Floor Statements

Madam President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming adjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn to then convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business being conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma session, the Senate adjourn until the next pro forma session: Friday, February 18 at 9 a.m.; Tuesday, February 22 at 3 p.m.; and Friday, February 25 at 2 p.m. I further ask that when the Senate adjourns on Friday, February 25, it next convene at 3 p.m., Monday, February 28; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, Senator Leahy be recognized to deliver Washington's Farewell Address, as provided under the previous order; and that following his remarks, morning business be closed and the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 139, H.R. 3755; further, that the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, February 28.

Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, over the last 12 months, the economy has rebounded at levels that we have not seen in decades--a 5.7-percent GDP growth rate and 6.6 million new jobs. This is the fastest our economy has grown since, perhaps, 1984, and the new jobs we added to the economy were the most ever for a President's first year.

After former President Trump botched our national response to COVID, America is now on the right track under President Biden, but we face serious challenges that demand action from Congress. The cost of living has come up for families across the country and around the world. The destruction unleashed by COVID has decimated supply chains, strained the labor supply, and the effects of a global pandemic that began 2 years ago still reverberate today. These challenges demand action, and Democrats remain laser-focused on lowering costs for American families.

Yesterday, our caucus met for our weekly lunch, where we held a spirited, enthusiastic discussion about ideas from our Members of how we can lower costs and take action to do so. We talked about how we can continue working to lower childcare costs, prescription drug costs, the costs of semiconductors, which is a huge driver of price increases across a wide variety of products, and things as basic and vital as the cost of food and meat.

Lowering costs will continue to be a caucuswide effort. We are not going to agree on everything, but we are all on the same page in that we need to tackle the issue head on.

That is the difference between Democrats and Republicans. Rising costs, of course, impact all of us, whether we come from blue or red States, but Democrats are the ones laser-focused on showing where we stand and in offering solutions that aim squarely at the problem. Republicans seem to have no solutions, just rhetoric. The other side, sadly, seems, oftentimes, motivated by something else. Rather than working with us in a bipartisan spirit, our Republican colleagues seem more comfortable giving speeches that go on and on about rising costs without offering any solutions. Complaining about the problem doesn't make inflation better--proposing solutions does--and that is precisely what Democrats will continue focusing on.

Over the next month and beyond, Members from our side will continue offering a number of solutions--solutions--that will lower costs and leave more money in people's pockets. We need to help working families build wealth after the pandemic. We need to lower the costs of medications like insulin, which can still reach $600 a month. We need to relieve our strained supply chains and increase domestic manufacturing on things like chips--and on that front, I am hopeful that we can take bipartisan action soon.

Our Republican colleagues, we hope, will join us in these efforts. Our Members would welcome it.

We have come a long way from the start of COVID, but we still have more to do. Democrats' goals are to make sure that the job creation and wage increases of last year carry into this year. We are going to keep working on that this spring, and I hope to see our colleagues from the other side work with us to improve the lives of the American people. If we can keep wages growing and get costs down, the average American will have more money in his or her pocket to live a better life.

Mr. President, on the CR, soon our Republican colleagues must come to an agreement with Democrats for passing a continuing resolution to keep the government open until March 11. This extension is necessary in order to give appropriators more time to arrive at an omnibus.

On the one hand, bipartisan negotiations on a yearlong spending bill continue to go well--a credit to everyone working on this issue from both sides of the aisle. I thank Chairman Leahy, Ranking Member Shelby, and my House colleagues.

On the other hand, right now, the thing we must do--the responsible thing to do--is to pass the CR before the deadline on Friday. Democrats are united in approving it just as it was approved with great bipartisan support in the House.

Nobody here wants a Republican government shutdown. I dare say Republicans prefer not to have a Republican shutdown, but for that to happen, Republicans must keep working with us on an agreement to move quickly on a CR. Democrats are working in good faith to reach a time agreement soon with our Republican colleagues. There is every reason in the world to arrive at an agreement quickly, so I urge my colleagues on the other side to keep working with us to get there.

Madam President, I thank the majority whip.

Thank you for your good work as chair of the Judiciary and for your talk on this issue.

I thank my colleague from Minnesota, who has been passionate about getting this done as well.

I rise today to join with my Democratic colleagues in support of these U.S. attorneys and marshals who have singlehandedly been delayed for weeks by one Senator, the junior Senator from Arkansas.

For decades--decades--Democrats and Republicans have regularly cooperated to swiftly confirm the many, many individuals selected by each President to serve in their administration. Regardless of the party in the White House, both sides have long agreed that a President deserves to have his or her administration in place

quickly. That doesn't mean we don't disagree, but it does mean that when nominees are held up, opposed, or blocked, it is for a legitimate purpose, not for leverage and partisan games to score political points at the expense of public safety. Most of us still believe in that principle but, sadly, not all of us.

On the other side of the aisle, a small group of obstructionist Republicans has spent the last year hijacking the rules of the Senate to place an unprecedented number of holds on hundreds--hundreds--of Presidential appointees.

Let me repeat. This isn't about a few nominees here and there; we are talking about hundreds of nominees.

In this case, my colleague from Arkansas is holding back six U.S. attorneys and two U.S. marshals--vital roles in preserving public safety. The level of partisan obstruction is a new low for the Senate.

When President Trump was in office, every single U.S. attorney and U.S. marshal--every single one--was confirmed by this Chamber with unanimous consent. Yes, we had deep, deep problems with the Trump Department of Justice, but never did we demand a rollcall vote just to confirm nominees like these. In fact, the last time the Senate had to hold a rollcall vote--listen to this--the last time the Senate had to hold a rollcall vote to confirm a U.S. attorney was a half a century ago--nearly half a century ago--in 1975, and it is not hard to see why. U.S. attorneys and marshals aren't political positions. Their job is literally to keep Americans safe. They are Federal prosecutors, and they are Federal law enforcement.

If my Republican colleagues on the other side truly care about public safety, why are they obstructing the appointments of individuals whose jobs would precisely be to maintain public safety in the first place? It is ``Alice in Wonderland'' logic.

Now, this isn't just about breaking precedent. Right now, communities across the country still don't have their U.S. attorneys on the job because of obstruction here in the Senate. Districts in Georgia, Ohio, Nevada, Minnesota, Michigan, and Illinois are all still waiting for U.S. attorneys.

Sadly, the families who live in these communities shouldn't have to pay the price for what a very small number of Republicans are doing here, but, sadly, that is what is happening. It is a textbook example of why Americans are frustrated with the Senate and are frustrated with their government.

On the other hand, I want to thank my Democratic colleagues for advocating on behalf of the U.S. attorneys and marshals. I thank my friend Senator Durbin, chairman of the Judiciary, for speaking passionately. I thank Senator Klobuchar for coming to the floor to speak. I thank Senators Rosen and Cortez Masto and Duckworth and Brown, who have also spoken.

One way or another, these nominees will be confirmed by the Senate. Republican obstructionists can try to delay, but they cannot stop these individuals from ultimately going through.

If the holds on these nominees are not dropped, I will be filing cloture on them, and we will schedule votes to advance them until the job is finished. If that means more late nights, then more late nights are coming. If it means vote series with six or seven or eight votes in a row, then that is what we will do.

Most of us don't want to go down that road, and we don't have to. The overwhelming majority of Democrats and Republicans want to preserve the decades of precedent and comity that has enabled us to work together on nominees.

So let me say for one last time, delaying the appointment of U.S. attorneys and U.S. marshals over cheap partisan games ultimately makes Americans less safe and weakens law enforcement.

I urge my Republican colleague to drop his obstruction or else he can explain to his colleagues why we have to schedule a dizzyingly large number of rollcall votes just to push these nominees through.

I thank my colleagues for their work and yield to Senator Durbin.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session to be in a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:30 a.m., on Thursday, February 17; that following the prayer and the pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 267, H.R. 6617, the continuing resolution; that at 1 p.m., the cloture motion ripen.

If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

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

Now, first, Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk that is due for a second reading.

In order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceeding.

Now, Mr. President, last night--and this is relevant to what we just did, putting the new bill on the calendar for a second reading. Last night, we had a chance to continue progress on a bipartisan, long-overdue postal reform bill when I moved to expeditiously fix a few technical errors to the legislation sent to us by the House. Sadly, my request was blocked by the junior Senator from Florida without much in the way of clear explanation.

For instance, he says he wants to stand up for postal workers, but all the organizations representing postal workers strongly support this bill. They are eager for it. He says he wants to protect and strengthen Medicare, but the Postal Service already pays into Medicare; and the CBO says this proposal, this bill, will save the government money.

So I hope for the sake of our postal workers, our Postal Service, and for the millions, tens of millions, and even hundreds of millions of Americans who depend on the Postal Service, that this is not obstruction for obstruction's sake.

This is a textbook example of why Americans often get frustrated with the Senate and with Washington. Postal reform is highly bipartisan. It got a majority of votes in the House from both parties. It is desperately needed. We all hear from our constituents about snail mail and the price they pay for it. It is backed by both parties in both Houses, including the chairman and ranking member of the relevant committees--the Democratic and Republican leading members of both committees. And it has broad support from the postal workers, who tend to be Democratic, and Postmaster DeJoy, who is a friend of President Trump's and was appointed by him.

Nevertheless, it was blocked. I am sure that Republicans don't want to be the party that was responsible for blocking popular and bipartisan postal reform.

The delay is regrettable, but the good news is that we will get bipartisan postal reform done. It has been negotiated for months and debated for a decade. It has enough bipartisan support--more than enough--ample support to become law, and I am hopeful we will move it through this Chamber as quickly as we can. And that is what the procedural motion I did before was about.

And I certainly want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for working on this bill, particularly, my

friend Chairman Gary Peters, who spoke passionately last night in defense of the bill and rebutted all of the Senator from Florida's arguments handily. And I look forward to getting postal reform passed through this Chamber very soon.