Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act

Mr. President, I rise today to re-introduce the ``Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act.''

For over two decades, cleaning up the Tijuana River Valley has been one of my top priorities for Southern California. The wastewater, trash and sediment that continues to flow into San Diego and Imperial Counties is an alarming danger to public health and our economy. Although we have made recent strides in cleaning up this pollution, there is much work remaining.

That's why I am proud to introduce this important legislation, once again, to help address this decades-long issue. I am very pleased Senator Padilla has joined me as an original cosponsor and I look forward to working with him on this important issue.

Polluted water from the Tijuana and New Rivers flows north across the border into the United States causing unsanitary water conditions, pollution and beach closures across Southern California. It also jeopardizes military training exercises for Navy Seals in Camp Pendleton.

Three-quarters of the 1,700-square-mile Tijuana River watershed lies in Mexico. However, the watershed, along with all its pollutants, drains into San Diego County and the Tijuana River Valley.

In addition to jeopardizing human health and safety, two of the most drastic effects from this cross-border water pollution are harm to wildlife and damage to the tourism industry, integral to Southern Californian communities. As the coronavirus pandemic continues to threaten our nation's health and economy, it is critical we work to address the pollution in the region so California can welcome visitors back to their beaches when it is safe to do so.

The beaches in the region are central to San Diego's tourism economy. In recent years, beaches in the communities of Coronado and Imperial Beach were closed for more than 200 days in a single year due to pollution.

Health and safety of residents and workers are also at risk. In recent years, local Border Patrol union officials reported that 80 officers suffered from contamination, rashes, infections, chemical burns and lung irritation due to toxic cross-border flows.

In addition, pollution from Mexico harms sensitive areas that provide critical habitat for more than 300 species of birds as well as marine animals like leopard sharks and bottlenose dolphins. The region is home to multiple parks and public lands, including the Tijuana River's National Estuarine Research Reserve, the River Mouth State Marine Conservation Area and River Valley Regional Park Preserve.

The harmful effects of pollution in the Tijuana River Valley on our residents, businesses, economy and environment are simply unacceptable.

In February 2020, the Government Accountability Office issued a comprehensive report, ``International Boundary Water Commission: Opportunities Exist to Address Water Quality Problems.'' My office worked closely with the GAO to utilize their findings to craft meaningful change through this legislation.

Simultaneously, we were able to secure $300 million in the U.S.- Mexico-Canada trade agreement to address pollution in the Tijuana River Valley Watershed.

With significant funding and detailed findings by the GAO investigation, we developed this legislation in concert with federal, state and local agency input. As beaches in both the United States and Mexico continue to close due to high levels of pollution, it is as imperative as ever to advance a solution that engages all stakeholders.

The Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act includes key reforms to advance concrete solutions.

One of the problems is that no one agency is in charge of this problem. A whole range of agencies--EPA, International Boundary and Water Commission, State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Defense Department--all have jurisdiction or interest in this international issue.

What we need is one agency in charge, taking input from the others so decisions can be made. This approach is similar to other large, regional environmental challenges like the Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, Everglades and Chesapeake Bay. Here in California, we have also seen great success with this model of interagency coordination at Lake Tahoe.

Here's how the bill would work:

The EPA would be officially named the agency with overall control of this effort.

The EPA, along with its federal, state and local partners, would be directed to identify a list of priority projects. It also would be authorized to accept and distribute funds to build, operate and maintain those projects.

The bill would permanently authorize the Border Water Infrastructure Program to manage storm water runoff and water reuse projects.

State and local authorities would also be authorized to contribute funding to federal projects, which is currently not allowed.

The International Boundary and Water Commission would be authorized to mitigate storm water from Mexico and the pollution that comes with it and is required to construct, operate and maintain projects on the priority list developed by the agencies within the U.S. that improve water quality.

We need a new and comprehensive approach to this issue that has plagued border communities for too long. This bill creates a formal process to consider effective, long-term solutions and additional wastewater infrastructure to mitigate cross-border pollution and I hope the Senate can move on this bill quickly.

I want to thank California Environmental Protection Agency, California Natural Resources Agency, San Diego and Imperial counties, cities of Imperial Beach and Coronado, Mayor of Chula Vista, Mary Casillas Salas, the City of San Diego and the Port of San Diego for supporting this legislation. These communities, and others, have been negatively impacted by this issue for far too long.

It's past time that we finally solve this problem to safeguard local health and economic growth.

Once again, I thank Senator Padilla for his cosponsorship. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Affordable Housing Redevelopment Act,'' which I introduced today.

I want to thank Senator Padilla for joining me on this important bill, and Representatives Jared Huffman and Mike Thompson for leading a companion measure in the House of Representatives.

Established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the Neighborhood Stabilization Program was created by Congress to help provide assistance to communities hit hard by the recession by funding the acquisition and rehabilitation of troubled residential properties.

The program helped States, local governments, and nonprofit organizations acquire properties and rehabilitate or repurpose them as long-term affordable housing.

Between 2008 and 2019, Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds have facilitated the construction or rehabilitation of more than 50,000 homes, and the program has generated $1.8 billion in return income, allowing communities to stretch Federal investments even further.

Today, more than 7.4 million units of affordable housing are needed across the U.S. to meet the needs of low-income renters. In my home State of California, more than 1.4 million units are needed to address the State's affordable housing shortage.

Due to financial burdens and loss of income resulting from the COVID- 19 pandemic, millions of people in the United States are at risk of eviction or foreclosure, and the need for more affordable housing is expected to increase dramatically.

In addition to making long-term investments in building new affordable housing in the United States, it is also critically important to focus resources on more immediate solutions, such as acquiring and rehabilitating existing buildings.

Acquisition and rehabilitation provides two distinct advantages: it lowers per-unit construction costs and makes affordable housing units available to low-income households much faster.

The ``Affordable Housing Redevelopment Act'' would reauthorize and expand the Neighborhood Stabilization Program to help State and local governments purchase blighted, vacant, abandoned, foreclosed, or surplus properties, and convert them into affordable housing. Eligible projects would include mixed-use development and conversions of non- residential office and retail properties.

All new units would have to serve households whose income does not exceed area median income, and at least 25 percent of units would serve households whose income does not exceed 50 percent of area median income. Long-term affordability requirements would apply in all cases.

The bill would authorize $1.5 billion in discretionary appropriations to be allocated as a competitive grant program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

This bill provides a targeted and cost effective way for the Federal government to help communities build more affordable housing, while also stimulating local economies and creating jobs.

I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Native Plant Species Pilot Program Act. I am pleased to be partnering with Senator Cantwell on this initiative. Our bipartisan bill would create a new pilot program at the National Park Service to support the use of native plants, and would direct the Park Service to review existing data and study the cost-effectiveness of using native plants.

Native plants are species found naturally in regions and can add beauty and value to our National Park System. Benefits range from using less water and pesticides, purifying the air, and recharging groundwater in wetlands. By using native species, the Park Service can also improve habitat for wildlife and restore important species of birds and butterflies to their natural environment.

In Acadia National Park, native plants are an important part of the ongoing conservation efforts undertaken by Superintendent Kevin Schneider and all those who work to encourage the use of native plants. Acadia National Park protects more than 900 plant species, including some that are globally, nationally, and locally rare.

Acadia is home to the vibrant rhodoras that flower along wetland edges in the spring and stunning wood lilies that bloom on the mountain tops

in August, helping to attract the more than 3.5 million visitors a year to the seventh most-visited national park in the United States. The Wild Gardens of Acadia, located at Sieur de Monts, are a collection of more than 400 native plants maintained almost exclusively by park volunteers and represent the natural plant communities found within Acadia National Park. This partnership project with Friends of Acadia allows visitors to easily step through the park's myriad habitats and learn about the splendor of Acadia's native plant species. The Wild Gardens celebrates its 60th anniversary in 2021.

Native plants, however, face many threats, such as non-native pests, non-native plants, diseases, and a changing climate. Today, almost one quarter of Acadia National Park's species are non-native to the park. The red spruce, iconic to Acadia, is projected to lose a substantial amount of its habitat in coming decades because of climate change. In addition, invasive pests, such as the Emerald Ash Borer and the hemlock woolly adelgid are affecting northern forests and have expanded into Maine. Hemlock woolly adelgid recently infested hemlock trees just outside of the park on Mount Desert Island.

Our bipartisan bill has earned endorsements from the Garden Club of America, Friends of Acadia, Scenic America, and the Native Plant Center at Westchester Community College. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation to help protect the natural landscapes at our national parks for years to come.

Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce in the Senate, with my colleagues Senators Young, Duckworth, Lee, Coons, Grassley, Durbin and Paul a bipartisan resolution to repeal the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMF) against Iraq. This legislation will formally end the authorizations for the Gulf and Iraq wars--30 and 19 years, respectively, after these AUMFs were first passed, reasserting Congress' vital role in not only declaring wars, but in ending them. The repeal of these authorizations also recognizes the strong partnership the United States now has with a sovereign, democratic Iraq.

The United States is no longer at war with Iraq and our legal frameworks should reflect this reality as much as our policy frameworks, to include the Strategic Framework Agreement that Iraq and the United States signed in November 2008, which affirms the establishment of a long-term relationship of cooperation and friendship, based on the principle of equality in sovereignty and the rights and principles that are enshrined in the United Nations Charter.

Since 2014, U.S. troops have been in Iraq, alongside Iraqi forces, at the Government of Iraq's request for assistance in combating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Current Administration officials, including President Biden, Secretary of State Blinken, Secretary of Defense Austin and Commander of the United States Central Command, General McKenzie, have routinely emphasized that United States military forces remain in Iraq at the invitation of the Government of Iraq and in respect to its sovereignty. Recent presidential administrations have maintained that the 2002 AUMF only serves to ``reinforce'' any legal authority to combat ISIS provided by the 2001 AUMF and is not independently required to authorize any such activities. As such, repealing the 1991 AUMF and the 2002 AUMF would not affect ongoing United States military operations. It would however, prevent the future misuse of the Gulf and Iraq War authorizations and strengthen Congressional oversight over war powers.

It is past time to repeal both AUMFs and formally mark the end of the Iraq War that resulted in a devastating loss of life and wounded tens of thousands of our troops. It makes no sense that two AUMFs remain in place against a country that is now a close partner. They serve no operational purpose, run the risk of future abuse by the President, and help keep our nation at permanent war.

I am proud to join this group of Senators in introducing a bill to repeal these outdated and unnecessary authorizations. I hope we can continue to find bipartisan compromise on these tough war power issues to include revising and replacing the 2001 AUMF.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that requires the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a study on the establishment of, and the potential land that could be included in, a unit of the National Forest System in the State of Hawaii.

The U.S. Forest Service currently oversees more than 150 National forests that receive Federal funding for watershed protection, wildlife conservation, enhancement of recreational access, wildfire prevention, among other things. Despite having unique forest ecosystems found nowhere else in the Nation, Hawaii is currently among the few States that do not have a National Forest. If warranted, a National Forest designation in Hawaii could provide additional Federal research and management resources.

This bill directs the U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary, acting through the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service, to conduct a study in coordination with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, and in consultation with the Hawaii Department of Agriculture as well as other State and local stakeholders, on the islands of Hawaii, Oahu, Kauai, Molokai, Lanai, and Maui.

This study would, among other things, assess unique vegetation types, opportunities to improve and protect forest resources, secure favorable water flows, and opportunities for visitor use.

The Secretary of Agriculture is given three years to conduct the study and report the results to Congress. Information from that report will then inform which lands in Hawaii, if any, would be suitable for inclusion in a National Forest. This bill is supported by the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.