Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, later today, the Senate will take the first step toward ratifying an amendment to one of the most successful international environmental agreements in modern history, the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol.

Members can expect to cast the first vote on cloture later this afternoon after the weekly party lunches. Today's vote will require 60 votes in the affirmative to move forward. And since the Kigali Amendment is part of a treaty, it will require two-thirds of the Chamber to ultimately ratify this provision.

The Kigali Amendment will be one of the most significant bipartisan measures the Senate takes on all year, and that is saying something, because we have done a lot.

It would affirm our country's intention to phase down the use of hydrofluorocarbons--commonly known as HFCs--by 85 percent over the next 15 years. Experts say this step alone could prevent half a degree Celsius of warming by the end of the 21st century. Is that incredible? Half a degree. We struggle to get there. This one measure will do it. That may not seem like much, but within the larger context of global temperature, it is really very significant.

There are two paths our country can take, depending on what we do with the Kigali Amendment. If we ratify this treaty, not only will we protect our planet, but this is an economic issue and an issue to go after China, which is a rogue nation in this regard. It will provide us a golden opportunity for American businesses to dominate in emerging business.

Every year, millions of refrigerators and AC units are sold around the world; and in the United States, many families own more than one refrigerator. That is a lot of appliances that will need HFC alternatives, which U.S. businesses, particularly, are working to prepare for. By one measure, the combined impact of ratifying the Kigali Amendment and other steps we have taken to reduce HFCs would create 150,000 new jobs and generate nearly $39 billion in investment by 2027 as new markets open up for trade. So this, in many ways, is a pro-jobs measure, one supported by the Chamber of Commerce, by major retailers like Walmart, by the Semiconductor Industry Association, and many other business groups.

If we fail to ratify the amendment, the rest of the world is going to move on without us. Without Kigali, we are going to play second fiddle to nations like China, whose businesses will surpass ours in developing viable HFC alternatives, taking jobs that, by all rights, belong here in America. And by 2033, parties to Kigali will be prohibited-- prohibited--from any trade in HFCs with non-Kigali nations. We will lose out tens of billions of dollars of sales.

There is no reason to have that happen. Ratifying Kigali will not require any change in the current U.S. law. We already have domestic policies phasing out HFCs here at home, so we are putting into practice many of the reforms the Kigali Amendment calls for, and no consumer will have to change any appliance.

So for the sake of U.S. businesses, for the sake of U.S. innovators, for the

sake of making sure China has to comply and be part of the world community and not do what they think is just good for themselves--which seems to be President Xi's way of doing things--I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of advancing the Kigali Amendment later today. It is low- hanging fruit for creating tens of thousands of good-paying jobs right here at home.

Mr. President, now on the DISCLOSE Act. Later today, President Biden will deliver remarks on one of the gravest dangers undermining our democracy--the power of dark money that has taken over our elections.

I expect the President's remarks will preview action here in the Senate, where we will have a vote this week to begin debate on the DISCLOSE Act--a bill I long promised to bring to the floor. My colleagues, led by the indefatigable and relentless and brilliant Senator Whitehouse, have done a wonderful job championing this issue for years.

The DISCLOSE Act is very simple to grasp: it would require super PACs and other dark money groups to report anyone contributing $10,000 or more during an election cycle. The same goes for any group spending any money in support of or in opposition to judicial nominees. In other words, it would require similar forms of transparency that traditional campaigns and candidates already face. We have to disclose when accepting political contributions.

And, frankly, why shouldn't this be law? What reason under Heaven is there for keeping massive political contributions hidden from the public? Even the Republican leader, who has dedicated much of his career, unfortunately, to killing many campaign finance reforms, claimed in the past to support increased disclosure; though, sadly, he is opposed to our bill today for no good reason. If you are for disclosure, you should be for our bill, and these flimsy arguments that it will deter people from giving are absurd--absurd.

If a multimillionaire wants to spend colossal sums on candidates or nominees who are deeply anti-choice or who will support anti-democracy candidates or who will harbor views deeply in conflict with the views of the general public, shouldn't the public have at least the right to know it?

The rights of voters and the health of our democracy far outweigh any interest that a multibillionaire could have in concealing political spending from public scrutiny.

So, the DISCLOSE Act will give every Senator a choice: a vote to bring transparency to our elections or stand with the forces of dark money.

Let me say that again. The DISCLOSE Act will give every Senator a choice: vote to bring transparency to our elections, remove the veil from this dark money that the public hates that is cascading into our elections or stand on the side of dark money. Who wants to be on that side? We will see this week.

I want to take a moment to thank my colleague, Senator Whitehouse, for his incredible work in championing this legislation. He is arguably the Senate's greatest champion in the fight against dark money, someone who has dedicated years to uncovering the pernicious links between dark money groups and radical judicial nominees.

Do you want to know one of the main reasons we have a ``MAGA'' Court that overturns Roe v. Wade, that stands in the way of smart gun control laws and gun safety laws, that stands in the way of environmental progress? It is because of dark money, in good part--dark money.

Sheldon Whitehouse has exposed this link better than anyone I know. He has gotten the rest of us to pay attention in a deeper way to the gravity of this issue. He will come to the floor later today and throughout the week to continue highlighting this issue. And I know others will be joining to stand by his side.

I thank him for his work. I thank the President for speaking about it this afternoon. And I stand with Senator Whitehouse in highlighting this issue ahead of the vote, and I urge my colleagues to support the DISCLOSE Act.

Mr. President, in other matters, today, the Senate will vote to confirm our sixth circuit court judge in the month of September--Judge Florence Pan--to sit on the all-important DC Circuit Court of Appeals. If confirmed, Judge Pan will make history as the first Taiwanese American ever to serve on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, joining in the proud company of so many other Biden nominees who have expanded the diversity and experience of the Federal bench.

As we all know, the DC Circuit Court is the second-most important Federal court in the country after the Supreme Court. Before this court comes disputes that involve Congress and much of the Federal Government, so many of its decisions involve constitutional or administrative law. It goes without saying that nominees to this court must be individuals of the highest caliber. They need to be experienced, balanced, and above all, committed to the rule of law.

That is exactly what we have in Judge Pan. She has had over a decade of experience as a judge in the District of Columbia and has seen practically every legal dispute under the Sun. She is already well- known to this Chamber, having been confirmed as a district judge with 68 votes. She should be similarly confirmed with bipartisan support.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5503.

I ask unanimous consent to dispense with further reading of the amendment.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, today, my thoughts are with all our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico--and all communities across the Caribbean--battered by the destruction of Hurricane Fiona. As of this morning, well over a million residents on the island remain without power, and two-thirds remain without running water.

In a short while, I will get on the phone with the FEMA Administrator and urge that they be ready to approve temporary 100 percent Federal cost share for all emergency protective services that Puerto Rico conducts in the coming days. That means covering the island's costs for distributing food and water, disaster operations, and emergency medical care. Right now, the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund has about $15 billion as of late last week--a fund we Democrats fought extremely hard to secure.

I will also join with my colleagues in the New York delegation to send FEMA a letter calling on them to be ready to support Puerto Rico on any upcoming request for aid.

Five years--almost exactly 5 years to the day--after Puerto Rico was devastated by Hurricane Maria, the Federal Government has a responsibility to make sure we don't repeat the mistakes of the previous administration. The Federal response should be swift, robust, and continued for as long as the island needs.

Madam President, now on judges, as we begin the third week of the work period, the Senate presses ahead to confirm more of President Biden's impressive lineup of judicial nominees.

This week, we will aim to confirm our sixth--yes, sixth--circuit court nominee of the month, and this one is especially important. It is to move forward on Judge Florence Pan to serve as a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Columbia.

After the Supreme Court, the DC Court of Appeals is the most important Federal court in the country, with jurisdiction over cases involving Congress and executive branch Agencies. It goes without saying that those nominated to serve as jurists on this court must be individuals of the highest caliber, of impeccable credentials, and must show deep fidelity to the Constitution.

The President couldn't have done better than Judge Pan: a brilliant, accomplished, and truly bipartisan nominee. The Senate confirmed her to the DC district court with an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 68 to 30. Since then, her conduct on the bench has vindicated that margin. So I hope we can see similar bipartisan support this week.

The daughter of Taiwanese immigrants, Judge Pan graduated from the University of Pennsylvania and earned her law degree from Stanford, where she wrote on the Law Review.

As a judge for both the DC Superior Court and DC district court, she has seen practically every kind of legal dispute under the Sun: criminal law, family law, administrative law, consumer protection, immigration, employment law, and more. In short, she is a remarkably qualified and experienced jurist.

So I urge my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of advancing this nominee. A seat on the DC Circuit deserves to be filled by a high-caliber and impartial jurist, and, thankfully, we have that in Judge Pan.

Madam President, now on the Kigali treaty, besides working on judicial nominations, the Senate will also vote this week to advance a pair of critically important measures on the floor.

First, we will vote tomorrow to proceed to the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, an agreement from the 1980s that united much of the world in reducing the use of industrial chemicals harmful to our ozone layer. Three decades later, this agreement has been an unqualified success. The Kigali Amendment is a golden opportunity to strengthen U.S. businesses and secure an edge against China in the emerging industry of next-generation refrigerants.

Let me explain. It sounds a little complicated, but it is important. The Kigali Amendment, which has been negotiated by both Democratic and Republican administrations, would build on the Montreal Protocols by affirming the U.S. commitment to phase out the use of a particularly dangerous chemical known as hydrofluorocarbons, abbreviated commonly as HFCs. Though used only in small amounts in household appliances like refrigerators and air conditioners, they wreak havoc on our atmosphere. Many on both sides have long agreed we should transition away from their use.

By ratifying the Kigali Amendment, businesses that specialize in the next generation of refrigerant technologies would see new markets open for them. In fact, one study suggests U.S. net exports could increase by $6 billion annually--$6 billion. So this is a projobs bill.

Combined with previous measures to reduce HFCs, this step could help create 150,000 new jobs here in the United States. All the while, we would get a much needed leg up on Chinese businesses that still lag behind--for now--in developing viable HFC alternatives. Failure to ratify the Kigali Amendment would mean squandering billions in economic activity and potentially over 100,000 good-paying American jobs.

The good news: This measure has broad support from the business community, including the Chamber of Commerce, the American Chemistry Council, the Semiconductor Industry Association, and many others. The same support should manifest itself here in the Senate.

The first vote on cloture will require 60 Senators to move forward. And because this is a treaty, we will then need the support of two- thirds of the Chamber to ratify.

For the sake of U.S. businesses, U.S. innovators, and the sake of our climate and American dominance in emerging markets, I urge my colleagues from both sides to vote in favor of advancing and ratifying the Kigali Amendment.

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

Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Madam President, I move to proceed to consider Calendar No. 484, S. 4822.

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, September 19, be waived.

Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Madam President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 1055.

Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Madam President, I move to proceed to legislative session.