Floor Statements

Madam President, I will probably get in trouble with somebody for saying this, but the question of when life begins, the deeper question of what defines life, which biological entities are alive or possess independent existence versus which biological entities are simply part of something else that is alive--man, those are really hard questions.

I heard my colleague Senator Daines on the floor earlier tonight talking passionately about his belief that life begins at conception and that humans have an obligation to defend a day-old fetus equally to our obligation to defend the life of someone who has been born.

Now, I disagree. I believe that life begins at birth. I believe that our legal obligation towards a born human is different than our legal obligation toward an unborn fetus. But on that narrow question of when life begins, I don't cast any particular judgment on Senator Daines for believing what he believes. His belief system is shared by millions of Americans--not the majority of Americans, but a significant share.

This disagreement that he and I have over when legally protected life begins, though, is as significant and as important a disagreement as exists--right--because it is about the most foundational questions in human existence: What is life? Who decides whether a woman bears a child? Who has control over that woman's body? Who has control over the most sacred and critical function of a human being, the act of giving birth? It just doesn't get any more important than that set of questions.

And given this fundamental disagreement, given the weightiness of these questions, given the large number of Americans who sit on either side of these questions, I come to one simple conclusion: No government, no group of politicians, should make this decision for anyone else. This decision about whether to abort a pregnancy, so morally complicated, so socially divisive, should and must be left to individuals--in this case, to women--to decide.

Over the course of history, millions have died in fights over another weighty moral issue--the question of whether God exists, and if a God exists, exactly what form that being takes and what it requires of humans. Disputes over religion have eradicated entire civilizations.

What does this have to do with Roe v. Wade?

Well, our Founding Fathers decided that there were some topics that were so personal, so subject to disagreement and controversy, that government should just be barred from registering judgment.

That is part of the reason why our civilization has not been plagued by wars between religious groups--a reality that continues to paralyze societies to this day in other parts of the world--because we keep government out of the question of which God is the right God. That is up to every American to decide for themselves, even though many Americans believe that the consequence of observing or following the wrong God is serious--eternal damnation, for some. The stakes are huge when it comes to religion, but government sits on the sidelines.

To me, that is an imperfect but instructive corollary to the debate over choice and abortion. The decision about whether to have an abortion is so personal, and the lack of consensus in the country on the question is so unavoidable, as to make government intervention just as illegitimate as it would be if government tried to dictate to someone which religion they should follow.

Now, that is not the exact route that the Supreme Court traveled to get to the Roe decision, but it helps me understand why, from 1973 until today, the decision about whether or not to have an abortion has been a constitutional right of the individual, not the constitutional right of the government to decide.

Frankly, it has always been really hard for me to square how Republicans, who so readily evangelize about small government, about the importance of putting families and their decision-making processes first, about the evil of public sector overreach, are so enthusiastic about the government micromanaging personal decisions about pregnancy or marriage or adoption.

Small government is great, I guess, for corporations, but it is not so great when it comes to the most intimate decisions that families make.

And as I have said on this floor before, it is also hard to take seriously Republicans' passionate pleas for this body to defend the existence of an unborn fetus when they seem to care so little about many of the existential threats that are posed to every American after they are born.

Today, this day, over 100 Americans are going to die from gunshot wounds, from murders, and suicides. And whether my Republican colleagues agree with me or not that stricter gun laws is part of the solution to this uniquely American epidemic that plagues those that are born, I don't know that I have ever heard a Republican speech dedicated to this crisis on the floor of the Senate. I have heard dozens dedicated to the cause of those before birth. It seems that after birth, life matters a little bit less to some people in this body.

So that is what I think. And as I said, I will probably get into some hot water for admitting that I understand the arguments that people like Senator Daines make. I don't agree with his views, but I understand them. And my hope is, is that as we begin this debate over the future of reproductive choice and health in this country, as this debate heats up--because it is not going away. We are taking a vote tomorrow, but this is a debate that is going to consume this Nation if the Alito opinion becomes law, which I believe it will.

My hope is that we are honest about the complexity of this debate, but the Republicans are equally honest in the claims that they make.

Let me just briefly tell you what I mean.

Today, I heard Republican Senators making a whole bunch of claims that are just so ungrounded in truth as to diminish the quality of what should be a very important debate on a very weighty subject.

For instance, I heard Senators make the claim that the protesters who were protesting outside or near Supreme Court Justices' homes threatened violence against those Justices. That was

an explicit claim made by people who came down to this floor who might have heard it on some unreputable website, but it is not true.

You can object to protesters being outside of public officials' homes. It has happened to all of us, by the way, but don't make up threats of violence just because it makes for a better story.

I heard one Senator say that the Women's Health Protection Act, for which I will proudly vote tomorrow, allows for garage abortions. That is not true. That is just plainly not true.

Every State requires that abortions be performed in licensed healthcare facilities and nothing in the bill changes it. Don't say that just because it makes a better story.

Many Republicans claim that the bill we are taking up tomorrow allows abortions up to the date of birth. That is not true either.

The Women's Health Protection Act does codify Roe v. Wade, but Roe only protects a woman's right to have an abortion without restriction until viability and then afterward protects for the woman's health or risk of death. The bill simply does not expand the circumstances under which an abortion can be performed beyond what currently exists in case law.

So I am going to be honest with my colleagues about the admitted complexities--the political, moral complexities of this debate. But I expect opponents of the bill that we are debating tomorrow to be equally honest in the arguments they make as well.

So I will have a lot more to say about this topic as we begin what I think is a debate that will consume this Nation, rightfully, over the course of the coming weeks and months, but for today I will leave it there.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, the provision in the underlying bill that Senator Cruz's motion argues for is a good one in that we should care about cooperation between China and Iran, but I would encourage my colleagues to oppose this MTI because of another extraneous provision in the motion.

The motion argues that the United States should tie our Iran terrorism sanctions to our China policy, and that, frankly, is a bad idea. Terrorism-related sanctions are about punishing and deterring support for terrorism. If we want to use sanctions to deter cooperation between Iran and China, then we should craft those tailored sanctions; but to tie our Iran terrorism sanctions to our China policy would have the effect, really, of muddying the waters about the purpose of terrorism sanctions. Terrorism sanctions should be about stopping terrorism--period, stop. If we start applying terrorism sanctions for other purposes, it weakens our entire anti-terror strategy.

For that reason, I would urge opposition to the motion.

Vote on Motion

Mr. President, I would urge opposition to this motion.

This motion asks the Senate to endorse President Trump's Iran policy--a policy that, if you didn't notice, was a complete, total failure.

The motion calls for a provision in the underlying bill to prohibit a return to the JCPOA and to keep Trump's ``maximum pressure'' campaign intact until a mythical comprehensive agreement is achieved with Iran, inclusive of all their malevolent behavior. This policy just hasn't worked. To apply it prospectively would be ruinous.

Friends, Iran is weeks away from having enough nuclear material for a weapon. To deny this administration the ability to enter into a nuclear agreement isn't just folly; it is downright dangerous.

I wish a comprehensive agreement with Iran was possible, but 4 years of failure by President Trump was proof that, for the time being, it is not. We should not endorse 4 more years of this failed Iran policy.

I urge opposition.

Vote on Motion

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

Mr. President, I am one of the few parents of young children in the Senate. But almost every one of us here is a parent, so you know that one of the most spectacular things your kid can do is to write you a letter. Sometimes--frankly, most of the time--when I have gotten those letters,

it is because my kid wants to protest something that I have done. I have gotten a few of those where my kids are so upset about a rule or a decision that we have made as parents, they sit down and they catalog their grievances on paper.

Maybe if you are lucky, you get a nice letter. My in-laws have one still plastered up on their wall from their youngest daughter who wrote them a nice list when she was young about the things she appreciated. But those ``Dear Mommy'' or ``Dear Daddy'' letters, that is one of the rare joys of parenthood.

On March 6, 2018, Patricia Verbeeck awoke to find one of those letters for her left by her child Eric. It was laying on the pillow of his bed. She picked it up, and she read it to herself. ``Dear Mommy,'' her child wrote. Maybe her eyes twinkled thinking of what sweet or funny thoughts might come next. But this is what the letter said:

Dear Mommy, I am sorry to do this to you, but I have killed

myself by jumping off the top floor, the 12th floor, of your

building . . . at the nearest stair exit to the elevators on

that floor.

I felt I could no longer live my life as a lie, living as a

boy, instead of the girl I knew I could become. I am sorry I

lied to you. I was losing hope in the world and could not see

my way out of the wrong body and I decided it was time for my

life to end . . .

As you might imagine, Patricia didn't get beyond that first line. Upon reading it, she dropped the letter, and she ran straight to her balcony and below, she saw the vague outline of a body and police officers surrounding it.

I follow President Trump's family members on social media. I do it because I know how influential they are. I know how many Americans-- good, decent Americans--admire them and listen to what they say.

Lately, the posts from Trump's family members have just been of one theme: America should fear transgender children. The Trump family and their network of supporters and sycophants have decided that Eric Verbeeck and other kids like them are the No. 1 problem facing America today. And over the past year, this crowd has orchestrated a relentless and unceasing campaign to marginalize, demonize, and bully kids whose gender identity is different from their biological sex.

This year alone, Republican State legislatures across the country have introduced 150 bills to deny rights to transgender Americans.

Today, the Alabama legislature introduced legislation that is fast- tracked, from what I understand, to become law that makes it a felony-- a felony--for a doctor to provide healthcare to a transgender child. In Texas, the Governor directed his child welfare agency to investigate parents like Patricia who are simply determined to support their children if they help them secure the gender-affirming treatment they need. Criminalizing parents of transgender children is just around the corner in some States.

In Congress, Trump's allies spent more time talking about transgender kids than they spent talking about healthcare or taxes or education. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene--perhaps Trump's best ally in the House--had a sign outside her office calling the experience of transpeople a ``fiction'' just to bully her hallway neighbor, Representative Marie Newman, who has a transgender daughter.

And in the Supreme Court hearings here last month, at least one Senator used their time on the national stage to suggest that the entire idea of being transgender is a leftwing hoax.

All across America, Republicans--not all Republicans but the Trump wing of the Republican Party has declared war against transgender kids, and these children have noticed. A recent survey of transgender youth showed that half of them--52 percent--had contemplated suicide over the last year.

Just think about that for a second, my colleagues, half of all the kids who are transgender come to the conclusion at some point in their young lives that they would be better off dead than live in a world that believes they are threats to be marginalized or expunged. That is a national crisis, and we need to talk, honestly and candidly, about what has led us to this moment.

We need to start by acknowledging that this conversation is long overdue. This dialogue about transgender children, it may feel new, but transgender kids aren't, transgender adults aren't. The only difference between today and, say, 50 years ago, is that today there is space for kids and adults to be open about who they truly are.

We are all born with a biological sex. And centuries of tightly controlled constructs about what a man should be and what a man should act like and what a woman should be and what a woman should act like, they have sorted human beings into personality and professional profiles based on that gender.

But there are many of us--this has been the case for human history-- who don't associate with the gender that biological chance ascribed to us. There are people who are assigned male at birth who feel, in their bones, that they are female. That is what Eric felt. That is what Eric knew. And there are people who are assigned female at birth, but know, they just know, that they are male.

And there is nothing wrong with that. That process of figuring out which gender you identify with, it poses no threat to anyone. But we do have to acknowledge how hard it is, given those centuries of gender identity and stereotypes, for some Americans to understand what a kid like Eric was going through.

For Americans, for instance, who were born a male and feel like a male and who are surrounded by family and friends who associate with a gender that matches the sex they were born into, the whole notion of a boy becoming a girl or a girl becoming a boy--I get it--that can be disconcerting. It can be difficult to understand. But I also know that this discomfort will pass as more Americans learn what I have learned. Transgender and nonbinary children aren't any different than any other kids.

You might not know a transgender or nonbinary kid, but, trust, me, you do. You know what these kids are like because they are no different than any other children. My son has transgender and nonbinary friends. He has nontransgender friends, but when they are all sitting around our kitchen after school, there is no difference between them in terms of how they act and how they talk, what they are like, what they like, what they don't like. They are kids. They are just kids.

And so here is my message to the adults with power who have decided to spend their days bullying these kids: Stop it. Grow up. So you are not ready to accept transgender people, fine. I hope you come around someday. But these kids threaten no one. They are hurting no one.

And, well, there are important conversations we need to have about how we include transgender kids fully in sports. I could walk into a room of a thousand people in my State and ask how many of them have had a child lose a sporting event to a transgender girl and not a single hand would raise.

Saving girls sports is not the reason why Donald Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene and their whole political movement has made bullying transgender kids their top priority. No, it is their top priority because they know hate and fear of what some people don't understand has a habit of selling in this country. I wish that weren't true, but it has always been true.

There is always going to be a constituency in America that will listen to an argument for why Black people or Mexicans or Muslims or gay people or transgender people are ruining America, why we should fear them.

It is not true. It has never been true. But demagogues and their movements, they tend not to have actual ideas, things they are for. Demagogues normally just focus on what they hate.

Let me say it again. Half of all transgender children in this country have thought to themselves, at some point, that they would be better off dead than live in a world where so many people fear them. That is heartbreaking to know that we are doing that to these kids.

Being a teenager today--I know; I have one--with social media and the pandemic, it is hard enough, but imagine being a teenager who wakes up every day knowing that they aren't the gender they were assigned by biology at birth. Imagine keeping your feelings about that secret for years, worried--worried--about what your parents or your friends might say.

Imagine the anguish of a scared 12-year-old or 14-year-old sitting in bed

awake for hours each night trying to process all of that alone with no help. Imagine the courage it then takes for that kid to have the first conversation with a parent or a friend. And then layer on top of that some of the most powerful people in the world deciding to use their power not to cure disease or end poverty or hunger but instead to use their power to target those very scared, desperate kids and to use their powers to harass and bully and shame them.

Imagine how small, how insecure, how weak a person must be to have all that power and to use it to bully children.

Seth Walsh was gay, not transgender, but his experience was not much different than Eric's. Students at his school were systematic in their targeting of him because of his sexual orientation. They pushed him down the stairs. They kicked him until he was badly bruised. They screamed at him. They called him names. No doubt these bullies took direction and inspiration from adults who paved the way, who endorsed this kind of hateful behavior.

One day, after one of these incidents, a frightened Seth called his mom and he said: ``Mom, you have to come get me right now.'' His mom could feel--hear the fear in his voice, and so she grabbed Seth's little brother and they got in the car and they rushed to pick him up. His mom was so supportive. That afternoon they sat and they talked.

Seth took a shower to calm himself down, and afterward he asked his mom for a pen and told her that he was going to go outside and play with the dogs. About 10 minutes later, his mom went outside to continue this conversation with her son, but it was too late. Seth had hung himself from a tree. The pen that he asked for was for his suicide note.

I tell you these stories because they are consequences of adults' behavior. Donald Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene and their ilk, they aren't murderers, but make no mistake, there is a direct through line from the hateful words and the policies of leaders and the misery that too many transgender, nonbinary, and gay kids are going through today.

But I am also here to tell you that Trump and Taylor Greene, others like them, they are not the majority. And I want to make sure that I finish by sending a message to transgender children and adults that these hateful people, this movement that is growing out there to try to target you, it is not going to win. We are going to build a community of love and protection for you. No matter how bad things may seem right now, they are going to get better. The world is going to get kinder. Adults are going to learn their lessons. And if you don't have it now, as you are struggling with your identity, you will find a support structure that will nurture and support you. It is out there for you. You should be who you are. Don't feel like you need to hide your true self just because of these idiot adults who feel big by bullying people who are different from them.

Be who you are and know that there are a whole lot of us who are going to work our tails off to support you, to love you, and to make sure that you get a chance to thrive--because in the long run, the bullies never win. They never do.

I yield the floor.

I ask unanimous consent that the injunction of secrecy be removed from the following treaty transmitted to the Senate on April 7, 2022, by the President of the United States: the extradition treaty with the Republic of Albania, Treaty Document No. 117-2. I further ask that the treaty be considered as having been read the first time; that it be referred with accompanying papers to the Committee on Foreign Relations and ordered to be printed; and that the President's message be printed in the Record.

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The message of the President is as follows:

To the Senate of the United States:

With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Albania (the ``Treaty''), signed at Tirana on December 22, 2020. I also transmit, for the information of the Senate, the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty.

The Treaty would replace the extradition treaty between the United States and Albania, signed at Tirana on March 1, 1933. The Treaty follows generally the form and content of other extradition treaties recently concluded by the United States. It would replace an outmoded list of extraditable offenses with a modern ``dual criminality'' approach, which would enable extradition for such offenses as money laundering, cyber-related crimes, and other newer offenses not appearing on the list. The Treaty also contains a modernized ``political offense'' clause and provides that extradition shall not be refused based on the nationality of the person sought. Finally, the Treaty incorporates a series of procedural improvements to streamline and expedite the extradition process.

I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty, and give its advice and consent to ratification.

Joseph R. Biden, Jr. The White House, April 7, 2022.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 646, 790, 814, 863, 864; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc without intervening action or debate; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate resume legislative session.

Mr. 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.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate

proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 304, S. 2687.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Tester substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the bill, as amended.

Mr. President, I ask that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 1875 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Rounds substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 323, S. Res. 503.

I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment to the resolution be agreed to.

I know of no further debate on the resolution, as amended.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendment to the preamble be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 3823, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

I ask unanimous consent that the Grassley substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 317, S. 3785.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

The bill (S. 3785) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 4070, which was introduced earlier today.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Chair lay before the Senate the message to accompany S. 658.

The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message from the House of Representatives:

Resolved, That the bill from the Senate (S. 658) entitled

``An Act to authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to

work with cybersecurity consortia for training, and for other

purposes.'', do pass with an amendment.

Motion to Concur

Mr. President, I move to concur in the House amendment, and I ask unanimous consent that the motion be agreed to and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 592, submitted earlier today.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.