Floor Statements

Madam President, it has long been said that ``neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays'' our U.S. postal ``couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.'' These words, in fact, are chiseled in granite above the entrance to the post office on 8th Avenue in New York City--one of the grandest post offices in our Nation. It is the adopted creed of the faithful and hard-working letter carriers and frontline workforce of our Postal Service.

As I have said before, I have no beef with the men and women of our Postal Service, but I have real and deep concerns about how the Postal Service is being run under the current Postmaster General.

President Biden doesn't get to choose a new Postmaster General just because he is the new President. In fact, the current officeholder, Louis DeJoy, was chosen by the Board under the previous administration.

Weeks ago, I joined with many colleagues and with Chairman Peters of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which is responsible for the Postal Service, to send a letter to Postmaster General DeJoy to restore on-time delivery and stop the harmful systemwide changes that have caused unacceptable mail delays.

Sadly, that is not the first time I have had to reach out, with Senators in this body, to the Postmaster General. In fact, on five separate occasions, we have written the Postmaster General, between August and February, last year to this year. We have demanded transparency. We have insisted on the restoration of mail sorting machines. We have asked for assistance with vote-by-mail deliveries and wrote for just simple answers to pending constituent inquiries.

In my hometown of Wilmington, DE, last August, I joined our attorney general, Kathy Jennings, my senior Senator, Tom Carper, Congresswoman Lisa Blunt Rochester, and a series of union leaders for a day of action to save the Postal Service.

A few days later, I drove myself to our mail distribution center in New Castle after leadership of the Postal Service denied my request to visit. Thanks to having been alerted by some frontline employees, I drove around back and was able to see a dismantled massive piece of mail handling equipment left outside in the rain.

In January and February alone, my office received hundreds of messages from constituents complaining about mail issues. Since last April, I have heard from nearly 5,000 Delawareans--folks asking for robust funding for the Postal Service, wanting stronger vote-by-mail initiatives, and hundreds and hundreds of them reporting delays in the mail.

I want to take a few minutes, if I might, and just go through some of these concerns I have heard, which, I have also heard from colleagues, are being replicated across our Nation.

Gloria Lester, down in Lewes, in Sussex County, said that mail that previously took just 3 to 4 days is now taking her 4 to 6 weeks. Her bills are due before she even gets the statements. And her husband's VA medication took a month to arrive from the date they mailed it.

Jim Nichols of Milford wrote concerned about the delay in getting his newspapers, his magazines, and his other periodicals.

And Jim is not alone. I have heard from local and regional newspapers that rely on the Postal Service to deliver out-of-State and out-of-area subscribers.

We have a beach area with a lot of homeowners who live here in our Nation's Capital or elsewhere throughout the region. And Chris Raush, who is with the Cape Gazette, which gets mailed to folks all over our region, told me some of their out-of-State subscribers don't receive the paper for a month, and then, when they do, they get a big bundle of old papers. And now with papers not showing up weeks at a time, they have had to tell subscribers this is just out of their control and offer refunds.

Megan Stibbe, of the Delmarva Farmer, another local paper, said that she has ``been having a lot of trouble with Delaware deliveries. The postal system,'' as she said in writing to me, ``is very screwed up right now. Delmarva Farmers have not received their newspapers at all in January.''

I have received dozens and dozens more emails, texts, letters, and phone messages from frustrated constituents.

Dianne Boyle, of Magnolia, DE, felt so strongly about this ongoing debacle of delayed delivery in the Postal Service that she hand delivered her own letter of concern to my Dover office.

Richard Bilkski of Selbyville, a gentleman with real and significant heart issues that require him to be on medication, was down to his very last pill on January 25. After calling and calling and calling, it turned out that his medication had been sitting in the Wilmington post office for 3 weeks.

Toby Rubenstein, from Hockessin, wrote me and said:

I have paid my bills by check all my life. [And now] the

Postal Service is so unreliable, that I now have monthly

problems paying [my] bills on time. [And] I'm not alone in

this.

Claudette Richardson of Newark, DE, wrote me a note saying that she had mailed her sister a Christmas card on December 14, and it arrived February 12.

Marcy Leib Rolmann wrote me and said: Our ``mail here in Sussex County as everywhere is horrible, despite our great letter carriers.''

Geiana Hollis of Wilmington wrote to me last month because of her passport sitting idle at a Philadelphia distribution center for 10 days. She was set to travel abroad and had to delay her trip.

Bill Powers, former county councilman I know well from New Castle County, a member of the Farm Bureau, is a longtime turkey grower who now provides fresh eggs for local farmers markets. Bill has experienced significant losses with turkey and chick deliveries and called my office with concerns.

And I want, before I close, to mention one last story, from Trebs Thompson, of Newark, an egg farmer with Whimsical Farms. Trebs wrote:

Largely our postal system has been a jewel. It handles a

large volume of mail cheaply, with a high degree of speed and

accuracy. Many of us depend on it for government paperwork,

medications, orders, payments, and for farmers like me, seeds

[and] day-old chicks.

The Post Office has been shipping day-old chicks to farms

like mine for over 100 years. Today, all 20 baby hens arrived

cold and lifeless. I cried [as I opened the box]. The

[postal] supervisor cried. The gentleman who normally

delivers my mail apologized profusely, but [it is] not his

fault.

Whatever one feels about mail-in ballots or politics, I am

asking you to put this aside and do what you can to restore

the Postal Service.

Trebs Thompson is right. No farmer should ever have to open a box of dead chicks. No constituent should have to hand deliver a letter to their Senator. Our veterans shouldn't be going without lifesaving medication.

Postmaster DeJoy appeared before Members of the House last week and apologized for the slow mail delivery and said he has a forthcoming plan, which I am concerned includes further cuts to delivery service.

So let me summarize. My understanding is that DeJoy's plans for the future of the Postal Service include higher prices and slower delivery. Delawareans are tired, and our Postal Service workers are tired, too, of the constraints placed on them. How will we solve this problem? In my view, we need to confirm as quickly as possible President Biden's nominees to the Postal Board of Governors: Ron Stroman, Amber McReynolds, and Anton Hajjar--all folks who have deep experience in the postal system. They could get us back on track.

We also have to prioritize investments in the Postal Service. Congress secured $10 billion for the Postal Service in the unanimously passed CARES Act to provide the resources to maintain operation at a time when families are relying on mail service more than ever during this pandemic.

I will continue to support the Postal Service. I will continue to petition the Postmaster General, and I won't stop until there is a solution to this critical and pressing issue. Our letter carriers

and our customers shouldn't suffer because of toxic leadership at the highest levels of our Postal Service.

I yield the floor to my colleague from the State of Maine.

Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity to address the body today about the bill we are to take up and debate and advance this evening and about several different provisions that are of specific concern and interest to me, to the residents of the State of Delaware, and to our Nation.

Let me just remind all of us the moment that we are in. There are 26 million Americans who have been infected by COVID-19, a dread, deadly, global pandemic, and 445,000 Americans have been killed so far in this pandemic--far too many.

In my little home State of Delaware--just 900,000 people--we not too long ago passed 1,000 deaths, and, like many other States, we are racing to deliver vaccines and to address the economic and the human wreckage of this pandemic and the recession caused by the bungled mishandling of this pandemic by the now previous administration. I am encouraged because there is also a positive number: 34 million Americans have been vaccinated.

Delaware has been at the forefront of delivering vaccines quickly and safely, and now with President Biden and his team at the helm, they are pulling together the resources of our Nation--using the Defense Production Act to deliver needed PPE, testing capabilities, and vaccines to every corner of our country. They have a lot of work to do. They are behind because of some of the failures of the past, but I am excited by the promise of the future.

Yesterday, I had the honor of meeting with President Biden in the Oval Office for an hour first thing in the morning, and we talked about this pandemic and his plan, the American Rescue Plan, the $1.9 trillion in badly needed relief that will touch almost every American family and move us quickly out of this pandemic and back toward growth and security, health and

prosperity. And his determination, despite all the back-and-forth about numbers--his determination, at the very core of what we do, is to keep in mind the middle class of this country, the folks who have been overlooked, underserved, and most disadvantaged. He is passionate about seeing the ways in which this pandemic has revealed the deep inequities in our country and making sure of how we respond to educational needs, to housing needs, to transportation needs, and to healthcare needs, that we combat the profound inequalities of our society and Build Back Better.

As Senator Carper and I were sitting with President Biden, going over $1,400 checks and this many months of unemployment extension and this much for housing and homelessness or this much for transit, he said: Wait, wait. Just remember at the end of the day, keep in your mind's eye a family--a plumber and a teacher with two kids at home, one of them laid off, desperately trying to pay their rent, trying to figure out how to pay their bills, trying to figure out how they can keep a roof over their kids' heads. Remember the people we are trying to help and serve.

I am reminded of Mark from New Castle, who called my office to tell me he had been laid off, and he was desperately afraid, that he was struggling because he was fighting cancer, a health condition, and fighting homelessness, concerned about losing his home. Fighting housing and homelessness, combating homelessness and ensuring security of housing has got to be at the center of how we respond to this crisis.

Economist Mark Zandi says there is $57 billion in owed back rent unpaid. One of the best things we have done as a body is to extend the eviction moratorium that the CDC imposed last year. A key piece of the bill we are taking up and debating is to ensure that more Americans have an opportunity to safe, sanitary, decent, and affordable housing. Before this pandemic, more than 17 million American households spent more than half their money on rent or mortgage, unaffordable to any household--those 17 million households stretched to their limits. The pandemic has made the risk of eviction or foreclosure greater than ever.

Some know my early years were spent working around issues of housing and homelessness. I served with the National Coalition for the Homeless in New York and in five other States around the country, staying in homeless shelters in the late eighties, when homelessness was an explosion, a crisis across this country that impacted families and communities of all types and backgrounds.

People experiencing homelessness are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. Homeless individuals infected are twice as likely to be hospitalized, four times as likely to need critical care, and three times as likely to die.

In Delaware, on Martin Luther King Day, as part of a service project, I got a chance to visit the Hope Center. The Hope Center used to be known as the Sheraton. It was a hotel in foreclosure, and an innovative county executive used some of the CARES Act money that we provided federally to the State and local governments to buy it at auction and to reopen it as a source of 192 emergency housing rooms that can have up to 400 people in it. It was great to tour that center on Martin Luther King Day, to be part of those delivering personal items and material for those who are now resident at the Hope Center. But it is just one of many examples of how Federal resources we provided last year have been used creatively to help keep people in rental housing, in emergency housing, or in their homes.

The CDC Federal eviction moratorium was extended in the bill we passed in December, but it runs out in March; thus, the urgency of our acting. And President Biden's American Rescue Plan includes $30 billion in emergency rental assistance and $5 billion to prevent further outbreaks of COVID-19 among America's homeless population. We need to make this a key piece of this provision, an important part of this bill, and it is my hope we can find support on both sides, but if we don't, we must move forward.

Let me speak to two other topics before I yield the floor, if I might.

Those of us on the East Coast, and my colleague from Maryland and my colleague from New Jersey are certainly among them, travel by Amtrak frequently. Before this pandemic, Amtrak carried a record 32 million passengers just 2 years ago. But just like the airlines when the pandemic hit, it lost the vast majority of their passengers. So, too, did Amtrak and commuter rail all over our country. It has been a key piece of our society, our competitiveness, our interconnectedness for over a century, and there are millions who depend on it as their way to commute up and down the East Coast corridor in particular.

My office recently heard from Ken Potts, the Delaware representative for the Rail Passengers Association, about the urgent need for funding; and, frankly, this is a warning notice for those of us who don't realize that I-95, right as it goes through Wilmington, DE, is about to be shut down for most of the next 2 years on a generational repair project. There is going to be 100,000 people deterred off of the highway, and hopefully onto rail, but only if it can keep running.

There are 1,200 furloughed Amtrak employees on the east coast and other places around the country. Those are the folks I interact with on the days when I commute from Wilmington to Washington. I get a chance to talk to the staff, the conductors, the people who work at Union Station or in Wilmington's Joe Biden Station. Twelve hundred furloughed employees and families struggling, just like the airlines, every bit as deserving of relief, and the budget resolution would allow for the $2 billion over the course of this pandemic that they need. We have provided relief before. We need to provide relief in this bill and going forward.

As I mentioned in my opening, getting the vaccine distributed as quickly as possible is the most urgent thing before us. Last Saturday, I had the chance to volunteer for several hours at a vaccination site with Drs. Coker and Hockstein, put together at ENT & Allergy of Delaware. They vaccinated over 150 people, and they had connected to and reached out to some churches that I am familiar with and fond of-- Seeds of Greatness, Bethel AME.

But we are under pressure because there are new variants of this virus emerging around the world. What viruses do is they mutate. Some of you know there are new variants from South Africa, from Brazil, from the UK that are more transmissive and, potentially, more deadly. So one of the things we have to keep an eye on is that we cannot close ourselves off from the world. Something that is missing from the Republican proposal and that is urgently needed that is in the Biden American Rescue Plan is $11 billion to help with global vaccination relief.

I recently spoke with Strive Masiyiwa, a dear friend from Africa who is leading the African Union's plans for how to vaccinate the 54 countries on the Continent of Africa Sure, the Russians have offered their Sputnik vaccine, which was not fully and transparently developed and tested. The Chinese are offering their vaccine. But what I believe the developing world would welcome with open arms, if we would just fund it and provide it, is the rapid scale-up, production, and manufacturing in countries like South Africa, India, and elsewhere of the tried, true, tested, scientifically sound vaccines made available by Pfizer, by Johnson & Johnson, by Moderna, by the Western companies like AstraZeneca and others that have shown that their vaccines are safe.

The United States has long been a leader in world health. We have inspired the world in the way in which we have brought our medical advances, our scientific capability, and our humanitarian commitment to the world. This should be another chapter in that long and great history.

And we must remember that no one in this world is safe from this pandemic until the entire world has been successfully vaccinated. If we do not contribute to the global vaccine campaign of COVAX, if we do not participate in the World Health Organization in meeting the needs of the developing world, it will simply come back to the people of the United States.

Of course, we must prioritize vaccinating our Nation, our people, Delawareans. But just as Joe Biden in the Oval Office earlier this week asked me to keep in my mind's eye that family sitting around a kitchen table, worried, struggling with finances, with their

health, with their future, we have to keep our eye on the horizon, on having passenger rail available to recover when our country recovers, on having housing and affordable housing options for families who are struggling with homelessness, and our eye on the horizon of the potential threat from the rest of the world of more dangerous variants, which is why we need to contribute to a global campaign to ensure that all of the world's people are safe from this pandemic.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to these three connected concerns, all of which touch on Delaware's families and our Nation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have a question for all of my colleagues this evening, which is this: What happened here today, and how is it different from what we expected as we assembled in this Chamber early this afternoon?

Sadly, much like the impeachment trial of just a year ago, I think as many of us slogged our way to the Nation's Capital and dutifully filed into this Chamber, we expected hours and hours of debate and discussion, knowing the outcome, knowing that what was being engaged in by a handful of our colleagues was a political stunt, feeding the ego of our President, who is chasing conspiracy theories about how he actually won the election 2 months ago that he lost and indulging his belief that somehow, somehow, the Congress could still, at the last moment, snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

Even in the last day, President Trump had been haranguing his own incredibly loyal Vice President, Mike Pence, as if somehow Vice President Pence would simply declare him President today.

We knew that President Trump had been stirring up the spirits of thousands, urging them to come to Washington. We had an inkling that he might go out and speak to them, but I don't think, as we filed into this Chamber, any of us--any of us--expected that, for the second time in our Republic's history, the perimeter of this Capitol would be breached, Members of the Senate would be rushed to safety; that not just the Capitol Police but U.S. Marshals and FBI officers and fully combat-geared soldiers would be in the U.S. Capitol, taking it back from a riotous mob of thugs.

Just a few moments ago, I went to the Rotunda to see the litter and the trash, the residue and the remnants of those who took over this building today, and to say thank you to the men and women of law enforcement who helped secure it after it fell to an angry mob.

But, folks, we have to think about the consequences of what happened here today, why this happened, and what it means and what it teaches, because, frankly, tonight, now, the whole world is watching. The entire world is watching a montage of scenes--of folks cavorting in the Capitol, half-naked men taking that seat, scrawling things on different surfaces, parading up and down the Capitol corridors with a Confederate flag and a Trump flag, and in other ways signaling that they had done something significant. No. In fact, what they have actually done is weakened our democracy, showed some of its fragility, and encouraged our opponents around the world.

In the last 2 months since the election, we have one man who has abandoned his post, who has mostly spent his time golfing and tweeting and indulging himself in conspiracy theories and been less and less attuned to our national security and to a raging pandemic, and another man, our President-elect, who is preparing to take over the responsibility for leading this country out of this pandemic and out of its current state of deep, deep division.

President Trump has abandoned his post. He does not deserve to be President any longer, and he poses a real and present threat to the future of our democracy.

But let me also say this to my colleagues, half of whom changed their intended vote today after seeing what happened in the Capitol. There were, as we began, roughly 13 Senators--Republicans--who said they were going to vote against the certification of the election, and when we actually finally called the roll, it was just 6--7 of them having been chastened by the events of today. But two who continue on this quest clerked for the Supreme Court Chief Justice, are deeply schooled in the law, and know better than what they did today. And in the House, in the debate going on over in the House even now, more than 100 House Republicans continue with this effort.

On this floor earlier today, this evening, there were strong and clear and brave speeches by Republicans and Democrats alike.

So I have a question as we move forward. When will this fever break? When will we finally say to each other: Enough is enough of indulging and following populism and demagoguery. Is it time to finally show who the leaders are and to uphold our Constitution that every one of the House Members and a third of us swore to uphold just 3 days ago?

I will tell you, as I look ahead, that I am confident that 2 weeks from now, Joseph Biden will be sworn in as the next President, Kamala Harris sworn in as the next Vice President, and we have a unique moment in my lifetime, because, as Presidents and leaders in the Senate of both parties over the last decades have observed, the Senate has steadily shrunk in its significance, its role, in its power, and the Presidency has steadily grown. Not in my lifetime--not since LBJ--have we had an incoming President who spent 36 years in this Chamber.

We have a chance with Joe Biden, a President-elect who ran on bringing our country together, a President-elect who ran on turning the page from our moment of national division, and a

President-elect who respects and honors and understands the significance of this body.

So we have to take this opportunity to heal, to hear each other, to compromise, to work together, and to see the real challenges facing the American people and take this last best moment.

What happened here today should leave all of us gravely concerned about the health and the future of our democracy, and the opportunity we will have 2 weeks from today is one we should not let pass us by.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, on the 75th anniversary of D-Day, I wish to honor a member of our Greatest Generation, Stanley P. ``Lucky'' Lawruk, Sr., of Wilmington, DE. Stanley P. Lawruk, a lifelong Delawarean, served in the U.S. Army Air Corps at the Battle of Normandy and throughout World War II.

On D-Day, June 6, 1944, 20-year-old Technical Sergeant Stanley Lawruk was on his fourth combat mission as

both the flight engineer and top turret gunner on a Boeing B-17G Flying Fortress. Sergeant Lawruk and his fellow crewmen were part of the 327th Bombardment Squadron, 92nd Bomb Group, known as Fame's Favored Few.

His squadron's mission on D-Day was to target and destroy the marshalling yards and industrial center at Thury-Harcourt in Normandy, France. As the dorsal turret gunner, Sergeant Lawruk manned twin 50- caliber machineguns located just above the cockpit of his bomber.

``I saw all the ships go across the channel,'' Stan said in a 2014 interview. ``They were so thick, you could almost walk across the channel [on them]. And you could see the troops.'' Sergeant Stan Lawruk survived D-Day and the many follow-on missions of the Normandy campaign. After more than 20 combat flights, Lucky Lawruk had earned his nickname.

On his 26th mission, Stan Lawruk's luck ran out. On August 25, 1944, Stan's B-17 was on a bombing mission to destroy a V-2 rocket experimental station located along the coast of Peenemunde, Germany. There, his Flying Fortress fell victim to anti-aircraft batteries below.

``A direct hit blew off the propeller on our number four engine. That in turn tore a large hole in our right wing,'' Stan said in a 1945 newspaper interview. ``Another hit put our number three engine on fire and set another windmilling. We lost altitude rapidly.''

Stan and his fellow wingmen were instructed to bail out over Germany; however, they decided to stick with the plane if possible. ``Over the Baltic we started to toss out everything we could move or pry loose,'' Stan said in 1945, stating that he even tried to drop the ball turret. ``I didn't have a chance to finish the job before I jumped to my crash position. We came down in a slight crash near a fishing village. None of the crew was hurt.''

A declassified document, Missing Air Crew Report 8275, recently found in the National Archives, verifies that all nine crew members survived the force of the crash landing near Sovde, Sweden. Weather conditions and visibility were described as ``cloudy smooth.'' The bomber, numbered 43-37596, was last sighted at ``1322 hours'' that day.

Stan and his crew were rescued by Swedish troops and Red Cross workers; however, the American airmen would remain in neutral Sweden for 6 months. The bomber crew were considered prisoners of war until repatriated back to England. Stan, who originally enlisted in January 1943, remained in the U.S. Army Air Corps until he was honorably discharged at New Castle Army Airfield in October 1945.

After World War II, Stan did what many GIs did upon returning home. He picked up where he left off before the war. Stan went back to his grocery job at the American Store, now known as ACME, located at Chestnut and Franklin Streets in Wilmington.

Shortly thereafter, Stan Lawruk married Pearl DeLucia in November 1946. Together Stan and Pearl raised three children: Kathy, Stan, and Tim. Stan eventually landed a delivery job with the Tasty Baking Company, the maker of Tastykake treats. He worked there for 35 years until retirement. Topping that record was the nearly 69 years of marriage shared by Stan and Pearl Lawruk. His beloved wife passed away in 2015.

Stan, who just celebrated his 95th birthday, is still well known in our community and in our State. He recently moved to Wilmington VA Medical Center's Community Living Center, where he quickly became a favorite among the residents, staff, and veterans.

Stan still loves Tastykake treats and is widely known to be a bit of a card sharp who enjoys a game of Blackjack. Besides his interest in playing cards, he recently discovered his talent as an artist. In the last year alone, Stan has painted more than a dozen works of art. Folk who know Stan know him to be a loving, caring, social, and extremely positive person.

In summary, Stanley ``Lucky'' Lawruk is truly part of our Greatest Generation. I offer him my thanks for his sacrifices for family, for State, for country, and for humanity.

Stan, on behalf of a grateful nation, thank you for your dedicated service.

Mr. President, it is an honor and a joy for me to come to the floor today not just as the Senator representing Delaware but as the cochair of the Senate Law Enforcement Caucus, which I am very proud to have a chance to lead with my friend and colleague Senator Blunt from Missouri.

As you just heard, he recited some of the many ways in which we have been able to work together. Senator Blunt, as a seasoned senior appropriator, someone who has experience in the House of Representatives and in the private sector at home, leading an educational institution, and has worked in State and local government, along with my experience in local government and the private sector--I think that has allowed us to do really good and positive things for the men and women of law enforcement.

This is National Police Week. It is an opportunity for us--not just here in the Senate but all over the country--to thank the hundreds of thousands of men and women in State and local law enforcement, as well as in Federal law enforcement agencies, who make possible the opportunity we have to enjoy our freedoms. Our basic safety, our ability to travel far and wide, to speak and live, and to praise and believe as we hope--all of this is made possible because of the ways in which our law enforcement officers guarantee those freedoms by literally putting their lives on the line for us each and every day. For that, we are eternally grateful.

The Law Enforcement Caucus, which Senator Blunt and I founded, has held a number of engaging and important bipartisan sessions. You heard the Senator reference things like the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program and RISS, the Regional Intelligence Sharing System that helps to connect resources between Federal and State and local law enforcement. We also recently had a session on sharing relationship- building models where we had folks in from Delaware and Missouri to talk about how law enforcement serves as positive role models and mentors in the community through terrific programs.

I look forward to continuing to work with my friend and colleague Senator Blunt on these issues in the year ahead in the Law Enforcement Caucus and to talking briefly here on the floor today about how we should not just give great speeches but actually take important actions to demonstrate to the families and to the men and women of law enforcement that we care deeply about their service and about whether they come home at the end of their shift.

I serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee. On a unanimous basis, we recently advanced a series of bills that will help advance officer safety, not the least of which is making permanent the Federal Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program that has literally saved lives across the country. The capitol police--the police who protect Delaware's capitol and our courthouse--had a dramatic and personal experience with that when two law enforcement officers' lives were saved when they were shot in the line of duty, and it was only because they were wearing vests made possible by this Federal-State partnership that they survived.

I will also continue to work to support the COPS Program, which ensures that we have officers on the ground in communities large and small in Delaware, such as Cheswold, Delmar, Laurel, Ocean View, Smyrna, and my home city of Wilmington. They all have been able to hire new officers in recent years because of the COPS Program.

We are also working together on reforms to the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program to ensure that families of officers who are permanently disabled or lose their lives in the line of duty receive the benefits they richly deserve.

Let me conclude by thanking and honoring a few specific officers from Delaware's law enforcement community for their service this past year. We have not had any Delawareans' names added to the Wall of Honor referenced by the Senator from Missouri, but all of us who have affection for and support the law enforcement community in Delaware know that we are simply blessed this year to have not joined that terrible roll of great honor of those who have given their lives in the line of duty.

Let me briefly thank Sergeant Paul Doherty of the Delaware State Police, who was awarded the Robert J. Seinsoth Memorial Award as the 2018 Delaware Crime Stoppers Law Enforcement Officer of the Year. His investigatory work following up on a robbery led to the apprehension of a serial, dangerous criminal who harmed other Delawareans.

Let me honor Detective Jonathan Moyer, who led the investigation of fraud and theft at Beebee Hospital in Lewes, DE.

Let me honor Detective Ryan Schmid from the Dover Police Department. He is a 6-year veteran of that department and maintained an amazing clearance rate of 84 percent in investigated burglaries, robberies, and attempted murder and solved homicide.

Lastly, let me recognize Detective Brad Cordrey, who is Delaware's Child Welfare Professional of the Year and has served under Georgetown chief of police R.L. Hughes, who said that ``Brad's dedication, compassion, and tenacity to solve serious cases are unmatched.''

There is so much more I could say, but given the number of my colleagues who have also come to the floor to speak, let me conclude by simply saying how grateful all of us are to the men and women of law enforcement.

During this National Police Week, let me say what a great blessing it is to be able to continue to work with my colleague Senator Blunt of Missouri in cochairing the Law Enforcement Caucus in this Congress and hopefully for many years to come.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and service of a distinguished Delawarean, veteran of the U.S. Army for 27 years, businessman, husband, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and brother, Ed Scully.

I got to know Ed during my time as New Castle County executive and worked with him on a variety of issues facing the aviation industry.

Ed was known for his persistence during my time in the Senate when it came to bringing and keeping good, high-paying jobs in Delaware, and in particular, he was passionate about helping veterans in our State get jobs in the aviation industry.

After graduating from Wilmington, Delaware's Salesianum School, Ed joined the U.S. Army in February 1961. Ed was no ordinary soldier; he joined the Special Forces and earned his Green Beret. He was promoted five times during his 27 years of service and retired at the rank of lieutenant colonel. Ed received many awards and decorations, including the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star with Valor, the Purple Heart, the Joint Services Meritorious Service Medal, the Air Medal, the Combat Infantryman's Badge, the Special Forces Tab, the Parachute Badge, the Senior Aviation Badge, the Vietnam Jump Wings, and the Special Forces Combat Patch.

After attending flight school, aviation became Ed's passion, and he spent the rest of his life as a military and civilian aviation expert.

After he retired from the military and returned to Delaware, he began a second career at Summit Aviation, a 500-acre airport in Middletown, DE, where he continued supporting America's men and women in uniform. Summit was an early supporter of the Delaware State Police Aviation Branch, building a hangar and providing all aircraft maintenance. To this day, Summit is a top employer of veterans in the state. Ed retired from Summit in June, 2013, after 25 years. Prior to his retirement, Summit named their new modification center after him: the Scully Modification Center. There are few people who can say that they have dedicated their lives to their country, but Ed certainly can.

Sadly, Ed passed away on December 24, 2018, and was buried in Arlington National Cemetery, but he leaves behind an indelible legacy and one he should be most proud of: his family. Ed is survived by his loving and devoted wife of 45 years, Patricia, his brothers Robert and Thomas, his daughters, Suzanne Gubich, Corynn Ciber, Kristin Stein, his son Edward Scully IV, and his grandchildren and great-grandchildren; Danielle, Cole, Kyle, Maxwell, Julia, Connor, Ashton, and Kailani.

I am grateful for Ed's service to our State and our Nation, and I hope that this tribute to his memory helps his family and friends know what an impact his life made.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to recognize a true public servant, an individual who has been by my side since my first year as a Senator, someone who will be dearly missed, not only in my office but by this institution as a whole as he moves on to his next chapter this week: my deputy chief of staff and senior policy advisor, Franz Wuerfmannsdobler.

Franz has had a great impact on this institution, on the staff members who served here over the last two decades, and on me. His sage advice, his patience, his incredibly calm demeanor, his willingness to mentor and guide others, his respect for this institution, and his knowledge borne out of 20 years of experience in the Senate have contributed in countless ways to the meaningful work we have been able to do here for the people of Delaware and our country.

Today, I want to recognize and thank Franz for his remarkable and his selfless career. I want to thank him for what he has done for me, for my office, for the people of Delaware, and pay tribute to the legacy he leaves.

It is a remarkable legacy. He has been on the frontlines of events and policy battles that have quite literally shaped the history of our country over the last two decades--from 9/11 to the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, from energy and appropriations efforts to sustained concerns and engagement around bipartisanship.

Franz's career in the Senate began in 1998 when he served as a legislative assistant for the late, great Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who was himself a giant of this body. For 8 years, Franz handled issues from energy to environment, to climate change and natural resources. It was also in Senator Byrd's office that Franz cut his teeth on the complex appropriations process, learning from the master appropriator himself.

Franz's career then took him to the office of former Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, where he was a trusted senior energy policy advisor, and then on the Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee before finally joining my own office in March of 2011.

Franz's list of legislative accomplishments is long and impressive and reflects his deep grasp of policy and the mechanics of politics. He helped to shape elements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. He was central to establishing reformed fuel economy standards for our Nation's automobiles and played a key role in the Recovery Act, a massive effort that helped pull our Nation out of the depths of a recession.

Franz is a person of ideas and vision. His vision for our country has led to policies that have made our Nation cleaner, more innovative, and more secure. Likewise, his vision in my Senate office has made our team more efficient, more effective, and more successful. Franz has played a key role in shaping my office early on, helping to create a team-based structure and the positive culture of our legislative staff.

He also introduced me to the valuable concept of having an office built around and relying on expert legislative fellows, including, in particular, fellows from the American Association for the Advancement of Science, whose incredible expertise and deep knowledge in scientific matters has been invaluable in advancing technology and science policy in my last 8 years. In total, Franz has mentored more than 15 fellows during his time in the Senate--13 of them are AAAS fellows in my own office, and they have attested individually and collectively to the reach, scope, and power of his guidance and mentorship to them.

Franz is also a master of appropriations--an arcane process that even the most seasoned legislative veterans should admit that they don't completely understand. He brought his wealth of experience to our team, taking the reins of the Federal budget and appropriations process and building from the ground up the complex and detailed appropriations system that we use to this day. There is no question that Franz's expertise and the time he dedicated to building this meticulous system has made me a more effective member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and led to countless wins for the State of Delaware--from funding for critical transportation improvements and investments in our first responders to support that has helped to establish and enhance the NIIMBL manufacturing institute of the University of Delaware and to fully fund science and R&D projects around the country and in my home State.

Beyond Franz's technical expertise, nothing better exemplifies his character than the patience and dedication with which he has taught others about the appropriations process. Each year, Franz hosts ``Appropriations Bootcamp 101`` to teach new staff members the ins and outs of this riveting and complex process. He takes the time to explain it, to get into the weeds, and to answer question after question. Franz has also taken his show on the road in my home State of Delaware, meeting with State, local government, and community stakeholders to explain the appropriations process and help to secure more funding for our State. He has even developed a legendary method for teaching staff about appropriations by using bags of marbles to explain funding allocations for each Appropriations subcommittee. For the record, the legislative branch gets just one marble.

Franz's patience extends far beyond the annual appropriations process. He always maintains his cool and has a striking and calming presence, even in the most trying of circumstances. One of those more trying circumstances occurred at a staff outing just a few years ago. Franz had driven a couple of other members of our team, and on their way home, his car broke down. The group decided to push start the car, going down a hill to get momentum, while a junior staffer manned the wheel. Unfortunately, the lack of power steering made it impossible to turn the wheel. After a good strong push, the car rolled right down the hill and into a tree. Franz very calmly said: Don't worry about it. It is not a problem; it is all going to be fine--even when the front end of his car was unrecognizable. Franz's response to that situation, his cool and calm demeanor, is characteristic of the grace he has imparted on all of us, even in some of the most tumultuous times here in the Senate.

One of the unique things about Franz is that whenever you meet somebody who knows him or has worked with him, they talk about the ways in which he has gone out of his own way to help them and mentor them over the years. So many people in the Senate view Franz not just as a friend or colleague but as someone who they know has helped them in their careers and someone who has shown them the ropes and invested time in supporting them and helping them succeed. One member of my team described it this way:

Franz has an uncanny ability to take the time necessary to

help. He enables us to do our jobs and do them well. We get

meaningful things done, and that's because of the wisdom

Franz has imparted.''

In an environment here in the Senate that is at times fast paced, Franz takes the time to invest in younger people. He sees potential in staff and imparts knowledge and experience, even when there is more than enough to keep him busy just meeting his own commitments. For example, Franz took it upon himself to create a manual for the new fellows who work in my office every year. The manual, which should be required reading for every new Senate staffer, describes how to write a bill and important things about the process of working in the Senate.

He also maintains the Capitol Hill Urban Dictionary, which he shares with new staff and interns to help them decode internal Senate jargon, including oft-used, but rarely explained phrases like ``en bloc'' or ``move the needle.'' It explains, for example, what to do when asked: Do you have language on that.

Franz embraces the importance of teaching the next generation of Capitol Hill staff how to do their job well. I think that is truly his greatest legacy--the remarkable diaspora of younger staff members he has believed in, invested in, and helped to train who are now working everywhere from the Senate to the House, to the Department of Defense, to running a nonprofit in Kenya.

Each year, Franz and his wonderful wife Lisa host an annual gathering at their home for a growing community of current and former fellows and, literally, dozens of colleagues--folks who have shared experiences, who care about policy, who like a good geeky joke, and who enjoy helping each other and developing and sustaining each other's careers.

That is just the kind of person Franz is. He has impacted so many people--something that was never more evident than at his wedding to Lisa a few years ago, which I was deeply honored to have the chance to officiate. In addition to their friends and family, guests that day included former Senator Dorgan, folks who had mentored Franz early in his career, dozens of individuals he mentored himself, and people from all walks of life who support Franz and Lisa and care about them. It was a testament to the community they have created, both inside and outside the Senate.

Franz cares deeply about this institution. He cares about policies, and he cares about people. He is always looking for ways to bridge the partisan divide and make this broken place work better. It hasn't always been easy. Like many of us, Franz has struggled with the slowing pace of legislative progress in the Senate in recent years and its increasingly divisive nature. It says so much about him and about his faith in us and in this institution that he is leaving his Senate career to go work on these very issues, helping to lead the Bipartisan Policy Center in advancing bipartisan policy solutions to address the challenges facing our Nation and the institution of the Senate.

He has made such a mark that he is known throughout this institution by a single name. Few people are known by just one name--Bono, Noah, Cher, Franz. With Franz's leaving the Senate, I promise to continue to do my part here to bridge what divides us where we can and to do the important work required of us. That includes passage of the Master Limited Partnerships Parity Act, important bipartisan legislation that will level the tax playing field for clean energy, which Franz has worked on for Congress after Congress as long as I have been here--work that I intend to finish.

While I am sad today to see Franz leave my office in the Senate, he will be deeply missed by everyone on my staff and everyone who has benefited from his wisdom, but I am also excited

to see the inspiring things he will accomplish in his next chapter.

I want to thank Franz for his dedication, his leadership, and his expertise. I want to thank his family for sharing him with us these past 8 years in my office and these 2 decades here in the Senate. He inspires me every day to be a better and more thoughtful, more careful, and more caring legislator. He leaves a deep and positive impact on all of us that we will not soon forget. Thank you, Franz. You will be deeply missed.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today, it is with a heavy heart that I wish to recognize the life and legacy of William ``Bill'' Murray, a tremendous advocate for kidney disease patients in my home State of Delaware. This week, advocates from across the country will travel to Washington, DC, to meet with their congressional representatives, share their stories, and ask that we remain committed to investing in kidney disease research.

Like Bill, who became involved with the National Kidney Foundation and the kidney disease community in 2014, many patients, family members, and caregivers throughout the country will meet with their legislators and government officials to increase awareness of and improve policies focusing on kidney disease.

I am proud to say that Bill made being involved with the National Kidney Foundation a family event, often bringing his partner Linda, daughter-

in-law Danielle, grandson Emerson, sister Michelle, nieces, friends, and others to as many events as possible.

Bill worked tirelessly to increase awareness about kidney disease in Delaware, spending time volunteering at local events, helping with community health screenings, and organizing support for World Kidney Day. True to character, even in his death, he helped those in need by being a deceased donor for patients waiting for organ transplants. As my family, staff, and I extend our deepest sympathies to all those who had the privilege of knowing Bill, I take comfort in knowing that his impact, passion, and determination will continue to bring hope to the kidney disease community for years to come.

Mr. President, I want to recognize the wisdom and insight from my friend and colleague from the great State of Georgia. We have unmet disaster needs in this country. I look forward to working with him to achieve the relief of the disaster impacts on the Southeastern United States and other States.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about climate change--to talk about something that is a pressing and real problem that affects everyone in this country, and, in fact, in our world. It is a challenge that we can't afford to ignore any longer because the health of our families, our economy, our environment, and even our national security, quite literally, depend on our ability to address it and address it promptly.

After a year of recordbreaking extreme weather in 2018--when we saw rising average temperatures fuel California's deadliest wildfire season on record, when Florida was faced with the strongest hurricane ever to reach that State's panhandle, and when farmers in Delaware and across the country faced challenges due to severe flooding and drought--it is clear that we can't afford to sit back and do nothing about climate change while the American people pay the price.

The costs of our inaction are real--real in human suffering, real in disaster recovery spending, real in lost economic opportunity, and real in the burden borne by our Armed Forces around the world.

Yes, there is a clear link between climate change and national security. The Pentagon has consistently pointed to climate change as a real national security threat that will make the military's job around the world harder. National security leaders from across administrations, both Republican and Democratic, have warned that climate change acts as a ``threat multiplier,'' increasing global instability and weakening fragile States as climate change leads to more extreme weather events and scarcer food and water resources.

In many ways, these findings echo themes about climate change that we already know--that it is already happening, that it continues to get worse, that it is going to cost us dearly, and that we can do something about it. It is that last point that I want to focus on. We can do something to stop the disastrous impacts of climate change, so long as we recognize it and work together in a bipartisan way to develop, take up, debate, and pass meaningful legislation that can make a difference.

Democrats have a broad range of bold and new policy proposals and of tested and fully developed policy proposals to address climate change. Many of them are bipartisan.

I wanted to come to the floor today to talk through 4 different bills that I have cosponsored--some that are relatively new and some considered across several Congresses--that are positive, constructive steps forward we can take to address climate change.

The first, and probably my oldest bill in this field, is called the MLP Parity Act--a catchy name, I know. It has five Republican colleagues who have cosponsored it now over three Congresses. This bill expands to renewable forms of energy, to carbon capture and sequestration, and to renewable and so-called clean energy a popular and long-established tax tool for financing energy projects that the oil and gas and pipeline sectors have enjoyed for decades. It would level the playing field. It would stop picking winners and losers in terms of energy tax policy. It would be, literally, an ``all of the above'' energy financing strategy. If enacted, it would be the first permanent change for the financing of clean energy projects in the U.S. Tax Code--potentially, worth billions of new private investment in renewable forms of energy.

It is also cosponsored by the Republican chair of the Energy Committee, Senator Murkowski, the Republican chair of the Banking Committee, Senator Crapo, and three other colleagues from across the country. We have five Democrats and five Republicans. It has had a hearing in front of the Energy Committee and a hearing in front of the Finance Committee in previous Congresses. This is the sort of solid, scored bipartisan bill that would be a meaningful step forward in addressing climate change.

Senator Lindsey Graham and I have introduced the IMPACT for Energy Act to create a private foundation to support cutting-edge energy research and technology commercialization. Why would we do this? What am I talking about?

Well, a guy named Bill Gates, one of the greatest inventors and innovators in American history, wants to deploy private investments and foundation investments alongside the Department of Energy, in partnership with a lot of other individuals, to significantly accelerate the cutting-edge research being done at our National Laboratories through the Department of Energy.

This is a tool that several other Federal Agencies already have. It is a so-called private foundation that allows them to marry up private sector dollars--foundation dollars--with Federal dollars to leverage greater impact. This private foundation can go out and raise that additional money and add it to the energy R&D already being funded by the Federal Government.

I also want to applaud the hard and bipartisan work of my colleagues, led by Senators Murkowski and Cantwell on the Energy Committee, on a comprehensive energy bill with a wide range of policy ideas that can move us forward. It has several components that I contributed and that would help to address climate change. I very much hope that in this Congress we can finally take up this bipartisan bill and see it signed into law.

Last, but in some ways most importantly, I want to mention a bill I offered at the end of the last Congress with my friend and former colleague, the Senator from Arizona, Jeff Flake. Despite our very different ideological, cultural and contextual backgrounds--we are from different States, from different faiths, and from different perspectives on the role of government and society; he is a real conservative, and I am a progressive Democratic--we still managed to come together and introduce a bill that addresses the cost of ignoring climate change and the impact it will have on the people in our home States.

We offered the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act. It is a commonsense bill to achieve significant and sustained emissions reductions and to help to mitigate the worse impacts of climate change. Our bill would accomplish this by using a free-market approach to pricing carbon pollution that would spur economic growth and put money back in the pockets of American taxpayers. Similar legislation has been introduced in the House of Representatives by a bipartisan coalition. I look forward to reintroducing this bill in this Congress.

The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act should be the centerpiece of a robust, bipartisan climate agenda because it aggressively tackles emissions while optimizing economic growth and income for working families. We estimate that our bill would reduce emissions by 90 percent by 2050, while creating as many as 2 million net new jobs in the next decade.

I believe this is an efficient way to use market forces to address the very real problem of climate change while creating jobs and opportunities for American workers. Frankly, an outright ban on nonrenewable sources would be inefficient and disruptive to workers from all sectors, but, in particular, across the building trades and other vital sectors of employment. In contrast, sending a strong market signal in favor of lower carbon or carbon-neutral energy would spur investment and growth in these technologies by the private sector and lead us toward a lower carbon future through competition.

We don't need to choose between clean energy and economic growth or between combating climate change and creating jobs. These two goals are not permanently and mutually exclusive. They can go hand in hand if we craft the right policies. Still, we cannot move abruptly away from an economy that relies heavily on fossil fuels without having a real and coordinated plan for the very people--the millions of Americans--whose jobs will ultimately be impacted by that transition.

Fortunately, a gradual transition to a clean energy future can also be an effective job creator. In 2017, the renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors alone employed 2.8 million Americans. If we place a price on carbon and then let the market work, we will create jobs across a wide range of industries, occupations, and geographies.

As we work to deal with the effects of climate change by moving to a cleaner energy and infrastructure economy--an economy that is more resilient--we will need to rely on workers who are already in place in many of these industries. We will need building trades professionals to construct and maintain our new resilient and clean energy infrastructure. We will need manufacturing workers to build these more energy-efficient products. We will also need scientists and engineers to help research, develop, design, and deploy these new technologies. These workers bring real experience and skills to the table, and we must ensure that these skills translate into new, good jobs and that the workers in these new jobs are able to organize for fair competition, for fair compensation, and for fair work conditions.

We can't tackle climate change alone. The United States is the largest historic emitter of carbon dioxide, but our emissions have been declining in recent years. Meanwhile, China has whirred past us, and China and India and other countries are rapidly catching up in their carbon emissions. We need an approach that incentivizes these countries to reduce their emissions as well. The United States is a world leader in science and technology and innovation. We need to develop and advance new technologies--carbon-neutral technologies like small, modular nuclear reactors and carbon capture and sequestration--that we can export. Then we need to find ways to encourage countries like China and India to modernize and industrialize while also reducing their emissions.

There is good work taking place in this area, and there are good solutions we can act on together. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a serious, thorough, deliberate, and thoughtful way. We need to be prepared to adapt to the ongoing impacts of climate change. We need to make sure American workers and families aren't left behind or are burdened by Federal climate policy.

This administration, unfortunately, strikes me as taking us backward. We are voting on an EPA Administrator in this Chamber who is failing to take action on climate, even on action that is widely supported by industry. Our President just proposed a National Security Council initiative to counter the consensus around climate change and refute the idea that greenhouse gases are harmful to the environment. I shouldn't even need to say this, but that just isn't how science works.

That is why, here in the Senate, we need to take the opportunity to lead and to have voices from both parties in Congress and in this country who want to take bold steps to address the climate. The hard part is going to be squaring these big, bold ideas with political reality. That is hard, but there are ways we can do it. Instead of being silent, we should bring this conversation to the forefront. Instead of debating whether climate change is real, we should be passing bipartisan bills, like the ones I have mentioned today, that can meaningfully address climate change and improve our economy.

Climate change is a serious threat to our economy, to our security, and to our way of life. We need leadership from all parts of our society and government to tackle it, and we must do our part in the Senate. I look forward to having conversations across the aisle, to working together, to identifying real solutions to the challenges before us, and to creating new opportunities for America's workers.

I thank the Presiding Officer.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Drew Story, a science fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 116th Congress.

Madam President, I rise today to offer brief remarks on the nomination of Eric Miller to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

I have concerns about Mr. Miller's controversial record--some of his ideas and his jurisprudence--which I have spoken to on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which informed my vote against him on the committee.

But today, I want to speak about my reservations about this body's moving forward with his confirmation, given that neither of his home State Senators have returned a blue slip.

Let me briefly talk about what a blue slip is and why it matters. It is not in the Constitution. It was not something imagined by the Founders. It was something developed by the Members of this body to put one further bumper on the power of the President to nominate Federal judges and then for the Senate to carry out its constitutional advice and consent role. For a long time, it worked fine, and I actually had a terrific experience with the blue-slip process. Don McGahn, as the White House Counsel, and my senior Senator, Tom Carper, and I, when we had a vacancy--two vacancies, actually, in the Federal district court in Delaware--went to our local bar and asked for them to put together a committee to interview potential candidates.

We went to the White House Counsel and spoke about the importance of the Delaware district court and the process we were following, and, in the end, out of a very wide pool of initial candidates and the folks who were interviewed by a broad and nonpartisan selection committee of our local bar, we advanced three names to the White House. The White House picked two, and they were ultimately nominated, and Senator Carper and I both returned the blue slips on them. They proceeded. They were both confirmed. They are now seated as district court judges.

That is the way this ought to work. Why does it matter? It matters because our States are different. We are the United States, and each of our States has slightly different cultures, traditions, and communities. The point of having a Senate made up of 100 representatives of our 50 States is for each of us to come here and carry forward some of the values and traditions of our States.

I am a member of the Delaware bar. It is a bar with a great and proud tradition. It is a bar with a somewhat different culture--a much more collegial culture, I would argue, than many States around us, and it was important to me to be able to advocate to the President, to the White House, for the nomination of folks who would represent the best of our bench and bar.

Look, the President and I are in different parties. I understand that we will have different policy positions, but in order to get the absolute best and brightest of the American bar and to have them reflect the values and priorities of the State Senators are elected from, the blue slip was developed.

We have had a difficult and divisive and partisan period here in the Senate for as long as I have been here. I don't think it is because I am here, but it has been as long as I have been here--since 2010. We have had a number of regrettable changes in the policies and the practices and the culture of this place, but proceeding with a confirmation vote of a nominee who was not supported by either home State Senator for a circuit court position is unprecedented.

I think, before we proceed, this body should stop and reflect on what this means for our future. In a district as small as Delaware, it is likely the Senators actually know the nominees. In a circuit as large as the Ninth, which is the largest, geographically, in our whole country, it is almost a certainty that the Senators will not know the judges nominated by the President to represent their circuit.

The blue slip has long been a procedural barrier to the President's nominating people who did not reflect the bench and bar of the States from which they are drawn. The leader is pushing this forward, even over several other nominees pending on this floor.

One other piece of the process that brought us to today to a vote on Eric Miller's nomination for the Ninth Circuit that is worth commenting on is that the confirmation hearing on the Judiciary Committee was held while we were not in session. No Democrat was present to question this nominee. The questions that were raised and the comments that were made were only in writing and for the Record, and my understanding is, this questioning is very brief--just 5 minutes before just a handful of Republican Senators, I think two.

This young man is going to be given a lifetime appointment to one of the most important judicial posts in our country. Frankly, my own kids have to work longer and harder and answer more questions to get a good grade in high school than this gentleman did in terms of the confirmation process of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I am very worried about the precedent this sets, about what it says--which is that we continue to push past norms and traditions in this body--and about where we are headed.

It is my hope that some of my colleagues on the Judiciary Committee will work with me in the months ahead to recognize that there is a long, now-bitter path of he said, she said, who shot John, who acted first, which has resulted in changes to the whole nomination process.

I think we can yet pull back to a place where those who are nominated are the best and brightest of our country, where, in the process, there are protections for the minority and the majority, and where we can all end up voting proudly for those who are nominated to serve on the Federal bench of the United States.

I increasingly hear commentators on cable talking about judges as if you can know how they will vote based on the President who nominated them. So-and-so is described as a Bush judge or a Reagan judge or a Clinton judge or an Obama judge, a Trump judge or a Bush judge, as if that tells you everything you need to know about a judge. It should not.

In my State, it doesn't, and it is my hope that we can yet pull ourselves back from the brink of one more step to a place where our judges are seen not as the black-robed individuals dispensing independent justice but as folks wearing blue and red jerseys advancing a partisan political agenda. That way lies disaster for our constitutional Republic.

Both parties have taken steps that have led us here. Both parties need to take steps that will heal this, and I intend to vote against the nomination of Mr. Miller because of my concerns about these procedural changes that I think are so destructive.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask by unanimous consent that the attached letter signed by 58 former national security officials, who served under Republican and Democratic administrations, criticizing President Trump's declaration of a national emergency to build a wall on our southern border be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to offer briefly my remarks on the nomination of William Barr to serve as Attorney General of the United States.

This past Thursday, when the Judiciary Committee of the Senate considered him, I was absent, being the cochair of the National Prayer Breakfast. I would like to offer my conclusions briefly here on the floor.

I have weighed carefully over several weeks William Barr's nomination to serve as the next Attorney General. Initially, I have to say, I was greatly encouraged that the President nominated a nominee whose service had included leadership roles in the Justice Department, including Attorney General of the United States.

However, I believe my responsibility to assess Mr. Barr's candidacy requires me to consider his entire record, including his recent writings, his statements, and his work, and to focus on his ability to actually meet the test of our current time. Having met with him in person, having questioned him during the Judiciary Committee's confirmation hearing, having reviewed his record, and having reviewed his written answers to questions submitted for the record, I ultimately believe Mr. Barr does not meet this test. I am not confident that he will uphold the Attorney General's critical role in defending the Department of Justice as an institution and in ensuring that the special counsel's investigation proceeds with independence and, by so doing, restores the trust of the American people in the rule of law.

In weighing his nomination, the memo Mr. Barr chose to author in June 2018--and to submit--criticizing the special counsel's investigation into obstruction of justice, I concluded was significant and could not be ignored. Mr. Barr tried to narrow or minimize the import of this memo by saying it was a specific application to a particular statute. The fact remains that his memo is rooted in and embraces an exceptionally broad theory of executive power that could threaten not only the special counsel's investigation but a lot of our current understanding of the scope and reach of Executive power.

When I asked him if he had sent other lengthy, detailed legal memos he had researched and written himself to the Department of Justice as a private citizen, he could only cite that one memo from this year, dealing critically with the special counsel's investigation.

At his nomination hearing in the committee, I sought simple and concrete assurances from Mr. Barr that he would give the special counsel's ongoing investigation the independence and separation from partisan politics it needs and deserves. In some instances I was genuinely encouraged by his answers. I was glad to hear a forceful answer from Mr. Barr that he would not fire the special counsel without cause and would resign rather than do so, if so ordered.

On other issues, however, he failed to give the sort of simple and clear commitment that former Attorney General Elliot Richardson gave at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee during the period of an

important investigation in the 1970s. Mr. Barr would not commit to following the guidance of career DOJ ethics officials on whether he should recuse himself. He would not commit to deferring to special counsel Mueller's investigative decisions. Finally, he would not commit to making special counsel Mueller's final report public. In essence, Mr. Barr is asking the American people and those of us who represent them to trust him to do the right thing. There are reasons to believe that he will, but there are, as I have laid out briefly, reasons to be gravely concerned that he will not.

Something my predecessor here in the Senate, Senator Joe Biden, expressed in voting to confirm him back in 1991, was his grave concerns about his expansive view of Executive power, but that was a very different time in our history, with a different Court and a different context.

I think we must be clear-eyed about the moment our country faces and the Attorney General's potentially pivotal role in ensuring the integrity of the rule of law and the institutions of our democracy. I believe it is my responsibility in the Senate to protect the special counsel investigation, to ensure that other ongoing Federal investigations are not interfered with because of a narrow or partisan purpose, and to safeguard the rule of law.

If Mr. Barr is confirmed, I hope he will prove me wrong. I hope he will demonstrate to the American people of all parties and backgrounds that he will put the interests of our democracy above the moment and partisan priorities. I hope he will prove to be a terrific, solid, and reliable steward for the ongoing investigation Special Counsel Mueller is leading into Russian interference in the 2016 election. If so, I will gladly put aside our policy differences to work with him for the good of the American people during this critical time, but I regret I have reached the conclusion that I cannot support his nomination this week.

Thank you, Mr. President.

With that, I yield the floor.