SMART Energy Act

Mr. President, I rise today to decry yet again Putin's horrific actions against Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.

As we bear witness to this deadly war and the consequences of this fossil fuel-funded invasion, I stand here again to denounce our own addiction to fossil fuels, along with Big Oil's relentless attempts to sabotage clean and renewable energy with the support of the Republican Party.

We can see in the coverage on television that the corporate profiteering by Big Oil and the American Petroleum Institute--the American Prevarication Institute--has once again played a part in war and destruction. And all are enabled by the GOP's fealty to oil, gas, and the fallacy of American energy independence. It is a tale of Republican hypocrisy, all funded by the fossil fuel industry. It would be absurdly comic if it weren't so horribly tragic.

Oil profits are the engine of Russia's economy, and natural gas is the geopolitical weapon it wields to threaten Europe's energy security. Nearly 40 percent of Russia's entire revenue is derived from oil and gas exports. Russia's tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery are funded by dirty fossil fuels purchased by other countries, including the United States of America. We are part of the funding of Vladimir Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine. We import oil from Russia. That oil goes to Putin and his cronies.

We have a moral moment here to provide all possible humanitarian aid to the Ukrainian people. We have a moral moment here to cut off the money pipeline that is funding the missiles and the tanks that are destroying the homes of the Ukrainian people. And we have a moral moment here to reject the bad-faith arguments that are using this horrifying invasion to push for more drilling and money to fossil fuel companies, more lands and waters lost to the extraction of oil and gas, and more profit for Big Oil at the expense of American pocketbooks as our consumers are tipped upside down at the gasoline pumps all across our country, shaking money out of those pockets and sending it to Big Oil and sending it to Russia.

During 2021, Russia supplanted Mexico as the second largest exporter of crude oil and petroleum in the United States. On average, we bought more than 600,000 barrels of oil from Russia every single day of 2021. That is more than $17 billion in American money going to Putin and his oil-soaked oligarchs.

We need to shut that money pipeline to Putin off before it does any more damage. That is why I announced my Severing Putin's Immense Gains from Oil Transfers, or the SPIGOT, Act this week. This bill would conclusively lift the veil on the Russian fossil fuel industry's corrupt dealings, while requiring the United States to eliminate carbon-polluting imports from Russia, moving the United States toward a future that is no longer dependent upon Russian oil but dependent upon our own renewable resources.

Global oil markets will adjust in the short term and long term to our import ban on oil. In the short term, we can actually supplant any supply disruptions with an additional release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. A 10-percent release of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve would backfill all of our Russian imports for 100 days or, to put it another way, we have a Strategic Petroleum Reserve of 600 million barrels. If we deploy 600,000 barrels a day, we can do it for 1,000 days in a row in order to make sure the Russians understand that we are dead serious about this.

Putin's $630 billion central bank reserve that he thinks is going to protect him and his economy--well, that chest is filled with the spoils of oil and natural gas. A lot of it is money from American consumers. It is not just the sales to the United States or Europe but the interconnected dirty energy markets that feed off this fuel-soaked firestorm.

If we want to truly dial-up the pressure on Putin and his oligarchs, we need to end our deadly addiction to Russian fossil fuels and help our allies to do the very same thing. If we want to truly say no more to fossil-fueled war, we need to pursue the pathway to peace that is powered by domestic clean energy--international clean energy revolution led by the United States.

But instead what I hear from Republicans and on FOX News and from the

American Petroleum Institute is the same classic refrain of: ``Drill, baby, drill.'' Their insidious answer to war, to rising prices, to any crisis that they can use for their own purpose is more drilling and more leases.

Well, where has the ``American Prevarication Institute'' argument gotten us so far? One, skyrocketing exports, which hike up our prices to American consumers and feed into the global fossil fuel addiction; public lands and waters the size of Indiana that are locked down by unused fossil fuel leases, which companies squat upon to pad their own asset base and prevent renewable development; wars and national security threats, driven and paid for by Big Oil's craving for more profits; climate chaos with more than $700 billion worth of damages caused by extreme weather disasters in the United States over the last 5 years alone--$700 billion worth of damage to us, to the United States, from climate in the last 5 years.

In 2015, Congress repealed the crude oil and gas export ban that had been in place for 40 years in our country so that we would keep our oil here. It was repealed with unanimous support of the Republican Party, on the other side of the aisle, and it allowed for the sale of U.S. crude and natural gas on the global markets.

I warned at that time it would be a huge mistake for our country to take that action. It was the worst of all worlds. It led to recordbreaking amounts of U.S. oil going to foreign nations without benefiting U.S. consumers. Pain at the pump was not eased and neither was our dangerous dependence on illicit foreign oil. And every time-- every time--the Republicans call for more leasing, for more pipelines, for deepening our addiction to fossil fuels, they cry crocodile tears. They said we need to plunder our own lands and waters in order to lower prices for Americans, in order to ensure national independence from foreign oil sources, and then they exported that oil overseas. That was their plan all along. It wasn't so secret. It was obvious because that is how the American Petroleum Institute--the American Prevarication Institute--works.

But that argument is now leakier than an old oil tanker, and it has been proven again and again. Every bill that came up approving the Keystone XL Pipeline--drilling for oil off our coast, selling off our public lands to whatever bidder showed up--I just asked the same thing every single time. In 2011, in 2012, in 2015, every time, I asked Republicans if they would agree to ban any exports from these projects and keep Americans from bearing the environmental and health burden from projects that provide no benefit to their own families, to their own States. And every time, the Republicans blocked or rejected my amendments--every time. That proved their arguments won't hold water.

The Big Oil-backed push to extract more and more from American lands and waters was never about helping Americans at the pump. It was about pumping up the profits of Big Oil by getting a higher price out on the international marketplace for American oil, for American natural gas. That was their plan.

I am sick of the hypocrisy. I am sick of letting the American Petroleum Institute's prevarication triumph over the truth. I am sick of watching Americans deal with the climate crisis with dirty air, with dirty water, with high gas prices just to help the oil companies make a buck by getting the highest price they can on the international market exporting American oil.

The Republicans' push to use the crisis in Ukraine to line Big Oil's pockets isn't about addressing inflation at home. It is about inflating fossil fuel profits for Big Oil and big gas. In 2021, as gasoline prices increased by over 50 percent, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and Total Energies recorded their biggest profits that they had seen in 8 years.

In 2015, before the Republicans lifted the export ban--before the American Petroleum Institute got the Congress to vote to lift the ban on the export of American oil--China imported 191,000 barrels of oil from the United States. Now we send four times as much oil to China as we did back in the beginning of 2016 after the ban was lifted. To put it another way, we now import from Russia 600,000 barrels of oil a day, and we export to China 600,000 barrels of oil a day. What is wrong with that picture?

Our natural resources go to China, which they then use to fabricate products, which then they sell back to us undermining our own industries. And meanwhile, to make up for it, we import 600,000 barrels of oil from Russia and line the pockets of Putin, which allows him to buy the tanks, the planes, the infantry to assault and destroy a democracy in Ukraine.

This is a formula for failure of historic magnitude. And it was all so clear in that debate in 2015 when the Republicans led the effort to lift the ban on the export of our oil. It was oh-so clear what was going to happen, which is why I led the fight here on the Senate floor to block the lifting of that ban.

But I don't want to hear from the Republicans with their crocodile tears how much they care about importation of oil from Russia because the bottom line is, we now import 8.6 million barrels of oil a day into the United States. We now have a crisis on our hands that we have to ultimately deal with. We export 8.6 million barrels of oil a day. We export out of our country 8.6 million barrels of oil a day.

So I hear from Republicans, ``Oh, we need energy independence.'' Well, what are we doing exporting 8.6 million barrels of oil a day? What is that all about? We know what it is all about. It is about the American Petroleum Institute. It is about Big Oil and Big Gas getting a higher price on the international market than they get on the domestic market. That is what it was all about from the very beginning. We have an opportunity here to stop, finally, Big Oil's relentless quest for profit, which is funding Putin's war at the same time it undermines our competitiveness with China.

More leases are not going to help our allies in Europe. We are already sending our oil to the highest bidder. Oil and gas companies already have leases the size of Indiana. Let me say that again. The oil and gas industry has bid for, over the last two decades, leases to drill on the property owned by the American people. And 53 percent of those leases have yet to be drilled upon. That is the truth. If they are serious--which they are not--they should start drilling. If their crocodile tears are real, in fact, they should just start drilling.

But, of course, they are not going to because they--by squatting on those lands--keep the price of oil high. They keep the price of natural gas high. And Japan and South Korea and China right now get more of our imports than any other country. If oil companies really wanted to help Europe get off Russian gas, they could do that right now with the resources they have. Let me say that again. Oil companies could help Europe get off Russian natural gas right now with the resources they have, but that is not what they want. They want unfettered profit, more public lands, and more power on the global market. And that profit-- that oil-soaked power--has directly fueled Putin's war on Ukraine.

So there is a different pathway, and we have to commit to destroying demand for Putin's dirty energy business model by powering our country with clean, American-made renewable energy. And we can power our way to peace. An additional 16 million electric vehicles on the road in the United States would replace all of the oil that we import from Russia on a daily basis.

By passing the $555 billion investment in clean energy and climate justice, we can build a ``made in America'' clean energy economy that delivers real energy independence. We can unlock a safe, healthy future and untether ourselves from Putin's dirty profits. With tax credits and rebates in wind and solar, offshore wind, transmission, electric vehicles, heat pumps, and advanced domestic manufacturing, we can cut costs at home while cutting off Putin's money pipeline. These investments would reduce our dependence on global oil markets and instead power our country through localized clean energy.

Our Federal climate policies, our Federal energy policies are exactly what we need in this moment--this national security, moral, and economic moment. We don't need to power our Nation on Russian oil and sell off our forest and seas for an unnecessary Big

Oil land grab when they already have an area the size of Indiana that they are not drilling on because that increases their profits right now. We don't need to pay for Russia's invasion of Ukraine through Russian imports while paying higher prices at the pump to support profiteering and exports.

Let's wake up and win the renewable race to the future. Let's reject fossil-fueled greed for what that is--just greed. Let's protect our allies by destroying Putin's business model and delivering a future powered by domestic clean energy. That is the promise of peace. That is the promise to the whole world, to live on a safe planet. This is the promise we must make to the next generation of American young people and young people of the world, that we are going to power a clean energy revolution of wind and solar and all-electric vehicles and battery storage technologies, and we are going to destroy the business model of Russia and destroy the business models of other petrostates around the world with American innovation.

That is what the young people of our country and the world should expect from this generation and this Senate in 2022 on the floor of the United States Senate. That is the debate which we should have this year on behalf of a safer, more peaceful, more healthy, and more moral world.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, I rise today to object to the motion from the Senator from Montana to pass this bill through unanimous consent.

This push to put every square inch of Federal land up for sale is not a new one. It has been the plan of the American Petroleum Institute from the beginning of recorded time. It is not helping the Ukrainians in their fight, and it is not helping our European allies. It is helping inflate the profits of big oil and big gas companies.

In 2021 and 2020, we exported more crude oil and petroleum than we imported. Since 2015, when every Republican on their side lifted the ban on the exportation of American oil--that is what they wanted is their plan, that of the American Petroleum Institute--we now export 8.6 million barrels of oil out of our country every single day. Without question, whenever I have heard anything about energy independence, well, that was the natural consequence of lifting the ban on the exportation of our oil, and now, it is up to 8.6 million barrels a day.

As a matter of fact, in 2021, we actually exported 650,000 barrels of oil a day to China as we were importing 600,000 barrels of oil a day from Russia because that is what the American Petroleum Institute wanted--a globalization of this oil market--with the American consumer and the American economy just caught, ultimately, in an economic crossfire, which is where we are right now. We give China our natural resources so that they can produce a finished product. Meanwhile, we have to import 600,000 barrels of oil from Russia to make up for that, which they then use to pay for the planes for the navy and for the infantry, right now, working to destroy the democracy of Ukraine.

So the answer is for the United States to chart a new course. In 2021, 2020, 2019, and 2018, we exported more natural gas than we imported. We don't have a fossil fuel supply problem in the United States at all. We are supplying fossil fuels all around the world right now. We are sending our fuel to Japan, to China, to South Korea. Fossil fuel companies are sending their products anywhere they can get the highest price--raising costs for all of us at home.

By the way, again, understand that that is the key. Once they get it out of the United States and put it on a ship--natural gas or oil--they then get the highest price in the world for it, but they leave behind less oil and natural gas in the United States. With that diminished supply, that leads to an increase in prices for consumers for home heating oil, for gasoline, and for the natural gas to heat their homes. That has been their plan since 2015, to lift the ban on the exportation of American oil and natural gas.

Still, they are unfinished, and they want to be able to drill and frack every single inch of our national forests, our public lands, our coastlines. They want to add to their stockpiles of leases that they are squatting on already. Here are the numbers. It is absolutely astounding. Again, it is all part of the American Petroleum Institute's control of our domestic and foreign policy.

Right now, onshore, in our forests and fields and plains, 53 percent of all of the leases that the American Petroleum Institute--Exxon, Chevron, you name it--already has one. By the way, it is 2 bucks an acre--2 bucks an acre. They are not drilling on them, and they have had their leases for 5 years, for 10 years, for 15 years, for 20 years.

Then we hear from the American Petroleum Institute that we need more land that you will lease to us on public lands that we can buy for a couple of bucks, and we promise--we promise--we will start drilling on it, but just give us more land--even though they already have an area the size of Indiana that they have bid for and now, from the American people, on public lands, have the right to drill. But they are not doing it.

Offshore is even worse. On our pristine coasts from Maine to Florida, 77 percent of the existing leases which the American Petroleum Institute has, they haven't even drilled on them yet. They are sitting there. Yet they are coming here and saying: We need even more that we can get at this bargain basement price of a couple of bucks an acre.

That is their business plan, and it is just so disingenuous for the American Petroleum Institute to just continue to try to exploit crises while they, themselves, are not doing their own job, because it is inconsistent with the huge profit-making goals which they have.

Using the crisis in Ukraine and rising oil prices to push for more pro-oil policies doesn't make sense. Our oil addiction is what added more than $17 billion to Putin's pockets last year. Let me just say that again. We in the United States, at the gas pump, sent $17 billion to Putin for his war machine just in 2021.

So let's just not pretend that we need to plunder every inch of our country in order to protect our allies or to lower gas prices. Oil and gas companies want to frack and extract so they can continue to send American fuel abroad while they plead energy independence and send that to China as the highest bidder.

That is not our plan. It can't be our plan. We have to have a true, clean energy independence that helps rid the world of Putin's business model and leads the way to an American-led, international clean energy revolution. The Republicans right now are blocking the clean energy package that we have in the U.S. Senate.

For every 16 million all-electric vehicles we deploy, we back out the equivalent of all the oil we import from Russia. With the next 16 million, we back out all of the oil we import from Saudi Arabia. That is the plan for young people in our country and for young people around the world. If we do that in coordination with our allies, that destroys, in the long term, the business model of Russia and of the Middle Eastern nations that have us addicted to their oil.

I just think that we are at a critical time, and we need big plans; but one of them cannot be that we are saying to the oil industry that you can exploit this crisis, because if they are serious--and I will just finish on this note.

When we debated in January of 2015 the Keystone Pipeline, I made the amendment here on the Senate floor, saying, if we build this Keystone Pipeline, that we have to keep all of the oil here in the United States--it is the dirtiest oil in the world, the tar sands of Canada. In a straw that they wanted to build right through the United States, with all the environmental risks taken by the American people, they would then export it. So my amendment said, if we build this pipeline and take all of the environmental risks, that the oil should stay here.

Every single Republican voted not to keep it here. They all said that that oil can be exported to any country in the world.

Secondly, back when I was in the House of Representatives, I would make the amendment each year. If you want to drill off the coastlines of the United States, then any oil which is found has to stay here in America; otherwise, the beaches and the fishing industries of the United States take all the risks, and the oil companies reap all of the profits by putting that oil and natural gas on the international markets.

Every Republican voted no. We are not going to have a ban on the exportation of that oil and gas even though it endangers the drilling and would endanger the beaches and the fishing industries of the United States.

So it has always been about an export strategy, and that is all this is as well. It is an attempt to get more leases that they would then hoard--squat on--wait for the price to go higher, and then in their own good time, they would begin to drill, but it would only be in their interests, not our national interests.

As a result, because of the long, unfortunate history of the relationship between the American people and the American Petroleum Institute, I object.

Mr. President, just in response to the Senator, we have never had an ``all of the above'' strategy, truly. We have had an ``oil above all'' strategy. That is the problem that we have. That is the hole that we have dug for ourselves.

It is time for the United States to finally put a plan in place that backs out the imported oil from Russia, backs out the imported oil from the Middle East, and the only way we can do it is if we pass the climate provisions in President Biden's plan.

By 2030, the goal is to have 40 percent of all of our vehicles being all electric--no oil, no gasoline. Do you know what that does? It destroys the business model of Russia. It destroys the business model of the countries in the Middle East that need that petrol dollar from the American consumer in order to fund all of their nefarious activities.

Germany is going 65 percent all-electric vehicles by the year 2030--9 years from now, 65 percent all electric.

So if we put this together and we are serious about it right now, we will destroy the long-term threat fueled by our own addiction to energy, Europe's addiction to fossil fuels, and it will just send us on a clean energy future.

But in order to do it, we need a true ``all of the above'' strategy, not ``oil above all.'' That is how we got here. And if we are going to do it, we have to pass that comprehensive clean energy package out of the Senate this year and put it on President Biden's desk.

That will scare Putin and his cronies vacationing in Sochi. That will put a fear into the hearts of the oil monarchs of the Middle East because they will know once and for all that we are serious about not allowing our American consumer dollars to fuel conflicts around the world.

Again, I appreciate the time.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I rise today in support of S.J. Res. 38, a resolution to terminate the COVID-19 national emergency declaration.

After nearly 2 years of living under this state of emergency, the American people are worn out and yearning to breathe free. They long for their God-given freedoms and for leaders to take their side.

We as a nation must begin to learn to live with COVID. The robust powers this emergency declaration provides the Federal Government are no longer necessary, and Congress must debate and ultimately repeal them in order to begin the process of unwinding the powers the government took hold of during the peak of the crisis.

As we contemplate what returning to normal means, most Americans accept that COVID will likely never be entirely behind us, and setting zero COVID cases as a victory condition is more harmful than good.

That being said, of course, we have to respect the virus and protect the vulnerable, but we also must accept that personal responsibility, not government mandates and restrictions, must govern our approach to the virus going forward.

We must repeal this emergency declaration today to deliver a symbolic victory to our citizens that normalcy is around the corner and that limited government and our constitutional rights still reign supreme. It is high time to stop talking about restrictions and the unknown. We must chart a new course to victory today that respects the virus and our freedoms.

Let's look back on the recent history of this national emergency declaration. On March 13, 2020, President Trump first declared the national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease outbreak.

Two days prior, following an alarming rate of transmission, the World Health Organization had declared COVID-19 as a global pandemic. Little was known about the rapidly spreading virus at the time, but President Trump's declaration was intended to grant himself, as Chief Executive, additional authorities to bolster the Federal Government's efforts to control the virus and ease the burden on our healthcare system.

Less than a week later, California became the first State to issue a statewide stay-at-home order, and lockdowns, mask mandates, school closures, and capacity limits commenced all across the Nation.

These were the earliest and most frightening days of the pandemic, when our understanding of the virus was minimal and all measures were needed to react to a globe contagion unlike anything seen in nearly a century.

Almost a year later, and just over a month after his inauguration, in February 2021, President Biden justifiably went on to extend the COVID- 19 national emergency declaration for another year, a requirement under the National Emergencies Act that had it not been acted on, would have resulted in the automatic termination of the declaration.

At the time of President Biden's initial extension, only 50 million doses of the vaccine had been administered, and eligibility was largely limited to healthcare workers, first responders, and the most vulnerable populations. It would still be weeks or months before all adults would be eligible in all 50 States. Viral treatments and therapeutics were scarcely available to the public. All the while, the potentially more severe and contagious Delta variant was brewing in other regions of the world before it was detected and became the dominant variant here at home.

The situation on the ground in the United States has changed drastically since those early stages of the pandemic. Thanks to American innovation and Operation Warp Speed, the United States has now multiple vaccines available to all Americans over the age of 5. Everyone ages 12 and older is eligible for a booster shot if they want that inoculation.

In fact, more than 550 million shots have been administered in the United States, with 215 million people fully vaccinated, including 89 percent of individuals 65 and older. Additionally, the FDA has authorized two oral antivirals, and monoclonal antibody treatments are available for those at high risk of becoming seriously ill. Well done. Well done.

Omicron is now the dominant variant in the United States, accounting for 97 percent of the cases. While more contagious, Omicron tends to result in more mild symptoms in infected individuals. In Kansas, the daily case average in recent weeks has decreased 99 percent. Let me say that again. The daily case average has decreased 99 percent. Hospitalizations are down about 80 percent, and deaths are down 98 percent. Nationally, we are seeing drastic decreases in these same three categories as well. But perhaps even more importantly, today, at least 94 percent of Americans have some level of immunization.

Accordingly, States in every corner of the Nation are repealing indoor mask mandates, including blue States that have most adamantly enforced them. Yes, indeed, freedom-loving Americans who are worn out by the draconian lockdowns and mandates are giving a sigh of relief.

Despite all these advances in our position of a much greater understanding of the virus, President Biden stealthily extended the national emergency declaration once again on a late Friday afternoon 2 weeks ago.

Next, let us lay out some of the effects these policies have had on the American people and why we must abandon this approach, shrink the Federal response, and move toward a more nimble and effectively locally based community strategy that allows individual citizens and local health officials to exercise and promote old-fashioned self- responsibility and individual choice.

The first COVID-19 wave in the spring of 2020 took the world by surprise. The spread of the cases globally and in the United States was met with government-ordered lockdowns abroad and here at home. In just a few weeks, lockdowns put more than 10 million Americans out of work, with 6.6 million people applying for unemployment benefits in the last week of March alone.

These lockdowns, some of which extended for months in certain States, and the subsequent mandates and requirements that still remain in place have had dramatically negative impacts on our quality of life and had been minimally beneficial.

A recent study from Johns Hopkins University found lockdowns only reduced the COVID-19 death rate by 0.2 percent--0.2 percent--2 out of 1,000. These researchers noted that while ``lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted.''

These costs have been felt at an alarming rate in a number of aspects of American life. Drug overdose deaths rose by 30 percent in 2020, hitting the highest number ever recorded. Symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorder and the use of mental health care among adults increased by 36 percent from August 2020 to February of 2021.

The numbers for our children are even more troubling--our children, our grandchildren. The CDC found between March and October 2020, emergency department visits for mental health emergencies rose by 24 percent for children ages 5 through 11 and 31 percent for children ages 12 to 17 years.

In addition, emergency department visits for suspected suicide attempts

increased nearly 51 percent among girls ages 12 through 17--51 percent--in early 2021 compared to the same period in 2019.

School closures in the 2020-2021 academic year left students, on average, 5 months behind in mathematics and 4 months behind in reading. Disadvantaged and low-income schools disproportionately, of course, felt that impact.

These societal ills have been compounded by mask mandates, vaccine mandates, and isolation orders. Keeping this emergency declaration in place will cause--will cause--public health officials and governments at all levels to maintain the possibility of allowing them to remain or resurrecting them.

And much like America's alcohol prohibition a century ago, these mandates will make criminals out of all of us, as we all are guilty of disregarding them at one time or another. This only creates more disrespect for law and order. We can't allow this to happen.

And I have to add this: The mortality rate from COVID for the United States is 75 percent higher than Sweden's--75 percent higher than Sweden's--despite Sweden issuing no shutdowns or mask mandates. Not surprisingly, Sweden's economy is humming ahead of ours at a 5-percent rate above prepandemic levels.

All this being said, once again, I beg this administration and the national media to stop fearmongering, to share all the science, and, please, let our people go.

The Democrats' COVID obsession has also resulted in out-of-control spending and massive debt. Congress has appropriated $6 trillion. That is 6 times 10 to the 12th--6 with 12 zeroes after it--$6 trillion to respond to this crisis. This means Federal spending to combat the pandemic has well surpassed the $4.1 trillion the United States spent waging World War II. Throw in the roughly $1.5 trillion on World War I, the Korean war, Vietnam, and the Gulf war combined, and it still would not exceed what has been spent on COVID relief.

Let me say that another way. We borrowed from my children, my grandchildren, your children and grandchildren. We borrowed and spent more money on COVID than all the major wars combined form the 20th century.

While the $2.2 trillion CARES Act passed with nearly unanimous consent in both this body and the House, President Biden and the Democrats in Congress insisted more was needed.

Despite warnings from economists on all ends of the political spectrum that it would harm our economy, Democrats rammed through a highly partisan $1.9 trillion more of a spending package that has overheated our economy. This bill was in response to a problem that was already fixing itself.

Shockingly, I have to point out, only 9 percent of this funding was related to healthcare, and less than 1 percent was dedicated to vaccines. Instead, the funding, like the drawnout, unnecessary, heavy- handed health restrictions, was meant to implement drastic changes in our way of life and system of governance and expand Big Government socialism, not to mention it has resulted in the highest level of inflation we have seen in this country in 40 years. As one economist put it, the U.S. stimulus has been in a ``category of its own'' and has resulted in more inflation than almost any other advanced economy in the world.

With hundreds of billions of dollars of funds for schools and State governments unspent, the President announced during his State of the Union that he plans to send a supplemental COVID relief funding request to Congress. Our Nation's emergency posture to this virus is driving out-of-control spending, fueling inflation, and strapping our children and, again, our grandchildren, with more than $30 trillion in debt.

Indeed, at this time, our national debt is a greater threat to our Nation than COVID. This alone is another reason to end this declaration.

Now let me turn to the executive's emergency authority--the executive branch's emergency authority and Congress's role in delegating those powers. Since article II of the Constitution does not grant the President emergency powers, all such authority is granted by Congress. Many of these authorities are provided through three laws: the National Emergencies Act, which is what we are focused on today; the Stafford Act; and the Public Health Service Act.

All three have been applied by this administration to the COVID response, but the National Emergencies Act grants congressional oversight over a declaration by the President. Before I get into the need to exercise that congressional authority, let me quickly discuss what repealing this emergency declaration will not do. Let's talk about what it won't do.

First, terminating this emergency declaration will not impact the title 42 order currently in place and being exercised at our southern border that allows border officials to expel illegal aliens. Again, this will not impact title 42. The crisis at the United States-Mexico border has been fueled by this administration's decision to resume catch-and-release, halt construction of the border wall, and promise half a million dollars to immigrant families who broke our laws.

As a result, the number of illegal aliens crossing our southern border is at the highest level in more than 20 years under President Biden.

I can assure you, Republicans' intention is not to take away the only tool being utilized at our southern border to stem the tide of illegal immigrants pouring in. The authority for this order lies within the Secretary of Health and Human Services' public health emergency declaration made on January 31, 2020, under the Public Health Service Act.

The most recent internal review of title 42 submitted by CDC Director Walensky on February 2 found that the order needed to remain in place. Republicans agree--we agree--that the external threat of COVID coming across the border unchecked from other nations preserves the need for this order to remain in place and for us to pass legislation outside of these emergency declarations to further secure our porous border.

Second, terminating the emergency declaration would not impact the waivers issued by the HHS Secretary. Let me say that again. Terminating the emergency declaration would not impact the waivers issued by the HHS Secretary. These critical flexibilities--including increased access to care via telehealth--have been crucial to our ability to combat the virus. The telehealth waivers will not be impacted by removing the NEA.

And, in fact, I am a cosponsor of legislation to make many of these successful telehealth waivers permanent, and we must do so after the public health emergency expires, and we return to normal.

Until today, Congress has failed to fulfill our duty and oversight responsibilities laid out in the National Emergencies Act, ceding immense, unchecked power to the executive branch. We must, as the Democratic Representative from the great State of Kentucky, Romano Mazzoli, stated when this bill was being debated in 1975. I will quote Representative Mazzoli, the Democrat from Kentucky.

Consciously and deliberately [we must] force ourselves to

come to grips periodically--and ultimately--[deal] with the

vexing problems of national emergencies. The blame as well as

the glory will be on the shoulders of the Congress. . . . But

that is as it is supposed to be--that is the responsible

course.

The blame and the glory should remain on the shoulders of Congress, and that is why we are here today. We are here today to debate this responsible course moving forward.

While the COVID-19 emergency declaration has not utilized all powers provided to the President, major actions have been taken as a direct result of the declaration. Our Ready Reserve remains active, our Coast Guard is stretched, and the staggeringly expensive student loan relief remains in place.

More importantly, though, this declaration drives our Federal Government to maintain its massive emergency response infrastructure and drives leftwing politicians in Congress to push harmful mandates and unrestrained spending.

These powers are no longer needed. We have tools to minimize the impact of this virus and truly live with it.

This idea of living with COVID is not a fringe position held by Republicans. Democratic New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy recently said it was time to, and I will quote him, ``learn how to live'' with it. Democratic Governors in

Nevada, Rhode Island, New York, California--I will say California again--Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, and Oregon have announced they are lifting certain mask mandates and easing other restrictions.

Internationally, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand are working towards ``living with COVID'' phases. Just last week, the British Prime Minister announced that part of his ``living with COVID'' plan would even include the repeal of legislation and legal requirements for those who test positive for COVID to self-isolate.

While President Biden claimed during his State of the Union Address that--and I will quote him--``we are moving forward safely, back to . . . normal routines,'' his actions don't match his words. His call for a ``reset'' and claims to be loosening government intrusion into our lives by way of COVID restrictions are only half-truths. We know this because all these next items are true:

Despite being presented with the devastating effects of lockdowns, school and indoor mask mandates, and other restrictions, the President renewed the Federal Government's national emergency declaration again. In fact, the President just hours ago issued a veto threat of this resolution should it make it to his desk--the President promising a veto before we even have this vote on the Senate floor.

The CDC continues to hide data points they believe would be ``misinterpreted'' by those outside of the swamp they view as ignorant. The people--the people--are so much smarter than they are given credit for. This data gives information on who is receiving booster shots, the effectiveness of vaccines for certain age groups, and figures related to reinfections. This allows the Federal Government to suppress information that contradicts their one-size-fits-all policy and approach and preserves intrusive government policies.

Next, despite the President patting himself on the back for relaxing mask mandates, we still have in place the CDC order that requires masks on airplanes, in Ubers, and on your children's schoolbuses.

The administration has only withdrawn one of their vaccine mandates, the OSHA mandate on employers with more than 100 employees, after--only after--the Supreme Court struck it down. Three mandates are thankfully enjoined by the courts, but deadlines for the CMS mandate on healthcare workers are beginning to be enforced.

Just yesterday, on this floor, 44 Senate Democrats voted to keep the mandate in place despite its constitutional violation of State police powers, harm to an already weak healthcare workforce, and outdated science that guided the promulgation of the rule.

Next, the President's National COVID-19 Preparedness Plan asks Congress to approve funding that would expand the production of vaccines to 1 billion doses a year. That equates to three doses for every person--three doses per American. Do they plan to mandate these? Dr. Fauci recently led us to believe that indeed might be the case, and I will quote Dr. Fauci: ``The potential future requirement for an additional boost . . . is being carefully monitored in real time.''

While we prevented separated members of the military from receiving dishonorable discharges for choosing not to get the vaccine, the Defense Department has kicked out hundreds of our bravest service men and women.

How can the President downplay the progress we have made in our ability to combat the virus? And, more importantly, how can he continue to pursue an invasive and coercive Federal response that has eroded our freedoms and spread misery throughout this Nation? Does he not hear the cry of the people who have given him the power to be President?

As the United States enters the third year of COVID-19, 70 percent of Americans agree that it is time we accepted that COVID is here to stay and that we just need to get on with our lives--70 percent of Americans. We can't get Americans to decide where to go to lunch together, let alone on an issue this big, and 70 percent of Americans maintain these policies are no longer about science or about public health or the will of the people. That is all a guise.

This is about power and using a global pandemic to grow government and lurch our Nation toward socialism. The suffering caused by the government's actions has had an immense impact on the daily lives of Americans in ways that will take years to correct, if ever.

We now know that these actions were wrong. The same people who argued to keep this emergency declaration in place are the same people who were wrong in their advocacy for these government actions.

They were wrong when they told you not to be afraid to go to Chinese New Year celebrations when the first cases were detected in the United States.

They were wrong when they said it was racist to suspend inbound travel from China.

They were wrong when they called you a conspiracy theorist for believing it was possible for this virus to have developed in nature or to have leaked from a laboratory.

They were wrong when they told you lockdowns must remain in place.

They were wrong when they told you masking your children was the only way they could attend in-person classes safely.

They were wrong when they told you massive stimulus spending was necessary and would not lead to inflation.

They were wrong when they told you that inflation would be transitory.

And they were wrong when they denied that natural immunity provided a strong defense against COVID infection and severe symptoms. They were wrong when they denied that natural immunity provided a strong defense against COVID infection and severe symptoms.

They have been wrong nearly every step of the way during the response to this pandemic--always a day late and a dollar spent in the wrong direction. Yet here they are, these same individuals who now reside in the White House and hold majorities in Congress, telling us it would be detrimental to our own health to repeal the President's national emergency declaration. Their motivation is not genuine. It is a blatant effort to further extend the massive accumulation of power that the Federal Government has extended across America for the last 2 years.

Today, the Senate has an opportunity to act to rein in this control and reassert our article I authorities. The Constitution demands it. The authors of the National Emergencies Act demand it. The protection of American liberties demands it.

We have the tools to protect the vulnerable and our populous is near full herd immunity, with 94 percent of Americans having some level of immunity now. Let's not listen to those who have wronged us and have been proven incorrect countless times before throughout this pandemic. Let's listen to common sense and reason. Let's listen to science, and let's listen to the people.

Let's abandon the COVID obsession and groupthink that has infiltrated the highest ranks of government, and let's return the ability to make decisions related to the virus back to the American people.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, one of my favorite tasks up here is to give folks from back home a tour of this Capitol. We meet them in the Crypt, and we go through the Old Supreme Court, and we walk up the back steps into the Capitol's Rotunda. And I love to say nothing. I love to just watch the folks look up at the walls and gaze at all the famous statues--statues of Eisenhower and Reagan.

There are portraits in that Rotunda, each with a story to tell. Perhaps my favorite portrait is one by John Trumbull; it is a painting of General George Washington, depicting in 1783 his resigning his commission as Commander of the Continental Army. Everyone looks at that painting, and they see in the President--at that time General--George Washington's hands his commission, that piece of paper that he is handing off to the Continental Army.

Behind him, there is a throne; and importantly, it is an empty throne with King's robes on it, seemingly to say that George Washington said: I will not be a King; I will throw my robes off, and we will have a Republic, a democracy.

I would ask our President to throw off his robes. I would ask him to listen to the people and end this declaration of emergency.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, on Tuesday evening, President Biden delivered his first State of the Union Message to Congress and to the American people. His remarks were timely, strong, and statesmanlike.

He touched on many topics. I think his message really boiled down to two profound questions: How do we protect democracy in other nations, particularly in Ukraine, which is now entering the second week of a horrific and unprovoked invasion by Russian forces; and then he asked, how can we protect and preserve democracy here in America?

Dictators like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping want the world to believe that democracy is nothing more than chaos and gridlock. The people of Ukraine are showing the world just how wrong these despots are.

I speak to you today from the comfort and safety of the Senate Chamber in the United States of America, in Washington, DC, on a beautiful springlike day. But I have to reflect for a moment on what life must be like at this very moment in Kyiv, in Ukraine, and what it must be like in Lviv; two cities in Ukraine that I visited where bombs are raining down on innocent people--children, women, and men who are losing their lives because Vladimir Putin believes that he can restore the Soviet Union to its borders.

We have all seen the video of the Ukrainian grandmother, armed with nothing more than sunflower seeds and courage, confronting Russian soldiers.

We have seen ordinary Ukrainian men and women and teenagers taking up arms, making Molotov cocktails, building barricades, taking down highway and road signs to confuse the invading Russians--even laying down their lives to stop Russian tanks and convoys.

In the back of my mind, I am sure I am thinking what many Americans are thinking: Could I do the same thing? Could I bring together the courage at this moment to stand up and fight if my home is at stake, if my family is at stake, if my country is at stake?

The Ukrainians are answering that message every minute of every day. Their courage and unity in the face of this Russian barbarity is inspiring the world.

For months, President Biden, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, and others in the Biden administration have worked behind the scenes to revitalize the NATO alliance. That critical alliance emerged after the last great land war in Europe in 1945 from the allies who came out of it and said: Never again. We will stand together to stop any invader against the NATO coalition, the NATO alliance.

The Biden administration has worked behind the scenes to remind this alliance that there comes a moment when you have to bring to this alliance the courage and direction to stand for the kind of democracy which we are all committed to.

Two years ago, we had a President who took Putin's word over the assessment of America's own intelligence Agencies and said he threatened to pull the United States participation out of NATO. Today, we have a President who actually shared U.S. intelligence with our allies to show Putin for the liar that he was from the very start.

NATO is more unified today--thank you, Vladimir Putin, for that--than it has ever been since the Cold War or the end of World War II. In fact, nations that are not formally part of NATO--Sweden and Finland, for example--have stepped up, in concert with the NATO alliance, to stand our ground and protest what is happening in Ukraine and to protect Europe--even Switzerland. Switzerland, which is famously neutral in all major conflicts, has come out of its neutrality and made it clear that they, too, stand against the Putin invasion.

In his State of the Union Address, President Biden urged Congress to approve billions of dollars in emergency military and humanitarian assistance for Ukraine. Sign me up. I will vote for that in a second, and I hope it comes soon. We need to agree on an aid package without delay and get it to the President as quickly as possible, not just for the humanitarian purpose but for the purpose of showing American unity with the resistance in Ukraine.

Ukrainian ordinary citizens are dying today because of Vladimir Putin and the bombs and missiles he is launching. As in every war, innocent Ukrainians will soon be facing greater suffering, greater hunger--even starvation. In the year 2022, is it imaginable that this is happening in Europe? We must rally the world to support those still in the Ukraine, assist our allies in neighboring nations who are housing and feeding neighboring Ukrainians who have fled their homeland. They estimate 800,000 to a million Ukrainians have left the country to find safety nearby.

Once again, let me thank the people of Poland. They have been opening their doors to the people of Ukraine for many years, and now, they are being called on in an extraordinary way to harbor these refugees and to take care of them at this moment of need. They are fleeing Putin's war, and their numbers are growing dramatically. Some have suggested that a humanitarian airlift is a possibility. I don't want to rule that out. Let's explore that and see whether that is the best way to provide relief to those still in Ukraine facing Putin's attack.

President Biden also promised to form a high-level task force to enforce U.S. sanctions against Putin, sanctions against Russia's political elites, and sanctions against the corrupt oligarchs. That always brings a cheer here in America because people think that those who have been engaged in a kleptocracy in the name of personal greed should be held accountable. The thought that they are shopping in New York City or buying luxury condos and apartments in London or are harboring their yachts in any country is disgusting.

They need to pay a price. We shouldn't just freeze their assets; we ought to seize their assets and hold them to rebuild Ukraine amid the devastation that the Russians are causing. Putin wants to be a czar. He and his cronies have become a pariah.

We will support Ukraine, but we also have work to do to strengthen our own democracy. We also have to remember that the bordering nations, the Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, are especially vulnerable to Russian aggression. They, as members of the NATO alliance, know that they have friends at their back, but we have got to reinforce that to the people of those small countries who worry about their very survival.

Let's take a look at home. As the President said, we have finally moved

to a safer direction with the pandemic. What a relief it was to go to the State of the Union Address and not wear a mask. Following doctors' orders, I might add, we listened to the medical experts who told us it is safe now not to be wearing a mask unless you are in a particular category of people. So most of us enjoyed one of the first public gatherings of a political nature where we were without masks and relieved to be so. We need to get back to our normal routines. We need to get our kids back in school--all of them--as quickly as possible.

We added 6 million new jobs last year, an alltime record. Things are good and positive, but inflation still is haunting this Nation. Wages are up; inflation is up. But it is not just our Nation. Inflation is a global problem. COVID-19 constricted the economy of the world. We are now emerging from it with new jobs, new businesses, new appetites, and new consumption. It is all good. But the cost of it is inflation.

I trust that we can bring this under control soon. Inflation is real. It is eating away at families' wages and savings and their faith in the future. When people work hard and can't get ahead, that is not just an economic problem; that can be a threat to our democratic spirit because it can open the door for anti-democratic demagogues.

In his State of the Union Address, President Biden laid out a plan to help American families afford big-ticket items that are essential; restore the enhanced child tax credit; help parents raise their kids and themselves out of poverty; help families with quality affordable daycare, childcare; expand family and medical leave so workers don't have to choose between caring for an ailing member of their family or a terminally ill parent and keeping their jobs; make healthcare more affordable and accessible; expand veterans' health benefits to cover more cancers and other service-related health conditions; and make prescription drugs more affordable by letting Medicare negotiate the price for medication.

Just one simple thing seems to be so popular across this country, cap the monthly cost of insulin at $35--$35. There are some 34 million people who are suffering from diabetes in this country, and of course their families are pulling for them every day. Think of all of the lives that could be improved if insulin were affordable. If a fourth or half of those who are diabetic have to now ration their insulin and risk their health, that is just wrong in a great nation. We should have insulin at affordable prices, and $35 a month is that. It is an outrage that the price of insulin has been raised countless times to more than $300 a vial.

As we support the Ukrainian people and their immense courage, I hope we will also find the courage to protect America's future.

Tribute to Tom Balanoff

Mr. President, when it comes to the American labor movement, I selfishly say all roads lead to Chicago. At the turn of the 20th century, workers from all walks of life and from every corner of the globe joined together in support of a simple but profound belief: An injury to one is an injury to all.

Few leaders have embodied that philosophy of solidarity and mutuality more than Tom Balanoff, president of the Service Employees International Union--SEIU--Local 1 in Chicago and the union's State council. If you are a worker in Illinois or a worker anywhere in America, there is a good chance you know Tom. He has devoted his life not only to building a strong labor movement but a more inclusive one.

Now, he is retiring from his post as president of Local 1. Though his leadership will be missed, he leaves behind a formidable legacy.

He helped build a global labor movement, led by essential workers. I am talking about janitors, security officers, airport staff, and nursing home and home healthcare workers who are reclaiming their power in the workplace.

As president of Local 1, Tom Balanoff transformed the chapter into one of the most influential forces in the American labor movement, and every step of the way, he held true to the chapter's progressive roots. Formed in Chicago in 1921, Local 1 was the first racially integrated union in America, bringing together immigrant janitors from across the globe who were fighting for better working conditions.

From that moment on, SEIU has been synonymous with merging the fight for workers' rights with the fight for social equality, and Tom has carried that legacy to new heights. He has been a steadfast champion of racial equality, gender equality, and protecting the rights of immigrant workers, and he has assembled the most diverse leadership team in SEIU's history.

Importantly, Tom's commitment to leading a socially conscious labor movement is steeped in a proud family tradition. It began when Tom's grandfather, James Balanoff, immigrated to America from Bulgaria and found work in a live chicken shop on Commercial Avenue in Chicago. Since then, each generation of the ``Battling Balanoffs'' has been grounded in a commitment to defending the rights of working people in and outside of the workplace.

The Balanoff family notes with pride that both Tom's father and grandfather attended the 1937 Memorial Day Massacre, where police opened fire on unarmed protesters at the gate of the Republic Steel Company in South Chicago, killing 10 men and injuring scores of others. If the police had hoped to fracture union solidarity, the massacre had the exact opposite effect on the Balanoff family and many others.

The Balanoff family has stood by workers. Tom's father, James Jr., organized steelworkers at a time when manufacturing was the dominant industry in America, and he eventually rose to be president of the largest steelworkers union in America, Local 1010, in East Chicago, IN. Tom has been helping lead the charge for justice for all since he was in middle school--middle school--when he and his siblings were the only White kids in class to protest racial segregation in American schools.

By the time Tom was ready to follow in his family's tradition of union activism, America's economy was going through a dramatic shift. Factories were shuttering and good-paying union jobs disappearing, shipped overseas. As more and more Americans left the factories and found new opportunities in airports, hospitals, nursing homes, offices, and coffee shops, Tom discovered his life's mission: defending the rights of the service workers who make our economy tick. To complement the commitment to economic and labor justice that runs in the Balanoff family's veins, Tom earned a master's degree in labor and industrial relations from the University of Illinois.

For decades, whenever and wherever his skills were needed to protect the rights of workers, you could count on Tom Balanoff to be there. He worked for the International Association of Firefighters here in Washington, for the Allied Industrial Workers in Chicago, and the Cement, Lime and Gypsum Workers in Kansas City before then-SEIU president, John Sweeney, spotted Tom's exception abilities and brought him to work for SEIU in Washington, DC.

Tom would go on to serve as trustee of John Sweeney's old SEIU local, Local 32BJ, in New York City. After a successful tenure there, he returned to Chicago, first as SEIU Local 46 trustee and eventually as president of both SEIU Local 1 and president of the Illinois State Council.

Tom always has seized opportunities to uplift disempowered workers. In 2005, he traveled down to Houston to help unionize janitors who were being paid as little as $20 a day. In the heart of one of the most anti-union States in the country, Tom secured a contract for more than 5,000 janitors that doubled their pay.

Never content to settle, Tom kept the victories coming. Just a few months later, he helped thousands of janitors in Cincinnati, Columbus, and Indianapolis win a similar contract. It was a testament to his lifelong belief that, when working people of all identities come together, they win.

In the world of politics, my friend Tom has been a champion of the downtrodden. Several years ago, he helped launch the progressive caucus in the Chicago City Council, despite facing significant political headwinds. Today, more than a third of the city council members belong to that caucus.

Perhaps the most consequential decision Tom ever made as a political changemaker was in the year 2003, when he became an early endorser of a

community organizer running for the U.S. Senate by the name of Barack Obama. That endorsement helped pave the way for former President Obama's stratospheric rise in the world of politics.

And a few years later, Tom became the first labor leader in America to endorse Barack Obama's campaign for President. At the time, Tom and I were part of the same lonely club. I was the first U.S. Senator to endorse President Obama's candidacy in 2007, and for more than a year, I was the only Senator to do so. But Tom and I knew that Barack Obama was the leader this country needed.

We had seen firsthand the amazing work he had done in Chicago, helping displaced workers rebuild their lives and partnering with churches to launch job training. We knew that President Obama had what it took to unite our country. And without Tom's support, his candidacy may never have gotten off the ground.

Tom has said one of the leaders who inspired him most during his career was Nelson Mandela. A few years after the end of apartheid, Nelson Mandela wrote: ``To be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.''

Tom has dedicated his life to enhancing the freedom of others. He has stood for immigrant workers so that they could find a voice in the workplace. He has stood in solidarity with Black workers protesting against racial injustice. And he has worked to protect our communities and our children by demanding climate justice as well.

In one of his final acts as president of Local 1, Tom helped make history again. He handed the reins of leadership of that storied local to the first Black president of the SEIU's State council. Greg Kelley is a proven champion of working people in Illinois and across the country. And I might add that when I sat down for breakfast to congratulate Greg on this new opportunity, he reminded me that he had once been an intern in my Senate office--something I am very proud of.

Tom Balanoff is leaving his post at a promising moment for the working people of America. Since the beginning of the pandemic, service workers have come together to demand safer working conditions, higher wages, and better benefits.

For instance, in December, workers in Starbucks in Buffalo, NY, voted to unionize. It will be the company's first-ever union. And those workers will soon be represented by Starbucks Workers United, an affiliate of SEIU. This moment is a culmination of Tom's decades of service to the labor movement.

I want to thank Tom Balanoff for everything he has achieved for working families in Chicago, throughout America, and literally around the world. He has cultivated progressive political power and helped build a fairer economy that rewards hard work, not just wealth.

Loretta and I wish him a long, joyous retirement with his wife Hetty and their two kids.

Tom, I am looking forward to seeing you some day soon in Highland Park--watermelon juice on me.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly), and the Senator from California (Mr. Padilla) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, 15 years ago, an environmental group called the Clean Sky Coalition launched an ad campaign targeting coal. The ads featured faces covered in soot, with the headline: ``Face it, Coal is Filthy.''

Of the many controversial ad campaigns we have seen over the years, this doesn't seem particularly noteworthy, but these ads at the time sparked so much outrage that they were eventually pulled.

You might wonder why. An environmental group attacking coal is hardly front-page news. Why was this ad campaign different? This wasn't a matter of what was being said; it was a matter of who was saying it and why.

It quickly came to life that the group behind the ad was only about 2 weeks old, and the entire ``pro-environment'' effort was sponsored by a natural gas company seeking market share over coal.

As they say, politics makes for strange bedfellows--in this case, environmentalists and natural gas companies were both anti-coal, though, for very different reasons.

Knowing that the American people wouldn't respond to the argument that coal is bad because it means less business for the gas companies, this particular company found a deceptive and manipulative way to help shape public opinion.

Today, we are seeing a similar push but with much greater reach and far higher stakes. Just as one company used the guise of environmentalism to attack its competition, Russia today is using the same tactic to boost its own profits and enhance its power.

The Office of Director of National Intelligence released a report in 2017 outlining some of Russia's disinformation campaign, on everything from U.S. elections to U.S. energy policy.

Of course, one of the Kremlin's favorite tools is its intentional propaganda outlet known as RT, formally known as Russia Today.

According to the report, RT ran anti-fracking programming in the United States that highlighted environmental and public health concerns. That is right. The propaganda arm of the Russian Federation, RT, was running anti-fracking programming in the United States. And you might ask yourself: For what purpose?

Well, the Director of National Intelligence report in 2017 said: This is likely reflective of the Russian Government's concern about the impact of fracking, which is a device to release natural gas from shale. The report said this is likely reflective of the Russian Government's concern about the impact of fracking in U.S. natural gas production on the global energy market and the potential challenges to Gazprom's profitability--Gazprom, of course, being the Russian Federation's energy company.

In short, all of this propaganda on Russia today and the opposition to fracking that they were encouraging would be good for the sale of Russian gas as opposed to natural gas produced here in the United States.

Russia can't seem to dominate the global energy market on its own, so it tries to take down the competition. It is not just a matter of dollars and cents; it is a matter of geopolitical power. This isn't a farfetched conspiracy theory that was crafted to combat the Green New Deal. As I said, it comes from an unclassified report from the Director of National Intelligence Office 5 years ago--2017.

Knowledge of this practice likely predates that report by a number of years. Reporting indicates that even Hillary Clinton spoke about those malign activities in a 2014 speech. She warned about what she called ``phony environmental groups'' that were funded by the Russians.

Russia is no stranger--in fact, they are expert at disinformation campaigns, and it doesn't abide by the same moral and ethical codes as the rest of the world.

The past several days have shone a light on how far Putin is willing to go to increase his own power. I am not suggesting that all environmental groups are funded by the Russian Government--not in the slightest--but we need to be clear-eyed about Russia's efforts to shape U.S. policies and European policies for their own benefit. We need to be hyperaware of the ways decisions made in Washington could benefit Moscow and empower Putin to the detriment of our allies in NATO and in Europe.

Unfortunately, the energy cards in Europe are currently stacked in Russia's favor. From day one, the Biden administration has taken hostile actions toward American energy suppliers and sent even more business to Russia.

Only hours after the President was sworn in on January 20, 2021, he canceled the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline and halted all new energy leasing and permitting on public lands and waters. His administration effectively discouraged investments in new production, and now the United States is producing less oil and less natural gas. Production is, in fact, down about 1.2 million barrels a day in the United States, and that has to be made up somewhere because the world continues to consume energy. It needs energy in order to survive and to thrive. Where does it get that energy when the United States does not produce it? Well, you guessed it--it gets it from Russia, and it gets it from OPEC, including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Sadly, the buck doesn't stop there. In light of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration hasn't taken any effective action against Putin's energy weapon. Even though the administration has imposed sanctions on Russian banks and oligarchs, the country's lucrative oil and gas industry remains untouched. This is their primary financial asset.

I remember our friend John McCain, when he was still alive, used to joke that Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country, making the obvious point in a humorous way.

Russia continues to use these oil sales and natural gas sales and the captive markets that it has in Europe and in other places around the world in order to finance its war against innocent Ukrainians. There is no question but that the revenue from these exports--and we have seen the price of oil since Putin invaded Ukraine again--the price of a barrel of oil go up to $115 a barrel. And there is no question that he is using the revenue derived from the sale of that $115 barrel oil to kill innocent Ukrainians and to violate their sovereignty and to commit war crimes. We simply cannot continue to supply Russia with the blood money it needs to carry out its nefarious actions.

I am proud to cosponsor legislation that was introduced by our friend from Kansas, Senator Marshall, to ban the purchase of Russian oil in the United States. We have the great fortune of living in a resource- rich country, and there is no reason we should be importing Russian oil, now more than ever.

The President said he does not want to target Russian oil and gas because of the impact it will have on prices here at home. Well, we already know that because of inflation--because of shoveling money out of Washington, DC, out into the great American economy, inflation has already caused prices at the pump and prices in the

grocery stores to rise. Given the fact that gas prices have already risen 40 percent since President Biden took office, I understand his concerns, but that doesn't mean Russia should get a free pass.

Rather than identify ways to offset global demand for Russian energy, President Biden is inadvertently playing into Putin's hand. He is not calling for any more American-made oil and gas; he is calling for less.

Tuesday evening, President Biden said he wants to double America's clean energy production, including sources like wind and solar. I want to be clear, I support an ``all of the above'' energy policy. As I have said time and time again, Texas produces more energy from wind than any other State in the country, and it is an important part of our energy mix.

Every day, though, Texas is also making serious strides in energy innovation. This is the way to solve the problem; it is to innovate-- not to regulate, not to tax, not to punish, but to innovate. We need to continue to find ways to innovate cleaner sorts of energy as we eventually transition, as we must at some point in the future--maybe decades from now--from petroleum-based products to some other source of energy.

I believe we need to continue to encourage innovation and diversification of our energy sources, but the fact remains today that renewables are not close to being able to supply the energy needs that our country demands. As it stands today, renewables--solar, wind-- comprise less than 20 percent of our electricity generation. We know the Sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow, and when Mother Nature fails to deliver an adequate supply of energy, we need some other source of that energy, which means American-produced natural gas and oil.

If the President continues to wage a war on American oil and gas companies, we won't be able to protect ourselves or our allies.

One of the great things about the shale gas revolution is our ability to ship energy overseas to our friends and allies around the world. Unfortunately, the infrastructure has not kept up with the demand, leaving our friends and allies dependent on Vladimir Putin and the Russian Federation for their only choice. We need to provide them more choices, and that means produce more here in America of clean-burning natural gas and then exporting that LNG to our friends and allies around the world so they aren't subject to Putin's extortion and demands.

Our top priority needs to be, when it comes to energy, to pursue independence. If we are able to bolster renewables, invest in carbon capture technologies, and take other steps along the way to reduce emissions, that is a great goal for us to pursue. But our No. 1 priority here, today, and now should be for the United States and our allies to be energy secure. Right now, Europe is not energy secure; it is energy insecure because of the intentional acts of Vladimir Putin to make Russia the sole source of energy needs for countries in Europe and the policies restricting the development of our American-made energy here in the United States.

Just a few years ago, we were almost there when it came to energy security. In 2019, the United States became a net total energy exporter for the first time since 1952--a net total energy exporter. The last time we did that, it was 1952, and we maintained that status through the year 2020. But President Biden has, for reasons that are inscrutable to me, turned back the clock, taking us from an era of energy independence back to the oil crisis of the 1970s.

For decades, leaders in our country fought to reduce our reliance on foreign oil in anticipation of a global crisis exactly like the one we are facing now. We can't erase all of this progress we have made at the exact moment when we need that progress and that production the most.

Russia will always use energy as a weapon to tear down and intimidate its adversaries. The United States, conversely, must use it as a tool to lift up our allies and improve global energy security.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to this administration's dangerous policy of American weakness and in support of the strong men and women of the United States' energy sector, who are ready to step forward to return this Nation to energy independence, to burnish this Nation's strength, and to show the Russians what the United States is capable of.

It will be lost on no one that we are approximately a week into the largest conventional military attack in Europe since 1945. Vladimir Putin's brutal war of choice against the Ukrainians continues as we speak. It grows worse, more devastating, and more brutal by the hour, and it is time that, in the midst of this war, we confronted a basic fact: that Russia isn't so much a country as it is a gas station, and Vladimir Putin's gas station is open for business and pumping away, and this administration--this administration--has made the decision to make this country more dependent on Russian oil, to make the world more dependent on Russian oil, to embolden and empower Vladimir Putin at a time when the world can ill afford it, and it is time to change course.

And we can change course. We can change our energy production policy. We can open up our energy sector to make us once again the dominant energy producer in the world, to make us truly energy independent, to make us energy strong, to put Russia in its place, and to put the United States at the head of the energy sector worldwide.

But that is not where we stand right now. Today, the United States is importing--in the midst of this conflict, in the midst of Russian aggression, the United States is importing--buying from Russia to the tune of 670,000 barrels of oil every single day. It has nearly doubled just in the past year.

Now, I would submit to you that whatever you think about this administration's geostrategic policies--this is, after all, an administration that has managed to lose two sovereign nations in the space of 6 months--whatever you think of that record, this is not sustainable. This is not good for the world. This makes America weaker, not stronger, and this is a time for American strength.

What did Joe Biden do when he came to the Office of the President of the United States just over a year ago?

Well, among his first actions was to cancel the Keystone Pipeline, to halt a leasing program in Alaska, to issue a halt on all new oil and gas leases, as well as drilling permits on Federal lands and Federal waters. By the way, that accounts for about 25 percent of U.S. energy production.

He directed Federal Agencies to get rid of all support for fossil fuels. He imposed new regulations on oil and gas and methane emissions. He hired new SEC regulators to propose new climate regulations, and the list goes on and on.

And these policies have had their effect. I will give the President credit where credit is due. His policies to throttle down our energy production have been successful. He has succeeded in making this Nation energy dependent.

In 2019, in 2020--for the first time, certainly, in my lifetime--the United States actually exported more energy than it imported. We were energy independent, and, even better, we were becoming the energy supplier for the world.

Who is the energy supplier for the world now? It is Vladimir Putin, and that is because, at least in part, of the policies that this administration and President Biden have deliberately sought to pursue.

Look, the statistics don't lie. Why is Russia able to pursue this war of aggression in Ukraine?

Well, at least in part because of this: They supply 20 percent of Europe's oil--Russia alone, 20 percent of Europe's oil--40 percent of its gas, 20 percent of its coal. Russia supplies to the tune of 55 percent of Germany's natural gas alone--just Germany's, 55 percent. Now, can we wonder why our German partners were slow to want to sanction Russia, to provide lethal aid to Ukraine when they needed it before the invasion occurred? It is because Russia has Europe in a stranglehold.

And that should be no excuse. I am not saying that the Europeans deserve an out--not at all. But I am saying that Vladimir Putin has used his power, his energy production, to try and project new power in Europe, and, unfortunately, he is having success.

It ought to be our policy to reverse his power projection, to shut down his gas stations--his gas station of a country--by returning this country to energy independence and energy dominance, and we can do it.

This is not a pie-in-the-sky pipe dream. We have been there before. We were just energy independent, just a few years ago. We know what to do. It is actually pretty simple. All we have to do is roll back the disastrous policies that this administration imposed just a year ago, roll those back and allow the American worker to get back to work on our pipelines, on our rigs, drilling and pumping natural gas and producing biofuels like the ones that we produce, the kind that we produce in my State. Put American energy back to work. It is actually pretty simple.

Sometimes, Ronald Reagan once said, there actually are simple solutions, not easy ones but simple ones. This one is simple, it is direct, and it is time that we took it.

And that is why I have introduced legislation, along with Senator Grassley and Senator Hagerty and Senator Tuberville, that would do just this. It would reverse the disastrous energy policies of this administration, the policies that have emboldened and enabled and empowered Vladimir Putin and the Russian military, and return this country to energy strength, return this country to energy dominance.

I can't put it any better than this: If you will give--if the President of the United States would give--the American worker a chance--give the folks who man those pipelines, give the folks who work the oil rigs--give them a chance to show what they can do, and I will tell you what they will show you: They will show you that they are the best in the world. They will show you that they are the strongest in the world. They will show you that this country is the strongest in the world, and they will put the Russian energy sector to shame.

And, by the way, Joe Biden's policy was to green-light the Russian pipeline, Putin's pipeline, Nord Stream 2. He lifted sanctions on it when he came to office; imposed limits on our own energy production but lifted them on the Russians.

Here is a suggestion: Shut down Putin's pipelines. Shut down Putin's energy sector. Open ours up. Do just the opposite of what President Biden did a year ago. Shut down the Russian energy production, open up American energy protection, and show the world what the American people can do.

And that is what the bill that I have introduced, along with my cosponsors, who I am proud to have with me--that is what it would do. It is very simple, Mr. President, and I would suggest to you that the time is of the essence.

I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged from further consideration of S. 3714 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I want to thank the Senator from Delaware for his remarks, which I appreciate. It is a privilege to serve with him, as we do, on the Homeland Security Committee, and work with him as we do--as I have--and I look forward to working together, hopefully on this issue, and others in the future.

We do disagree on this issue. We have an honest and, I think, principled disagreement. It is one that we ought to talk about. I am glad we are talking about it here today, and I suspect it is one, ultimately, that the American people are going to have to weigh in on

because the differences are pretty significant. And that is fine. That is democracy.

But I just want to highlight two things where I think we have a principled disagreement. The first is the idea that, if we produce more energy in this country, it won't have any effect on prices, energy prices, or make us energy independent.

I would just ask the American people, I mean: Does gas cost more today than it did before Joe Biden became President? Yes, it does. Are you paying more for groceries? Are you paying more, if you are a farmer, for fertilizer? Are you paying more for every input that is associated with energy today than before Joe Biden was President? Unfortunately, yes, you are.

Inflation is out of control in this country. Inflation associated with the fuel that Americans use to fill up their trucks and their vans and that they use to heat their homes is out of control, and there is a reason for that. This is the reason for that. We are not producing energy in this country like we were. We were energy independent in 2019 and 2020. It is not as if it can't be done. It has been done. Prices were lower. It is basic supply and demand.

But there is also a national security aspect to this. Why would we want to be dependent on a totalitarian state that is invading its neighbors and is seeking to establish energy control of Europe and beyond?

Why wouldn't we seek to thwart it? And why would we ask the American people to pay more, day in and day out, to heat their homes, for fuel for their cars? Why would we put them through that? Why would we ask them to do that?

I just submit to you that there is a real tradeoff here, and the administration has chosen the wrong side of the tradeoff. Put the American energy sector back to work.

One other comment. I know that the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, former Senator Kerry, has expressed similar concerns about climate change and has said recently that he fears that the crisis in Ukraine will distract from the urgency of climate change.

Well, I submit to you that the crisis in Ukraine--the existential threat to that proud and sovereign nation which is now in danger of being extinguished, the threat to stability in Europe that Russia now exerts, and the threat that China will exert to the world--yes, indeed, that may distract from climate change, but that is just reality. It is time we face the most pressing security threats that we have. And putting Americans back to work and lowering their gas prices and their fuel prices, making American families safer and more secure and making our enemies less secure, that is a good policy, and it is one that I hope we can have.

So, again, I thank my colleague and my friend, the Senator from Delaware, and I suspect it won't be the last time we talk about this.

I yield the floor.