Baltimore National Heritage Area Reauthorization Act

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I have come to the floor to speak in support of the Postal Service Reform Act, which is now pending before the Senate.

The mission of the U.S. Postal Service since the Continental Congress appointed Benjamin Franklin as our Nation's first Postmaster General in 1775 has been to ``bind the Nation together.''

So it sounds kind of like a pretty quaint, outdated idea, but it is actually serious; it is actually statutory.

And 39 U.S.C. tasks the Postal Service with binding our Nation together by delivering all of our mail to every American promptly, reliably, and efficiently, no matter where we live.

The Postal Service Reform Act will improve the Agency's ability to meet that requirement, including in large, geographically remote places, like Alaska, where it certainly has a significant impact on our lives.

We count on the Postal Service to deliver not only the letters and the magazines and the bills, but also necessities of life: food, medicine, business inventory, spare parts. Just about anything you could possibly think of for daily life comes to us in Alaska through the mail service.

The Postal Service is unique in its universal service obligation and the fact that it delivers both mail and packages to Americans in every community, whether you live in Key West, FL, or Utqiagvik, AK. No other Federal Agency or commercial enterprise does this.

But it is becoming more and more difficult for the Postal Service to accomplish the swift completion of their appointed rounds, as we recall.

And believe me, I certainly hear about the Postal Service's decreasing ability to provide its services promptly, reliably, and efficiently. I hear about it as soon as I get off the airplane when I get back home. I hear from individuals all over the State, telling me the concerns that they have about mail that is late or perhaps not delivered at all.

Our phones ring in our offices around the State because a small post office has been closed for a period of days because the postmaster has left, and there is no replacement available.

I hear about the long lines to pick up mail, the long lines to just even buy a stamp in some of our smaller communities that get inundated by tourists in the summer.

So we know. We hear the strains on our Postal Service. Despite postal workers' dedication, the fact of the matter is that the Agency is in trouble, and it needs the reforms that are contained in the bill that is pending before us.

While many Americans believe the Postal Service is supported by the American taxpayer, that is not the case. Congress only reimburses it for mailing audio books to the blind and ballots to overseas voters. That is it.

The Postal Service has to meet its payroll and fund retiree health benefits; maintain its facilities, equipment, and vehicles; deliver the mail to its destination on time with its own revenue from the sale of postage. But their financial instability is making those responsibilities harder and harder to fulfill.

So we are debating this legislation on the floor today to give the Postal Service the tools that it needs to be successful and to fulfill its essential mission and to hold the USPS accountable for improved performance because we all want to see that.

So this legislation that we will hopefully vote on later today is not without controversy. Reform legislation is never without controversy, but that is why I appreciate the opportunity to outline what I think are some of the positive provisions.

Importantly, the bill increases the Postal Service's accountability for on-time delivery and requires greater transparency in achieving the goal. The bill requires that mail delivery not only be prompt and economical but also consistent and reliable and provided in a manner that increases operational efficiency.

It requires the USPS to develop a new, searchable public performance dashboard that is updated weekly so both Congress and the public can keep a close eye on whether or not they are living up to our expectations.

It also requires new regular reporting to the Postal Regulatory Commission, the PRC, and to Congress on a variety of indicators, including the impacts of price changes and information about reliability, efficiency, and cost effectiveness, Postal workforce recruitment and retention, and how investments in equipment and infrastructure are impacting service.

In addition, the PRC and the Postal Service's inspector general must identify why there are inefficiencies in the collection, sorting, transportation, and delivery of large envelopes, newsletters, and magazines.

These findings will be reported to Congress and the Postmaster General. USPS would then have 6 months to put in place PRC-approved changes that will fix whatever faults may have been found.

The bill will also do what many of us have advocated for, which is reform the cost of healthcare for USPS employees and their retirees.

So it provides needed stabilization for the USPS health benefits system, and, hopefully, it will relieve the pressure on their budget and support sustainable benefits for employees and retirees. This is a key provision.

The bill also codifies an appropriations rider that has long required the USPS to integrate the delivery of letters and packages for 6-day delivery and includes a fair compromise on the attribution of costs for processing and delivering packages.

One of the--I guess--top complaints that I hear from Alaskans is that the cost of shipping via commercial package services is oftentimes more than the price of the item itself. Integrated delivery of mail and packages saves the U.S. Postal Service money by allowing it to be more efficient.

And while UPS and FedEx charge most Alaskans extra for delivering their packages, these companies then drop their packages off in Anchorage at that hub and let the Postal Service take care of what we call last mile delivery. Well, in Alaska, that often means the last several hundred miles.

Now, some are concerned that USPS subsidizes the cost of packages with revenue derived from delivering letters. But in fact, the law that we passed in 2006, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, forbids the Postal Service from cross-subsidizing revenue to make sure that it is competing fairly with commercial package carriers.

Current law also requires that package delivery covers all of its attributable costs, and while the Postal Regulatory Commission and the Federal courts have examined and upheld the cost attribution methodology, the Postal Service Reform Act requires yet another look, which I think is probably a fair compromise.

Importantly for Alaskans and for me, this legislation will not result in cost increases for the essential bypass mail program. This is what it says it is. It is essential. It is a program that allows rural Alaskans who live in communities that are not connected by roads--about 80 percent of our communities are in that situation--but allows them to receive pallets of food, whatever necessary mailable matter that comes from stores in Anchorage or Fairbanks, without millions of individual boxes of goods going through Postal facilities. And that benefits the consumer, and it saves the Postal Service tens of millions of dollars a year in operating costs and untold millions in facility costs.

While the Postal Service Reform Act directs the PRC to engage in another review of attributable costs, I have

been assured by both sides of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, by the PRC, and by the Postal Service that this provision will not impact bypass mail, and I certainly intend to hold them to their word.

Another concern that I want to address over this bill is allowing USPS to partner with State, local, and Tribal governments to provide nonpostal services. Now, I understand where this comes from, but this legislation specifically requires that any nonpostal services must cover their own costs without any degradation to regular Postal services.

So, in my view, if the U.S. Postal Service can help deliver additional services to the American public under these two caveats, then they should be allowed to do so.

So H.R. 3076 is a big step forward in helping the Postal Service achieve financial stability. It will enable the Agency to continue to bind the Nation together with efficient and cost-effective universal service and allow postal employees to achieve the swift completion of their appointed rounds. It is supported by a wide array of businesses, both large and small, all who rely on our Postal Service. It is supported by Postal employees, by retired Federal employees, and the Postal Service itself.

It has received overwhelming bipartisan support in the House of Representatives. I certainly hope that it will draw the same here in the Senate, and I want to commend the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, as well as Ranking Member Portman, for the good work that they have done in bringing this bill to us today.

(Ms. ROSEN assumed the Chair.)

International Women's Day

Madam President, now, while I am still here on the floor, I want to take just a moment and acknowledge that today, March 8, marks International Women's Day.

This is a day for us to recognize the achievements and the contributions that women are making in communities across the globe, and, as an Alaskan, I am going to start local first, because I have got so many, many phenomenal women in my State who are doing incredible things, and I am exceptionally proud of them.

I was home over the weekend. We were celebrating the start of the 50th running of the Iditarod race. This is an extraordinary feat of just strength and grit and determination and resilience.

There were 49 mushers that left Willow on Sunday; 17 of those mushers who will make the trek to Nome are women--17 women. So we have got a very, very strong field, but running a race like this, where it is the musher and your team of dogs going through the wilderness of Alaska--we have got deep snow throughout. The moose are not in a very cooperative mood right now. There are dangers along the trail, and who knows what the conditions are going to be like a week from now. And so it takes an extraordinary individual.

And to know the strength of women, as they have taken on the Iditarod--when award-winning or world-renowned winner Susan Butcher first won that race--she has won that race four times--but when she ran it about three decades ago, there was a popular bumper sticker that was going around the State at the time. It was, ``Alaska, where men are men and women win the Iditarod.'' We were pretty proud of Susan Butcher. We are hoping that our women do well and all of our mushers do well.

But like these female mushers who are racing, women leaders are virtually in every field, from healthcare to resource development, to fishing, to our universities, and everything in between, and many of us are very proud to know that they have become somewhat household names, some of them.

This year, we were able to celebrate Emma Broyles, a young woman from Anchorage, 20 years old. She became the first Alaskan and the first Korean American to ever be crowned Miss America in the 100-year history of that event. So we are very proud of her. I was able to celebrate with her this weekend at the Iditarod itself.

Another young woman that we have celebrated this past year is Lydia Jacoby. Lydia is from Seward, AK, and at 17, she competed in her first Olympics. She brought home the gold medal for this country, winning the 100-meter breaststroke race. So we were all eyes on Lydia. So proud of her.

And there are so many who deserve our thanks and our gratitude. I always like to give a shout-out to an exceptional leader in our State, who has provided critical leadership and guidance throughout the pandemic, Dr. Anne Zink.

It is so important to know that it is not necessarily finishing at the end of a race or a crown or a medal. It is just the endurance that goes with the day-to-day completion of your work.

I was on the floor just last month to recognize the work of Native civil rights advocate Elizabeth Peratrovich, who pushed the Territory of Alaska, our legislature at the time, to pass the first antidiscrimination act in the Nation. We did this in 1945. We are so proud of how she, as a Native woman leader, made our State and our Nation a more inclusive and more representative democracy.

So, today, on International Women's Day, it gives us an opportunity to recognize the impressive feats that women have taken on and have accomplished. It is a day to thank women for their daily contributions--again, both big, where they win the awards and they make the headlines, but also for those day-to-day contributions that they make to raising healthy, strong children, to being the fabric in the family, to being that contributor in the workplace.

But this isn't a day that we just look back and recognize those who have made great accomplishments. It is also a day that we look ahead at the work that we have to do to continue to advance equality and justice for all women.

Just down the hallway from here in the Rotunda is the Portrait Monument. We all see it; we walk by it; and maybe we don't even notice it anymore but take a look at it next time. We know the pioneering women who are represented on it: Lucretia Mott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Susan B. Anthony.

But we need to look at it more carefully, and we need to remember there is a fourth bust that Adelaide Johnson did not sculpt, and the base of the monument is also unfinished. It is a reflection of the unfinished struggle for women's rights and equality.

So for all the progress that we have made, and we know it has been considerable, Madam President, as you are sitting in that chair and this woman from Alaska is addressing you--we have made great progress, but the struggle is unfinished.

The data documents the gaps in gender equality in our country, and too many women feel it firsthand in their daily lives. So on International Women's Day, I also want to remind the Senate of a couple important ways that we can help further women's rights.

And I am pleased that my colleague Senator Cardin is on the floor at this moment because we have been working together. We have been working together to try to do this unfinished business when it comes to ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, to ensure women's equality is expressly recognized in our Constitution.

Three-quarters of the States have now ratified that amendment. Alaska did it back in 1972, Virginia most recently in 2020. I am hopeful that its time has come.

And to help facilitate that, Senator Cardin and I have introduced a resolution to remove the arbitrary ratification deadline from the ERA so it can finally take effect. I think the Senate needs to take this resolution up and pass it like the House of Representatives did last year.

Another step--a critical step--that we must take now is the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act to help ensure that there is a path to justice for survivors of interpersonal violence.

I was very proud to introduce the new VAWA bill with Senator Durbin, Senator Ernst, and Senator Feinstein last month. I am pleased--so pleased--that we have 22 total cosponsors, 11 from each party.

Our bipartisan bill modernizes the nearly three decades' old Violence Against Women Act, and it reauthorizes important programs that provide services to survivors. It directs resources to prevent further violence and hold perpetrators accountable for their

actions. And it takes needed and important steps to address domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking.

I mentioned dating violence. We have a provision that I have included and we have named after an Alaskan victim of dating violence, and that is Breanna Moore.

We focused on improving access to medical forensics for victims of violence, including through training for medical professionals that will allow them to provide evidence-based and trauma-informed care.

We have a strong Tribal title in this VAWA bill. It builds on VAWA 2013 by closing the gaps in the law to protect Native people. The Tribal title also includes an Alaska pilot program which provides a targeted solution to help empower Tribes in a way that recognizes the unique and complex jurisdictional landscape that we have in my State. It is a recognition that Tribes are valuable partners. They are critical partners that can play a larger role in providing public safety while reducing the burden on my State.

As I have said many times before, there should be nothing--nothing-- partisan about keeping people safe from violence. And our VAWA reauthorization is a result of many years of hard work and negotiations by advocates and stakeholders alike. I hope that we can consider this and pass this very, very soon.

I recognize the great work of Senator Ernst on our side and Senator Durbin and Senator Feinstein on the other side of the aisle. It has been an effort that is timely, is needed, and is necessary.

So I am happy to be able to recognize, for just a few moments on this International Women's Day--as we celebrate the many, many incredible women in our lives and in our country, we also recognize that our work for true equality remains unfinished, but we have got some good paths forward if we can just try.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, first, let me thank Senator Murkowski for her leadership on behalf of women's issues here in the U.S. Senate. I join her in calling for the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women's Act. I am glad that she mentioned that. I join her as her partner in the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. We have to pass a resolution here extending the date. Senator Murkowski has been a leader on all these issues.

During Women's History Month, I am using this time to point out the progress we have made. Senator Murkowski mentioned that we have made tremendous progress on behalf of gender equality in the United States, but we still have a path in front of us. I was pleased to see Senator Murkowski point out the challenges that still exist and the reason why we need to be active in regard to gender equity issues, including the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act and the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment. So I thank her for her leadership, and I am glad to be her partner on many of these issues.

So today, we can celebrate the progress that has been made and call attention to the obstacles that exist. Throughout our Nation's history, generations of women have won hard-fought battles in pushing closer and closer toward securing full citizenship and all that entails.

Our Nation today is stronger from this progress, reaching new milestones in gender equality. President Biden announced earlier this month his historic selection of Judge Jackson to fill the role of the retiring Supreme Court Justice Breyer on the highest Court in our land. Judge Jackson would be the first Black woman to serve on the Court and only the fifth woman to serve as a Justice of the total of 115 who have served on the Supreme Court throughout our history.

I was pleased, along with Senator Van Hollen, to recommend Lydia Griggsby to serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. She is the first Black female judge to serve in the State of Maryland.

Yes, we have a lot to celebrate during Women's History Month here in March.

During President Biden's recent State of the Union Address, which I attended, I was struck by the image of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Kamala Harris flanking President Biden. Vice President Harris is our first woman and first woman of color to hold the second highest office in the land. Though they undoubtedly both experienced significant challenges and obstacles on their career path due to their gender, they are now serving in two of the highest ranking offices in our government.

President Biden has appointed one of the most diverse Cabinets in history, including the first women to serve as Treasury Secretary and Director of National Intelligence.

We have a lot to celebrate on our path for gender equality in America, but we still have more that needs to be done.

At the same time, structural disadvantages and inequalities on account of gender persist across so many areas here in America. As one example, as chair of the Small Business Entrepreneurship Committee, where the Presiding Officer also serves, I have been working over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic to understand the economic effects on small businesses and to help provide needed resources. In this role, I have seen firsthand the structural disadvantages experienced by women- owned small businesses and how they have been compounded by the challenges of this pandemic. We need to take action to help in regard to that issue.

Further, the Supreme Court actions to date in cases related to reproductive freedom indicate an alarming openness to overturning the precedents that have given women control over their own bodies and futures for decades. Among many other very important reasons, full reproductive autonomy is essential in ensuring that women are able to participate fully as citizens in all facets of our democracy.

I am pleased that President Biden established the first Gender Policy Council to advance gender equity across the entire Federal Government and that the Gender Policy Council issued the first-ever national gender strategy to support the full participation of all people, including women and girls in the United States and around the world.

Yes, we have unfinished business in regard to gender equity issues. I am committed to working to advance the Equal Rights Amendment that Senator Murkowski talked about. The two of us are the lead sponsors of the resolution in this body that would remove the arbitrary time limit.

This simple amendment, the Equal Rights Amendment, first written by Alice Paul in 1923, states:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or

abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate

legislation, the provisions of this article.

I can't understand any objection to including that fundamental protection in the Constitution of the United States.

As President Biden stated in his Presidential Proclamation during this Women's History Month, ``But despite the progress being made, women and girls--especially women and girls of color--still face systemic barriers to full participation and wider gaps in opportunity and equality . . . The Congress sent the Equal Rights Amendment to the States for ratification 50 years ago and it is long past time that the principle of women's equality should be enshrined in our Constitution.''

And as Senator Murkowski said, the requisite number of States have ratified the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution. The arbitrary time limit that was put on by Congress is the only reason we haven't had a certification process.

The vast majority of Americans agree with this principle today. A 2020 AP poll found that 74 percent of Americans--74 percent--favor the Equal Rights Amendment. A second spring poll conducted by Pew found that 78 percent of respondents were in support of adding women to the Constitution. In a nation as divided as ours has become, a principle with this level of support on this important topic compels our attention and our action.

Given that so much has changed since this amendment was first written and since it was first proposed by Congress to the States, it is worth explaining some of the practical effects it

could have if formalized today. First, it would expand legal recourse against gender discrimination. Second, it would empower those of us in Congress to enact stronger laws preventing gender discrimination across a wide array of issues. Third, it would require the Supreme Court--or courts--to use a higher standard of review than is currently applied in the cases of gender discrimination.

The ratification of the ERA could be expected to have effects across such diverse areas as pay discrimination, LGBTQ rights, gender-based and domestic violence, sexual harassment, and more. This constitutional amendment would provide a firmer foundation for existing laws and create new authority for Congress to pass laws in areas in which it has historically lacked a constitutional prerogative.

Our Constitution is a framework of, by, and for the people. It must be able to evolve to meet the changing views and beliefs of the people. Already a majority of the U.S. Senate has cosponsored the bipartisan resolution that I referred to, S.J. Res. 1, that Senator Murkowski and I introduced to remove the procedural deadline that Congress once set to honor the clear will of the people and to make the legitimacy of our 28th Amendment clear beyond a doubt.

The House of Representatives has already passed this resolution twice. It is time for us to do the same. I look forward to the opportunity to bring this resolution to the floor in the coming months and would strongly urge every one of my colleagues to support that resolution. Thirty-eight States have already ratified it. Most Americans already think it is in our Constitution. Let's get that job done.

Bicentennial Birth of Harriet Tubman

Madam President, March 8, as has been pointed out, is International Women's Day. It happens during the month of March, which is Women's History Month, here in the United States.

I wish to commemorate the bicentennial birth of one of Maryland's most iconic leaders, a true American hero who has inspired global human rights' defenders, and that is Harriet Tubman.

As we close this year's chapter of Black History Month and ring in Women's History Month, what better way to celebrate these annual observances than by honoring the valor, journey, and life of Harriet Tubman and her fight for freedom, which intersects with our modern-day fight for civil rights, climate action, and environmental justice.

Harriet Tubman was born Araminta Ross in Dorchester County, MD, along our Eastern Shore, around 1822. She was the ``Moses of her people,'' personally leading at least 70 enslaved people to freedom. She is a cherished daughter of Maryland. She did this at great personal sacrifice to her own safety and freedom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.

This year, in 2022, we observe the bicentennial of the start of her life as a key leader in the abolition and women's suffrage movements. She embodied extraordinary courage and took immeasurable risks as a soldier, spy, and conductor on the Underground Railroad, leading her family and communities to freedom. In an unjust country to her race, she was there, working for America's future and helping to liberate the enslaved people.

In Maryland, this year also marks the 5-year anniversary of the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad Visitor Center, which opened its doors to the public in 2017. In its first year, it drew nearly 100,000 visitors from every State and more than 70 countries, exceeding all expectations. It is inspirational to see this visitor center and to see her journey through life and what she was able to accomplish. One person can make a difference. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., told us frequently, ``Each one of us in this world can make a difference.'' Harriet Tubman made such a difference throughout her lifetime.

The visitor center houses exhibit space that shares Tubman's compelling story, surrounded by landscape and waterways preserved to resemble how they would have appeared to her over 200 years ago in her early life as an enslaved child, young woman, and freedom seeker. The Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Monument and National Historical Park preserve these characteristics in her early home on Maryland's Eastern Shore.

The visitor center serves as an orientation center to the national monument and historical park and gateway to the larger Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad Scenic Byway, which includes the Brodess Farm, where Harriet Tubman lived as a child; Bucktown General Store, where she first stood up against the oppressors as a young girl; and other places that were part of the Underground Railroad in Dorchester, Talbot, and Caroline Counties.

I recently introduced legislation with my colleagues in the Baltimore congressional delegation, S. 3744, reauthorizing the designations of the Baltimore National Heritage Area, which encompasses listings on the Underground Railroad network.

Harriet Tubman was not only a fierce defender for freedom from slavery but also for the women's rights movement, particularly for Black women. Following her treacherous journey to freedom, Harriet Tubman spoke on the importance of women's suffrage in New York, Washington, and Boston. In 1896, she was one of the first guests to speak at the National Association of Colored Women and was hailed a strong advocate. Women secured the right to vote in 1920 with the 19th Amendment, but it wasn't until 1965 that voting rights became a reality for Black women.

Let me conclude my comments on Women's History Month by once again quoting from President Biden.

As President Biden proclaimed Women's History Month this month, he said:

As we reflect on the achievements of women and girls across

the centuries and pay tribute to the pioneers who paved the

way, let us recommit to the fight and help realize the deeply

American vision of a more equal society where every person

has a shot at pursuing the American dream. In doing so, we

will advance economic growth, our health and safety, and the

security of our Nation and the world.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, as I mentioned yesterday, Senators had the chance to hear directly from Ukraine's President Zelenskyy over the weekend. He and his constituents--the brave people of Ukraine--have won the hearts and minds of all of us all across the world.

Their pain, of course, is Putin's fault, but as I and others warned for weeks before the invasion, that pain has been compounded by the West's hesitation and sluggishness in helping Ukraine prepare for this onslaught, which we could all see coming. This crisis was not only foreseeable; it was, in fact, foreseen.

Republicans spent months urging President Biden to put more lethal aid in Ukrainian hands before Russian invasion made those deliveries much more difficult. We urged the administration to reinforce our eastern flank NATO partners before Putin escalated his war against Ukraine rather than playing catchup. We called for heavier sanctions before Putin had fully committed his forces and his pride. We warned repeatedly that the Biden administration must not let these actions be slowed down to the speed of bureaucracy. But that is, of course, what happened.

As President Zelenskyy himself said publicly last week, while he appreciates all the Western help, much of it is ultimately arriving ``too late.''

The Biden administration is now finally doing many of the things they slow-walked months ago as too provocative or too escalatory: providing Stingers, sharing intelligence, deploying more forces to NATO's eastern flank, finally, getting out of the way of sanctioning Nord Stream 2.

Now, as supplies dwindle and safe resupply and transit corridors narrow, friends of Ukraine will have to work even harder to help the citizens and their government stay in the fight.

It has been obvious for some time that Ukraine would benefit from receiving Soviet-era aircraft and air defense systems from our eastern flank NATO partners that still maintain inventories of such weapons. The United States can help these allies worried about giving up such capabilities by helping to backfill with American-made and NATO- standard weapons. I understand the administration may be finally coming around to support this but, again, at the stately pace of bureaucracy. This needs to get done and get done yesterday.

(Mr. PADILLA assumed the Chair.)

Meanwhile, the Congress is acting; that includes additional security assistance funding for Ukraine and for our eastern flank NATO allies in the supplemental appropriations bill, along with funding for loan guarantees to help eastern flank countries buy American weapons to shore up our collective defenses.

I appreciate the Democratic leader working in good faith to accommodate my request that the funding bill significantly increase the security assistance drawdown fund available to the President and to backfill our DOD stockpiles that are helping our friends in harm's way. I hope we finalize those steps soon.

This supplemental is urgent, but the fact is, the White House has, thus far, taken steps to limit their own options and made them miss the window to provide impactful assistance. This administration not only reportedly refused a request prior to the conflict to increase the number of U.S. military trainers in the country but moved the advisers we had to the far west of the country and then pulled them from the country entirely, like they also pulled out our entire diplomatic mission.

These noncombat advisers could have helped facilitate more shipments of weapons to the field and more training to teach Ukrainians how to use them. They could have laid important logistical groundwork to ensure weapons could continue to flow through the frontlines after the conflict began.

In area after area, the record shows the Biden administration pulled their punches, even though everyone knew--knew--that the war was coming, and even so, the Ukrainians are mounting an incredible and brave resistance.

Imagine where these brave people might be now if the administration had moved at the speed of necessity rather than the snail's pace of bureaucracy. Now we must commit to keep lethal aid flowing.

We have to continue strengthening NATO and deepening our security partnerships and interoperability with other European partners. We need to encourage more commitments like the German Chancellor's recent announcement that they will massively step up their investment in their own defense and in NATO. And perhaps most important of all, we cannot have Washington politicians in the business of shortchanging our own defense spending at the very time when we are pleading with Western Europe to increase theirs.

We have to lead by example and make the kind of robust investments needed for long-term competition with Russia and China.

In the meantime, the sobering reality is that Ukraine is very likely to see more and escalating brutalities in the days and the weeks ahead. The world remembers the butchery in Grozny and the cold-blooded targeting in Aleppo, and the world will remember this moment as Russia sics conscripts on Ukrainian civilians and arrests its own people when they object.

For all of the Kremlin's lies about Ukraine, about how it is supposedly just an extension of Russia and its people are really Russians, we now know for certain that Russians and Ukrainians do have, in fact, at least one thing in common: Vladimir Putin considers their lives equally disposable.

Biden Administration

Mr. President, now on a related matter, the price of gas jumped more in the past week than any week on record. This, of course, began long before Russia invaded Ukraine. Even before that, families across America were paying dramatically higher gas prices than they faced when President Biden took office. I expect our Democratic friends will now try to blame the entire increase in prices on our efforts to punish on Russia, but don't be fooled. This is more than a year in the making.

Back in November, President Biden's Secretary of Energy was asked about any efforts--any efforts--to ramp up production of our own abundant American energy, and she literally laughed at the question. ``That is hilarious,'' Secretary Granholm said.

The Secretary suggested that increasing domestic production would be futile because the market for oil is global. Well, it sure is. But right now the free world is considering making this market a little bit less global to punish Russia for its brutal conquests in Ukraine.

So it would sure be nice if America had gone into this crisis with more headroom on supply and on gas prices. Just 3 years ago, under Republican policies, we had become a net oil exporter for the first time since World War II.

But Democrats are completely committed to their ideological holy war on affordable energy. From the campaign trail, then-candidate Biden promised, ``I guarantee you we are going to end fossil fuel.'' And in office, the Biden administration has used its considerable Executive authority to actively target affordable American-made oil and natural gas.

On his first day in office, the President canceled the pipeline project that would have sped the safe transport of reliable fuel. The very next week, he suspended all new Federal leases on oil and natural gas exploration.

So Washington Democrats spent months trying to pass policies that would drive the most affordable, reliable, and abundant forms of America energy--and the jobs they support--literally into extinction.

Just yesterday, as even our Western European friends are realizing that green fantasies can't fuel their countries and are trying to turn back toward nuclear, coal, and domestic natural gas, Biden administration officials gave a press conference where they repeated the same--the very same--platitudes about renewables.

You really can't make this stuff up. The Democrats in charge of the United States of America want us to embrace the same failed strategies from which our European friends are frantically backpedaling as fast as they can.

So while the Ukrainians are fighting Russia, Democrats are trying to fight a war on the law of supply and demand. They only want to have to look at solar panel and windmills here at home. So they want to get our oil and gas from everywhere else, but many of the biggest players in the global market are countries that don't much care for the United States. And now the Biden administration's green hostility to domestic energy production has been going hat in hand begging our antagonists to increase production. After spending a year hammering America's own energy producers, the Biden administration appears to be commencing a world tour to try to buy oil from people who don't like us.

As I mentioned yesterday, the administration appears close to a deal that would help Iran enrich more nuclear material and enrich its economy by lifting oil export sanctions.

Reports also suggest U.S. officials have met with the Maduro regime with the aim of relaxing sanctions on Venezuelan oil as well. This administration wants to ramp up energy imports from Iran and Venezuela? That is the world's largest state sponsor of terror and a thuggish South American dictator, respectively.

So they would rather buy from these people than buy from Texas, Alaska, or Pennsylvania. Just let that sink in.

The administration is also apparently making similar overtures to Saudi Arabia. Obviously, the Saudis are not an adversary like these other countries, but I doubt the American people are thrilled to see President Biden trying to increase our dependence on Middle Eastern oil and OPEC while declaring America's own resources off limits.

A green light for the Arabian Gulf and a red one for the Gulf of Mexico--what sense does that make? The political left thinks that affordable energy is dirty and bad so they are happy to export the dirty work and import the oil. Let's ask our friends in Europe how that plays out.

Outsourcing even more production to dictators and theocrats is not the answer. Dumping more subsidies into solar panels and charging stations, praying everything works out, is not the answer. The answer is to let Americans produce American energy.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, it took several months and the worst inflation in 40 years, but finally--finally--Democrats are acknowledging that we have an inflation problem.

The President actually acknowledged inflation in the State of the Union last week. But, unfortunately, while Democrats may finally be talking about inflation, they still don't seem to understand how we got here, and they are continuing to push a whole raft of terrible proposals that would hurt working families and make our inflation crisis even worse.

So how did we get here? Why are Americans currently struggling with huge grocery bills and big price increases on essential goods? It is true that supply chain issues and the reopening of economies after COVID shutdowns created certain inflationary pressure, but a big part of the reason things are so bad in the United States right now is because of the American Rescue Plan spending spree the Democrats passed last March.

When Democrats took office last January, inflation was at 1.4 percent, well within the Fed's target inflation rate of 2 percent. And it might have stayed there had Democrats not decided that they needed to pass a massive partisan $1.9 trillion spending spree under the guise of COVID relief--mere weeks, I might add--after Congress had already passed a major COVID bill. That is right. President Biden and congressional Democrats took office right after Congress had approved a fifth--fifth--bipartisan COVID relief bill, and it was abundantly clear that we were not in immediate need of trillions more in government spending.

But that didn't matter to Democrats. Now that they were in control of Congress and the White House, they wanted to take advantage of the COVID crisis. So in the name of COVID relief, they pushed through a massive partisan piece of legislation filled with unnecessary spending and handouts to Democratic interest groups.

And, of course, the results were predictable. The bill flooded the economy with unnecessary government spending, and the economy overheated as a result. In the words of Jason Furman in a January New York Times article, `` `The United States has had much more inflation than almost any other advanced economy in the world,' said Jason Furman, an economist at Harvard University and former Obama administration economic adviser. The difference, he said, comes because `the United States' stimulus is in a category of its own.' ''

Unfortunately, Democrats seem unable--or unwilling--to recognize that it was their policies that helped push us into our current inflation crisis. In fact, the President used his State of the Union Address to push for even more--more--excessive government spending, a sure way of making our inflation crisis even worse--and not just increased in spending but major new entitlements.

Yes, our Nation is massively in debt, inflation is soaring, and Democrats think now is a good time to create major new entitlements, and, of course, to raise taxes to pay for them. The President claims that he won't raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000, but that is not actually the case. Analysis of Build Back Better proposals reveals more than one tax hike would hit Americans with incomes below $400,000. And then there are the indirect costs.

A centerpiece of the President's tax plans is increasing taxes on corporations. While that may sound like a tax hike on the uber rich, the truth is that the burden of corporate tax hikes would fall heavily on ordinary workers in the form of lower wages, decreased job opportunities and retirement savings, and a less vibrant economy.

The President likes to talk about tax fairness, about hiking taxes on corporations and wealthy Americans so that they pay ``their fair share.'' Of course, he ignores the fact that wealthy Americans pay a disproportionately large share of taxes in this country and that the Federal Government has seen a huge increase in corporate tax receipts, thanks in part to business growth in the wake of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

All that aside, I find the President's call for wealthy Americans to pay their fair share highly ironic considering the Democrats managed to include a tax break for wealthy Americans in their Build Back Better plan. That is right. The Democrats' SALT proposal would overwhelmingly--overwhelmingly--benefit affluent taxpayers in high-tax States. Apparently, making wealthy Americans pay their fair share only applies to wealthy Republican Americans or until wealthy Democrats start asking for tax breaks.

On the corporate tax side, in the State of the Union Address, the President highlighted the corporate minimum tax he is proposing. What he didn't mention was that his corporate minimum tax isn't actually a minimum tax at all. Thanks to the clean energy and affordable housing tax credits the President is advocating, among other credits, companies that take action on Democrats' preferred policies could end up completely evading Biden's so-called minimum tax. So much for making corporations pay their fair share.

In his State of the Union Address, the President highlighted ``the revitalization of American manufacturing.'' He said, ``Companies are choosing to build new factories here when just a few years ago, they would have gone overseas.'' He said that in the State of the Union speech.

The revitalization of American manufacturing is, indeed, something to celebrate. But, unfortunately, President Biden wants to undo the very tax policies that helped create the conditions for this manufacturing renaissance in the first place.

Before Republicans passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, we were experiencing a wave of inversions, which is a wonky way of saying that companies were moving their headquarters overseas. Why were companies moving

overseas? Because of the punishing corporate tax system we had in the United States. Prior to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the United States had the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. That put American businesses at a real disadvantage next to their foreign counterparts, and it created a significant incentive for U.S. companies to move jobs or their entire companies overseas. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act addressed this problem by lowering our Nation's massive corporate tax rate and bringing the U.S. international tax system into the 21st century.

How did it work? Well, in the wake of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, inversions stopped--stopped--and as the President pointed out, companies are building here in America. To quote the President of the National Association of Manufacturers:

Reducing tax rates drove historic growth in the

manufacturing sector.

Unfortunately, if the President has his way, this manufacturing renaissance would likely drastically slow or come to an end altogether. Hiking taxes on American companies, as the President wants to do, would once again put American companies at a competitive disadvantage next to their foreign counterparts.

If the President hikes corporate taxes, we won't be seeing a surge of new building in America or companies keeping jobs here at home. Instead, we will be seeing fewer American jobs and more jobs and companies heading overseas. Democrats have already wreaked a lot of economic harm on American families with their American Rescue Plan spending spree. And the other policies that they are pushing and the tax hikes and new entitlements the President outlined in his State of the Union Address would prolong our inflation crisis and do further damage to our economy and to American workers and families.

I am glad the Democrats are finally recognizing that inflation is a problem, but it would have been nice if they could also recognize how their spending helped get us into this mess in the first place and how their current tax hike and spending plans would hurt Americans and result in a less prosperous economy in the future.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, much of the news media today is focused on Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine--and rightfully so--but not enough attention is being paid to negotiations that are happening today and have been happening in Vienna.

The Biden administration seems dead set on reviving, at any cost, the Iran nuclear deal. Worse, President Biden's chief negotiator Rob Malley--who, I observe, is not a Senate-confirmed official--outsourced our negotiations for reviving this flawed Iran deal to the Russians. This is outrageous.

Let me get this straight. We are working hand in glove with Vladimir Putin to reach a deal that will help Russia evade sanctions being imposed for its aggression in Ukraine and work with its ally Iran.

This is not the way to protect the safety and the interest of the American people.

This is what Russia's chief negotiator to the Iran talks had to say about what he has accomplished for the Biden administration:

I am absolutely sincere in this regard when I say that Iran

got much more than it could expect, much more.

He recently told reporters, adding:

Realistically speaking, Iran got more than, frankly, I

expected or others expected. This is a matter of fact.

Again, this is Russia's chief negotiator making this statement.

Most alarmingly, this revived deal would pave Iran's path to a nuclear weapon. News reports also suggest that the revived deal would quickly unleash $90 billion in frozen funds to Iran--again, the world's biggest state-sponsor of terrorism. Moreover, Iran can expect to earn roughly $50 billion annually in renewed oil exports.

It is unconscionable that the Biden administration appears more eager to unleash the energy production in Venezuela and Iran than right here in America. The Biden administration is so stubborn and blinded by its ideological green energy fantasies that it would rather work with terrorists and dictators--folks with some of the worst human rights records in history--than admit it was a mistake to abandon America's energy independence. This administration would rather work with killers than with American drillers.

As before, the Iranian regime will use this massive windfall of sanctions relief to fund terrorism and aggression against our ally Israel, against our Arab partners, and against Americans serving in the Middle East.

Let me be clear. The Trump administration was right to withdraw us from the Iran nuclear deal in May of 2018. But I am not here today to debate the pros and cons of resurrecting the Iran deal. We will likely have that debate in the days to come, probably sooner than most people think.

Rather, I am here today to argue for preserving the role that Congress--amid concerns that the Biden administration will not submit their new Iran nuclear deal for review and for an up-or-down vote--that Congress must maintain its role as required by U.S. law.

If news reports are to be believed, the Biden administration may be nearing the end of negotiations for an agreement to resuscitate the Iran deal. As Reuters reported recently:

The draft text of the agreement, which is more than 20

pages long, stipulates a sequence of steps to be implemented

. . .

In 2014 and 2015, many lawmakers passionately argued that the original Iran deal should have been submitted to the Senate as a treaty, requiring our advice and consent under the U.S. Constitution. But because the Obama administration refused to follow the Constitution, Congress was compelled to enact the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, or INARA. INARA passed the Senate in a 99-to-1 vote--99 to 1. This is nearly unanimous, a bipartisan vote that reflects how frustrated the Senate is that the executive branch was trying to circumvent Congress on such an important matter. INARA clearly requires that any agreement--I repeat, any agreement--related to the nuclear program of Iran should be submitted to the Senate and to the House for congressional review, including for an up-or-down vote.

It is beyond debate that the Biden administration is required by law to submit any new agreement for reviving the Iran deal to Congress for congressional review, but the Biden administration has not clearly committed that it will submit whatever agreement it is negotiating in Vienna for our review and an up-or-down vote by Congress.

If the Biden administration refuses to submit its new Iran agreement to Congress, it will be ignoring the law and undermining the role of this body in foreign policy.

Last year, I was concerned this might happen. That is why I introduced the Iran Sanctions Relief Review Act of 2020. My bill borrows a provision from the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA, an act that overwhelmingly passed Congress in 2017.

The CAATSA provision allows for congressional review and an up-or- down vote on any Presidential waiver of Russia's sanctions. My bill takes word-for-word that same provision and applies it to any Presidential waiver of Iran sanctions. This is important because any new agreement to revive the Iran deal will require once again the executive branch to waive Iran sanctions. In other words, my bill protects the role of Congress if the executive branch ignores INARA and refuses to submit the new agreement to the Senate and to the House.

So far, 37 Senators have cosponsored the Iran Sanctions Relief Review Act with me. This number is significant because 37 Senators would be more than enough to deny the Senate's advice and consent if the executive branch actually followed the Constitution and presented a new Iran agreement to the Senate as a treaty.

I urge my colleagues who have not yet cosponsored the Iran Sanctions Relief Review Act to join me and to do so. We must protect the first branch of government from an executive branch that seeks to encroach upon it or even to ignore it.

I also remind the Biden administration, the Iranian regime, and the world of a fact that should be patently obvious by now: Any agreement to revive the Iran nuclear deal that lacks the Senate's advice and consent under the

Constitution--that is, that lacks the support of 67 Senators--will not survive multiple Presidential administrations. It will be ripped up just like it was the last time. And I have zero doubt that, as before, the next Presidential administration will end this deal again and will snap back sanctions--with a vengeance--against the Iranian regime and those countries that were foolish enough to trade with it.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.