Stop Fentanyl Border Crossings Act

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, I feel like, in fact, I have been here on a weekly basis to talk about this issue. And the reason I feel that way is that I have been here on a weekly basis to talk about what is happening in the wake of the Dobbs decision, which stripped the American people of the first fundamental freedom, the first fundamental right, that we have lost since reconstruction.

This was a 50-year effort on the part of certain people in this country, with an ideological commitment to overturn Roe v. Wade, who used every single mechanism that they could of our democracy and, now, ultimately, our judiciary, to enforce a legal outcome that the vast majority of the American people have never supported and, today, don't support.

We find ourselves on the floor today, I dare say, facing a resolution by the Senator from Alabama, whom I have been out here arguing with for the last 6 weeks--a resolution that would be decried by, I would bet, 9 out of 10 Americans. I will be fair: 8 out of 10 Americans. This is an effort in the wake of the Dobbs decision, which stripped the American people of this fundamental freedom, this fundamental right that families have relied on for 50 years.

Millions of veterans now live in States where abortion is banned. I will come to that in a second.

In an attempt to deal with the catastrophe in the wake of Dobbs, the VA has promulgated some rules to make it allowable in the Veterans' Administration. When a veteran or their family member has been raped, is the victim of incest, or when the life of the mother is at stake, what the VA has said--because we are dealing with the overturning of Roe v. Wade--in those cases, those three limited cases, we are going to allow people to get access to care at the Veterans' Administration.

That has set off the Senator from Alabama, who is now trying to get the Senate to pass a resolution to ban that so that veterans and their families who are the victims of rape, who are the victims of incest, or where the life of the mother is at stake, cannot get medical care at the Veterans' Administration. In a State like his, which has banned abortion, that is what is at stake this week.

A month ago, we were on this floor because the same Senator from Alabama was putting a blanket hold on every single flag officer's promotion in the U.S. military. Think about that. That sounds impossible. That sounds like an exaggeration.

Madam President, the reason it sounds that way to you is because, first of all, you are a reasonable person, but, second of all, it has never happened in the history of this Senate before--that somebody has held up the promotion of every single flag officer, put a blanket hold on.

Now, that is not because of what the VA is doing. That is because of what the Department of Defense is doing, because the Department of Defense, again, in the wake of Dobbs--the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade--in the wake of that, DOD has said: If you are serving in a State where abortion is banned, we will pay for your travel from that State to another State. We will say that you don't need to use unpaid leave to get to that other State.

And we have said--DOD, not me, has said: If you want to take a little longer to talk to your commanding officer about one of the most personal decisions anybody could make, any family could make, any woman could make, we are going to give you a little bit of extra time to do that.

Those are the three things. I bet 80 percent of the American people support those things, and I guarantee you more than 80 percent of the American people

do not support the idea that we are going to hold up every single flag officer who is coming here for a promotion, at a moment when Putin has invaded Ukraine and China is rattling their saber over their idiosyncratic view of how the world ought to work.

I heard that somebody today said: Well, this veterans rule violates the Hyde amendment.

First of all, the Hyde amendment, as is well known, doesn't even apply to the VA. And, if it did--guess what--there are three exceptions to the Hyde amendment: rape, incest, and the health of the mother.

So they are even trying to turn back Hyde. That is what they are trying to do on the floor of this Senate, and they are messing with the readiness of the American Armed Forces to do it.

What brought us here?

What brought us here was the Dobbs decision. What brought us here was a Court packed--packed--with a wish list of people who, for 50 years, have been fighting for an originalist--so-called originalist; made up, made up--but an originalist conception of constitutional law, and they finally found a guy in the form of President Donald Trump who was willing to put these people on the Court.

And they gave the Court the majority they needed to eviscerate Roe v. Wade, to strip this fundamental right, to strip this fundamental freedom, and to do it with contempt; to not wrestle with the question of what is going to happen to people serving in the Armed Forces of the United States if they are unlucky enough to need an abortion and they live in a State like Alabama, for example, where, if you are a doctor and you perform an abortion, you can go to jail for 99 years--although, admittedly, admittedly, there is an exception in Alabama for the life of the mother.

This end point--I hope it is an end point. This end point of that 50- year war on freedom, war on Roe v. Wade, war on a set of expectations that women, in particular, have in this country, but that families have in this country--that war was brought to a conclusion, in some sense, by a majority opinion written by Justice Scalia that, essentially--read it, read it--essentially came down to this: If it wasn't a right in 1868, it is not a right in 2023. If it wasn't a freedom in 1868, it is not a freedom today.

Forget that, at that time of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, Black people and women didn't even have the right to vote. They didn't even have the right to vote. But in the 21st century, when we are meant to compete in a global economy, in a society that, by any measure, is still profoundly unequal but far more equal than it was in those days, where women do have the right to vote, where Black people do have the right--thank God--in this country to vote, we are reading the language in 1868 and saying: Well, was it a right or a freedom then? That is how we are going to decide whether it is one today.

In the early 1990s, when I was in law school and when we knew that it was at the dawn of originalism--I mean, that was happening right then. It was part of the Reagan revolution. It was part of law and economics. It was part of making the shareholder the supreme being in the United States of America--part of that whole measure, that whole time period in the country's history. That is when some genius--and they were a genius--came up with the word ``originalism'' to describe a legal ideology that says: We are only going to look in the rearview mirror to figure out what our rights are today--as if they could divine the intent of the Founding Fathers on a question like abortion, who, by the way, had massive disagreements among themselves.

Anybody who has ever read even a signpost or a tourist--you know, some sort of signpost on the side of Independence Hall in Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia--knows how many disagreements the Founders had with themselves. The idea that somehow you are going to divine their one view about what the Constitution should say is preposterous. But here we are. Here we are.

And we were told when this happened: Don't worry about it. You know, this is just a matter of the Supreme Court sending this right, sending this fundamental freedom--this fundamental freedom--back to the States. That is all. It is just an exercise in federalism.

Well, since this happened, since Dobbs was passed, 18 States have banned abortion. I have one kid who is about the age of the pages now. Two others are older than the pages now. I am telling you, I was with my daughter Caroline the other day, riding through Colorado, looking at the billboards as we went by, and I said to her: Man, Caroline--she is now 23--if you had told me 20 years ago that in 2023 we would be living in a country that was legalizing marijuana and banning abortion, I would not have believed you. I would not have believed you.

She doesn't believe it either.

As my friend Jon Tester, my friend the farmer from Montana, says, his daughter is having to fight for rights that her mother never had to fight for because her grandmother won these rights. And now we are rolling it all back because the Supreme Court majority that Donald Trump made possible after all these years, after all this effort to strip the American people of this freedom, has decided, if it is not a right in 1868, it is not a right today.

So 18 States have banned abortion. Nine have no exceptions for rape or incest. There have been now restrictions on freedom to travel. Texas famously has put $10,000 bounties. It is like the Wild West, all of a sudden, where if you are a friend or a neighbor who is driving somebody to access abortion services and somebody catches you, says you shouldn't have been doing it, you can get a $10,000 bounty.

In Florida, in the Sunshine State--I think Florida is the third largest State in the country--one of them, the third largest State in the country--in broad daylight--actually, to be honest with you, it was at 11 o'clock at night--the Governor has now signed a 6-week ban on abortion.

One in three women don't even know that they are pregnant. A third of women don't even know that they are pregnant at 6 weeks.

I don't know whether the Governor of Florida knows that or doesn't know that, but it is an interesting question: Which would be worse, him knowing it or not knowing it?

And, now, all of a sudden, 9 million veterans and their families, including 2 million female veterans, live in States that have banned abortion or restricted it in ways that would have been unimaginable to my daughter Caroline, to families all over the country.

And, as I said, in some limited way of dealing with it, the VA announced these rules. But these narrow rules that have to do with rape and incest and the life of the mother, they are not enough for the Senator from Alabama, and, this afternoon, he is forcing a vote to strip away the VA policy and impose a position on every veteran in America that is more extreme than his own State.

Hyde doesn't apply to the VA, and, even if it did, there are exceptions for rape, for incest, for the life of the mother. That is not extreme enough for them. His resolution would ensure that veterans who have been raped, who are victims of incest, whose life is at risk, can't seek an abortion at the VA, along with their spouses and their dependents.

Even in Alabama there is an exception for the life of the mother, and they have one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country.

I am going to come to an end because my colleague is here from Nevada. I have two colleagues here from Nevada. So I am confused. I said I am going to finish, but I will take a couple of minutes and then finish, but by saying that it is tragic that we have to have this vote in 2023. It is.

This is a tragedy. It is a tragedy. It is a spectacle. It is an embarrassment. But at least people will have the opportunity to know where every Member of the Senate stands, and they are going to understand what a 50-year political effort to strip America of this freedom looks like.

You know, there was a survey in a poll last month in Florida, and my colleague won't be surprised to know this: 75 percent of Florida opposes a 6-week ban; 61 percent of the GOP in Florida opposes a 6-week ban. Let that sink in.

I don't know. I am not a great politician, unlike some people. But, maybe, that is why he was signing it at 11 o'clock at night. Maybe that is why, when the Governor of Florida signed it,

he sent out a tweet that didn't say he had signed a 6-week ban on abortion in Florida, because 75 percent of the people there oppose it, just like the majority of Americans.

And so I think we should defeat this resolution. I think the American people should take note of every single vote that is cast here by these Senators.

But, really, as important as that, we need to understand what has happened to our politics, what has happened to our Supreme Court through this 50-year war on American freedom and this 50-year war on a woman's right to choose.

And we need to come together as a country and codify a woman's right to choose so the next generation of Americans has the benefit that the last 50 years of Americans have had.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, it is a pleasure to be on the floor today with the chair of our EPW Committee and with my friend from Arkansas, Senator Boozman.

I am going to speak again about another example of the bipartisan work of our EPW Committee, where we have had accomplishments that are real, practical, and positive and result in good change for our country. On the EPW Committee, we have a history of working together, of crafting legislation together, and of getting good policy going. Sometimes it is not easy, but we have been able to do it.

The cornerstone of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which made needed investments in our Nation's core infrastructure, was written and passed out of EPW. With the Water Resources Development Act, it was the same thing. It supports the work of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on projects across this country. It was passed out of our EPW Committee unanimously, and it eventually became law.

Today, Chairman Carper, Senator Boozman, and I are reintroducing two pieces of legislation that had been previously approved by EPW and the Senate unanimously--both the committee and the full Senate--to tackle another issue in a bipartisan way, which is access to recycling in America.

Not only is recycling something that we have found people really want to do, but it is great for the environment, and it is good for business. It supports over 1 million jobs and generates billions of dollars in economic output every year. But in order to grow these numbers, we need to ensure people who want to participate really can, particularly those in rural and underserved areas, such as areas of my State, so that they can do so.

Mr. President, the first bill we are reintroducing today, the Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act, addresses challenges when it comes to recycling for many of our smaller cities and towns.

In the one I live in, we have sort of stopped and started on recycling. Recycling services, including curbside recycling, are just simply not available. These rural areas share common barriers to accessibility: location and proximity to material recovery facilities and the size and density of the population. This is just not available. This has led to low processing yields and high costs in collection and transportation costs, making it difficult for material recovery facilities to operate at a profit.

Our legislation would establish a pilot recycling program to ensure places like West Virginia, Arkansas, Wyoming, or Alaska aren't being left behind. The pilot program would award grants on a competitive basis to eligible entities for improving recycling accessibility in a community or communities within the same geographic area.

Along with improving access to recycling, it is important to fix important data gaps, as the chairman spoke about, when it comes to recycling in America. That is the intent of the Recycling and Composting Accountability Act, which is the other piece of legislation we are introducing today. It would improve data collection on our Nation's recycling systems and explore the potential of a national composting strategy. Not only would this give us a better idea of how well States are doing through recycling and composting rates, but it would also help us identify those areas that may be struggling to sustain and grow proper recycling programs.

These are simple steps we can take, supported by both Republicans and Democrats, to improve and expand recycling in this country. Americans in every community--rural and urban, on the coasts or in the heartland--share a desire to protect our environment. These pieces of legislation will help make it easier for them to recycle, to contribute to a healthier planet, and to create jobs along the way.

With Earth Day coming up, it is fitting that we continue our efforts to expand recycling by reintroducing these bills today, alongside Chairman Carper and Senator Boozman, and I thank them both for their work.

Drug Crisis

Mr. President, I informed the Senator from Arkansas, but I need to inform Senator Carper that I am having back-to-back speeches, so I am going to totally change the topic here real quick before Senator Boozman talks about recycling. Thank you for letting me move ahead here.

Mr. President, I rise today to talk about an issue that is impacting every State in our Nation, an issue that has the potential to impact every community, every family, and every person in the Chamber today, and that is the drug and substance abuse crisis.

My home State of West Virginia knows all too well about the scars that this crisis has created and the devastating toll that it takes. West Virginia, unfortunately, continues to lead the Nation in overdose deaths per capita. It is a sad statistic for us, and although these deaths have been declining, every single overdose death is one too many.

In 2020, we lost 1,197 West Virginians to overdoses. Data from our State health department indicates that over 80 percent of these deaths included an opioid.

Our State's EMS teams responded to over 9,000 suspected overdose calls, and there were 6,916 emergency room visits related to overdoses. These numbers are just staggering and clearly show the continued and urgent need to address this crisis and the many forms that it comes in.

This is certainly an issue that requires immediate attention from every level of government and deserves more than just four mentions in the President's most recent budget proposal.

While I feel the President and his administration lack that sense of urgency, ending the addiction crisis and taking action to save countless lives remains one of my top priorities.

Each time I meet with our northern or our southern U.S. attorneys in West Virginia, the drug crisis is by far the largest topic of discussion. Their offices see firsthand the amount of illicit drugs that are entering our State and work around the clock to remove the threat that these substances create in our communities.

Like I have said in this Chamber before, last October our U.S. Attorney's Office of the Northern District of West Virginia recovered approximately 75 pounds of cocaine, 19 pounds of methamphetamine, and nearly 5 pounds of fentanyl in Wheeling, WV, on one bust.

Investigators found that traffickers had these drugs shipped from the U.S.-Mexican border to Ohio via tractor-trailer and used cash payments to people who flew from California to Pittsburgh to move the cash back and forth. The connection between the crisis at our southern border and the drug epidemic we are seeing at home does not get any clearer than that.

In December of last year, the DEA announced nationwide seizures of over 50.6 million fentanyl pills and more than 10,500 pounds of fentanyl powder. The DEA estimates that these seizures could represent 379 million potentially deadly overdoses of fentanyl. That is enough fentanyl to kill every single American. And these are just the drugs that they found.

With the Border Patrol stretched unfathomably thin, there is no telling the amount of drugs that are getting through undetected. We know that these drugs are entering our country through the southern border, making their way into each and every State and wreaking havoc.

If President Biden would get a little more serious about stopping this, I think he has to get serious about border security. In a crisis this urgent, it is time to act.

I have spoken with the DEA administrator about the support they need and the challenges that they are facing. I have introduced legislation, led letters, and pushed for initiatives that informed the public of the dangers of fentanyl getting in the hands of our youth, that strengthen our investigations on fentanyl trafficking, and that

prevent fentanyl and synthetic drug shipments from being smuggled into the United States through the mail.

Currently, we are working on efforts to crack down on and schedule the illicit drug xylazine, which I understand is also known as ``tranq.'' If you didn't know by now, xylazine is an easily accessible veterinarian tranquilizer that is being mixed with opioids, including fentanyl, increasing the number of fatal overdoses nationwide.

This crisis is ever-changing, which means our approach needs to be multifaceted as well.

I encourage the President, his administration, and all of our colleagues right here in the Congress to stay on this effort and stop the latest modifications before it is too late.

Even in the midst of devastating losses in our State, I have always been inspired, encouraged, and moved by the efforts of people in West Virginia to end the drug crisis and help those in our State during the times when they need it the most. West Virginians continue to be responsible for the most innovative recovery solutions and prevention efforts that we have seen.

The opioid crisis has made a personal targeted impact on communities all across our State, and in turn we have seen success through these community-based solutions.

I have seen in Martinsburg, WV, with a program that is a police- school-community-health-and-education partnership working to prevent substance use disorders from ever happening to our youth. By building strong families and empowering the community, we build resiliency in children and families to help them overcome this horrible addiction.

I have seen this in Kearneysville, WV, where they are building a recovery village so that individuals who are struggling with addiction receive access to family and community they definitely need.

The detailed focus is on housing and workforce development, aspects of recovery that are absolutely critical.

I have seen drug court programs all across our State, where West Virginians are building each other up, holding each other accountable, and giving those who struggle with addiction the chance for a life of recovery.

You know, West Virginians take care of West Virginians, and there is no other issue that requires each and every one of us to work together quite like this one.

So, President Biden, the drug crisis has created a dire situation in communities not just across my State but across the country. We have no time to waste. Every day of inaction results in turmoil and devastation for so many families and loved ones.

We need to secure the southern border; we need to crack down on illicit drug trafficking and new tactics that criminals are implementing; and we need to deliver the tools our communities need to implement Federal programs and develop those community-based solutions that we know work best. We must do this together. We must do it now. Countless lives depend on us.

With that, I yield the floor to my colleague from Arkansas, my fellow recycler, Senator Boozman.

Recycling

Madam President, there is a grave threat to America's future lurking online. Big Tech giants and other online platforms are working every day to capture the minds of our children in order to pad their profits.

Toddlers, before they can walk or barely talk, have learned to reach out and touch that bright little screen. Mothers and fathers on car rides and plane trips trust that little screen will buy them quiet time. Captivated, mesmerized, even hypnotized, the screen experience continues. And unless parents are very careful, it can go from bad to worse. It starts with music and games, which many of the parents find harmless. As the child grows up and graduates to a cell phone, there is an opportunity to move to a new level of information and communication.

Let's face it, even the most caring, conscientious parent struggles to keep up with all the apps and options. And the producers of these online experiences are determined to work on the brains of these children, capture their

little customers in the process, and pad their profits.

So who is protecting our kids from internet profiteers and predators? I am sorry to say, almost no one. In fact, our laws are written to protect the predators, not the kids.

Clearly, every child can benefit from a safe online experience. They can make friends, expand their knowledge, learn skills. But social media, we all know, has a dangerous dark side. Innocent children are lured into online environments and powerful algorithms working to keep them there. Unsuspecting kids can be sexually exploited and their childhood images captured forever by predators and profit-taking abusers.

Drug pushers no longer search for playgrounds to sell deadly narcotics. Two clicks on the internet bring them their new young customers. Many children are bullied and harassed online or pressured into dangerous, deadly behavior.

Rose Bronstein is a mother from Chicago. She knows how cruel and dangerous the online world can be. Rose's son Nate was a 10th grader at a private school when he started being taunted by classmates using texts and Snapchat. The bullying of her son was vicious, and it included messages urging Nate to kill himself. Nate died by suicide at the age of 15.

We have known for years about the online dangers to children's privacy and safety. We have talked a lot about them. We have even held hearings in Congress about them. Journalists have written so many articles about the dangers, but the problem has only grown worse.

Research into exactly how social media use affects children is still in its early stage, largely because of Big Tech's failure to adequately monitor, report, and prevent violation of children's online privacy and safety. But a picture is emerging, and it is alarming.

This chart tells a story. The gold line you see here shows the amount of time teenagers spend scrolling through social media and watching online videos. According to Common Sense, a group that tracks media use by young kids and teens, kids spend an average of nearly 3 hours a day on sites like Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube. That is a nearly 60-percent increase in the last 6 years.

This white line shows that an increase in teens' use of social media has been accompanied by a sharp spike in teen depression. According to the CDC, between 2013 and 2021, the percentage of teens who reported persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness shot up 42 percent-- between 2013 and 2021.

The blue line shows what happens with girls' mental health. Today, nearly one in three girls in America say they have seriously considered suicide. That is a 34-percent spike in the past decade.

We have given tech companies nearly three decades to police themselves. They have failed miserably, and our children are paying the price. Our teenagers are in a mental health crisis.

Congress must impose stronger, enforceable online protections for kids. Our children are not commodities, and we can't continue to expect parents and victims alone to stand up to Big Tech with few ways to hold tech companies accountable.

Two months ago, the Senate Judiciary Committee, which I chair, held a hearing on online threats to children's safety. We heard powerful testimony from those working to increase children's privacy and safety online. They included law enforcement, the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, the American Psychological Association, and the child internet safety advocacy organization known as Fairplay.

We also heard from victims. The stories were frightening, frightening to every parent and every grandparent, and heartbreaking.

Charlotte--and I am using a pseudonym here--didn't attend the hearing, but she has allowed me to tell her story in the hope that it may help others who have been victimized online, as she has been, by sexual predators.

Charlotte was 16 years old when she first visited a social media site that a friend told her about. It sounded so exciting, she said, a place where she could meet people from all over the world. I won't use the name of the site, but you would recognize it immediately. It is used by tens of millions of people every single day.

Among the people Charlotte met online was a man who showered her with attention and compliments, gained her trust, and eventually enticed Charlotte into performing sex acts for him over the webcam and sending explicit videos to him.

Maybe that sounds shocking to you, but be prepared. Research shows that over one-third of teenagers today believe that it is normal to share the same sorts of images and videos that Charlotte shared online--one-third.

She was still in high school when the online harassment began. First came anonymous emails, then a phone call to her parents' house calling her vile names. Eventually, the images she shared with that man she thought was a friend would be posted on more than 100 websites across the world, often with her name and identifiable information included.

Charlotte filed her first of six police reports about the images when she reached the age of 18. Eventually, she, her mother, her boyfriend, and child safety groups would file hundreds of reports with social media providers around the world trying to get these horrible images taken down, often to no avail.

While she was in college studying to be a teacher--her lifelong dream--the images were posted again, along with her name and the name of her college. When the university found out about it, it canceled her student teaching placement and threatened to withhold her degree.

She was a teacher of special education at a middle school when one of her students saw the images again online. Charlotte told her principal. She was fired a few days later.

Again and again, it was Charlotte who was blamed, not the abusers who tormented her online. Over the years, Charlotte tried three times to take her own life. It has now been 14 years since she met that predator online, but the images continue to circulate again and again. The abuse never stops, and Charlotte says she doubts she will ever feel safe again.

This Senate can help Charlotte and countless other young people who are sexually abused online each year by passing a bill that I am introducing today. It is called the Stop CSAM Act. CSAM, C-S-A-M, stands for ``child sexual abuse material.'' Federal law still uses the old term--``pornography,'' ``child pornography''--but that is misleading because pornography implies consent, and children under the age of 18 cannot legally consent to the creation or sharing of sexually explicit images of themselves.

So these images are, by definition, evidence of a crime. Yet, under current law, it is extremely difficult to bring lawsuits against tech companies that allow child sexual abuse materials to be posted on their websites.

How can this be, you ask? Here is how. The Communications Decency Act of 1996--remember that year--contains a section, section 230, that offers near-total immunity to Big Tech. As a result, victims like Charlotte have no way to force tech companies to remove content posted on their sites--not even these child sexual abuse horrible images.

My bill, the Stop CSAM Act, is going to change that. It would protect victims and promote accountability within the tech industry. Companies that fail to remove CSAM and related imagery after being notified about them would face significant fines. They would also be required to produce annual reports detailing their efforts to keep children safe from online sex predators, and any company that promotes or facilitates online child exploitation could face new criminal and civil penalties.

When section 230 was created in 1996, Mark Zuckerberg was in the sixth grade. Facebook and social media sites didn't even exist. It is time that we rewrite the law to reflect the reality of today's world.

A bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators Graham and Blumenthal would also help to do that. It is called the EARN IT Act, and it would let CSAM victims--these child sexual abuse victims--have their day in court by amending section 230 to eliminate Big Tech's near-total immunity from liability and responsibility.

When we learned two decades ago that Big Tobacco was lying about their

efforts to hook kids on smoking, Congress took action to establish reasonable guardrails to protect public health, and the courts held Big Tobacco accountable for the damage and death it had caused.

Now, Big Tech is using the same playbook in order to profit by hooking America's kids on its dangerous products. It is time to hold them accountable just as we did with Big Tobacco.

I will close with one more story from our committee hearing. Kristin Bride is a mother from Oregon. After being bullied relentlessly by supposed friends using Snapchat and anonymous messaging apps, Kristin's 16-year-old son Carson hanged himself in his family's garage. After his death, Kristin discovered the online taunts they had been throwing at her son. She sued the anonymous messaging apps in California State court for failing to enforce even their own safety standard.

The court dismissed the lawsuit, and what did they cite? Section 230, our law from 1996.

As Kristin told our committee, ``It shouldn't take grieving parents filing lawsuits to hold the industry accountable for their dangerous and addictive product design.''

We have the bipartisan support in the Senate to protect our children and grandchildren online. It is time that we use it.

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

Mr. President, I am pleased to have the opportunity to give some thoughts today on what is going on in the United States and around the globe.

Here in these early months of this new Congress, there clearly is broad bipartisan agreement on the importance of the Indo-Pacific region for our country's future. We are strengthening our military posture in that region, and last Congress, we passed legislation to strengthen our strategic industries.

What is being ignored, however, is a third component essential to our success in the region: expanding trade. At a State and Foreign Ops hearing in March, I noted the importance of our economic relationships around the world and asked Secretary of State Blinken about our approach to trade agreements, particularly America's absence from the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership--the CPTPP.

He told me the original pact in 2015 had real benefits, economically and strategically, but since then the world has moved on. I agree with him, our allies and our partners have moved on. They have moved on without us.

A year ago this month, President Biden made his first trip to Asia and unveiled the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, the administration's initiative to reengage the region on standards involving digital trade, supply chains, climate change, and corruption.

This is a small start, but it falls far short of what is needed today to advance American prosperity and security--also, the well-being of our Asian partners. In particular, the President's proposal fails to include greater U.S. market access.

The United States is belatedly offering a tepid leadership to a region that remains committed to open trade.

We can and must correct this or fall further behind in the most economically dynamic region in the world. I call on President Biden to enter into--and Congress to ratify--the CPTPP. It would be difficult to overstate how important the Indo-Pacific is to American prosperity. The region comprises 40 percent of the global economic output, and that is expected to grow to 50 percent by the end of the decade.

The largest economy in the region belongs to China, which is the largest trading partner for the region's countries. This provides Beijing with leverage to bully our allies and partners into making concessions in exchange for access to the Chinese market. It allows Beijing, not the United States, the same opportunity to have that relationship, so necessary.

China, for example, used coercion to retaliate against Australia after our allies in Canberra called for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19. Beijing regularly forces American businesses to refrain from criticism of China or conform to communist policies.

China's leaders can coerce and intimidate because they have economic strength. It is clear China will exert that tremendous leverage over other nations to achieve its global ambitions. Its attempts to bully countries into its sphere of influence are on full display through the Belt and Road Initiative, which has left trails of debt traps and human rights abuses. Unfortunately, the United States is ceding our economic leadership that we established and maintained for the last 80 years.

Having quit the Trans-Pacific Partnership under bipartisan, Republican and Democrat, criticism for that departure, the countries we worked with--treaty allies and partners--moved ahead. They moved ahead without us and in 2018 brought into force a successor agreement, the CPTPP. These countries represent more than 13 percent of global GDP, and in the last few weeks, Great Britain has gained membership.

So important is the CPTPP to the Pacific economies that China has applied for membership. They did so last September. It would be a grave mistake for us to assume that in America's absence China would be denied membership indefinitely.

China wants in, despite already being the largest member of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Agreement, which also includes our treaty allies, Japan and South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. This trade bloc accounts for nearly one-third of global GDP.

These two agreements, comprised of nations with diverse ideologies, underscore the importance of the economics of the Indo-Pacific region. In Asia especially, economics and security are one and the same, and for Washington to ignore that is a miscalculation.

Our allies and partners in this region are noticing. They notice our absence. Australia's Foreign Minister said at the end of last year:

America's decision not to proceed with the CPTPP is still

being felt in the region. . . . We have reached a stage in

the evolution of our alliances where they will increasingly

require a fully developed economic dimension, as well.

In other words, we can't have the same relationship with countries that we don't deal with in trade in economic relationships.

At the end of 2022, Singapore's Defense Minister had this to say:

The U.S. increasing their military presence in Asia as a

stabilizing force is virtuous, it is good and we will support

that.

But then he made this key point:

We think that the U.S. should do more to engage as it did

previously, to build an economic framework, which as a tide

can lift all boats.

Despite our own National Security Strategy which declares that ``we need to win the competition for the 21st century'' and that we will ``shape the rules

of the road for . . . trade and economics,'' the document makes clear President Biden believes ``we have to move beyond traditional Free Trade Agreements.''

But given the words of our Pacific friends, it is equally clear they have not moved beyond such agreements. In fact, they are doubling down on them without us. The President and his administration are either oblivious to this fact or indifferent.

Given the stakes, whichever one it is, it is a serious mistake. Dating back to the 1980s, the National Security Strategy is a congressionally mandated report issued by the President to convey the administration's national security goals and how to achieve them. In recent decades, one document is published each Presidential term rather than yearly.

The 2022 document, President Biden stresses upholding the ``rules- based international order'' but then refuses to engage in shaping one of the significant pillars of that order: trade.

The National Security Strategy invokes four principles, two of which are openness and inclusiveness. And as one scholar observed, the President's approach to trade is neither open nor inclusive.

This hurts our goals in this region, and it hurts Americans at home, our very national security. Our engagement really is about our own well-being. Our own well-being is often dependent upon the well-being of our friends and allies or those we want to be our friends or allies.

Economic partnerships can promote U.S. national security interests by protecting critical access to technology, minerals, and food supplies. We know what happens when we are so dependent upon one particular country for meeting our country's needs in strategic items. It is a mistake for us to have all eggs in a basket. Robust trade agreements safeguard the intellectual property and manufacturing capabilities that underpin our American military dominance.

Southeast Asia presents a situation in which our agricultural producers can score significant market access wins, while U.S. soft power can bolster our influence with these critical partners with these countries that are or can be our friends.

America's economy is the foundation of our power. Without the creation of wealth, we cannot afford to sustain the world's greatest military, which in turn defends the peace that enables the flow of goods. As a column in the Wall Street Journal just within the last week argued, ``The U.S. must embrace the politics of growth. Our world must be, and must be seen to be, the surest, fastest path to raising living standards all over the world. That's what we did after World War II. We must find a way to do it again today.''

What that is saying is we can't allow China to be seen as the path to economic well-being for people and nations around the world and specifically in the South Pacific.

Southeast Asia presents a situation in which our agriculture producers can score significant market access wins while we are making a difference in our own capabilities to influence the world.

America's economy is the foundation of our power, and we must utilize it. In competing with China in the coming decades, it is essential that the United States provide a positive vision for the region that attracts countries to what America offers beyond security support. Leadership is more than making clear what we are against. We must offer a compelling case of what we are for and how it will benefit those we wish to lead, those we wish to be partners with.

Little in geopolitics is a win-win, but trade is a rare area that advances our interests and those of our partners. According to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, the American people understand this. Three in four Americans think that trade is good for the U.S. economy, but Congress and the President are making a mistake ignoring the old idea of open trade.

To best compete with China in Asia and to help Americans at home, joining the CPTPP and providing greater market access is an obvious place to begin. Jobs, economic opportunity for us, and most importantly, the well-being of our Nation, our national security, depend upon trade and that relationship it creates.

(Ms. CORTEZ MASTO assumed the Chair.)

Mr. President, happy Earth Week.

I rise today, along with a couple of my colleagues--one from West Virginia and another from Arkansas--to speak on the Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act of 2023 and on the Recycling and Composting Accountability Act, which is bipartisan legislation that would improve our Nation's recycling and composting systems.

As a number of our colleagues know, my wife and I are both avid recyclers and composters and have been for some time. I have long believed in environmental stewardship. That is the way my parents raised my sister and me, and I suspect it is the way a lot of parents of Members of this body raised their sons and daughters. They raised us to leave behind a cleaner, healthier planet for future generations, and that is a belief I know is shared not just by elected officials here in Washington but by many people across this country.

I am also a strong believer that bipartisan solutions are lasting solutions. Whenever possible, we ought to work to find common ground and put forward bipartisan solutions that can stand the test of time. To that end, I am pleased to have found great partners--not just good partners but great partners--in developing these bipartisan recycling bills: Senator Capito, our ranking member on the Environment and Public Works Committee, with whom I am privileged to serve and to chair, along with Senator John Boozman, cochair of the Senate's Recycling Caucus, our colleague from Arkansas. All three of us recognize that we have to do our part to continue to improve our Nation's recycling and composting efforts. In doing so, it not only benefits our environment but also creates economic opportunity and jobs--a lot of jobs.

The legislation we are here to discuss today would address several of the challenges that America's recycling efforts currently face and what we might do about them. One of these challenges is the availability of good data.

In November of 2021, with input from many stakeholders, the Environmental Protection Agency released its first-ever national recycling strategy. When that strategy was released, I was delighted to learn that many of the comments I had submitted to the EPA on behalf of our committee had been incorporated into the final version. It was a happy day when we learned that. This document offered a transformative vision for strengthening our Nation's waste management efforts. It also highlighted the need for greater standardization around data collection.

To address this challenge around data collection, Senator Boozman and I, along with our staffs, developed the Recycling and Composting Accountability Act. Our bill would improve the EPA's ability to gather data on our Nation's recycling systems and explore opportunities for implementing a national composting strategy.

The EPA has also set a goal of increasing the U.S. recycling rate to 50 percent by 2030. With a current recycling rate of only 32 percent, it is clear we have a long way to go. That is why we must also focus on increasing access to recycling opportunities throughout our Nation--not just in urban areas or suburban areas but in rural areas as well. Many Americans in disadvantaged communities want to recycle and compost, too, but they are unable to do so because they, in many cases, live in communities that lack curbside pickup, that lack bottle return, and that lack other necessary recycling infrastructure.

Senator Capito's Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act of 2023 would address this challenge by creating a pilot program with EPA to help expand recycling services in underserved areas. The Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act that she has written would bring many communities, including those in rural areas, into the recycling world while also better protecting our environment.

I commend Senator Capito for her work and her leadership in developing this legislation. I also want to continue working with her to ensure that her bill helps to jump-start recycling in communities with the greatest need, especially in disadvantaged and historically underserved communities.

Both of the bills that I have referred to from members of our committee are a result of a true collaboration, and they reflect a substantial amount of bipartisan effort dedicated to exploring and addressing our Nation's recycling and composting challenges.

The adoption of these bills this week is fitting and timely, as Saturday marks the 53rd anniversary of the very first Earth Day. This day is personal to me. Some 53 years ago this Saturday, I stood side by side with tens of thousands of people in San Francisco's Golden Gate Park. I was a naval flight officer. I had completed my training and was about to deploy out of Moffett Field, CA, to head for Southeast Asia, but I had an opportunity to join tens of thousands of people in Golden Gate Park that day to celebrate our country's first-ever Earth Day.

That same year, Democrats and Republicans worked together with then- President Richard Nixon to create a Federal Agency dedicated to protecting our environment. The name of that Agency? The Environmental Protection Agency.

Decades later, I can still vividly remember--I can; I can close my eyes and remember it now--that first Earth Day and the urgency we felt to save our planet. Today, a younger generation also shares that sense of urgency.

While I believe we ought to live every day like it is Earth Day, on April 22 of each year, I especially welcome the opportunity to reflect and give thanks for all of the incredible natural resources and natural beauty that God has given us on this planet of ours.

Earth Day is also a time for all of us to reflect on our actions individually and as a whole, to think about what more we can do and should be doing to protect our planet and its inhabitants. Like many people, I try to live my life by the golden rule of always treating people the way I want to be treated. I also believe that principle extends to the way we treat and care for our planet and those with whom we share it.

A couple of years ago--and some of my colleagues may remember--we had a visitor on the other side of the Capitol, in the House Chamber. He was a fellow from France named Macron, the Prime Minister of France. He came to address a joint session of Congress that day, and he did a great job. He was very well received, I think, by everybody.

On that day, he spoke of the importance of protecting our environment from the threats of climate change, hazardous waste, and toxic pollution. At the end of his speech, he said something I will never forget. He was talking about our planet, and these were his words:

There is no planet B. There is no planet B. This is the

only one we are going to have.

I sat there that day, thinking, boy, he has gotten it right; there is no planet B. That means we only have one chance to get it right when it comes to protecting and caring for this planet of ours.

As I said earlier, I am committed to leaving behind a cleaner, healthier planet for future generations. I welcome all of our colleagues to join Senator Capito and myself in that effort. Fortunately, we have made remarkable progress over the past five decades following that very first Earth Day. From enacting comprehensive laws to protect our environment and support good-paying, clean energy jobs to ratifying the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol and phasing down the use of superpolluting chemicals like HFCs, which are 1,000 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, there is much to be proud of. Still, our work is not finished. We have a long way to go. I think it was Robert Frost who said we have miles to go before we sleep--miles to go before we sleep.

So, today, we celebrate the opportunity to build on this progress and leave behind a livable planet with our

bipartisan recycling legislation. We also acknowledge that there is more to be done. In the spirit of Earth Day, I am prepared to roll up my sleeves and keep marching forward in my effort to do the right thing by our planet and the people who call it home just as I did some 53 years ago this Saturday. I invite Americans from all walks of life to join the Senator from West Virginia, Senator Capito; Senator Boozman from Arkansas; and myself in this effort. It is the right thing to do, and it will make you feel good all over. I promise.

I yield the floor.