going in the weeks ahead by passing the rest of President Biden's Build Back Better agenda. It is very simple. If we want to create more jobs, if we want to fight inflation, if we want to help families lower costs, the best thing we can do is pass Build Back Better. Let me repeat that. Want to fight inflation? Support Build Back Better. For all of 2021, we have seen a historic and unprecedented economic recovery compared to where we were at the depths of the COVID crisis. But there is no denying that, as our recovery continues, we must work to address supply chain troubles that have exacerbated inflation in recent months. Build Back Better is exactly what the doctor ordered. No fewer than 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists and economists across the political spectrum have said repeatedly that Build Back Better and infrastructure together will reduce--reduce--inflationary pressures. In just, I think it was, this morning's Washington Post, Larry Summers, one of the inflation hawks in this country, recommended passing Build Back Better as a way to reduce inflation. The childcare investments alone will save parents thousands of dollars a year. Right now, families pay an average of $10,000 annually on childcare for each kid under 4. Many pay more than that. That is a backbreaking expense that too many families--the majority--simply cannot afford. Build Back Better will provide the largest investment in childcare ever. Extending the childcare tax credit will help parents save on things like diapers and groceries and gasoline. And, of course, Build Back Better will finally empower Medicare to directly negotiate drug prices in Part B and Part D, lowering costs for millions of seniors and American families. On insulin alone, our plan would make it so that Americans with diabetes won't pay more than $35 a month for insulin. Mr. President, none of the things I am talking about are luxuries; none are handouts. They are daily essentials that families need to thrive and which, over the years, have grown expensive. And America is behind this. In every poll you see, they are for of all these things. Why will not a single Republican vote for it? Why will not a single Republican vote to reduce insulin costs to $35, not a single Republican vote to help Americans with childcare, not a single Republican vote for the best way to reduce inflation, even though they talk about it a lot? It is profoundly disappointing to see our Republican colleagues more focused on exploiting problems faced by the American people. Just recently, my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, told Americans precisely how he feels about the rising costs, inflation costs, faced by families. His quote: ``[It] is a gold mine for us.'' It is a gold mine; that is what the Republican junior Senator from Florida said. How cynical, how low, how wildly out of touch is that? The same Republicans who spent years under Donald Trump cutting taxes for the wealthy are now opposing relief for the middle class and cheering for costs to go up. I hope the American people remember that. Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs. Republicans, on the other hand, think inflation is ``a gold mine'' for them and are rooting for prices to go up. These are the same partisan, shortsighted games that have frustrated American families, who have increasingly wondered who in government is looking out for them. Well, yesterday, Americans got to see one shining example of what can happen when elected officials do look out for them. Build Back Better is another opportunity to do the same, and we will not let up until we pass Build Back Better and keep our promise to recapture that sunny American optimism that has long been the key to our success. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8216 | null | 3,506 |
formal | handouts | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Mr. President, make no mistake, we will keep going in the weeks ahead by passing the rest of President Biden's Build Back Better agenda. It is very simple. If we want to create more jobs, if we want to fight inflation, if we want to help families lower costs, the best thing we can do is pass Build Back Better. Let me repeat that. Want to fight inflation? Support Build Back Better. For all of 2021, we have seen a historic and unprecedented economic recovery compared to where we were at the depths of the COVID crisis. But there is no denying that, as our recovery continues, we must work to address supply chain troubles that have exacerbated inflation in recent months. Build Back Better is exactly what the doctor ordered. No fewer than 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists and economists across the political spectrum have said repeatedly that Build Back Better and infrastructure together will reduce--reduce--inflationary pressures. In just, I think it was, this morning's Washington Post, Larry Summers, one of the inflation hawks in this country, recommended passing Build Back Better as a way to reduce inflation. The childcare investments alone will save parents thousands of dollars a year. Right now, families pay an average of $10,000 annually on childcare for each kid under 4. Many pay more than that. That is a backbreaking expense that too many families--the majority--simply cannot afford. Build Back Better will provide the largest investment in childcare ever. Extending the childcare tax credit will help parents save on things like diapers and groceries and gasoline. And, of course, Build Back Better will finally empower Medicare to directly negotiate drug prices in Part B and Part D, lowering costs for millions of seniors and American families. On insulin alone, our plan would make it so that Americans with diabetes won't pay more than $35 a month for insulin. Mr. President, none of the things I am talking about are luxuries; none are handouts. They are daily essentials that families need to thrive and which, over the years, have grown expensive. And America is behind this. In every poll you see, they are for of all these things. Why will not a single Republican vote for it? Why will not a single Republican vote to reduce insulin costs to $35, not a single Republican vote to help Americans with childcare, not a single Republican vote for the best way to reduce inflation, even though they talk about it a lot? It is profoundly disappointing to see our Republican colleagues more focused on exploiting problems faced by the American people. Just recently, my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, told Americans precisely how he feels about the rising costs, inflation costs, faced by families. His quote: ``[It] is a gold mine for us.'' It is a gold mine; that is what the Republican junior Senator from Florida said. How cynical, how low, how wildly out of touch is that? The same Republicans who spent years under Donald Trump cutting taxes for the wealthy are now opposing relief for the middle class and cheering for costs to go up. I hope the American people remember that. Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs. Republicans, on the other hand, think inflation is ``a gold mine'' for them and are rooting for prices to go up. These are the same partisan, shortsighted games that have frustrated American families, who have increasingly wondered who in government is looking out for them. Well, yesterday, Americans got to see one shining example of what can happen when elected officials do look out for them. Build Back Better is another opportunity to do the same, and we will not let up until we pass Build Back Better and keep our promise to recapture that sunny American optimism that has long been the key to our success. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8216 | null | 3,507 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Build Back Better Agenda Mr. President, make no mistake, we will keep going in the weeks ahead by passing the rest of President Biden's Build Back Better agenda. It is very simple. If we want to create more jobs, if we want to fight inflation, if we want to help families lower costs, the best thing we can do is pass Build Back Better. Let me repeat that. Want to fight inflation? Support Build Back Better. For all of 2021, we have seen a historic and unprecedented economic recovery compared to where we were at the depths of the COVID crisis. But there is no denying that, as our recovery continues, we must work to address supply chain troubles that have exacerbated inflation in recent months. Build Back Better is exactly what the doctor ordered. No fewer than 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists and economists across the political spectrum have said repeatedly that Build Back Better and infrastructure together will reduce--reduce--inflationary pressures. In just, I think it was, this morning's Washington Post, Larry Summers, one of the inflation hawks in this country, recommended passing Build Back Better as a way to reduce inflation. The childcare investments alone will save parents thousands of dollars a year. Right now, families pay an average of $10,000 annually on childcare for each kid under 4. Many pay more than that. That is a backbreaking expense that too many families--the majority--simply cannot afford. Build Back Better will provide the largest investment in childcare ever. Extending the childcare tax credit will help parents save on things like diapers and groceries and gasoline. And, of course, Build Back Better will finally empower Medicare to directly negotiate drug prices in Part B and Part D, lowering costs for millions of seniors and American families. On insulin alone, our plan would make it so that Americans with diabetes won't pay more than $35 a month for insulin. Mr. President, none of the things I am talking about are luxuries; none are handouts. They are daily essentials that families need to thrive and which, over the years, have grown expensive. And America is behind this. In every poll you see, they are for of all these things. Why will not a single Republican vote for it? Why will not a single Republican vote to reduce insulin costs to $35, not a single Republican vote to help Americans with childcare, not a single Republican vote for the best way to reduce inflation, even though they talk about it a lot? It is profoundly disappointing to see our Republican colleagues more focused on exploiting problems faced by the American people. Just recently, my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, told Americans precisely how he feels about the rising costs, inflation costs, faced by families. His quote: ``[It] is a gold mine for us.'' It is a gold mine; that is what the Republican junior Senator from Florida said. How cynical, how low, how wildly out of touch is that? The same Republicans who spent years under Donald Trump cutting taxes for the wealthy are now opposing relief for the middle class and cheering for costs to go up. I hope the American people remember that. Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs. Republicans, on the other hand, think inflation is ``a gold mine'' for them and are rooting for prices to go up. These are the same partisan, shortsighted games that have frustrated American families, who have increasingly wondered who in government is looking out for them. Well, yesterday, Americans got to see one shining example of what can happen when elected officials do look out for them. Build Back Better is another opportunity to do the same, and we will not let up until we pass Build Back Better and keep our promise to recapture that sunny American optimism that has long been the key to our success. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8216 | null | 3,508 |
formal | middle class | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Mr. President, make no mistake, we will keep going in the weeks ahead by passing the rest of President Biden's Build Back Better agenda. It is very simple. If we want to create more jobs, if we want to fight inflation, if we want to help families lower costs, the best thing we can do is pass Build Back Better. Let me repeat that. Want to fight inflation? Support Build Back Better. For all of 2021, we have seen a historic and unprecedented economic recovery compared to where we were at the depths of the COVID crisis. But there is no denying that, as our recovery continues, we must work to address supply chain troubles that have exacerbated inflation in recent months. Build Back Better is exactly what the doctor ordered. No fewer than 17 Nobel Prize-winning economists and economists across the political spectrum have said repeatedly that Build Back Better and infrastructure together will reduce--reduce--inflationary pressures. In just, I think it was, this morning's Washington Post, Larry Summers, one of the inflation hawks in this country, recommended passing Build Back Better as a way to reduce inflation. The childcare investments alone will save parents thousands of dollars a year. Right now, families pay an average of $10,000 annually on childcare for each kid under 4. Many pay more than that. That is a backbreaking expense that too many families--the majority--simply cannot afford. Build Back Better will provide the largest investment in childcare ever. Extending the childcare tax credit will help parents save on things like diapers and groceries and gasoline. And, of course, Build Back Better will finally empower Medicare to directly negotiate drug prices in Part B and Part D, lowering costs for millions of seniors and American families. On insulin alone, our plan would make it so that Americans with diabetes won't pay more than $35 a month for insulin. Mr. President, none of the things I am talking about are luxuries; none are handouts. They are daily essentials that families need to thrive and which, over the years, have grown expensive. And America is behind this. In every poll you see, they are for of all these things. Why will not a single Republican vote for it? Why will not a single Republican vote to reduce insulin costs to $35, not a single Republican vote to help Americans with childcare, not a single Republican vote for the best way to reduce inflation, even though they talk about it a lot? It is profoundly disappointing to see our Republican colleagues more focused on exploiting problems faced by the American people. Just recently, my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, told Americans precisely how he feels about the rising costs, inflation costs, faced by families. His quote: ``[It] is a gold mine for us.'' It is a gold mine; that is what the Republican junior Senator from Florida said. How cynical, how low, how wildly out of touch is that? The same Republicans who spent years under Donald Trump cutting taxes for the wealthy are now opposing relief for the middle class and cheering for costs to go up. I hope the American people remember that. Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs. Republicans, on the other hand, think inflation is ``a gold mine'' for them and are rooting for prices to go up. These are the same partisan, shortsighted games that have frustrated American families, who have increasingly wondered who in government is looking out for them. Well, yesterday, Americans got to see one shining example of what can happen when elected officials do look out for them. Build Back Better is another opportunity to do the same, and we will not let up until we pass Build Back Better and keep our promise to recapture that sunny American optimism that has long been the key to our success. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8216 | null | 3,509 |
formal | blue | null | antisemitic | American Rescue Plan Mr. President, I want to speak today, sort of, maybe not so much as a Senator but as a former city councilman and mayor. I am sort of unique. There are 30 people in the United States who have been a mayor, Governor, and U.S. Senator--1 of only 30 in our entire history. The first time I was introduced and someone said that, I thought, that clearly cannot be right. So many Governors become Senators, that clearly cannot be right. I asked the Historian to research the matter because someone introduced me that way. And it came back that that is correct. Only 30 people in the history of this country have been a mayor, a Governor, and a Senator. And as I pondered the reason for that, it suddenly occurred to me: Being a mayor will kill you. Governors can become Senators, but mayors often make everyone mad, and it is hard to go from being a mayor to having a post-mayoral political career because the job is so tough. And yet, when people ask me: Which job do you like better, Governor or Senator, I always say: Look, I like them all. But if you made me give up every title I ever had except one, the one I would hold on to is mayor. I would hold on to being a mayor because when you are a mayor, it is 24/7, 365. There is no recess for a mayor. City councils and mayors don't go into recess. You are dealing with people on the issues that are the closest to them. You can make people happier or madder. You can convince people in local government, in a nation of 330 million, sometimes they think: What does my vote matter? What does my voice matter? No one will listen to me. In local government, you can convince people that actually they will be listened to. So I would hold on to that mayoral role, and, frankly, if I had not been mayor, I never would have been a Lieutenant Governor or Governor or a U.S. Senator. So I owe anything that I am or do in politics now to the fact that I started in local government. I spoke yesterday to the Virginia Association of Counties, the gathering of all county supervisors of all 95 counties around Virginia. They gather once a year, usually in person. Last year, it was by Zoom. They were so glad to be back together, in person, in Norfolk yesterday, hundreds of them in a conference room. And they asked me to come and talk about what is going on in Congress. And I said: How much time do you have? But what I really focused on was three things, and I want to focus on those three things now, speaking about them from the perspective of local officials not just in Virginia but all over this country: first, the American Rescue Plan, which was passed in March, but it is just beginning to have an impact in Virginia's cities, counties, and towns; second, the bipartisan infrastructure bill that was signed at the White House yesterday; and, third, the education and workforce bill that we are working on now that I believe will reach the President's desk in December. I started off by telling these county supervisors what I truly believe; that anybody in public life right now, elected or a first responder or any classroom teacher, when we are all finished with our times in public life, I think we will look back on this period of time, beginning March 2020, as the most important period of our public service careers. The pandemic has created such destruction, death, economic catastrophe, illness, and division that we have all been tested in our personal lives and our work on behalf of our citizens. Our constituents have needed us in unparalleled ways since March of 2020. Last year, on a cold Saturday in March, we passed the American Rescue Plan. It contains significant funding in four basic pillars: healthcare, relief to individuals and families, aid to businesses, and then, finally, aid to State and local governments, including educational institutions. The American Rescue Plan immediately affected millions of Americans--families, healthcare, institutions, businesses--through measures like massive vaccine deployment, checks to individuals, business grants. These kept families afloat and helped protect themselves against COVID, and they also kept the lights on for many of our local businesses. But what I want to focus on is the aid that we gave to State and local governments and, again, particularly--particularly--to local governments. Virginia and its localities, through the American Rescue Plan, received $7.2 billion in the American Rescue Plan; $4 billion to the Commonwealth of Virginia and $3.2 billion to our cities, counties, and towns. And as soon as we passed it, I started to go around and talk to our cities, counties, and towns: How are you going to spend these local moneys? What they told me was interesting in Aprilof last year. They said: Well, first, we are going to wait and see how the State decides to spend their $4 billion because we don't want to spend on something and have the State spend on the same thing. So we are going to let the State, the Governor, Governor Northam, the General Assembly program the $4 billion. But while the State is doing that, we are going to go out and dialogue with our citizens. And I really applaud my local governments. Recognizing this was one-time money that wouldn't happen every year, they had intense public dialogue with local constituents about what can we do to really transform? How can we use this money? And they have done it in fascinating ways. As I traveled around the State and talked to these local governments, I see them advancing long-delayed capital projects, water and wastewater upgrades, closing the digital divide by investing in broadband, constructing community centers in parts of the community that haven't received investments in the past. Many gave hazard pay to first responders. The American Rescue Plan helped people fund police, ambulance, fire, mental health workers, public health workers, grants to local nonprofits and churches that supported the community during COVID, grants to shore up Virginia's hard-hit businesses that were engaged in the tourism industry as people stopped traveling. This is what our local governments have done with these dollars. The investments are supplemented by more than three and a half billion additional dollars to Virginia childcare providers, K-12 school systems, colleges, community colleges, with billions more for other local priorities like transit and broadband infrastructure. So it was heartening to talk to these county officials. And there are more red counties in Virginia then there are blue counties, so I was talking to county officials from all over the State, and more would have been in Republican counties than Democratic counties. But they were thrilled that Congress--that the Senate by a one-vote margin, as we all remember--passed the American Rescue Plan to invest in these key local priorities. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8219 | null | 3,510 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Mr. President, I want to now talk about the third bill. The administration calls this bill the Build Back Better bill, and some call it the reconciliation bill because of the Senate budget procedure that we are using to pass it. As a member of the Budget and the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committees, I call it the education and workforce bill. It is an education and workforce bill. This bill, to me, is fundamentally about preparing America's workers for tomorrow and making sure that our workforce has the training and the childcare and the housing and the healthcare to outcompete any country in the world. If we want to make good on the promise of the infrastructure bill, who is going to build it? We just signed an infrastructure bill, but it didn't have the training and the education component. Who is going to build this? We have to have a workforce to build this massive infrastructure improvement, a once-in-a-generation improvement. That is what the Build Back Better bill is about. We are not going to outcompete China just by diplomacy or tariffs or tough talk. We aren't going to outcompete China just by growing our military budget. The best way to outcompete China is to invest in America's workers. The success of America's economy in the next 50 years will depend on our making the same investments that allowed us to thrive in the 20th century--investing in infrastructure, investing in people--and that is the basis of Build Back Better. This education and workforce bill also provides sizable investments in community colleges to train workers for infrastructure jobs, to train the next generation of K-12 teachers, and to train workers to enable America to lead the world into a new and innovative energy economy. There will be investments in rural economic development, a Pell grant increase, an extension of the child tax credit, and additional healthcare and housing funds to reduce costs for American families. The bill will close the Medicaid coverage gap, lower healthcare costs and the costs of prescription drugs, and will fund better public health infrastructure. The thing about this bill that maybe excites me the most is this: We will be able to provide funding for States to make prekindergarten universally available for every 3- and 4-year-old in this country, and we will do it through a mixed delivery model that supports high-quality public and private providers. This will help an additional 140,000 3- and 4-year-olds in Virginia have pre-K, and we will also fund childcare for the kids younger than 3 years old to bring down costs of childcare for working families. When you combine both the pre-K and the childcare support in Virginia, it will mean that 500,000 more kids just in my State will have access to quality and affordable childcare and early education. When kids get a strong start, itputs them on a brighter path for the rest of their lives, and it makes it much easier for their parents to go into the workforce, knowing that their child has high-quality and affordable childcare options. If we pass this bill, and I am confident we will, it is going to be the most pro-family and most pro-child bill Congress has ever passed. I believe this bill will do for children what Social Security did for seniors in a status that we have long lived in this country, where we accept a child poverty rate that is dramatically higher than the adult poverty rate. What does that say? What does that say about a society? This workforce and education bill, Build Back Better, will end our acceptance of that unacceptable status quo and move us to a position where we can cut child poverty and give our kids a much stronger start for a successful life. The American Rescue Plan, as I mentioned a minute ago, passed the Senate by just one vote--just one vote. One vote had changed all of those benefits to my local governments and to families and to educational institutions and to hospitals and healthcare networks and to businesses. All of those would have not occurred. None of the counties whose leadership I spoke to yesterday would have received the moneys that I talked about for the transformative projects. I hope we will pass this education and workforce bill by a wider margin than just one vote, but if it is just one vote--if it is just one vote--so be it. So be it. When there was an effort in this Chamber in August of 2017 to take health insurance away from 30 million people--one of the most dramatic moments in my entire public service career--we saved 30 million people's healthcare by 1 vote--by 1 vote. When we acted on the American Rescue Plan in the middle of the pandemic, in March, to try to help our country climb out of the worst public health crisis in a century, we got it by one vote. I would like a wider margin, but if it is just one vote--if it is just one vote--we will still be doing really important work. Americans deserve a Congress that will fund businesses and schools; that will train the workforce; that will build out transportation networks; that will support hospitals and health clinics; deploy vaccines; provide additional funding for law enforcement officers and first responders; create better broadband connections; provide tax relief to working families and lower childcare costs. Build Back Better is the next step to lifting us out of the pandemic and rebuilding the American economy. I have to say I am 63 years old--I will be 64 in February--and this has been the hardest 20 months of my life, and I think most people in this country might say the same thing. Just think about the sheer number of the 750,000 people who have passed and the people who have been ill--my wife and I both had COVID, and we know a lot of people who died of COVID--and beyond, those being the folks who didn't have COVID but who had a grandchild born whom they couldn't go visit or a friend who died, and they couldn't go to the funeral, or who lost a job or had a business that they had sweated to build but had to shut its doors. It has been such a tough time. But, as I looked out at the hundreds of county officials who were gathered in person yesterday in Norfolk and as I talked to them about these bills--and I saw them there in person--I detected an uplift. I am feeling a sense of uplift. I am feeling a sense of uplift as we see wages increasing. I am feeling a sense of uplift as we make a commitment, for the first time in a generation, to be builders and invest and grow our infrastructure. I am feeling a sense of uplift as we approach investing in workers and in our families the same way we are investing in infrastructure. I have a feeling that, over the next couple of months, these important investments will braid together in a way that will make people feel a sense of uplift about the economy and as vaccines continue to be distributed and now as boosters are being distributed. How wonderful it was to hear the Presiding Officer talking about his children being able to be vaccinated, his school-aged children. I think that is going to contribute to a sense of uplift, too. I just want this body to be a generator of uplift. Sadly, a lot has come out of the Capitol in the last few years that hasn't exactly been an uplift for people. I believe we are standing on the threshold of a chapter where this body, the U.S. Senate, will be a great generator of uplift for the American people, and I believe passing the Build Back Better is a step that will be really important in making that happen. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8220-2 | null | 3,511 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Remembering Max Cleland Madam President, over the weekend, I reflected on an event in my life that occurred 58 years ago. On November 24, 1963, I had just transferred and was a sophomore at Georgetown University. It was a chilly, gray Sunday morning, and I had joined a huge crowd of thousands of people in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House, to stand in mournful silence. A few minutes after 1 o'clock that afternoon, the doors of the White House opened, and the flag-draped casket of President John F. Kennedy was carried out. The casket was placed on a caisson for a solemn procession to this U.S. Capitol. The route was lined with hundreds of thousands of mourners standing 10, 12 deep. Hardly anyone spoke. The only sounds were the clacking of horses' hooves, the sound of metal wheels on the pavement, and the muffled sounds and drums of the military escort. More than 30 years later, I recounted that student experience to a colleague in the U.S. Senate. His name was Max Cleland from the State of Georgia, and he said to me: ``Durbin, I was standing in the same corner in Lafayette Square that you were standing in.'' He was there for the same reason I was: to witness history and to pay homage to our fallen President. There we were, just a few feet away from one another in Lafayette Square, but our lives took a much different course immediately after that. I went to law school, married, and started a family, and my wife and I were blessed with three kids. Max Cleland enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1965 after graduating from college. Military service was a long tradition in his family. He spent 2 years in what he called a ``cushy'' job as an Army aide, and he hated it. He fought to be sent to Vietnam. In April 1968, with less than a month left in his tour of duty, Army CPT Max Cleland found himself at the Battle of Khe Sanh, one of the longest and deadliest battles in the Vietnam war. On April 8, 1968, he jumped off of a helicopter and saw a hand grenade on the ground. He thought it had fallen off his flak jacket. As he reached to pick it up, the grenade exploded, tearing off his right arm and both of his legs. He was 25 years old. When he was recovering at Walter Reed, a friend took his doctor aside and asked him in confidence: What sort of life awaits this triple amputee? What would he be able to do? The doctor said that if Max ever recovered enough just to put on his own shirt, that simple task would exhaust him for the rest of the day. Well, that doctor didn't understand his patient. He didn't know Max Cleland. He saw what that grenade blast had taken away from him, but he didn't see the deep reservoirs of faith, strength, and determination that remained in Max and grew stronger over time. Before his injury, Max Cleland was the golden boy of his hometown of Lithonia, GA. He was his parents' only child. He stood 6 feet 2 inches, was a basketball and tennis player in high school, and was voted the ``most exceptional student'' during his senior year. He could have done anything with his life, but during that internship semester in Washington in 1963, Max Cleland decided he wanted to be a U.S. Senator. Nothing could kill that dream--not even the terrible explosion at Khe Sanh that took three of his limbs and nearly took his life. After 8 months in VA hospitals and rehab centers, he went home to Georgia. In 1970, at the age of 28, he became the youngest person ever elected to the Georgia State Senate. In 1984, he became the youngest person to head up the U.S. Veterans' Administration, now the Department of Veterans Affairs. It was under his watch that the VA first admitted the existence of something called post-traumatic stress disorder. Max knew the hell of post-traumatic stress well. He fought for treatment and compensation for our vets, and he struggled with visible and invisible wounds of war. In 1982, Max Cleland was elected Georgia secretary of state, a position he held for 14 years. During that time, he gathered some of the biggest vote totals in Georgia history. When Georgia Senator Sam Nunn decided to retire in 1996, Max knew it was his chance. He threw his hat in the ring and was elected U.S. Senator of Georgia. We came to this Senate together in 1997. When Max came to the Senate, there was no ramp for wheelchair users in the Senate. He had to make his first speech from the back of the Chamber. He tucked a quote from the Book of Isaiah inside his breast pocket. It was simple: ``Do not be afraid.'' He joined the Armed Services Committee and expanded education benefits for all veterans through the GI bill. He was just full of energy and good cheer. I remember that warm smile and his big belly laughs. His optimism was a choice, and it required a grueling regimen to maintain it. He took 3 hours every morning to prepare himself physically and mentally to face each day. I remember reading an article in the Washington Post about a regimen of strenuous physical exercise, which he designed for himself. He had taken a spare bedroom in his apartment and did his own workout routine--this triple amputee--each morning. For years, Max felt a sort of shame about his injuries. He felt the wounds were his own fault. He always thought that he had dropped the hand grenade that nearly killed him. It took 30 years for the truth to come out. Max was telling this story on national TV when a man called in afterwards and said: I need to talk to Senator Cleland. He said to him: ``Max, that's not how it happened at all. I know. I was there.'' He said another soldier had dropped the grenade, a ``newbie'' who hadn't taken the precautions that veteran soldiers know to take to prevent an accidental detonation. The story turned out to be true, and after 30 years, Max could begin to forgive himself. Max was serving in the Senate on 9/11. Months later, the Senate was debating how to merge several Agencies, offices, and Departments into the brandnew Department of Homeland Security. It was the biggest reorganization of the Federal Government since World War II, and it would create one of the largest Federal Agencies. Some saw it as an opportunity to take on the unions. Max and I and many others thought otherwise. Wevoted against an amendment that would have denied employees of the new Department the same collective bargaining rights as other Federal workers. It was months later that Max stood for reelection. Near the end of that race, there was an infamous ad that showed images of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and questioned Max's commitment to protect America. How do you look at a man who has lost three limbs in war and struggled every day of his life to serve others and accuse him of not being willing to defend this country? Max Cleland was one of six Vietnam veterans in the Senate at that time. All of his brothers in arms, including Republican Senators John McCain and Chuck Hagel, were furious about that ad. They raised enough hell to have that ad pulled. Sadly, the damage was done. Max lost his race for reelection. He called that loss ``the second hand grenade'' in his life. In his 2009 memoir aimed at his fellow wounded veterans, he wrote: ``My body, my soul, my spirit, and my belief in life itself was stolen from me by the disaster of the Vietnam War. I found solace in attempting to `turn my pain into somebody else's gain' by immersing myself in politics and public service.'' When his Senate years were over, he said: ``I went down physically, mentally, emotionally, down into the deepest, darkest hole in my life. I had several moments when I just didn't want to continue to live.'' The post-traumatic stress came roaring back into his life, and so 40 years after he first arrived there, Max returned to Walter Reed to try to mend not his body but his broken heart. It was connecting with other warriors that pulled him out of his despair. I want to thank my Senate colleagues and especially my friend, former Majority Leader Harry Reid, for their commitment during that dark time. They helped him return to public service. He was appointed to the 9/11 Commission and served for a short while before resigning to serve on the board of the U.S. Export-Import Bank. In 2009, President Obama chose Max to serve as Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission. Last week, Max Cleland died at his home in Atlanta. His big heart finally succumbed. He was 79 years old. On the same day he died, another veteran fighting the invisible wounds of war shot and killed himself at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington. Air Force TSgt Kenneth Omar Santiago was only 31. In a note posted on social media before he died, he wrote: ``No one knows who is struggling and waging wars that the eye cannot see. What does chronic depression even look like?'' Max Cleland knew the answer to that question. If he had met Sergeant Santiago--or any of the 17 veterans who die by suicide every single day in America--he would have told them what he said to himself every day: ``Hold on. Seek help. Do not be afraid.'' Max Cleland was a soldier, a patriot, and a friend. We can pay no better tribute to him than to honor his service and sacrifice and help those who continue to live with those visible and invisible wounds of war. Farewell, Max. I will miss you. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8225 | null | 3,512 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Remembering Max Cleland Madam President, over the weekend, I reflected on an event in my life that occurred 58 years ago. On November 24, 1963, I had just transferred and was a sophomore at Georgetown University. It was a chilly, gray Sunday morning, and I had joined a huge crowd of thousands of people in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House, to stand in mournful silence. A few minutes after 1 o'clock that afternoon, the doors of the White House opened, and the flag-draped casket of President John F. Kennedy was carried out. The casket was placed on a caisson for a solemn procession to this U.S. Capitol. The route was lined with hundreds of thousands of mourners standing 10, 12 deep. Hardly anyone spoke. The only sounds were the clacking of horses' hooves, the sound of metal wheels on the pavement, and the muffled sounds and drums of the military escort. More than 30 years later, I recounted that student experience to a colleague in the U.S. Senate. His name was Max Cleland from the State of Georgia, and he said to me: ``Durbin, I was standing in the same corner in Lafayette Square that you were standing in.'' He was there for the same reason I was: to witness history and to pay homage to our fallen President. There we were, just a few feet away from one another in Lafayette Square, but our lives took a much different course immediately after that. I went to law school, married, and started a family, and my wife and I were blessed with three kids. Max Cleland enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1965 after graduating from college. Military service was a long tradition in his family. He spent 2 years in what he called a ``cushy'' job as an Army aide, and he hated it. He fought to be sent to Vietnam. In April 1968, with less than a month left in his tour of duty, Army CPT Max Cleland found himself at the Battle of Khe Sanh, one of the longest and deadliest battles in the Vietnam war. On April 8, 1968, he jumped off of a helicopter and saw a hand grenade on the ground. He thought it had fallen off his flak jacket. As he reached to pick it up, the grenade exploded, tearing off his right arm and both of his legs. He was 25 years old. When he was recovering at Walter Reed, a friend took his doctor aside and asked him in confidence: What sort of life awaits this triple amputee? What would he be able to do? The doctor said that if Max ever recovered enough just to put on his own shirt, that simple task would exhaust him for the rest of the day. Well, that doctor didn't understand his patient. He didn't know Max Cleland. He saw what that grenade blast had taken away from him, but he didn't see the deep reservoirs of faith, strength, and determination that remained in Max and grew stronger over time. Before his injury, Max Cleland was the golden boy of his hometown of Lithonia, GA. He was his parents' only child. He stood 6 feet 2 inches, was a basketball and tennis player in high school, and was voted the ``most exceptional student'' during his senior year. He could have done anything with his life, but during that internship semester in Washington in 1963, Max Cleland decided he wanted to be a U.S. Senator. Nothing could kill that dream--not even the terrible explosion at Khe Sanh that took three of his limbs and nearly took his life. After 8 months in VA hospitals and rehab centers, he went home to Georgia. In 1970, at the age of 28, he became the youngest person ever elected to the Georgia State Senate. In 1984, he became the youngest person to head up the U.S. Veterans' Administration, now the Department of Veterans Affairs. It was under his watch that the VA first admitted the existence of something called post-traumatic stress disorder. Max knew the hell of post-traumatic stress well. He fought for treatment and compensation for our vets, and he struggled with visible and invisible wounds of war. In 1982, Max Cleland was elected Georgia secretary of state, a position he held for 14 years. During that time, he gathered some of the biggest vote totals in Georgia history. When Georgia Senator Sam Nunn decided to retire in 1996, Max knew it was his chance. He threw his hat in the ring and was elected U.S. Senator of Georgia. We came to this Senate together in 1997. When Max came to the Senate, there was no ramp for wheelchair users in the Senate. He had to make his first speech from the back of the Chamber. He tucked a quote from the Book of Isaiah inside his breast pocket. It was simple: ``Do not be afraid.'' He joined the Armed Services Committee and expanded education benefits for all veterans through the GI bill. He was just full of energy and good cheer. I remember that warm smile and his big belly laughs. His optimism was a choice, and it required a grueling regimen to maintain it. He took 3 hours every morning to prepare himself physically and mentally to face each day. I remember reading an article in the Washington Post about a regimen of strenuous physical exercise, which he designed for himself. He had taken a spare bedroom in his apartment and did his own workout routine--this triple amputee--each morning. For years, Max felt a sort of shame about his injuries. He felt the wounds were his own fault. He always thought that he had dropped the hand grenade that nearly killed him. It took 30 years for the truth to come out. Max was telling this story on national TV when a man called in afterwards and said: I need to talk to Senator Cleland. He said to him: ``Max, that's not how it happened at all. I know. I was there.'' He said another soldier had dropped the grenade, a ``newbie'' who hadn't taken the precautions that veteran soldiers know to take to prevent an accidental detonation. The story turned out to be true, and after 30 years, Max could begin to forgive himself. Max was serving in the Senate on 9/11. Months later, the Senate was debating how to merge several Agencies, offices, and Departments into the brandnew Department of Homeland Security. It was the biggest reorganization of the Federal Government since World War II, and it would create one of the largest Federal Agencies. Some saw it as an opportunity to take on the unions. Max and I and many others thought otherwise. Wevoted against an amendment that would have denied employees of the new Department the same collective bargaining rights as other Federal workers. It was months later that Max stood for reelection. Near the end of that race, there was an infamous ad that showed images of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and questioned Max's commitment to protect America. How do you look at a man who has lost three limbs in war and struggled every day of his life to serve others and accuse him of not being willing to defend this country? Max Cleland was one of six Vietnam veterans in the Senate at that time. All of his brothers in arms, including Republican Senators John McCain and Chuck Hagel, were furious about that ad. They raised enough hell to have that ad pulled. Sadly, the damage was done. Max lost his race for reelection. He called that loss ``the second hand grenade'' in his life. In his 2009 memoir aimed at his fellow wounded veterans, he wrote: ``My body, my soul, my spirit, and my belief in life itself was stolen from me by the disaster of the Vietnam War. I found solace in attempting to `turn my pain into somebody else's gain' by immersing myself in politics and public service.'' When his Senate years were over, he said: ``I went down physically, mentally, emotionally, down into the deepest, darkest hole in my life. I had several moments when I just didn't want to continue to live.'' The post-traumatic stress came roaring back into his life, and so 40 years after he first arrived there, Max returned to Walter Reed to try to mend not his body but his broken heart. It was connecting with other warriors that pulled him out of his despair. I want to thank my Senate colleagues and especially my friend, former Majority Leader Harry Reid, for their commitment during that dark time. They helped him return to public service. He was appointed to the 9/11 Commission and served for a short while before resigning to serve on the board of the U.S. Export-Import Bank. In 2009, President Obama chose Max to serve as Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission. Last week, Max Cleland died at his home in Atlanta. His big heart finally succumbed. He was 79 years old. On the same day he died, another veteran fighting the invisible wounds of war shot and killed himself at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington. Air Force TSgt Kenneth Omar Santiago was only 31. In a note posted on social media before he died, he wrote: ``No one knows who is struggling and waging wars that the eye cannot see. What does chronic depression even look like?'' Max Cleland knew the answer to that question. If he had met Sergeant Santiago--or any of the 17 veterans who die by suicide every single day in America--he would have told them what he said to himself every day: ``Hold on. Seek help. Do not be afraid.'' Max Cleland was a soldier, a patriot, and a friend. We can pay no better tribute to him than to honor his service and sacrifice and help those who continue to live with those visible and invisible wounds of war. Farewell, Max. I will miss you. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8225 | null | 3,513 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Federal Bureau of Prisons Report Madam President, on a completely different topic, earlier today, the inspector general at the Department of Justice released a stunning report. It found that the Federal Bureau of Prisons had failed to negotiate with the prison guard union for more than 20 months. Think of that. The management of the Federal Bureau of Prisons failed to negotiate with the prison guard union for more than 20 months. This has led to a delay of more than 30 critical Bureau policies to help protect their staff and inmates. That report was published just days after an investigation by the Associated Press, which concluded that the Bureau is ``a hotbed of abuse, graft and corruption, and has turned a blind eye to employees accused of misconduct.'' Both investigations confirm what we have known for a long time: the current Director of the Bureau of Prisons, Michael Carvajal, should no longer lead the Bureau of Prisons. This morning, I publicly called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to replace Mr. Carvajal with a reform-minded Director who is not a product of that Bureau's bureaucracy. Since Director Carvajal was appointed by former Attorney General Bill Barr in February 2020, we have witnessed a series of cascading failures that have endangered the lives of BOP inmates, as well as the correctional officers who work there. Director Carvajal has failed to resolve chronic staffing shortages at the Bureau. He has failed to contain outbreaks of COVID-19 within our prisons. The COVID-19 infection rate in the Bureau of Prisons is six times what it is in the rest of the population. He has failed to fully implement the reforms that the Members of this Senate enacted, including an overwhelmingly bipartisan First Step Act, signed into law by President Trump. To take one example, under the First Step Act, low-risk inmates are eligible to receive earned time credits to reduce their sentences. They do this by completing programs designed to prevent them from committing another crime when they are released. The inspector general concluded that the Bureau of Prisons has not allowed any--any--time credits to be awarded because they have not finalized the policy nearly 3 years after the First Step Act was signed into law. That act was a bipartisan measure. Senator Grassley and I were the lead sponsors on it. And it was a measure, as I mentioned, signed by President Trump. For 3 years, the Bureau of Prisons has done little or nothing to implement it. Director Carvajal has also failed to prevent serious misconduct by his own employees. Some of these numbers are incredible. Since 2019, more than 100 Federal prison workers have been arrested, charged or convicted of crimes, including sexual abuse, murder, and introducing contraband into prison. Altogether, these crimes account for two-thirds--let me say it again: two-thirds--of criminal cases against Department of Justice personnel, even though BOP employees comprise less than one-third of the DOJ's workforce. There is no excuse for any further delay in dismissing Director Carvajal. It is time for Attorney General Garland to appoint new leadership to the Bureau that will address the crises he has created or allowed to exist and to take critical steps to reform our Federal prison system. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8226 | null | 3,514 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. ROMNEY. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the esteemed legacy of my friend, Arne Sorenson, who passed away earlier this year. Arne's many accomplishments in his personal and professional life continue to profoundly impact the lives of many. Most recently, Arne's Marriott family, numbering over 120,000 employees, witnessed his high-caliber leadership as he navigated the company through a turbulent period in the hospitality industry. Arne was a faithful and compassionate servant leader, and I will always cherish his friendship. Arne's contagious spirit of kindness and generosity sets a high standard for what success looks like, in both public and private life. As a business executive, he cared deeply for his employees and customers and continued to serve as president and CEO while privately persevering through extraordinary health challenges. His selfless leadership is an example we can all aspire to. The culture he helped build and foster at Marriott is unmatched. Arne's decades of experience in the hospitality industry yielded outstanding results for his enterprise, notably the acquisition of over 30 hotel groups, elevating Marriott to be the largest hotel chain in the world. His humility and wisdom often carried the day. He consistently praised and recognized the achievements of his employees and partners and always sought feedback from friends, family, colleagues, and customers. Above all, Arne was a faithful and loving husband, father, and friend. His integrity and values-based decision making extended from the business world to the benefit of everyone lucky enough to have known him, especially his wonderful family. Arne's wife and four children were his greatest pride, joy, and purpose, and while they now mourn his loss, I hope they may find comfort knowing Arne's light will shine on for eternity. May he rest in peace. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. ROMNEY | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8234-4 | null | 3,515 |
formal | Baltimore | null | racist | The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as indicated: EC-2592. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Pseudomonas Fluorescens Strains ACK55; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance; Technical Correction'' (FRL No. 9000-01-OCSPP) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. EC-2593. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Clothianidin; Pesticide Tolerances'' (FRL No. 8667-01-OCSPP) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. EC-2594. A communication from the Associate Administrator, Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, General Services Administration, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a violation of the Antideficiency Act; to the Committee on Appropriations. EC-2595. A communication from the Army Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of the Army, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Manufacture, Sale, Wear, and Quality Control of Heraldic Items'' (RIN0702-AA70) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-2596. A communication from the Acting Inspector General, Export-Import Bank of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a vacancy in the position of Inspector General, Export-Import Bank of the United States, received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 2, 2021; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-2597. A communication from the Senior Congressional Liaison, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fair Credit Reporting; Name-Only Matching Procedures'' (12 CFR Part 1022) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. EC-2598. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Carbon Black Production and Cyanide Chemicals Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology Reviews, and Carbon Black Production Area Source Technology Review'' ((RIN2060-AU66) (FRL No. 7523-03-OAR)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2599. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication Operations Residual Risk Technology Review and Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production and Fabrication Area Source Technology Review'' ((RIN2060-AU57) (FRL No. 7526-03- OAR)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2600. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Refractory Products Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology Review'' ((RIN2060-AU67) (FRL No. 7527-02- OAR)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2601. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks, Surface Coating of Metal Cans, Boat Manufacturing, and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing; Technical Corrections'' ((RIN2060-AT49, RIN2060-AT51, RIN2060-AT12, and RIN2060-AT25) (FRL No. 8472-01-OAR)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2602. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Response to Vacatur of Certain Provisions of the Mercury Inventory Reporting Rule'' ((RIN2070-AK93) (FRL No. 8523-02-OCSPP)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2603. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Washington; Low Emission Vehicle Program'' (FRL No. 8814-02-R10) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2604. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Air Plan Approval; Maryland; Baltimore Area Base Year Inventory for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (FRL No. 9091-02-R3) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2605. A communication from the Associate Director of the Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Colorado; Revisions to Regulation Number 7; Aerospace, Oil and Gas, and Other RACT Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard for the Denver Metro/North Front Range Nonattainment Area'' (FRL No. 9163-02-R8) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. EC-2606. A communication from the Senior Congressional Liaison, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Truth in Lending (Regulation Z) Annual Threshold Adjustments (Credit Cards, HOEPA, and Qualified Mortgages)'' (12 CFR Part 1026) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 4, 2021; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8235-6 | null | 3,516 |
formal | terrorist | null | Islamophobic | Mr. PETERS (for himself and Mr. Portman) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary: S. Res. 448 Whereas November 19, 2021, marks the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107-71; 115 Stat. 597) by President George W. Bush, creating the Transportation Security Administration (commonly known as the ``TSA''); Whereas, after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the TSA was established with the mission to prevent similar attacks and restore confidence in air travel; Whereas, for 20 years, employees and officers of the TSA have been on the front lines ensuring safety in the skies and for the traveling public; Whereas, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the TSA quickly adjusted its security operations in order to meet current and future security needs of transportation systems in the United States; Whereas, throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the TSA has remained on the front lines at airports in the United States; Whereas more than 10,000 employees of the TSA have tested positive for COVID-19, and more than 30 employees of the TSA have lost their lives to COVID-19; and Whereas the people of the United States will continue to be able to rely upon the vigilance of the TSA in the face of future unknown threats: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) designates November 19, 2021, as ``TSA Appreciation Day''; and (2) recognizes-- (A) the service and sacrifices made by employees and officers of the Transportation Security Administration; and (B) the role such employees and officers play in keeping the United States secure. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8241-2 | null | 3,517 |
formal | coincidence | null | antisemitic | Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today for now the ninth time to unmask the rightwing, dark money scheme to capture our Supreme Court. I say ``capture'' in the sense of regulatory capture, an Agency capture--a well-known phenomenon. Today, I turn to an important tool of the scheme's apparatus: the orchestrated amicus curiae brief. So, first things first, amicus--or friend of the court--briefs are an important instrument in our judicial system. They help those who aren't parties to a case to share their expertise, insight, or advocacy with the Court. I file them myself. ``Friend of the court'' briefs are necessary and useful, usually. However, in recent years, the Court has had a lot more friends than it used to. Amici filed 781 briefs in the 2014 Supreme Court term--a more than 800-percent increase from the 1950s and a 95-percent increase just from 1995. In the 2010 term, 715 amicus briefs were filed in 78 cases. By 2019, that number had swelled to 911 briefs in just 57 cases. The average number of briefs per argued case almost doubled--from 9 in 2010 to 16 in 2019. There is another odd feature to this uptick of amicus briefs. Most of the time, you file an amicus brief when the Justices have taken a case and are poised to actually decide the outcome of that case, at the so-called merits stage of the case, which makes sense because this is when the rulings actually become law. But these days, more and more amici arrive when the Court considers whether to take up the case, when the Justices are deciding whether to grant certiorari, or cert. Between 1982 and 2014, the percentage of petitions with at least one cert-stage amicus more than doubled. Justices pay attention to amicus briefs. The Court cited amicus briefs 606 times in 417 opinions from 2008 to 2013--far more than in the past. These briefs don't always add value, and top appellate judges are beginning to sound that alarm. Seventh Circuit Judge Michael Scudder said in 2020: ``Too many amicus briefs do not even pretend to offer value and instead merely repeat . . . a party's position'' and ``serve only as a show of hands on what interest groups are rooting for what outcome.'' OK. So what does this have to do with the scheme? Well, what happens if the Justices whom dark money forces ushered onto the Court are looking for that show of hands? I doubt it is just a coincidence that the rightwing donor machine that set out to capture the Court has also kicked into gear flotillas of amici thatinundate the Court with briefs, signaling their desire for a certain outcome--a showing of hands that is orchestrated. Now, the scheme is, by design, hard to make out. It runs on anonymous dark money for a reason. It works through front groups, some with multiple fictitious names. It works hard and spends plenty to hide its hand. Still, look carefully, and the scheme's hand is there to see. Like eddies swirling the water's surface as a creature moves beneath, signs of rightwing donor influence swirl around the Court. One of the strongest signs is that there is a pattern--a pattern of success when orchestrated flotillas of dark money amici, funded by a small number of wealthy rightwing donors, show up: they win. This Court, the Court that dark money built, delivers in their favor. Exhibit A is probably the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, where the idea for this scheme first bubble up years ago with the Powell memo. Over the past 15 years or so, the chamber has filed more amicus briefs at the Supreme Court than almost anyone else and has gotten its preferred result 70 percent of the time. And no one knows what company or what interest the chamber may be fronting for. That is hidden from the Court and from the other parties. The chamber can even hide if one of its members wrote or funded the chamber's amicus brief in that member's own case. So the members of the party and the chamber on behalf of the member file an amicus brief, and no one is the wiser. So it is no surprise that the chamber is trying very hard to block the Judicial Conference from bringing more transparency and daylight into the funding of these amicus briefs. It is not just the chamber in this deep racket here. If you take the recent anti-union cases--Janus v. AFSCME, Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, and Freidrichs v. California Teachers Association, each case drew 10 or more amicus filers connected to these scheme donors. In both Freidrichs and Janus, scheme megadonor the Bradley Foundation funded the law groups representing the anti-union plaintiffs and also funded a dozen supporting amici. The front groups even swapped seats with a group representing plaintiffs in one case, turning up as an amicus in the other case and vice versa. It is a front-group, pea-and-shell game that the Court, for some reason, indulges. It is no surprise that all of these cases delivered big wins for corporate interests out to weaken organized labor. Or you could look at the scheme's attack on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB has long been a target of rightwing interests. The Center for Media and Democracy reported that 16--16--rightwing foundations, including the Bradley Foundation and Donors Trust, had donated almost $70 million to 11 amici who opposed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I did a brief in that case, an amicus brief of my own, and I put this graphic in my amicus brief as an appendix to show the Court the common funding of all of these groups that purported to come in as independent, unassociated amicus filers. So here are the donors across the top--Donors Trust, Bradley Foundation, Scaife Foundation, Searle Trust, Charles Koch Foundation, Kirby Foundation, and the DONNA Foundation--and here are the groups that filed briefs. Every single one got money from Donors Trust, which is called the Koch brothers' ATM. It is the entity that hides who the real donor is, and it just shows up as Donors Trust. Here is the Bradley Foundation--all but one, two, three. Here is the Scaife Foundation--all but one, two, three, four, five, and so on. So there is an enormous amount of overlap that I was able to figure out, as pointed out in my brief, and then the Center for Media and Democracy came through with a more complete report and did an even better job of researching that. So remember from my previous speeches how it was the Federalist Society that was home to the dark money turnstile that selected all three of Trump's Supreme Court appointees. Eleven amici supporting the challenge to the CFPB received funding from entities that also funded the Federalist Society. So it is a pea-and-shell game of funded amici with a lot of shells. And then there is the biggest scheme case of them all. You might call it the scheme-a-palooza. The case was called Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. In this case, more than 50 dark money organizations filed amicus briefs at the cert stage, when the question is, Do we take the case, before it is even being argued on the merits? Fifty dark money groups appeared at the cert stage, and another 45 turned up at the merit stage, all to support the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which you will recognize as the Koch-backed twin to Americans for Prosperity, which is the front group at the heart of the Koch brothers' political operation. It is the center of the rightwing political dark money web. Essentially, the Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Americans for Prosperity are the same organization. In current, state-of-the-art, dark money politics, you twin a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) and work them as a pair. Sure enough, if you look at Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Foundation, they share quite a lot. They share the exact same address, for instance: 1310 North Courthouse Road, Suite 700, Arlington, VA. They share the same CEO. They share the same senior vice president of grassroots in Americans for Prosperity and senior vice president for State operations in Americans for Prosperity Foundation. They share the same senior vice president of policy. They share the same chairman of the board. They share the same president. If you were to do a piercing of the corporate veil analysis, you would be hard-pressed to show that these are not essentially the same organization. And that armada of amici that came into the Americans for Prosperity Foundation case, all of them received funding from the Koch political network or the Koch identity laundering group, Donors Trust. At least eleven prominent rightwing groups gave close to $222 million, spread across 69 of those amici who came in to support their fellow Americans for Prosperity Foundation. If the little flotillas of a dozen or so in the CFPB case and in the anti-labor cases were sending a signal to the Court, this turnout was a screaming alarm--a megaphone--in the Court's face. So what made the AFPF case such a big deal for the scheme? Well, this case gave ``the Court that dark money built'' an opportunity to do something that dark money donors desperately wanted. It gave the Court the opportunity to create for the dark money donors a new constitutional right--a new constitutional right to dark money, the essential political weapon for the scheme. And the Court did it. The Republican Justices, six to three, did it. ``The Court that dark money built'' struck down a State rule requiring limited disclosure of nonprofit donor information from a very political nonprofit and went on to cast a shadow of doubt on the constitutionality of disclosure requirements of any kind. The amicus mischief at the Court continues. Look at the gun case before the Court right now, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This case is priority No. 1 for the NRA and its gun industry backers. It has been a centerpiece of the scheme for a very long time to have the Court create gun rights that even a Republican Congress won't give to the firearms industry. So in this case, the amicus signal flags are flying. Sixty-five organizations filed briefs supporting the NRA affiliate that brought the challenge. At least 13 of those groups have ties to the scheme's dark money funding network. Several amici are arms of other amici; that is, the fundraising or lobbying arm of an organization that itself also filed a brief in the case. At least five amici are NRA affiliates, and they were joined by the NRA's ``Civil Rights Defense Fund.'' And, believe it or not, thanks to leaks by Russian hackers, we have seen that the NRA paid a lawyer at one of the amicus groups hundreds of thousands of dollars to file pro-NRA briefs in this case, none of which was disclosed to the Court, none of which was disclosed to the parties, none of which was disclosed to the public. It took Russian hackers to find out that the NRA was funneling money to an amicus for a brief. Well, it seems like the Justices got the signal from all of those dark-money-funded amici. Based on questioning from the Court Republicans at oral argument, this case looks almost certain to go in the scheme's favor. Pause to consider what this means. The NRA basically cloned itself to amplify its voice before the Court, just as other scheme front groups have done in other cases, in wave upon orchestrated wave of amicus briefs, washing into the cases that matter to the scheme's big donors. And when those little orchestrated flotillas or the big orchestrated armadas show up at the Court to signal what they want, they always get what they want from the dark money majority at the Court--always. Maybe not all they want always--some groups ask for more than others. Some signal where they want the Court to go in future cases, not just what they want in this case. But the response from the Republicans on ``the Court that dark money built'' is clear. They heed the dark money signals every single time. Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence, with flotillas of dark-money-funded front groups--front groups that don't bother to ``offer value,'' that aren't even real, in the sense that they have no real business or function, that exist merely to signal their donors' desired outcomes, while hiding their donors' identities. It is an armada of fakery that the court indulges. This fakery lets a small, wealthy, donor elite manufacture sham allies to get themselves a bigger say at the Supreme Court than everyone else. They are out to get the Court to do stuff for them that Americans don't want and that Congress won't vote for. But with a captured Court, they can get what they want, and they do. The American people may not be able to see all of the rot, but they can see enough to know that something is rotten over there across First Street at that Court. We must set it right. To be continued. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WHITEHOUSE | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8314-3 | null | 3,518 |
formal | every single time | null | white supremacist | Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today for now the ninth time to unmask the rightwing, dark money scheme to capture our Supreme Court. I say ``capture'' in the sense of regulatory capture, an Agency capture--a well-known phenomenon. Today, I turn to an important tool of the scheme's apparatus: the orchestrated amicus curiae brief. So, first things first, amicus--or friend of the court--briefs are an important instrument in our judicial system. They help those who aren't parties to a case to share their expertise, insight, or advocacy with the Court. I file them myself. ``Friend of the court'' briefs are necessary and useful, usually. However, in recent years, the Court has had a lot more friends than it used to. Amici filed 781 briefs in the 2014 Supreme Court term--a more than 800-percent increase from the 1950s and a 95-percent increase just from 1995. In the 2010 term, 715 amicus briefs were filed in 78 cases. By 2019, that number had swelled to 911 briefs in just 57 cases. The average number of briefs per argued case almost doubled--from 9 in 2010 to 16 in 2019. There is another odd feature to this uptick of amicus briefs. Most of the time, you file an amicus brief when the Justices have taken a case and are poised to actually decide the outcome of that case, at the so-called merits stage of the case, which makes sense because this is when the rulings actually become law. But these days, more and more amici arrive when the Court considers whether to take up the case, when the Justices are deciding whether to grant certiorari, or cert. Between 1982 and 2014, the percentage of petitions with at least one cert-stage amicus more than doubled. Justices pay attention to amicus briefs. The Court cited amicus briefs 606 times in 417 opinions from 2008 to 2013--far more than in the past. These briefs don't always add value, and top appellate judges are beginning to sound that alarm. Seventh Circuit Judge Michael Scudder said in 2020: ``Too many amicus briefs do not even pretend to offer value and instead merely repeat . . . a party's position'' and ``serve only as a show of hands on what interest groups are rooting for what outcome.'' OK. So what does this have to do with the scheme? Well, what happens if the Justices whom dark money forces ushered onto the Court are looking for that show of hands? I doubt it is just a coincidence that the rightwing donor machine that set out to capture the Court has also kicked into gear flotillas of amici thatinundate the Court with briefs, signaling their desire for a certain outcome--a showing of hands that is orchestrated. Now, the scheme is, by design, hard to make out. It runs on anonymous dark money for a reason. It works through front groups, some with multiple fictitious names. It works hard and spends plenty to hide its hand. Still, look carefully, and the scheme's hand is there to see. Like eddies swirling the water's surface as a creature moves beneath, signs of rightwing donor influence swirl around the Court. One of the strongest signs is that there is a pattern--a pattern of success when orchestrated flotillas of dark money amici, funded by a small number of wealthy rightwing donors, show up: they win. This Court, the Court that dark money built, delivers in their favor. Exhibit A is probably the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, where the idea for this scheme first bubble up years ago with the Powell memo. Over the past 15 years or so, the chamber has filed more amicus briefs at the Supreme Court than almost anyone else and has gotten its preferred result 70 percent of the time. And no one knows what company or what interest the chamber may be fronting for. That is hidden from the Court and from the other parties. The chamber can even hide if one of its members wrote or funded the chamber's amicus brief in that member's own case. So the members of the party and the chamber on behalf of the member file an amicus brief, and no one is the wiser. So it is no surprise that the chamber is trying very hard to block the Judicial Conference from bringing more transparency and daylight into the funding of these amicus briefs. It is not just the chamber in this deep racket here. If you take the recent anti-union cases--Janus v. AFSCME, Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, and Freidrichs v. California Teachers Association, each case drew 10 or more amicus filers connected to these scheme donors. In both Freidrichs and Janus, scheme megadonor the Bradley Foundation funded the law groups representing the anti-union plaintiffs and also funded a dozen supporting amici. The front groups even swapped seats with a group representing plaintiffs in one case, turning up as an amicus in the other case and vice versa. It is a front-group, pea-and-shell game that the Court, for some reason, indulges. It is no surprise that all of these cases delivered big wins for corporate interests out to weaken organized labor. Or you could look at the scheme's attack on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB has long been a target of rightwing interests. The Center for Media and Democracy reported that 16--16--rightwing foundations, including the Bradley Foundation and Donors Trust, had donated almost $70 million to 11 amici who opposed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I did a brief in that case, an amicus brief of my own, and I put this graphic in my amicus brief as an appendix to show the Court the common funding of all of these groups that purported to come in as independent, unassociated amicus filers. So here are the donors across the top--Donors Trust, Bradley Foundation, Scaife Foundation, Searle Trust, Charles Koch Foundation, Kirby Foundation, and the DONNA Foundation--and here are the groups that filed briefs. Every single one got money from Donors Trust, which is called the Koch brothers' ATM. It is the entity that hides who the real donor is, and it just shows up as Donors Trust. Here is the Bradley Foundation--all but one, two, three. Here is the Scaife Foundation--all but one, two, three, four, five, and so on. So there is an enormous amount of overlap that I was able to figure out, as pointed out in my brief, and then the Center for Media and Democracy came through with a more complete report and did an even better job of researching that. So remember from my previous speeches how it was the Federalist Society that was home to the dark money turnstile that selected all three of Trump's Supreme Court appointees. Eleven amici supporting the challenge to the CFPB received funding from entities that also funded the Federalist Society. So it is a pea-and-shell game of funded amici with a lot of shells. And then there is the biggest scheme case of them all. You might call it the scheme-a-palooza. The case was called Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. In this case, more than 50 dark money organizations filed amicus briefs at the cert stage, when the question is, Do we take the case, before it is even being argued on the merits? Fifty dark money groups appeared at the cert stage, and another 45 turned up at the merit stage, all to support the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which you will recognize as the Koch-backed twin to Americans for Prosperity, which is the front group at the heart of the Koch brothers' political operation. It is the center of the rightwing political dark money web. Essentially, the Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Americans for Prosperity are the same organization. In current, state-of-the-art, dark money politics, you twin a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) and work them as a pair. Sure enough, if you look at Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Foundation, they share quite a lot. They share the exact same address, for instance: 1310 North Courthouse Road, Suite 700, Arlington, VA. They share the same CEO. They share the same senior vice president of grassroots in Americans for Prosperity and senior vice president for State operations in Americans for Prosperity Foundation. They share the same senior vice president of policy. They share the same chairman of the board. They share the same president. If you were to do a piercing of the corporate veil analysis, you would be hard-pressed to show that these are not essentially the same organization. And that armada of amici that came into the Americans for Prosperity Foundation case, all of them received funding from the Koch political network or the Koch identity laundering group, Donors Trust. At least eleven prominent rightwing groups gave close to $222 million, spread across 69 of those amici who came in to support their fellow Americans for Prosperity Foundation. If the little flotillas of a dozen or so in the CFPB case and in the anti-labor cases were sending a signal to the Court, this turnout was a screaming alarm--a megaphone--in the Court's face. So what made the AFPF case such a big deal for the scheme? Well, this case gave ``the Court that dark money built'' an opportunity to do something that dark money donors desperately wanted. It gave the Court the opportunity to create for the dark money donors a new constitutional right--a new constitutional right to dark money, the essential political weapon for the scheme. And the Court did it. The Republican Justices, six to three, did it. ``The Court that dark money built'' struck down a State rule requiring limited disclosure of nonprofit donor information from a very political nonprofit and went on to cast a shadow of doubt on the constitutionality of disclosure requirements of any kind. The amicus mischief at the Court continues. Look at the gun case before the Court right now, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This case is priority No. 1 for the NRA and its gun industry backers. It has been a centerpiece of the scheme for a very long time to have the Court create gun rights that even a Republican Congress won't give to the firearms industry. So in this case, the amicus signal flags are flying. Sixty-five organizations filed briefs supporting the NRA affiliate that brought the challenge. At least 13 of those groups have ties to the scheme's dark money funding network. Several amici are arms of other amici; that is, the fundraising or lobbying arm of an organization that itself also filed a brief in the case. At least five amici are NRA affiliates, and they were joined by the NRA's ``Civil Rights Defense Fund.'' And, believe it or not, thanks to leaks by Russian hackers, we have seen that the NRA paid a lawyer at one of the amicus groups hundreds of thousands of dollars to file pro-NRA briefs in this case, none of which was disclosed to the Court, none of which was disclosed to the parties, none of which was disclosed to the public. It took Russian hackers to find out that the NRA was funneling money to an amicus for a brief. Well, it seems like the Justices got the signal from all of those dark-money-funded amici. Based on questioning from the Court Republicans at oral argument, this case looks almost certain to go in the scheme's favor. Pause to consider what this means. The NRA basically cloned itself to amplify its voice before the Court, just as other scheme front groups have done in other cases, in wave upon orchestrated wave of amicus briefs, washing into the cases that matter to the scheme's big donors. And when those little orchestrated flotillas or the big orchestrated armadas show up at the Court to signal what they want, they always get what they want from the dark money majority at the Court--always. Maybe not all they want always--some groups ask for more than others. Some signal where they want the Court to go in future cases, not just what they want in this case. But the response from the Republicans on ``the Court that dark money built'' is clear. They heed the dark money signals every single time. Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence, with flotillas of dark-money-funded front groups--front groups that don't bother to ``offer value,'' that aren't even real, in the sense that they have no real business or function, that exist merely to signal their donors' desired outcomes, while hiding their donors' identities. It is an armada of fakery that the court indulges. This fakery lets a small, wealthy, donor elite manufacture sham allies to get themselves a bigger say at the Supreme Court than everyone else. They are out to get the Court to do stuff for them that Americans don't want and that Congress won't vote for. But with a captured Court, they can get what they want, and they do. The American people may not be able to see all of the rot, but they can see enough to know that something is rotten over there across First Street at that Court. We must set it right. To be continued. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WHITEHOUSE | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8314-3 | null | 3,519 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today for now the ninth time to unmask the rightwing, dark money scheme to capture our Supreme Court. I say ``capture'' in the sense of regulatory capture, an Agency capture--a well-known phenomenon. Today, I turn to an important tool of the scheme's apparatus: the orchestrated amicus curiae brief. So, first things first, amicus--or friend of the court--briefs are an important instrument in our judicial system. They help those who aren't parties to a case to share their expertise, insight, or advocacy with the Court. I file them myself. ``Friend of the court'' briefs are necessary and useful, usually. However, in recent years, the Court has had a lot more friends than it used to. Amici filed 781 briefs in the 2014 Supreme Court term--a more than 800-percent increase from the 1950s and a 95-percent increase just from 1995. In the 2010 term, 715 amicus briefs were filed in 78 cases. By 2019, that number had swelled to 911 briefs in just 57 cases. The average number of briefs per argued case almost doubled--from 9 in 2010 to 16 in 2019. There is another odd feature to this uptick of amicus briefs. Most of the time, you file an amicus brief when the Justices have taken a case and are poised to actually decide the outcome of that case, at the so-called merits stage of the case, which makes sense because this is when the rulings actually become law. But these days, more and more amici arrive when the Court considers whether to take up the case, when the Justices are deciding whether to grant certiorari, or cert. Between 1982 and 2014, the percentage of petitions with at least one cert-stage amicus more than doubled. Justices pay attention to amicus briefs. The Court cited amicus briefs 606 times in 417 opinions from 2008 to 2013--far more than in the past. These briefs don't always add value, and top appellate judges are beginning to sound that alarm. Seventh Circuit Judge Michael Scudder said in 2020: ``Too many amicus briefs do not even pretend to offer value and instead merely repeat . . . a party's position'' and ``serve only as a show of hands on what interest groups are rooting for what outcome.'' OK. So what does this have to do with the scheme? Well, what happens if the Justices whom dark money forces ushered onto the Court are looking for that show of hands? I doubt it is just a coincidence that the rightwing donor machine that set out to capture the Court has also kicked into gear flotillas of amici thatinundate the Court with briefs, signaling their desire for a certain outcome--a showing of hands that is orchestrated. Now, the scheme is, by design, hard to make out. It runs on anonymous dark money for a reason. It works through front groups, some with multiple fictitious names. It works hard and spends plenty to hide its hand. Still, look carefully, and the scheme's hand is there to see. Like eddies swirling the water's surface as a creature moves beneath, signs of rightwing donor influence swirl around the Court. One of the strongest signs is that there is a pattern--a pattern of success when orchestrated flotillas of dark money amici, funded by a small number of wealthy rightwing donors, show up: they win. This Court, the Court that dark money built, delivers in their favor. Exhibit A is probably the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, where the idea for this scheme first bubble up years ago with the Powell memo. Over the past 15 years or so, the chamber has filed more amicus briefs at the Supreme Court than almost anyone else and has gotten its preferred result 70 percent of the time. And no one knows what company or what interest the chamber may be fronting for. That is hidden from the Court and from the other parties. The chamber can even hide if one of its members wrote or funded the chamber's amicus brief in that member's own case. So the members of the party and the chamber on behalf of the member file an amicus brief, and no one is the wiser. So it is no surprise that the chamber is trying very hard to block the Judicial Conference from bringing more transparency and daylight into the funding of these amicus briefs. It is not just the chamber in this deep racket here. If you take the recent anti-union cases--Janus v. AFSCME, Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, and Freidrichs v. California Teachers Association, each case drew 10 or more amicus filers connected to these scheme donors. In both Freidrichs and Janus, scheme megadonor the Bradley Foundation funded the law groups representing the anti-union plaintiffs and also funded a dozen supporting amici. The front groups even swapped seats with a group representing plaintiffs in one case, turning up as an amicus in the other case and vice versa. It is a front-group, pea-and-shell game that the Court, for some reason, indulges. It is no surprise that all of these cases delivered big wins for corporate interests out to weaken organized labor. Or you could look at the scheme's attack on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB has long been a target of rightwing interests. The Center for Media and Democracy reported that 16--16--rightwing foundations, including the Bradley Foundation and Donors Trust, had donated almost $70 million to 11 amici who opposed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I did a brief in that case, an amicus brief of my own, and I put this graphic in my amicus brief as an appendix to show the Court the common funding of all of these groups that purported to come in as independent, unassociated amicus filers. So here are the donors across the top--Donors Trust, Bradley Foundation, Scaife Foundation, Searle Trust, Charles Koch Foundation, Kirby Foundation, and the DONNA Foundation--and here are the groups that filed briefs. Every single one got money from Donors Trust, which is called the Koch brothers' ATM. It is the entity that hides who the real donor is, and it just shows up as Donors Trust. Here is the Bradley Foundation--all but one, two, three. Here is the Scaife Foundation--all but one, two, three, four, five, and so on. So there is an enormous amount of overlap that I was able to figure out, as pointed out in my brief, and then the Center for Media and Democracy came through with a more complete report and did an even better job of researching that. So remember from my previous speeches how it was the Federalist Society that was home to the dark money turnstile that selected all three of Trump's Supreme Court appointees. Eleven amici supporting the challenge to the CFPB received funding from entities that also funded the Federalist Society. So it is a pea-and-shell game of funded amici with a lot of shells. And then there is the biggest scheme case of them all. You might call it the scheme-a-palooza. The case was called Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. In this case, more than 50 dark money organizations filed amicus briefs at the cert stage, when the question is, Do we take the case, before it is even being argued on the merits? Fifty dark money groups appeared at the cert stage, and another 45 turned up at the merit stage, all to support the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which you will recognize as the Koch-backed twin to Americans for Prosperity, which is the front group at the heart of the Koch brothers' political operation. It is the center of the rightwing political dark money web. Essentially, the Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Americans for Prosperity are the same organization. In current, state-of-the-art, dark money politics, you twin a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) and work them as a pair. Sure enough, if you look at Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Foundation, they share quite a lot. They share the exact same address, for instance: 1310 North Courthouse Road, Suite 700, Arlington, VA. They share the same CEO. They share the same senior vice president of grassroots in Americans for Prosperity and senior vice president for State operations in Americans for Prosperity Foundation. They share the same senior vice president of policy. They share the same chairman of the board. They share the same president. If you were to do a piercing of the corporate veil analysis, you would be hard-pressed to show that these are not essentially the same organization. And that armada of amici that came into the Americans for Prosperity Foundation case, all of them received funding from the Koch political network or the Koch identity laundering group, Donors Trust. At least eleven prominent rightwing groups gave close to $222 million, spread across 69 of those amici who came in to support their fellow Americans for Prosperity Foundation. If the little flotillas of a dozen or so in the CFPB case and in the anti-labor cases were sending a signal to the Court, this turnout was a screaming alarm--a megaphone--in the Court's face. So what made the AFPF case such a big deal for the scheme? Well, this case gave ``the Court that dark money built'' an opportunity to do something that dark money donors desperately wanted. It gave the Court the opportunity to create for the dark money donors a new constitutional right--a new constitutional right to dark money, the essential political weapon for the scheme. And the Court did it. The Republican Justices, six to three, did it. ``The Court that dark money built'' struck down a State rule requiring limited disclosure of nonprofit donor information from a very political nonprofit and went on to cast a shadow of doubt on the constitutionality of disclosure requirements of any kind. The amicus mischief at the Court continues. Look at the gun case before the Court right now, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This case is priority No. 1 for the NRA and its gun industry backers. It has been a centerpiece of the scheme for a very long time to have the Court create gun rights that even a Republican Congress won't give to the firearms industry. So in this case, the amicus signal flags are flying. Sixty-five organizations filed briefs supporting the NRA affiliate that brought the challenge. At least 13 of those groups have ties to the scheme's dark money funding network. Several amici are arms of other amici; that is, the fundraising or lobbying arm of an organization that itself also filed a brief in the case. At least five amici are NRA affiliates, and they were joined by the NRA's ``Civil Rights Defense Fund.'' And, believe it or not, thanks to leaks by Russian hackers, we have seen that the NRA paid a lawyer at one of the amicus groups hundreds of thousands of dollars to file pro-NRA briefs in this case, none of which was disclosed to the Court, none of which was disclosed to the parties, none of which was disclosed to the public. It took Russian hackers to find out that the NRA was funneling money to an amicus for a brief. Well, it seems like the Justices got the signal from all of those dark-money-funded amici. Based on questioning from the Court Republicans at oral argument, this case looks almost certain to go in the scheme's favor. Pause to consider what this means. The NRA basically cloned itself to amplify its voice before the Court, just as other scheme front groups have done in other cases, in wave upon orchestrated wave of amicus briefs, washing into the cases that matter to the scheme's big donors. And when those little orchestrated flotillas or the big orchestrated armadas show up at the Court to signal what they want, they always get what they want from the dark money majority at the Court--always. Maybe not all they want always--some groups ask for more than others. Some signal where they want the Court to go in future cases, not just what they want in this case. But the response from the Republicans on ``the Court that dark money built'' is clear. They heed the dark money signals every single time. Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence, with flotillas of dark-money-funded front groups--front groups that don't bother to ``offer value,'' that aren't even real, in the sense that they have no real business or function, that exist merely to signal their donors' desired outcomes, while hiding their donors' identities. It is an armada of fakery that the court indulges. This fakery lets a small, wealthy, donor elite manufacture sham allies to get themselves a bigger say at the Supreme Court than everyone else. They are out to get the Court to do stuff for them that Americans don't want and that Congress won't vote for. But with a captured Court, they can get what they want, and they do. The American people may not be able to see all of the rot, but they can see enough to know that something is rotten over there across First Street at that Court. We must set it right. To be continued. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WHITEHOUSE | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8314-3 | null | 3,520 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today for now the ninth time to unmask the rightwing, dark money scheme to capture our Supreme Court. I say ``capture'' in the sense of regulatory capture, an Agency capture--a well-known phenomenon. Today, I turn to an important tool of the scheme's apparatus: the orchestrated amicus curiae brief. So, first things first, amicus--or friend of the court--briefs are an important instrument in our judicial system. They help those who aren't parties to a case to share their expertise, insight, or advocacy with the Court. I file them myself. ``Friend of the court'' briefs are necessary and useful, usually. However, in recent years, the Court has had a lot more friends than it used to. Amici filed 781 briefs in the 2014 Supreme Court term--a more than 800-percent increase from the 1950s and a 95-percent increase just from 1995. In the 2010 term, 715 amicus briefs were filed in 78 cases. By 2019, that number had swelled to 911 briefs in just 57 cases. The average number of briefs per argued case almost doubled--from 9 in 2010 to 16 in 2019. There is another odd feature to this uptick of amicus briefs. Most of the time, you file an amicus brief when the Justices have taken a case and are poised to actually decide the outcome of that case, at the so-called merits stage of the case, which makes sense because this is when the rulings actually become law. But these days, more and more amici arrive when the Court considers whether to take up the case, when the Justices are deciding whether to grant certiorari, or cert. Between 1982 and 2014, the percentage of petitions with at least one cert-stage amicus more than doubled. Justices pay attention to amicus briefs. The Court cited amicus briefs 606 times in 417 opinions from 2008 to 2013--far more than in the past. These briefs don't always add value, and top appellate judges are beginning to sound that alarm. Seventh Circuit Judge Michael Scudder said in 2020: ``Too many amicus briefs do not even pretend to offer value and instead merely repeat . . . a party's position'' and ``serve only as a show of hands on what interest groups are rooting for what outcome.'' OK. So what does this have to do with the scheme? Well, what happens if the Justices whom dark money forces ushered onto the Court are looking for that show of hands? I doubt it is just a coincidence that the rightwing donor machine that set out to capture the Court has also kicked into gear flotillas of amici thatinundate the Court with briefs, signaling their desire for a certain outcome--a showing of hands that is orchestrated. Now, the scheme is, by design, hard to make out. It runs on anonymous dark money for a reason. It works through front groups, some with multiple fictitious names. It works hard and spends plenty to hide its hand. Still, look carefully, and the scheme's hand is there to see. Like eddies swirling the water's surface as a creature moves beneath, signs of rightwing donor influence swirl around the Court. One of the strongest signs is that there is a pattern--a pattern of success when orchestrated flotillas of dark money amici, funded by a small number of wealthy rightwing donors, show up: they win. This Court, the Court that dark money built, delivers in their favor. Exhibit A is probably the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, where the idea for this scheme first bubble up years ago with the Powell memo. Over the past 15 years or so, the chamber has filed more amicus briefs at the Supreme Court than almost anyone else and has gotten its preferred result 70 percent of the time. And no one knows what company or what interest the chamber may be fronting for. That is hidden from the Court and from the other parties. The chamber can even hide if one of its members wrote or funded the chamber's amicus brief in that member's own case. So the members of the party and the chamber on behalf of the member file an amicus brief, and no one is the wiser. So it is no surprise that the chamber is trying very hard to block the Judicial Conference from bringing more transparency and daylight into the funding of these amicus briefs. It is not just the chamber in this deep racket here. If you take the recent anti-union cases--Janus v. AFSCME, Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, and Freidrichs v. California Teachers Association, each case drew 10 or more amicus filers connected to these scheme donors. In both Freidrichs and Janus, scheme megadonor the Bradley Foundation funded the law groups representing the anti-union plaintiffs and also funded a dozen supporting amici. The front groups even swapped seats with a group representing plaintiffs in one case, turning up as an amicus in the other case and vice versa. It is a front-group, pea-and-shell game that the Court, for some reason, indulges. It is no surprise that all of these cases delivered big wins for corporate interests out to weaken organized labor. Or you could look at the scheme's attack on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB has long been a target of rightwing interests. The Center for Media and Democracy reported that 16--16--rightwing foundations, including the Bradley Foundation and Donors Trust, had donated almost $70 million to 11 amici who opposed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I did a brief in that case, an amicus brief of my own, and I put this graphic in my amicus brief as an appendix to show the Court the common funding of all of these groups that purported to come in as independent, unassociated amicus filers. So here are the donors across the top--Donors Trust, Bradley Foundation, Scaife Foundation, Searle Trust, Charles Koch Foundation, Kirby Foundation, and the DONNA Foundation--and here are the groups that filed briefs. Every single one got money from Donors Trust, which is called the Koch brothers' ATM. It is the entity that hides who the real donor is, and it just shows up as Donors Trust. Here is the Bradley Foundation--all but one, two, three. Here is the Scaife Foundation--all but one, two, three, four, five, and so on. So there is an enormous amount of overlap that I was able to figure out, as pointed out in my brief, and then the Center for Media and Democracy came through with a more complete report and did an even better job of researching that. So remember from my previous speeches how it was the Federalist Society that was home to the dark money turnstile that selected all three of Trump's Supreme Court appointees. Eleven amici supporting the challenge to the CFPB received funding from entities that also funded the Federalist Society. So it is a pea-and-shell game of funded amici with a lot of shells. And then there is the biggest scheme case of them all. You might call it the scheme-a-palooza. The case was called Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta. In this case, more than 50 dark money organizations filed amicus briefs at the cert stage, when the question is, Do we take the case, before it is even being argued on the merits? Fifty dark money groups appeared at the cert stage, and another 45 turned up at the merit stage, all to support the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, which you will recognize as the Koch-backed twin to Americans for Prosperity, which is the front group at the heart of the Koch brothers' political operation. It is the center of the rightwing political dark money web. Essentially, the Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Americans for Prosperity are the same organization. In current, state-of-the-art, dark money politics, you twin a 501(c)(3) and a 501(c)(4) and work them as a pair. Sure enough, if you look at Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Foundation, they share quite a lot. They share the exact same address, for instance: 1310 North Courthouse Road, Suite 700, Arlington, VA. They share the same CEO. They share the same senior vice president of grassroots in Americans for Prosperity and senior vice president for State operations in Americans for Prosperity Foundation. They share the same senior vice president of policy. They share the same chairman of the board. They share the same president. If you were to do a piercing of the corporate veil analysis, you would be hard-pressed to show that these are not essentially the same organization. And that armada of amici that came into the Americans for Prosperity Foundation case, all of them received funding from the Koch political network or the Koch identity laundering group, Donors Trust. At least eleven prominent rightwing groups gave close to $222 million, spread across 69 of those amici who came in to support their fellow Americans for Prosperity Foundation. If the little flotillas of a dozen or so in the CFPB case and in the anti-labor cases were sending a signal to the Court, this turnout was a screaming alarm--a megaphone--in the Court's face. So what made the AFPF case such a big deal for the scheme? Well, this case gave ``the Court that dark money built'' an opportunity to do something that dark money donors desperately wanted. It gave the Court the opportunity to create for the dark money donors a new constitutional right--a new constitutional right to dark money, the essential political weapon for the scheme. And the Court did it. The Republican Justices, six to three, did it. ``The Court that dark money built'' struck down a State rule requiring limited disclosure of nonprofit donor information from a very political nonprofit and went on to cast a shadow of doubt on the constitutionality of disclosure requirements of any kind. The amicus mischief at the Court continues. Look at the gun case before the Court right now, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This case is priority No. 1 for the NRA and its gun industry backers. It has been a centerpiece of the scheme for a very long time to have the Court create gun rights that even a Republican Congress won't give to the firearms industry. So in this case, the amicus signal flags are flying. Sixty-five organizations filed briefs supporting the NRA affiliate that brought the challenge. At least 13 of those groups have ties to the scheme's dark money funding network. Several amici are arms of other amici; that is, the fundraising or lobbying arm of an organization that itself also filed a brief in the case. At least five amici are NRA affiliates, and they were joined by the NRA's ``Civil Rights Defense Fund.'' And, believe it or not, thanks to leaks by Russian hackers, we have seen that the NRA paid a lawyer at one of the amicus groups hundreds of thousands of dollars to file pro-NRA briefs in this case, none of which was disclosed to the Court, none of which was disclosed to the parties, none of which was disclosed to the public. It took Russian hackers to find out that the NRA was funneling money to an amicus for a brief. Well, it seems like the Justices got the signal from all of those dark-money-funded amici. Based on questioning from the Court Republicans at oral argument, this case looks almost certain to go in the scheme's favor. Pause to consider what this means. The NRA basically cloned itself to amplify its voice before the Court, just as other scheme front groups have done in other cases, in wave upon orchestrated wave of amicus briefs, washing into the cases that matter to the scheme's big donors. And when those little orchestrated flotillas or the big orchestrated armadas show up at the Court to signal what they want, they always get what they want from the dark money majority at the Court--always. Maybe not all they want always--some groups ask for more than others. Some signal where they want the Court to go in future cases, not just what they want in this case. But the response from the Republicans on ``the Court that dark money built'' is clear. They heed the dark money signals every single time. Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence, with flotillas of dark-money-funded front groups--front groups that don't bother to ``offer value,'' that aren't even real, in the sense that they have no real business or function, that exist merely to signal their donors' desired outcomes, while hiding their donors' identities. It is an armada of fakery that the court indulges. This fakery lets a small, wealthy, donor elite manufacture sham allies to get themselves a bigger say at the Supreme Court than everyone else. They are out to get the Court to do stuff for them that Americans don't want and that Congress won't vote for. But with a captured Court, they can get what they want, and they do. The American people may not be able to see all of the rot, but they can see enough to know that something is rotten over there across First Street at that Court. We must set it right. To be continued. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WHITEHOUSE | Senate | CREC-2021-11-16-pt1-PgS8314-3 | null | 3,521 |
formal | tax cut | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Now on Build Back Better--I want to return to a comment made recently by the other side that crystalizes the difference between how the two parties see today's challenges. ``A gold mine.'' ``A gold mine.'' Those three words were used by my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, when talking about Americans struggling with rising costs. A gold mine for them. If you want to know why Americans can get frustrated with Washington, look no further than the comments like the one from the gentleman from Florida. The Republicans, who voted for a giant tax break for millionaires and billionaires, don't have any solutions for working families, but they see political gold in exploiting their struggles. Families are still struggling to pull themselves out of a once-in-a-century economic crisis brought about by COVID. They want to pay less for things like groceries, healthcare, prescription drugs, and childcare. They want us to find ways to make that happen, and that is just what Democrats are doing in Build Back Better. But, unfortunately, Republicans appear more interested in politics than progress. It is simple: If we want to fight inflation, if we want to create more jobs--so many businesses are short of workers--and if we want to lower costs andmake sure families have more money in their pockets, the best thing--the best thing--we can do is pass Build Back Better. Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists--and more from both sides of the political spectrum--have said that this bill will help relieve inflationary pressures over the long term. And this morning, an exclusive by Reuters confirmed that, for all the Republicans howling at the Moon about inflation, Build Back Better will not--will not--increase inflation. And here is what the leading economist at Moody's said: The bills do not add to inflation pressures, as the policies help to lift long-term economic growth via stronger productivity and labor force growth, and thus take the edge off inflation. Stronger growth, less inflation. I will say it again: If you want to fight inflation, if you want to lower costs and grow the economy, support Build Back Better. If you want to fight inflation, support Build Back Better. Build Back Better is going to help families save money by making childcare more affordable. It is going to give parents a tax break so they can pay for diapers and groceries and gas. It is going to lower the cost of prescription drugs, like insulin and cancer treatments; and it is going to put more Americans to work, help our economy grow in the long term. The American people want these things. Why won't a single Republican come out and vote for them--a single Republican? Why do Republicans seem so intent on opposing lowering the price of insulin or giving parents a middle-class tax break? Given the choice between helping families afford childcare and leaving them to fend for themselves, Republicans are telling families: You are on your own. Listen to the list of things I just mentioned: middle-class tax breaks, lowering prescription drug costs, childcare. These aren't handouts. These aren't luxury items. To so many families, they are daily essentials, and they are just the beginning of what the BBB would offer. While Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs, Republicans, who spent years under Donald Trump trying to repeal healthcare and give tax breaks to the ultrarich, are opposing tax cuts to the middle class while rooting for prices to go up and up--a gold mine. Americans won't forget who in Washington is fighting for them and who is spending their time trying to exploit their hardships. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-17-pt1-PgS8319-10 | null | 3,522 |
formal | tax cuts | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Now on Build Back Better--I want to return to a comment made recently by the other side that crystalizes the difference between how the two parties see today's challenges. ``A gold mine.'' ``A gold mine.'' Those three words were used by my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, when talking about Americans struggling with rising costs. A gold mine for them. If you want to know why Americans can get frustrated with Washington, look no further than the comments like the one from the gentleman from Florida. The Republicans, who voted for a giant tax break for millionaires and billionaires, don't have any solutions for working families, but they see political gold in exploiting their struggles. Families are still struggling to pull themselves out of a once-in-a-century economic crisis brought about by COVID. They want to pay less for things like groceries, healthcare, prescription drugs, and childcare. They want us to find ways to make that happen, and that is just what Democrats are doing in Build Back Better. But, unfortunately, Republicans appear more interested in politics than progress. It is simple: If we want to fight inflation, if we want to create more jobs--so many businesses are short of workers--and if we want to lower costs andmake sure families have more money in their pockets, the best thing--the best thing--we can do is pass Build Back Better. Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists--and more from both sides of the political spectrum--have said that this bill will help relieve inflationary pressures over the long term. And this morning, an exclusive by Reuters confirmed that, for all the Republicans howling at the Moon about inflation, Build Back Better will not--will not--increase inflation. And here is what the leading economist at Moody's said: The bills do not add to inflation pressures, as the policies help to lift long-term economic growth via stronger productivity and labor force growth, and thus take the edge off inflation. Stronger growth, less inflation. I will say it again: If you want to fight inflation, if you want to lower costs and grow the economy, support Build Back Better. If you want to fight inflation, support Build Back Better. Build Back Better is going to help families save money by making childcare more affordable. It is going to give parents a tax break so they can pay for diapers and groceries and gas. It is going to lower the cost of prescription drugs, like insulin and cancer treatments; and it is going to put more Americans to work, help our economy grow in the long term. The American people want these things. Why won't a single Republican come out and vote for them--a single Republican? Why do Republicans seem so intent on opposing lowering the price of insulin or giving parents a middle-class tax break? Given the choice between helping families afford childcare and leaving them to fend for themselves, Republicans are telling families: You are on your own. Listen to the list of things I just mentioned: middle-class tax breaks, lowering prescription drug costs, childcare. These aren't handouts. These aren't luxury items. To so many families, they are daily essentials, and they are just the beginning of what the BBB would offer. While Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs, Republicans, who spent years under Donald Trump trying to repeal healthcare and give tax breaks to the ultrarich, are opposing tax cuts to the middle class while rooting for prices to go up and up--a gold mine. Americans won't forget who in Washington is fighting for them and who is spending their time trying to exploit their hardships. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-17-pt1-PgS8319-10 | null | 3,523 |
formal | handouts | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Now on Build Back Better--I want to return to a comment made recently by the other side that crystalizes the difference between how the two parties see today's challenges. ``A gold mine.'' ``A gold mine.'' Those three words were used by my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, when talking about Americans struggling with rising costs. A gold mine for them. If you want to know why Americans can get frustrated with Washington, look no further than the comments like the one from the gentleman from Florida. The Republicans, who voted for a giant tax break for millionaires and billionaires, don't have any solutions for working families, but they see political gold in exploiting their struggles. Families are still struggling to pull themselves out of a once-in-a-century economic crisis brought about by COVID. They want to pay less for things like groceries, healthcare, prescription drugs, and childcare. They want us to find ways to make that happen, and that is just what Democrats are doing in Build Back Better. But, unfortunately, Republicans appear more interested in politics than progress. It is simple: If we want to fight inflation, if we want to create more jobs--so many businesses are short of workers--and if we want to lower costs andmake sure families have more money in their pockets, the best thing--the best thing--we can do is pass Build Back Better. Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists--and more from both sides of the political spectrum--have said that this bill will help relieve inflationary pressures over the long term. And this morning, an exclusive by Reuters confirmed that, for all the Republicans howling at the Moon about inflation, Build Back Better will not--will not--increase inflation. And here is what the leading economist at Moody's said: The bills do not add to inflation pressures, as the policies help to lift long-term economic growth via stronger productivity and labor force growth, and thus take the edge off inflation. Stronger growth, less inflation. I will say it again: If you want to fight inflation, if you want to lower costs and grow the economy, support Build Back Better. If you want to fight inflation, support Build Back Better. Build Back Better is going to help families save money by making childcare more affordable. It is going to give parents a tax break so they can pay for diapers and groceries and gas. It is going to lower the cost of prescription drugs, like insulin and cancer treatments; and it is going to put more Americans to work, help our economy grow in the long term. The American people want these things. Why won't a single Republican come out and vote for them--a single Republican? Why do Republicans seem so intent on opposing lowering the price of insulin or giving parents a middle-class tax break? Given the choice between helping families afford childcare and leaving them to fend for themselves, Republicans are telling families: You are on your own. Listen to the list of things I just mentioned: middle-class tax breaks, lowering prescription drug costs, childcare. These aren't handouts. These aren't luxury items. To so many families, they are daily essentials, and they are just the beginning of what the BBB would offer. While Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs, Republicans, who spent years under Donald Trump trying to repeal healthcare and give tax breaks to the ultrarich, are opposing tax cuts to the middle class while rooting for prices to go up and up--a gold mine. Americans won't forget who in Washington is fighting for them and who is spending their time trying to exploit their hardships. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-17-pt1-PgS8319-10 | null | 3,524 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Build Back Better Agenda Now on Build Back Better--I want to return to a comment made recently by the other side that crystalizes the difference between how the two parties see today's challenges. ``A gold mine.'' ``A gold mine.'' Those three words were used by my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, when talking about Americans struggling with rising costs. A gold mine for them. If you want to know why Americans can get frustrated with Washington, look no further than the comments like the one from the gentleman from Florida. The Republicans, who voted for a giant tax break for millionaires and billionaires, don't have any solutions for working families, but they see political gold in exploiting their struggles. Families are still struggling to pull themselves out of a once-in-a-century economic crisis brought about by COVID. They want to pay less for things like groceries, healthcare, prescription drugs, and childcare. They want us to find ways to make that happen, and that is just what Democrats are doing in Build Back Better. But, unfortunately, Republicans appear more interested in politics than progress. It is simple: If we want to fight inflation, if we want to create more jobs--so many businesses are short of workers--and if we want to lower costs andmake sure families have more money in their pockets, the best thing--the best thing--we can do is pass Build Back Better. Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists--and more from both sides of the political spectrum--have said that this bill will help relieve inflationary pressures over the long term. And this morning, an exclusive by Reuters confirmed that, for all the Republicans howling at the Moon about inflation, Build Back Better will not--will not--increase inflation. And here is what the leading economist at Moody's said: The bills do not add to inflation pressures, as the policies help to lift long-term economic growth via stronger productivity and labor force growth, and thus take the edge off inflation. Stronger growth, less inflation. I will say it again: If you want to fight inflation, if you want to lower costs and grow the economy, support Build Back Better. If you want to fight inflation, support Build Back Better. Build Back Better is going to help families save money by making childcare more affordable. It is going to give parents a tax break so they can pay for diapers and groceries and gas. It is going to lower the cost of prescription drugs, like insulin and cancer treatments; and it is going to put more Americans to work, help our economy grow in the long term. The American people want these things. Why won't a single Republican come out and vote for them--a single Republican? Why do Republicans seem so intent on opposing lowering the price of insulin or giving parents a middle-class tax break? Given the choice between helping families afford childcare and leaving them to fend for themselves, Republicans are telling families: You are on your own. Listen to the list of things I just mentioned: middle-class tax breaks, lowering prescription drug costs, childcare. These aren't handouts. These aren't luxury items. To so many families, they are daily essentials, and they are just the beginning of what the BBB would offer. While Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs, Republicans, who spent years under Donald Trump trying to repeal healthcare and give tax breaks to the ultrarich, are opposing tax cuts to the middle class while rooting for prices to go up and up--a gold mine. Americans won't forget who in Washington is fighting for them and who is spending their time trying to exploit their hardships. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-17-pt1-PgS8319-10 | null | 3,525 |
formal | middle class | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Now on Build Back Better--I want to return to a comment made recently by the other side that crystalizes the difference between how the two parties see today's challenges. ``A gold mine.'' ``A gold mine.'' Those three words were used by my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, when talking about Americans struggling with rising costs. A gold mine for them. If you want to know why Americans can get frustrated with Washington, look no further than the comments like the one from the gentleman from Florida. The Republicans, who voted for a giant tax break for millionaires and billionaires, don't have any solutions for working families, but they see political gold in exploiting their struggles. Families are still struggling to pull themselves out of a once-in-a-century economic crisis brought about by COVID. They want to pay less for things like groceries, healthcare, prescription drugs, and childcare. They want us to find ways to make that happen, and that is just what Democrats are doing in Build Back Better. But, unfortunately, Republicans appear more interested in politics than progress. It is simple: If we want to fight inflation, if we want to create more jobs--so many businesses are short of workers--and if we want to lower costs andmake sure families have more money in their pockets, the best thing--the best thing--we can do is pass Build Back Better. Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists--and more from both sides of the political spectrum--have said that this bill will help relieve inflationary pressures over the long term. And this morning, an exclusive by Reuters confirmed that, for all the Republicans howling at the Moon about inflation, Build Back Better will not--will not--increase inflation. And here is what the leading economist at Moody's said: The bills do not add to inflation pressures, as the policies help to lift long-term economic growth via stronger productivity and labor force growth, and thus take the edge off inflation. Stronger growth, less inflation. I will say it again: If you want to fight inflation, if you want to lower costs and grow the economy, support Build Back Better. If you want to fight inflation, support Build Back Better. Build Back Better is going to help families save money by making childcare more affordable. It is going to give parents a tax break so they can pay for diapers and groceries and gas. It is going to lower the cost of prescription drugs, like insulin and cancer treatments; and it is going to put more Americans to work, help our economy grow in the long term. The American people want these things. Why won't a single Republican come out and vote for them--a single Republican? Why do Republicans seem so intent on opposing lowering the price of insulin or giving parents a middle-class tax break? Given the choice between helping families afford childcare and leaving them to fend for themselves, Republicans are telling families: You are on your own. Listen to the list of things I just mentioned: middle-class tax breaks, lowering prescription drug costs, childcare. These aren't handouts. These aren't luxury items. To so many families, they are daily essentials, and they are just the beginning of what the BBB would offer. While Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs, Republicans, who spent years under Donald Trump trying to repeal healthcare and give tax breaks to the ultrarich, are opposing tax cuts to the middle class while rooting for prices to go up and up--a gold mine. Americans won't forget who in Washington is fighting for them and who is spending their time trying to exploit their hardships. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-17-pt1-PgS8319-10 | null | 3,526 |
formal | working families | null | racist | Build Back Better Agenda Now on Build Back Better--I want to return to a comment made recently by the other side that crystalizes the difference between how the two parties see today's challenges. ``A gold mine.'' ``A gold mine.'' Those three words were used by my colleague, the junior Senator from Florida, when talking about Americans struggling with rising costs. A gold mine for them. If you want to know why Americans can get frustrated with Washington, look no further than the comments like the one from the gentleman from Florida. The Republicans, who voted for a giant tax break for millionaires and billionaires, don't have any solutions for working families, but they see political gold in exploiting their struggles. Families are still struggling to pull themselves out of a once-in-a-century economic crisis brought about by COVID. They want to pay less for things like groceries, healthcare, prescription drugs, and childcare. They want us to find ways to make that happen, and that is just what Democrats are doing in Build Back Better. But, unfortunately, Republicans appear more interested in politics than progress. It is simple: If we want to fight inflation, if we want to create more jobs--so many businesses are short of workers--and if we want to lower costs andmake sure families have more money in their pockets, the best thing--the best thing--we can do is pass Build Back Better. Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists--and more from both sides of the political spectrum--have said that this bill will help relieve inflationary pressures over the long term. And this morning, an exclusive by Reuters confirmed that, for all the Republicans howling at the Moon about inflation, Build Back Better will not--will not--increase inflation. And here is what the leading economist at Moody's said: The bills do not add to inflation pressures, as the policies help to lift long-term economic growth via stronger productivity and labor force growth, and thus take the edge off inflation. Stronger growth, less inflation. I will say it again: If you want to fight inflation, if you want to lower costs and grow the economy, support Build Back Better. If you want to fight inflation, support Build Back Better. Build Back Better is going to help families save money by making childcare more affordable. It is going to give parents a tax break so they can pay for diapers and groceries and gas. It is going to lower the cost of prescription drugs, like insulin and cancer treatments; and it is going to put more Americans to work, help our economy grow in the long term. The American people want these things. Why won't a single Republican come out and vote for them--a single Republican? Why do Republicans seem so intent on opposing lowering the price of insulin or giving parents a middle-class tax break? Given the choice between helping families afford childcare and leaving them to fend for themselves, Republicans are telling families: You are on your own. Listen to the list of things I just mentioned: middle-class tax breaks, lowering prescription drug costs, childcare. These aren't handouts. These aren't luxury items. To so many families, they are daily essentials, and they are just the beginning of what the BBB would offer. While Democrats are fighting to pass legislation to lower costs, Republicans, who spent years under Donald Trump trying to repeal healthcare and give tax breaks to the ultrarich, are opposing tax cuts to the middle class while rooting for prices to go up and up--a gold mine. Americans won't forget who in Washington is fighting for them and who is spending their time trying to exploit their hardships. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-17-pt1-PgS8319-10 | null | 3,527 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3730) to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish in the Department of Veterans Affairs an Advisory Committee on United States Outlying Areas and Freely Associated States, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgH6596 | null | 3,528 |
formal | urban | null | racist | Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, in a few moments, I will put forward a request to the Senate to take up and approve the nomination of an Oregonian, my friend Chuck Sams, President Biden's choice to lead the National Park Service. I am just going to take a few minutes to talk about Chuck Sams and why he is the right person for this critical job. Colleagues, we all know that the Park Service is often called America's best idea, and together those parks form a network of treasures that no other country can match. The fact is, the National Park Service is not only about the views and the photo-ops. It is all about our country. It is what makes our country so special for so many. The Director of the National Park Service is in charge of an organization of over 22,000 employees and almost a quarter million volunteers. The National Park System generates tens of millions of dollars of economic activity. The people of my State know particularly how important those critical outdoor treasures are for rural economies and rural jobs. The fact also is that there are park units in every State in the country--urban parts, rural parts, historic American buildings, ancient archeological sites--and personnel at the Park Service do it all, from education to preservation, to maintenance, and even resilience against wildfire. Chuck Sams has been a longtime Umatilla Tribal leader, and there he has served in a variety of roles. He is a member of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, working with officials from across the Pacific Northwest. He is a veteran of the U.S. Navy. He is a role model--a role model--in so many respects, and particularly in the stewardship of America's lands, waters, wildlife, and history. And the Congress and the parkgoers are going to rely on him in the months and years ahead because we all know the Park Service faces big challenges. I am going to wrap up and make my unanimous consent request, but, first, I want to commend my colleague from Alaska. My colleague and I have been working pretty much through the day. I will be brief. I just want to thank the Senator from Alaska. We have been working throughout the day to resolve the whole issue of the Sams nomination. This is a wonderful person who is going to give public service a really good name when he is confirmed. My colleague from Alaska has raised a number of issues that he considers very important to his State. He and I have worked together on a variety of these issues, both from the standpoint of the Energy Committee and most recently as chairman of the Finance Committee, when we have worked on some tax issues. So I want to thank him for his cooperation that is going to make it possible for us to advance this nomination tonight. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Executive Calendar No. 508, Charles F. Sams III, of Oregon, to be Director of the National Park Service, and that the Senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WYDEN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8436 | null | 3,529 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Ms. CANTWELL. Madam President, on November 15, 2021, I was unable to be present for the rollcall vote No. 466 on the Motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 401, the nomination of Graham Steele to be an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. However, had I been present, I would have voted in favor of the motion to invoke cloture. I supported Mr. Steele's nomination based on his strong track record as a respected expert on financial policy and consumer protection and his years of service in senior level positions here in the Senate. | 2020-01-06 | Ms. CANTWELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8437 | null | 3,530 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH. Madam President, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear the most anticipated abortion case in nearly 30 years when it considers Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization in oral argument on December 1, 2021. This development allows us to consider the many people whose dedication to the pro-life cause has led us to this point. One of those people is former President Donald J. Trump. The pro-life movement would not be where it is today absent his advocacy for pro-life policies and for conservative judges. In January 2016, Presidential candidate Trump said, ``America, when it is at its best, follows a set of rules that have worked since our Founding. One of those rules is that we, as Americans, revere life and have done so since our Founders made it the first, and most important, of our `unalienable' rights.'' He continued, ``Over time, our culture of life in this country has started sliding toward a culture of death. Perhaps the most significant piece of evidence to support this assertion is that since Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Count 43 years ago, over 50 million Americans never had the chance to enjoy the opportunities offered by this country. They never had the chance to become doctors, musicians, farmers, teachers, husbands, fathers, sons or daughters. They never had the chance to enrich the culture of this nation or to bring their skills, lives, loves or passions into the fabric of this country. They are missing, and they are missed.'' These words helped guide President Trump's actions in office as he advocated for pro-life policies both domestically and abroad. Domestically, President Trump fought to defund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers from receiving Federal funding. He prohibited such entities from receiving title X funding and permitted States to prohibit them from participating in Medicaid as well. In 2018, President Trump issued a rule requiring health insurers to specify whether plans cover abortion. He also issued rules to protect religious objectors and moral objectors from the Department of Health and Human Services contraceptive mandate. In addition, the President established a new Conscience and Religious Freedom division of the Office for Civil Rights to protect healthcare providers who object to participating in abortions. President Trump's commitment to the unborn was just as strong abroad. Just days after his inauguration, President Trump ended Federal funding of abortion overseas by reinstating the Mexico City Policy, which prohibits nongovernment organizations receiving U.S. aid grants from performing and promoting abortions overseas. He directed the Secretary of State to implement the ban on taxpayer funds for overseas abortions across most U.S. global health programs through his Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy. In addition, President Trump also defunded the United Nations Population Fund, a program long tied to China's forced abortion one-child policy. To further underline this, the Trump administration in 2020 declared to the United Nations that abortion is not a human right and signed the Geneva Consensus Declaration, where 33 nations joined together to reaffirm the value of unborn life. Finally, in January 2021, the Trump administration and called for the Chinese Communist Party to immediately end its system of forced abortions. In addition to his work within the executive branch, President Trump also showed his commitment to the pro-life cause by nominating constitutional conservative and originalist judges to the Federal judiciary. He nominated three originalist Justices to the U.S. Supreme Court: Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017, Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett in 2020. More broadly, President Trump nominated 234 new article III judges who share this commitment to upholding our Constitution as written. As the pro-life movement advances, it is important for us to recognize how we got here. Former President Trump deserves praise for all his administration did over the past 4 years to advance the cause of the unborn. I am gratitude for that work and recognize the tireless advocacy of the Trump administration to protect both women and their babies. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8438-3 | null | 3,531 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mrs. FISCHER. Madam President, I rise today to congratulate Gen. John E. Hyten on his retirement from the U.S. Air Force. I also want to extend my congratulations to his wife, Laura, and note the remarkable bond they share. Their partnership in life has enabled his success in uniform, and his achievements are truly theirs. Across four decades of service, General Hyten has risen through the ranks to become one of the most respected voices in our military, and many in this Chamber rely on his deep knowledge and expertise. This is especially true on matters relating to space and nuclear deterrence. I got to know General Hyten when he became a Nebraska constituent following his appointment to be the commander of U.S. Strategic Command in 2016. This was actually General Hyten's second tour of duty at Offutt Air Force Base, having previously commanded the 6th Space Operations Squadron there in the late nineties. During his 3 years as the commander of STRATCOM, I was privileged to work closely with him, not just as the senior Senator from Nebraska, but also the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee's Strategic Forces subcommittee, which directly oversees STRATCOM's mission areas. During this span, we witnessed a marked shift in the strategic landscape, with worrying trends with respect to adversary behavior in space and investment in nuclear arms greatly accelerating. This elevated the importance of STRATCOM's mission and meant that, as its commander, General Hyten was on the front line of some of the most daunting security challenges facing our Nation. During his tenure, he played a key role in the Department of Defense's response to these evolving threats. As space transformed into a warfighting domain, his candid advice was invaluable in Congress reorganization of the Department of Defense's space enterprise, including the creation of the Space Force and elevation of Space Command to a full-fledged unified combatant command. He was also an extremely effective advocate for our Nation's nuclear forces, which continue to be the bedrock of our national security. As a vocal champion of nuclear modernization, he helped make the case for renewing the triad and broadening the modernization conversation to increase focus on nuclear command, control and communications--or NC3--systems, as well as National Nuclear Security Administration's nuclear complex. He played an important part in drafting the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, which marked the first time since the end of the Cold War that an NPR occurred against a backdrop of growing nuclear threats and therefore had to confront the uncomfortable reality that Russia and China had not followed our lead in reducing nuclear stockpiles. He explained the problem with his customary candor: ``When we started de-emphasizing nuclear weapons, what did the rest of the world do? The rest of the world did exactly the opposite. So if we de-emphasize nuclear weapons, we're putting the country at jeopardy and we can never allow that to happen.'' Those sage words are still true today and should continue to guide U.S. nuclear policy. They also reflect another of General Hyten's characteristics that I value greatly: his unwavering focus on the threats facing our Nation. A tireless advocate for a return of threat-based planning, he always endeavored to base his approach on the changing threat picture and to educate those around him about the activities of our adversaries. When he was nominated to be the next Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, I felt very strongly that he was the right leader, with the right expertise, at the right time. I knew he would bring all of the qualities that distinguished him as a STRATCOM commander to bear in his new role, and he did not disappoint. As Vice Chairman, he continued to discharge his responsibilities with great professionalism and dedication, and his confirmation to the position also meant that the Nation could benefit from his leadership for 2 more years. Sadly, that time is at an end. And while the 40 years of exemplary service Gen. John Hyten has rendered make this retirement well-earned, I hope he will continue to share his wisdom and counsel. I wish General Hyten and his wife, Laura, a wonderful retirement together and all the best in their future. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. FISCHER | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8438 | null | 3,532 |
formal | religious liberty | null | homophobic | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH. Madam President, as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization case, I am taking time to recognize leaders in the pro-life movement who have helped bring us to this point. Today, I pay tribute to former Congressman Sean Duffy, who represented the pro-life values of the Seventh District of Wisconsin for five terms from 2011-2019. Throughout his time in the House, Representative Duffy remained unwavering in his commitment to the sanctity of life. Whatever pro-life issuearose, Representative Duffy was there to defend the unborn and the value of all life. As religious liberty issues entered in the debate over the Affordable Care Act--ACA--Representative Duffy fought to keep taxpayer funding from covering abortions in ACA health plans. His opposition was part of his larger effort to oppose taxpayer funding for abortion in any arena, a fight embodied in his support of the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. As our Nation a few years later learned of the horrors perpetrated by notorious abortionist Kermit Gosnell, Representative Duffy took to the House floor to highlight the evil of abortion as shown in Gosnell's case. When videos revealed that Planned Parenthood was illegally selling fetal tissue from aborted babies, Representative Duffy joined his colleagues in calling for an investigation into this travesty. His pro-life leadership role led to an appointment to the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Select Investigative Panel on Planned Parenthood that investigated that organization's illegal fetal tissue sales. A true pro-life hero, Representative Duffy leads by example in living out his pro-life values. On August 2019, Representative Duffy announced his resignation to focus on his ninth child who was born with heart defects and Down's syndrome. Representative Duffy, along with his wife Rachel Campos-Duffy, stands as an inspirational example of how to champion pro-life and pro-family values in both public roles and in private lives. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8439-3 | null | 3,533 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH. Madam President, I rise to pay tribute to Morse Tan, former Ambassador at Large for Global Criminal Justice, whose dedication to the legal defense of human rights and the rights of the unborn is commendable. Morse Tan's work to promote these values has spanned the globe. As an expert on North Korea, he has written extensively about the human rights abuses occurring in that country and how those responsible can be held accountable. In his book, ``North Korea, International Law and the Dual Crises: Narrative and Constructive Engagement,'' Tan sheds light on the genocide of Christians in North Korea, focusing specifically on the forced abortions imposed on many North Korean women. As Ambassador at Large for Global Criminal Justice during the last administration, Ambassador Tan worked to gather evidence of China's repressive treatment of the Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities, including forced abortions and forced sterilizations. Based in part on the Ambassador's work, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in July 2020 imposed sanctions on Chinese officials because of human rights abuses. Furthermore, Secretary Pompeo determined that China had committed crimes against humanity and genocide against the Uyghurs and other ethnic minority groups, based on the findings of an internal review led by Ambassador Tan. Ambassador Tan has also undertaken significant work on behalf of the sanctity of life in the United States as well. He has filed amicus briefs in two Supreme Court cases regarding pro-life issues. In McCorvey v. Hill, Ambassador Tan coordinated, researched, and edited some 24 amicus briefs on behalf of Norma McCorvey, who was the plaintiff ``Jane Roe'' in Roe v. Wade. In Cano v. Baker, he coordinated, researched, and edited 22 amicus briefs on behalf of Sandra Cano, who was the plaintiff ``Mary Doe'' in Doe v. Bolton. Finally, I hope that Ambassador Tan's work as a law professor in courses such as bioethics, international human rights, and constitutional law will inspire a new generation to take up the legal fight to protect the sanctity of life. It is an honor to recognize Ambassador Morse Tan for his uncompromising work to defend the right of the unborn babies in courts and to bring justice and accountability for perpetrators of forced abortions around the world. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8440-3 | null | 3,534 |
formal | religious freedom | null | homophobic | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH. Madam President, I rise to recognize Bethany Kozma, former Deputy Chief of Staff at the United States Agency for International Development--USAID. She deserves to be honored for her tireless work during the last administration to execute pro-life, pro-family, and pro-religious freedom policies across USAID. While her efforts in this regard garnered criticism, Mrs. Kozma remained resolute in advancing the Agency's firm pro-life positions. Her courage is an example to us all to cling tightly to our strongly held values, even in face of criticism. Standing strong, Mrs. Kozma played an integral role in helping the U.S. Department of State, USAID, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services better synchronize their efforts in countless multilateral negotiations. This synergy helped ensure that the agreements formed by those negotiations did not promote or permit abortion. In my own work here in the Senate, I know staff members toiling behind the scenes do important work that allows me to do my job successfully. No doubt, that is also true in the executive branch. The work of dedicated agency staff like Mrs. Kozma was integral to the many pro-life successes of the past administration. Her tireless work helped ensure the United States could lead in pro-life policies abroad. Mrs. Kozma and others like her deserve recognition and our gratitude. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8440 | null | 3,535 |
formal | religious freedom | null | homophobic | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH. Madam President, with the U.S. Supreme Court set to consider Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization in oral arguments on December 1, 2021, I am taking time to recognize individuals whose dedication to the pro-life cause has led us to this point. In this case, I pay tribute to Mr. John D. Beckett from Elyria, OH. His activities have been intertwined with championing pro-life and religious freedom. Mr. Beckett graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1960, after which he initially worked as an engineer in the aerospace industry. In 1963, he joined his father's small manufacturing business, R.W. Beckett Corporation, and 2 years later became president following his father's death. Under Mr. Beckett's leadership, this small company grew over time to become a worldwide leader in producing engineered components for residential and commercial heating. With its affiliates, the company employs nearly 1,000 people. In addition to his business endeavors, Mr. Beckett has long been active in both church and community-related activities. This is where he has established himself as a champion of the pro-life movement. In 1973, Mr. Beckett became a founding member of the Intercessors for America, a national prayer organization, and he continues to serve on the board today. The Intercessors for America has helped lead grassroots efforts for people of faith to unite in prayer for the pro-life movement and for the unborn. In addition, he also became a founding board member of King's College in New York City, a Christian university, and he also serves on the board of Cru--Campus Crusade for Christ International. Alongsidethese community activities, Mr. Beckett also found time to become a published author, writing two books about faith in the workplace. For these business and community activities, Mr. Beckett has received numerous accolades. He received an honorary doctor of law degree from both Spring Arbor University in 2002 and also from King's College in 2008. He was also named Christian Businessman of the Year by the Christian Broadcasting Network in 1999 and the Entrepreneur of the Year by Ernst & Young in 2003. Today, he resides in Elyria, OH, with his wife, Wendy, to whom he has been married since 1961. I am thankful to John D. Beckett for his support of many nonprofit organizations that defend the rights of the unborn and religious freedom. His work in helping establish the Intercessors for America has led to untold numbers of prayers being raised for the pro-life movement. I am pleased to honor his work through that organization as well as his lifetime of service to so many worthy causes. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. HYDE-SMITH | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8442-3 | null | 3,536 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Ms. ROSEN. Madam President, I am proud to host a number of interns from Nevada in my office, all of whom have contributed greatly to my work in the U.S. Senate. I know I speak for my colleagues as well when I say that many of our interns have enjoyed and benefited from a wonderful program operated by the Stennis Center for Public Service. This program is designed to enhance the internship experience for exceptional future leaders, giving young Americans an inside look at how Congress works and an opportunity to learn from bipartisan senior staffers and foster bipartisan relationships that will carry some of them through their career supporting Congress. Stennis interns are selected based on their employment experience, college course load, and future service to Congress. This fall, 32 interns were chosen to be a part of this prestigious experience. These interns serve us on both sides of the aisle, working for Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate, including one exceptional intern in my office who was awarded this opportunity: Natalie Gilbert of Las Vegas, NV. Natalie is an impressive young Nevadan, having earned the distinguished honors of State of Nevada Mock Trial Outstanding Attorney and National Merit Commended Scholar in 2020. Before interning with my office, she interned with the Clark County District Attorney's Office in the homicide and domestic violence departments and worked directly with their victim advocacy program. Surpassing over 100 hours of volunteer service, Natalie has been an invaluable member of our Las Vegas community. I am proud to recognize Natalie and her incredible efforts. I wish her only the best as she continues to pursue her studies in political economy and justice and peace studies at Georgetown University. In addition to Natalie, I would like to congratulate all of the Stennis interns on their completion of this exceptional program. I also thank the Stennis Center and their senior Fellows for providing a meaningful experience and fostering bipartisan work. I ask that the names of the 2021 Fall Stennis congressional interns and the offices in which they work be printed in the Record. The material follows: Delanie Blubaugh, LaVale, MD, U.S. Representative David Trone; Sameer Chhetri, Philadelphia, PA, U.S. Representative Lois Frankel; Alexandra Dorotinsky, Damascus, MD, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen; Adam Duffy, Washington, DC, House Committee on Rules; Drew Ficociello, Washington, DC, U.S. Representative Cindy Axne; Rukmini Ganesh, Bowling Green, KY, House Committee on Education and Labor. Natalie Gilbert, Las Vegas, NV, U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen; Ava Goble, Hilo, HI, U.S. Representative Kaiali`i Kahele; Diana Grechukhina, Ocean City, MD, U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen; Kathleen Griffith, Washington, DC, Senate Special Committee on Aging; Kendall Groza, Washington, DC, U.S. Representative Billy Long; Amanda Guilardi, Washington, DC, House Committee on the Judiciary. Kylie Harlan, Bells, TX, U.S. Representative Kevin Brady; Victoria Izaguirre, Spring Branch, TX, U.S. Representative Randy Weber; Niklas Kleinworth, Washington, DC, U.S. Senator James Risch; Catherine Lawson, Arlington, VA, U.S. Representative Kevin Brady; Haley Ledford, Fort Dodge, IA, U.S. Representative Randy Feenstra; Laura Ludwig, Washington, DC, U.S. Representative Jimmy Panetta. Sophie Mittelstaedt, Washington, DC, U.S. Representative Marilyn Strickland; Jennifer Rivera-Galindo, Miami, FL, Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Jeremy Rodriguez- Melendez, Hormigueros, PR, U.S. Representative Don Young; Owen Rosenberg, Washington, DC, U.S. Representative Andrew Garbarino; Caroline Rykard, Midway, GA, U.S. Representative Buddy Carter; Natalie Salazar, Houston, TX, U.S. Representative Sylvia Garcia. Ethan Sanders, Bartlesville, OK, U.S. Representative Lizzie Fletcher; Ben Savercool, Washington, DC, House Committee on Appropriations; Alexandra Schindewolf, Woodbine, NJ, U.S. Representative Ken Buck; Alexander Siegal, Longboat Key, FL, U.S. Representative Charlie Crist; Jaydn Smith, Washington, DC, U.S. Senator Deb Fischer; Sydney Smith, Washington, DC, U.S. Representative Mondaire Jones. McKayla Steineke, Boston, MA, Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Jessie Xu, West Hartford, CT, Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. | 2020-01-06 | Ms. ROSEN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8444-2 | null | 3,537 |
formal | safeguarding | null | transphobic | Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I rise today to honor one of Rhode Island's most respected oceans and environmental policymakers, who happens to also be my State Senator, Dawn Euer. All of us whom have worked with Senator Euer recognize her deep commitment to Rhode Island and to safeguarding the future of the planet by fighting the climate crisis. Senator Euer earned a law degree from Roger Williams University. While in law school, she served as a legal intern in my office, where I saw firsthand her dedication to public service and to using the law to better the lives of others. Senator Euer began her political career as an activist and organizer. She was instrumental in the fight to make gay marriage the law of the land in Rhode Island. Senator Euer has served on the boards of the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island and Bike Newport. She has also advised the Newport City Council on energy efficiency, renewables, sustainable planning, and other environmental matters. In 2017, Senator Euer successfully ran to represent parts of Newport and Jamestown in the Rhode Island State Senate. Running in a district on the front lines of climate change and sea level rise, Senator Euer advocated for substantial investments in renewable energy and resiliency. In the last legislative session, Senator Euer delivered on that promise in a big way. She succeeded in passing the Act on Climate bill, the most comprehensive climate legislation in State history. As the lead sponsor, Senator Euer developed an actionable plan to create mandatory and enforceable emissions reduction goals that chart a course to a safer future. With that legislative victory in hand, Senator Euer recently traveled to COP26 in Glasgow to help show the world that American climate leadership is back. For my friend Senator Euer's tireless efforts in championing the 2021 Act on Climate and for all of her hard work on behalf of the people of Newport and Jamestown, I stand today to recognize her. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. WHITEHOUSE | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8445-2 | null | 3,538 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | On request by Senator Tommy Tuberville, under the authority of S. Res. 116, 112th Congress, the following nomination was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: Michael F. Gerber, of Pennsylvania, to be a Member of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board for a term expiring September 25, 2022, vice Michael D. Kennedy, term expired. On request by Senator Tommy Tuberville, under the authority of S. Res. 116, 112th Congress, the following nomination was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: Michael F. Gerber, of Pennsylvania, to be a Member of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board for a reappointment term expiring September 25, 2026. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8446-3 | null | 3,539 |
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-2626. A communication from the Treasurer of the National Gallery of Art, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Gallery's Inspector General Report for fiscal year 2021; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2627. A communication from the Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular 2022-01, Small Entity Compliance Guide'' (FAC 2022- 01) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 15, 2021; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2628. A communication from the Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services Administration, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular 2022-01, Introduction'' (FAC 2022-01) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 15, 2021; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2629. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 24-198, ``Wilkinson School Disposition Authorization Temporary Act of 2021''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2630. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 24-199, ``Advisory Neighborhood Commissions Humanitarian Relief Extension Temporary Amendment Act of 2021''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2631. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 24-200, ``Coronavirus Unemployment Compensation Provisions Sunset Temporary Amendment Act of 2021''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2632. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 24-201, ``Office of Administrative Hearings Unemployment Appeals Extension Temporary Amendment Act of 2021''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2633. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 24-202, ``Certified Midwife Credential Amendment Act of 2021''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2634. A communication from the Secretary of the Board of Governors, United States Postal Service, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Board's annual report relative to its compliance with Section 3686(c) of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2635. A communication from the Chairman of the Board, Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Corporation's consolidated report addressing the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA or Integrity Act); to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2636. A communication from the Board Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Farm Credit Administration, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Administration's Semiannual Report of the Inspector General and the Semiannual Management Report on the Status of Audits for the period from April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2637. A communication from the Board Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Farm Credit Administration, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Administration's Performance and Accountability Report for fiscal year 2021; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2638. A communication from the Senior Advisor, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report relative to two (2) vacancies in the Department of Health and Human Services, received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 15, 2021; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. EC-2639. A communication from the Director of the Office of Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Election of Officers of the Osage Minerals Council'' (RIN1076-AF58) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on November 2, 2021; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8446-4 | null | 3,540 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. COONS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations: S. Res. 458 Whereas, for 75 years, the United Nations Children's Fund (commonly known as ``UNICEF'') has worked tirelessly to support the rights and well-being of every child, in partnership with the United States; Whereas UNICEF was established in December 1946 to provide relief for children and adolescents in war-ravished countries and for child health purposes generally and to provide, without discrimination, assistance to vulnerable children around the world; Whereas, in 1965, the Nobel Prize was awarded to UNICEF for the ``promotion of brotherhood among nations''; Whereas UNICEF has been and remains a formidable and stalwart advocate for children around the world; Whereas UNICEF operates in more than 190 countries and territories to save the lives, to defend the rights, and fulfill the potential of children from early childhood through adolescence; Whereas UNICEF partners with United States service organizations, including with Rotary International to eradicate polio, Kiwanis International to fight maternal and neonatal tetanus and iodine deficiency disorders, the American Red Cross to decrease the incidence of childhood measles, Lions Club International to promote and support education initiatives globally, Special Olympics International to protect and uphold the rights of children with disabilities, and many other organizations; Whereas, since 1990, continuing efforts by UNICEF in partnership with the United States and other countries have helped slash child mortality rates by more than half; Whereas UNICEF provides critical water, sanitation, and hygiene services and supplies for millions of people in 153 countries; Whereas UNICEF trains social service workers to deliver essential services and to provide community-based mental health and psychosocial interventions that reach children, adolescents, parents, and caregivers in 117 countries; Whereas UNICEF helps provide education to millions of children and works to ensure that every child has access to education and the opportunity to develop the skills needed for life and work; Whereas UNICEF plays a key role in the global response by the United Nations to the COVID-19 pandemic and in the global vaccine distribution plan; Whereas, beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, UNICEF responds to new and ongoing humanitarian situations in 152 countries; Whereas UNICEF remains a trusted and reliable source for the secure delivery of vaccines and medicines around the world, particularly for vulnerable populations; Whereas UNICEF provides personal protective equipment and facilitates training on infection prevention and control for millions of health workers; and Whereas UNICEF, through its work on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic, seeks not only to facilitate recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, but also to reimagine the future for every child by implementing solutions to respond effectively to the COVID-19 pandemic and strengthening systems to better respond to future crises: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) recognizes the 75th anniversary of the establishment of the United Nations Children's Fund (commonly known as ``UNICEF''); (2) applauds UNICEF for the critical role it plays in protecting the rights and lives of vulnerable children around the world, including the global fight against COVID-19; (3) recommits to the United States partnership with and support for UNICEF; and (4) pledges to work with UNICEF to reimagine the future for every child as the world recovers and rebuilds from the COVID-19 pandemic. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-18-pt1-PgS8454-3 | null | 3,541 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I would like to reflect on my trip to Glasgow, Scotland, for COP26, the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference. I was fortunate to have 18 Senate colleagues join me to bolster President Biden's agenda and the United States' leadership role on the world stage. Six years ago, I had the privilege of leading a congressional delegation to COP21, which produced the Paris Agreement in 2015. Countries from all across the globe collectively agreed that the threats and effects of climate change were too damaging to ignore. Unfortunately, the previous administration's fraught decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement jeopardized our credibility. The global effort suffered another setback last year, when the UN Climate Change Conference was postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and it was not safe to gather. These major setbacks were costly, but this time, we went to Glasgow resolved to make up for lost time. One of President Biden's first actions when he took the oath of office was to rejoin the Paris Agreement. Since then, President Biden has brought the United States back to the negotiating table and made unprecedented commitments and investments to tackle the climate crisis. The overarching goal of this year's UN climate conference was to rally countries toward action that would reduce emissions enough to keep the goal to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius within reach. Without a doubt, Glasgow raised ambition. Ninety percent of the world's GDP now has net zero commitments, and 154 countries put forward new climate action plans to cut emissions. The Glasgow Climate Pact established a clear consensus that all nations need to do much more, immediately, to prevent a catastrophic rise in global temperatures. In April, President Biden announced our Nationally Determined Commitment--NDC--will target reducing emissions by 50-52 percent by 2030, compared to 2005 level, consistent with achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by no later than 2050. The combined impact of the Senate's Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that President Biden signed into law on Monday and the Build Back Better Act framework announced last month will put U.S. emissions on a path to meeting the new target. The target is consistent with President Biden's goal of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by no later than 2050 and of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Time is not slowing down. According to NOAA, last month was the fourth warmest October in 142 years of recorded measurements. Scientists have sounded the alarm that, if we fail to act a catastrophic rise in global temperatures will result, and some of the changes in the climate will be irreversible. Recognizing the urgency, the Glasgow Decision asks world leaders to submit stronger NDCs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the end of next year, instead of in 2025. It would be the first time nations offer new emissions pledges 2 years in a row, in 2021 and 2022. Although there were qualifiers, the express mention of fossil fuels in the text of the Glasgow Decision is notable since prior negotiations have referred to warming and emissions rather than the source of that pollution, most of which comes from coal, oil, and gas. COP26 marks a significant step forward in our global resolve, and the commitment to reduce private sector global carbon emissions by significant amounts is especially noteworthy. But there is more work to do. As Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry remarked in his closing press conference, a gap remains. Even if we implement all our renewed commitments, we are now on track for somewhere between 1.8 and 2.4 degrees of warming. I do not take this as a sign of failure; however, the COP26 outcome was never the goal, nor is it the end. If anything, COP26 marks the end of the beginning in which we now know that the Paris Agreement is durable and, in fact, provides a reliable framework and set of processes for the world to center its cooperative efforts. The story of Glasgow isn't just about the National Determined Commitments--NDCs. There was also greater attention paid to adaptation. The Adaptation Fund received $356 million in new support from contributing national and regional governments, including our first ever U.S. contribution of $50 million. Pledges nearly tripled the fund's 2021 resource mobilization goal of $120 million for climate change adaptation and resilience projects and programs in developing countries. Ahead of the dialogue, President Biden announced the launch of the President's Emergency Plan for Adaptation and Resilience--PREPARE--a whole-of-government initiative that will serve as the cornerstone of the Federal Government response to the increasing impacts of the global climate crisis on vulnerable communities worldwide. Resources are a pillar of the plan, which calls for $3 billion in adaptation finance annually by fiscal year2024, the largest U.S. commitment ever made to build capacity in developing countries to adapt to and manage the impacts of climate change by 2030. Congress must meet the moment and deliver robust appropriations for adaptation finance. As one of the wealthiest and most developed countries, we have a moral obligation to act. We cannot back away from our promises, as acting on climate is a matter of life or death. COP26 succeeded in renewing developed countries' climate finance commitments and helped catalyze increased private sector climate finance commitments at levels never seen before. Climate finance refers to the local, national, or transnational financing that supports mitigation and adaptation actions to address climate change. In 2009, parties with more resources collectively committed to unlock $100 billion per year from public and private sources between 2020 and 2025 to support those that are less resourced and more vulnerable cut their emissions and adapt to climate impacts. A report by Germany and Canada commissioned by the U.K., the host of this year's COP, found that developed countries are not set to meet the climate finance target until 2023--3 years late. In April, President Biden said the U.S. would double its contribution to $5.7 billion, and in his first speech to the United Nations as President, he pledged in September to ``double that number again,'' bringing the Nation's commitment to $11.4 billion per year by 2024. Consistent, strong support for the U.S. contribution to the Green Climate Fund--GCF--is indispensable in financing global endeavors to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. U.S. contributions to the GCF and other multilateral and bilateral partnerships have the potential to mobilize additional public and private sector funds, highly leveraging the impact of our investments. As Congress works to pass transformative legislation for a clean domestic economy, COP26 provided a chance for the United States and our global partners to reevaluate and negotiate new objectives, strategies, and commitments to tackle climate change through various lenses. Each day of the climate conference explored a new theme. Our delegation had the opportunity to attend the entirety of ``Nature Day.'' Agriculture, forestry, and other land use account for nearly one-quarter of global greenhouse gas emissions. They also support global food security and millions of jobs. At the same time, ecosystems protect us; healthy forests absorb emissions, and wetlands defend our coastlines against storm surges. On November 6, 26 nations committed to sustainable farming policies, such as reducing low carbon practices that would in turn scale back emissions and prevent unnecessary pollution. At home, the Build Back Better Act will provide major financial support to farmers and ranchers who adopt ``climate smart agriculture and forestry'' practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and sequester additional carbon stocks in soils and vegetation. The delegation met with a range of foreign officials and civil society leaders, received a briefing from Secretary John Kerry, conducted a side event at the U.S. Center on Congress' climate agenda--in which nine Senators participated--and held a press conference at the COP site to share our views with the public. That same day, U.S. Agency for International Development--USAID--Administrator Samantha Power and the Rockefeller Foundation signed a memorandum of understanding forming the basis of a strategic partnership between USAID, Power Africa, and the newly launched Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet. Senator Coons and I were honored to give remarks during the official signing ceremony in the Sustainable Development Goal 7--SDG7--Pavilion as original sponsors of the Electrify Africa Act of 2015. The partnerships will advance the goals of ending energy poverty in Africa, combating climate change, and strengthening the enabling environment for clean energy. Alongside the events marking Nature Day, our trip marked the end of Week One of COP26, with negotiations gathering pace and work focusing on Week Two. After our delegation departed, the parties completed the Rulebook, after 6 years of discussions. These guidelines to implement the Paris Agreement rules include transparency rules to report on emissions and measure our collective progress toward achievement of NDCs. After more than 5 years and with the processes mostly in place, the global community is clearly committed to tackling the climate crisis. We must now enter the next phase with a laserlike focus on implementation of the agreement wherein we meet our commitments through urgent and ambitious action. I wish to applaud my colleagues for joining the delegation to Glasgow and beyond and thank Senate Democratic leadership for recognizing and supporting our work abroad. COP26 put us on a clear path with discrete steps to achieve our 2030 goals and set a much closer course to achieving a clean economy with net zero emissions by mid-century. I urge the U.S. Senate to turn the ambition achieved at COP26 into action in this decisive decade. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. CARDIN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-19-pt1-PgS8758-3 | null | 3,542 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House, reported that on November 3, 2021, she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, the following bills: H.R. 3475. To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic in Columbus, Georgia, as the ``Robert S. Poydasheff VA Clinic''. H.R. 3919. To ensure that the Federal Communications Commission prohibits authorization of radio frequency devices that pose a national security risk. H.R. 4172. To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic in Aurora, Colorado, as the ``Lieutenant Colonel John W. Mosley VA Clinic''. Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House, further reported that on November 15, 2021, she presented to thePresident of the United States, for his approval, the following bill: H.R. 2911. To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit to Congress a plan for obligating and expending Coronavirus pandemic funding made available to the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House, further reported that on November 16, 2021, she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, the following bills: H.R. 1510. To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit to Congress a report on the use of cameras in medical facilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs. H.R. 2093. To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make all fact sheets of the Department of Veterans Affairs available in English, Spanish, and Tagalog, and other commonly spoken languages, and for other purposes. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-11-23-pt1-PgH6671-9 | null | 3,543 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House, reported that on November 3, 2021, she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, the following bills: H.R. 3475. To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic in Columbus, Georgia, as the ``Robert S. Poydasheff VA Clinic''. H.R. 3919. To ensure that the Federal Communications Commission prohibits authorization of radio frequency devices that pose a national security risk. H.R. 4172. To name the Department of Veterans Affairs community-based outpatient clinic in Aurora, Colorado, as the ``Lieutenant Colonel John W. Mosley VA Clinic''. Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House, further reported that on November 15, 2021, she presented to thePresident of the United States, for his approval, the following bill: H.R. 2911. To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit to Congress a plan for obligating and expending Coronavirus pandemic funding made available to the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. Cheryl L. Johnson, Clerk of the House, further reported that on November 16, 2021, she presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, the following bills: H.R. 1510. To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit to Congress a report on the use of cameras in medical facilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs. H.R. 2093. To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make all fact sheets of the Department of Veterans Affairs available in English, Spanish, and Tagalog, and other commonly spoken languages, and for other purposes. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-11-23-pt1-PgH6671-9 | null | 3,544 |
formal | terrorists | null | Islamophobic | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, today's Democratic Party does not make the policy decisions of a party that is serious about protecting our country. In May, President Biden released a budget proposal that proposed a de facto cut in defense spending, and that was before the President's own supercharged inflation further cut the purchasing power of every defense dollar. In August, his botched Afghanistan retreat shattered our allies' trust and delighted the terrorists. In 10 months in office, despite naive happy talk from the administration, the threats we face are markedly worse. The vacuum they left in Afghanistan has emboldened terrorists, from Iran's militias in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen to the highest ranks of the Taliban's government. Their desperation to return to a failed nuclear deal has given Iran the upper hand in negotiations. For 4 years, my colleague the Democratic leader seemed constantly focused on Putin and Russia. But now, with Putin flaunting his power and Russia engaged in ongoing cyber attacks, weapons tests, and troop buildups? Crickets. And for all their talk about China's threat, we have seen no evidence that Democrats intend for the United States to keep pace with the PLA's investments in nuclear and hypersonic weapons. The bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission has made clear that we cannot shortchange our military modernization and have a prayer of competing with the People's Republic of China or even the declining but dangerous Russian Republic. Our colleagues across the aisle have missed one opportunity after another to right the ship. They have used the reconciliation process to pass trillions in new partisan spending without a cent for defending the Nation. And despite the strong bipartisan work of our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee, the Democratic leader kept this year's Defense authorization bill in limbo literally for months and now wants to block the Senate from a real debate and a real amendment process. Debating the right way to confront Russian threats to America and our allies and equip our friends in Ukraine is certainly worth the Senate's time. Putin is massing tens of thousands of troops on Ukraine's border, but the Democratic leader is trying to block a debate about responding to Russian aggression? It makes no sense. Considering sanctions on the pipeline that fuels Putin's encroachment over Europe--including provisions from Senator Risch that closely mirror language that the House added unanimously--is certainly worth the Senate's time. Setting the record straight on our resolve to maintain a strong and credible nuclear deterrent that can check the worst impulses of our adversaries is also worth the Senate's time. Yet, once again, the Democratic leader seems to want to put national security last. My colleague is trying to overcorrect for poor planning by cramming a 2-week bill into 2 or 3 days' time. I imagine there might be finger-pointing at the Republicans if that proves impossible. So nothing less than the safety of the American people is at stake. This is more important than political timetables or partisan wish lists. So if the Democratic leader insists on forcing a cloture vote later today, I will oppose cutting off these important debates prematurely when they have really just begun. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8768-5 | null | 3,545 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,546 |
formal | blue | null | antisemitic | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,547 |
formal | tax cut | null | racist | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,548 |
formal | tax cuts | null | racist | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,549 |
formal | illegal immigrant | null | anti-Latino | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,550 |
formal | illegal immigrants | null | anti-Latino | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,551 |
formal | middle class | null | racist | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,552 |
formal | welfare | null | racist | Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, now on a related matter, why do our Democratic colleagues want to shortchange our national defense? Well, to free up their time and attention for another massive, reckless taxing-and-spending spree, a radical wish list that would hurt American families and help China. Working families are already getting slammed by runaway costs because the Democrats' last massive spending spree drove up inflation. Gas prices are up about 50 percent, used car prices are up more than 25 percent, and grocery prices across practically every category are up significantly over this time last year. But, in response, Washington Democrats want to print, borrow, and spend trillions more. Even if you accept all their budget gimmicks at face value, this bill alone would unleash $800 billion in not-paid-for spending in the next 5 years. Years 5 through 10 are when their crushing tax hikes and phony accounting would actually begin to kick in. But even then the bill is not paid for. President Biden promised Americans over and over that this legislation would cost zero dollars. Obviously, that is false. The Congressional Budget Office says that after 10 years, after their tax hikes and fake offsets are factored in, their spree would still add up to $367 billion and add that all to the deficit. President Biden said the deficit impact would be zero. In reality, it is hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. President Biden promised Americans something else too. He said he would never raise taxes on the middle class. People earning less than $400,000 per year were not to pay a penny more. He has completely broken this promise as well. Among the $1.5 trillion in job-killing tax increases are new burdens for small businesses, family farms, and direct hikes on middle-class families earning less than six figures. Meanwhile, amazingly, Democrats did find room in their plan to include $300 billion in tax cuts for the wealthiest blue-State ZIP codes in New York and California. Our colleagues want to pretend they are launching another New Deal. Yet one of the biggest components is a direct cash giveaway to their richest constituents. So the cost of this spending spree would be astronomical, and the massive tax hikes that would only partly pay for it would literally crush an already fragile economy. Well, what about the content of the liberal wish list? If Democrats get to steal the American people's credit card for this historic spending spree, what would our citizens even get to unwrap? Well, there would be massive government giveaways to supposedly green initiatives, giving rise to a whole new generation of waste and abuse like Solyndra. There would be a gigantic slush fund so that HHS Secretary Becerra, the culture warrior who sued Catholic nuns, could take over daycare and prekindergarten across America. He would be in charge of subsidizing certain kinds of private family choices but not others and tilting the playing field against faith-based childcare. There would be a continuation of inflationary welfare payments that Washington is sending out with zero work requirements whatsoever, and illegal immigrants would get the money as well. Oh, and, as we speak, Senate Democrats are still trying desperately behind the scenes to get sweeping amnesty included in the bill as well. So it goes on and on like this, a hodgepodge catalog that is built to satisfy the demands of activists, not the needs of families. If you ask any working-class or middle-class American family for their top concerns, you aren't going to hear many people pining for massive tax hikes, electric car charging stations, and woke bureaucrats getting control of their kids' early childhoods. My colleagues across the aisle seem determined to spend the weeks ahead on ways to waste Americans' money while making Americans' problems even worse. So let's hope enough of our Democratic colleagues step back, take stock, do the responsible thing, and kill this bill. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. McCONNELL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8769 | null | 3,553 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. MARSHALL. Madam President, today I wish to recognize a fellow Kansan, Jace Ward, for his incredible fight against cancer, inspiring advocacy work, and unyielding display of hope in the face of a terminal illness. At the age of 22, Jace passed away surrounded by family and friends, and today, I commemorate the remarkable accomplishments during his short life. Jace was born on February 18, 1999, in Wichita, KS. He enjoyed a fantastic childhood in Inman and then moved to Wamego at age 12, where he excelled in school and extracurricular activities. After graduating from Wamego High School in 2017, Jace attended the University of Kansas, studying law and business with scholarships under the Law Education Accelerated Degree Program and the Business Scholars Program. Following a rollover car accident in February 2019, Jace started to experience eye problems. After an MRI, it was revealed that Jace had an aggressive and particularly deadly form of brain cancer called diffuse intrinsic pontine plioma, DIPG. It generally affects children between the ages of 5 to 9 and has no chance of survival as no effective treatment exists. In fact, only 10 percent of patients survive 2 years after their diagnosis, and less than 1 percent survive past 5 years. Despite these unforgiving odds, Jace decided to make the most of the time he had left. After being diagnosed with DIPG, Jace transferred to Kansas State University--KSU--on scholarship and majored in business entrepreneurship. He was awarded a bachelor of business administration degree posthumously from KSU, but while he was studying, he also championed advocacy and awareness for pediatric cancer. While attending KSU, Jace worked vigorously for California-based Emerson Collective as a member of the Health Team, which focuses on advocating and investing funds to combat rare cancers like his. As a member of this organization, he visited with Federal officials in Congress and various agencies at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to raise awareness. Notably, Jace delivered a keynote address at a congressional briefing on DIPG, spoke to the NIH on patient ownership of genomic data, and met with over 67 congressional offices, including mine. As a Member of the House of Representatives and his Congressman, I cosponsored a House resolution expressing support for honoring a day towards DIPG to raise awareness and encourage research into cures for DIPG and other pediatric cancers. As a business major keenly aware of private sector dynamics and pharmaceutical manufacturing, Jace also helped establish partnerships with biopharmaceutical innovators and foundations. He regularly brought together foundations to partner with him on aspirations he had to fill gaps in research and patient navigation. Jace conceptualized a DIPG Patient Navigation System to direct patients to molecular diagnostics and clinical trials, attracted the support of 20 top doctors and several foundations to open this novel system in November. Because of Jace, over 300 tumors previously held in storage awaiting funding for genomic sequencing are now being sequenced added to quadruple those available for researchers. Jace inspired an astonishing $5 million in funding for pediatric brain cancer research and treatment, and it is because of him that over 200 patients received expanded access to an investigational drug. When asked about what he wanted to do with the remaining time he had left and whether he would devote it towards travel or other personal experiences, Jace responded, ``I can't die, I'm busy.'' Jace ignored the ticking clock tethered to him to become a thundering voice for future patients, always putting the need to advance science and protect younger kids and their legacies before his own. As a physician for nearly 30 years, I am no stranger to cancer or the miracle of hope when faced with the heartbreaking news of a diagnosis. Even during the toughest of times, I have witnessed God in my patient's grace and acceptance; Jace is no exception. I am profoundly honored to have had the opportunity to get to know him and his remarkable family. Jace is survived by his loving parents, Roger and Lisa, and his sister, Brooke. I ask my colleagues and all Kansans to join me in remembering Jace's courageous fight, his ability to rise to the challenge, and to make a lasting impact in the fight against pediatric cancer. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. MARSHALL | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8778-2 | null | 3,554 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | At the request of Mr. Scott of South Carolina, the name of the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of S. 19, a bill to authorize the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to approve State and local plans to partner with small and mid-size restaurants and nonprofit organizations to provide nutritious meals to individuals in need, to waive certain matching fund requirements, and for other purposes. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8780 | null | 3,555 |
formal | quota | null | racist | SA 4849. Mr. LEE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 3867 proposed by Mr. Reed to the bill H.R. 4350, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2022 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: In section 511, beginning in subsection (d)(4), strike the period at the end of subparagraph (B)(ii) and all that follows through subsection (g) and insert the following: ``; and (C) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(p) No person may be inducted for training and service under this title if such person-- ``(1) has a dependent child and the other parent of the dependent child has been inducted for training or service under this title unless the person volunteers for such induction; or ``(2) has a dependent child who has no other living parent.''. (5) Section 10(b)(3) (50 U.S.C. 3809(b)(3)) is amended by striking ``the President is requested'' and all that follows through ``race or national origin'' and inserting ``the President is requested to appoint the membership of each local board so that each board has both male and female members and, to the maximum extent practicable, it is proportionately representative of those registrants within its jurisdiction in each applicable basis set forth in section 703(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2002e-2(a)), but no action by any board shall be declared invalid on the ground that such board failed to conform to such representation quota''. (6) Section 16(a) (50 U.S.C. 3814(a)) is amended by striking ``men'' and inserting ``persons''. (e) Maintaining the Health of the Selective Service System.--Section 10(a) (50 U.S.C. 3809(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(5) The Selective Service System shall conduct exercises periodically of all mobilization plans, systems, and processes to evaluate and test the effectiveness of such plans, systems, and processes. Once every 4 years, the exercise shall include the full range of internal and interagency procedures to ensure functionality and interoperability and may take place as part of the Department of Defense mobilization exercise under section 10208 of title 10, United States Code. The Selective Service System shall conduct a public awareness campaign in conjunction with each exercise to communicate the purpose of the exercise to the public.''. (f) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--The Military Selective Service Act is amended-- (1) in section 4 (50 U.S.C. 3803)-- (A) in subsection (a) in the third undesignated paragraph-- (i) by striking ``his acceptability in all respects, including his'' and inserting ``such person's acceptability in all respects, including such person's''; and (ii) by striking ``he may prescribe'' and inserting ``the President may prescribe''; (B) in subsection (c)-- (i) in paragraph (2), by striking ``any enlisted member'' and inserting ``any person who is an enlisted member''; and (ii) in paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), by striking ``in which he resides'' and inserting ``in which such person resides''; (C) in subsection (g), by striking ``coordinate with him'' and inserting ``coordinate with the Director''; and (D) in subsection (k)(1), by striking ``finding by him'' and inserting ``finding by the President''; (2) in section 5(d) (50 U.S.C. 3805(d)), by striking ``he may prescribe'' and inserting ``the President may prescribe''; (3) in section 6 (50 U.S.C. 3806)-- (A) in subsection (c)(2)(D), by striking ``he may prescribe'' and inserting ``the President may prescribe''; (B) in subsection (d)(3), by striking ``he may deem appropriate'' and inserting ``the President considers appropriate''; and (C) in subsection (h), by striking ``he may prescribe'' each place it appears and inserting ``the President may prescribe''; (4) in section 10 (50 U.S.C. 3809)-- (A) in subsection (b)-- (i) in paragraph (3)-- (I) by striking ``He shall create'' and inserting ``The President shall create''; and (II) by striking ``upon his own motion'' and inserting ``upon the President's own motion''; (ii) in paragraph (4), by striking ``his status'' and inserting ``such individual's status''; and (iii) in paragraphs (4), (6), (8), and (9), by striking ``he may deem'' each place it appears and inserting ``the President considers''; and (B) in subsection (c), by striking ``vested in him'' and inserting ``vested in the President''; (5) in section 13(b) (50 U.S.C. 3812(b)), by striking ``regulation if he'' and inserting ``regulation if the President''; (6) in section 15 (50 U.S.C. 3813)-- (A) in subsection (b), by striking ``his'' each place it appears and inserting ``the registrant's''; and (B) in subsection (d), by striking ``he may deem'' and inserting ``the President considers''; (7) in section 16(g) (50 U.S.C. 3814(g))-- (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``who as his regular and customary vocation'' and inserting ``who, as such person's regular and customary vocation,''; and (B) in paragraph (2)-- (i) by striking ``one who as his customary vocation'' and inserting ``a person who, as such person's customary vocation,''; and (ii) by striking ``he is a member'' and inserting ``such person is a member''; (8) in section 18(a) (50 U.S.C. 3816(a)), by striking ``he is authorized'' and inserting ``the President is authorized''; (9) in section 21 (50 U.S.C. 3819)-- (A) by striking ``he is sooner'' and inserting ``sooner''; (B) by striking ``he'' each subsequent place it appears and inserting ``such member''; and (C) by striking ``his consent'' and inserting ``such member's consent''; (10) in section 22(b) (50 U.S.C. 3820(b)), in paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking ``his'' each place it appears and inserting ``the registrant's''; and (11) except as otherwise provided in this section-- (A) by striking ``he'' each place it appears and inserting ``such person''; (B) by striking ``his'' each place it appears and inserting ``such person's''; (C) by striking ``him'' each place it appears and inserting ``such person''; and (D) by striking ``present himself'' each place it appears in section 12 (50 U.S.C. 3811) and inserting ``appear''. (g) Enactment of Authorization Required for Draft.-- (1) Amendment.--Section 17 of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. 3815) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(d) No person shall be inducted for training and service in the Armed Forces unless Congress first passes and there is enacted a law expressly authorizing such induction into service.''. (h) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, except that the amendments made by subsections (d) and (g) shall take effect 1 year after such date of enactment. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8791 | null | 3,556 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | SA 4857. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4350, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2022 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of section 6456, add the following: (c) Improvements to CHIPS.--Section 9902 of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (15 U.S.C. 4652) is amended-- (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: ``(c) Conditions of Receipt.-- ``(1) Required agreement.--A covered entity to which the Secretary awards Federal financial assistance under this section shall enter into an agreement that specifies that, during the 5-year period immediately following the award of the Federal financial assistance-- ``(A) the covered entity will not-- ``(i) repurchase an equity security that is listed on a national securities exchange of the covered entity or any parent company of the covered entity, except to the extent required under a contractual obligation that is in effect as of the date of enactment of this subsection; ``(ii) outsource or offshore jobs to a location outside of the United States; or ``(iii) abrogate existing collective bargaining agreements; and ``(B) the covered entity will remain neutral in any union organizing effort. ``(2) Financial protection of government.-- ``(A) In general.--The Secretary may not award Federal financial assistance to a covered entity under this section, unless-- ``(i)(I) the covered entity has issued securities that are traded on a national securities exchange; and ``(II) the Secretary of the Treasury receives a warrant or equity interest in the covered entity; or ``(ii) in the case of any covered entity other than a covered entity described in clause (i), the Secretary of the Treasury receives, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury-- ``(I) a warrant or equity interest in the covered entity; or ``(II) a senior debt instrument issued by the covered entity. ``(B) Terms and conditions.--The terms and conditions of any warrant, equity interest, or senior debt instrument received under subparagraph (A) shall be set by the Secretary and shall meet the following requirements: ``(i) Purposes.--Such terms and conditions shall be designed to provide for a reasonable participation by the Secretary of Commerce, for the benefit of taxpayers, in equity appreciation in the case of a warrant or other equity interest, or a reasonable interest rate premium, in the case of a debt instrument. ``(ii) Authority to sell, exercise, or surrender.--For the primary benefit of taxpayers, the Secretary may sell, exercise, or surrender a warrant or any senior debt instrument received under this subparagraph. The Secretary shall not exercise voting power with respect to any shares of common stock acquired under this subparagraph. ``(iii) Sufficiency.--If the Secretary determines that a covered entity cannot feasibly issue warrants or other equity interests as required by this subparagraph, the Secretary may accept a senior debt instrument in an amount and on such terms as the Secretary determines appropriate.''. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8793-2 | null | 3,557 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio, and I am on the floor today to talk about a major public health crisis facing our country, one that is resulting in thousands of people losing their lives, causing the death of over 100,000 Americans a year, and has negatively impacted so many millions more in my home State of Ohio and all around the country. And, no, I am not talking about COVID-19. I am talking about an epidemic within the pandemic. I am talking about the surging epidemic of drug use and addiction that has fueled a record number of overdose deaths and threatens to get even worse. In the past 19 months or so, our attention has, understandably, been directed toward the COVID-19 crisis. And, once again, we see with Omicron the possibility of another variant coming, and those public health challenges are real. But I have to tell you that it has led us to ignore another crisis. The Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, recently issued a report which was shocking and should serve as a wake-up call to all of us. It said that between April of 2020 and April of 2021, the most recent year for which we have data, we had over 100,000 individuals lose their lives to drug overdose deaths in this country. That is the highest ever. It is a record. By the way, 100,000 deaths per year is more than the deaths from gunshot wounds and the deaths from car accidents combined. It is truly the epidemic within the pandemic. Away from the headlines, we have this other tragic healthcare crisis that has left no part of the country unaffected. Forty-six States and the District of Columbia have seen their overdose rates go up in the last year, with a 26-percent increase in my home State of Ohio. In some States, there are now as many drug overdose deaths as there are COVID deaths. Like many of you, I have seen firsthand the damage drugs like crystal meth or cocaine or heroin or now the synthetic opioids are causing to the families we represent, to people who have gotten caught in that spiral of drug abuse and addiction. I have also seen the heroic efforts of first responders who have saved people's lives by administering naloxone, which some call Narcan, its brand name. It is a miracle drug that literally saves lives by being able to reverse the effects of an overdose. And I have ridden with law enforcement and treatment providers on rapid response teams in various places in Ohio that follow up with those who have overdosed. Literally, somebody overdoses, and then this rapid response team--usually made up of law enforcement but also treatment providers, social workers--goes to people's homes, and it is amazing what you will find out. I was, frankly, a little surprised during my first visit--then, I got more used to it--which is that people respond very favorably. Most people who are approached by these rapid response teams agree to get into treatment. And isn't that the key? Using Narcan again and again and again to save someone's life is not the answer. The answer is to get that person into treatment so that that person can get back to his or her family, his or her work, and to a normal life and to be more productive in life. I have also met with families and loved ones affected, hearing their stories about how losing a family member to addiction has had such a negative impact, often tearing those families apart. And, of course, I have talked to a lot of people in recovery who have told me about the grip of addiction on their lives and how they got help and what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of people get help, get into treatment, and it doesn't work for them. They have to do it again and again. But, ultimately, for those who can stay in recovery and are able to stay sober and clean, they have the most amazing stories. And so many of them are coming back and contributing in big ways to our communities--many helping others. Their recovery, basically, is reaching out to others and helping them along the way. Some are called recovery coaches, which is a more formal title, but so many of them are, in effect, recovery coaches helping others who are struggling. There are so many lives that have been touched by this crisis--100,000-plus deaths, but so many others affected. And I have made it a goal of mine to make sure Congress is playing its role in addressing this effort that must be at the community level, at the State level, but also at the national level to respond to what is a true national crisis. What makes it especially heartbreaking to me is that, only a few years ago, we had finally begun to make progress on this. We were beginning to turn the corner. We were seeing lower addiction rates. We were seeing lower overdose deaths for the first time in decades. How did we do it? Well, we redoubled our efforts on prevention, on getting people into treatment, on getting people into longer term recovery, making more naloxone available. Thanks to the bipartisan leadership here in Congress, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA, which I coauthored with my colleague Sheldon Whitehouse, and the 21st Century CURES Act were both signed into law in 2016, helping to pave the way for several billion dollars in new Federal funding to strengthen State, local, and nonprofit efforts to combat addiction. Our CARA legislation and the follow-up CARA.2 legislation that we passed a few years ago took a comprehensive approach based on best practices. We actually had seminars here in Washington. We brought people from all over the country here. We had four different conferences where we got information as to what was working and not working in our communities, and things that were working we funded. We directed resources toward more treatment and recovery services for individuals and more focus on prevention. I can't overstate how critical these kinds of proven services are for people on the path to recovery. Congress had never, before this legislation, ever funded recovery services. I have visited a number of inpatient and outpatient centers for addiction in Ohio to talk with those working to overcome their addiction. They have told me time and again how these recovery services gave them the structure, the support, and, most importantly, the hope they needed to be able to overcome this disease. And we actually started to see that hope translate into real success on the ground, real numbers and real people's lives. In 2017, Ohio's overdose death rate had increased for 30-plus straight years, and Ohio's death per capita that year, 2017, was almost three times that of the national average. But that next year, in 2018, as these two signature laws, CARA and CURES, were fully implemented, Ohio began to turn the tide with a 22-percent reduction in overdose deaths in 1 year. Again, after more than 30 years of increases in overdose deaths every single year, a 22-percent decrease. Nationally, overdose deaths declined that year about 4 percent, again, after a year after year of increases. In 2019, we had a slight decrease also. These were promising developments. But since then, there has been a lethal convergence on both the supply side of this issue and the demand side of this issue. Sam Quinones, the author of ``Dreamland,'' which I think is the seminal book on the rise of opioids in this country, recently put it well. He said in an interview that before COVID hit, Mexican cartels had achieved their goal, finally, of covering our country with ``the most . . . mind-mangling drugs we've ever seen. . . . It just so happened that we went into isolation at the very moment when these drugs hit their apex.'' A terrible coincidence that as the supply increased because of the greed of traffickers, the demand increased because of COVID. These two things came together, and that has caused this huge increase in overdoses, addiction, and overdose deaths. Let's look at the supply side of this crisis first. The record number of deadly narcotics and other drugs that are taking the lives of moms, dads, children, and loved ones all across the country are coming into our country in record numbers. As many are aware, for much of the past few decades, the most common cause of overdose deaths were prescription opioids like OxyContin or Percocet. Often people who suffered a serious injury or accident needed pain relief, and often, unfortunately, doctors and dentists overprescribed opioids. People developed an addiction that led to accidental overdoses, often from cheaper and more available heroin when the prescription drugs ran out. Now we are dealing with a class of drugs that are tens if not hundreds of times deadlier than those prescription drugs, the so-called synthetic opioids. The most well known of these is fentanyl, which, as you can see by this chart of drug overdoses, has become the drug most responsible for overdose deaths. The red here is overdose deaths overall, and the blue is overdose deaths that are attributed to fentanyl. You can see what has happened. Fentanyl was about half of overdose deaths in 2018. Half of all overdose deaths was one drug, fentanyl. In 2019, it was more than half and, in 2020, way more than half of all the overdose deaths caused by one drug, a synthetic opioid called fentanyl. It is the deadliest one. Incredibly, 80 percent of drug overdoses in Ohio and overdose deaths in Ohio can now be attributed to this deadly substance, based on what the experts tell me--80 percent. It is not surprising that the amount of fentanyl seized on the streets of Ohio cities like Dayton, OH, recently has nearly doubled compared to last year. And it is not only the amount of fentanyl that is flooding our country. Evil traffickers have increasingly disguised it by mixing it with other drugs or pressing it into fake pills to look like common pharmaceuticals. This concerted effort to expand the reach of fentanyl addiction started before the pandemic, but it is only accelerating. It is a profitable business for drug dealers. Compared to heroin, fentanyl is less expensive to manufacture and, pound-for-pound, far more potent. A few flakes can kill you. Traffickers make a bigger profit, and people are trapped into addiction more easily. Traffickers increasingly lace fentanyl with other drugs--cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, and even marijuana in some cases. They do it as a way to boost its effects and cut down on its costs. In Mexico, they use cheap pill presses to mold fentanyl doses into the shape of prescription drugs--everyday pills that people take for a variety of reasons. What that means is that many of the individuals who now lose their lives to a fentanyl overdose don't even know they are taking fentanyl until it is too late. Recently, I participated in a roundtable discussion on the border crisis and how it has impacted the addiction crisis. We heard from an Ohio mother, Virginia Krieger, who lost her daughter Tiffany to an accidental fentanyl death. Virginia told us about how Tiffany had been unable to get the care she wanted from her physician. That led her to buying pills on the street--pills she was told were Percocet, and it looked like Percocet. That is what was stamped on it. But in reality, it was laced with lethal doses of heroin and fentanyl. When Tiffany took these pills for her pain, she was poisoned by the fentanyl, and the life of a young 26-year-old woman was snuffed out far too soon. We are hearing this across the State. Recently, in Cleveland, OH, Xanax pills, an antianxiety medication--fake pills pressed by Mexican traffickers contained fentanyl and caused overdoses and overdose deaths. My heart goes out to these families. My heart goes out to Virginia, who, by the way, has channeled her grief into something positive, and that is going to schools and explaining to young people how dangerous this is. Her view is that no one should ever take a pill unless they know it comes from a pharmacy. She is right. People across the country need to know that pills of all shapes and sizes can contain fentanyl even though they might say something else. No street drug is safe right now from the threat of fentanyl poisoning, and too many kids and adults who weren't addicted to opioids are unknowingly ingesting these substances and putting themselves at risk. We need to be on high alert. Parents and kids need to know that right now no drug you get on the street can be safe. Our communities are saturated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids right now. Among other things, of course, this drives the price of the drugs down. So, yes, the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs, but with its overwhelming supply, the price of the drug goes down and there is higher use and higher demand. A conversation about how we can cut down on the supply side of course has to start with our strategy on our southern border. For years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were overwhelmingly illegally manufactured in China. As then-chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I led a bipartisan investigation back in 2017 which showed that fentanyl was coming into our country from China primarily through our own lax Postal Service. Our own Postal Service was the conduit. That is why I worked in a bipartisan manner to write and pass what is called the STOP Act, which required the Postal Service, for the first time, to crack down on fentanyl through the mail. We required the Postal Service to get advanced tracking data on international shipments coming to the United States, showing the package's origin, contents, and destination. This allowed law enforcement to spot potentially dangerous packages ahead of time and make it much more difficult to move fentanyl into the United States in this manner. Other carriers were already doing it--FedEx, private carriers, DHL, but the post office was not. The good news is that the STOP Act has been effective, and also, after persistent engagement and pressure from the United States, China scheduled fentanyl, meaning made it illegal, and its analogues as a class of illegal drugs. We believe these changes have helped to dramatically reduce the flow of fentanyl directly from China into the United States. But, obviously, it hasn't solved the problem because Mexican transnational criminal organizations know a great business opportunity when they see one, and they moved in to take over the fentanyl market in the United States. Now Mexican transnational criminal organizations work with criminal gangs in China to import into Mexico the ingredients used to make fentanyl, where the final product is made in so-called superlabs. We have a record amount of the substance pouring in, both at our ports of entry and through other gaps in our southern border security by car, by truck, by courier. This is a problem that continues to get worse as this shocking chart shows us. Look at the dramatic increases in fentanyl that was seized along the U.S. border. This past fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection seized 11,201 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill every man, woman, and child in America--more than double the amount from the previous year and four times the amount from fiscal year 2019. Just a few weeks ago in Southern California, border officials discovered 8\1/2\ tons of meth in a single truck along with 400 pounds of fentanyl. Remember, it only takes a few flakes of fentanyl to kill you. This 400 pounds could kill millions. Their smuggling operations are complex and sophisticated, and Customs and Border Protection have their hands full. According to the most recent statistics, last month, seizures of fentanyl increased 42 percent. That is 42 percent in 1 month. This is only how much we know was discovered, was apprehended. We don't know how much more made it over the border undetected. When I have asked Customs and Border Protection and DHS, our homeland security officials, in public hearings, as I did the week before last, they don'tanswer the question because they don't know. But in private conversations with Border Patrol agents, they tell me that they believe the vast majority of drugs are coming in undetected. So this is just the seizures, not the amount of drugs that are streaming across the border. I take no pleasure in saying this, but the failure of the Biden administration to control the southern border has resulted in record levels of deadly fentanyl coming in to our country and contributes to the growing strength of the Mexican transnational criminal organizations. Part of the problem is that the Biden administration's own policies have encouraged an unprecedented surge of unlawful migrants at the border, diverting our Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents away from interdicting drugs. I have seen that on the southern border as has anyone else who has visited. These law enforcement officers who should be on the line stopping the criminals carrying drugs are instead processing a record number of migrants. This massive influx of unlawful migrants began when President Biden was inaugurated and made specific policy changes, and it has only continued to worsen ever since. We had all hoped that during the summer months, when normally unlawful migration slows down because of the heat, that we would have a lessening of this issue, but it didn't happen. In fact, last month was a record month for October for Border Patrol apprehensions. As the border crisis created by the Biden administration policy changes continues, the administration has failed to give Customs and Border Protection the resources they need: additional personnel, better technology, infrastructure, and more, to enable them to better protect our Nation along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico. On an average day in 2020, Customs and Border Protection processed 650,000-plus passengers and pedestrians, 187,000 incoming privately owned vehicles, and 77,900 truck, rail, and sea containers. The amount of traffic at the border is going up now that there is less concern about the pandemic. However, only 2 percent of those privately owned vehicles are physically searched at the border, and less than 20 percent of all those commercial vehicles are scanned for drugs before they cross into the United States. Let me repeat that: 2 percent. So if you are a smuggler driving a sedan with multiple pounds of fentanyl concealed in hidden compartments, right now you have a very good chance of getting across the border without a search. That is not a gap in our security, that is a gaping hole. We have known this is a problem. Congress, last January, almost a year ago, passed and President Trump signed into law a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security give Congress a plan and a strategy on using technology and making policy and resources changes to be able to scan all vehicles. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is late delivering this report. It was due over 4 months ago, and we still don't have it. In conversations with administration officials the week before last, I got assurances that it is coming soon. I hope so. We need it. It would be extremely helpful to have this information as we finalize the spending bills over the next month or so. I am proud that the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invested billions of dollars in upgrading and modernizing our ports of entry, including ports of entry on the southern border. Our ports are aging, some of them badly. This funding would allow Customs and Border Protection officers to have adequate space to do more screening of vehicles. However, we cannot and should not build a brandnew port of entry and then just install the old legacy technology for scanning and detection of deadly narcotics. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dramatically upgrade seaports of entry with modern, state-of-the-art detection technology that can help our officers catch more of these drugs before they enter our communities. In May, I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona to establish a $1 billion irregular migration border response fund so that the Department of Homeland Security is not forced to transfer resources away from drug interdiction priorities to fund processing of individuals, food, clothing, blankets, and transportation when there is an influx of migrants, as has happened periodically. These contingency resources would be available immediately when there is a surge to quickly respond to increased migration at the border. Considering the crisis at our border and the record amounts of fentanyl coming in, it was not surprising to me in September when the Drug Enforcement Agency, DEA, issued its first public safety alert in more than 6 years after it seized more than 9.5 million fake pills this year, more than the last 2 years combined. As I said, we all need to be on high alert. We hear a lot these days about problems with the supply chain, with delayed shipments and cancelled orders. I will tell you the Mexican transnational criminal organizations don't have that problem. They are moving more fentanyl than ever into our communities, and once that fentanyl is here, what a waste. Sadly, more people are caught in the grip of addiction. This brings us to the demand side of the equation. Again, most important to me is reducing the demand for these drugs, but both the demand and the supply side are related. As we discussed, the supply of deadly fentanyl was already increasing when COVID-19 hit us almost 2 years ago. Clearly, this pandemic has led to more isolation, anxiety for some, depression for others. Millions of Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Millions have lost loved ones to COVID-19. Some in recovery have not been able to be with their treatment providers or with their recovery coaches, as we talked about earlier. Millions have had their lives turned upside down, and some have turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Others, who were on the path to recovery, have suffered setbacks--relapsing into drug use again. Last month, I visited with Erin Helms, who runs recovery homes for women in northeast Ohio that I have had the chance to visit. Erin told me about the challenges during COVID to connect people with treatment and recovery support services when they overdose or when they are being released out of the criminal justice system. When we were in the most restrictive time of the pandemic, those people fell through the cracks, and we are seeing the results of that today. These overdose deaths are happening away from the national headlines, but they are taking a toll all the same. As I said, this is truly a nationwide crisis. It will take all of us here in Congress coming together to work on a bipartisan basis to find solutions to turn the tide again, reduce overdose deaths, and put more affected individuals on the path to recovery. So what can we do here in Congress in moving forward? What are the answers? First, we have got to be able to address both the supply side and the demand side. This chart lays out some of the ways we can help with both, all of which I have talked about tonight. This means we need to complete the installation of enhanced border security technology, which has already been appropriated by Congress, so that the Border Patrol has the tools it needs to complete its national security mission--so enhanced border security. In March, I visited El Paso and saw fully funded construction materials laying on the ground, at the border, at the place where there was a gap in the wall. I heard directly from Border Patrol officers about the importance of enhancing border security to give them the opportunity to complete their national security mission and help them to stop the drugs. That is why, at his nomination hearing in October, I pressed Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus, the nominee to be Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the need to install the enhanced border technology and complete the funded sections of the wall. Not only are there physical gaps in the wall right now that we have already paid for, but there is technology, which, to me, is the most important part of the wall. So you need the barrier, but, also, you need the technology to be able to monitor it, and it is only about 10 percent completed in that El Paso sector. That is outrageous. Everybody--Republicans and Democrats alike--likes to say they are for technology. We should complete the technology along the border and help the Border Patrol be able to do their important job, including keeping these deadly narcotics out of our communities. We also must pass the bipartisan Border Response Resilience Act, which I talked about, that I introduced with Senator Kelly. It would provide an additional billion dollars to the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection folks during a surge in unlawful migration, like the one we are in right now. Due to limited resources, Border Patrol agents are pulled off the border to care for migrants, and drug cartels are taking advantage of these open gaps in our Nation's security. Even some of the checkpoints had to be closed down when there was a recent surge on the border near Del Rio, TX. Drug interdiction checkpoints here in the United States are left unmanned so offices can process more migrant families. But the supply chain doesn't start and end on the U.S. border. Criminals understand the opportunities of the globalized world, and they pose a dynamic threat to the United States. They are smart and adaptable and can take advantage of the complexity and volume of international trade and travel patterns, and they do that. They also understand how to exploit openings in law enforcement and regulatory approaches. Many of the ingredients used to make fentanyl continue to come from China, and Chinese money laundering networks have emerged as key enablers in the business model of Mexican transnational criminal organizations. This must stop. While we have a complex and difficult agenda with China, this issue needs to remain at the top of our list. I urge the Biden administration to push the Chinese Government to be our partner in cracking down on these international crime rings rather than a tacit enabler. It is in both of our countries' interests. Likewise, the issue should be front and center in our relationship with Mexico. Both of our countries lose when the traffickers are successful. Our country is inundated with lethal substances, and the cartels gain money and sometimes American-made firearms that allow them to better wage war on the government in Mexico City. For both of our countries' sakes, we need to partner more effectively with Mexico--international cooperation. We should also recognize that these adaptable drug traffickers will have other options as we go after this current supply chain. We saw this after the STOP Act started to be implemented and traffickers from China shifted to Mexico. There is a risk that it becomes a game of whack-a-mole--when you stop it in one place and it crops up somewhere else. As an example, as we work to stop the flow of fentanyl ingredients from China, other countries, like India, could prove to be good alternative sources. We need to be prepared to partner with India and other potential new sources in this lethal supply chain to ensure we continue to improve our security. We also need to continue to enforce the provisions in the STOP Act to ensure that our postal service does not, once again, become the viable option for traffickers moving fentanyl into the United States. After missing the initial October 2019 deadline for full implementation of the STOP Act regulations, in March, Customs and Border Patrol finally began demanding 100 percent of advanced tracking data on shipments entering the country. That is good. I am glad we got there. That means that, for every package coming into the United States that originates from a country like India or China, we have a sense of what the package contains, where it is from, and where it is going, or else it doesn't come in. However, a number of waivers remain in place for these regulations for low-risk, low-volume, and less-developed countries. These waivers allow some countries to continue to skirt these reporting requirements, including, if you can believe it, Russia. It should not be in that category. This means criminals in Russia can continue to send potentially illegal packages into the United States without our knowing in advance what they may contain, posing a significant security risk, and undercutting the goals of the STOP Act. Frankly, I think it is an unacceptable oversight in enforcement, and I believe there is bipartisan agreement that that is the case. That is why I am urging DHS Secretary Mayorkas and the Biden administration to narrow down the STOP Act waivers and ensure that high-risk countries, like Russia, have to comply with these critical advanced tracking data requirements. In addition to this added security at the border, closer cooperation with the international community, and better STOP Act enforcement, we need to take the unexpected but important step to make sure that these deadly synthetic opioids actually remain illegal so that our law enforcement can take the proper steps to crack down on them. In order to avoid prosecution, prior to 2018, evil scientists in China and drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fentanyl, sometimes adjusting a single molecule and creating what are essentially fentanyl copycats to get around the law. While these fentanyl-related substances have the same narcotic properties as fentanyl, their tiny variations allow them to evade prosecution. Oftentimes, actually, these simpler substances than fentanyl were even more deadly. Carfentanil is actually more deadly than fentanyl, and that was one of the substances that was being made. Just this past week, we have learned that a fentanyl-related substance called para-fluorofentanyl has been discovered laced into drugs in my home State of Ohio, as an example. To address all of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 2018, used its authority to temporarily classify all fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I substances, which allows law enforcement to aggressively intercept and destroy them. Unfortunately, this designation was only temporary. We have successfully extended the designation a few times, but it will expire in about 2 months, at the end of January. Until we make these fentanyl-related drugs--these are fentanyl copycat drugs, some more dangerous than fentanyl--law enforcement will not have the certainty they need to go after criminals moving these deadly substances, and lives will be lost. Fortunately, we have legislation, already, to address this. Our bipartisan FIGHT Fentanyl Act, which I introduced with Senator Joe Manchin, would fix this problem by permanently classifying fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I. It is about time. That would give our law enforcement the certainty to go after synthetic opioids in all of its forms and show we are committed to addressing the threat posed by this dangerous class of drugs. The FIGHT Fentanyl Act would increase the costs of fentanyl on the street and would be an important step toward rededicating our efforts to stopping these drugs from stealing thousands of lives and causing so much pain. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and support this legislation to help us reduce the supply of dangerous synthetic opioids on our streets. So, again, on the supply side, let's pass legislation to be sure we are making fentanyl permanently illegal. Let's look at what we can do on the demand side to reduce this demand--insatiable sometimes in our country--for these illegal drugs: more effective prevention and education and ensuring individuals struggling with addiction get the support they need to overcome the disease and no longer feel the need to turn to these dangerous substances. That is all part of it. The first step, to me, is to continue to build on what we know has worked. Remember, back in 2018, we actually had the first year-over-year decrease in overdose deaths in the country in about three decades--a 22-percent decrease in my home State of Ohio in 1 year. Building on that success starts with building on our CARA legislation we talked about earlier. Before CARA, the Federal Government provided no funding of any kind for recovery support services, which are so essential to so many in overcoming their addictions. There was also no Federal funding for naloxone, also known as Narcan, which is so effective because it is a miracle drug that allows first responders to reverse the effects of an overdose and save lives and get people into treatment. CARA also lifted the cap on the number of patients a doctor could treatwith a medication assisted treatment called Suboxone, while also allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe this medication. All of these provisions expanded access to treatment, and that was incredibly important. I remember a father who came to me from Ohio and talked about his daughter. His daughter had an accident, an injury. She took pain medication. She became addicted to opioids. She then shifted to heroin because it was more available and less expensive. She was in and out of treatment and never took it seriously. One day, she went to her father and said, ``I am ready. I am ready to go into treatment. I am ready to turn my life around.'' He was convinced it was true until he went out to find a treatment provider for her, and as continues to be the case in some communities--and at that time, before 2018, it was the case in many communities--there were no beds available. There was no treatment option. She had to go on a waiting list. While she was on the waiting list, she overdosed on heroin and died in her own bedroom, and her father found her there. So all of these provisions we put in place expanded access to treatment to be able to ensure that those stories are not repeated. In the 5 years since our CARA legislation has become law, I have visited with hundreds of recovering addicts at treatment centers; I have visited with experts on local addiction and mental health boards; and I have been to recovery homes and other nonprofits across Ohio. We have talked about what we can do now to build on the successes we were having back in the 2018-2019 period, as well as what we did with regard to CARA 2.0, which is the bill that passed in 2018. The result of those discussions is CARA 3.0--the third CARA legislation. I introduced that with Senator Whitehouse earlier this year, and it builds on the existing CARA framework and expands its scope to ensure all Americans who are fighting addiction have the chance to overcome this disease. It does so by addressing three important areas: one, research, education, prevention; two, treatment and recovery; and, three, criminal justice reform. CARA 3.0 will bolster our work to prevent drug abuse--before it even happens--through better research and better education and prevention. I believe effective prevention is done when it is at the community level, which is where it is most effective, and engages a wide variety of stakeholders--youth, parents, faith leaders, educators--all with a focus on showing the risks of drug abuse and addiction. There are now about 2,000 community coalitions around the country that do this, and God bless them for the work they do. They benefit from our legislation called the Drug-Free Communities Act, which is also something that is important with regard to CARA 3.0. Over 25 years ago, I found in my own community an antidrug coalition. It is now called PreventionFIRST! It is still in existence, doing a great job. In fact, I had a Zoom call with the leaders of PreventionFIRST! last week to learn about some of the new innovations they are coming up with to reach more people. They do a drug survey every 2 years--they are in the middle of fielding that right now--where they get the best information. It is almost like a census, not a survey, from high schoolers all over the greater Cincinnati area to find out what drugs are being used, what people's attitudes are about drugs. They take that and use that to try to promote the prevention message in a way that is effective. I appreciate what they do, again, and that is part of what we need to do in this new legislation, is to redouble our efforts on prevention, to keep people out of the funnel of addiction in the first place. It is obviously the most effective way to address this issue. In our legislation we call for a massive new national drug awareness campaign as part of this. I believe that ought to be done with help from the private sector, by the way. There are plenty of people in the private sector who have concerns about this issue and should. It affects their workforce. Certainly, with regard to companies that are in the pharmaceutical business, they should have a strong interest in this. We could leverage funding--taxpayer funding--in ways that could create, for the first time in a couple of decades, a very effective national media campaign to get the word out there. We know that a number of Federal Agencies have smaller efforts on this front, but we need more coordination and a united message coming from the Federal Government and from the private sector. Our bill also includes more for research and development of alternative pain treatment methods that don't lead to addiction. To me, it is unbelievable that we are still relying on these opioid pain medications that were developed a couple of decades ago. And although some have worked on this issue--and I appreciate those researchers--we need to put more money and focus on this to find ways to treat pain without the addictive properties of the opioids. And CARA 3.0 will also take the important step of addressing the disproportionate effect the addiction crisis has had on certain vulnerable communities. Second, our bill will build on what has worked with regard to treatment and recovery. So the first step is more research, education and prevention. The second one is with regard to treatment and recovery. It will double down on proven evidence-based addiction treatment methods while expanding treatment options for groups particularly vulnerable to addiction, including young people, new and expecting mothers, rural communities, and communities of color. Third, our bill will build on what works and how we treat addiction. It will double down on these treatment methods. It will, importantly, make permanent the current expanded telehealth options for addiction treatment that were temporarily created in response to the social distancing required by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important. Telehealth was something that was a necessity during COVID. People couldn't come to the doctor for visits. They couldn't be at their treatment providers in person. And we wondered whether telehealth would be effective. I believe that for mental health treatment and for addiction services, behavioral health, that it has been incredibly important. And although addictions have gone up during this period, obviously, and the overdose rates are at record highs, my belief--and from talking to experts I have come to this belief--it would be even worse if we had not had the telehealth options. So in the dark cloud of the pandemic, the silver lining may be that we learned how to use telehealth better. And our legislation allows that to continue to be used with reimbursement; as an example, Medicaid reimbursement or Medicare reimbursement. CARA 3.0 will also bolster the recovery options for individuals working to put addiction behind them through funding to support the recovery support services and networks. It eliminates the waiver required of physicians who want to provide medication-assisted treatments to their patients and changes the law to allow those drugs to be prescribed via telehealth for greater ease of access. The bill will also help to destigmatize addiction recovery in the workplace by ensuring that one of these medications to treat addiction does not count as a drug-free workplace violation. Finally, CARA 3.0 reforms our criminal justice system to ensure that those struggling with addiction, including our veterans, are treated with fairness and common sense, putting them on a path to recovery rather than a downward spiral of abuse. Importantly, CARA 3.0 funds a Department of Justice grant program to help incarcerated individuals struggling with addiction to receive medication-assisted treatment while they are still in the criminal justice system. This means that when they are released, they have a much higher chance of success. If someone is addicted, and you don't treat it, and you let them out of the system, they are very likely to go back to a life of addiction. But if we allow medication-assisted treatment in the criminal justice system, we will reduce recidivism or repeated offenses. I think that makes sense for the person addicted, for the community, and certainly for the taxpayer. CARA and CARA 2.0 have given States and local communities new resources and authorities to make a realdifference. CARA 3.0 renews and strengthens these programs. And given the recent spike in addiction, it provides a boost in funding as well. When added with the existing CARA programs that are authorized through 2023, we would be investing over $1 billion per year to address this longstanding epidemic, putting us on the path toward a brighter future free from addiction. The addiction epidemic has proven to be resilient. It is a disease that knows no ZIP Code, and one that is always ready to come roaring back should we not stay vigilant. Columnist Peggy Noonan was exactly right when she wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Wall Street Journal that: We have a deep and profound addiction crisis in our country and we've had it so long we forget to see it . . . and nobody's talking about it because nobody has a plan. She is exactly right. We need a plan right now to tackle this crisis that continues to devastate our country. I have laid out one tonight that can give us some understanding of the magnitude of the problem, the nature of the challenge, but also have the Federal Government take concrete steps to turn the tide once again. Again, we have done it before. Let's do it again. Washington can and should be a partner to the State and local groups on the ground every day working to combat this crisis. We should be a better partner. We have got to all work together to find constructive solutions to the addiction epidemic and ensure more Americans don't suffer in silence, that we don't lose more lives to these deadly drugs but instead ensure that more Americans can achieve their God-given potential in life. I yield back my time. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8799-2 | null | 3,558 |
formal | blue | null | antisemitic | Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio, and I am on the floor today to talk about a major public health crisis facing our country, one that is resulting in thousands of people losing their lives, causing the death of over 100,000 Americans a year, and has negatively impacted so many millions more in my home State of Ohio and all around the country. And, no, I am not talking about COVID-19. I am talking about an epidemic within the pandemic. I am talking about the surging epidemic of drug use and addiction that has fueled a record number of overdose deaths and threatens to get even worse. In the past 19 months or so, our attention has, understandably, been directed toward the COVID-19 crisis. And, once again, we see with Omicron the possibility of another variant coming, and those public health challenges are real. But I have to tell you that it has led us to ignore another crisis. The Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, recently issued a report which was shocking and should serve as a wake-up call to all of us. It said that between April of 2020 and April of 2021, the most recent year for which we have data, we had over 100,000 individuals lose their lives to drug overdose deaths in this country. That is the highest ever. It is a record. By the way, 100,000 deaths per year is more than the deaths from gunshot wounds and the deaths from car accidents combined. It is truly the epidemic within the pandemic. Away from the headlines, we have this other tragic healthcare crisis that has left no part of the country unaffected. Forty-six States and the District of Columbia have seen their overdose rates go up in the last year, with a 26-percent increase in my home State of Ohio. In some States, there are now as many drug overdose deaths as there are COVID deaths. Like many of you, I have seen firsthand the damage drugs like crystal meth or cocaine or heroin or now the synthetic opioids are causing to the families we represent, to people who have gotten caught in that spiral of drug abuse and addiction. I have also seen the heroic efforts of first responders who have saved people's lives by administering naloxone, which some call Narcan, its brand name. It is a miracle drug that literally saves lives by being able to reverse the effects of an overdose. And I have ridden with law enforcement and treatment providers on rapid response teams in various places in Ohio that follow up with those who have overdosed. Literally, somebody overdoses, and then this rapid response team--usually made up of law enforcement but also treatment providers, social workers--goes to people's homes, and it is amazing what you will find out. I was, frankly, a little surprised during my first visit--then, I got more used to it--which is that people respond very favorably. Most people who are approached by these rapid response teams agree to get into treatment. And isn't that the key? Using Narcan again and again and again to save someone's life is not the answer. The answer is to get that person into treatment so that that person can get back to his or her family, his or her work, and to a normal life and to be more productive in life. I have also met with families and loved ones affected, hearing their stories about how losing a family member to addiction has had such a negative impact, often tearing those families apart. And, of course, I have talked to a lot of people in recovery who have told me about the grip of addiction on their lives and how they got help and what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of people get help, get into treatment, and it doesn't work for them. They have to do it again and again. But, ultimately, for those who can stay in recovery and are able to stay sober and clean, they have the most amazing stories. And so many of them are coming back and contributing in big ways to our communities--many helping others. Their recovery, basically, is reaching out to others and helping them along the way. Some are called recovery coaches, which is a more formal title, but so many of them are, in effect, recovery coaches helping others who are struggling. There are so many lives that have been touched by this crisis--100,000-plus deaths, but so many others affected. And I have made it a goal of mine to make sure Congress is playing its role in addressing this effort that must be at the community level, at the State level, but also at the national level to respond to what is a true national crisis. What makes it especially heartbreaking to me is that, only a few years ago, we had finally begun to make progress on this. We were beginning to turn the corner. We were seeing lower addiction rates. We were seeing lower overdose deaths for the first time in decades. How did we do it? Well, we redoubled our efforts on prevention, on getting people into treatment, on getting people into longer term recovery, making more naloxone available. Thanks to the bipartisan leadership here in Congress, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA, which I coauthored with my colleague Sheldon Whitehouse, and the 21st Century CURES Act were both signed into law in 2016, helping to pave the way for several billion dollars in new Federal funding to strengthen State, local, and nonprofit efforts to combat addiction. Our CARA legislation and the follow-up CARA.2 legislation that we passed a few years ago took a comprehensive approach based on best practices. We actually had seminars here in Washington. We brought people from all over the country here. We had four different conferences where we got information as to what was working and not working in our communities, and things that were working we funded. We directed resources toward more treatment and recovery services for individuals and more focus on prevention. I can't overstate how critical these kinds of proven services are for people on the path to recovery. Congress had never, before this legislation, ever funded recovery services. I have visited a number of inpatient and outpatient centers for addiction in Ohio to talk with those working to overcome their addiction. They have told me time and again how these recovery services gave them the structure, the support, and, most importantly, the hope they needed to be able to overcome this disease. And we actually started to see that hope translate into real success on the ground, real numbers and real people's lives. In 2017, Ohio's overdose death rate had increased for 30-plus straight years, and Ohio's death per capita that year, 2017, was almost three times that of the national average. But that next year, in 2018, as these two signature laws, CARA and CURES, were fully implemented, Ohio began to turn the tide with a 22-percent reduction in overdose deaths in 1 year. Again, after more than 30 years of increases in overdose deaths every single year, a 22-percent decrease. Nationally, overdose deaths declined that year about 4 percent, again, after a year after year of increases. In 2019, we had a slight decrease also. These were promising developments. But since then, there has been a lethal convergence on both the supply side of this issue and the demand side of this issue. Sam Quinones, the author of ``Dreamland,'' which I think is the seminal book on the rise of opioids in this country, recently put it well. He said in an interview that before COVID hit, Mexican cartels had achieved their goal, finally, of covering our country with ``the most . . . mind-mangling drugs we've ever seen. . . . It just so happened that we went into isolation at the very moment when these drugs hit their apex.'' A terrible coincidence that as the supply increased because of the greed of traffickers, the demand increased because of COVID. These two things came together, and that has caused this huge increase in overdoses, addiction, and overdose deaths. Let's look at the supply side of this crisis first. The record number of deadly narcotics and other drugs that are taking the lives of moms, dads, children, and loved ones all across the country are coming into our country in record numbers. As many are aware, for much of the past few decades, the most common cause of overdose deaths were prescription opioids like OxyContin or Percocet. Often people who suffered a serious injury or accident needed pain relief, and often, unfortunately, doctors and dentists overprescribed opioids. People developed an addiction that led to accidental overdoses, often from cheaper and more available heroin when the prescription drugs ran out. Now we are dealing with a class of drugs that are tens if not hundreds of times deadlier than those prescription drugs, the so-called synthetic opioids. The most well known of these is fentanyl, which, as you can see by this chart of drug overdoses, has become the drug most responsible for overdose deaths. The red here is overdose deaths overall, and the blue is overdose deaths that are attributed to fentanyl. You can see what has happened. Fentanyl was about half of overdose deaths in 2018. Half of all overdose deaths was one drug, fentanyl. In 2019, it was more than half and, in 2020, way more than half of all the overdose deaths caused by one drug, a synthetic opioid called fentanyl. It is the deadliest one. Incredibly, 80 percent of drug overdoses in Ohio and overdose deaths in Ohio can now be attributed to this deadly substance, based on what the experts tell me--80 percent. It is not surprising that the amount of fentanyl seized on the streets of Ohio cities like Dayton, OH, recently has nearly doubled compared to last year. And it is not only the amount of fentanyl that is flooding our country. Evil traffickers have increasingly disguised it by mixing it with other drugs or pressing it into fake pills to look like common pharmaceuticals. This concerted effort to expand the reach of fentanyl addiction started before the pandemic, but it is only accelerating. It is a profitable business for drug dealers. Compared to heroin, fentanyl is less expensive to manufacture and, pound-for-pound, far more potent. A few flakes can kill you. Traffickers make a bigger profit, and people are trapped into addiction more easily. Traffickers increasingly lace fentanyl with other drugs--cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, and even marijuana in some cases. They do it as a way to boost its effects and cut down on its costs. In Mexico, they use cheap pill presses to mold fentanyl doses into the shape of prescription drugs--everyday pills that people take for a variety of reasons. What that means is that many of the individuals who now lose their lives to a fentanyl overdose don't even know they are taking fentanyl until it is too late. Recently, I participated in a roundtable discussion on the border crisis and how it has impacted the addiction crisis. We heard from an Ohio mother, Virginia Krieger, who lost her daughter Tiffany to an accidental fentanyl death. Virginia told us about how Tiffany had been unable to get the care she wanted from her physician. That led her to buying pills on the street--pills she was told were Percocet, and it looked like Percocet. That is what was stamped on it. But in reality, it was laced with lethal doses of heroin and fentanyl. When Tiffany took these pills for her pain, she was poisoned by the fentanyl, and the life of a young 26-year-old woman was snuffed out far too soon. We are hearing this across the State. Recently, in Cleveland, OH, Xanax pills, an antianxiety medication--fake pills pressed by Mexican traffickers contained fentanyl and caused overdoses and overdose deaths. My heart goes out to these families. My heart goes out to Virginia, who, by the way, has channeled her grief into something positive, and that is going to schools and explaining to young people how dangerous this is. Her view is that no one should ever take a pill unless they know it comes from a pharmacy. She is right. People across the country need to know that pills of all shapes and sizes can contain fentanyl even though they might say something else. No street drug is safe right now from the threat of fentanyl poisoning, and too many kids and adults who weren't addicted to opioids are unknowingly ingesting these substances and putting themselves at risk. We need to be on high alert. Parents and kids need to know that right now no drug you get on the street can be safe. Our communities are saturated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids right now. Among other things, of course, this drives the price of the drugs down. So, yes, the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs, but with its overwhelming supply, the price of the drug goes down and there is higher use and higher demand. A conversation about how we can cut down on the supply side of course has to start with our strategy on our southern border. For years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were overwhelmingly illegally manufactured in China. As then-chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I led a bipartisan investigation back in 2017 which showed that fentanyl was coming into our country from China primarily through our own lax Postal Service. Our own Postal Service was the conduit. That is why I worked in a bipartisan manner to write and pass what is called the STOP Act, which required the Postal Service, for the first time, to crack down on fentanyl through the mail. We required the Postal Service to get advanced tracking data on international shipments coming to the United States, showing the package's origin, contents, and destination. This allowed law enforcement to spot potentially dangerous packages ahead of time and make it much more difficult to move fentanyl into the United States in this manner. Other carriers were already doing it--FedEx, private carriers, DHL, but the post office was not. The good news is that the STOP Act has been effective, and also, after persistent engagement and pressure from the United States, China scheduled fentanyl, meaning made it illegal, and its analogues as a class of illegal drugs. We believe these changes have helped to dramatically reduce the flow of fentanyl directly from China into the United States. But, obviously, it hasn't solved the problem because Mexican transnational criminal organizations know a great business opportunity when they see one, and they moved in to take over the fentanyl market in the United States. Now Mexican transnational criminal organizations work with criminal gangs in China to import into Mexico the ingredients used to make fentanyl, where the final product is made in so-called superlabs. We have a record amount of the substance pouring in, both at our ports of entry and through other gaps in our southern border security by car, by truck, by courier. This is a problem that continues to get worse as this shocking chart shows us. Look at the dramatic increases in fentanyl that was seized along the U.S. border. This past fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection seized 11,201 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill every man, woman, and child in America--more than double the amount from the previous year and four times the amount from fiscal year 2019. Just a few weeks ago in Southern California, border officials discovered 8\1/2\ tons of meth in a single truck along with 400 pounds of fentanyl. Remember, it only takes a few flakes of fentanyl to kill you. This 400 pounds could kill millions. Their smuggling operations are complex and sophisticated, and Customs and Border Protection have their hands full. According to the most recent statistics, last month, seizures of fentanyl increased 42 percent. That is 42 percent in 1 month. This is only how much we know was discovered, was apprehended. We don't know how much more made it over the border undetected. When I have asked Customs and Border Protection and DHS, our homeland security officials, in public hearings, as I did the week before last, they don'tanswer the question because they don't know. But in private conversations with Border Patrol agents, they tell me that they believe the vast majority of drugs are coming in undetected. So this is just the seizures, not the amount of drugs that are streaming across the border. I take no pleasure in saying this, but the failure of the Biden administration to control the southern border has resulted in record levels of deadly fentanyl coming in to our country and contributes to the growing strength of the Mexican transnational criminal organizations. Part of the problem is that the Biden administration's own policies have encouraged an unprecedented surge of unlawful migrants at the border, diverting our Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents away from interdicting drugs. I have seen that on the southern border as has anyone else who has visited. These law enforcement officers who should be on the line stopping the criminals carrying drugs are instead processing a record number of migrants. This massive influx of unlawful migrants began when President Biden was inaugurated and made specific policy changes, and it has only continued to worsen ever since. We had all hoped that during the summer months, when normally unlawful migration slows down because of the heat, that we would have a lessening of this issue, but it didn't happen. In fact, last month was a record month for October for Border Patrol apprehensions. As the border crisis created by the Biden administration policy changes continues, the administration has failed to give Customs and Border Protection the resources they need: additional personnel, better technology, infrastructure, and more, to enable them to better protect our Nation along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico. On an average day in 2020, Customs and Border Protection processed 650,000-plus passengers and pedestrians, 187,000 incoming privately owned vehicles, and 77,900 truck, rail, and sea containers. The amount of traffic at the border is going up now that there is less concern about the pandemic. However, only 2 percent of those privately owned vehicles are physically searched at the border, and less than 20 percent of all those commercial vehicles are scanned for drugs before they cross into the United States. Let me repeat that: 2 percent. So if you are a smuggler driving a sedan with multiple pounds of fentanyl concealed in hidden compartments, right now you have a very good chance of getting across the border without a search. That is not a gap in our security, that is a gaping hole. We have known this is a problem. Congress, last January, almost a year ago, passed and President Trump signed into law a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security give Congress a plan and a strategy on using technology and making policy and resources changes to be able to scan all vehicles. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is late delivering this report. It was due over 4 months ago, and we still don't have it. In conversations with administration officials the week before last, I got assurances that it is coming soon. I hope so. We need it. It would be extremely helpful to have this information as we finalize the spending bills over the next month or so. I am proud that the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invested billions of dollars in upgrading and modernizing our ports of entry, including ports of entry on the southern border. Our ports are aging, some of them badly. This funding would allow Customs and Border Protection officers to have adequate space to do more screening of vehicles. However, we cannot and should not build a brandnew port of entry and then just install the old legacy technology for scanning and detection of deadly narcotics. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dramatically upgrade seaports of entry with modern, state-of-the-art detection technology that can help our officers catch more of these drugs before they enter our communities. In May, I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona to establish a $1 billion irregular migration border response fund so that the Department of Homeland Security is not forced to transfer resources away from drug interdiction priorities to fund processing of individuals, food, clothing, blankets, and transportation when there is an influx of migrants, as has happened periodically. These contingency resources would be available immediately when there is a surge to quickly respond to increased migration at the border. Considering the crisis at our border and the record amounts of fentanyl coming in, it was not surprising to me in September when the Drug Enforcement Agency, DEA, issued its first public safety alert in more than 6 years after it seized more than 9.5 million fake pills this year, more than the last 2 years combined. As I said, we all need to be on high alert. We hear a lot these days about problems with the supply chain, with delayed shipments and cancelled orders. I will tell you the Mexican transnational criminal organizations don't have that problem. They are moving more fentanyl than ever into our communities, and once that fentanyl is here, what a waste. Sadly, more people are caught in the grip of addiction. This brings us to the demand side of the equation. Again, most important to me is reducing the demand for these drugs, but both the demand and the supply side are related. As we discussed, the supply of deadly fentanyl was already increasing when COVID-19 hit us almost 2 years ago. Clearly, this pandemic has led to more isolation, anxiety for some, depression for others. Millions of Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Millions have lost loved ones to COVID-19. Some in recovery have not been able to be with their treatment providers or with their recovery coaches, as we talked about earlier. Millions have had their lives turned upside down, and some have turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Others, who were on the path to recovery, have suffered setbacks--relapsing into drug use again. Last month, I visited with Erin Helms, who runs recovery homes for women in northeast Ohio that I have had the chance to visit. Erin told me about the challenges during COVID to connect people with treatment and recovery support services when they overdose or when they are being released out of the criminal justice system. When we were in the most restrictive time of the pandemic, those people fell through the cracks, and we are seeing the results of that today. These overdose deaths are happening away from the national headlines, but they are taking a toll all the same. As I said, this is truly a nationwide crisis. It will take all of us here in Congress coming together to work on a bipartisan basis to find solutions to turn the tide again, reduce overdose deaths, and put more affected individuals on the path to recovery. So what can we do here in Congress in moving forward? What are the answers? First, we have got to be able to address both the supply side and the demand side. This chart lays out some of the ways we can help with both, all of which I have talked about tonight. This means we need to complete the installation of enhanced border security technology, which has already been appropriated by Congress, so that the Border Patrol has the tools it needs to complete its national security mission--so enhanced border security. In March, I visited El Paso and saw fully funded construction materials laying on the ground, at the border, at the place where there was a gap in the wall. I heard directly from Border Patrol officers about the importance of enhancing border security to give them the opportunity to complete their national security mission and help them to stop the drugs. That is why, at his nomination hearing in October, I pressed Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus, the nominee to be Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the need to install the enhanced border technology and complete the funded sections of the wall. Not only are there physical gaps in the wall right now that we have already paid for, but there is technology, which, to me, is the most important part of the wall. So you need the barrier, but, also, you need the technology to be able to monitor it, and it is only about 10 percent completed in that El Paso sector. That is outrageous. Everybody--Republicans and Democrats alike--likes to say they are for technology. We should complete the technology along the border and help the Border Patrol be able to do their important job, including keeping these deadly narcotics out of our communities. We also must pass the bipartisan Border Response Resilience Act, which I talked about, that I introduced with Senator Kelly. It would provide an additional billion dollars to the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection folks during a surge in unlawful migration, like the one we are in right now. Due to limited resources, Border Patrol agents are pulled off the border to care for migrants, and drug cartels are taking advantage of these open gaps in our Nation's security. Even some of the checkpoints had to be closed down when there was a recent surge on the border near Del Rio, TX. Drug interdiction checkpoints here in the United States are left unmanned so offices can process more migrant families. But the supply chain doesn't start and end on the U.S. border. Criminals understand the opportunities of the globalized world, and they pose a dynamic threat to the United States. They are smart and adaptable and can take advantage of the complexity and volume of international trade and travel patterns, and they do that. They also understand how to exploit openings in law enforcement and regulatory approaches. Many of the ingredients used to make fentanyl continue to come from China, and Chinese money laundering networks have emerged as key enablers in the business model of Mexican transnational criminal organizations. This must stop. While we have a complex and difficult agenda with China, this issue needs to remain at the top of our list. I urge the Biden administration to push the Chinese Government to be our partner in cracking down on these international crime rings rather than a tacit enabler. It is in both of our countries' interests. Likewise, the issue should be front and center in our relationship with Mexico. Both of our countries lose when the traffickers are successful. Our country is inundated with lethal substances, and the cartels gain money and sometimes American-made firearms that allow them to better wage war on the government in Mexico City. For both of our countries' sakes, we need to partner more effectively with Mexico--international cooperation. We should also recognize that these adaptable drug traffickers will have other options as we go after this current supply chain. We saw this after the STOP Act started to be implemented and traffickers from China shifted to Mexico. There is a risk that it becomes a game of whack-a-mole--when you stop it in one place and it crops up somewhere else. As an example, as we work to stop the flow of fentanyl ingredients from China, other countries, like India, could prove to be good alternative sources. We need to be prepared to partner with India and other potential new sources in this lethal supply chain to ensure we continue to improve our security. We also need to continue to enforce the provisions in the STOP Act to ensure that our postal service does not, once again, become the viable option for traffickers moving fentanyl into the United States. After missing the initial October 2019 deadline for full implementation of the STOP Act regulations, in March, Customs and Border Patrol finally began demanding 100 percent of advanced tracking data on shipments entering the country. That is good. I am glad we got there. That means that, for every package coming into the United States that originates from a country like India or China, we have a sense of what the package contains, where it is from, and where it is going, or else it doesn't come in. However, a number of waivers remain in place for these regulations for low-risk, low-volume, and less-developed countries. These waivers allow some countries to continue to skirt these reporting requirements, including, if you can believe it, Russia. It should not be in that category. This means criminals in Russia can continue to send potentially illegal packages into the United States without our knowing in advance what they may contain, posing a significant security risk, and undercutting the goals of the STOP Act. Frankly, I think it is an unacceptable oversight in enforcement, and I believe there is bipartisan agreement that that is the case. That is why I am urging DHS Secretary Mayorkas and the Biden administration to narrow down the STOP Act waivers and ensure that high-risk countries, like Russia, have to comply with these critical advanced tracking data requirements. In addition to this added security at the border, closer cooperation with the international community, and better STOP Act enforcement, we need to take the unexpected but important step to make sure that these deadly synthetic opioids actually remain illegal so that our law enforcement can take the proper steps to crack down on them. In order to avoid prosecution, prior to 2018, evil scientists in China and drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fentanyl, sometimes adjusting a single molecule and creating what are essentially fentanyl copycats to get around the law. While these fentanyl-related substances have the same narcotic properties as fentanyl, their tiny variations allow them to evade prosecution. Oftentimes, actually, these simpler substances than fentanyl were even more deadly. Carfentanil is actually more deadly than fentanyl, and that was one of the substances that was being made. Just this past week, we have learned that a fentanyl-related substance called para-fluorofentanyl has been discovered laced into drugs in my home State of Ohio, as an example. To address all of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 2018, used its authority to temporarily classify all fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I substances, which allows law enforcement to aggressively intercept and destroy them. Unfortunately, this designation was only temporary. We have successfully extended the designation a few times, but it will expire in about 2 months, at the end of January. Until we make these fentanyl-related drugs--these are fentanyl copycat drugs, some more dangerous than fentanyl--law enforcement will not have the certainty they need to go after criminals moving these deadly substances, and lives will be lost. Fortunately, we have legislation, already, to address this. Our bipartisan FIGHT Fentanyl Act, which I introduced with Senator Joe Manchin, would fix this problem by permanently classifying fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I. It is about time. That would give our law enforcement the certainty to go after synthetic opioids in all of its forms and show we are committed to addressing the threat posed by this dangerous class of drugs. The FIGHT Fentanyl Act would increase the costs of fentanyl on the street and would be an important step toward rededicating our efforts to stopping these drugs from stealing thousands of lives and causing so much pain. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and support this legislation to help us reduce the supply of dangerous synthetic opioids on our streets. So, again, on the supply side, let's pass legislation to be sure we are making fentanyl permanently illegal. Let's look at what we can do on the demand side to reduce this demand--insatiable sometimes in our country--for these illegal drugs: more effective prevention and education and ensuring individuals struggling with addiction get the support they need to overcome the disease and no longer feel the need to turn to these dangerous substances. That is all part of it. The first step, to me, is to continue to build on what we know has worked. Remember, back in 2018, we actually had the first year-over-year decrease in overdose deaths in the country in about three decades--a 22-percent decrease in my home State of Ohio in 1 year. Building on that success starts with building on our CARA legislation we talked about earlier. Before CARA, the Federal Government provided no funding of any kind for recovery support services, which are so essential to so many in overcoming their addictions. There was also no Federal funding for naloxone, also known as Narcan, which is so effective because it is a miracle drug that allows first responders to reverse the effects of an overdose and save lives and get people into treatment. CARA also lifted the cap on the number of patients a doctor could treatwith a medication assisted treatment called Suboxone, while also allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe this medication. All of these provisions expanded access to treatment, and that was incredibly important. I remember a father who came to me from Ohio and talked about his daughter. His daughter had an accident, an injury. She took pain medication. She became addicted to opioids. She then shifted to heroin because it was more available and less expensive. She was in and out of treatment and never took it seriously. One day, she went to her father and said, ``I am ready. I am ready to go into treatment. I am ready to turn my life around.'' He was convinced it was true until he went out to find a treatment provider for her, and as continues to be the case in some communities--and at that time, before 2018, it was the case in many communities--there were no beds available. There was no treatment option. She had to go on a waiting list. While she was on the waiting list, she overdosed on heroin and died in her own bedroom, and her father found her there. So all of these provisions we put in place expanded access to treatment to be able to ensure that those stories are not repeated. In the 5 years since our CARA legislation has become law, I have visited with hundreds of recovering addicts at treatment centers; I have visited with experts on local addiction and mental health boards; and I have been to recovery homes and other nonprofits across Ohio. We have talked about what we can do now to build on the successes we were having back in the 2018-2019 period, as well as what we did with regard to CARA 2.0, which is the bill that passed in 2018. The result of those discussions is CARA 3.0--the third CARA legislation. I introduced that with Senator Whitehouse earlier this year, and it builds on the existing CARA framework and expands its scope to ensure all Americans who are fighting addiction have the chance to overcome this disease. It does so by addressing three important areas: one, research, education, prevention; two, treatment and recovery; and, three, criminal justice reform. CARA 3.0 will bolster our work to prevent drug abuse--before it even happens--through better research and better education and prevention. I believe effective prevention is done when it is at the community level, which is where it is most effective, and engages a wide variety of stakeholders--youth, parents, faith leaders, educators--all with a focus on showing the risks of drug abuse and addiction. There are now about 2,000 community coalitions around the country that do this, and God bless them for the work they do. They benefit from our legislation called the Drug-Free Communities Act, which is also something that is important with regard to CARA 3.0. Over 25 years ago, I found in my own community an antidrug coalition. It is now called PreventionFIRST! It is still in existence, doing a great job. In fact, I had a Zoom call with the leaders of PreventionFIRST! last week to learn about some of the new innovations they are coming up with to reach more people. They do a drug survey every 2 years--they are in the middle of fielding that right now--where they get the best information. It is almost like a census, not a survey, from high schoolers all over the greater Cincinnati area to find out what drugs are being used, what people's attitudes are about drugs. They take that and use that to try to promote the prevention message in a way that is effective. I appreciate what they do, again, and that is part of what we need to do in this new legislation, is to redouble our efforts on prevention, to keep people out of the funnel of addiction in the first place. It is obviously the most effective way to address this issue. In our legislation we call for a massive new national drug awareness campaign as part of this. I believe that ought to be done with help from the private sector, by the way. There are plenty of people in the private sector who have concerns about this issue and should. It affects their workforce. Certainly, with regard to companies that are in the pharmaceutical business, they should have a strong interest in this. We could leverage funding--taxpayer funding--in ways that could create, for the first time in a couple of decades, a very effective national media campaign to get the word out there. We know that a number of Federal Agencies have smaller efforts on this front, but we need more coordination and a united message coming from the Federal Government and from the private sector. Our bill also includes more for research and development of alternative pain treatment methods that don't lead to addiction. To me, it is unbelievable that we are still relying on these opioid pain medications that were developed a couple of decades ago. And although some have worked on this issue--and I appreciate those researchers--we need to put more money and focus on this to find ways to treat pain without the addictive properties of the opioids. And CARA 3.0 will also take the important step of addressing the disproportionate effect the addiction crisis has had on certain vulnerable communities. Second, our bill will build on what has worked with regard to treatment and recovery. So the first step is more research, education and prevention. The second one is with regard to treatment and recovery. It will double down on proven evidence-based addiction treatment methods while expanding treatment options for groups particularly vulnerable to addiction, including young people, new and expecting mothers, rural communities, and communities of color. Third, our bill will build on what works and how we treat addiction. It will double down on these treatment methods. It will, importantly, make permanent the current expanded telehealth options for addiction treatment that were temporarily created in response to the social distancing required by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important. Telehealth was something that was a necessity during COVID. People couldn't come to the doctor for visits. They couldn't be at their treatment providers in person. And we wondered whether telehealth would be effective. I believe that for mental health treatment and for addiction services, behavioral health, that it has been incredibly important. And although addictions have gone up during this period, obviously, and the overdose rates are at record highs, my belief--and from talking to experts I have come to this belief--it would be even worse if we had not had the telehealth options. So in the dark cloud of the pandemic, the silver lining may be that we learned how to use telehealth better. And our legislation allows that to continue to be used with reimbursement; as an example, Medicaid reimbursement or Medicare reimbursement. CARA 3.0 will also bolster the recovery options for individuals working to put addiction behind them through funding to support the recovery support services and networks. It eliminates the waiver required of physicians who want to provide medication-assisted treatments to their patients and changes the law to allow those drugs to be prescribed via telehealth for greater ease of access. The bill will also help to destigmatize addiction recovery in the workplace by ensuring that one of these medications to treat addiction does not count as a drug-free workplace violation. Finally, CARA 3.0 reforms our criminal justice system to ensure that those struggling with addiction, including our veterans, are treated with fairness and common sense, putting them on a path to recovery rather than a downward spiral of abuse. Importantly, CARA 3.0 funds a Department of Justice grant program to help incarcerated individuals struggling with addiction to receive medication-assisted treatment while they are still in the criminal justice system. This means that when they are released, they have a much higher chance of success. If someone is addicted, and you don't treat it, and you let them out of the system, they are very likely to go back to a life of addiction. But if we allow medication-assisted treatment in the criminal justice system, we will reduce recidivism or repeated offenses. I think that makes sense for the person addicted, for the community, and certainly for the taxpayer. CARA and CARA 2.0 have given States and local communities new resources and authorities to make a realdifference. CARA 3.0 renews and strengthens these programs. And given the recent spike in addiction, it provides a boost in funding as well. When added with the existing CARA programs that are authorized through 2023, we would be investing over $1 billion per year to address this longstanding epidemic, putting us on the path toward a brighter future free from addiction. The addiction epidemic has proven to be resilient. It is a disease that knows no ZIP Code, and one that is always ready to come roaring back should we not stay vigilant. Columnist Peggy Noonan was exactly right when she wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Wall Street Journal that: We have a deep and profound addiction crisis in our country and we've had it so long we forget to see it . . . and nobody's talking about it because nobody has a plan. She is exactly right. We need a plan right now to tackle this crisis that continues to devastate our country. I have laid out one tonight that can give us some understanding of the magnitude of the problem, the nature of the challenge, but also have the Federal Government take concrete steps to turn the tide once again. Again, we have done it before. Let's do it again. Washington can and should be a partner to the State and local groups on the ground every day working to combat this crisis. We should be a better partner. We have got to all work together to find constructive solutions to the addiction epidemic and ensure more Americans don't suffer in silence, that we don't lose more lives to these deadly drugs but instead ensure that more Americans can achieve their God-given potential in life. I yield back my time. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8799-2 | null | 3,559 |
formal | coincidence | null | antisemitic | Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio, and I am on the floor today to talk about a major public health crisis facing our country, one that is resulting in thousands of people losing their lives, causing the death of over 100,000 Americans a year, and has negatively impacted so many millions more in my home State of Ohio and all around the country. And, no, I am not talking about COVID-19. I am talking about an epidemic within the pandemic. I am talking about the surging epidemic of drug use and addiction that has fueled a record number of overdose deaths and threatens to get even worse. In the past 19 months or so, our attention has, understandably, been directed toward the COVID-19 crisis. And, once again, we see with Omicron the possibility of another variant coming, and those public health challenges are real. But I have to tell you that it has led us to ignore another crisis. The Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, recently issued a report which was shocking and should serve as a wake-up call to all of us. It said that between April of 2020 and April of 2021, the most recent year for which we have data, we had over 100,000 individuals lose their lives to drug overdose deaths in this country. That is the highest ever. It is a record. By the way, 100,000 deaths per year is more than the deaths from gunshot wounds and the deaths from car accidents combined. It is truly the epidemic within the pandemic. Away from the headlines, we have this other tragic healthcare crisis that has left no part of the country unaffected. Forty-six States and the District of Columbia have seen their overdose rates go up in the last year, with a 26-percent increase in my home State of Ohio. In some States, there are now as many drug overdose deaths as there are COVID deaths. Like many of you, I have seen firsthand the damage drugs like crystal meth or cocaine or heroin or now the synthetic opioids are causing to the families we represent, to people who have gotten caught in that spiral of drug abuse and addiction. I have also seen the heroic efforts of first responders who have saved people's lives by administering naloxone, which some call Narcan, its brand name. It is a miracle drug that literally saves lives by being able to reverse the effects of an overdose. And I have ridden with law enforcement and treatment providers on rapid response teams in various places in Ohio that follow up with those who have overdosed. Literally, somebody overdoses, and then this rapid response team--usually made up of law enforcement but also treatment providers, social workers--goes to people's homes, and it is amazing what you will find out. I was, frankly, a little surprised during my first visit--then, I got more used to it--which is that people respond very favorably. Most people who are approached by these rapid response teams agree to get into treatment. And isn't that the key? Using Narcan again and again and again to save someone's life is not the answer. The answer is to get that person into treatment so that that person can get back to his or her family, his or her work, and to a normal life and to be more productive in life. I have also met with families and loved ones affected, hearing their stories about how losing a family member to addiction has had such a negative impact, often tearing those families apart. And, of course, I have talked to a lot of people in recovery who have told me about the grip of addiction on their lives and how they got help and what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of people get help, get into treatment, and it doesn't work for them. They have to do it again and again. But, ultimately, for those who can stay in recovery and are able to stay sober and clean, they have the most amazing stories. And so many of them are coming back and contributing in big ways to our communities--many helping others. Their recovery, basically, is reaching out to others and helping them along the way. Some are called recovery coaches, which is a more formal title, but so many of them are, in effect, recovery coaches helping others who are struggling. There are so many lives that have been touched by this crisis--100,000-plus deaths, but so many others affected. And I have made it a goal of mine to make sure Congress is playing its role in addressing this effort that must be at the community level, at the State level, but also at the national level to respond to what is a true national crisis. What makes it especially heartbreaking to me is that, only a few years ago, we had finally begun to make progress on this. We were beginning to turn the corner. We were seeing lower addiction rates. We were seeing lower overdose deaths for the first time in decades. How did we do it? Well, we redoubled our efforts on prevention, on getting people into treatment, on getting people into longer term recovery, making more naloxone available. Thanks to the bipartisan leadership here in Congress, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA, which I coauthored with my colleague Sheldon Whitehouse, and the 21st Century CURES Act were both signed into law in 2016, helping to pave the way for several billion dollars in new Federal funding to strengthen State, local, and nonprofit efforts to combat addiction. Our CARA legislation and the follow-up CARA.2 legislation that we passed a few years ago took a comprehensive approach based on best practices. We actually had seminars here in Washington. We brought people from all over the country here. We had four different conferences where we got information as to what was working and not working in our communities, and things that were working we funded. We directed resources toward more treatment and recovery services for individuals and more focus on prevention. I can't overstate how critical these kinds of proven services are for people on the path to recovery. Congress had never, before this legislation, ever funded recovery services. I have visited a number of inpatient and outpatient centers for addiction in Ohio to talk with those working to overcome their addiction. They have told me time and again how these recovery services gave them the structure, the support, and, most importantly, the hope they needed to be able to overcome this disease. And we actually started to see that hope translate into real success on the ground, real numbers and real people's lives. In 2017, Ohio's overdose death rate had increased for 30-plus straight years, and Ohio's death per capita that year, 2017, was almost three times that of the national average. But that next year, in 2018, as these two signature laws, CARA and CURES, were fully implemented, Ohio began to turn the tide with a 22-percent reduction in overdose deaths in 1 year. Again, after more than 30 years of increases in overdose deaths every single year, a 22-percent decrease. Nationally, overdose deaths declined that year about 4 percent, again, after a year after year of increases. In 2019, we had a slight decrease also. These were promising developments. But since then, there has been a lethal convergence on both the supply side of this issue and the demand side of this issue. Sam Quinones, the author of ``Dreamland,'' which I think is the seminal book on the rise of opioids in this country, recently put it well. He said in an interview that before COVID hit, Mexican cartels had achieved their goal, finally, of covering our country with ``the most . . . mind-mangling drugs we've ever seen. . . . It just so happened that we went into isolation at the very moment when these drugs hit their apex.'' A terrible coincidence that as the supply increased because of the greed of traffickers, the demand increased because of COVID. These two things came together, and that has caused this huge increase in overdoses, addiction, and overdose deaths. Let's look at the supply side of this crisis first. The record number of deadly narcotics and other drugs that are taking the lives of moms, dads, children, and loved ones all across the country are coming into our country in record numbers. As many are aware, for much of the past few decades, the most common cause of overdose deaths were prescription opioids like OxyContin or Percocet. Often people who suffered a serious injury or accident needed pain relief, and often, unfortunately, doctors and dentists overprescribed opioids. People developed an addiction that led to accidental overdoses, often from cheaper and more available heroin when the prescription drugs ran out. Now we are dealing with a class of drugs that are tens if not hundreds of times deadlier than those prescription drugs, the so-called synthetic opioids. The most well known of these is fentanyl, which, as you can see by this chart of drug overdoses, has become the drug most responsible for overdose deaths. The red here is overdose deaths overall, and the blue is overdose deaths that are attributed to fentanyl. You can see what has happened. Fentanyl was about half of overdose deaths in 2018. Half of all overdose deaths was one drug, fentanyl. In 2019, it was more than half and, in 2020, way more than half of all the overdose deaths caused by one drug, a synthetic opioid called fentanyl. It is the deadliest one. Incredibly, 80 percent of drug overdoses in Ohio and overdose deaths in Ohio can now be attributed to this deadly substance, based on what the experts tell me--80 percent. It is not surprising that the amount of fentanyl seized on the streets of Ohio cities like Dayton, OH, recently has nearly doubled compared to last year. And it is not only the amount of fentanyl that is flooding our country. Evil traffickers have increasingly disguised it by mixing it with other drugs or pressing it into fake pills to look like common pharmaceuticals. This concerted effort to expand the reach of fentanyl addiction started before the pandemic, but it is only accelerating. It is a profitable business for drug dealers. Compared to heroin, fentanyl is less expensive to manufacture and, pound-for-pound, far more potent. A few flakes can kill you. Traffickers make a bigger profit, and people are trapped into addiction more easily. Traffickers increasingly lace fentanyl with other drugs--cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, and even marijuana in some cases. They do it as a way to boost its effects and cut down on its costs. In Mexico, they use cheap pill presses to mold fentanyl doses into the shape of prescription drugs--everyday pills that people take for a variety of reasons. What that means is that many of the individuals who now lose their lives to a fentanyl overdose don't even know they are taking fentanyl until it is too late. Recently, I participated in a roundtable discussion on the border crisis and how it has impacted the addiction crisis. We heard from an Ohio mother, Virginia Krieger, who lost her daughter Tiffany to an accidental fentanyl death. Virginia told us about how Tiffany had been unable to get the care she wanted from her physician. That led her to buying pills on the street--pills she was told were Percocet, and it looked like Percocet. That is what was stamped on it. But in reality, it was laced with lethal doses of heroin and fentanyl. When Tiffany took these pills for her pain, she was poisoned by the fentanyl, and the life of a young 26-year-old woman was snuffed out far too soon. We are hearing this across the State. Recently, in Cleveland, OH, Xanax pills, an antianxiety medication--fake pills pressed by Mexican traffickers contained fentanyl and caused overdoses and overdose deaths. My heart goes out to these families. My heart goes out to Virginia, who, by the way, has channeled her grief into something positive, and that is going to schools and explaining to young people how dangerous this is. Her view is that no one should ever take a pill unless they know it comes from a pharmacy. She is right. People across the country need to know that pills of all shapes and sizes can contain fentanyl even though they might say something else. No street drug is safe right now from the threat of fentanyl poisoning, and too many kids and adults who weren't addicted to opioids are unknowingly ingesting these substances and putting themselves at risk. We need to be on high alert. Parents and kids need to know that right now no drug you get on the street can be safe. Our communities are saturated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids right now. Among other things, of course, this drives the price of the drugs down. So, yes, the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs, but with its overwhelming supply, the price of the drug goes down and there is higher use and higher demand. A conversation about how we can cut down on the supply side of course has to start with our strategy on our southern border. For years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were overwhelmingly illegally manufactured in China. As then-chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I led a bipartisan investigation back in 2017 which showed that fentanyl was coming into our country from China primarily through our own lax Postal Service. Our own Postal Service was the conduit. That is why I worked in a bipartisan manner to write and pass what is called the STOP Act, which required the Postal Service, for the first time, to crack down on fentanyl through the mail. We required the Postal Service to get advanced tracking data on international shipments coming to the United States, showing the package's origin, contents, and destination. This allowed law enforcement to spot potentially dangerous packages ahead of time and make it much more difficult to move fentanyl into the United States in this manner. Other carriers were already doing it--FedEx, private carriers, DHL, but the post office was not. The good news is that the STOP Act has been effective, and also, after persistent engagement and pressure from the United States, China scheduled fentanyl, meaning made it illegal, and its analogues as a class of illegal drugs. We believe these changes have helped to dramatically reduce the flow of fentanyl directly from China into the United States. But, obviously, it hasn't solved the problem because Mexican transnational criminal organizations know a great business opportunity when they see one, and they moved in to take over the fentanyl market in the United States. Now Mexican transnational criminal organizations work with criminal gangs in China to import into Mexico the ingredients used to make fentanyl, where the final product is made in so-called superlabs. We have a record amount of the substance pouring in, both at our ports of entry and through other gaps in our southern border security by car, by truck, by courier. This is a problem that continues to get worse as this shocking chart shows us. Look at the dramatic increases in fentanyl that was seized along the U.S. border. This past fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection seized 11,201 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill every man, woman, and child in America--more than double the amount from the previous year and four times the amount from fiscal year 2019. Just a few weeks ago in Southern California, border officials discovered 8\1/2\ tons of meth in a single truck along with 400 pounds of fentanyl. Remember, it only takes a few flakes of fentanyl to kill you. This 400 pounds could kill millions. Their smuggling operations are complex and sophisticated, and Customs and Border Protection have their hands full. According to the most recent statistics, last month, seizures of fentanyl increased 42 percent. That is 42 percent in 1 month. This is only how much we know was discovered, was apprehended. We don't know how much more made it over the border undetected. When I have asked Customs and Border Protection and DHS, our homeland security officials, in public hearings, as I did the week before last, they don'tanswer the question because they don't know. But in private conversations with Border Patrol agents, they tell me that they believe the vast majority of drugs are coming in undetected. So this is just the seizures, not the amount of drugs that are streaming across the border. I take no pleasure in saying this, but the failure of the Biden administration to control the southern border has resulted in record levels of deadly fentanyl coming in to our country and contributes to the growing strength of the Mexican transnational criminal organizations. Part of the problem is that the Biden administration's own policies have encouraged an unprecedented surge of unlawful migrants at the border, diverting our Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents away from interdicting drugs. I have seen that on the southern border as has anyone else who has visited. These law enforcement officers who should be on the line stopping the criminals carrying drugs are instead processing a record number of migrants. This massive influx of unlawful migrants began when President Biden was inaugurated and made specific policy changes, and it has only continued to worsen ever since. We had all hoped that during the summer months, when normally unlawful migration slows down because of the heat, that we would have a lessening of this issue, but it didn't happen. In fact, last month was a record month for October for Border Patrol apprehensions. As the border crisis created by the Biden administration policy changes continues, the administration has failed to give Customs and Border Protection the resources they need: additional personnel, better technology, infrastructure, and more, to enable them to better protect our Nation along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico. On an average day in 2020, Customs and Border Protection processed 650,000-plus passengers and pedestrians, 187,000 incoming privately owned vehicles, and 77,900 truck, rail, and sea containers. The amount of traffic at the border is going up now that there is less concern about the pandemic. However, only 2 percent of those privately owned vehicles are physically searched at the border, and less than 20 percent of all those commercial vehicles are scanned for drugs before they cross into the United States. Let me repeat that: 2 percent. So if you are a smuggler driving a sedan with multiple pounds of fentanyl concealed in hidden compartments, right now you have a very good chance of getting across the border without a search. That is not a gap in our security, that is a gaping hole. We have known this is a problem. Congress, last January, almost a year ago, passed and President Trump signed into law a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security give Congress a plan and a strategy on using technology and making policy and resources changes to be able to scan all vehicles. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is late delivering this report. It was due over 4 months ago, and we still don't have it. In conversations with administration officials the week before last, I got assurances that it is coming soon. I hope so. We need it. It would be extremely helpful to have this information as we finalize the spending bills over the next month or so. I am proud that the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invested billions of dollars in upgrading and modernizing our ports of entry, including ports of entry on the southern border. Our ports are aging, some of them badly. This funding would allow Customs and Border Protection officers to have adequate space to do more screening of vehicles. However, we cannot and should not build a brandnew port of entry and then just install the old legacy technology for scanning and detection of deadly narcotics. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dramatically upgrade seaports of entry with modern, state-of-the-art detection technology that can help our officers catch more of these drugs before they enter our communities. In May, I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona to establish a $1 billion irregular migration border response fund so that the Department of Homeland Security is not forced to transfer resources away from drug interdiction priorities to fund processing of individuals, food, clothing, blankets, and transportation when there is an influx of migrants, as has happened periodically. These contingency resources would be available immediately when there is a surge to quickly respond to increased migration at the border. Considering the crisis at our border and the record amounts of fentanyl coming in, it was not surprising to me in September when the Drug Enforcement Agency, DEA, issued its first public safety alert in more than 6 years after it seized more than 9.5 million fake pills this year, more than the last 2 years combined. As I said, we all need to be on high alert. We hear a lot these days about problems with the supply chain, with delayed shipments and cancelled orders. I will tell you the Mexican transnational criminal organizations don't have that problem. They are moving more fentanyl than ever into our communities, and once that fentanyl is here, what a waste. Sadly, more people are caught in the grip of addiction. This brings us to the demand side of the equation. Again, most important to me is reducing the demand for these drugs, but both the demand and the supply side are related. As we discussed, the supply of deadly fentanyl was already increasing when COVID-19 hit us almost 2 years ago. Clearly, this pandemic has led to more isolation, anxiety for some, depression for others. Millions of Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Millions have lost loved ones to COVID-19. Some in recovery have not been able to be with their treatment providers or with their recovery coaches, as we talked about earlier. Millions have had their lives turned upside down, and some have turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Others, who were on the path to recovery, have suffered setbacks--relapsing into drug use again. Last month, I visited with Erin Helms, who runs recovery homes for women in northeast Ohio that I have had the chance to visit. Erin told me about the challenges during COVID to connect people with treatment and recovery support services when they overdose or when they are being released out of the criminal justice system. When we were in the most restrictive time of the pandemic, those people fell through the cracks, and we are seeing the results of that today. These overdose deaths are happening away from the national headlines, but they are taking a toll all the same. As I said, this is truly a nationwide crisis. It will take all of us here in Congress coming together to work on a bipartisan basis to find solutions to turn the tide again, reduce overdose deaths, and put more affected individuals on the path to recovery. So what can we do here in Congress in moving forward? What are the answers? First, we have got to be able to address both the supply side and the demand side. This chart lays out some of the ways we can help with both, all of which I have talked about tonight. This means we need to complete the installation of enhanced border security technology, which has already been appropriated by Congress, so that the Border Patrol has the tools it needs to complete its national security mission--so enhanced border security. In March, I visited El Paso and saw fully funded construction materials laying on the ground, at the border, at the place where there was a gap in the wall. I heard directly from Border Patrol officers about the importance of enhancing border security to give them the opportunity to complete their national security mission and help them to stop the drugs. That is why, at his nomination hearing in October, I pressed Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus, the nominee to be Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the need to install the enhanced border technology and complete the funded sections of the wall. Not only are there physical gaps in the wall right now that we have already paid for, but there is technology, which, to me, is the most important part of the wall. So you need the barrier, but, also, you need the technology to be able to monitor it, and it is only about 10 percent completed in that El Paso sector. That is outrageous. Everybody--Republicans and Democrats alike--likes to say they are for technology. We should complete the technology along the border and help the Border Patrol be able to do their important job, including keeping these deadly narcotics out of our communities. We also must pass the bipartisan Border Response Resilience Act, which I talked about, that I introduced with Senator Kelly. It would provide an additional billion dollars to the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection folks during a surge in unlawful migration, like the one we are in right now. Due to limited resources, Border Patrol agents are pulled off the border to care for migrants, and drug cartels are taking advantage of these open gaps in our Nation's security. Even some of the checkpoints had to be closed down when there was a recent surge on the border near Del Rio, TX. Drug interdiction checkpoints here in the United States are left unmanned so offices can process more migrant families. But the supply chain doesn't start and end on the U.S. border. Criminals understand the opportunities of the globalized world, and they pose a dynamic threat to the United States. They are smart and adaptable and can take advantage of the complexity and volume of international trade and travel patterns, and they do that. They also understand how to exploit openings in law enforcement and regulatory approaches. Many of the ingredients used to make fentanyl continue to come from China, and Chinese money laundering networks have emerged as key enablers in the business model of Mexican transnational criminal organizations. This must stop. While we have a complex and difficult agenda with China, this issue needs to remain at the top of our list. I urge the Biden administration to push the Chinese Government to be our partner in cracking down on these international crime rings rather than a tacit enabler. It is in both of our countries' interests. Likewise, the issue should be front and center in our relationship with Mexico. Both of our countries lose when the traffickers are successful. Our country is inundated with lethal substances, and the cartels gain money and sometimes American-made firearms that allow them to better wage war on the government in Mexico City. For both of our countries' sakes, we need to partner more effectively with Mexico--international cooperation. We should also recognize that these adaptable drug traffickers will have other options as we go after this current supply chain. We saw this after the STOP Act started to be implemented and traffickers from China shifted to Mexico. There is a risk that it becomes a game of whack-a-mole--when you stop it in one place and it crops up somewhere else. As an example, as we work to stop the flow of fentanyl ingredients from China, other countries, like India, could prove to be good alternative sources. We need to be prepared to partner with India and other potential new sources in this lethal supply chain to ensure we continue to improve our security. We also need to continue to enforce the provisions in the STOP Act to ensure that our postal service does not, once again, become the viable option for traffickers moving fentanyl into the United States. After missing the initial October 2019 deadline for full implementation of the STOP Act regulations, in March, Customs and Border Patrol finally began demanding 100 percent of advanced tracking data on shipments entering the country. That is good. I am glad we got there. That means that, for every package coming into the United States that originates from a country like India or China, we have a sense of what the package contains, where it is from, and where it is going, or else it doesn't come in. However, a number of waivers remain in place for these regulations for low-risk, low-volume, and less-developed countries. These waivers allow some countries to continue to skirt these reporting requirements, including, if you can believe it, Russia. It should not be in that category. This means criminals in Russia can continue to send potentially illegal packages into the United States without our knowing in advance what they may contain, posing a significant security risk, and undercutting the goals of the STOP Act. Frankly, I think it is an unacceptable oversight in enforcement, and I believe there is bipartisan agreement that that is the case. That is why I am urging DHS Secretary Mayorkas and the Biden administration to narrow down the STOP Act waivers and ensure that high-risk countries, like Russia, have to comply with these critical advanced tracking data requirements. In addition to this added security at the border, closer cooperation with the international community, and better STOP Act enforcement, we need to take the unexpected but important step to make sure that these deadly synthetic opioids actually remain illegal so that our law enforcement can take the proper steps to crack down on them. In order to avoid prosecution, prior to 2018, evil scientists in China and drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fentanyl, sometimes adjusting a single molecule and creating what are essentially fentanyl copycats to get around the law. While these fentanyl-related substances have the same narcotic properties as fentanyl, their tiny variations allow them to evade prosecution. Oftentimes, actually, these simpler substances than fentanyl were even more deadly. Carfentanil is actually more deadly than fentanyl, and that was one of the substances that was being made. Just this past week, we have learned that a fentanyl-related substance called para-fluorofentanyl has been discovered laced into drugs in my home State of Ohio, as an example. To address all of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 2018, used its authority to temporarily classify all fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I substances, which allows law enforcement to aggressively intercept and destroy them. Unfortunately, this designation was only temporary. We have successfully extended the designation a few times, but it will expire in about 2 months, at the end of January. Until we make these fentanyl-related drugs--these are fentanyl copycat drugs, some more dangerous than fentanyl--law enforcement will not have the certainty they need to go after criminals moving these deadly substances, and lives will be lost. Fortunately, we have legislation, already, to address this. Our bipartisan FIGHT Fentanyl Act, which I introduced with Senator Joe Manchin, would fix this problem by permanently classifying fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I. It is about time. That would give our law enforcement the certainty to go after synthetic opioids in all of its forms and show we are committed to addressing the threat posed by this dangerous class of drugs. The FIGHT Fentanyl Act would increase the costs of fentanyl on the street and would be an important step toward rededicating our efforts to stopping these drugs from stealing thousands of lives and causing so much pain. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and support this legislation to help us reduce the supply of dangerous synthetic opioids on our streets. So, again, on the supply side, let's pass legislation to be sure we are making fentanyl permanently illegal. Let's look at what we can do on the demand side to reduce this demand--insatiable sometimes in our country--for these illegal drugs: more effective prevention and education and ensuring individuals struggling with addiction get the support they need to overcome the disease and no longer feel the need to turn to these dangerous substances. That is all part of it. The first step, to me, is to continue to build on what we know has worked. Remember, back in 2018, we actually had the first year-over-year decrease in overdose deaths in the country in about three decades--a 22-percent decrease in my home State of Ohio in 1 year. Building on that success starts with building on our CARA legislation we talked about earlier. Before CARA, the Federal Government provided no funding of any kind for recovery support services, which are so essential to so many in overcoming their addictions. There was also no Federal funding for naloxone, also known as Narcan, which is so effective because it is a miracle drug that allows first responders to reverse the effects of an overdose and save lives and get people into treatment. CARA also lifted the cap on the number of patients a doctor could treatwith a medication assisted treatment called Suboxone, while also allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe this medication. All of these provisions expanded access to treatment, and that was incredibly important. I remember a father who came to me from Ohio and talked about his daughter. His daughter had an accident, an injury. She took pain medication. She became addicted to opioids. She then shifted to heroin because it was more available and less expensive. She was in and out of treatment and never took it seriously. One day, she went to her father and said, ``I am ready. I am ready to go into treatment. I am ready to turn my life around.'' He was convinced it was true until he went out to find a treatment provider for her, and as continues to be the case in some communities--and at that time, before 2018, it was the case in many communities--there were no beds available. There was no treatment option. She had to go on a waiting list. While she was on the waiting list, she overdosed on heroin and died in her own bedroom, and her father found her there. So all of these provisions we put in place expanded access to treatment to be able to ensure that those stories are not repeated. In the 5 years since our CARA legislation has become law, I have visited with hundreds of recovering addicts at treatment centers; I have visited with experts on local addiction and mental health boards; and I have been to recovery homes and other nonprofits across Ohio. We have talked about what we can do now to build on the successes we were having back in the 2018-2019 period, as well as what we did with regard to CARA 2.0, which is the bill that passed in 2018. The result of those discussions is CARA 3.0--the third CARA legislation. I introduced that with Senator Whitehouse earlier this year, and it builds on the existing CARA framework and expands its scope to ensure all Americans who are fighting addiction have the chance to overcome this disease. It does so by addressing three important areas: one, research, education, prevention; two, treatment and recovery; and, three, criminal justice reform. CARA 3.0 will bolster our work to prevent drug abuse--before it even happens--through better research and better education and prevention. I believe effective prevention is done when it is at the community level, which is where it is most effective, and engages a wide variety of stakeholders--youth, parents, faith leaders, educators--all with a focus on showing the risks of drug abuse and addiction. There are now about 2,000 community coalitions around the country that do this, and God bless them for the work they do. They benefit from our legislation called the Drug-Free Communities Act, which is also something that is important with regard to CARA 3.0. Over 25 years ago, I found in my own community an antidrug coalition. It is now called PreventionFIRST! It is still in existence, doing a great job. In fact, I had a Zoom call with the leaders of PreventionFIRST! last week to learn about some of the new innovations they are coming up with to reach more people. They do a drug survey every 2 years--they are in the middle of fielding that right now--where they get the best information. It is almost like a census, not a survey, from high schoolers all over the greater Cincinnati area to find out what drugs are being used, what people's attitudes are about drugs. They take that and use that to try to promote the prevention message in a way that is effective. I appreciate what they do, again, and that is part of what we need to do in this new legislation, is to redouble our efforts on prevention, to keep people out of the funnel of addiction in the first place. It is obviously the most effective way to address this issue. In our legislation we call for a massive new national drug awareness campaign as part of this. I believe that ought to be done with help from the private sector, by the way. There are plenty of people in the private sector who have concerns about this issue and should. It affects their workforce. Certainly, with regard to companies that are in the pharmaceutical business, they should have a strong interest in this. We could leverage funding--taxpayer funding--in ways that could create, for the first time in a couple of decades, a very effective national media campaign to get the word out there. We know that a number of Federal Agencies have smaller efforts on this front, but we need more coordination and a united message coming from the Federal Government and from the private sector. Our bill also includes more for research and development of alternative pain treatment methods that don't lead to addiction. To me, it is unbelievable that we are still relying on these opioid pain medications that were developed a couple of decades ago. And although some have worked on this issue--and I appreciate those researchers--we need to put more money and focus on this to find ways to treat pain without the addictive properties of the opioids. And CARA 3.0 will also take the important step of addressing the disproportionate effect the addiction crisis has had on certain vulnerable communities. Second, our bill will build on what has worked with regard to treatment and recovery. So the first step is more research, education and prevention. The second one is with regard to treatment and recovery. It will double down on proven evidence-based addiction treatment methods while expanding treatment options for groups particularly vulnerable to addiction, including young people, new and expecting mothers, rural communities, and communities of color. Third, our bill will build on what works and how we treat addiction. It will double down on these treatment methods. It will, importantly, make permanent the current expanded telehealth options for addiction treatment that were temporarily created in response to the social distancing required by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important. Telehealth was something that was a necessity during COVID. People couldn't come to the doctor for visits. They couldn't be at their treatment providers in person. And we wondered whether telehealth would be effective. I believe that for mental health treatment and for addiction services, behavioral health, that it has been incredibly important. And although addictions have gone up during this period, obviously, and the overdose rates are at record highs, my belief--and from talking to experts I have come to this belief--it would be even worse if we had not had the telehealth options. So in the dark cloud of the pandemic, the silver lining may be that we learned how to use telehealth better. And our legislation allows that to continue to be used with reimbursement; as an example, Medicaid reimbursement or Medicare reimbursement. CARA 3.0 will also bolster the recovery options for individuals working to put addiction behind them through funding to support the recovery support services and networks. It eliminates the waiver required of physicians who want to provide medication-assisted treatments to their patients and changes the law to allow those drugs to be prescribed via telehealth for greater ease of access. The bill will also help to destigmatize addiction recovery in the workplace by ensuring that one of these medications to treat addiction does not count as a drug-free workplace violation. Finally, CARA 3.0 reforms our criminal justice system to ensure that those struggling with addiction, including our veterans, are treated with fairness and common sense, putting them on a path to recovery rather than a downward spiral of abuse. Importantly, CARA 3.0 funds a Department of Justice grant program to help incarcerated individuals struggling with addiction to receive medication-assisted treatment while they are still in the criminal justice system. This means that when they are released, they have a much higher chance of success. If someone is addicted, and you don't treat it, and you let them out of the system, they are very likely to go back to a life of addiction. But if we allow medication-assisted treatment in the criminal justice system, we will reduce recidivism or repeated offenses. I think that makes sense for the person addicted, for the community, and certainly for the taxpayer. CARA and CARA 2.0 have given States and local communities new resources and authorities to make a realdifference. CARA 3.0 renews and strengthens these programs. And given the recent spike in addiction, it provides a boost in funding as well. When added with the existing CARA programs that are authorized through 2023, we would be investing over $1 billion per year to address this longstanding epidemic, putting us on the path toward a brighter future free from addiction. The addiction epidemic has proven to be resilient. It is a disease that knows no ZIP Code, and one that is always ready to come roaring back should we not stay vigilant. Columnist Peggy Noonan was exactly right when she wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Wall Street Journal that: We have a deep and profound addiction crisis in our country and we've had it so long we forget to see it . . . and nobody's talking about it because nobody has a plan. She is exactly right. We need a plan right now to tackle this crisis that continues to devastate our country. I have laid out one tonight that can give us some understanding of the magnitude of the problem, the nature of the challenge, but also have the Federal Government take concrete steps to turn the tide once again. Again, we have done it before. Let's do it again. Washington can and should be a partner to the State and local groups on the ground every day working to combat this crisis. We should be a better partner. We have got to all work together to find constructive solutions to the addiction epidemic and ensure more Americans don't suffer in silence, that we don't lose more lives to these deadly drugs but instead ensure that more Americans can achieve their God-given potential in life. I yield back my time. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8799-2 | null | 3,560 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio, and I am on the floor today to talk about a major public health crisis facing our country, one that is resulting in thousands of people losing their lives, causing the death of over 100,000 Americans a year, and has negatively impacted so many millions more in my home State of Ohio and all around the country. And, no, I am not talking about COVID-19. I am talking about an epidemic within the pandemic. I am talking about the surging epidemic of drug use and addiction that has fueled a record number of overdose deaths and threatens to get even worse. In the past 19 months or so, our attention has, understandably, been directed toward the COVID-19 crisis. And, once again, we see with Omicron the possibility of another variant coming, and those public health challenges are real. But I have to tell you that it has led us to ignore another crisis. The Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, recently issued a report which was shocking and should serve as a wake-up call to all of us. It said that between April of 2020 and April of 2021, the most recent year for which we have data, we had over 100,000 individuals lose their lives to drug overdose deaths in this country. That is the highest ever. It is a record. By the way, 100,000 deaths per year is more than the deaths from gunshot wounds and the deaths from car accidents combined. It is truly the epidemic within the pandemic. Away from the headlines, we have this other tragic healthcare crisis that has left no part of the country unaffected. Forty-six States and the District of Columbia have seen their overdose rates go up in the last year, with a 26-percent increase in my home State of Ohio. In some States, there are now as many drug overdose deaths as there are COVID deaths. Like many of you, I have seen firsthand the damage drugs like crystal meth or cocaine or heroin or now the synthetic opioids are causing to the families we represent, to people who have gotten caught in that spiral of drug abuse and addiction. I have also seen the heroic efforts of first responders who have saved people's lives by administering naloxone, which some call Narcan, its brand name. It is a miracle drug that literally saves lives by being able to reverse the effects of an overdose. And I have ridden with law enforcement and treatment providers on rapid response teams in various places in Ohio that follow up with those who have overdosed. Literally, somebody overdoses, and then this rapid response team--usually made up of law enforcement but also treatment providers, social workers--goes to people's homes, and it is amazing what you will find out. I was, frankly, a little surprised during my first visit--then, I got more used to it--which is that people respond very favorably. Most people who are approached by these rapid response teams agree to get into treatment. And isn't that the key? Using Narcan again and again and again to save someone's life is not the answer. The answer is to get that person into treatment so that that person can get back to his or her family, his or her work, and to a normal life and to be more productive in life. I have also met with families and loved ones affected, hearing their stories about how losing a family member to addiction has had such a negative impact, often tearing those families apart. And, of course, I have talked to a lot of people in recovery who have told me about the grip of addiction on their lives and how they got help and what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of people get help, get into treatment, and it doesn't work for them. They have to do it again and again. But, ultimately, for those who can stay in recovery and are able to stay sober and clean, they have the most amazing stories. And so many of them are coming back and contributing in big ways to our communities--many helping others. Their recovery, basically, is reaching out to others and helping them along the way. Some are called recovery coaches, which is a more formal title, but so many of them are, in effect, recovery coaches helping others who are struggling. There are so many lives that have been touched by this crisis--100,000-plus deaths, but so many others affected. And I have made it a goal of mine to make sure Congress is playing its role in addressing this effort that must be at the community level, at the State level, but also at the national level to respond to what is a true national crisis. What makes it especially heartbreaking to me is that, only a few years ago, we had finally begun to make progress on this. We were beginning to turn the corner. We were seeing lower addiction rates. We were seeing lower overdose deaths for the first time in decades. How did we do it? Well, we redoubled our efforts on prevention, on getting people into treatment, on getting people into longer term recovery, making more naloxone available. Thanks to the bipartisan leadership here in Congress, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA, which I coauthored with my colleague Sheldon Whitehouse, and the 21st Century CURES Act were both signed into law in 2016, helping to pave the way for several billion dollars in new Federal funding to strengthen State, local, and nonprofit efforts to combat addiction. Our CARA legislation and the follow-up CARA.2 legislation that we passed a few years ago took a comprehensive approach based on best practices. We actually had seminars here in Washington. We brought people from all over the country here. We had four different conferences where we got information as to what was working and not working in our communities, and things that were working we funded. We directed resources toward more treatment and recovery services for individuals and more focus on prevention. I can't overstate how critical these kinds of proven services are for people on the path to recovery. Congress had never, before this legislation, ever funded recovery services. I have visited a number of inpatient and outpatient centers for addiction in Ohio to talk with those working to overcome their addiction. They have told me time and again how these recovery services gave them the structure, the support, and, most importantly, the hope they needed to be able to overcome this disease. And we actually started to see that hope translate into real success on the ground, real numbers and real people's lives. In 2017, Ohio's overdose death rate had increased for 30-plus straight years, and Ohio's death per capita that year, 2017, was almost three times that of the national average. But that next year, in 2018, as these two signature laws, CARA and CURES, were fully implemented, Ohio began to turn the tide with a 22-percent reduction in overdose deaths in 1 year. Again, after more than 30 years of increases in overdose deaths every single year, a 22-percent decrease. Nationally, overdose deaths declined that year about 4 percent, again, after a year after year of increases. In 2019, we had a slight decrease also. These were promising developments. But since then, there has been a lethal convergence on both the supply side of this issue and the demand side of this issue. Sam Quinones, the author of ``Dreamland,'' which I think is the seminal book on the rise of opioids in this country, recently put it well. He said in an interview that before COVID hit, Mexican cartels had achieved their goal, finally, of covering our country with ``the most . . . mind-mangling drugs we've ever seen. . . . It just so happened that we went into isolation at the very moment when these drugs hit their apex.'' A terrible coincidence that as the supply increased because of the greed of traffickers, the demand increased because of COVID. These two things came together, and that has caused this huge increase in overdoses, addiction, and overdose deaths. Let's look at the supply side of this crisis first. The record number of deadly narcotics and other drugs that are taking the lives of moms, dads, children, and loved ones all across the country are coming into our country in record numbers. As many are aware, for much of the past few decades, the most common cause of overdose deaths were prescription opioids like OxyContin or Percocet. Often people who suffered a serious injury or accident needed pain relief, and often, unfortunately, doctors and dentists overprescribed opioids. People developed an addiction that led to accidental overdoses, often from cheaper and more available heroin when the prescription drugs ran out. Now we are dealing with a class of drugs that are tens if not hundreds of times deadlier than those prescription drugs, the so-called synthetic opioids. The most well known of these is fentanyl, which, as you can see by this chart of drug overdoses, has become the drug most responsible for overdose deaths. The red here is overdose deaths overall, and the blue is overdose deaths that are attributed to fentanyl. You can see what has happened. Fentanyl was about half of overdose deaths in 2018. Half of all overdose deaths was one drug, fentanyl. In 2019, it was more than half and, in 2020, way more than half of all the overdose deaths caused by one drug, a synthetic opioid called fentanyl. It is the deadliest one. Incredibly, 80 percent of drug overdoses in Ohio and overdose deaths in Ohio can now be attributed to this deadly substance, based on what the experts tell me--80 percent. It is not surprising that the amount of fentanyl seized on the streets of Ohio cities like Dayton, OH, recently has nearly doubled compared to last year. And it is not only the amount of fentanyl that is flooding our country. Evil traffickers have increasingly disguised it by mixing it with other drugs or pressing it into fake pills to look like common pharmaceuticals. This concerted effort to expand the reach of fentanyl addiction started before the pandemic, but it is only accelerating. It is a profitable business for drug dealers. Compared to heroin, fentanyl is less expensive to manufacture and, pound-for-pound, far more potent. A few flakes can kill you. Traffickers make a bigger profit, and people are trapped into addiction more easily. Traffickers increasingly lace fentanyl with other drugs--cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, and even marijuana in some cases. They do it as a way to boost its effects and cut down on its costs. In Mexico, they use cheap pill presses to mold fentanyl doses into the shape of prescription drugs--everyday pills that people take for a variety of reasons. What that means is that many of the individuals who now lose their lives to a fentanyl overdose don't even know they are taking fentanyl until it is too late. Recently, I participated in a roundtable discussion on the border crisis and how it has impacted the addiction crisis. We heard from an Ohio mother, Virginia Krieger, who lost her daughter Tiffany to an accidental fentanyl death. Virginia told us about how Tiffany had been unable to get the care she wanted from her physician. That led her to buying pills on the street--pills she was told were Percocet, and it looked like Percocet. That is what was stamped on it. But in reality, it was laced with lethal doses of heroin and fentanyl. When Tiffany took these pills for her pain, she was poisoned by the fentanyl, and the life of a young 26-year-old woman was snuffed out far too soon. We are hearing this across the State. Recently, in Cleveland, OH, Xanax pills, an antianxiety medication--fake pills pressed by Mexican traffickers contained fentanyl and caused overdoses and overdose deaths. My heart goes out to these families. My heart goes out to Virginia, who, by the way, has channeled her grief into something positive, and that is going to schools and explaining to young people how dangerous this is. Her view is that no one should ever take a pill unless they know it comes from a pharmacy. She is right. People across the country need to know that pills of all shapes and sizes can contain fentanyl even though they might say something else. No street drug is safe right now from the threat of fentanyl poisoning, and too many kids and adults who weren't addicted to opioids are unknowingly ingesting these substances and putting themselves at risk. We need to be on high alert. Parents and kids need to know that right now no drug you get on the street can be safe. Our communities are saturated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids right now. Among other things, of course, this drives the price of the drugs down. So, yes, the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs, but with its overwhelming supply, the price of the drug goes down and there is higher use and higher demand. A conversation about how we can cut down on the supply side of course has to start with our strategy on our southern border. For years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were overwhelmingly illegally manufactured in China. As then-chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I led a bipartisan investigation back in 2017 which showed that fentanyl was coming into our country from China primarily through our own lax Postal Service. Our own Postal Service was the conduit. That is why I worked in a bipartisan manner to write and pass what is called the STOP Act, which required the Postal Service, for the first time, to crack down on fentanyl through the mail. We required the Postal Service to get advanced tracking data on international shipments coming to the United States, showing the package's origin, contents, and destination. This allowed law enforcement to spot potentially dangerous packages ahead of time and make it much more difficult to move fentanyl into the United States in this manner. Other carriers were already doing it--FedEx, private carriers, DHL, but the post office was not. The good news is that the STOP Act has been effective, and also, after persistent engagement and pressure from the United States, China scheduled fentanyl, meaning made it illegal, and its analogues as a class of illegal drugs. We believe these changes have helped to dramatically reduce the flow of fentanyl directly from China into the United States. But, obviously, it hasn't solved the problem because Mexican transnational criminal organizations know a great business opportunity when they see one, and they moved in to take over the fentanyl market in the United States. Now Mexican transnational criminal organizations work with criminal gangs in China to import into Mexico the ingredients used to make fentanyl, where the final product is made in so-called superlabs. We have a record amount of the substance pouring in, both at our ports of entry and through other gaps in our southern border security by car, by truck, by courier. This is a problem that continues to get worse as this shocking chart shows us. Look at the dramatic increases in fentanyl that was seized along the U.S. border. This past fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection seized 11,201 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill every man, woman, and child in America--more than double the amount from the previous year and four times the amount from fiscal year 2019. Just a few weeks ago in Southern California, border officials discovered 8\1/2\ tons of meth in a single truck along with 400 pounds of fentanyl. Remember, it only takes a few flakes of fentanyl to kill you. This 400 pounds could kill millions. Their smuggling operations are complex and sophisticated, and Customs and Border Protection have their hands full. According to the most recent statistics, last month, seizures of fentanyl increased 42 percent. That is 42 percent in 1 month. This is only how much we know was discovered, was apprehended. We don't know how much more made it over the border undetected. When I have asked Customs and Border Protection and DHS, our homeland security officials, in public hearings, as I did the week before last, they don'tanswer the question because they don't know. But in private conversations with Border Patrol agents, they tell me that they believe the vast majority of drugs are coming in undetected. So this is just the seizures, not the amount of drugs that are streaming across the border. I take no pleasure in saying this, but the failure of the Biden administration to control the southern border has resulted in record levels of deadly fentanyl coming in to our country and contributes to the growing strength of the Mexican transnational criminal organizations. Part of the problem is that the Biden administration's own policies have encouraged an unprecedented surge of unlawful migrants at the border, diverting our Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents away from interdicting drugs. I have seen that on the southern border as has anyone else who has visited. These law enforcement officers who should be on the line stopping the criminals carrying drugs are instead processing a record number of migrants. This massive influx of unlawful migrants began when President Biden was inaugurated and made specific policy changes, and it has only continued to worsen ever since. We had all hoped that during the summer months, when normally unlawful migration slows down because of the heat, that we would have a lessening of this issue, but it didn't happen. In fact, last month was a record month for October for Border Patrol apprehensions. As the border crisis created by the Biden administration policy changes continues, the administration has failed to give Customs and Border Protection the resources they need: additional personnel, better technology, infrastructure, and more, to enable them to better protect our Nation along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico. On an average day in 2020, Customs and Border Protection processed 650,000-plus passengers and pedestrians, 187,000 incoming privately owned vehicles, and 77,900 truck, rail, and sea containers. The amount of traffic at the border is going up now that there is less concern about the pandemic. However, only 2 percent of those privately owned vehicles are physically searched at the border, and less than 20 percent of all those commercial vehicles are scanned for drugs before they cross into the United States. Let me repeat that: 2 percent. So if you are a smuggler driving a sedan with multiple pounds of fentanyl concealed in hidden compartments, right now you have a very good chance of getting across the border without a search. That is not a gap in our security, that is a gaping hole. We have known this is a problem. Congress, last January, almost a year ago, passed and President Trump signed into law a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security give Congress a plan and a strategy on using technology and making policy and resources changes to be able to scan all vehicles. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is late delivering this report. It was due over 4 months ago, and we still don't have it. In conversations with administration officials the week before last, I got assurances that it is coming soon. I hope so. We need it. It would be extremely helpful to have this information as we finalize the spending bills over the next month or so. I am proud that the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invested billions of dollars in upgrading and modernizing our ports of entry, including ports of entry on the southern border. Our ports are aging, some of them badly. This funding would allow Customs and Border Protection officers to have adequate space to do more screening of vehicles. However, we cannot and should not build a brandnew port of entry and then just install the old legacy technology for scanning and detection of deadly narcotics. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dramatically upgrade seaports of entry with modern, state-of-the-art detection technology that can help our officers catch more of these drugs before they enter our communities. In May, I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona to establish a $1 billion irregular migration border response fund so that the Department of Homeland Security is not forced to transfer resources away from drug interdiction priorities to fund processing of individuals, food, clothing, blankets, and transportation when there is an influx of migrants, as has happened periodically. These contingency resources would be available immediately when there is a surge to quickly respond to increased migration at the border. Considering the crisis at our border and the record amounts of fentanyl coming in, it was not surprising to me in September when the Drug Enforcement Agency, DEA, issued its first public safety alert in more than 6 years after it seized more than 9.5 million fake pills this year, more than the last 2 years combined. As I said, we all need to be on high alert. We hear a lot these days about problems with the supply chain, with delayed shipments and cancelled orders. I will tell you the Mexican transnational criminal organizations don't have that problem. They are moving more fentanyl than ever into our communities, and once that fentanyl is here, what a waste. Sadly, more people are caught in the grip of addiction. This brings us to the demand side of the equation. Again, most important to me is reducing the demand for these drugs, but both the demand and the supply side are related. As we discussed, the supply of deadly fentanyl was already increasing when COVID-19 hit us almost 2 years ago. Clearly, this pandemic has led to more isolation, anxiety for some, depression for others. Millions of Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Millions have lost loved ones to COVID-19. Some in recovery have not been able to be with their treatment providers or with their recovery coaches, as we talked about earlier. Millions have had their lives turned upside down, and some have turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Others, who were on the path to recovery, have suffered setbacks--relapsing into drug use again. Last month, I visited with Erin Helms, who runs recovery homes for women in northeast Ohio that I have had the chance to visit. Erin told me about the challenges during COVID to connect people with treatment and recovery support services when they overdose or when they are being released out of the criminal justice system. When we were in the most restrictive time of the pandemic, those people fell through the cracks, and we are seeing the results of that today. These overdose deaths are happening away from the national headlines, but they are taking a toll all the same. As I said, this is truly a nationwide crisis. It will take all of us here in Congress coming together to work on a bipartisan basis to find solutions to turn the tide again, reduce overdose deaths, and put more affected individuals on the path to recovery. So what can we do here in Congress in moving forward? What are the answers? First, we have got to be able to address both the supply side and the demand side. This chart lays out some of the ways we can help with both, all of which I have talked about tonight. This means we need to complete the installation of enhanced border security technology, which has already been appropriated by Congress, so that the Border Patrol has the tools it needs to complete its national security mission--so enhanced border security. In March, I visited El Paso and saw fully funded construction materials laying on the ground, at the border, at the place where there was a gap in the wall. I heard directly from Border Patrol officers about the importance of enhancing border security to give them the opportunity to complete their national security mission and help them to stop the drugs. That is why, at his nomination hearing in October, I pressed Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus, the nominee to be Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the need to install the enhanced border technology and complete the funded sections of the wall. Not only are there physical gaps in the wall right now that we have already paid for, but there is technology, which, to me, is the most important part of the wall. So you need the barrier, but, also, you need the technology to be able to monitor it, and it is only about 10 percent completed in that El Paso sector. That is outrageous. Everybody--Republicans and Democrats alike--likes to say they are for technology. We should complete the technology along the border and help the Border Patrol be able to do their important job, including keeping these deadly narcotics out of our communities. We also must pass the bipartisan Border Response Resilience Act, which I talked about, that I introduced with Senator Kelly. It would provide an additional billion dollars to the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection folks during a surge in unlawful migration, like the one we are in right now. Due to limited resources, Border Patrol agents are pulled off the border to care for migrants, and drug cartels are taking advantage of these open gaps in our Nation's security. Even some of the checkpoints had to be closed down when there was a recent surge on the border near Del Rio, TX. Drug interdiction checkpoints here in the United States are left unmanned so offices can process more migrant families. But the supply chain doesn't start and end on the U.S. border. Criminals understand the opportunities of the globalized world, and they pose a dynamic threat to the United States. They are smart and adaptable and can take advantage of the complexity and volume of international trade and travel patterns, and they do that. They also understand how to exploit openings in law enforcement and regulatory approaches. Many of the ingredients used to make fentanyl continue to come from China, and Chinese money laundering networks have emerged as key enablers in the business model of Mexican transnational criminal organizations. This must stop. While we have a complex and difficult agenda with China, this issue needs to remain at the top of our list. I urge the Biden administration to push the Chinese Government to be our partner in cracking down on these international crime rings rather than a tacit enabler. It is in both of our countries' interests. Likewise, the issue should be front and center in our relationship with Mexico. Both of our countries lose when the traffickers are successful. Our country is inundated with lethal substances, and the cartels gain money and sometimes American-made firearms that allow them to better wage war on the government in Mexico City. For both of our countries' sakes, we need to partner more effectively with Mexico--international cooperation. We should also recognize that these adaptable drug traffickers will have other options as we go after this current supply chain. We saw this after the STOP Act started to be implemented and traffickers from China shifted to Mexico. There is a risk that it becomes a game of whack-a-mole--when you stop it in one place and it crops up somewhere else. As an example, as we work to stop the flow of fentanyl ingredients from China, other countries, like India, could prove to be good alternative sources. We need to be prepared to partner with India and other potential new sources in this lethal supply chain to ensure we continue to improve our security. We also need to continue to enforce the provisions in the STOP Act to ensure that our postal service does not, once again, become the viable option for traffickers moving fentanyl into the United States. After missing the initial October 2019 deadline for full implementation of the STOP Act regulations, in March, Customs and Border Patrol finally began demanding 100 percent of advanced tracking data on shipments entering the country. That is good. I am glad we got there. That means that, for every package coming into the United States that originates from a country like India or China, we have a sense of what the package contains, where it is from, and where it is going, or else it doesn't come in. However, a number of waivers remain in place for these regulations for low-risk, low-volume, and less-developed countries. These waivers allow some countries to continue to skirt these reporting requirements, including, if you can believe it, Russia. It should not be in that category. This means criminals in Russia can continue to send potentially illegal packages into the United States without our knowing in advance what they may contain, posing a significant security risk, and undercutting the goals of the STOP Act. Frankly, I think it is an unacceptable oversight in enforcement, and I believe there is bipartisan agreement that that is the case. That is why I am urging DHS Secretary Mayorkas and the Biden administration to narrow down the STOP Act waivers and ensure that high-risk countries, like Russia, have to comply with these critical advanced tracking data requirements. In addition to this added security at the border, closer cooperation with the international community, and better STOP Act enforcement, we need to take the unexpected but important step to make sure that these deadly synthetic opioids actually remain illegal so that our law enforcement can take the proper steps to crack down on them. In order to avoid prosecution, prior to 2018, evil scientists in China and drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fentanyl, sometimes adjusting a single molecule and creating what are essentially fentanyl copycats to get around the law. While these fentanyl-related substances have the same narcotic properties as fentanyl, their tiny variations allow them to evade prosecution. Oftentimes, actually, these simpler substances than fentanyl were even more deadly. Carfentanil is actually more deadly than fentanyl, and that was one of the substances that was being made. Just this past week, we have learned that a fentanyl-related substance called para-fluorofentanyl has been discovered laced into drugs in my home State of Ohio, as an example. To address all of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 2018, used its authority to temporarily classify all fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I substances, which allows law enforcement to aggressively intercept and destroy them. Unfortunately, this designation was only temporary. We have successfully extended the designation a few times, but it will expire in about 2 months, at the end of January. Until we make these fentanyl-related drugs--these are fentanyl copycat drugs, some more dangerous than fentanyl--law enforcement will not have the certainty they need to go after criminals moving these deadly substances, and lives will be lost. Fortunately, we have legislation, already, to address this. Our bipartisan FIGHT Fentanyl Act, which I introduced with Senator Joe Manchin, would fix this problem by permanently classifying fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I. It is about time. That would give our law enforcement the certainty to go after synthetic opioids in all of its forms and show we are committed to addressing the threat posed by this dangerous class of drugs. The FIGHT Fentanyl Act would increase the costs of fentanyl on the street and would be an important step toward rededicating our efforts to stopping these drugs from stealing thousands of lives and causing so much pain. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and support this legislation to help us reduce the supply of dangerous synthetic opioids on our streets. So, again, on the supply side, let's pass legislation to be sure we are making fentanyl permanently illegal. Let's look at what we can do on the demand side to reduce this demand--insatiable sometimes in our country--for these illegal drugs: more effective prevention and education and ensuring individuals struggling with addiction get the support they need to overcome the disease and no longer feel the need to turn to these dangerous substances. That is all part of it. The first step, to me, is to continue to build on what we know has worked. Remember, back in 2018, we actually had the first year-over-year decrease in overdose deaths in the country in about three decades--a 22-percent decrease in my home State of Ohio in 1 year. Building on that success starts with building on our CARA legislation we talked about earlier. Before CARA, the Federal Government provided no funding of any kind for recovery support services, which are so essential to so many in overcoming their addictions. There was also no Federal funding for naloxone, also known as Narcan, which is so effective because it is a miracle drug that allows first responders to reverse the effects of an overdose and save lives and get people into treatment. CARA also lifted the cap on the number of patients a doctor could treatwith a medication assisted treatment called Suboxone, while also allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe this medication. All of these provisions expanded access to treatment, and that was incredibly important. I remember a father who came to me from Ohio and talked about his daughter. His daughter had an accident, an injury. She took pain medication. She became addicted to opioids. She then shifted to heroin because it was more available and less expensive. She was in and out of treatment and never took it seriously. One day, she went to her father and said, ``I am ready. I am ready to go into treatment. I am ready to turn my life around.'' He was convinced it was true until he went out to find a treatment provider for her, and as continues to be the case in some communities--and at that time, before 2018, it was the case in many communities--there were no beds available. There was no treatment option. She had to go on a waiting list. While she was on the waiting list, she overdosed on heroin and died in her own bedroom, and her father found her there. So all of these provisions we put in place expanded access to treatment to be able to ensure that those stories are not repeated. In the 5 years since our CARA legislation has become law, I have visited with hundreds of recovering addicts at treatment centers; I have visited with experts on local addiction and mental health boards; and I have been to recovery homes and other nonprofits across Ohio. We have talked about what we can do now to build on the successes we were having back in the 2018-2019 period, as well as what we did with regard to CARA 2.0, which is the bill that passed in 2018. The result of those discussions is CARA 3.0--the third CARA legislation. I introduced that with Senator Whitehouse earlier this year, and it builds on the existing CARA framework and expands its scope to ensure all Americans who are fighting addiction have the chance to overcome this disease. It does so by addressing three important areas: one, research, education, prevention; two, treatment and recovery; and, three, criminal justice reform. CARA 3.0 will bolster our work to prevent drug abuse--before it even happens--through better research and better education and prevention. I believe effective prevention is done when it is at the community level, which is where it is most effective, and engages a wide variety of stakeholders--youth, parents, faith leaders, educators--all with a focus on showing the risks of drug abuse and addiction. There are now about 2,000 community coalitions around the country that do this, and God bless them for the work they do. They benefit from our legislation called the Drug-Free Communities Act, which is also something that is important with regard to CARA 3.0. Over 25 years ago, I found in my own community an antidrug coalition. It is now called PreventionFIRST! It is still in existence, doing a great job. In fact, I had a Zoom call with the leaders of PreventionFIRST! last week to learn about some of the new innovations they are coming up with to reach more people. They do a drug survey every 2 years--they are in the middle of fielding that right now--where they get the best information. It is almost like a census, not a survey, from high schoolers all over the greater Cincinnati area to find out what drugs are being used, what people's attitudes are about drugs. They take that and use that to try to promote the prevention message in a way that is effective. I appreciate what they do, again, and that is part of what we need to do in this new legislation, is to redouble our efforts on prevention, to keep people out of the funnel of addiction in the first place. It is obviously the most effective way to address this issue. In our legislation we call for a massive new national drug awareness campaign as part of this. I believe that ought to be done with help from the private sector, by the way. There are plenty of people in the private sector who have concerns about this issue and should. It affects their workforce. Certainly, with regard to companies that are in the pharmaceutical business, they should have a strong interest in this. We could leverage funding--taxpayer funding--in ways that could create, for the first time in a couple of decades, a very effective national media campaign to get the word out there. We know that a number of Federal Agencies have smaller efforts on this front, but we need more coordination and a united message coming from the Federal Government and from the private sector. Our bill also includes more for research and development of alternative pain treatment methods that don't lead to addiction. To me, it is unbelievable that we are still relying on these opioid pain medications that were developed a couple of decades ago. And although some have worked on this issue--and I appreciate those researchers--we need to put more money and focus on this to find ways to treat pain without the addictive properties of the opioids. And CARA 3.0 will also take the important step of addressing the disproportionate effect the addiction crisis has had on certain vulnerable communities. Second, our bill will build on what has worked with regard to treatment and recovery. So the first step is more research, education and prevention. The second one is with regard to treatment and recovery. It will double down on proven evidence-based addiction treatment methods while expanding treatment options for groups particularly vulnerable to addiction, including young people, new and expecting mothers, rural communities, and communities of color. Third, our bill will build on what works and how we treat addiction. It will double down on these treatment methods. It will, importantly, make permanent the current expanded telehealth options for addiction treatment that were temporarily created in response to the social distancing required by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important. Telehealth was something that was a necessity during COVID. People couldn't come to the doctor for visits. They couldn't be at their treatment providers in person. And we wondered whether telehealth would be effective. I believe that for mental health treatment and for addiction services, behavioral health, that it has been incredibly important. And although addictions have gone up during this period, obviously, and the overdose rates are at record highs, my belief--and from talking to experts I have come to this belief--it would be even worse if we had not had the telehealth options. So in the dark cloud of the pandemic, the silver lining may be that we learned how to use telehealth better. And our legislation allows that to continue to be used with reimbursement; as an example, Medicaid reimbursement or Medicare reimbursement. CARA 3.0 will also bolster the recovery options for individuals working to put addiction behind them through funding to support the recovery support services and networks. It eliminates the waiver required of physicians who want to provide medication-assisted treatments to their patients and changes the law to allow those drugs to be prescribed via telehealth for greater ease of access. The bill will also help to destigmatize addiction recovery in the workplace by ensuring that one of these medications to treat addiction does not count as a drug-free workplace violation. Finally, CARA 3.0 reforms our criminal justice system to ensure that those struggling with addiction, including our veterans, are treated with fairness and common sense, putting them on a path to recovery rather than a downward spiral of abuse. Importantly, CARA 3.0 funds a Department of Justice grant program to help incarcerated individuals struggling with addiction to receive medication-assisted treatment while they are still in the criminal justice system. This means that when they are released, they have a much higher chance of success. If someone is addicted, and you don't treat it, and you let them out of the system, they are very likely to go back to a life of addiction. But if we allow medication-assisted treatment in the criminal justice system, we will reduce recidivism or repeated offenses. I think that makes sense for the person addicted, for the community, and certainly for the taxpayer. CARA and CARA 2.0 have given States and local communities new resources and authorities to make a realdifference. CARA 3.0 renews and strengthens these programs. And given the recent spike in addiction, it provides a boost in funding as well. When added with the existing CARA programs that are authorized through 2023, we would be investing over $1 billion per year to address this longstanding epidemic, putting us on the path toward a brighter future free from addiction. The addiction epidemic has proven to be resilient. It is a disease that knows no ZIP Code, and one that is always ready to come roaring back should we not stay vigilant. Columnist Peggy Noonan was exactly right when she wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Wall Street Journal that: We have a deep and profound addiction crisis in our country and we've had it so long we forget to see it . . . and nobody's talking about it because nobody has a plan. She is exactly right. We need a plan right now to tackle this crisis that continues to devastate our country. I have laid out one tonight that can give us some understanding of the magnitude of the problem, the nature of the challenge, but also have the Federal Government take concrete steps to turn the tide once again. Again, we have done it before. Let's do it again. Washington can and should be a partner to the State and local groups on the ground every day working to combat this crisis. We should be a better partner. We have got to all work together to find constructive solutions to the addiction epidemic and ensure more Americans don't suffer in silence, that we don't lose more lives to these deadly drugs but instead ensure that more Americans can achieve their God-given potential in life. I yield back my time. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8799-2 | null | 3,561 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio, and I am on the floor today to talk about a major public health crisis facing our country, one that is resulting in thousands of people losing their lives, causing the death of over 100,000 Americans a year, and has negatively impacted so many millions more in my home State of Ohio and all around the country. And, no, I am not talking about COVID-19. I am talking about an epidemic within the pandemic. I am talking about the surging epidemic of drug use and addiction that has fueled a record number of overdose deaths and threatens to get even worse. In the past 19 months or so, our attention has, understandably, been directed toward the COVID-19 crisis. And, once again, we see with Omicron the possibility of another variant coming, and those public health challenges are real. But I have to tell you that it has led us to ignore another crisis. The Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, recently issued a report which was shocking and should serve as a wake-up call to all of us. It said that between April of 2020 and April of 2021, the most recent year for which we have data, we had over 100,000 individuals lose their lives to drug overdose deaths in this country. That is the highest ever. It is a record. By the way, 100,000 deaths per year is more than the deaths from gunshot wounds and the deaths from car accidents combined. It is truly the epidemic within the pandemic. Away from the headlines, we have this other tragic healthcare crisis that has left no part of the country unaffected. Forty-six States and the District of Columbia have seen their overdose rates go up in the last year, with a 26-percent increase in my home State of Ohio. In some States, there are now as many drug overdose deaths as there are COVID deaths. Like many of you, I have seen firsthand the damage drugs like crystal meth or cocaine or heroin or now the synthetic opioids are causing to the families we represent, to people who have gotten caught in that spiral of drug abuse and addiction. I have also seen the heroic efforts of first responders who have saved people's lives by administering naloxone, which some call Narcan, its brand name. It is a miracle drug that literally saves lives by being able to reverse the effects of an overdose. And I have ridden with law enforcement and treatment providers on rapid response teams in various places in Ohio that follow up with those who have overdosed. Literally, somebody overdoses, and then this rapid response team--usually made up of law enforcement but also treatment providers, social workers--goes to people's homes, and it is amazing what you will find out. I was, frankly, a little surprised during my first visit--then, I got more used to it--which is that people respond very favorably. Most people who are approached by these rapid response teams agree to get into treatment. And isn't that the key? Using Narcan again and again and again to save someone's life is not the answer. The answer is to get that person into treatment so that that person can get back to his or her family, his or her work, and to a normal life and to be more productive in life. I have also met with families and loved ones affected, hearing their stories about how losing a family member to addiction has had such a negative impact, often tearing those families apart. And, of course, I have talked to a lot of people in recovery who have told me about the grip of addiction on their lives and how they got help and what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of people get help, get into treatment, and it doesn't work for them. They have to do it again and again. But, ultimately, for those who can stay in recovery and are able to stay sober and clean, they have the most amazing stories. And so many of them are coming back and contributing in big ways to our communities--many helping others. Their recovery, basically, is reaching out to others and helping them along the way. Some are called recovery coaches, which is a more formal title, but so many of them are, in effect, recovery coaches helping others who are struggling. There are so many lives that have been touched by this crisis--100,000-plus deaths, but so many others affected. And I have made it a goal of mine to make sure Congress is playing its role in addressing this effort that must be at the community level, at the State level, but also at the national level to respond to what is a true national crisis. What makes it especially heartbreaking to me is that, only a few years ago, we had finally begun to make progress on this. We were beginning to turn the corner. We were seeing lower addiction rates. We were seeing lower overdose deaths for the first time in decades. How did we do it? Well, we redoubled our efforts on prevention, on getting people into treatment, on getting people into longer term recovery, making more naloxone available. Thanks to the bipartisan leadership here in Congress, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA, which I coauthored with my colleague Sheldon Whitehouse, and the 21st Century CURES Act were both signed into law in 2016, helping to pave the way for several billion dollars in new Federal funding to strengthen State, local, and nonprofit efforts to combat addiction. Our CARA legislation and the follow-up CARA.2 legislation that we passed a few years ago took a comprehensive approach based on best practices. We actually had seminars here in Washington. We brought people from all over the country here. We had four different conferences where we got information as to what was working and not working in our communities, and things that were working we funded. We directed resources toward more treatment and recovery services for individuals and more focus on prevention. I can't overstate how critical these kinds of proven services are for people on the path to recovery. Congress had never, before this legislation, ever funded recovery services. I have visited a number of inpatient and outpatient centers for addiction in Ohio to talk with those working to overcome their addiction. They have told me time and again how these recovery services gave them the structure, the support, and, most importantly, the hope they needed to be able to overcome this disease. And we actually started to see that hope translate into real success on the ground, real numbers and real people's lives. In 2017, Ohio's overdose death rate had increased for 30-plus straight years, and Ohio's death per capita that year, 2017, was almost three times that of the national average. But that next year, in 2018, as these two signature laws, CARA and CURES, were fully implemented, Ohio began to turn the tide with a 22-percent reduction in overdose deaths in 1 year. Again, after more than 30 years of increases in overdose deaths every single year, a 22-percent decrease. Nationally, overdose deaths declined that year about 4 percent, again, after a year after year of increases. In 2019, we had a slight decrease also. These were promising developments. But since then, there has been a lethal convergence on both the supply side of this issue and the demand side of this issue. Sam Quinones, the author of ``Dreamland,'' which I think is the seminal book on the rise of opioids in this country, recently put it well. He said in an interview that before COVID hit, Mexican cartels had achieved their goal, finally, of covering our country with ``the most . . . mind-mangling drugs we've ever seen. . . . It just so happened that we went into isolation at the very moment when these drugs hit their apex.'' A terrible coincidence that as the supply increased because of the greed of traffickers, the demand increased because of COVID. These two things came together, and that has caused this huge increase in overdoses, addiction, and overdose deaths. Let's look at the supply side of this crisis first. The record number of deadly narcotics and other drugs that are taking the lives of moms, dads, children, and loved ones all across the country are coming into our country in record numbers. As many are aware, for much of the past few decades, the most common cause of overdose deaths were prescription opioids like OxyContin or Percocet. Often people who suffered a serious injury or accident needed pain relief, and often, unfortunately, doctors and dentists overprescribed opioids. People developed an addiction that led to accidental overdoses, often from cheaper and more available heroin when the prescription drugs ran out. Now we are dealing with a class of drugs that are tens if not hundreds of times deadlier than those prescription drugs, the so-called synthetic opioids. The most well known of these is fentanyl, which, as you can see by this chart of drug overdoses, has become the drug most responsible for overdose deaths. The red here is overdose deaths overall, and the blue is overdose deaths that are attributed to fentanyl. You can see what has happened. Fentanyl was about half of overdose deaths in 2018. Half of all overdose deaths was one drug, fentanyl. In 2019, it was more than half and, in 2020, way more than half of all the overdose deaths caused by one drug, a synthetic opioid called fentanyl. It is the deadliest one. Incredibly, 80 percent of drug overdoses in Ohio and overdose deaths in Ohio can now be attributed to this deadly substance, based on what the experts tell me--80 percent. It is not surprising that the amount of fentanyl seized on the streets of Ohio cities like Dayton, OH, recently has nearly doubled compared to last year. And it is not only the amount of fentanyl that is flooding our country. Evil traffickers have increasingly disguised it by mixing it with other drugs or pressing it into fake pills to look like common pharmaceuticals. This concerted effort to expand the reach of fentanyl addiction started before the pandemic, but it is only accelerating. It is a profitable business for drug dealers. Compared to heroin, fentanyl is less expensive to manufacture and, pound-for-pound, far more potent. A few flakes can kill you. Traffickers make a bigger profit, and people are trapped into addiction more easily. Traffickers increasingly lace fentanyl with other drugs--cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, and even marijuana in some cases. They do it as a way to boost its effects and cut down on its costs. In Mexico, they use cheap pill presses to mold fentanyl doses into the shape of prescription drugs--everyday pills that people take for a variety of reasons. What that means is that many of the individuals who now lose their lives to a fentanyl overdose don't even know they are taking fentanyl until it is too late. Recently, I participated in a roundtable discussion on the border crisis and how it has impacted the addiction crisis. We heard from an Ohio mother, Virginia Krieger, who lost her daughter Tiffany to an accidental fentanyl death. Virginia told us about how Tiffany had been unable to get the care she wanted from her physician. That led her to buying pills on the street--pills she was told were Percocet, and it looked like Percocet. That is what was stamped on it. But in reality, it was laced with lethal doses of heroin and fentanyl. When Tiffany took these pills for her pain, she was poisoned by the fentanyl, and the life of a young 26-year-old woman was snuffed out far too soon. We are hearing this across the State. Recently, in Cleveland, OH, Xanax pills, an antianxiety medication--fake pills pressed by Mexican traffickers contained fentanyl and caused overdoses and overdose deaths. My heart goes out to these families. My heart goes out to Virginia, who, by the way, has channeled her grief into something positive, and that is going to schools and explaining to young people how dangerous this is. Her view is that no one should ever take a pill unless they know it comes from a pharmacy. She is right. People across the country need to know that pills of all shapes and sizes can contain fentanyl even though they might say something else. No street drug is safe right now from the threat of fentanyl poisoning, and too many kids and adults who weren't addicted to opioids are unknowingly ingesting these substances and putting themselves at risk. We need to be on high alert. Parents and kids need to know that right now no drug you get on the street can be safe. Our communities are saturated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids right now. Among other things, of course, this drives the price of the drugs down. So, yes, the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs, but with its overwhelming supply, the price of the drug goes down and there is higher use and higher demand. A conversation about how we can cut down on the supply side of course has to start with our strategy on our southern border. For years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were overwhelmingly illegally manufactured in China. As then-chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I led a bipartisan investigation back in 2017 which showed that fentanyl was coming into our country from China primarily through our own lax Postal Service. Our own Postal Service was the conduit. That is why I worked in a bipartisan manner to write and pass what is called the STOP Act, which required the Postal Service, for the first time, to crack down on fentanyl through the mail. We required the Postal Service to get advanced tracking data on international shipments coming to the United States, showing the package's origin, contents, and destination. This allowed law enforcement to spot potentially dangerous packages ahead of time and make it much more difficult to move fentanyl into the United States in this manner. Other carriers were already doing it--FedEx, private carriers, DHL, but the post office was not. The good news is that the STOP Act has been effective, and also, after persistent engagement and pressure from the United States, China scheduled fentanyl, meaning made it illegal, and its analogues as a class of illegal drugs. We believe these changes have helped to dramatically reduce the flow of fentanyl directly from China into the United States. But, obviously, it hasn't solved the problem because Mexican transnational criminal organizations know a great business opportunity when they see one, and they moved in to take over the fentanyl market in the United States. Now Mexican transnational criminal organizations work with criminal gangs in China to import into Mexico the ingredients used to make fentanyl, where the final product is made in so-called superlabs. We have a record amount of the substance pouring in, both at our ports of entry and through other gaps in our southern border security by car, by truck, by courier. This is a problem that continues to get worse as this shocking chart shows us. Look at the dramatic increases in fentanyl that was seized along the U.S. border. This past fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection seized 11,201 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill every man, woman, and child in America--more than double the amount from the previous year and four times the amount from fiscal year 2019. Just a few weeks ago in Southern California, border officials discovered 8\1/2\ tons of meth in a single truck along with 400 pounds of fentanyl. Remember, it only takes a few flakes of fentanyl to kill you. This 400 pounds could kill millions. Their smuggling operations are complex and sophisticated, and Customs and Border Protection have their hands full. According to the most recent statistics, last month, seizures of fentanyl increased 42 percent. That is 42 percent in 1 month. This is only how much we know was discovered, was apprehended. We don't know how much more made it over the border undetected. When I have asked Customs and Border Protection and DHS, our homeland security officials, in public hearings, as I did the week before last, they don'tanswer the question because they don't know. But in private conversations with Border Patrol agents, they tell me that they believe the vast majority of drugs are coming in undetected. So this is just the seizures, not the amount of drugs that are streaming across the border. I take no pleasure in saying this, but the failure of the Biden administration to control the southern border has resulted in record levels of deadly fentanyl coming in to our country and contributes to the growing strength of the Mexican transnational criminal organizations. Part of the problem is that the Biden administration's own policies have encouraged an unprecedented surge of unlawful migrants at the border, diverting our Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents away from interdicting drugs. I have seen that on the southern border as has anyone else who has visited. These law enforcement officers who should be on the line stopping the criminals carrying drugs are instead processing a record number of migrants. This massive influx of unlawful migrants began when President Biden was inaugurated and made specific policy changes, and it has only continued to worsen ever since. We had all hoped that during the summer months, when normally unlawful migration slows down because of the heat, that we would have a lessening of this issue, but it didn't happen. In fact, last month was a record month for October for Border Patrol apprehensions. As the border crisis created by the Biden administration policy changes continues, the administration has failed to give Customs and Border Protection the resources they need: additional personnel, better technology, infrastructure, and more, to enable them to better protect our Nation along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico. On an average day in 2020, Customs and Border Protection processed 650,000-plus passengers and pedestrians, 187,000 incoming privately owned vehicles, and 77,900 truck, rail, and sea containers. The amount of traffic at the border is going up now that there is less concern about the pandemic. However, only 2 percent of those privately owned vehicles are physically searched at the border, and less than 20 percent of all those commercial vehicles are scanned for drugs before they cross into the United States. Let me repeat that: 2 percent. So if you are a smuggler driving a sedan with multiple pounds of fentanyl concealed in hidden compartments, right now you have a very good chance of getting across the border without a search. That is not a gap in our security, that is a gaping hole. We have known this is a problem. Congress, last January, almost a year ago, passed and President Trump signed into law a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security give Congress a plan and a strategy on using technology and making policy and resources changes to be able to scan all vehicles. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is late delivering this report. It was due over 4 months ago, and we still don't have it. In conversations with administration officials the week before last, I got assurances that it is coming soon. I hope so. We need it. It would be extremely helpful to have this information as we finalize the spending bills over the next month or so. I am proud that the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invested billions of dollars in upgrading and modernizing our ports of entry, including ports of entry on the southern border. Our ports are aging, some of them badly. This funding would allow Customs and Border Protection officers to have adequate space to do more screening of vehicles. However, we cannot and should not build a brandnew port of entry and then just install the old legacy technology for scanning and detection of deadly narcotics. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dramatically upgrade seaports of entry with modern, state-of-the-art detection technology that can help our officers catch more of these drugs before they enter our communities. In May, I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona to establish a $1 billion irregular migration border response fund so that the Department of Homeland Security is not forced to transfer resources away from drug interdiction priorities to fund processing of individuals, food, clothing, blankets, and transportation when there is an influx of migrants, as has happened periodically. These contingency resources would be available immediately when there is a surge to quickly respond to increased migration at the border. Considering the crisis at our border and the record amounts of fentanyl coming in, it was not surprising to me in September when the Drug Enforcement Agency, DEA, issued its first public safety alert in more than 6 years after it seized more than 9.5 million fake pills this year, more than the last 2 years combined. As I said, we all need to be on high alert. We hear a lot these days about problems with the supply chain, with delayed shipments and cancelled orders. I will tell you the Mexican transnational criminal organizations don't have that problem. They are moving more fentanyl than ever into our communities, and once that fentanyl is here, what a waste. Sadly, more people are caught in the grip of addiction. This brings us to the demand side of the equation. Again, most important to me is reducing the demand for these drugs, but both the demand and the supply side are related. As we discussed, the supply of deadly fentanyl was already increasing when COVID-19 hit us almost 2 years ago. Clearly, this pandemic has led to more isolation, anxiety for some, depression for others. Millions of Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Millions have lost loved ones to COVID-19. Some in recovery have not been able to be with their treatment providers or with their recovery coaches, as we talked about earlier. Millions have had their lives turned upside down, and some have turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Others, who were on the path to recovery, have suffered setbacks--relapsing into drug use again. Last month, I visited with Erin Helms, who runs recovery homes for women in northeast Ohio that I have had the chance to visit. Erin told me about the challenges during COVID to connect people with treatment and recovery support services when they overdose or when they are being released out of the criminal justice system. When we were in the most restrictive time of the pandemic, those people fell through the cracks, and we are seeing the results of that today. These overdose deaths are happening away from the national headlines, but they are taking a toll all the same. As I said, this is truly a nationwide crisis. It will take all of us here in Congress coming together to work on a bipartisan basis to find solutions to turn the tide again, reduce overdose deaths, and put more affected individuals on the path to recovery. So what can we do here in Congress in moving forward? What are the answers? First, we have got to be able to address both the supply side and the demand side. This chart lays out some of the ways we can help with both, all of which I have talked about tonight. This means we need to complete the installation of enhanced border security technology, which has already been appropriated by Congress, so that the Border Patrol has the tools it needs to complete its national security mission--so enhanced border security. In March, I visited El Paso and saw fully funded construction materials laying on the ground, at the border, at the place where there was a gap in the wall. I heard directly from Border Patrol officers about the importance of enhancing border security to give them the opportunity to complete their national security mission and help them to stop the drugs. That is why, at his nomination hearing in October, I pressed Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus, the nominee to be Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the need to install the enhanced border technology and complete the funded sections of the wall. Not only are there physical gaps in the wall right now that we have already paid for, but there is technology, which, to me, is the most important part of the wall. So you need the barrier, but, also, you need the technology to be able to monitor it, and it is only about 10 percent completed in that El Paso sector. That is outrageous. Everybody--Republicans and Democrats alike--likes to say they are for technology. We should complete the technology along the border and help the Border Patrol be able to do their important job, including keeping these deadly narcotics out of our communities. We also must pass the bipartisan Border Response Resilience Act, which I talked about, that I introduced with Senator Kelly. It would provide an additional billion dollars to the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection folks during a surge in unlawful migration, like the one we are in right now. Due to limited resources, Border Patrol agents are pulled off the border to care for migrants, and drug cartels are taking advantage of these open gaps in our Nation's security. Even some of the checkpoints had to be closed down when there was a recent surge on the border near Del Rio, TX. Drug interdiction checkpoints here in the United States are left unmanned so offices can process more migrant families. But the supply chain doesn't start and end on the U.S. border. Criminals understand the opportunities of the globalized world, and they pose a dynamic threat to the United States. They are smart and adaptable and can take advantage of the complexity and volume of international trade and travel patterns, and they do that. They also understand how to exploit openings in law enforcement and regulatory approaches. Many of the ingredients used to make fentanyl continue to come from China, and Chinese money laundering networks have emerged as key enablers in the business model of Mexican transnational criminal organizations. This must stop. While we have a complex and difficult agenda with China, this issue needs to remain at the top of our list. I urge the Biden administration to push the Chinese Government to be our partner in cracking down on these international crime rings rather than a tacit enabler. It is in both of our countries' interests. Likewise, the issue should be front and center in our relationship with Mexico. Both of our countries lose when the traffickers are successful. Our country is inundated with lethal substances, and the cartels gain money and sometimes American-made firearms that allow them to better wage war on the government in Mexico City. For both of our countries' sakes, we need to partner more effectively with Mexico--international cooperation. We should also recognize that these adaptable drug traffickers will have other options as we go after this current supply chain. We saw this after the STOP Act started to be implemented and traffickers from China shifted to Mexico. There is a risk that it becomes a game of whack-a-mole--when you stop it in one place and it crops up somewhere else. As an example, as we work to stop the flow of fentanyl ingredients from China, other countries, like India, could prove to be good alternative sources. We need to be prepared to partner with India and other potential new sources in this lethal supply chain to ensure we continue to improve our security. We also need to continue to enforce the provisions in the STOP Act to ensure that our postal service does not, once again, become the viable option for traffickers moving fentanyl into the United States. After missing the initial October 2019 deadline for full implementation of the STOP Act regulations, in March, Customs and Border Patrol finally began demanding 100 percent of advanced tracking data on shipments entering the country. That is good. I am glad we got there. That means that, for every package coming into the United States that originates from a country like India or China, we have a sense of what the package contains, where it is from, and where it is going, or else it doesn't come in. However, a number of waivers remain in place for these regulations for low-risk, low-volume, and less-developed countries. These waivers allow some countries to continue to skirt these reporting requirements, including, if you can believe it, Russia. It should not be in that category. This means criminals in Russia can continue to send potentially illegal packages into the United States without our knowing in advance what they may contain, posing a significant security risk, and undercutting the goals of the STOP Act. Frankly, I think it is an unacceptable oversight in enforcement, and I believe there is bipartisan agreement that that is the case. That is why I am urging DHS Secretary Mayorkas and the Biden administration to narrow down the STOP Act waivers and ensure that high-risk countries, like Russia, have to comply with these critical advanced tracking data requirements. In addition to this added security at the border, closer cooperation with the international community, and better STOP Act enforcement, we need to take the unexpected but important step to make sure that these deadly synthetic opioids actually remain illegal so that our law enforcement can take the proper steps to crack down on them. In order to avoid prosecution, prior to 2018, evil scientists in China and drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fentanyl, sometimes adjusting a single molecule and creating what are essentially fentanyl copycats to get around the law. While these fentanyl-related substances have the same narcotic properties as fentanyl, their tiny variations allow them to evade prosecution. Oftentimes, actually, these simpler substances than fentanyl were even more deadly. Carfentanil is actually more deadly than fentanyl, and that was one of the substances that was being made. Just this past week, we have learned that a fentanyl-related substance called para-fluorofentanyl has been discovered laced into drugs in my home State of Ohio, as an example. To address all of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 2018, used its authority to temporarily classify all fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I substances, which allows law enforcement to aggressively intercept and destroy them. Unfortunately, this designation was only temporary. We have successfully extended the designation a few times, but it will expire in about 2 months, at the end of January. Until we make these fentanyl-related drugs--these are fentanyl copycat drugs, some more dangerous than fentanyl--law enforcement will not have the certainty they need to go after criminals moving these deadly substances, and lives will be lost. Fortunately, we have legislation, already, to address this. Our bipartisan FIGHT Fentanyl Act, which I introduced with Senator Joe Manchin, would fix this problem by permanently classifying fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I. It is about time. That would give our law enforcement the certainty to go after synthetic opioids in all of its forms and show we are committed to addressing the threat posed by this dangerous class of drugs. The FIGHT Fentanyl Act would increase the costs of fentanyl on the street and would be an important step toward rededicating our efforts to stopping these drugs from stealing thousands of lives and causing so much pain. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and support this legislation to help us reduce the supply of dangerous synthetic opioids on our streets. So, again, on the supply side, let's pass legislation to be sure we are making fentanyl permanently illegal. Let's look at what we can do on the demand side to reduce this demand--insatiable sometimes in our country--for these illegal drugs: more effective prevention and education and ensuring individuals struggling with addiction get the support they need to overcome the disease and no longer feel the need to turn to these dangerous substances. That is all part of it. The first step, to me, is to continue to build on what we know has worked. Remember, back in 2018, we actually had the first year-over-year decrease in overdose deaths in the country in about three decades--a 22-percent decrease in my home State of Ohio in 1 year. Building on that success starts with building on our CARA legislation we talked about earlier. Before CARA, the Federal Government provided no funding of any kind for recovery support services, which are so essential to so many in overcoming their addictions. There was also no Federal funding for naloxone, also known as Narcan, which is so effective because it is a miracle drug that allows first responders to reverse the effects of an overdose and save lives and get people into treatment. CARA also lifted the cap on the number of patients a doctor could treatwith a medication assisted treatment called Suboxone, while also allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe this medication. All of these provisions expanded access to treatment, and that was incredibly important. I remember a father who came to me from Ohio and talked about his daughter. His daughter had an accident, an injury. She took pain medication. She became addicted to opioids. She then shifted to heroin because it was more available and less expensive. She was in and out of treatment and never took it seriously. One day, she went to her father and said, ``I am ready. I am ready to go into treatment. I am ready to turn my life around.'' He was convinced it was true until he went out to find a treatment provider for her, and as continues to be the case in some communities--and at that time, before 2018, it was the case in many communities--there were no beds available. There was no treatment option. She had to go on a waiting list. While she was on the waiting list, she overdosed on heroin and died in her own bedroom, and her father found her there. So all of these provisions we put in place expanded access to treatment to be able to ensure that those stories are not repeated. In the 5 years since our CARA legislation has become law, I have visited with hundreds of recovering addicts at treatment centers; I have visited with experts on local addiction and mental health boards; and I have been to recovery homes and other nonprofits across Ohio. We have talked about what we can do now to build on the successes we were having back in the 2018-2019 period, as well as what we did with regard to CARA 2.0, which is the bill that passed in 2018. The result of those discussions is CARA 3.0--the third CARA legislation. I introduced that with Senator Whitehouse earlier this year, and it builds on the existing CARA framework and expands its scope to ensure all Americans who are fighting addiction have the chance to overcome this disease. It does so by addressing three important areas: one, research, education, prevention; two, treatment and recovery; and, three, criminal justice reform. CARA 3.0 will bolster our work to prevent drug abuse--before it even happens--through better research and better education and prevention. I believe effective prevention is done when it is at the community level, which is where it is most effective, and engages a wide variety of stakeholders--youth, parents, faith leaders, educators--all with a focus on showing the risks of drug abuse and addiction. There are now about 2,000 community coalitions around the country that do this, and God bless them for the work they do. They benefit from our legislation called the Drug-Free Communities Act, which is also something that is important with regard to CARA 3.0. Over 25 years ago, I found in my own community an antidrug coalition. It is now called PreventionFIRST! It is still in existence, doing a great job. In fact, I had a Zoom call with the leaders of PreventionFIRST! last week to learn about some of the new innovations they are coming up with to reach more people. They do a drug survey every 2 years--they are in the middle of fielding that right now--where they get the best information. It is almost like a census, not a survey, from high schoolers all over the greater Cincinnati area to find out what drugs are being used, what people's attitudes are about drugs. They take that and use that to try to promote the prevention message in a way that is effective. I appreciate what they do, again, and that is part of what we need to do in this new legislation, is to redouble our efforts on prevention, to keep people out of the funnel of addiction in the first place. It is obviously the most effective way to address this issue. In our legislation we call for a massive new national drug awareness campaign as part of this. I believe that ought to be done with help from the private sector, by the way. There are plenty of people in the private sector who have concerns about this issue and should. It affects their workforce. Certainly, with regard to companies that are in the pharmaceutical business, they should have a strong interest in this. We could leverage funding--taxpayer funding--in ways that could create, for the first time in a couple of decades, a very effective national media campaign to get the word out there. We know that a number of Federal Agencies have smaller efforts on this front, but we need more coordination and a united message coming from the Federal Government and from the private sector. Our bill also includes more for research and development of alternative pain treatment methods that don't lead to addiction. To me, it is unbelievable that we are still relying on these opioid pain medications that were developed a couple of decades ago. And although some have worked on this issue--and I appreciate those researchers--we need to put more money and focus on this to find ways to treat pain without the addictive properties of the opioids. And CARA 3.0 will also take the important step of addressing the disproportionate effect the addiction crisis has had on certain vulnerable communities. Second, our bill will build on what has worked with regard to treatment and recovery. So the first step is more research, education and prevention. The second one is with regard to treatment and recovery. It will double down on proven evidence-based addiction treatment methods while expanding treatment options for groups particularly vulnerable to addiction, including young people, new and expecting mothers, rural communities, and communities of color. Third, our bill will build on what works and how we treat addiction. It will double down on these treatment methods. It will, importantly, make permanent the current expanded telehealth options for addiction treatment that were temporarily created in response to the social distancing required by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important. Telehealth was something that was a necessity during COVID. People couldn't come to the doctor for visits. They couldn't be at their treatment providers in person. And we wondered whether telehealth would be effective. I believe that for mental health treatment and for addiction services, behavioral health, that it has been incredibly important. And although addictions have gone up during this period, obviously, and the overdose rates are at record highs, my belief--and from talking to experts I have come to this belief--it would be even worse if we had not had the telehealth options. So in the dark cloud of the pandemic, the silver lining may be that we learned how to use telehealth better. And our legislation allows that to continue to be used with reimbursement; as an example, Medicaid reimbursement or Medicare reimbursement. CARA 3.0 will also bolster the recovery options for individuals working to put addiction behind them through funding to support the recovery support services and networks. It eliminates the waiver required of physicians who want to provide medication-assisted treatments to their patients and changes the law to allow those drugs to be prescribed via telehealth for greater ease of access. The bill will also help to destigmatize addiction recovery in the workplace by ensuring that one of these medications to treat addiction does not count as a drug-free workplace violation. Finally, CARA 3.0 reforms our criminal justice system to ensure that those struggling with addiction, including our veterans, are treated with fairness and common sense, putting them on a path to recovery rather than a downward spiral of abuse. Importantly, CARA 3.0 funds a Department of Justice grant program to help incarcerated individuals struggling with addiction to receive medication-assisted treatment while they are still in the criminal justice system. This means that when they are released, they have a much higher chance of success. If someone is addicted, and you don't treat it, and you let them out of the system, they are very likely to go back to a life of addiction. But if we allow medication-assisted treatment in the criminal justice system, we will reduce recidivism or repeated offenses. I think that makes sense for the person addicted, for the community, and certainly for the taxpayer. CARA and CARA 2.0 have given States and local communities new resources and authorities to make a realdifference. CARA 3.0 renews and strengthens these programs. And given the recent spike in addiction, it provides a boost in funding as well. When added with the existing CARA programs that are authorized through 2023, we would be investing over $1 billion per year to address this longstanding epidemic, putting us on the path toward a brighter future free from addiction. The addiction epidemic has proven to be resilient. It is a disease that knows no ZIP Code, and one that is always ready to come roaring back should we not stay vigilant. Columnist Peggy Noonan was exactly right when she wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Wall Street Journal that: We have a deep and profound addiction crisis in our country and we've had it so long we forget to see it . . . and nobody's talking about it because nobody has a plan. She is exactly right. We need a plan right now to tackle this crisis that continues to devastate our country. I have laid out one tonight that can give us some understanding of the magnitude of the problem, the nature of the challenge, but also have the Federal Government take concrete steps to turn the tide once again. Again, we have done it before. Let's do it again. Washington can and should be a partner to the State and local groups on the ground every day working to combat this crisis. We should be a better partner. We have got to all work together to find constructive solutions to the addiction epidemic and ensure more Americans don't suffer in silence, that we don't lose more lives to these deadly drugs but instead ensure that more Americans can achieve their God-given potential in life. I yield back my time. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8799-2 | null | 3,562 |
formal | Cleveland | null | racist | Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Ohio, and I am on the floor today to talk about a major public health crisis facing our country, one that is resulting in thousands of people losing their lives, causing the death of over 100,000 Americans a year, and has negatively impacted so many millions more in my home State of Ohio and all around the country. And, no, I am not talking about COVID-19. I am talking about an epidemic within the pandemic. I am talking about the surging epidemic of drug use and addiction that has fueled a record number of overdose deaths and threatens to get even worse. In the past 19 months or so, our attention has, understandably, been directed toward the COVID-19 crisis. And, once again, we see with Omicron the possibility of another variant coming, and those public health challenges are real. But I have to tell you that it has led us to ignore another crisis. The Centers for Disease Control, the CDC, recently issued a report which was shocking and should serve as a wake-up call to all of us. It said that between April of 2020 and April of 2021, the most recent year for which we have data, we had over 100,000 individuals lose their lives to drug overdose deaths in this country. That is the highest ever. It is a record. By the way, 100,000 deaths per year is more than the deaths from gunshot wounds and the deaths from car accidents combined. It is truly the epidemic within the pandemic. Away from the headlines, we have this other tragic healthcare crisis that has left no part of the country unaffected. Forty-six States and the District of Columbia have seen their overdose rates go up in the last year, with a 26-percent increase in my home State of Ohio. In some States, there are now as many drug overdose deaths as there are COVID deaths. Like many of you, I have seen firsthand the damage drugs like crystal meth or cocaine or heroin or now the synthetic opioids are causing to the families we represent, to people who have gotten caught in that spiral of drug abuse and addiction. I have also seen the heroic efforts of first responders who have saved people's lives by administering naloxone, which some call Narcan, its brand name. It is a miracle drug that literally saves lives by being able to reverse the effects of an overdose. And I have ridden with law enforcement and treatment providers on rapid response teams in various places in Ohio that follow up with those who have overdosed. Literally, somebody overdoses, and then this rapid response team--usually made up of law enforcement but also treatment providers, social workers--goes to people's homes, and it is amazing what you will find out. I was, frankly, a little surprised during my first visit--then, I got more used to it--which is that people respond very favorably. Most people who are approached by these rapid response teams agree to get into treatment. And isn't that the key? Using Narcan again and again and again to save someone's life is not the answer. The answer is to get that person into treatment so that that person can get back to his or her family, his or her work, and to a normal life and to be more productive in life. I have also met with families and loved ones affected, hearing their stories about how losing a family member to addiction has had such a negative impact, often tearing those families apart. And, of course, I have talked to a lot of people in recovery who have told me about the grip of addiction on their lives and how they got help and what worked and what didn't work. Unfortunately, a lot of people get help, get into treatment, and it doesn't work for them. They have to do it again and again. But, ultimately, for those who can stay in recovery and are able to stay sober and clean, they have the most amazing stories. And so many of them are coming back and contributing in big ways to our communities--many helping others. Their recovery, basically, is reaching out to others and helping them along the way. Some are called recovery coaches, which is a more formal title, but so many of them are, in effect, recovery coaches helping others who are struggling. There are so many lives that have been touched by this crisis--100,000-plus deaths, but so many others affected. And I have made it a goal of mine to make sure Congress is playing its role in addressing this effort that must be at the community level, at the State level, but also at the national level to respond to what is a true national crisis. What makes it especially heartbreaking to me is that, only a few years ago, we had finally begun to make progress on this. We were beginning to turn the corner. We were seeing lower addiction rates. We were seeing lower overdose deaths for the first time in decades. How did we do it? Well, we redoubled our efforts on prevention, on getting people into treatment, on getting people into longer term recovery, making more naloxone available. Thanks to the bipartisan leadership here in Congress, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, or CARA, which I coauthored with my colleague Sheldon Whitehouse, and the 21st Century CURES Act were both signed into law in 2016, helping to pave the way for several billion dollars in new Federal funding to strengthen State, local, and nonprofit efforts to combat addiction. Our CARA legislation and the follow-up CARA.2 legislation that we passed a few years ago took a comprehensive approach based on best practices. We actually had seminars here in Washington. We brought people from all over the country here. We had four different conferences where we got information as to what was working and not working in our communities, and things that were working we funded. We directed resources toward more treatment and recovery services for individuals and more focus on prevention. I can't overstate how critical these kinds of proven services are for people on the path to recovery. Congress had never, before this legislation, ever funded recovery services. I have visited a number of inpatient and outpatient centers for addiction in Ohio to talk with those working to overcome their addiction. They have told me time and again how these recovery services gave them the structure, the support, and, most importantly, the hope they needed to be able to overcome this disease. And we actually started to see that hope translate into real success on the ground, real numbers and real people's lives. In 2017, Ohio's overdose death rate had increased for 30-plus straight years, and Ohio's death per capita that year, 2017, was almost three times that of the national average. But that next year, in 2018, as these two signature laws, CARA and CURES, were fully implemented, Ohio began to turn the tide with a 22-percent reduction in overdose deaths in 1 year. Again, after more than 30 years of increases in overdose deaths every single year, a 22-percent decrease. Nationally, overdose deaths declined that year about 4 percent, again, after a year after year of increases. In 2019, we had a slight decrease also. These were promising developments. But since then, there has been a lethal convergence on both the supply side of this issue and the demand side of this issue. Sam Quinones, the author of ``Dreamland,'' which I think is the seminal book on the rise of opioids in this country, recently put it well. He said in an interview that before COVID hit, Mexican cartels had achieved their goal, finally, of covering our country with ``the most . . . mind-mangling drugs we've ever seen. . . . It just so happened that we went into isolation at the very moment when these drugs hit their apex.'' A terrible coincidence that as the supply increased because of the greed of traffickers, the demand increased because of COVID. These two things came together, and that has caused this huge increase in overdoses, addiction, and overdose deaths. Let's look at the supply side of this crisis first. The record number of deadly narcotics and other drugs that are taking the lives of moms, dads, children, and loved ones all across the country are coming into our country in record numbers. As many are aware, for much of the past few decades, the most common cause of overdose deaths were prescription opioids like OxyContin or Percocet. Often people who suffered a serious injury or accident needed pain relief, and often, unfortunately, doctors and dentists overprescribed opioids. People developed an addiction that led to accidental overdoses, often from cheaper and more available heroin when the prescription drugs ran out. Now we are dealing with a class of drugs that are tens if not hundreds of times deadlier than those prescription drugs, the so-called synthetic opioids. The most well known of these is fentanyl, which, as you can see by this chart of drug overdoses, has become the drug most responsible for overdose deaths. The red here is overdose deaths overall, and the blue is overdose deaths that are attributed to fentanyl. You can see what has happened. Fentanyl was about half of overdose deaths in 2018. Half of all overdose deaths was one drug, fentanyl. In 2019, it was more than half and, in 2020, way more than half of all the overdose deaths caused by one drug, a synthetic opioid called fentanyl. It is the deadliest one. Incredibly, 80 percent of drug overdoses in Ohio and overdose deaths in Ohio can now be attributed to this deadly substance, based on what the experts tell me--80 percent. It is not surprising that the amount of fentanyl seized on the streets of Ohio cities like Dayton, OH, recently has nearly doubled compared to last year. And it is not only the amount of fentanyl that is flooding our country. Evil traffickers have increasingly disguised it by mixing it with other drugs or pressing it into fake pills to look like common pharmaceuticals. This concerted effort to expand the reach of fentanyl addiction started before the pandemic, but it is only accelerating. It is a profitable business for drug dealers. Compared to heroin, fentanyl is less expensive to manufacture and, pound-for-pound, far more potent. A few flakes can kill you. Traffickers make a bigger profit, and people are trapped into addiction more easily. Traffickers increasingly lace fentanyl with other drugs--cocaine, crystal meth, heroin, and even marijuana in some cases. They do it as a way to boost its effects and cut down on its costs. In Mexico, they use cheap pill presses to mold fentanyl doses into the shape of prescription drugs--everyday pills that people take for a variety of reasons. What that means is that many of the individuals who now lose their lives to a fentanyl overdose don't even know they are taking fentanyl until it is too late. Recently, I participated in a roundtable discussion on the border crisis and how it has impacted the addiction crisis. We heard from an Ohio mother, Virginia Krieger, who lost her daughter Tiffany to an accidental fentanyl death. Virginia told us about how Tiffany had been unable to get the care she wanted from her physician. That led her to buying pills on the street--pills she was told were Percocet, and it looked like Percocet. That is what was stamped on it. But in reality, it was laced with lethal doses of heroin and fentanyl. When Tiffany took these pills for her pain, she was poisoned by the fentanyl, and the life of a young 26-year-old woman was snuffed out far too soon. We are hearing this across the State. Recently, in Cleveland, OH, Xanax pills, an antianxiety medication--fake pills pressed by Mexican traffickers contained fentanyl and caused overdoses and overdose deaths. My heart goes out to these families. My heart goes out to Virginia, who, by the way, has channeled her grief into something positive, and that is going to schools and explaining to young people how dangerous this is. Her view is that no one should ever take a pill unless they know it comes from a pharmacy. She is right. People across the country need to know that pills of all shapes and sizes can contain fentanyl even though they might say something else. No street drug is safe right now from the threat of fentanyl poisoning, and too many kids and adults who weren't addicted to opioids are unknowingly ingesting these substances and putting themselves at risk. We need to be on high alert. Parents and kids need to know that right now no drug you get on the street can be safe. Our communities are saturated with fentanyl and other synthetic opioids right now. Among other things, of course, this drives the price of the drugs down. So, yes, the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs, but with its overwhelming supply, the price of the drug goes down and there is higher use and higher demand. A conversation about how we can cut down on the supply side of course has to start with our strategy on our southern border. For years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids were overwhelmingly illegally manufactured in China. As then-chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, I led a bipartisan investigation back in 2017 which showed that fentanyl was coming into our country from China primarily through our own lax Postal Service. Our own Postal Service was the conduit. That is why I worked in a bipartisan manner to write and pass what is called the STOP Act, which required the Postal Service, for the first time, to crack down on fentanyl through the mail. We required the Postal Service to get advanced tracking data on international shipments coming to the United States, showing the package's origin, contents, and destination. This allowed law enforcement to spot potentially dangerous packages ahead of time and make it much more difficult to move fentanyl into the United States in this manner. Other carriers were already doing it--FedEx, private carriers, DHL, but the post office was not. The good news is that the STOP Act has been effective, and also, after persistent engagement and pressure from the United States, China scheduled fentanyl, meaning made it illegal, and its analogues as a class of illegal drugs. We believe these changes have helped to dramatically reduce the flow of fentanyl directly from China into the United States. But, obviously, it hasn't solved the problem because Mexican transnational criminal organizations know a great business opportunity when they see one, and they moved in to take over the fentanyl market in the United States. Now Mexican transnational criminal organizations work with criminal gangs in China to import into Mexico the ingredients used to make fentanyl, where the final product is made in so-called superlabs. We have a record amount of the substance pouring in, both at our ports of entry and through other gaps in our southern border security by car, by truck, by courier. This is a problem that continues to get worse as this shocking chart shows us. Look at the dramatic increases in fentanyl that was seized along the U.S. border. This past fiscal year, Customs and Border Protection seized 11,201 pounds of fentanyl, enough to kill every man, woman, and child in America--more than double the amount from the previous year and four times the amount from fiscal year 2019. Just a few weeks ago in Southern California, border officials discovered 8\1/2\ tons of meth in a single truck along with 400 pounds of fentanyl. Remember, it only takes a few flakes of fentanyl to kill you. This 400 pounds could kill millions. Their smuggling operations are complex and sophisticated, and Customs and Border Protection have their hands full. According to the most recent statistics, last month, seizures of fentanyl increased 42 percent. That is 42 percent in 1 month. This is only how much we know was discovered, was apprehended. We don't know how much more made it over the border undetected. When I have asked Customs and Border Protection and DHS, our homeland security officials, in public hearings, as I did the week before last, they don'tanswer the question because they don't know. But in private conversations with Border Patrol agents, they tell me that they believe the vast majority of drugs are coming in undetected. So this is just the seizures, not the amount of drugs that are streaming across the border. I take no pleasure in saying this, but the failure of the Biden administration to control the southern border has resulted in record levels of deadly fentanyl coming in to our country and contributes to the growing strength of the Mexican transnational criminal organizations. Part of the problem is that the Biden administration's own policies have encouraged an unprecedented surge of unlawful migrants at the border, diverting our Customs and Border Protection officers and Border Patrol agents away from interdicting drugs. I have seen that on the southern border as has anyone else who has visited. These law enforcement officers who should be on the line stopping the criminals carrying drugs are instead processing a record number of migrants. This massive influx of unlawful migrants began when President Biden was inaugurated and made specific policy changes, and it has only continued to worsen ever since. We had all hoped that during the summer months, when normally unlawful migration slows down because of the heat, that we would have a lessening of this issue, but it didn't happen. In fact, last month was a record month for October for Border Patrol apprehensions. As the border crisis created by the Biden administration policy changes continues, the administration has failed to give Customs and Border Protection the resources they need: additional personnel, better technology, infrastructure, and more, to enable them to better protect our Nation along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico. On an average day in 2020, Customs and Border Protection processed 650,000-plus passengers and pedestrians, 187,000 incoming privately owned vehicles, and 77,900 truck, rail, and sea containers. The amount of traffic at the border is going up now that there is less concern about the pandemic. However, only 2 percent of those privately owned vehicles are physically searched at the border, and less than 20 percent of all those commercial vehicles are scanned for drugs before they cross into the United States. Let me repeat that: 2 percent. So if you are a smuggler driving a sedan with multiple pounds of fentanyl concealed in hidden compartments, right now you have a very good chance of getting across the border without a search. That is not a gap in our security, that is a gaping hole. We have known this is a problem. Congress, last January, almost a year ago, passed and President Trump signed into law a requirement that the Department of Homeland Security give Congress a plan and a strategy on using technology and making policy and resources changes to be able to scan all vehicles. Unfortunately, the Biden administration is late delivering this report. It was due over 4 months ago, and we still don't have it. In conversations with administration officials the week before last, I got assurances that it is coming soon. I hope so. We need it. It would be extremely helpful to have this information as we finalize the spending bills over the next month or so. I am proud that the recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invested billions of dollars in upgrading and modernizing our ports of entry, including ports of entry on the southern border. Our ports are aging, some of them badly. This funding would allow Customs and Border Protection officers to have adequate space to do more screening of vehicles. However, we cannot and should not build a brandnew port of entry and then just install the old legacy technology for scanning and detection of deadly narcotics. We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to dramatically upgrade seaports of entry with modern, state-of-the-art detection technology that can help our officers catch more of these drugs before they enter our communities. In May, I introduced bipartisan legislation with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona to establish a $1 billion irregular migration border response fund so that the Department of Homeland Security is not forced to transfer resources away from drug interdiction priorities to fund processing of individuals, food, clothing, blankets, and transportation when there is an influx of migrants, as has happened periodically. These contingency resources would be available immediately when there is a surge to quickly respond to increased migration at the border. Considering the crisis at our border and the record amounts of fentanyl coming in, it was not surprising to me in September when the Drug Enforcement Agency, DEA, issued its first public safety alert in more than 6 years after it seized more than 9.5 million fake pills this year, more than the last 2 years combined. As I said, we all need to be on high alert. We hear a lot these days about problems with the supply chain, with delayed shipments and cancelled orders. I will tell you the Mexican transnational criminal organizations don't have that problem. They are moving more fentanyl than ever into our communities, and once that fentanyl is here, what a waste. Sadly, more people are caught in the grip of addiction. This brings us to the demand side of the equation. Again, most important to me is reducing the demand for these drugs, but both the demand and the supply side are related. As we discussed, the supply of deadly fentanyl was already increasing when COVID-19 hit us almost 2 years ago. Clearly, this pandemic has led to more isolation, anxiety for some, depression for others. Millions of Americans lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Millions have lost loved ones to COVID-19. Some in recovery have not been able to be with their treatment providers or with their recovery coaches, as we talked about earlier. Millions have had their lives turned upside down, and some have turned to drugs as a coping mechanism. Others, who were on the path to recovery, have suffered setbacks--relapsing into drug use again. Last month, I visited with Erin Helms, who runs recovery homes for women in northeast Ohio that I have had the chance to visit. Erin told me about the challenges during COVID to connect people with treatment and recovery support services when they overdose or when they are being released out of the criminal justice system. When we were in the most restrictive time of the pandemic, those people fell through the cracks, and we are seeing the results of that today. These overdose deaths are happening away from the national headlines, but they are taking a toll all the same. As I said, this is truly a nationwide crisis. It will take all of us here in Congress coming together to work on a bipartisan basis to find solutions to turn the tide again, reduce overdose deaths, and put more affected individuals on the path to recovery. So what can we do here in Congress in moving forward? What are the answers? First, we have got to be able to address both the supply side and the demand side. This chart lays out some of the ways we can help with both, all of which I have talked about tonight. This means we need to complete the installation of enhanced border security technology, which has already been appropriated by Congress, so that the Border Patrol has the tools it needs to complete its national security mission--so enhanced border security. In March, I visited El Paso and saw fully funded construction materials laying on the ground, at the border, at the place where there was a gap in the wall. I heard directly from Border Patrol officers about the importance of enhancing border security to give them the opportunity to complete their national security mission and help them to stop the drugs. That is why, at his nomination hearing in October, I pressed Tucson Police Chief Chris Magnus, the nominee to be Commissioner of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, on the need to install the enhanced border technology and complete the funded sections of the wall. Not only are there physical gaps in the wall right now that we have already paid for, but there is technology, which, to me, is the most important part of the wall. So you need the barrier, but, also, you need the technology to be able to monitor it, and it is only about 10 percent completed in that El Paso sector. That is outrageous. Everybody--Republicans and Democrats alike--likes to say they are for technology. We should complete the technology along the border and help the Border Patrol be able to do their important job, including keeping these deadly narcotics out of our communities. We also must pass the bipartisan Border Response Resilience Act, which I talked about, that I introduced with Senator Kelly. It would provide an additional billion dollars to the Border Patrol and U.S. Customs and Border Protection folks during a surge in unlawful migration, like the one we are in right now. Due to limited resources, Border Patrol agents are pulled off the border to care for migrants, and drug cartels are taking advantage of these open gaps in our Nation's security. Even some of the checkpoints had to be closed down when there was a recent surge on the border near Del Rio, TX. Drug interdiction checkpoints here in the United States are left unmanned so offices can process more migrant families. But the supply chain doesn't start and end on the U.S. border. Criminals understand the opportunities of the globalized world, and they pose a dynamic threat to the United States. They are smart and adaptable and can take advantage of the complexity and volume of international trade and travel patterns, and they do that. They also understand how to exploit openings in law enforcement and regulatory approaches. Many of the ingredients used to make fentanyl continue to come from China, and Chinese money laundering networks have emerged as key enablers in the business model of Mexican transnational criminal organizations. This must stop. While we have a complex and difficult agenda with China, this issue needs to remain at the top of our list. I urge the Biden administration to push the Chinese Government to be our partner in cracking down on these international crime rings rather than a tacit enabler. It is in both of our countries' interests. Likewise, the issue should be front and center in our relationship with Mexico. Both of our countries lose when the traffickers are successful. Our country is inundated with lethal substances, and the cartels gain money and sometimes American-made firearms that allow them to better wage war on the government in Mexico City. For both of our countries' sakes, we need to partner more effectively with Mexico--international cooperation. We should also recognize that these adaptable drug traffickers will have other options as we go after this current supply chain. We saw this after the STOP Act started to be implemented and traffickers from China shifted to Mexico. There is a risk that it becomes a game of whack-a-mole--when you stop it in one place and it crops up somewhere else. As an example, as we work to stop the flow of fentanyl ingredients from China, other countries, like India, could prove to be good alternative sources. We need to be prepared to partner with India and other potential new sources in this lethal supply chain to ensure we continue to improve our security. We also need to continue to enforce the provisions in the STOP Act to ensure that our postal service does not, once again, become the viable option for traffickers moving fentanyl into the United States. After missing the initial October 2019 deadline for full implementation of the STOP Act regulations, in March, Customs and Border Patrol finally began demanding 100 percent of advanced tracking data on shipments entering the country. That is good. I am glad we got there. That means that, for every package coming into the United States that originates from a country like India or China, we have a sense of what the package contains, where it is from, and where it is going, or else it doesn't come in. However, a number of waivers remain in place for these regulations for low-risk, low-volume, and less-developed countries. These waivers allow some countries to continue to skirt these reporting requirements, including, if you can believe it, Russia. It should not be in that category. This means criminals in Russia can continue to send potentially illegal packages into the United States without our knowing in advance what they may contain, posing a significant security risk, and undercutting the goals of the STOP Act. Frankly, I think it is an unacceptable oversight in enforcement, and I believe there is bipartisan agreement that that is the case. That is why I am urging DHS Secretary Mayorkas and the Biden administration to narrow down the STOP Act waivers and ensure that high-risk countries, like Russia, have to comply with these critical advanced tracking data requirements. In addition to this added security at the border, closer cooperation with the international community, and better STOP Act enforcement, we need to take the unexpected but important step to make sure that these deadly synthetic opioids actually remain illegal so that our law enforcement can take the proper steps to crack down on them. In order to avoid prosecution, prior to 2018, evil scientists in China and drug traffickers started making slight modifications to fentanyl, sometimes adjusting a single molecule and creating what are essentially fentanyl copycats to get around the law. While these fentanyl-related substances have the same narcotic properties as fentanyl, their tiny variations allow them to evade prosecution. Oftentimes, actually, these simpler substances than fentanyl were even more deadly. Carfentanil is actually more deadly than fentanyl, and that was one of the substances that was being made. Just this past week, we have learned that a fentanyl-related substance called para-fluorofentanyl has been discovered laced into drugs in my home State of Ohio, as an example. To address all of this, the Drug Enforcement Administration, in 2018, used its authority to temporarily classify all fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I substances, which allows law enforcement to aggressively intercept and destroy them. Unfortunately, this designation was only temporary. We have successfully extended the designation a few times, but it will expire in about 2 months, at the end of January. Until we make these fentanyl-related drugs--these are fentanyl copycat drugs, some more dangerous than fentanyl--law enforcement will not have the certainty they need to go after criminals moving these deadly substances, and lives will be lost. Fortunately, we have legislation, already, to address this. Our bipartisan FIGHT Fentanyl Act, which I introduced with Senator Joe Manchin, would fix this problem by permanently classifying fentanyl-related drugs as schedule I. It is about time. That would give our law enforcement the certainty to go after synthetic opioids in all of its forms and show we are committed to addressing the threat posed by this dangerous class of drugs. The FIGHT Fentanyl Act would increase the costs of fentanyl on the street and would be an important step toward rededicating our efforts to stopping these drugs from stealing thousands of lives and causing so much pain. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together and support this legislation to help us reduce the supply of dangerous synthetic opioids on our streets. So, again, on the supply side, let's pass legislation to be sure we are making fentanyl permanently illegal. Let's look at what we can do on the demand side to reduce this demand--insatiable sometimes in our country--for these illegal drugs: more effective prevention and education and ensuring individuals struggling with addiction get the support they need to overcome the disease and no longer feel the need to turn to these dangerous substances. That is all part of it. The first step, to me, is to continue to build on what we know has worked. Remember, back in 2018, we actually had the first year-over-year decrease in overdose deaths in the country in about three decades--a 22-percent decrease in my home State of Ohio in 1 year. Building on that success starts with building on our CARA legislation we talked about earlier. Before CARA, the Federal Government provided no funding of any kind for recovery support services, which are so essential to so many in overcoming their addictions. There was also no Federal funding for naloxone, also known as Narcan, which is so effective because it is a miracle drug that allows first responders to reverse the effects of an overdose and save lives and get people into treatment. CARA also lifted the cap on the number of patients a doctor could treatwith a medication assisted treatment called Suboxone, while also allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe this medication. All of these provisions expanded access to treatment, and that was incredibly important. I remember a father who came to me from Ohio and talked about his daughter. His daughter had an accident, an injury. She took pain medication. She became addicted to opioids. She then shifted to heroin because it was more available and less expensive. She was in and out of treatment and never took it seriously. One day, she went to her father and said, ``I am ready. I am ready to go into treatment. I am ready to turn my life around.'' He was convinced it was true until he went out to find a treatment provider for her, and as continues to be the case in some communities--and at that time, before 2018, it was the case in many communities--there were no beds available. There was no treatment option. She had to go on a waiting list. While she was on the waiting list, she overdosed on heroin and died in her own bedroom, and her father found her there. So all of these provisions we put in place expanded access to treatment to be able to ensure that those stories are not repeated. In the 5 years since our CARA legislation has become law, I have visited with hundreds of recovering addicts at treatment centers; I have visited with experts on local addiction and mental health boards; and I have been to recovery homes and other nonprofits across Ohio. We have talked about what we can do now to build on the successes we were having back in the 2018-2019 period, as well as what we did with regard to CARA 2.0, which is the bill that passed in 2018. The result of those discussions is CARA 3.0--the third CARA legislation. I introduced that with Senator Whitehouse earlier this year, and it builds on the existing CARA framework and expands its scope to ensure all Americans who are fighting addiction have the chance to overcome this disease. It does so by addressing three important areas: one, research, education, prevention; two, treatment and recovery; and, three, criminal justice reform. CARA 3.0 will bolster our work to prevent drug abuse--before it even happens--through better research and better education and prevention. I believe effective prevention is done when it is at the community level, which is where it is most effective, and engages a wide variety of stakeholders--youth, parents, faith leaders, educators--all with a focus on showing the risks of drug abuse and addiction. There are now about 2,000 community coalitions around the country that do this, and God bless them for the work they do. They benefit from our legislation called the Drug-Free Communities Act, which is also something that is important with regard to CARA 3.0. Over 25 years ago, I found in my own community an antidrug coalition. It is now called PreventionFIRST! It is still in existence, doing a great job. In fact, I had a Zoom call with the leaders of PreventionFIRST! last week to learn about some of the new innovations they are coming up with to reach more people. They do a drug survey every 2 years--they are in the middle of fielding that right now--where they get the best information. It is almost like a census, not a survey, from high schoolers all over the greater Cincinnati area to find out what drugs are being used, what people's attitudes are about drugs. They take that and use that to try to promote the prevention message in a way that is effective. I appreciate what they do, again, and that is part of what we need to do in this new legislation, is to redouble our efforts on prevention, to keep people out of the funnel of addiction in the first place. It is obviously the most effective way to address this issue. In our legislation we call for a massive new national drug awareness campaign as part of this. I believe that ought to be done with help from the private sector, by the way. There are plenty of people in the private sector who have concerns about this issue and should. It affects their workforce. Certainly, with regard to companies that are in the pharmaceutical business, they should have a strong interest in this. We could leverage funding--taxpayer funding--in ways that could create, for the first time in a couple of decades, a very effective national media campaign to get the word out there. We know that a number of Federal Agencies have smaller efforts on this front, but we need more coordination and a united message coming from the Federal Government and from the private sector. Our bill also includes more for research and development of alternative pain treatment methods that don't lead to addiction. To me, it is unbelievable that we are still relying on these opioid pain medications that were developed a couple of decades ago. And although some have worked on this issue--and I appreciate those researchers--we need to put more money and focus on this to find ways to treat pain without the addictive properties of the opioids. And CARA 3.0 will also take the important step of addressing the disproportionate effect the addiction crisis has had on certain vulnerable communities. Second, our bill will build on what has worked with regard to treatment and recovery. So the first step is more research, education and prevention. The second one is with regard to treatment and recovery. It will double down on proven evidence-based addiction treatment methods while expanding treatment options for groups particularly vulnerable to addiction, including young people, new and expecting mothers, rural communities, and communities of color. Third, our bill will build on what works and how we treat addiction. It will double down on these treatment methods. It will, importantly, make permanent the current expanded telehealth options for addiction treatment that were temporarily created in response to the social distancing required by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is important. Telehealth was something that was a necessity during COVID. People couldn't come to the doctor for visits. They couldn't be at their treatment providers in person. And we wondered whether telehealth would be effective. I believe that for mental health treatment and for addiction services, behavioral health, that it has been incredibly important. And although addictions have gone up during this period, obviously, and the overdose rates are at record highs, my belief--and from talking to experts I have come to this belief--it would be even worse if we had not had the telehealth options. So in the dark cloud of the pandemic, the silver lining may be that we learned how to use telehealth better. And our legislation allows that to continue to be used with reimbursement; as an example, Medicaid reimbursement or Medicare reimbursement. CARA 3.0 will also bolster the recovery options for individuals working to put addiction behind them through funding to support the recovery support services and networks. It eliminates the waiver required of physicians who want to provide medication-assisted treatments to their patients and changes the law to allow those drugs to be prescribed via telehealth for greater ease of access. The bill will also help to destigmatize addiction recovery in the workplace by ensuring that one of these medications to treat addiction does not count as a drug-free workplace violation. Finally, CARA 3.0 reforms our criminal justice system to ensure that those struggling with addiction, including our veterans, are treated with fairness and common sense, putting them on a path to recovery rather than a downward spiral of abuse. Importantly, CARA 3.0 funds a Department of Justice grant program to help incarcerated individuals struggling with addiction to receive medication-assisted treatment while they are still in the criminal justice system. This means that when they are released, they have a much higher chance of success. If someone is addicted, and you don't treat it, and you let them out of the system, they are very likely to go back to a life of addiction. But if we allow medication-assisted treatment in the criminal justice system, we will reduce recidivism or repeated offenses. I think that makes sense for the person addicted, for the community, and certainly for the taxpayer. CARA and CARA 2.0 have given States and local communities new resources and authorities to make a realdifference. CARA 3.0 renews and strengthens these programs. And given the recent spike in addiction, it provides a boost in funding as well. When added with the existing CARA programs that are authorized through 2023, we would be investing over $1 billion per year to address this longstanding epidemic, putting us on the path toward a brighter future free from addiction. The addiction epidemic has proven to be resilient. It is a disease that knows no ZIP Code, and one that is always ready to come roaring back should we not stay vigilant. Columnist Peggy Noonan was exactly right when she wrote a couple of weeks ago in the Wall Street Journal that: We have a deep and profound addiction crisis in our country and we've had it so long we forget to see it . . . and nobody's talking about it because nobody has a plan. She is exactly right. We need a plan right now to tackle this crisis that continues to devastate our country. I have laid out one tonight that can give us some understanding of the magnitude of the problem, the nature of the challenge, but also have the Federal Government take concrete steps to turn the tide once again. Again, we have done it before. Let's do it again. Washington can and should be a partner to the State and local groups on the ground every day working to combat this crisis. We should be a better partner. We have got to all work together to find constructive solutions to the addiction epidemic and ensure more Americans don't suffer in silence, that we don't lose more lives to these deadly drugs but instead ensure that more Americans can achieve their God-given potential in life. I yield back my time. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PORTMAN | Senate | CREC-2021-11-29-pt1-PgS8799-2 | null | 3,563 |
formal | safeguard | null | transphobic | Rear Admiral Brent Scott, Chief of Chaplains, U.S. Navy, Arlington, Virginia, offered the following prayer: Heavenly Father, we begin this afternoon in the privilege of prayer, thankful for our Nation, a people gathered from every tongue and Tribe, bound together through the more noble ideals of liberty, justice, and equality, formed and favored as one Nation under God. We ask Your help as we all work to safeguard this more perfect Union. We pray for this House of the people and implore You to inspire every Member to lead by their own example of reconciliation and deference, to rebuild our Nation's confidence in justice, and to restore our sense of equality to more powerfully serve as a body of and by and for the people. We intercede this afternoon for the men and women who wear our Nation's cloth, and especially the Navy Chaplain Corps on this their 246th anniversary. Bless these faithful servants of God and country who build and sustain the warrior spirit with faith, hope, and love in every corner and clime of the globe. Give them peace as they bring peace to this troubled world. We pray in Your holy Name. Amen. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6679-3 | null | 3,564 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the ruleson which the yeas and nays are ordered. The House will resume proceedings on postponed questions at a later time. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6680-9 | null | 3,565 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4045) to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'', and for other purposes, as amended. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PALLONE | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6689 | null | 3,566 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4026) to require the Comptroller General of the United States to submit to Congress a report on actions taken by the Secretary of Health and Human Services to address social determinants of health, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6697-7 | null | 3,567 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 550) to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to immunization system data modernization and expansion, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6698 | null | 3,568 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows: Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 550. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to immunization system data modernization and expansion, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-178). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 951. A bill to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out a national campaign to increase awareness of the importance of maternal vaccinations for the health of pregnant and postpartum individuals and their children, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-179). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2355. A bill to facilitate responsible, informed dispensing o controlled substances and other prescribed medications, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-180). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2364. A bill to amend title III of the Public Health Service Act to direct the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to provide for a public education campaign to raise public awareness of synthetic opioids; with an amendment (Rept. 117-181). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 1550. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for a public awareness campaign with respect to human papillomavirus, and for othe purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-182). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 3743. A bill to increase funding for the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the Food and Drug Administration and for the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (Rept. 117-183). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 4026. A bill to require the Comptroller General of the Unite States to submit to Congress a report on actions taken by the Secretary of Health and Human Services to address social determinants of health (Rept. 117-184). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 4045. A bill to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'', and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-185). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2685. A bill to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report examining the cybersecurity of mobile service networks, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-186). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 3894. A bill to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue and disseminate guidance to States to clarify strategies to address social determinants of health under the Medicaid program and the Children's Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-187). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5679. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 7, title 20, and title 43, United States Code (Rept. 117-188). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5677. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 2, United States Code, title 50, United States Code, and title 52, United States Code (Rept. 117-189). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5695. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions which were formerly classified to chapters 14 and 19 of title 25, United States Code (Rept. 117-190). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5705. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to provisions reclassified to title 34, United States Code (Rept. 117-191). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5982. A bill to make revisions in title 51, United States Code, as necessary to keep the title current, and to make technical amendments to improve the United States Code (Rept. 117-192). Referred to the House Calendar. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6710 | null | 3,569 |
formal | Reagan | null | white supremacist | Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows: Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 550. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to immunization system data modernization and expansion, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-178). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 951. A bill to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out a national campaign to increase awareness of the importance of maternal vaccinations for the health of pregnant and postpartum individuals and their children, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-179). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2355. A bill to facilitate responsible, informed dispensing o controlled substances and other prescribed medications, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-180). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2364. A bill to amend title III of the Public Health Service Act to direct the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to provide for a public education campaign to raise public awareness of synthetic opioids; with an amendment (Rept. 117-181). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 1550. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for a public awareness campaign with respect to human papillomavirus, and for othe purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-182). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 3743. A bill to increase funding for the Reagan-Udall Foundation for the Food and Drug Administration and for the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (Rept. 117-183). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 4026. A bill to require the Comptroller General of the Unite States to submit to Congress a report on actions taken by the Secretary of Health and Human Services to address social determinants of health (Rept. 117-184). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 4045. A bill to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'', and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-185). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 2685. A bill to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report examining the cybersecurity of mobile service networks, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-186). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. PALLONE: Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.R. 3894. A bill to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue and disseminate guidance to States to clarify strategies to address social determinants of health under the Medicaid program and the Children's Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 117-187). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5679. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 7, title 20, and title 43, United States Code (Rept. 117-188). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5677. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions classified to title 2, United States Code, title 50, United States Code, and title 52, United States Code (Rept. 117-189). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5695. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to certain provisions which were formerly classified to chapters 14 and 19 of title 25, United States Code (Rept. 117-190). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5705. A bill to make technical amendments to update statutory references to provisions reclassified to title 34, United States Code (Rept. 117-191). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. NADLER: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 5982. A bill to make revisions in title 51, United States Code, as necessary to keep the title current, and to make technical amendments to improve the United States Code (Rept. 117-192). Referred to the House Calendar. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-11-30-pt1-PgH6710 | null | 3,570 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which the yeas and nays are ordered. The House will resume proceedings on postponed questions at a later time. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6727-2 | null | 3,571 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2685) to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report examining the cybersecurity of mobile service networks, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6833 | null | 3,572 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4045) to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'', and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6834 | null | 3,573 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4045) to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'', and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6834 | null | 3,574 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5720) to amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to provide for a periodic transaction reporting requirement for Federal judicial officers and the online publication of financial disclosure reports of Federal judicial officers, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6835-2 | null | 3,575 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4055) to establish a cybersecurity literacy campaign, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6835 | null | 3,576 |
formal | urban | null | racist | {time} 1800 What they did was they invested in American infrastructure: American water systems and sewer systems, and maybe above all and most recognizable, the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, something that absolutely made a revolutionary change in this country. It made it so much easier to get around this country. It made it so much quicker and cheaper and easier for American companies to get their manufactured goods to market. It made American companies more competitive abroad, this investment in American infrastructure that the Greatest Generation made. And then after that, nothing. Nothing. For 50, 60, 70 years, nothing. We acted in this country like a bunch of spoiled, rotten children, entitled little kids. The things that our parents did for us, the sacrifices that our parents and grandparents made for us were taken for granted. We figured that we didn't have to make those sacrifices for our children and their grandchildren, that we didn't have to continue to update and renew and maintain and develop that portfolio of assets that was our American infrastructure that was handed down to us by that Greatest Generation. We didn't think we had to beef up public transit or passenger rail or roads and bridges or drinking water and wastewater systems. We didn't think we had to do those things because we took them for granted. We took them for granted generation after generation until this year, when Democrats in the House delivered--what?--the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that was signed into law. This past week, I want to tell you, House Democrats celebrated those jobs with more than 100 events across the country. In Georgia, Representative Carolyn Bourdeaux visited a local electric vehicle manufacturer called SK Battery to celebrate investments in local jobs. In Illinois, Congresswoman Cheri Bustos visited a VA clinic where new investments in broadband will improve telehealth services for our American veterans. In Massachusetts, Representative Jake Auchincloss sat down with the Massachusetts AFL-CIO to talk about good-paying union jobs coming to his district from this infrastructure law. In California, Congressman Jim Costa met with local water districts to talk about much-needed water infrastructure updates in California's Central Valley, where so many of our crops get grown. In upstate New York, we had a couple of Congressmen talking about infrastructure. Congressman Brian Higgins, out of Buffalo, visited infrastructure projects in his home city, the queen city of Buffalo. And we had Congressman Joe Morelle from Rochester, also in upstate New York, talking about how the infrastructure law will help that town of Rochester, New York, remove lead pipes. We all remember what happened in Flint, Michigan, where 100-year-old lead pipes poisoned little kids, gave them brain damage. Why? Well, because of a lot of things, but one of them was that we hadn't updated the water infrastructure in 100 years in Flint, Michigan. Joe Morelle was talking about that when he visited the Plug Power Gigafactory to tout the investments the law will make in clean hydrogen hubs and clean hydrogen manufacturing. He was talking about that, and he was talking about removing the lead pipes in Rochester so that these things don't happen again. In southern California, Congressman Mike Levin joined a Republican mayor from his California district to talk about how updates to infrastructure will help local drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. In New Mexico, Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernandez visited Zuni High School to discuss how the infrastructure law will improve access to broadband for students, and she toured the Navajo-Gallup water supply project with Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez. In north Texas, Congressman Colin Allred held a teletownhall with folks in his district to talk about all the ways the law will help meet local transportation needs. In northern Ohio, Representative Marcy Kaptur joined a summit about infrastructure to talk about how this law will help with flooding, with irrigation, and pollution remediation. Also in California, Congresswoman Doris Matsui visited local levees in California that will be improved because of this infrastructure bill. Every single one of these projects represents jobs and economic growth for our local communities. It represents investment in America. It represents belief in our country, belief in ourselves, that we can make the best of what we can do for the economy; that we can create jobs; that we can make it in America; we can manufacture goods in this country; that we can compete with any other company in the world as long as we provide the necessary infrastructure advantages that other countries are already doing. And don't think for one minute that China is not investing in its infrastructure to make its companies compete with us, that Russia is not doing it, that the European Union nations aren't doing it. They are all doing it. What would ever make us think that we don't have to compete with those companies from countries abroad? You know we do. Look at the cargo ships lined up outside the ports off of southern California. They are full of manufactured goods coming to this country for import. It is one thing to look at a piece of paper and look at the trade imbalance that America has suffered for years upon years. It is another thing to look at the pictures and the video of those container ships out in the harbors. Every one of those container ships, it takes 7,000 tractor-trailers to unload them, they are so full of goods coming to this country. Why we can't make those goods in this country, a lot of it has to do with our suffering, with our falling behind in our infrastructure. Our companies need this. This is something we need to do to keep American companies competitive. It is a jungle out there. In a global world market, what would ever make us think we don't have to compete with these foreign companies? That is what this bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act does. It is widely talked about how there are 13 Republicans who voted for the bill. That is why we call it bipartisan. It means both Democrat and Republican. Some people say, wow, what a wonder, how did you get 13 Republicans to vote for investing in America? Well, that is not the wonder. The wonder is what happened to the 200 Republicans who voted ``no'' on investing in America's infrastructure and updating what the Greatest Generation passed down to us in making America as strong as ever. We can make it. What happened to these people that they voted ``no'' on that? These are the people who touted infrastructure week after infrastructure week after infrastructure week, and what did they do? They did nothing. It took the Biden administration to come along and a Democratic-controlled House to pass the thing. That is exactly what we did, and what a wonderful afternoon on the south lawn of the White House, where we all gathered, Democrats and Republicans who supported that bill. It got signed into law. You know who I was sitting near? I was sitting near the CEO of Amtrak and the president of Amtrak and thechairman of the board of Amtrak, and I talked a lot about the way other places in this country will benefit from the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, but I haven't mentioned what will happen in northeastern Pennsylvania because it has to do with Amtrak. We have been struggling in northeastern Pennsylvania without train service for the last 51 years. It has been since the early 1970s since a passenger train rolled into Scranton, Pennsylvania. We have been without train service for that long. If you don't think that hurts an area, you are wrong. Here's how we know. We got Amtrak interested in investigating a New York City to Scranton, across the top of New Jersey, across the Delaware River, into southern Monroe County at the Delaware Water Gap, through Stroudsburg, up through Mount Pocono, past Tobyhanna, and up into Lackawanna County and Scranton, Pennsylvania. We got them interested in looking at that route, and they did. You know what they found, Madam Speaker? They found that this is exactly the kind of route that Amtrak ought to be investing in. What we did was we showed them what we have to offer in northeastern Pennsylvania. We showed them all of the recreational opportunities there are, we showed them the wonderful hardworking workforce that we have, the people that have the kind of work ethic and pride in their work that goes an awful long way toward creating successful manufacturing companies. We showed these things to people coming in from out of the area, and the Amtrak executives looked at this, and they said yes, this is the kind of line that makes sense. They examined it, and their specialists looked into it, and they worked out the economic activity increase that would result from such a new line. Three trains a day going back and forth between Scranton and along that line I discussed to New York City will result, according to Amtrak's economic analysis, in $87 million a year in additional economic activity each and every year those three trains are operating between New York City and Scranton. $87 million a year in economic activity. They are not just pulling those figures out of the air, Madam Speaker. They know what they are talking about at Amtrak because they have done it before, and they have seen it happen. They put in about an 80-mile stretch from Boston northbound, and they saw it happen. They saw why it happens, because people want to do development along the rail lines. Along those rail lines they have seen it time and time again, things pop up, factories pop up, office parks pop up, residential developments pop up. All of this means jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs. What we are interested in in northeastern Pennsylvania is not just a pretty ride through the countryside on a train. What we are interested in is the jobs, because $87 million a year in economic activity is an awful lot of jobs. These are just some examples, Madam Speaker, of what it means to have this infrastructure bill get passed into law and signed by the President. These are things that will happen. Maybe the greatest thing is that we look toward the future with that law. It is not just old-fashioned infrastructure. I mentioned before, the investment in broadband internet for every place in America, it is a model we have seen before. The government has done this before. Under the Roosevelt administration it was called the Rural Electrification Act, and the idea was there were some places in America that did not have electricity and should have electricity. Imagine living in a town that nobody can turn on an electric light at night. It was shocking and shameful, that kind of inequality in access to new technology. But we beat that. The Roosevelt administration pushed through the Rural Electrification Act, and every nook and cranny and every holler and every place that was off the beaten path ended up with electric service, and it was a wonderful thing. All of those people who could have been left behind were not. They were brought along. It is the same thing with our investment in rural internet access. When I say ``rural,'' that is largely the type of place that is left behind. There are some urban areas that are internet starved, you might say, but by and large, it is mostly rural places that will benefit from this massive investment in broadband internet. Why is it important? Because it is the same thing. If you don't have broadband internet in these rural places, these rural places get left behind modern life every bit as much as they would have gotten left behind 80 years ago without electricity. It means that kids studying in school aren't left behind because they have access to the internet, and their parents don't have to drive them to a local fast-food place so they can sit in the parking lot and get online that way. That is ridiculous. Every place in America ought to have broadband internet. Now, about 65 percent of achieving that goal is done through the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and about 35 percent, finishing the job, is in the Build Back Better Act. We can do such a thing for our children and our grandchildren, but it is more than that, Madam Speaker, it is also for our businesses. Our businesses depend on the internet as much as anybody else, as much as kids in school. They need to have access to quick communications. If you have places that don't have that access, you know what that means. That means new businesses will not spring up in those places. Those places will be bypassed. They will be left behind. Why would a business want to start up a new enterprise in a place that does not have access to broadband internet? It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure these things out. If we want to give these kinds of economic advantages to this country, and we want to be inclusive of every place in this country, no matter who they are or who they worship or how they vote, it doesn't matter. We have to come together as a country and realize that we are all in this together, and we need to provide broadband internet to every place in America every bit as much as we did that for basic electricity at the time we did that. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to tell you that we passed the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and that it was on the South Lawn of the White House that President Biden signed it into law. It is something that will redound to the benefit of our children and our grandchildren, and their children and their grandchildren. These are investments that will pay and pay generation after generation, and they will create millions and millions of jobs. We have already created 5.6 million jobs this year, but it doesn't stop there. We are just getting started. Madam Speaker, the Democrats have delivered this Congress. I couldn't be prouder. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. | 2020-01-06 | None | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6846 | null | 3,577 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | {time} 1800 What they did was they invested in American infrastructure: American water systems and sewer systems, and maybe above all and most recognizable, the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System, something that absolutely made a revolutionary change in this country. It made it so much easier to get around this country. It made it so much quicker and cheaper and easier for American companies to get their manufactured goods to market. It made American companies more competitive abroad, this investment in American infrastructure that the Greatest Generation made. And then after that, nothing. Nothing. For 50, 60, 70 years, nothing. We acted in this country like a bunch of spoiled, rotten children, entitled little kids. The things that our parents did for us, the sacrifices that our parents and grandparents made for us were taken for granted. We figured that we didn't have to make those sacrifices for our children and their grandchildren, that we didn't have to continue to update and renew and maintain and develop that portfolio of assets that was our American infrastructure that was handed down to us by that Greatest Generation. We didn't think we had to beef up public transit or passenger rail or roads and bridges or drinking water and wastewater systems. We didn't think we had to do those things because we took them for granted. We took them for granted generation after generation until this year, when Democrats in the House delivered--what?--the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that was signed into law. This past week, I want to tell you, House Democrats celebrated those jobs with more than 100 events across the country. In Georgia, Representative Carolyn Bourdeaux visited a local electric vehicle manufacturer called SK Battery to celebrate investments in local jobs. In Illinois, Congresswoman Cheri Bustos visited a VA clinic where new investments in broadband will improve telehealth services for our American veterans. In Massachusetts, Representative Jake Auchincloss sat down with the Massachusetts AFL-CIO to talk about good-paying union jobs coming to his district from this infrastructure law. In California, Congressman Jim Costa met with local water districts to talk about much-needed water infrastructure updates in California's Central Valley, where so many of our crops get grown. In upstate New York, we had a couple of Congressmen talking about infrastructure. Congressman Brian Higgins, out of Buffalo, visited infrastructure projects in his home city, the queen city of Buffalo. And we had Congressman Joe Morelle from Rochester, also in upstate New York, talking about how the infrastructure law will help that town of Rochester, New York, remove lead pipes. We all remember what happened in Flint, Michigan, where 100-year-old lead pipes poisoned little kids, gave them brain damage. Why? Well, because of a lot of things, but one of them was that we hadn't updated the water infrastructure in 100 years in Flint, Michigan. Joe Morelle was talking about that when he visited the Plug Power Gigafactory to tout the investments the law will make in clean hydrogen hubs and clean hydrogen manufacturing. He was talking about that, and he was talking about removing the lead pipes in Rochester so that these things don't happen again. In southern California, Congressman Mike Levin joined a Republican mayor from his California district to talk about how updates to infrastructure will help local drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. In New Mexico, Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernandez visited Zuni High School to discuss how the infrastructure law will improve access to broadband for students, and she toured the Navajo-Gallup water supply project with Navajo Nation President Jonathan Nez. In north Texas, Congressman Colin Allred held a teletownhall with folks in his district to talk about all the ways the law will help meet local transportation needs. In northern Ohio, Representative Marcy Kaptur joined a summit about infrastructure to talk about how this law will help with flooding, with irrigation, and pollution remediation. Also in California, Congresswoman Doris Matsui visited local levees in California that will be improved because of this infrastructure bill. Every single one of these projects represents jobs and economic growth for our local communities. It represents investment in America. It represents belief in our country, belief in ourselves, that we can make the best of what we can do for the economy; that we can create jobs; that we can make it in America; we can manufacture goods in this country; that we can compete with any other company in the world as long as we provide the necessary infrastructure advantages that other countries are already doing. And don't think for one minute that China is not investing in its infrastructure to make its companies compete with us, that Russia is not doing it, that the European Union nations aren't doing it. They are all doing it. What would ever make us think that we don't have to compete with those companies from countries abroad? You know we do. Look at the cargo ships lined up outside the ports off of southern California. They are full of manufactured goods coming to this country for import. It is one thing to look at a piece of paper and look at the trade imbalance that America has suffered for years upon years. It is another thing to look at the pictures and the video of those container ships out in the harbors. Every one of those container ships, it takes 7,000 tractor-trailers to unload them, they are so full of goods coming to this country. Why we can't make those goods in this country, a lot of it has to do with our suffering, with our falling behind in our infrastructure. Our companies need this. This is something we need to do to keep American companies competitive. It is a jungle out there. In a global world market, what would ever make us think we don't have to compete with these foreign companies? That is what this bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act does. It is widely talked about how there are 13 Republicans who voted for the bill. That is why we call it bipartisan. It means both Democrat and Republican. Some people say, wow, what a wonder, how did you get 13 Republicans to vote for investing in America? Well, that is not the wonder. The wonder is what happened to the 200 Republicans who voted ``no'' on investing in America's infrastructure and updating what the Greatest Generation passed down to us in making America as strong as ever. We can make it. What happened to these people that they voted ``no'' on that? These are the people who touted infrastructure week after infrastructure week after infrastructure week, and what did they do? They did nothing. It took the Biden administration to come along and a Democratic-controlled House to pass the thing. That is exactly what we did, and what a wonderful afternoon on the south lawn of the White House, where we all gathered, Democrats and Republicans who supported that bill. It got signed into law. You know who I was sitting near? I was sitting near the CEO of Amtrak and the president of Amtrak and thechairman of the board of Amtrak, and I talked a lot about the way other places in this country will benefit from the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, but I haven't mentioned what will happen in northeastern Pennsylvania because it has to do with Amtrak. We have been struggling in northeastern Pennsylvania without train service for the last 51 years. It has been since the early 1970s since a passenger train rolled into Scranton, Pennsylvania. We have been without train service for that long. If you don't think that hurts an area, you are wrong. Here's how we know. We got Amtrak interested in investigating a New York City to Scranton, across the top of New Jersey, across the Delaware River, into southern Monroe County at the Delaware Water Gap, through Stroudsburg, up through Mount Pocono, past Tobyhanna, and up into Lackawanna County and Scranton, Pennsylvania. We got them interested in looking at that route, and they did. You know what they found, Madam Speaker? They found that this is exactly the kind of route that Amtrak ought to be investing in. What we did was we showed them what we have to offer in northeastern Pennsylvania. We showed them all of the recreational opportunities there are, we showed them the wonderful hardworking workforce that we have, the people that have the kind of work ethic and pride in their work that goes an awful long way toward creating successful manufacturing companies. We showed these things to people coming in from out of the area, and the Amtrak executives looked at this, and they said yes, this is the kind of line that makes sense. They examined it, and their specialists looked into it, and they worked out the economic activity increase that would result from such a new line. Three trains a day going back and forth between Scranton and along that line I discussed to New York City will result, according to Amtrak's economic analysis, in $87 million a year in additional economic activity each and every year those three trains are operating between New York City and Scranton. $87 million a year in economic activity. They are not just pulling those figures out of the air, Madam Speaker. They know what they are talking about at Amtrak because they have done it before, and they have seen it happen. They put in about an 80-mile stretch from Boston northbound, and they saw it happen. They saw why it happens, because people want to do development along the rail lines. Along those rail lines they have seen it time and time again, things pop up, factories pop up, office parks pop up, residential developments pop up. All of this means jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs. What we are interested in in northeastern Pennsylvania is not just a pretty ride through the countryside on a train. What we are interested in is the jobs, because $87 million a year in economic activity is an awful lot of jobs. These are just some examples, Madam Speaker, of what it means to have this infrastructure bill get passed into law and signed by the President. These are things that will happen. Maybe the greatest thing is that we look toward the future with that law. It is not just old-fashioned infrastructure. I mentioned before, the investment in broadband internet for every place in America, it is a model we have seen before. The government has done this before. Under the Roosevelt administration it was called the Rural Electrification Act, and the idea was there were some places in America that did not have electricity and should have electricity. Imagine living in a town that nobody can turn on an electric light at night. It was shocking and shameful, that kind of inequality in access to new technology. But we beat that. The Roosevelt administration pushed through the Rural Electrification Act, and every nook and cranny and every holler and every place that was off the beaten path ended up with electric service, and it was a wonderful thing. All of those people who could have been left behind were not. They were brought along. It is the same thing with our investment in rural internet access. When I say ``rural,'' that is largely the type of place that is left behind. There are some urban areas that are internet starved, you might say, but by and large, it is mostly rural places that will benefit from this massive investment in broadband internet. Why is it important? Because it is the same thing. If you don't have broadband internet in these rural places, these rural places get left behind modern life every bit as much as they would have gotten left behind 80 years ago without electricity. It means that kids studying in school aren't left behind because they have access to the internet, and their parents don't have to drive them to a local fast-food place so they can sit in the parking lot and get online that way. That is ridiculous. Every place in America ought to have broadband internet. Now, about 65 percent of achieving that goal is done through the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and about 35 percent, finishing the job, is in the Build Back Better Act. We can do such a thing for our children and our grandchildren, but it is more than that, Madam Speaker, it is also for our businesses. Our businesses depend on the internet as much as anybody else, as much as kids in school. They need to have access to quick communications. If you have places that don't have that access, you know what that means. That means new businesses will not spring up in those places. Those places will be bypassed. They will be left behind. Why would a business want to start up a new enterprise in a place that does not have access to broadband internet? It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure these things out. If we want to give these kinds of economic advantages to this country, and we want to be inclusive of every place in this country, no matter who they are or who they worship or how they vote, it doesn't matter. We have to come together as a country and realize that we are all in this together, and we need to provide broadband internet to every place in America every bit as much as we did that for basic electricity at the time we did that. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to tell you that we passed the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and that it was on the South Lawn of the White House that President Biden signed it into law. It is something that will redound to the benefit of our children and our grandchildren, and their children and their grandchildren. These are investments that will pay and pay generation after generation, and they will create millions and millions of jobs. We have already created 5.6 million jobs this year, but it doesn't stop there. We are just getting started. Madam Speaker, the Democrats have delivered this Congress. I couldn't be prouder. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. | 2020-01-06 | None | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6846 | null | 3,578 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: EC-2790. A letter from the Alternate OSD FRLO, Department of Defense, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Department of State Rescission of Determination Regarding Sudan (DFARS Case 2021-D027) [Docket DARS-2021-0019] (RIN: 0750-AL46) received October 28, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Armed Services. EC-2791. A letter from the Regulations Coordinator, Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Flexibility for Head Start Designation Renewals in Certain Emergencies (RIN: 0970-AC85) received November 1, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Education and Labor. EC-2792. A letter from the Assistant General Counsel for Legislation, Regulation and Energy Efficiency, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Distribution Transformers [EERE-2017-BT-TP-0055] (RIN: 1904-AE19) received October 25, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2793. A letter from the Assistant General Counsel for Legislation, Regulation and Energy Efficiency, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Refrigeration Products [EERE-2017-BT-TP-0004] (RIN: 1904-AD84) received October 25, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2794. A letter from the Regulations Coordinator, Office of Population Affairs, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Ensuring Access to Equitable, Affordable, Client-Centered, Quality Family Planning Services (RIN: 0937-AA11) received November 15, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2795. A letter from the Regulations Coordinator, Health Resources and Services Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Implementation of Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-Saving Medications; Rescission of Regulation (RIN: 0906- AB30) received October 25, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2796. A letter from the Section Chief, Diversion Control Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Schedules of Controlled Substances: Placement of N- Ethylpentylone in Schedule I [Docket No.: DEA-482] received August 20, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2797. A letter from the Chief of Staff, Media Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, transmitting the Commission's final rule -- Expanding the Economic and Innovation Opportunities of Spectrum Through Incentive Auction [GN Docket No.: 12-268] received November 4, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2798. A letter from the Acting Assistant General Counsel for Legislation, Regulation and Energy Efficiency, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Energy Conservation Program: Final Determination of Fans and Blowers as Covered Equipment [EERE- 2011-BT-DET-0045] (RIN: 1905-AC55) received October 25, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2799. A letter from the Associate Administrator for Policy, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Rear Impact Guards and Rear Impact Protection [Docket No.: FMCSA-2019-0211] (RIN: 2126-AC31) received November 15, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. EC-2800. A letter from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Department of the Treasury, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Establishment of the Virginia Peninsula Viticultural Area [Docket No.: TTB-2020-0010; T.D. TTB-173; Ref: Notice No.: 195] (RIN: 1513-AC71) received September 28, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Ways and Means. EC-2801. A letter from the Chief Counsel, Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce, transmitting the Department's final rule -- General Updates and Elimination of Certain TAAF and PWEDA Regulations [Docket No.: 191218-0119] (RIN: 0610-AA80) received November 15, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); jointly to the Committees on Financial Services and Transportation and Infrastructure. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgH6857-3 | null | 3,579 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, on December 1, we mark the 33rd anniversary of World AIDS Day, which gives us an opportunity to pause and reflect on the lives lost to HIV/AIDS, how far we have come in the fight against this virus, and what we need to do to ensure an AIDS-free future. Since the first cases of AIDS were reported domestically in June 1981, more than 700,000 Americans have tragically died due to AIDS-related complications. Significant scientific advances, brought about by public and private partnerships, led to the development of antiretroviral therapies--ARTs--which have been instrumental in decreasing AIDS-related mortality rates by more than 80 percent since they peaked in 1995. Investment in U.S. disease surveillance, prevention, and public education has similarly led to an almost 50-percent decline in the incidence of infection since 2010. We are fortunate to have premier scientific research institutes within my home State of Maryland working together to combat this deadly virus. The National Institutes of Health, the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, and the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland all lead U.S. and global research on developing treatments and a vaccine for HIV/AIDS. The world-class research institutions housed in Maryland have not only substantially led the scientific advancements with respect to HIV/AIDS; they have also played a significant role in reducing the number of new cases among Marylanders and affording those who contract HIV/AIDS to continue living full lives. Across Maryland, more than 30,000 adults or adolescents were living with HIV at the end of 2020. Though my State ranks seventh among all U.S. States and Territories in HIV diagnosis rates per 100,000 people, we are making great strides to prevent new infections. Last year, Maryland recorded fewer than 1,000 new cases of HIV infection for the third consecutive year and a significant decrease over the peak of 2,612 new HIV infections among Marylanders in 1991. Public health initiatives the Maryland Department of Health implemented have been instrumental in reducing new infections, including programs like safe-sex education programs, condom distribution, access to prophylactic medication, and a statewide needle-exchange program for injection drug users. Today, approximately 1.2 million Americans are living with HIV, and they are able to lead healthier and safer lives due to increased access to care under the Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, ACA. The ACA has led to increased patient protections such as the prohibitions on rate-setting tied to health status, the elimination of preexisting condition exclusions, and an end to lifetime and annual dollar limits. Still, there are challenges ahead. Increasing prescription drug costs for ART regimens and health insurance benefit designs that shift out-of-pocket costs onto patients risk the progress we have made to end the HIV epidemic in the U.S. Although Federal financial support to Medicaid, the largest source of insurance coverage for people living withHIV, has increased through the duration of public health emergency due to the COVID-19 relief bills, tightening State budgets amid record Medicaid enrollment could hinder access to treatment or care for the HIV/AIDS population. Forty-two percent of adults with HIV receive healthcare under Medicaid. In the U.S., the fight against this disease also disproportionately affects communities of color, with Black and Latino Americans accounting for a disproportionate share of new HIV diagnoses and deaths, consisting of about 70 percent of new diagnosis despite making up roughly 30 percent of the U.S. population. The Biden-Harris administration's theme for World AIDS Day this year is ``Ending the HIV Epidemic: Equitable Access, Everyone's Voice,'' denoting a strong commitment to addressing health inequities within the epidemic. I share the administration's determination to address the disproportionate impact of the epidemic on marginalized populations like the LGBTQI+ community and racial and ethnic minorities. Internationally, the U.S. has invested more than $100 billion in the global HIV/AIDS response through the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief--PEPFAR--and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Global Fund. This investment has saved more than 20 million lives, prevented millions of people from becoming infected, and achieved HIV/AIDS epidemic control in more than 50 countries. Since 2003, PEPFAR has changed the trajectory of the HIV epidemic around the globe by expanding access to HIV prevention, treatment, and care interventions. PEPFAR is one of the most successful and cost-effective efforts in the history of American foreign assistance. Despite the progress we have made around the globe, there is still significant work to do. Of the 38 million people globally living with HIV, 12.6 million are not accessing lifesaving treatment. In 2019, there were 1.7 million people newly infected with HIV--more than three times the global target--and 690,000 people perished from this terrible disease. While we have made strides in combating HIV/AIDS in eastern and southern Africa, we have seen increases in new infections in Eastern Europe, central Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. As with last year's commemoration, this year's World AIDS Day finds us continuing to battle the COVID-19 pandemic. Support through PEPFAR and the Global Fund has financed efforts to minimize the disruption of the pandemic on HIV epidemic response efforts, through services like telehealth and multimonth dispensing of antiretroviral therapies. The COVID-19 pandemic, however, continues to affect the global response to HIV and threatens the decades of progress we have made against this disease. In addition to disrupting HIV treatments and prevention services, downstream impacts of the pandemic have cut off vulnerable populations from educational and social support services, and growing inequalities resulting from the economic downturn are likely to lead to increases in HIV risk behaviors and vulnerability. The Global Fund reported that last year, HIV testing dropped by 22 percent and the percentage of HIV-positive TB patients on antiretroviral therapies dropped 16 percent. A world free from HIV requires global leadership from the United States, and we have stepped up to the plate by heavily investing in the global response to HIV. From significant contributions to the Global Fund to the creation of PEPFAR, U.S. global health leadership and international collaboration helped to turn the tide on the global epidemic. This is as true today as it was 33 years ago. International public health crises require international responses. Unlike the previous administration, I support President Biden's actions to reprioritize cooperative global health response efforts. We are only as strong as the weakest health system, and it is incumbent upon the U.S. to lead global health response efforts as we look to end the COVID-19 pandemic and HIV/AIDS epidemic. One of the biggest tragedies of the HIV epidemic is that millions of people around the world died while waiting for treatment, and once treatment became available in 1987, it was out-of-reach. At about $8,000 a year--more than $17,000 in today's dollars--the first HIV drug was too expensive for populations who needed it most: low-income communities in the U.S. and low and middle-income countries. While Congress authorized $30 million in emergency funding to States to pay for low-income patients' treatment, global access to the drug lagged. For example, when we established PEPFAR in 2003, only 50,000 people in Africa were accessing lifesaving HIV treatment. We cannot make the same mistake with COVID-19. While we have made great strides domestically to vaccinate our population, it is equally important to vaccinate the rest of the world from COVID-19. The Biden administration has made significant strides to supply and commit future supplies of vaccines to low-income countries, and I implore the administration to continue working with vaccine manufacturers to expedite this effort as fast as humanly and safely possible. Equally important is ensuring access, when approved, to antiviral treatments. One potential antiviral treatment reduces the risk of hospitalization and death by 89 percent in high-risk adults when used in conjunction with ritonavir, a medication commonly used to treat HIV. The potential success of this antiviral treatment is a testament to the biomedical infrastructure of the United States, where the incredibly innovative treatments we developed for HIV may be effective in battling the COVID-19 pandemic, too. COVID-19 does not respect borders. To protect our domestic health, we must ensure that our allies and low and middle-income countries around the world have affordable access to eventually approved COVID-19 vaccines, diagnostics, and therapeutics. While we celebrate the progress we have made with respect to HIV/AIDS this World AIDS Day, we must recommit ourselves to continuing this fight because success is within our grasp. We have made so much progress through international partnerships. Donor nations; civil society; people living with HIV; faith-based organizations; scientific research community and academic partners such as Johns Hopkins University, the University of Maryland, and the Walter Reed Army Institute of Infectious Disease Research; the private sector; foundations; and implementing organizations such as Catholic Relief Services and Lutheran World Relief have complemented those partnerships tremendously. We must apply the lessons of the fight against HIV to our current battle against the COVID-19 pandemic so we can save more lives and get the global economy back on track. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. CARDIN | Senate | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgS8859-4 | null | 3,580 |
formal | safeguard | null | transphobic | Mrs. FISCHER. Madam President, I rise today to honor a devoted American patriot on her retirement from Federal civil service. Mrs. Robin Squatrito has served as the Director of Legislative Affairs for North American Aerospace Defense Command and United States Northern Command in Colorado Springs, CO, for over 15 years. During that time, she has provided expert legislative advice to nine NORAD and USNORTHCOM commanders, served as the principal liaison between the commands and the congressional defense committee staffs, and facilitated a tremendous collaborative relationship between NORAD, USNORTHCOM, and Congress--including my staff and me--as the commands have stood constant watch over the United States and Canadian homelands. In fact, Robin was a member of USNORTHCOM from the day the command was established in October 2002. At that time, she was serving our Nation as a colonel in the U.S. Air Force and was hand-selected by the first commander of USNORTHCOM, Gen. Ralph Eberhart, to be the Director of his Commander's Action Group. USNORTHCOM was established in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11, 2001, and Colonel Squatrito played an instrumental role in ensuring the command was organized and ready to safeguard our homeland from further attacks. When she retired after 26 years in uniform, it was only a matter of time before she answered the call to serve once more. From the day Robin returned to NORAD and USNORTHCOM as a civil servant, she has been a tireless advocate for our national defense. She iswell known inside and outside the headquarters as a passionate advocate for NORAD and USNORTHCOM, as well as for the men and women responsible for executing their critical missions. She is also recognized for her knowledge, remarkable attention to detail, and dedication, spending whatever time is necessary to make certain that every product that passes across her desk is as close to perfect as possible. Robin has repeatedly demonstrated her passion for doing the right thing and her commitment to high standards as she has guided nine NORAD and USNORTHCOM commanders through countless posture hearings, briefings, CODEL visits, office calls, phone calls, and numerous other engagements with Members of Congress and our staffs. Robin's colleagues and her family will tell you that she has always been one of the first leaders at work in the morning, and can often be found at her desk well after standard duty hours. And for Robin, time away from the office has never meant she was off duty. She is never far from her phone or her email in order to ensure commanders and Members of Congress always receive a prompt and professional response to any question, request, or concern. That is one of the reasons why Gen. Glen VanHerck, the current commander of NORAD and USNORTHCOM, has said Robin is ``one of the most diligent and dedicated professionals I've had the privilege of serving with over my more than 34 years in uniform. Robin's devotion to our country, homeland defense, and our commands is boundless. She embodies the true meaning of selfless service for a noble cause.'' And it is certainly fitting to offer our Nation's sincere thanks to Robin's family for their decades of service and sacrifice. That includes her husband, retired Col. Joe Squatrito, who also served our Nation with honor as an Air Force officer. It also includes their children, Michael and Stacey. As the entire Squatrito family looks forward to the coming new year with limitless opportunities and adventures ahead of them, Robin and Joe are also preparing to take on important new titles and responsibilities as first-time grandparents. It is my honor to thank Robin Squatrito for her lifetime of devoted service to our Nation. I wish her and her family all the very best in her extraordinarily well-deserved retirement. | 2020-01-06 | Mrs. FISCHER | Senate | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgS8860 | null | 3,581 |
formal | Baltimore | null | racist | Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to celebrate the life and mourn the passing of Bruce Corwin, a pillar of the sports and entertainment industries, a dedicated philanthropist, and a dear friend. Born and raised in California, Bruce believed deeply in the power of people. As a college student at Wesleyan, he traveled to Baltimore to march alongside Martin Luther King, Jr., and he protested fraternity discrimination by starting a new, inclusive group. After graduating in 1962, he participated in the Coro Fellows Program for aspiring public servants, the start of a lifelong relationship with Coro through which Bruce supported generations of civic leaders. Bruce made his career at Metropolitan Theaters, his family's business, which brought English- and Spanish-language movies to theaters across the Southwest. He was the third generation of his family to oversee the company, and he led it with passion for 40 years. Bruce extended his leadership into the community, where he wasknown for organizing mentorship and tutoring programs at his alma mater, Los Angeles High School. He supported countless charitable causes and was a beloved leader in California's Jewish community. I first met Bruce in 1994, when I was a Coro Fellow. Over the years, we bonded over talks of family, community, and leadership, as well as baseball, movies, and just a little politics. He always supported my public service aspirations. And he was an invaluable partner in fulfilling one of my passion projects, to open a state-of-the-art children's museum in the San Fernando Valley. After a 14-year journey, the Discovery Cube Los Angeles opened its doors in 2014. Bruce was incredibly kind, wise, generous, and compassionate. Everyone who knew Bruce felt blessed by his infectious and infinite optimism and inspiration. On a personal note, I remain in incredible admiration of the love that he and his wife Toni shared. It reminds me so much of the love and commitment my own parents shared. My wife Angela and I send our deepest condolences, love, and prayers to Toni Corwin and the entire Corwin family. We were blessed to share in so many great memories with the countless people around the country that Bruce touched and inspired throughout his life. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. PADILLA | Senate | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgS8861-3 | null | 3,582 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | The following bill was read the first time: S. 3299. A bill to prohibit the Department of Defense from discharging or withholding pay or benefits from members of the National Guard based on COVID-19 vaccination status. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgS8863-2 | null | 3,583 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | The following petitions and memorials were laid before the Senate and were referred or ordered to lie on the table as indicated: POM-94. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of Michigan urging the United States Congress to oppose unnecessary and harmful changes to Internal Revenue Service reporting requirements for Michigan's financial institutions; to the Committee on Finance. Senate Resolution No. 85 Whereas, The U.S. Department of Treasury has proposed requiring financial institutions to report financial account information for accounts with a gross flow threshold or fair market value of $600 or more. The proposal calls for financial institutions to report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with foreign accounts, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner. It would apply to business and personal accounts, including bank, loan, and investment accounts at those financial institutions subject to the proposed requirement; and Whereas, there are very real concerns over data privacy and security if this proposed Internal Revenue Service reporting requirement, or a similar requirement, is put in place. Keeping member and customer account information private and secure is among the primary goals of all financial institutions in Michigan and this proposal could jeopardize the security of accounts and personal information. As we have seen, numerous government data breaches have occurred in recent years. Moreover, the proposal constitutes an invasion of consumer privacy; and Whereas, Financial institutions throughout our state and country are already subject to many burdensome regulations that increase costs, damage customer relations, and otherwise hurt these businesses. The adoption of this extensive and intrusive financial reporting proposal would deepen that burden for Michigan's community-based and other financial institutions; now, there, be it Resolved by the Senate, That we urge the United States Congress to oppose unnecessary and harmful changes to Internal Revenue Service reporting requirements for Michigan's financial institutions; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate, and members of the Michigan congressional delegation, and the chairs of the United States Committee on Finance and United States House Committee on Ways and Means. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-01-pt1-PgS8863-4 | null | 3,584 |
formal | XX | null | transphobic | The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2930) to enhance protections of Native American tangible cultural heritage, and for other purposes, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. | 2020-01-06 | The SPEAKER pro tempore | House | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgH6891 | null | 3,585 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: EC-2802. A letter from the Associate Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Bifenthrin; Pesticide Tolerances [EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0352 and EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0560; FRL-8945-01-OCSPP] received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2803. A letter from the Associate Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Air Plan Approval; California; San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District; Stationary Source Permits [EPA-R09-OAR-2020-0238; FRL-8896-02-R9] received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2804. A letter from the Associate Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Arkansas: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revision [EPA-R06-RCRA-2021-0073; FRL-8800-02-R6] received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2805. A letter from the Associate Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Air Plan Approval; ID; West Silver Valley Redesignation to Attainment for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 Standard [EPA-R10-OAR-2020-0305; FRL-8878- 02-R10] received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2806. A letter from the Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy, General Services Administration, transmitting the Administration's summary presentation of final rules -- Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular 2022-01; Introduction [Docket No.: FAR-2021-0051, Sequence No. 5] received November 15, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Oversight and Reform. EC-2807. A letter from the Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy, General Services Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule -- Federal Acquisition Regulation: Revision of Definition of ``Commercial Item'' [FAC 2022-01; FAR Case 2018-018; Item I; Docket No.: FAR-2018-0018, Sequence No. 1] (RIN: 9000-AN76) received November 15, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Oversight and Reform. EC-2808. A letter from the Director, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy, General Services Administration, transmitting the Administration's small entity compliance guide -- Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular 2022-01; Small Entity Compliance Guide [Docket No.: FAR-2021-0051, Sequence No. 5] received November 15, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Oversight and Reform. EC-2809. A letter from the Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and C.A., Office of the Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Interior, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Election of Officers of the Osage Minerals Council [212A2100DD/AAKC001030/ A0A501010.999900] (RIN: 1076-AF58) received October 26, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Natural Resources. EC-2810. A letter from the Regulatory Specialist, Office of Natural Resources Revenue, Department of the Interior, transmitting the Department's final rule -- ONRR 2020 Valuation Reform and Civil Penalty Rule: Delay of Effective Date [Docket No.: ONRR-2020-0001; DS63644000DRT000000.CH7000 212D1113RT] (RIN: 1012-AA27) received October 20, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Natural Resources. EC-2811. A letter from the Agency Representative, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of Commerce, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Changes to Implement Provisions of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 [Docket No.: PTO-T-2021-0008] (RIN: 0651-AD55) received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on the Judiciary. EC-2812. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Fort Leonard Wood, MO [Docket No.: FAA-2021-0634; Airspace Docket No.: 21-ACE- 19] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. EC-2813. A letter from the Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Office of Chief Counsel, Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule -- Pipeline Safety: Safety of Gas Gathering Pipelines: Extension of Reporting Requirements, Regulation of Large, High-Pressure Lines, and Other Related Amendments [Docket No.: PHMSA-2011-0023; Amdt. Nos. 191-30; 192-129] (RIN: 2137-AF38) received November 18, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. EC-2814. A letter from the Federal Register Liaison Officer, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Department of the Treasury, transmitting the Department's final rule -- Establishment of the Verde Valley Viticultural Area [Docket No.: TTB-2020-0002; T.D. TTB-174; Ref: Notice No. 187] (RIN: 1513-AC54) received November 26, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Ways and Means. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgH6907-2 | null | 3,586 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. President, I rise today to honor and recognize a young Kansan who has truly gone above and beyond to help others, Ms. Avery Herrmann from Sabetha, KS. Avery has been making jewelry since 2017 to help support the Kansas Honor Flight. She first began designing jewelry after developing staphyloma in her right eye. Doctors had told her and her mother, Mary, that Avery should pick up a hobby to help keep her motor functions developing properly. Mary had made jewelry herself as a child, so she showed Avery the tools of the trade, and she hasn't stopped since. For a while, Avery had kept up with jewelry making for personal use, but the death of her grandfather Robert in 2016 showed her what she could do to make a difference with her skills. Robert was a Korean war veteran who had previously gone on an Honor Flight himself, which was one of his most memorable experiences. After his passing, Avery started Abundant Love jewelry as a tribute to her grandfather and a way to support veterans in her community. With this new business, she began selling earrings online and at various fundraising events. To date, Avery has raised almost $7,000 through Abundant Love. Stories like Avery's are what truly show the best of Kansas. I have met with countless veterans on Honor Flights, and each has their own unique and incredible experience like Robert. Avery already is selfless in making and selling her earrings to benefit Honor Flight, but what truly makes this project extraordinary is that she doesn't take a penny for herself. Every single dollar made from Abundant Love goes directly to Honor Flight's benefit. Whether she knows it or not, those veterans appreciate what she does for them, and I join them in showing my appreciation for Avery. I now ask my colleagues to join in me in recognizing Avery for her outstanding service for our Nation's heroes. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. MARSHALL | Senate | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgS8908-2 | null | 3,587 |
formal | Baltimore | null | racist | Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to a faith leader and community activist from my home State of Maryland who has recently stepped down from his post as senior pastor at Union Baptist Church: Reverend Alvin C. Hathaway. I would like to honor his service to the people of Maryland and enter the details of his journey into the Congressional Record so that current and future generations may learn from and study his inspiring career. The story of Reverend Hathaway's life is deeply bound to the story of Union Baptist Church. Alvin Hathaway grew up on Druid Hill Avenue in West Baltimore in a family that believed deeply in combining education and service--four doors down from the church itself--and he came of age in a neighborhood shaped and nurtured by faith. That community had cradled other great leaders too--leaders who,like Reverend Hathaway, bent the arc of history toward justice. Thurgood Marshall had lived along the same avenue where he grew up. The late great Maryland Congressman Elijah Cummings was one of his high school classmates. And at an early age, Reverend Hathaway was mentored by another legendary son of Baltimore City and civil rights champion, Reverend Vernon Dobson, with whom he helped organize and found BUILD, Baltimoreans United in Leadership Development. That organization has been serving the people of Baltimore City for over 40 years, helping to improve affordable housing, create jobs, revitalize neighborhoods, and so much more. Through BUILD, Reverend Hathaway left his mark on Baltimore City early in his career, and his legacy of good works will continue to endure through that powerful organization. But he has never been one to rest on his laurels, and Reverend Hathaway continued throughout his life to find new ways of serving at the intersection of faith and social justice--and of giving back to the church and the community that raised him. After earning a B.A. from the McKendree University School of Religion and an M.A. from Saint Mary's Seminary and University in Baltimore, Reverend Hathaway pursued a Ph.D. at the United Theological Seminary in Ohio, and he chose the history of Union Baptist Church as the focus of his academic study. Through his deep research into the narrative and legacy of that church, Reverend Hathaway became a steward of the church's culture, traditions, and values. I submit that no one knows Union Baptist Church better than Reverend Hathaway. He then returned to Baltimore City, becoming senior pastor of Union Baptist in 2007, and he channeled his efforts in that role toward renovating the very traditions of the church that he had studied and lived for so many years. Reverend Hathaway marshalled the full force of his religious wisdom and oratorical gift to guide the West Baltimore community forward, through both good times and bad times. His swelling sermons moved a generation--and grew the faith. But Reverend Hathaway learned early that the duties of a faith leader don't end at the bricks of the church walls. He took the values of his religious devotion and aimed them at the ongoing fight to realize the full promise of civil rights and equal opportunity. His efforts have spanned issues of health equity, civil rights, wages, and employment, but perhaps his greatest fight of them all has been waged through his dedication to expanding access to education. As senior pastor, Reverend Hathaway was deeply committed to bolstering the church's Head Start Program so more children from the surrounding area could receive high-quality early education. I have had the privilege of visiting the Union Baptist Head Start with him to see, firsthand, the impact his work has had on the community. Reverend Hathaway's legacy can be seen in the wide smiles of the children who benefit from that initiative--and who benefit from his efforts to grow and strengthen that vital program. While senior pastor at Union Baptist, Reverend Hathaway also served as a longtime leader of Promise Heights, an organization committed to improving outcomes in West Baltimore's Community Schools. He has helped guide the course of higher education through his role on the board of the University of Maryland Medical Center. He was an early and outspoken advocate for bridging the digital divide and narrowing the homework gap so more students could access the internet. And even now, after his retirement, he is leading the fight to transform the now vacant lot of P.S. 103 in West Baltimore into the Justice Thurgood Marshall Center, which will focus on programs supporting education, justice, and ethics. He has done all this, and more, over the course of an extraordinary career marked by a commitment to his faith, a dedication to the people of Baltimore City, and a belief in the power of community. Though he has retired as the leader of Union Baptist Church, I know that he will carry on in the work that has defined his tenure as senior pastor--and defined his entire life. I am proud to call him a full partner in the work of building a more perfect union, and I will continue standing shoulder-to-shoulder with him in our shared endeavor to invest in the success of all. | 2020-01-06 | Mr. VAN HOLLEN | Senate | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgS8908-3 | null | 3,588 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | At 10:57 a.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Mrs. Cole, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has passed the following bills, in which it requests the concurrence of the Senate: H.R. 2685. An act to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report examining the cybersecurity of mobile service networks, and for other purposes. H.R. 4045. An act to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'', and for other purposes. H.R. 4055. An act to establish a cybersecurity literacy campaign, and for other purposes. H.R. 4352. An act to amend the Act of June 18, 1934, to reaffirm the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for Indian Tribes, and for other purposes. H.R. 5720. An act to amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to provide for a periodic transaction reporting requirement for Federal judicial officers and the online publication of financial disclosure reports of Federal judicial officers, and for other purposes. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgS8909-3 | null | 3,589 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | The following bills were read the first and the second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: H.R. 2685. An act to direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information to submit to Congress a report examining the cybersecurity of mobile service networks, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. H.R. 4045. An act to direct the Federal Communications Commission to establish a task force to be known as the ``6G Task Force'' , and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. H.R. 4055. An act to establish a cybersecurity literacy campaign, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. H.R. 4352. An act to amend the Act of June 18, 1934, to reaffirm the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for Indian Tribes, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgS8909-4 | null | 3,590 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | The following bill was read the second time, and placed on the calendar: S. 3299. A bill to prohibit the Department of Defense from discharging or withholding pay or benefits from members of the National Guard based on COVID-19 vaccination status. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgS8909-5 | null | 3,591 |
formal | single | null | homophobic | Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Mr. Rubio, Ms. Warren, Mr. Markey, and Mr. Scott of Florida) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation: S. Res. 467 Whereas the Department of Defense began developing the Arecibo Observatory located in Barrio Esperanza, Arecibo, Puerto Rico, during the 1950s, and its characteristic instrument, a large radio telescope of 305 meters in diameter was completed in 1963; Whereas the facility was later owned by the National Science Foundation, and supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and various university partners; Whereas the Arecibo Observatory's 305-meter fixed spherical radio telescope, was the world's largest single-dish radio telescope until the Five-Hundred-Meter Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope located in Gizhou, China, began observing in 2016; Whereas the 305-meter radio telescope made unparalleled contributions to the fields of radio astronomy, planetary, and atmospheric sciences, and played a role in inspiring thousands of students in Puerto Rico, the Nation, and the world to pursue careers in STEM fields through the Arecibo Observatory Education and Public Outreach Programs; Whereas the radio telescope significantly advanced the field of radio astronomy, including the first indirect detection of gravitational waves, the first detection of extrasolar planets, innumerable contributions to the field of time domain astronomy and the study of the interstellar medium, and played a key role in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence; Whereas the Arecibo Observatory had the best planetary radar system in the world, used by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for near-Earth object detection and was an essential part of the agency's planetary defense program; Whereas the planetary radar at the Arecibo Observatory has contributed fundamentally and significantly to the knowledge of the solar system; Whereas the Arecibo Observatory's Incoherent Scatter Radar and supporting facilities have provided fundamental understanding of the ionosphere and upper atmosphere, and the interface between the atmosphere and space that protects the planet from solar wind, meteors, and other potential threats; and Whereas, December 1, 2021, marks the 1-year anniversary of the uncontrolled collapse sustained by the radio telescope after a series of cable failures in tower 4: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate-- (1) acknowledges the loss of the Arecibo Observatory's radio telescope due to its collapse and its implications for the loss of a unique world-class multidisciplinary science facility which conducted research in the areas of space and atmospheric sciences, radar astronomy and planetary sciences, astronomy, and astrophysics; (2) acknowledges that the uncontrolled collapse of the 305- meter radio telescope represents a remarkable loss of astronomical observation capabilities, scientific research and development, planetary defense capabilities, and applied science advantage for the United States; (3) recognizes the rich scientific, educational, and economic benefits that the Arecibo Telescope has made to the people of Puerto Rico, the Nation, and the world; (4) recognizes the work and contributions made by the thousands of dedicated staff who have supported the Arecibo Observatory for close to 6 decades; (5) commends the National Science Foundation for convening a virtual workshop in June 2021, to explore ideas for future scientific and educational activities at the Arecibo Observatory; and (6) encourages the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and other agencies to study means of replacing the scientific capabilities that were lost at the Arecibo Observatory, utilizing new state-of-the-art technologies at the site. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-02-pt1-PgS8914 | null | 3,592 |
formal | welfare | null | racist | The Chaplain, the Reverend Margaret Grun Kibben, offered the following prayer: Lord, find reason to delight in Your people. Call us to return to You, yielding our whole selves to Your desires for Your creation. You have told us what You desire, so we ask that You would help us to do justice, to find opportunities to be fair to one another, to seek out those who are oppressed and give them voice, to look around us, and where there is injustice, not to ignore it. We ask that You would help us to love kindness, not just engage in polite discourse or offer a friendly gesture, but to look into the eyes of another and show them Your love, to go that extra mile for someone else's welfare, to speak to someone who clearly needs a kind and sympathetic word. We ask that You would help us to walk humbly with You. God, You have called us to distinguished positions and entrusted to us significant responsibility. You have blessed us abundantly with opportunity and power. May we be ever mindful that all we have obtained, all that we enjoy, all that we are, is from You. As we employ these gracious gifts of Your providence, may we live into Your expectations, into Your desires, that You would take delight in us. In Your merciful name we pray. Amen. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-12-03-pt1-PgH6913-2 | null | 3,593 |
formal | Baltimore | null | racist | Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: EC-2815. A letter from the Acting Assistant Secretary, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor, transmitting the Department's Major interim final rules -- Prescription Drug and Health Care Spending [CMS- 9905-IFC] (RIN: 0938-AU66) received November 29, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Education and Labor. EC-2816. A letter from the Compliance Specialist, Wage and Hour Division, Department of Labor, transmitting the Department's Major final rule -- Increasing the Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors (RIN: 1235-AA41) received November 30, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104- 121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Education and Labor. EC-2817. A letter from the Associate Division Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Air Plan Approval; Maryland; Baltimore Area Base Year Inventory for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards [EPA- R03-OAR-2021-0017; FRL-9091-02-R3] received November 4, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2818. A letter from the Associate Division Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Colorado; Revisions to Regulation Number 7; Aerospace, Oil and Gas, and Other RACT Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard for the Denver Metro/North Front Range Nonattainment Area [EPA-R08- OAR-2021-0262; FRL-9163-02-R8] received November 4, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2819. A letter from the Associate Division Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Washington; Low Emission Vehicle Program [EPA-R10-OAR-2019-0574; FRL- 8814-02-R10] received November 4, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2820. A letter from the Associate Division Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- Response to Vacatur of Certain Provisions of the Mercury Inventory Reporting Rule [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0421; FRL-8523-02-OCSPP] (RIN: 2070-AK93) received November 4, 2021, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); Public Law 104-121, Sec. 251; (110 Stat. 868); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. EC-2821. A letter from the Associate Division Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule -- National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks, Surface Coating of Metal Cans, Boat Manufacturing, and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing; Technical Correction [EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0314, | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | House | CREC-2021-12-03-pt1-PgH6913-7 | null | 3,594 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Business Before the Senate Madam President, on other Senate priorities, as we continue working on Build Back Better, Democrats will simultaneously address other year-end priorities as well. First, we will continue working, as necessary, to process President Biden's nominations both to the Federal bench and to serve in key posts within his administration. On that front, today, we will begin consideration of a terrific nominee, Jessica Rosenworcel, tapped by President Biden to serve as Chair of the FCC. Ms. Rosenworcel has nearly a decade of experience already as an FCC Commissioner and will soon be the first-ever woman confirmed to serve as Chair, breaking another glass ceiling in our government. She has been a fierce advocate for closing the digital divide, for protecting net neutrality, and, when confirmed, Ms. Rosenworcel will oversee critical Federal programs that help low-income Americans secure internet access. There are other nominees to come this week. Regrettably, if our Republican colleagues continue their holds on various individuals, Senators should prepare for the possibility of late nights and votes on the weekend. The President deserves to have his team, and we will spend whatever time we need to ensure his nominees are confirmed. Finally, Democrats will also continue addressing other issues before the end of this year. We will keep working on finding a path forward on voting rights legislation, and there are many intense discussions going on in that area. We will also work to address the debt limit and preserve the full faith and credit of the United States. I want to thank Leader McConnell for his cooperation in that regard. And, this week, we also anticipate that we will be able to reach a final conference agreement on the NDAA. Congress has passed the annual Defense bill without fail for, roughly, 60 years, largely on a bipartisan basis. I expect this year will be no different. So there is a lot of work to do. It will likely take weekends and late nights to get it done, but we will continue forging ahead on behalf of the American people. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-06-pt1-PgS8920-5 | null | 3,595 |
formal | based | null | white supremacist | Russia Madam President, now on a totally different matter, last week brought new information about Russia's military activities along its border with Ukraine. Heavily armed ground forces are mobilizing by the tens of thousands. It is looking more and more like Vladimir Putin intends to redraw another border by force. The escalation of Putin's ongoing war against Ukraine is an immediate threat to Ukraine's sovereignty and to the security of its people. But as always with Putin, it is also a test with much broader consequences. Can aggressive powers violate sovereign countries without facing serious consequence? Fellow authoritarians in Beijing and Tehran will be watching how the free world responds. And President Biden has an opportunity to set the tone when he speaks with Putin tomorrow. The stakes for the President's call with Putin couldn't be clearer. We know what happens when the United States fails to engage with Russia from a position of strength. We know what weakness and capitulation get us. Remember how President Obama treated arms control and European-based missile defense as negotiable items that could be traded away in exchange for Moscow's good will. Remember how he mocked Republicans--perhaps most notably our colleague Senator Romney--who dared to suggest that we ought to take the threat of Russia seriously. Remember the cuts to defense spending. Remember the dithering over whether to provide meaningful capabilities to Ukraine when Putin first invaded and how useless our blankets and MREs were against Russian armor and Moscow-trained little green men. This weakness didn't purchase a reset; it produced a more emboldened Russia, willing to engage in more repression at home and more aggression abroad. And here we are today. Vladimir Putin is gearing up to escalate his violation of Ukraine's sovereignty. And if the free world doesn't object, there is no reason to assume he will stop there. So, tomorrow, President Biden has both the opportunity and the responsibility to tell Russia and Ukraine and our allies in Europe that the United States cares about sovereign borders and will help its friends protect them. If the free world is serious, its leaders--first and foremost, the President of the United States--will leave Putin no room to doubt that Ukraine's sovereignty is inviolable. And, by extension, they will signal to Chairman Xi that similar prospecting in the Pacific will come with prohibitive costs. If our leaders do not defend a fundamental tenet of international order, we cannot be surprised by the chaos that will follow. So if President Biden is serious, he will convince Germany's new government to abandon the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline and, instead, try to reduce its dependence on resources that enrich Putin and his cronies and give Moscow leverage over Europe. If the President intends to learn from the past and actually help Ukraine defend itself, he should expeditiously provide weapon systems that will materially help Ukraine defend itself against air threats. Finally, for the United States to lead the world's response to authoritarian aggression, I hope President Biden will call on our allies to do more to contribute to our collective security. In Europe, NATO member states must treat their own military modernization as a top priority. And in the Indo-Pacific, our friends in Taiwan and elsewhere must commit the resources, training, and reforms needed to help them face down their own looming threats. Tomorrow's call must mark a turning point for the Biden administration's approach to major power competition from one where words are pinned on hopes to one where its words are literally backed by strength. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-06-pt1-PgS8922-3 | null | 3,596 |
formal | public school | null | racist | School Board Violence Madam President, it was about 2 months ago there was an uproar in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hardly a day would pass, hardly a Republican Senator would take the committee dais and speak and not raise their mock horror and outrage over a decision by the Department of Justice under President Biden to notify school boards and school board members and teachers across the United States that we would not tolerate violence against them for their public duties. Merrick Garland, as Attorney General, volunteered to work with State and local law enforcement to make certain that members of the school board, teachers, administrators--all of them--would be safe in the execution of their duties, and none of them should fear violence. You wouldn't have believed the reaction from the Republican side of the dais in the Judiciary Committee. They came in and said that this is just an effort by the Biden administration to suppress free speech, to stop people who show up at school board meetings from expressing themselves. Well, we repeated over and over again it wasn't expression of speech we were worried about, it was violence and every form of it that the Department of Justice was responding to, they wouldn't hear of it. They refused to acknowledge the very real reality across the United States, and even in our State of Illinois, when it comes to violence against school board members. The Members of this Senate share something in common. At some point in our lives, we heard the call to public service. It may have come in the form of a law we wanted to change or a passion for serving our communities back home. But for some, the greatest call to public service is to help children, the desire to do what you can, inch by inch, day by day, to leave a better world for the kids. That is one of the reasons that Carolyn Waibel, a mother from my home State of Illinois, decided to put her name on the ballot to run in a local school board election. She wanted to serve her community and advocate for the safety and well-being of every child in St. Charles, IL, a suburb near Chicago. Sadly, Carolyn Waibel's career as a public servant was cut short. And it is not because she had any change of heart. It was because she feared for her family's safety. Trouble began last summer. Carolyn started receiving threatening emails because of her views on mask requirements and in-person learning. At first, she brushed them off and said she would ignore them. She figured harsh feedback was just part of being a public servant. But then she started receiving messages that read: ``Your days are numbered.'' This mother, school board member--a non-paying job--was having her life threatened. Then she started to receive other messages, and other events occurred. Soon enough, her personal information was spread out online, and her home became a target. Carolyn started discovering dead rodents thrown in her driveway. At one point, a trespasser cut the wires on the air-conditioning unit to her home. Then came the final straw: Carolyn actually heard someone sneak onto her property, cut the cord to her refrigerator, and open the door to her laundry room. Following months of harassment, Carolyn resigned from her district's school board in October. In explaining her decision to one news outlet, she said: ``I had to put the safety of myself and [my] family first.'' She said: Even though I have resigned, I am still receiving threats. Carolyn is far from the only school official who has feared for her safety inrecent months. I commend her situation to my Republican colleagues who were so critical of the Attorney General for even raising the possibility of violence against school board members. All throughout the country, school board members, teachers, and other officials have reported harassment, intimidation, and even assaults. In Pennsylvania, one school board president received a deluge of threatening emails, voice mails, and social media posts because of the district's COVID policies. Some of the messages threatened her life, while others threatened to share her personal information with the world. Down in Florida, a school board member received death threats because she chaperoned a parent-approved field trip to an LGBTQ-friendly restaurant. She received threatening letters and phone calls from all over the United States. In Ohio, a school board member received a letter that read: ``We're coming after you.'' After she shared the letter online, a public school official in a neighboring district said the members of his board had received similar threats. The list goes on and on. Just type ``school board violence'' into your favorite search engine and look for yourself. These threats against school officials are widespread and serious. A recent report from EdWeek Research Center found that 60 percent of the principals and district leaders they surveyed said ``someone in their district had been verbally or physical threatened in the past year'' because of the district's response to COVID-19. One in three of the officials surveyed said the school board members, even their nurses, had faced similar threats. Now, I understand the pandemic has caused great concern and confusion for parents, especially parents of young kids. It is a new challenge for all of us, and there are no simple or straightforward answers in keeping our schools open and safe. It is every parent's right to voice their disagreements with the members of their school board. And it is only natural that at times, emotions may run high, that is part of open debate in a free society. But there is a difference--a clear difference--which we should never overlook between free speech and threats of violence. We need to be unequivocal in drawing that line. I salute the Attorney General for making it clear that he was willing to stand up and defend those school board members who were subjected to harassment, intimidation, and even violence. These people work for no pay. Many of them are parents themselves. They are not part of some shadowy organization or conspiracy. They are our neighbors. They deserve to be safe, just as we all do. The unprecedented rise in threats against school board members and public school officials should not be taken lightly or politicized. There have already been too many instances of officials being assaulted. Law enforcement agencies have a responsibility to take these reports seriously, and that is exactly what the FBI is doing by tracking reports of violence and threats of violence against school officials. Keeping track of those incidents and those involved in them will save lives. It will enable State and local law enforcement to develop tailored strategies to keep communities safe. As part of these efforts, Attorney General Garland issued a memo on October 4 encouraging Justice Department officials to reach out to members of law enforcement to see if we could assist. This outreach is an integral part of the Department of Justice's responsibility. I am thankful these conversations are underway. Instead of condemning violence, some of our Republican colleagues have been railing against the Justice Department for even suggesting there is a possibility. Why? Do they believe these incidents of violence and threats are acceptable, that they shouldn't be taken seriously? I don't believe that. During the pandemic, there has been a troubling and growing trend of violent behavior in all spheres of public life. Everyone from flight attendants to election workers and--yes--school board officials has been harassed and assaulted. More than four in five flight attendants report they have had to deal with an unruly passenger during the first half of the year. As a frequent passenger on airlines, I have heard the announcements they make to try to let people know how serious this issue is and that it is going to be taken seriously. In a moment of danger, these workers and public servants are vulnerable. That is why the Department of Justice has to do its job. Here in the Senate, we should be united as well in saying violence and the threat of violence have no place in public life, whether in a Federal building, on an airplane, or in a school board meeting in St. Charles, IL. When parents like Carolyn Waibel are harassed to the point of fearing for their family's safety, we need to at least have the common sense and common courage to speak up. We need to support members of law enforcement who are doing everything they can to protect all of our families. Among our many freedoms as Americans is the freedom to live without fear. Let's defend that right together. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-06-pt1-PgS8923-2 | null | 3,597 |
formal | Chicago | null | racist | School Board Violence Madam President, it was about 2 months ago there was an uproar in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Hardly a day would pass, hardly a Republican Senator would take the committee dais and speak and not raise their mock horror and outrage over a decision by the Department of Justice under President Biden to notify school boards and school board members and teachers across the United States that we would not tolerate violence against them for their public duties. Merrick Garland, as Attorney General, volunteered to work with State and local law enforcement to make certain that members of the school board, teachers, administrators--all of them--would be safe in the execution of their duties, and none of them should fear violence. You wouldn't have believed the reaction from the Republican side of the dais in the Judiciary Committee. They came in and said that this is just an effort by the Biden administration to suppress free speech, to stop people who show up at school board meetings from expressing themselves. Well, we repeated over and over again it wasn't expression of speech we were worried about, it was violence and every form of it that the Department of Justice was responding to, they wouldn't hear of it. They refused to acknowledge the very real reality across the United States, and even in our State of Illinois, when it comes to violence against school board members. The Members of this Senate share something in common. At some point in our lives, we heard the call to public service. It may have come in the form of a law we wanted to change or a passion for serving our communities back home. But for some, the greatest call to public service is to help children, the desire to do what you can, inch by inch, day by day, to leave a better world for the kids. That is one of the reasons that Carolyn Waibel, a mother from my home State of Illinois, decided to put her name on the ballot to run in a local school board election. She wanted to serve her community and advocate for the safety and well-being of every child in St. Charles, IL, a suburb near Chicago. Sadly, Carolyn Waibel's career as a public servant was cut short. And it is not because she had any change of heart. It was because she feared for her family's safety. Trouble began last summer. Carolyn started receiving threatening emails because of her views on mask requirements and in-person learning. At first, she brushed them off and said she would ignore them. She figured harsh feedback was just part of being a public servant. But then she started receiving messages that read: ``Your days are numbered.'' This mother, school board member--a non-paying job--was having her life threatened. Then she started to receive other messages, and other events occurred. Soon enough, her personal information was spread out online, and her home became a target. Carolyn started discovering dead rodents thrown in her driveway. At one point, a trespasser cut the wires on the air-conditioning unit to her home. Then came the final straw: Carolyn actually heard someone sneak onto her property, cut the cord to her refrigerator, and open the door to her laundry room. Following months of harassment, Carolyn resigned from her district's school board in October. In explaining her decision to one news outlet, she said: ``I had to put the safety of myself and [my] family first.'' She said: Even though I have resigned, I am still receiving threats. Carolyn is far from the only school official who has feared for her safety inrecent months. I commend her situation to my Republican colleagues who were so critical of the Attorney General for even raising the possibility of violence against school board members. All throughout the country, school board members, teachers, and other officials have reported harassment, intimidation, and even assaults. In Pennsylvania, one school board president received a deluge of threatening emails, voice mails, and social media posts because of the district's COVID policies. Some of the messages threatened her life, while others threatened to share her personal information with the world. Down in Florida, a school board member received death threats because she chaperoned a parent-approved field trip to an LGBTQ-friendly restaurant. She received threatening letters and phone calls from all over the United States. In Ohio, a school board member received a letter that read: ``We're coming after you.'' After she shared the letter online, a public school official in a neighboring district said the members of his board had received similar threats. The list goes on and on. Just type ``school board violence'' into your favorite search engine and look for yourself. These threats against school officials are widespread and serious. A recent report from EdWeek Research Center found that 60 percent of the principals and district leaders they surveyed said ``someone in their district had been verbally or physical threatened in the past year'' because of the district's response to COVID-19. One in three of the officials surveyed said the school board members, even their nurses, had faced similar threats. Now, I understand the pandemic has caused great concern and confusion for parents, especially parents of young kids. It is a new challenge for all of us, and there are no simple or straightforward answers in keeping our schools open and safe. It is every parent's right to voice their disagreements with the members of their school board. And it is only natural that at times, emotions may run high, that is part of open debate in a free society. But there is a difference--a clear difference--which we should never overlook between free speech and threats of violence. We need to be unequivocal in drawing that line. I salute the Attorney General for making it clear that he was willing to stand up and defend those school board members who were subjected to harassment, intimidation, and even violence. These people work for no pay. Many of them are parents themselves. They are not part of some shadowy organization or conspiracy. They are our neighbors. They deserve to be safe, just as we all do. The unprecedented rise in threats against school board members and public school officials should not be taken lightly or politicized. There have already been too many instances of officials being assaulted. Law enforcement agencies have a responsibility to take these reports seriously, and that is exactly what the FBI is doing by tracking reports of violence and threats of violence against school officials. Keeping track of those incidents and those involved in them will save lives. It will enable State and local law enforcement to develop tailored strategies to keep communities safe. As part of these efforts, Attorney General Garland issued a memo on October 4 encouraging Justice Department officials to reach out to members of law enforcement to see if we could assist. This outreach is an integral part of the Department of Justice's responsibility. I am thankful these conversations are underway. Instead of condemning violence, some of our Republican colleagues have been railing against the Justice Department for even suggesting there is a possibility. Why? Do they believe these incidents of violence and threats are acceptable, that they shouldn't be taken seriously? I don't believe that. During the pandemic, there has been a troubling and growing trend of violent behavior in all spheres of public life. Everyone from flight attendants to election workers and--yes--school board officials has been harassed and assaulted. More than four in five flight attendants report they have had to deal with an unruly passenger during the first half of the year. As a frequent passenger on airlines, I have heard the announcements they make to try to let people know how serious this issue is and that it is going to be taken seriously. In a moment of danger, these workers and public servants are vulnerable. That is why the Department of Justice has to do its job. Here in the Senate, we should be united as well in saying violence and the threat of violence have no place in public life, whether in a Federal building, on an airplane, or in a school board meeting in St. Charles, IL. When parents like Carolyn Waibel are harassed to the point of fearing for their family's safety, we need to at least have the common sense and common courage to speak up. We need to support members of law enforcement who are doing everything they can to protect all of our families. Among our many freedoms as Americans is the freedom to live without fear. Let's defend that right together. I yield the floor. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-06-pt1-PgS8923-2 | null | 3,598 |
formal | the Fed | null | antisemitic | Nomination of Jessica Rosenworcel Madam President, I rise to support President Biden's nomination to the FCC of Jessica Rosenworcel to be the Chair of a new term of Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission. In selecting her, President Biden has picked someone with great experience and with great knowledge of the FCC in a moment where we need tremendous leadership. The FCC's oversight and scope touches just about every part of our domestic economy and our lives. And we know that in an information age, it can be an exciting time of a lot of change but also of many real challenges. So know that this FCC Chair will be challenged. There will be lots of things for every household. From affordable to reliability, to protecting consumers, to restoring an open and free internet, to driving new spectrum innovation policy, to safeguarding the public interest, there is a lot to do at the FCC. The policy decisions before the FCC are substantial, and Chairwoman Rosenworcel is committed to those priorities and, as I said, immensely qualified to lead at this critical moment. Before President Biden designated her to serve as Chair, Ms. Rosenworcel had spent nearly a decade at the FCC, and she knows how to get things done, furthering the Agency's work on important issues of helping to narrow the digital divide. When the pandemic hit, we obviously had a new challenge facing us: How to get students connected, how to get healthcare connected, how to help people living in disparity get access to affordable broadband. For the Tribal community of one nation, the Makah Nation--Madam President, I will yield to the majority leader for his motions. | 2020-01-06 | Unknown | Senate | CREC-2021-12-06-pt1-PgS8927 | null | 3,599 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.