Floor Statements

Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the following nomination: Calendar No. 265, Shalanda H. Baker, of Texas, to be Director of the Office of Minority Economic Impact, Department of Energy; that the nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to the nomination, and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President, I appreciate being recognized, and I am grateful that this conversation is being held between myself and the Senator from Utah, who is one of the more principled friends I have made in the U.S. Senate.

He has been a friend and a colleague, and we have worked and partnered on numerous things together. He is someone that, even though I think I am an inch or two taller than him, I look up to, in all sincerity.

I worry about our Nation right now, that we are taking statements that people have made and whipping around them a lot of presumptions. There is a difference between saying I am against capitalism and I am against racist, capitalistic policies. That is a big difference.

We are a nation that exploded forth to be the dominating economy on the planet through the capitalist system. But the capitalist system was not fair and equal all the time. In fact, it did not reflect what Adam Smith himself, in his essay on moral sentiments, talked about.

Capitalism is an ideal that the best way to distribute goods and opportunity is through this idea of a free market, where everyone has access. Clearly, that has not been the case in this Nation when African Americans were originally, in a capitalist system, slaves. Even after the period of our greatest national sin, Blacks were still held out of equal opportunity to be competitive.

If you look at, perhaps, some of the greatest ideas of capitalism-- this idea of working the land with your sweat and labor to produce products to sell into the market--well, look at something like the Homestead Act, where in many ways that land belonged to Native Americans who did not have that same free and equal opportunity. Think about the Homestead Act and how waves of incredible, hard-working European immigrants got that land, but Blacks were excluded.

No one in this body would deny that that is patently racist.

And this continues. In a lot of our biggest businesses, up until the sixties and seventies, women weren't allowed equal opportunity. That is a capitalist, sexist system that denied equal opportunity.

We know this from African Americans. I know this from my own family story about my father, here in this area, coming after college and being the first Black person hired by a small tech company the President may have heard of called IBM--the first Black salesman in the entire Virginia area, as walls were broken.

My father told me the story of why he left the company that he was working with. Because one of his managers said: You should get out of here because no nigger is ever going to be allowed to be a manager at this company.

That is racism.

So here is a nominee who--in the context literally that my colleague read, racist, capitalist policies--no one can deny that these policies existed in our country and that the free-market system hasn't been free.

People on both sides of the aisle, I have heard, speaking to the corporate concentration that is going on, the monopolistic practices we are seeing everywhere from the pharmaceutical industry to pharmacies, from farms to tech, that is working against the free-market, capitalist ideas of great philosophers, like Adam Smith. So to object to someone for that reason, to me, is patently unfair.

And my colleague also objected because of a policy. He described one policy. Well, Shalanda Baker is not going to be in a position where she is making policy. She is going to be charged with ensuring that there is equal access and opportunity in a wide range of the Department of Energy's programs, opportunities, and resources; that we are a more inclusive and more equitable Nation. That is her charge.

And this work is vital because nearly, in America, one in three households are energy insecure, meaning that they have difficulty paying their energy bills; and research has, unfortunately, shown that low-income households, disproportionately Black and Brown households, are more likely to be energy insecure.

I love this Nation more than any other country on the planet Earth. Yet we still have injustices that show that African Americans are disproportionately subject to inequalities.

The crazy thing about this is a spiritual law that Martin Luther King embodied so well. He said:

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

It is a truth.

In America, poverty is not just a problem of the poor; it costs this country more than a trillion dollars every year. So dealing with the fact that Blacks are disproportionately poor brings resources to us all. Every dollar raising one child above a poverty level returns $8 to our economy. So addressing inequality, addressing disparities, helps everyone.

Energy justice isn't something we talk nearly enough about, and that is why Ms. Baker's role is so important. So I am disappointed today.

I voted against a lot of Trump nominees, but I voted for a lot whom I disagreed with on policy. There is an urgency right now on this issue in America. There is an urgency right now to be a more just and inclusive society. There is an urgency right now to create deeper community in this country and to ensure that everyone has the fruits of liberty and opportunity. It is what we swear an oath to. It is what Ms. Baker's job is all about--making real the words of our united pledge that we will be a nation with liberty and justice for all.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I want to thank the two leaders that I joined, Senators Brown and Bennet, for championing this issue, not just for this Congress but for years. Before I came to Washington, these two men were standing up and talking about the moral core of our country.

If you want to see how a nation is doing, don't look at the buildings we build or at how many billionaires we have. Just look at children. What is galling me right now is that we have come to the 1-yard line.

We are at an inflection point in our country where we have to ask a question: Who are we?

My friend Senator Bennet and I have been working with kids well before we came here. He rattled off data that should be repeated. I say this is a moral issue, but he has shown us it is an economic issue. We are the wealthiest Nation on the planet Earth, and of the top 41 countries, we are at 38 in poor kids. What he pointed out is that poverty costs all of us. It is a deep, self-inflicted wound in this society, because poverty costs this Nation over $1 trillion as measured by economists.

But I would state that economists don't measure all the things that are important. Our GDP does not reflect well-being. It doesn't reflect how many antidepressants people take or how many child deaths there are. But the truth of our economy is that every dollar that we invest in getting children out of poverty returns $8 to this economy. So it is an economic issue, clearly.

It is a globally competitive issue because in a global, knowledge- based society, the Nation whose children learn the most will earn the most and will outcompete.

It is a national security issue as we go up against countries like China, whose top 10 percent of their graduating high school classes outnumber all the children we have, virtually.

But it is a moral issue most of all. If we are going to create a more beloved community, how do we treat our children?

Children who live in poverty literally have physical effects. Poverty is violence. Study after study shows that the brain development of children in poverty is inhibited, literally--the stress hormones, the cortisol. It is akin to an adult having a traffic accident every single day. It is an indicator of childhood trauma.

Poverty is a moral obscenity, and we, the richest Nation on the planet, where, year after year, our rich are getting richer, our children are getting poorer--who are we when we pledge allegiance to a flag and say ``liberty and justice for all''? Who are we?

We don't even know the demographic changes in our country. We have cities across America where 1 out of every 10 children is being raised by a grandparent. So here we are discussing childhood poverty, and some people are talking about work requirements, when we know from the data, from conservative think tanks to what we see in other nations like Canada, that things like the child allowance--or in our country, the child tax credit--increase workforce participation. But if you get rid of the child tax credit, those grandparents raising grandchildren--half of them--plunge back into poverty.

The stories are profound.

We heard from my colleague from Colorado. We know families in New Jersey, like a woman I just saw named Margarita. She used her child tax credit payments for exactly what so many said they would be used for. She used them for food for her children, for school supplies, to keep the electricity running in her house. We have heard

stories that they are used for a car bill to get people to work. They are used to pay for childcare that they need for their families so that they can work. Families are not using this money so they could quit their jobs. Quite the contrary, they are using them so they can get to work.

We are a nation in crisis because of how we treat our children. The child tax credit is a lifeline for the millions of grandparents raising grandchildren. It is a lifeline for low-income children.

So you heard from Senator Bennet. We are at an inflection point. What will we do right now? Will we extend the child tax credit? Will we make the full refundability permanent? Will we keep people having these monthly checks? That is a policy question. But the question before us really is a moral one. For once and for all, this is not partisan. It is a defining moment for the character of our country, and I say words are not enough.

We should show the child tax credit--the truth in our policies and what we do with our budgets. We should show our love through what we do, not what we say. And the best leading indicator of that will always be how the most vulnerable in our society are doing, how we take care of our elderly, and, in this case, how we care for our children.

I am honored now to have come to the floor our Senator from Georgia. I would remark that as much as I love the Senator from Ohio and the Senator from Colorado, the Senator from Georgia has a much better haircut.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I am so excited. This is perhaps the highlight of this long and painful and tortuous night.

Again, if it wasn't complete abdication of Senate procedures and esteem, I would walk over there and hug my colleague from Alabama.

And I will tell you right now--thank God--because there are some people who have said that there are Members of this deliberative body that want to defund the police, to my horror. And now this Member has given us the gift that finally--once and for all--we can put to bed this scurrilous accusation that somebody in this great, esteemed body would want to defund the police.

So let's all of us--100 people--not walk but sashay down there and vote for this amendment and put to rest the lies. I am sure I will see no political ads attacking anybody here over ``defund the police.''

And I would ask unanimous consent to add something else to this obvious bill. Can we add also that every Senator here wants to fund the police, believes in God, country, and apple pie. Thank you.

(Applause.)

Voice vote. Voice vote.

Vote on Amendment No. 3113

Mr. President, I rise to ask unanimous consent that the following materials in support of section 40209 of the bipartisan infrastructure framework, the Advanced Energy Manufacturing and Recycling Grant Program, be entered into the Record.

These sources, which include congressional testimony, disparity studies, and other evidence, shed further light on the longstanding barriers and disparities faced by minority-owned small business entities in the manufacturing sector that have lingering effects today. According to one study, while minority-owned businesses play a significant role in U.S. industry, they are underrepresented in the U.S. manufacturing industry and represent only 12.8 percent of all manufacturing firms. And in testimony from a July 9, 2020, hearing before the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Diversity and Inclusion, multiple witnesses spoke to the ongoing barriers that minority-owned businesses face in accessing capital during the pandemic. These sources further highlight the importance of and need for the Advanced Energy Manufacturing and Recycling Grant Program.

Mr. President, first I want to recognize my colleague from Connecticut, his moving tribute to a great American, and also thank him for his steadfast leadership on issues of gun safety in this country.

I am standing here with my colleagues today to talk about what is going on in this country around empowering children. We have a big thing happening tomorrow with the vast majority of families with kids across the country.

As of tomorrow, they will start seeing more money in their bank accounts every year for the rest of the year. These payments are the result of changes that we have made to the child tax credit, which was signed into law by President Biden as part of the American Rescue Plan because of the changes we advocated for.

What President Biden made law, more families and children are going to benefit from the child tax credit. More than ever before in history, in fact, this will be the greatest cut in overall child poverty in the history of America for this coming year.

So starting tomorrow, 90 percent of kids in America--90 percent of their families across the country--will start to see these payments for the rest of this year, up to $300 for every child in a household under 6 and $250 for every child in the household ages 6 through 17. For families in suburbs and cities and rural areas, for families across the country, this policy is transformative.

For the family of people with essential workers in Florida, the grandmother raising three children in California, a single mom in Pennsylvania working the same job for 20 years, for a parent in Utah-- you can go on and on and on--this is one of the most transformative policy changes made in our Nation in more than a century.

This policy means stability. It means help is on the way. It means hope is here.

In my home State, Margarita from Passaic, NJ, who is raising three kids on her own while working two jobs, one before sunrise, starting tomorrow, she will see hundreds of dollars a month to help her pay the electric bill, help her make rent, and help her children succeed in school.

For the family of two educators with kids in New York, tomorrow is transformative. Washington State, North Dakota, blue State, so-called red State--all over this country, we are seeing a transformation.

This is what a mom from Kansas said:

[This child tax credit] would help so much for single moms

like me to be able to feel secure as a parent. If at any time

something were to happen to me, such as a car repair, a

doctor visit, even a book fair for my children, I am just not

making enough to have any extra for anything other than

bills. Shoes and coats, maybe a ball glove. Karate or dance

lessons to improve social skills and athletic abilities and

teach children teamwork would be possible; [and] maybe even

at Christmas since they didn't get one in 2020.

For middle-class families trying to stay afloat, lower income families desperate to make ends meet, and families living in poverty struggling to put food on the table, tomorrow is a new start. For millions of Americans across the country, from this body, our President, tomorrow will begin a historically unparalleled moment.

Senator Brown, Senator Bennet, Senator Warnock, and I, along with our House colleagues, are going to continue to do what must be done. This change for this year--cutting child poverty, empowering millions of families, 90 percent of whom with kids will see a benefit--we must make this permanent. I will fight alongside my colleagues to see that this is not a one-time benefit for 1 year but a permanent change that we-- change our status. We are the 36th wealthiest Nation on the planet, and we are 4th from the bottom in child poverty. We are second to last in terms of child allowances. We in America have to make this country live up to its promise to every child that we are the cornerstone of the idea of the American dream; that we are the most fertile soil for which a child could thrive; that we love our children not just in words but in the policies we make. This is a historic moment.

The one thing I will say to anyone listening to my words, because, as my colleague knows, some families are eligible but might not benefit, please, we need to make sure that portal--that people know to go to childtaxcredit.gov to get the information. All of us have an obligation to help everyone avail themselves of this policy. I believe, God willing, we will make it permanent.

I now turn to my colleague Senator Bennet from Colorado, Mr. President, with your permission.

Mr. President, I thank my senior Senator, who himself has an

improbable story, his lived experience, a son of immigrants coming up in New Jersey, being born in a way that he knows struggle and knows poverty. And the fact that he is on the Senate floor speaking about someone else who has an improbable story shows you the greatness of America.

I am grateful for my senior Senator and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee for taking time to show us the importance of this moment. This is history here.

America has never before had an article III judge who also happens to be a Muslim. That has never before happened. Think about this: 200-plus years in American history, a country that was born and our Founders enshrined in our very founding documents, in the Bill of Rights, this ideal of freedom of religion. We celebrate religious plurality and religious diversity.

So this is an extraordinary moment. Now, I am thrilled that it is a bipartisan moment. In committee, during this time of heightened partisanship, in the Judiciary Committee, Judge Quraishi passed out 19 to 3--19 to 3--which is a further testimony not just to the gravity of this historic moment, not just to a man's religion, but to the man himself, the core of who he is. Senator Menendez said this.

Many people, after 9/11, felt the deep, agonizing grief in this country. We are not defined as a nation by what happens to us. We are defined by how we choose to respond. From the attacks at Pearl Harbor to the attacks on 9/11, those horrific moments, you saw how this Nation showed who it is--our grit, our guts, our grace, our greatness.

That is the tradition of Judge Quraishi. A man that had a glide path toward a career of comfort and private sector success made a decision. Those horrific tragedies, he would not let them define our Nation. How we defined ourselves was by people like him.

He joined the Army. He became a U.S. Army judge advocate. He attained the rank of captain. He was deployed to Iraq--first in 2004 and then again in 2006. And after his service in the military, Judge Quraishi continued his service to the Nation, like so many of our veterans do-- first as the assistant chief counsel in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and then as a Federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey.

Do not define a person by what they say. Simply do not define them by their faith and do not define them by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character and in the actions that they take. In a time that our Nation was crippled with grief, he stood up and he served, and he has been serving every single step since. He is ``well qualified.'' That is what the American Bar Association says.

But I tell you, he is well qualified on a higher standard than that. He is a patriot to this country. Patriotism is love of Nation, but love is not a being verb. It is a doing verb. It is action. His actions have shown his love for America, and now he is up here in this Chamber to make history. I urge my colleagues, as we saw in the Judiciary Committee in a 19-to-3 vote, to vote in a bipartisan way.

This is a chance for the annals of time to show our commitment to great people, to a great man, to a person of character, to a person of commitment, to a person of conviction, to a person of patriotism who happens also to be Muslim and, for the first time in American history, to achieve something. It should have been achieved a long time ago.

I am going to conclude by saying something: Judge Quraishi and I are relatively of a similar age, and we share another painful life happening that I know many of my colleagues have shared as well. During COVID-19, during this pandemic, the judge's father died. I talked to him during this time, and he is a man that was clearly grieving but kept a lot of that emotion under his jacket, in his heart.

I just want to say for the record: Judge Quraishi, you and I are both people of faith. And I want to tell him right now and say into this record: It is your father who also loved this country, who brought about an American dream for his family. He is watching right now this happening, these deliberations on the Senate floor. He, I pray, will see his son make history. And, Judge Quraishi, I am telling you right now, Your father is proud of you.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise today with a lot of joy. I get a chance to speak about someone I have known for decades. I am rising to speak about Julien Neals and my hope that he gets to serve on the U.S. District Court of the great State of New Jersey.

I have spoken to many of my colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee about Julien Neals. He is someone I have not just known for a long time, but even though he is not quite my height, I look up to him. We worked together when I was mayor of the city of Newark. So today what I really want to speak about is not simply his impressive career, his distinguished resume, but I really want to talk a bit about who he is.

I am not sure how many of my colleagues know this about the city of Newark, NJ, but when I became mayor in 2006, we inherited a lot of very complex, very serious challenges, and for the sake of our residents, we needed to make change quickly and very urgently. So I brought in this guy named Julien Neals, whom I didn't quite know that well, but he was so well highly recommended.

He moved from the private sector, where he was with a very prestigious New Jersey law firm, and decided to lead the transformation in New Jersey's largest municipal court. He knew that it was a court system that had to change, and he stepped up. He changed it. He changed the way our court operated. He centered it in common community values and made sure that everyone who came before that court was treated in a way that affirmed their dignity, no matter what the matter was.

He pioneered innovations that the whole State--in fact, many places in our Nation--took notice of. He created the first community court in the State of New Jersey, the first youth court, and the first veterans court. He realized that citizens all have, often, different needs, especially folks like our young people and our veterans, and that there is a different way to achieve a larger standard and a larger ideal of justice.

Well, the problem is, when you do so well in one job, you get pushed to another opportunity. I quickly moved him from being my chief judge of New Jersey's largest municipal court to come in and be my corporation counsel in my mayoral administration.

In the wake of the recession in 2008, he became the business manager, the person who runs the city day to day, and under the most difficult, savage of circumstances, he made challenging changes that helped us get through that very difficult period.

Cities all over New Jersey were being crushed financially, making massive amounts of layoffs, and in those financial times, he was able to get our city to be dramatically more efficient, to bring in new ideas that helped us to create everything from environmental sustainability to expanding access to municipal services to the public. He brought in innovations that became really par for the course all over New Jersey, but Newark did them first.

Today, now, Julien serves as the counsel for the largest county in New Jersey--a county that is bigger than some of our States.

I have had the privilege of knowing Julien, as I have said, now for the past couple decades, and I have watched him handle challenge after challenge, from a global recession to Hurricane Sandy. He has stood in the saddle and helped with calmness, with coolness, with an equipoise that is enviable to all, including me. I have watched him lead. I have watched him care. I have watched his love of others be reflected in the decisions he made under the most difficult of circumstances. I have seen him in crisis after crisis rise not just to meet the challenge but to, in most circumstances, have us come out better off than we were before.

He, in so many ways, is one of the great leaders I have had the privilege of working with in my life. Julien Neals is brilliant. He is thoughtful. He is deliberate in his decision making. He has all of the ideals that I think we want in a Federal judge.

I have to tell you, most importantly to me, I know him. I know his parents. I know his family. I know his kids. He is one of those people who would make you proud not just in knowing but in ascending to a position like a judge. I know he will make us proud in the way that he leads from the bench.

I want to thank President Biden for nominating him. I want to encourage all of my colleagues in a bipartisan way, as I said in the Judiciary Committee, to consider supporting him.

I have had many privileges as a U.S. Senator. God, this is one of those jobs where you have to, like, give glory to God every day for just having the privilege of standing on this floor and getting to be a part of some things that, as much as we rancor back and forth, we should all be proud of, whether it is a global pandemic or just making sure we are funding critical parts of the government where public servants serve. But of all the privileges I have, I have to say this is one of the great ones, the chance to make a man whom I look up to in every way--make him a Federal judge, to try to encourage my colleagues to make him a Federal judge.

I see that my senior Senator, my friend--another guy I look up to even though I got him by an inch or two--has come to the floor, and if the Presiding Officer would allow me, I would like to yield to the senior Senator of the State of New Jersey--more handsome than I am, but I think we are an equal tag team when it comes to serving our State

I yield the floor with the fear that he does have the microphone last.

Madam President, is there a pending vote now on the cloture vote?

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

Madam President, I appreciate the 180 seconds, and I will be patient and wait.

I am sorry. There is a quorum call, correct?

Reserving the right to object, I would just like to say that is why he is the senior Senator.

Mr. President, it is a real honor to be rising today to speak in advance of the vote on Kristen Clarke's nomination to serve as the Attorney General of the Department of Justice.

If she is confirmed, Kristen Clarke will be tasked with overseeing the Justice Department's work to protect the civil rights of all Americans.

I have known Kristen Clarke for years. I have worked with her. I know her, and I can tell you that there can be no one better for this job.

To say that Kristen Clarke has an impressive resume is a gross understatement. She started her career at the Justice Department in the Civil Rights Division. She worked with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. She led the Civil Rights Bureau for the State of New York Attorney General's Office and most recently served as president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

No one could blame Kristen Clarke, after this entire career of service and all that she has given, if she decided to take a step back and find a less demanding job, perhaps a far more lucrative job. But Ms. Clarke has dedicated herself to the highest principles of our Nation--indeed, to the founding ideals of our country, formed with the Bill of Rights, focusing on this idea of civil rights for all.

This is not just her job. This has been her calling. This is her consistent conviction--to serve, to sacrifice for our Nation's most sacrosanct ideals.

She has chosen to serve this country now at a time when we need her leadership more than ever. She is an asset to our country, and I believe she will serve with extraordinary distinction as a guardian of our civil rights.

We need her experience. We need her expertise. We need her heart, her commitment, her deep thoughtfulness

She is the daughter of immigrants, and after growing up in public housing, in a low-income household, Ms. Clarke made it to some of our most prestigious institutions and made it her cause to make the best out of herself. She is an incredible success story. She is a person who has overcome tremendous odds and advanced herself, not just for personal excellence but for public service. This makes her, in my book, a champion.

Yet there are still those in this confirmation process who want to say that Ms. Clarke is the wrong person for the job. They are actually using smear tactics and lies to try to misrepresent who Ms. Clarke is as a person. There is a saying, ``Let the work I have done speak for me,'' and I wish folk would listen.

She has prosecuted hate crimes. She has defended people's voting rights. She has fought against religious discrimination. She has dedicated her career to the cause of equal justice under law.

Ms. Clarke is the right person for this job. She is exactly who we need. At a time when we are confronting rising hate crimes in America, dramatically more instances of vandalism and violence against Asian Americans, against Jewish Americans, against transgender Americans, we need someone leading the Civil Rights Division who will stand up for all Americans, who has experience prosecuting hate crimes and makes it clear in this Nation that all are created equal and endowed by their Creator with fundamental civil rights. That is who she is now and who she has been for her entire career.

There are folks and forces working to strip away and weaken and undermine these fundamental rights. We see efforts to weaken our democracy, to threaten our principles. We need someone who will stand up and affirm who we are as a people--a nation that believes in robust voting rights, a nation that believes in the equal dignity of all people, a nation that believes in protecting religious liberty. We need a champion now as much as ever. We need Kristen Clarke leading the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice.

And it is not just me saying that. It is just not Democrats saying that. There are over 70 bipartisan former State attorneys general. We see police leaders, law enforcement leaders endorsing her, prosecutors endorsing her, the Anti-Defamation League and 69 different local, State, and national Jewish organizations, all agreeing that Kristen Clarke is the right person to stand for us, to work for us, to fight for us, to champion for our precious civil rights at the Department of Justice.

So many different individuals from all across the political landscape, from all different backgrounds, and so many organizations representing all of our diversity are speaking out in a chorus of conviction about not just how good

Kristen Clarke is but how urgent her nomination is because of who she has shown herself to be time and again: an unassailable, impressive career of service, service, service. She is and has been a servant leader for all of her career; a person of profound integrity; someone whose passion, whose sacrifice, whose struggle in the pursuit of justice has already made this Nation better.

I will say something on a personal note in closing. I have worked with Kristen Clarke for years now on things that we have done together, like a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill.

I had the occasion years ago of meeting her when she was out in Washington with her son. He was a young guy, not that tall. Then, during her hearings in the Judiciary Committee, I saw her again present herself in an extraordinarily powerful manner, with grace and expertise, but I saw that young man now had grown up. He is a big guy. And it would be a leap of ego for me to say that I saw myself in this young man because he is probably a lot smarter than I was when I was his age and clearly is a better athlete, even though I will say for the record that the older I get, the better I am in sports.

But I think about her career, and then I align it to what she has done in raising a young Black man in America. While I couldn't project myself onto him, I thought a lot about my mom in her. My mom raised my brother and me in a nation that strove to be who we say we are, a nation of liberty and justice for all. But where she knew we were falling short, she didn't raise us to be bitter; she raised us to be better. She raised us by setting an example, a woman who--from sitting in at a lunch counter to desegregate a restaurant, to helping organize the March on Washington, she showed me by example. As James Baldwin has said, children are never good at listening to their elders, but they never fail to imitate them.

I want you all to know that in Kristen Clarke, we have an extraordinary American, an extraordinary person, and a great mom. And I know what she has done with her life. She has lived perhaps with the greatest principle of all, which is for us in this generation to make a better way for the next, for us to make a more perfect Union, for us to understand that the arc of the moral universe is indeed long but we must bend it more towards justice.

I tell my colleagues and urge you to confirm her to this sacrosanct and urgent position today because I am confident to the core of my being that she will not just make us proud, she will not just defend those who are having their rights trampled or their dignity marginalized, but that she will make a better way for an America that fulfills its promise, still not yet achieved, for us to be a nation with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I am honored to join in a colloquy with some of my colleagues today on this urgent issue to really talk about the central function of our democracy, whether the ideals of this Nation are real for every American.

Now, if you cut me, I am going to bleed Jersey. But let me tell you very plainly that I am proud to have grown up in Jersey, but I am also proud to have been born in Washington, DC. This is where my parents met after college. This is where they fell in love. Their first date was at the Jefferson Memorial, at the paddle boats there at the Reflecting Pool. They, there, remember--telling me--just the love they had for each other that was already dawning, but also this fierce allegiance to this incredible community that is Washington, DC. My mom talked about the activism that was here. She was working for the public schools as a speech pathologist, and she talked about this patriotic feel that she had, especially when she was helping to organize the March on Washington. The words on the Jefferson Memorial, where my parents had their first date, at the end of Declaration of Independence, say: ``[W]e mutually pledge . . . our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.''

That is what we are called to pledge to one another, but for too long the people of this city have not had the honor, the privileges, the equal citizenship rights that so many others in every State in our Union, in all parts of our democracy, enjoy. These are rights, as my colleague says, that Washington, DC--in fact, disproportionate to many other States--people from this community have bled for and died for.

This city is an extraordinary place. It is a community. It outnumbers, in fact, in population other States. And we believe that the ideals of one person, one vote, no taxation without representation--that all of these are rights being denied fellow Americans. Where is the honor in that?

Veterans and servicemembers living here in DC did indeed fight for us, put their lives on the line for us, but do not have equal citizenship rights.

The people of DC pay both local and Federal taxes that go to help the people in red States and blue States. They are a city that pays more taxes than they are necessarily receiving back, but when the people of DC need help, when they need an advocate with voting power, they don't have one in this body or in the one across the hall.

The lack of representation really has consequences--serious ones-- that significantly decreases DC's leverage in getting laws passed and securing vital resources for its residents. We saw this firsthand in the first COVID-19 stimulus bill. Washington, DC, received $725 million less in critical aid than other less populous States. That was funding needed for Washington, DC, first responders, for COVID-19 tests, and other important lifesaving services. They were treated as second-class citizens.

How is this fair? How is this just? How is this sacred honor? And how can this be partisan? These are our sacrosanct values for those of us on both sides of the aisle. This is how our democracy was intended to function. These were some of the elements of the Revolutionary War.

I am hard-pressed to believe that my colleagues on either side of the aisle don't recognize that to deny the people of Washington, DC, representation is contrary to the values that we state regularly on this floor. Making DC a State is truly a civil rights issue, and it is also an issue of racial justice.

DC is a majority-minority city, and the people of this city deserve the same opportunity that other less populated States have to make their voices heard in Congress. This is especially urgent as we are seeing so many States around the country enact sweeping voting laws intended to make it harder for the DC majority--Black and Brown folks-- to even vote.

As U.S. Senators, we have an obligation not just to pass laws but to be stewards of democratic ideals and principals. We took an oath to that. Making DC a State is not just a matter of civil rights for DC. It is about all of us because our democracy will only survive as long as its true representation is that of all of its people. Truly, we know in this Nation--it has been said by greater leaders before us--that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

The people of DC have made clear what they want, saying it loudly. They deserve full citizenship rights. They deserve the right to vote. They deserve the right to have representation. They want to be the 51st State. They should be the 51st State.

My parents lived for many years in this city, and I heard about DC statehood as a little boy growing up in New Jersey. For them, it was a matter of dignity and respect. It was a matter of valuing this community and the richness of its people. To them, it is a shortfall in the evolution of our democracy that the people of this great city should be denied the very ideals that are written on the Jefferson Memorial.

I urge my colleagues to move on this and to grant this DC statehood and to afford them the sacred honor that all Americans deserve.

I yield the floor.

Reserving the right to object.

I am deeply grateful to my colleague and friend, the Senator from Arkansas, for bringing this to the floor of the U.S. Senate.

There is an urgency he described that I agree with. One hundred Senators here, and not one State has not been touched, devastatingly, by the fentanyl epidemic. These analogs present a crisis to our country. Lives are at stake so I share his sense of urgency.

I am hoping we can work together to find a way to stop, as he put it, these cartels and these drug labs from wreaking such havoc on our country. I believe that together we can find a solution. In fact, there has been constructive talk across the Capitol--bipartisan talk about finding a way to come to some kind of accord.

In addition to that, I am hopeful that there are other bills out there that have the same ambition, the same goal, the same sense of urgency that I believe should be part of the discussion; for example, policies like the ones in the STOP Fentanyl Act, which I understand Senator Markey will be introducing in the Senate very soon. I believe we should have time in the Judiciary Committee to work on a longer term solution that cannot just deal with the international cartels, not just deal with these horrific drug labs but also empower people who are addicted to begin not to be punished simply with the criminal justice system but to find ways to provide treatment and support to people who are struggling with addictions to this horrific drug.

So with that, I would like to object.

Madam President, I want to say, in conclusion, before I switch to another topic, that I appreciate the willingness of the Senator from Arkansas to look not just at his bill but a powerful potential bipartisan extension however we can deal with this. The urgency does exist. We are in a crisis.

Mr. President, I appreciate that. I want to acknowledge my speaking time was far earlier. I am supposed to be presiding right now, but I did not want to get between. I am but a mouse in the U.S. Senate, as a junior person. Those are two elephant titans over there.

I appreciate the indulgence of the Presiding Officer. I wanted to just give general remarks about Vanita Gupta, but I would love to weigh in and maybe pick up exactly where Senator Durbin left off.

Mr. President, I appreciate Senator Durbin quickly wrapping up his remarks and indulging me. I had some prepared remarks, but I want to break away from them.

Mr. President, thank you very much for the recognition.

I think--I am not sure, but I think I am the only Senator here who lives in a low-income, Black and Brown community in the U.S. Senate. I live in a beautiful neighborhood in the beautiful Central Ward of Newark, NJ.

We don't mistake wealth with worth. In fact, I went off to get a fancy education. I may have gotten my B.A. from Stanford, but I got my Ph.D. on the streets of Newark, learning from some of the most incredible people I have ever encountered in my life.

If there is one lesson that I have learned early in my days, in the 1990s, living in the Central Ward of Newark at the height of the drug war, it is that this War on Drugs was not a War on Drugs; it was a war on people--and not all people but certain people. It was a war on poor people. It was a war on Black people.

And it was destroying lives. People were getting criminal convictions for doing things that two of the last four Presidents admitted to doing--simple possession, getting criminal convictions for it.

And here is what is even more anguishing at a time in the opioid addiction where everybody now is on the same page that people who are addicted deserve to have treatment. Back in those days, churned into the criminal justice system were African Americans, for simple possession, who were in desperate need of compassion and care and love and treatment.

And this gets me to Vanita Gupta. I watched the two statements that my friend and colleague from Texas put up, there--screaming--the difference between those two statements: I don't support the legalization of all drugs, but I do support the decriminalization of small amounts of drugs and getting people help and not a lifetime scarlet letter of being a convicted criminal.

She does not support the decriminalization of all drugs. I am glad to see that she is looking at the challenge that we have in this country of arresting people who need help.

And my friend Senator Durbin, with great patience and not relying on raising his voice like I do, a real gentleman, said it simply: Vanita Gupta is not a partisan. She is a patriot.

Look at her career. I mean, my mom used to tell me: Who you are speaks so loudly I can't hear what you say. In other words, judge a person by what they have done in their life, how they have lived, where they have sacrificed, what commitments they have made.

You chart Vanita's career, from her activism in law school to defend the Constitution, from her very first assignment as a lawyer in Texas defending an outrage of injustice--and winning. Where are the people lining up to criticize her in those days working in her nonprofit work?

And then, for the great high salaries of Department of Justice workers, she goes to lead the Civil Rights Division. Are there people coming forward from their experiences? Are there police officers, are there police agencies, are there police groups coming forward to say: When she had that high and vaunted position in the Department of Justice, did she do something that so showed her partisanship?

Not one. In fact, quite the contrary to that, group after group of police organizations are coming forward and saying: She is not a partisan; she is a patriot. I stand by her. She is not a Democrat or a Republican; she is an honest broker, a fair actor who pursues justice.

She has conservatives who are partisans supporting her. I mean, that is the thing that gets me. We see partisan appointees all the time in here, but here is a woman who actually got people--Mark Holden from the Koch brothers organization is supporting her.

So I understand that maybe people are taking words and twisting them. There is not a Member of this body who

hasn't had that experience, when the intention, the good will, the honesty behind the words is distorted and twisted by millions of dollars from outside organizations that somehow want to destroy this woman.

I know Vanita Gupta. She is not just somebody I have a professional relationship with. I confess to the floor of the U.S. Senate, she has been my friend for years. I had occasion to talk to her dad, not during this time when she was nominated--months ago.

God, the stories he related about her, the pride that beamed through the telephone about her, about how he came from India with $8 in his pocket, with an immigrant's dream, and now he gets to see his daughters living lives of service, and how his children were wired this way, to so appreciate this Nation as immigrants, to know that this Nation was formed around the highest ideals of humanity, and to see his two daughters pursuing the cause of our country to make this a more perfect Union around the ideals of liberty and justice. That is Vanita Gupta's life.

I have had private conversations with her for years about these issues that now she is being accused on. And she is not some radical partisan. She has a heart and a compassion for human beings that, to me, inspires my actions.

And this is what hurts the most because somehow I have seen it in our society, when a woman stands up and is strong and defiantly dedicated to ideals that are not made real in reality, they are attacked again and again and again. I have seen it in my own party between Presidential candidates. The treatment that the public and the press gives one who is the woman is far different than the same standards they put to the man.

And then--God bless America--there is something about women of color that seems to really get them outrageous attacks. I have seen it through my culture's history. They hunted Harriet Tubman. They despised Sojourner Truth. They belittled Rosa Parks.

There seems to be something about strength, something about talent, something about being willing to tell the truth that generates something, that tries to relegate Black women and women of color to be hidden figures in history.

I see it in every element of our country--even in the medical profession, for God's sake. Even when you control for income and education, Black women giving birth, their pain is not attended to; they are underestimated for the struggles they are in; and they die four times more often than White women.

So with this woman I have known for years, I have seen her in private and public. I have seen her go to work with Republicans, join arm in arm with them in bettering our country. I have seen her serve from her twenties and thirties. I have seen her be, in every step of her career, committed to our country, sacrifice for it.

Here we stand on the Senate floor. And I tell you, on the day after the verdict of George Floyd, where I saw other patriots tell the truth on the stand, police officers break with the waves of history, the streams and currents, to tell the truth, this is a moment that I have to tell the truth.

This is a good American, a great American, honest, committed, who has sacrificed for her country. And in a time of injustice still, where our jails and our prisons are filled with people who are hurt, when we, the land of the free, have one out of every four incarcerated people and, get this, one of out of every three incarcerated women on the planet Earth in our jails and prisons--where almost 90 percent of them are survivors of sexual assault--this is the time we need more compassion; this is the time we need more empathy; this is the time we need more civic grace toward one another.

And Vanita embodies that. She stands for that in every fiber of her being. Her career echoes with that spirit. Should we confirm her to this position, I promise you here on the Senate floor before the flag of my country, she will do this Nation proud, committed. She will never mistake popularity for that purpose. She will never be distracted by the partisan games going on in the Capitol. She will be committed to the higher calling.

I ask my colleagues to step back for a moment and see the truth of who she is, who police organizations say she is, who prominent conservatives say she is, to see the person her dad says she is and elevate this incredible person, this incredible woman of color, to a position that desperately--to a nation that desperately needs this kind of leader.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have 9 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 25, 2021 at 9:30 a.m., in 106 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC, in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Child Nutrition Reauthorization: Healthy Meals and Healthy Futures.''

Mr. President, Member after Member has come down tonight to speak, and the conversation, as we all have come down here, was to come do something that I think is extraordinarily poignant.

This is the floor where policy is debated and where ideas of governance are discussed. It is a deliberative body, but we are in a democracy, and we represent people. So, tonight, the idea was that we would come down here and talk about people, but the pain is that they are not alive; that we would discuss the deceased, the dead, the murdered, the killed.

I believe that if America has not broken your heart, then you don't love her enough. Name after name tonight has been spoken by colleague after colleague, and, dear God, every single name is a son or daughter. It is a brother or sister. It is a family member. They are a person, part of a community, and they are dead.

But this is not just any limited list. It seems to grow like a cancer on the soul of our country. You take my age, 51 years old. Well, in just the time of my life, the death in our country has been something like has never before been seen in even a country at war because the people who have died, the human beings who have been lost, the family members who have been slain, their total number, in just my lifetime, add up to more than all of the Americans who have died in every single war from the Revolution to our current wars in the Middle East.

So my friends and my colleagues have read name after name after name, but the painful, heartbreaking reality is we could have taken hour after hour over days after days to name the total who have died in my lifetime. And the heartbreaking stories have to stagger you when you hear the testimony. On March 1, Kaiden Alex Peak, who was 4 years old, and his brother, Mayson Paul Peak, who was 3 years old, were gunned down, killed in Warsaw, MO. Jennifer Garcia, 21 years of age, and Charlie Borbon Lopez, 20 years, both killed in Portland, OR. Say their names. Say their names. Say their names.

Cobe Hilliard, 19, killed in Temple, TX. April Williams, 21, and her mom Tammy Briggs, 46, killed in Augusta, GA. Say their names. Say their names.

Christine Ruffin, age 61, was killed with a gun in Palm City, FL. Delquan Daniels, 23 years old, was killed with a gun in Rochester, NY. Say their names. Say their names.

Gerson Aleman Velasquez, 19, was killed with a gun in Myrtle Beach, SC. Lionel Darling, age 39, and Rayneesha Dotson, age 30, were both killed with guns--killed with guns. Say their name. Say their name.

Maritza Remijio Paniagua, age 20, was killed with a gun in Los Angeles. Merlyn McCallister, age 51, was killed with a gun in Chicago. Mishealia Marie Meredith, age 19, was killed with a gun in Eldorado, IL. Victor Brooks, age 20, was killed with a gun in Phoenix, AZ. Ronald Jeffery Laroy Jones, Jr., age 25, was killed with a gun in Columbus, OH. Say their names. Say their names.

This is the question of our country. What is the quality of our mercy? How courageous is our empathy? How destitute is our compassion? How anemic is our love for one another that this many Americans are dying hour after hour, day after day, month after month, year after year? Carnage in our country like never before seen in humanity, and we do nothing as a society and a government that was formed for a more perfect Union, for domestic tranquility, and for justice. At the top of our Federal Government's Constitution is the very ideal that we are for the common defense. Say their names.

Do we honor them? Do we love their survivors? Love is not sentimentality. It is not words. It demands something. It necessitates sacrifice. And I can tell you I am one of those folks who, serving in an American city, would have my police officers show me the films of murders from our cameras--human beings being shot and killed. How could it not shake the core of your soul? How could it not rip open wounds that cannot be healed?

My colleagues reading names of people, children lost, kids lost to suicide, bodies mangled, people paralyzed, how could it not call to your conscience? How could it not demand from all of us not to sit idly by and watch and witness? We are wounded as a society. We are hurting. There is pain that is unspoken, and that is so dangerous.

In 2018, Shahad Smith, I knew him well. I used to live in high-rise projects at the top of my block. There was a group of boys there, led by this young man named Hassan Washington. Hassan was brilliant. He was funny. He had a sharp wit. He had charisma. Shahad was one of the young men in high school who hung out with him in the lobby of my building. I would come home and I would see them there.

And I tell you, in 2018, I make it to the U.S. Senate, and I get a call from Jimmy Wright, a police officer from those buildings who--he is a beautiful man, and he was shaken. They killed Shahad on my block, where I live as a U.S. Senator, at the top of my block, and I will never forget how Jimmy described it. He said: Cory, I talked to the police officer. He was killed with an assault rifle. And he said: Cory, the police officer told me his head exploded.

And I--I had to hold onto something because most of those kids from that lobby, the children I watched grow up in my 8 years living in those projects, in those buildings, Black boys in a world where there is so much assault--the first of them to die.

In 2005, I would come home at night. I was chasing my dream to be the mayor of the largest city in my State. I was getting ready to run for office, and I came home and I smelled marijuana in the lobby.

Now, we live in a country where it is a lot different watching kids at Stanford, Yale smoke pot and have no worries. But for inner city Black kids, I will tell you right now, they have no margins for experimentation. And I said to myself: Oh, I have to intervene here. So I started asking them: Let's get out of this lobby. Let's go do something. Let's go to the movies. Let's eat. And I will never forget. I made a mistake, y'all. I said: You guys choose a movie. That was a mistake because they took me to something called ``Saw II.'' Do not see that movie.

And we went out to dinner at a diner, Andrew's Diner. I remember the conversations with them. I asked them what their dreams were. And this moved me because their dreams, they were humble dreams.

And I said that I would connect them with mentors, and I had all these plans about how to help these young men get out of the danger zone. Then I got too busy with my campaign. And I remember feeling a little guilty that I was too busy to follow through on the commitments I had made. And I consoled myself that I was running for mayor: When I become mayor, God, I will be able to help all children in the city. I will step up then. Let me just get through the campaign.

Well, I would still come home at night, and the boys weren't mad at me or anything like that. They would still greet me and cheer me on when I came into the lobby, Shahad and Hassan. It was amazing. They would lift me up.

One day they had lawn signs, my lawn signs, waving them, and formed a parade line. And I walked out and waved and got in the elevator until I realized, where did they get those lawn signs from? They are kind of expensive.

I ended up winning. And I had death threats on me. And when you are elected to office, get death threats, you have security. And next thing you know, I had police officers stationed in the lobby, and the boys weren't there anymore. They didn't want to hang out where the police officers were.

And I didn't think too much about it because I was running at full speed as a new mayor. I was 36, 37 years old. The violent crime in our city was peaking. There were too many shooters in that hot summer. I will never forget. And I would run to every street corner I could where there was a shooting in our city. And I would stand there, and I would say: This is not who we are. This is not America. This is not Newark. We are going to overcome this. And I would give street-level sermons telling people about the vision for our city. And, God, we would eventually turn down the violence.

But in those early days, a month into my office, I show up on a street corner, and there is a body covered by a sheet and another one being loaded on the back of an ambulance. And I barely paid attention to the humanity on the street. I didn't even ask for the names. I was too busy ministering to the living.

I get home that night to steal a couple hours of sleep in my early days as mayor. And I will never forget sitting in my bedroom with my BlackBerry, going through it, and I saw the name on the homicide report. At that moment in my life, something broke in me that will never fix. It wasn't an anonymous name that I didn't know. It wasn't just a cold issuance of another crime in a big city. The name was Hassan Washington. Four floors below me he lived with his grandma, a kid I promised to help with his dreams.

I will never forget his funeral for as long as I live. Perry's Funeral Home--God bless them, those professionals. I entered that funeral home as the newly minted mayor. And I was so upset when I saw it was in their basement room because going in that room was like descending into the bowel of a ship, a narrow staircase. And I get into this room. We were piled in on top of each other like we were chained together in grief, and people were crying. Everybody was showing up. Everybody was there for what is an American tradition: almost every day, another boy, another Black boy in a box killed by a gun.

And I wish I could tell you that I was strong in that moment. I wish I could tell you that I was mayoral, that I was a leader and the father of a city, but I wasn't. I felt shame. I felt hurt. I felt embarrassment.

I tried to lean on other people in that room. There were folk I had known for years, but, finally, I had enough. I had to run. I left there. I jumped in my SUV, drove to my new office in City Hall. And for the first time--not the last but for the first time as the mayor of New Jersey's great and largest city, I sat in that office, and I wept over a dead boy. And all I could think about was climbing through the feelings of shame and hurt and pain. All I could think about was that funeral in that basement room, packed full of people. All of us were there for his death, but where were we for his life?

What a morbid thing we have been doing here tonight, reading the names of dead people killed in our country, hoping that somehow-- somehow we could change. Well, I will tell you this right now: We are in a distraught moment in our Nation, where most of us agree on solid steps. It won't solve all the problems, but it would make a difference. It would save a Hassan. It would save a Shahad. It would save the 3- and 4-year-olds, the names I have read.

The question is, How courageous are we? How much do we truly love one another? What will we do? This is a moment in American history that could be the inflection point. If we act now, we could end some of this nightmare. If we fail to do anything, we will be back here again. The list of the dead will be longer. The heartache and the pain and the wounds and the grief and the sorrow and the shame will be deeper in America, the world's greatest country.

We must demand of each other a greater love. We must end the poverty of empathy. We must free ourselves from this prison, from this dungeon. We must release ourselves from these chains. We must demand that this Nation be the Nation we want it to be, be the Nation we hope it should be, be the Nation that those in military uniform died for--a nation where we make real the greatest principles of humanity, the greatest calling of every faith that there is--not words, but real, true, manifestation of the principle and the call.

Will we be silent? Will we be ignorant? Will we avoid? Will we do nothing? Will we be passive? Or will we truly be a nation that loves one another?

I yield the floor

Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of sections 1005 and 1006 of the American Rescue Plan Act.

These sections provide loan forgiveness and other critical assistance to Black farmers and to other farmers who are members of racial or ethnic groups that have for many decades suffered discrimination by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

According to USDA data, in 1920 in the United States there were nearly 1 million Black farmers, and they represented nearly 15 percent of all farmers in our country. Today, as a direct result of a brutal legacy of discrimination by a Federal agency, there are less than 50,000 Black farmers left and they represent less than 2 percent of all farmers in our country.

It is estimated that during the past century, Black farmers have lost between 15 and 20 million acres of land and the hundreds of billions of dollars of generational wealth that land represented.

The cause of the loss of so much Black-owned farmland and the loss of so many Black farmers is not a mystery. Federal court decisions, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and the USDA itself have all told us that a primary cause of that loss was long standing, pervasive discrimination by the USDA.

In his opinion in Pigford v. Glickman, Federal District Court Judge Paul Friedman stated clearly that USDA and their county commissioners discriminated against Black farmers when they denied, delayed, or otherwise frustrated the applications of those Black farmers for farm loans and other credit and benefit programs and that USDA and the county commissioners bear much of the responsibility for the dramatic decline in Black farms and Black-owned farmland.

Judge Friedman wrote his decision in 1999, but the systemic discrimination by USDA against Black farmers and other farmers of color by USDA was well documented beginning many decades earlier.

A 1965 report by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found that Federal, State, and local officials discriminated against Black farmers in agricultural programs and that this discrimination actively contributed to the decline in the Black ownership of farmland.

In 1968, a follow-up report from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found that Black farmers continued to face discrimination when seeking farm loans and other forms of assistance.

In 1970, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights again found that discrimination continued in USDA program administration. The 1970 report stated that only 2 out of more than 4,100 USDA county committee members in the South were Black farmers, even though there were 58 counties in the South where Black farmers comprised a majority of the farm operator population.

In 1982, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued another report entitled ``The Decline of Black Farming in America'' which found that the prevailing practice at the USDA was to follow local patterns of racial segregation and discrimination when providing assistance and that longstanding discrimination in USDA programs contributed to the decline in farms operated by African-American farmers.

In 1997, the USDA formed a Civil Rights Action Team to hold nationwide listening sessions to hear from socially disadvantaged and minority farmers. A report published after the listening sessions documented Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, and indigenous farmers who told story after story of USDA hurting minority farmers more than helping them. This 1997 report acknowledged that discrimination in USDA program delivery continued to exist to a large degree unabated and recommended 92 changes to address racial bias at the USDA.

In 1998, the USDA National Commission on Small Farms further described and documented the longstanding discrimination of USDA towards socially disadvantaged farmers. USDA stated that ``discrimination has been a contributing factor in the decline of Black farmers over the last several decades.'' The Commission's report also notes the ``history of under-allocation of resources to institutions that have served minority farmers.''

During the period between 1997 and 2000, Black farmers, Native American farmers, and Latino/Latina farmers filed lawsuits alleging USDA discriminated against them on the basis of race in processing their farm program applications and that USDA failed to investigate their complaints of discrimination. But settlements resulting from these lawsuits did not provide the relief necessary for these farmers of color to participate fully in the American agricultural economy.

On March 2, 2021, a group of full-time professors who work in agricultural, food law, and related subjects wrote in a letter to Majority Leader Schumer and Minority Leader McConnell that these court settlements were severely flawed because of the adversarial nature of the settlement process and because they attempted to define the problem in terms of discrete incidents of individualized discrimination without correcting the systemic problems that led to that discrimination. These professors noted that while some farmers received a payment, many remained indebted to the USDA, and the system itself remained broken.

Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record following my remarks.

In 2001, we then have a report by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights documenting the continued discriminatory lending practices against minority farmers. The Commission found that Black farmers waited four times longer than White farmers for USDA farm loans. The Commission recommended that USDA resolve the backlog of civil rights complaints and document and alleviate discriminatory lending practices.

However, USDA continued to struggle with resolving its backlog of civil rights complaints. In 2008, the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, reported that USDA's difficulties in resolving discrimination complaints persisted and that the USDA had not achieved its goal of preventing future backlogs of discrimination complaints.

In 2019, a GAO report observed that socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers had proportionately less agricultural credit than non- socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. This report found that farmers and ranchers of color continued to face more difficulties in obtaining farm loans and highlighted the historic, systemic discrimination against such farmers.

So now let's look at where we are today.

USDA spends billions of dollars each year to provide much needed support to American farmers. The Market Facilitation Program and Coronavirus Food Assistance Program are recent USDA programs designed to bolster the farm economy. In both programs the majority of funds went to nonminority farmers.

For example, the Environmental Working Group reported that nonminority farmers received nearly 97 percent of the $9.2 billion provided by the USDA's Coronavirus Food Assistance Program. Additionally, the Farm Bill Law Enterprise reported that 99 percent of market facilitation payments went to nonminority farmers.

Just last week the USDA stated ``there is a lot more that needs to be done and accomplished at USDA to make programming equitable and to root out decades of systemic discrimination that disproportionately affects Black, Hispanic, Indigenous and other farmers of color.''

Early this week Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack recognized the residual harm that decades of discrimination have caused to farmers of color when he stated: ``Here's the challenge: We're not only dealing with the specific issues of discrimination, but we're dealing with the cumulative effect of that discrimination over a period of time.''

And what is the cumulative effect of that discrimination over time? The cumulative effect of all the past systemic racism and discrimination is that Black farmers and other farmers of color were in a far more precarious financial situation before the COVID-19 pandemic hit us, and so many of them have simply not been able to weather the storm.

Approximately 13 percent of borrowers with FSA direct loans are currently delinquent on their loans and could lose their farms to foreclosure. But for Black farmers, 35 percent of those with FSA direct loans are in default and could soon lose their farms. And it is not only Black farmers--approximately 24 percent of the FSA direct loans to Hispanic, Asian-American, and Indigenous farmers are currently in default. What this means is that we are facing yet another wave of foreclosures and potential land loss by farmers of color. But the debt forgiveness and other assistance in the bill we are considering today can prevent this and can begin to turn the page on this shameful history of discrimination by the Federal Government.

I want to close by giving you one specific example of the discrimination I have been talking about.

Eddie and Dorothy Wise were residents of Whitakers, NC. A retired Green Beret, Mr. Wise's dream was to own a pig farm, and so in 1991, Mr. Wise purchased land and started to raise swine. But then came the discriminatory actions by USDA: failure to handle his loan applications in a timely manner, denial of loan applications, change of interest rates and escalation of monthly notes, and other misdeeds.

In 1997, a loan for improvements to the property was approved, but the receipt of the funds was delayed for 7 months, and his 400 pigs froze to death, destroying his operation. Later, he discovered that his original plan had been approved at the State level but that his loan officer never told him.

In the early morning hours of January 20, 2016, at least 14 Federal marshals descended with guns drawn on Eddie's farm and forcibly escorted him and his wife, who was still in bed and suffering from a debilitating medical condition, out of their home and off their property. Forcibly evicted from their home and their land and forced to live in a cheap motel, Dorothy Wise died shortly thereafter. The 106- acre farm was sold to an adjacent White farmer for the miniscule price of $260,000, and Eddie Wise had lost the one thing that he had always wanted--to own a pig farm.

This story is just one example of the discrimination that literally destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of Black farmers and their families over the last century.

Today we have the opportunity to take a step towards justice for those families.

I urge all of my colleagues to support sections 1005 and 1006 of the bill before the Senate today.

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