Floor Statements

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor a Michigander who is working every day to build bridges and bring people together at a very important time for our country and our world.

Farhat Qazi of West Bloomfield is an entrepreneur and a philanthropist. She is also a woman of deep faith who believes that religion can be a powerful force for peace and unity in the world.

In pursuit of this noble goal, Qazi created Children of Abraham Day, which was recognized in Michigan on December 4, 2020. The day is an opportunity for Jews, Muslims, and Christians to celebrate their shared origins as descendants of the Prophet Abraham; their reverence for the city of Jerusalem; and their common beliefs in love, charity, and moral behavior.

Far too often throughout history, religious differences have led to strife,

conflict, and war. By focusing on shared backgrounds and beliefs--and rededicating ourselves to religious understanding and tolerance--Qazi believes that people of diverse faiths can build a stronger, more peaceful, and more prosperous world. I couldn't agree with her more.

``I believe teaching our children the common origins and shared heritage of the Abrahamic faiths is key to future global unity, peace, and harmony,'' said Qazi. ``Children of Abraham Day is about showing how we can come together, celebrate, and appreciate a common bond.''

Farhat Qazi's belief in the power of Children of Abraham Day--and her tireless work to bring people of diverse religions together--deserves to be commended. It is my hope and prayer that this seed of understanding she has planted will continue to blossom and grow.

Madam President, first let me say, after listening to my colleague from Texas, if half of what he said I thought was accurate, I would not be supporting Judge Jackson. Fortunately, it is not. So I rise today to urge the Senate to confirm Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the United States Supreme Court. I am so excited about her nomination.

Her nomination, we know, is historic--not just because Judge Jackson is eminently qualified for the position. Both Democrats and Republicans agree. In fact, based on her broad range of experience, you could argue she is more qualified to serve on the Supreme Court than any sitting judge. It is not just historic because of the dignified and honorable way she has conducted herself during this entire nomination process. If you think your last job

interview was rough, take a look at hers. Judge Jackson showed incredible grace during more than 20 hours of questioning that at times was incredibly hostile and rude. I would challenge any Member of this Chamber to endure that level of pressure without cracking. I am quite certain I couldn't do it. She is eminently qualified, and we have seen her judicial temperament up close.

What really makes Judge Jackson's nomination historic is this number: 115. One hundred and fifteen. That is how many U.S. Supreme Court Justices have served in our Nation's entire history--115. Out of those 115 Justices, 108 have been White males. Just think about it for a moment. In other words, nearly 94 percent of the Supreme Court Justices in our Nation's history have been White men. That is a very exclusive club.

And like many very exclusive clubs, it has tended to leave a lot of folks out in the cold. In a country as magnificently diverse as ours, that is simply not right, and I am so grateful that President Biden understands this.

The decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court touch every single American. What does the right to vote truly mean under our Constitution? Freedom of religion; our freedom of speech. How are we as consumers or workers treated under our Constitution? Can a public school district force White students to attend one school while sending Black students to another? Can that same public school district refuse to educate students with disabilities? Can a couple be prevented from marrying and spending the rest of their lives caring for one another because they happen to be gay? And can a State override a woman's right to privacy and force her to continue a pregnancy that puts her own health and future at risk?

These are some of the types of decisions made by the U.S. Supreme Court every day. And when the Supreme Court doesn't look like America, it means that its decisions are less likely to take into account the lives and the needs of all Americans.

The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a straightforward answer when she was asked how many women should serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. How many was enough? ``Nine,'' she would say.

Well, we are not quite there yet--but four? I would say that is a pretty good start. And a Black woman Justice? It is about time. It is past time.

You may have seen a wonderful photo making the rounds. It is of Judge Jackson's 17-year-old daughter Leila. It was from the first day of the nomination hearing. Leila is wearing a beautiful lavender suit and sitting behind her mom.

The expression on her face is absolutely priceless. She is looking at her mom with such admiration and pride.

Well, Leila isn't alone. Millions of young Black girls and their moms and their grandmas are looking at Judge Jackson with that same pride and admiration. They have never had someone who looks like them serving on our Nation's highest Court.

And how many of these young girls will see this incredibly accomplished woman and think, ``Hey, that could be me''? I hope they all do.

I will be honored to support Judge Jackson's confirmation. I am excited. I am proud of her. And I urge my colleagues to do the same. It is past time.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have 13 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:

Madam President, I rise today to celebrate the 40th anniversary of one of the leading voices in healthcare, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice. Established on April 2, 1982, from three separate organizations, for four decades, it has been a voice for the essential and dedicated organizations that provide healthcare services to over 12 million patients annually in their own homes.

NAHC has provided valuable and trusted information that has helped guide Congress, the administration, Federal agencies, and many other health policy planners as we support the ability of patients to receive high quality healthcare at home.

From the beginning, NAHC has recognized that complex health policy issues require a unified voice. NAHC has brought together providers representing a wide range of home services including home health, hospice care, home and community-based services, home infusion therapy, private duty nursing for pediatric and adult patients, personal care services, home-based palliative care, and more. These providers are big and small, freestanding and part of larger institutions, nonprofit and commercial, rural and urban.

Healthcare continues to shift to care provided in the home--and with good reason. Providing expanded, holistic care in one's own home when clinically appropriate can improve the lives of patients while increasing quality and efficiency.

I pay tribute today to NAHC's decades of work to expand access to healthcare at home, and I look forward to partnering with NAHC members and staff for many more years to come.

Will the Senator yield?

Madam President, I thank Senator Thune and Senator Klobuchar. I know that the chair of the Commerce Committee is coming down to speak.

I just wanted to say congratulations. Thank you for your wonderful leadership on this. Obviously, with my hat on as chair of the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, this is a big deal, as they would say. This is a very big deal to, certainly, all of our growers in Michigan but, I know, across the country.

So thank you for your great bipartisan work, and hopefully, we can get this all the way across the finish line. I know the President is anxious to sign it.

Madam President, before I give my remarks, I want to give a shout-out again to our great leader, the chair of the Commerce Committee, Senator Cantwell. I don't know if this is a record, but Senator Cantwell moved this bill so fast through the committee, it is amazing. It is just building on the great work of the committee with the Innovation and Competition Act and so on.

Again, on behalf of all the farmers in Michigan and across the country, this is really important legislation.

(The remarks of Ms. Stabenow pertaining to the introduction of S. 3979 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Ms. STABENOW I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as the pandemic began, Congress, on a bipartisan basis, made sure our schools and our summer meal programs had easy-to-use flexibilities so they could continue to feed hungry children who were no longer physically in school or no longer able to go to a meal site in the summer because of COVID.

All across America now, because of a lot of hard work on a lot of people's part, our kids are now back in school, which is great. But 90 percent of our schools are still struggling to provide children healthy food as a result of higher food prices, less available staff, and more supply chain delays and shortages that we know about all the time. In fact, part of that relates to this bill which was just passed on shipping. This is part of the supply chain breakdown that has affected the ability for our schools to be able to get what they need for our children.

We have 90 percent--all this in red, across the country--of the States saying: We need these flexibilities that have been in place from the very beginning of COVID. We extended the flexibilities before, and they need them to continue to be able to feed children in our country. School cafeterias, summer meal providers--everybody is working as hard as they can to get back to normal, but they need time to transition so our children aren't hurt in the process. The USDA, school administrators, local mayors, even school food suppliers themselves have said they need these flexibilities to continue for another year.

Back in January, the Agricultural Secretary, Secretary Vilsack, called on Congress to once again extend what we call the nutrition waivers so that schools and meal providers had the flexibility they need to feed hungry children who may have their only meal at school or their only breakfast or their only lunch at school or, in the summer, through the feeding programs.

We have been working in good faith, as we always do, across the aisle to make this extension happens. We were working on having that happen as part of the omnibus. It was a real shock to me and to many of the Senators who care deeply about our children when Republican Leader McConnell refused to agree to extending the school nutrition flexibilities as part of the omnibus bill that we just passed, that we know was critically important to pass. We don't want the government to shut down. We had essential, critical resources for Ukraine and so many other issues. But our kids were left behind in this one, and it is not right. We need to fix it.

We are in a critical transition period right now, but we are not out of the pandemic yet. Without having these flexibilities extended, without this support, up to 30 million children who get their food, their only healthy meals at school will see their breakfast and lunch disrupted, and that makes absolutely no sense. Millions of kids will show up at their summer meal program this July and could very well see a ``closed'' sign.

That is why, today, Senator Lisa Murkowski and I are introducing the Support Kids Not Red Tape Act, along with Senator Collins and all 50 Members of our Democratic caucus.

Let me stress that this is a temporary extension with a clear end date and a lot of procedures put in place to safely get schools and summer meal programs back to normal operations. We want to give them time to transition.

I am so grateful for our colleagues' support--52 colleagues. We only need eight more. We only need eight more Republicans to join us to get this done right away, just like we did the shipping bill.

Our schools need time. Our kids need time right now rather than having this abruptly end June 30, which is not very far away. So let's be clear. To abruptly pull the lunch tray away from hungry kids at the end of June is just plain wrong.

Since the pandemic started in March 2020, food insecurity for families and their children has jumped by nearly two-thirds. We all know the stories. We have all seen the lines. People across the country are engaging to support each other. One in five kids comes to school hungry, and school and summer programs may be the only meal that they get. During the pandemic, it was even worse. Now, because of all the challenges continuing, we are not out of the woods on this yet in terms of feeding our children.

How have these flexibilities helped our children be able to get healthy meals? One example is in Rapid City, SD, where the local school district has partnered with Meals on Wheels in the summer to deliver meals to where the kids are. It makes sense. This has been a lifesaver for hungry children in their rural communities who had no way to get to the one school meal site that was miles and miles away.

In Arkansas, the food insecurity rate among children skyrocketed to over 32 percent during the pandemic, 32 percent of the children being food insecure, not being able to have a healthy meal.

Fayetteville and Bentonville schools' summer meals programs have provided weekly meal pack pickups with a week's worth of breakfast and lunch. So rather than a parent who is working trying to figure out, how do I get my child to a place to get a healthy breakfast, and by the way, I may have to take them back again for a healthy lunch--by the way, in the rural community, there is not a lot of public transportation. It certainly affects everyone in urban areas, suburban areas, and rural areas, but the distances in rural communities are an extra burden oftentimes. So they put together the capacity to do a week's worth. Those were the flexibilities we gave them that we want to continue.

In Edgecombe County, NC, resourceful schools found a way to get meals to 100 kids during the summer by using

the schoolbus. The schoolbus wasn't being used, so they put the food on a schoolbus and went out to the neighborhoods, out to the kids.

As a result of these flexibilities, twice as many kids got summer meals during the pandemic, which is something we also need to learn from. Just as we have learned the importance of high-speed internet after the pandemic, and we have addressed that, which is great, we have now learned that we need to rethink some of these things here, in terms of the flexibilities for our schools and how we deliver summer meals, how we address schools during the school year.

So it goes to show you what a big difference it makes for hungry kids when we don't make them or their families or their meal providers jump through all kinds of hoops to get something as basic as a healthy meal.

In schools across Kentucky, from smalltown Madison County to metropolis Jefferson County, these flexibilities have kept kids from getting caught in the redtape and going hungry if their struggling parent just missed one piece of paper on a form.

It has been a relief to school food service directors in small towns who are already working with half the staff, twice the stress of putting together healthy meals with all the food and supply chain shortages we have talked about.

Right now, school food service directors in Utah are placing orders for next year, knowing that many of the items they need are currently not available and the ones they can find have doubled in price.

The flexibilities and increased funding to deal with these costs--the things we have given them to deal with this--have made it possible to make substitutions when basic items like ground beef are not available or fruit is not available, to be able to put together something healthy in a different way.

Losing these flexibilities will cut their budgets by 40 percent and force meal providers to make pretty dire choices on which children to feed and how schools are going to pay for it.

Without our bill to support kids and cut redtape, all of these desperately needed flexibilities are going to go away at the end of June. They are just going to go away--all the support for schools, all the support for children, all the new creative things that have been able to be done to help children get healthy meals, done.

School meals, summer programs will have to scale back. Some will have to stop feeding kids altogether. Children will once again go hungry because of paperwork and bureaucracy outside of their control. I mean, you think about this: Are we on the side of bureaucracy or are we on the side of kids?

This legislation is on the side of kids. My colleagues supporting this bill and sponsoring this are on the side of kids, not redtape.

The unnecessary stress is going to be felt by families in every part of our country, from small towns to big cities, to suburban areas. So our bill gives us a clear, easy path forward to make sure children and to make sure schools have the time and the support they need to get back on their feet as we recover from the pandemic and to be able to plan for how this phases out. Schools across the country are telling us that these flexibilities are critical to continuing--absolutely critical.

So it is time for us to listen to them and to do the right thing for our children. I urge my colleagues to pass the Support Kids Not Red Tape Act as soon as possible.

Mr. President, as the pandemic began, Congress, on a bipartisan basis, made sure our schools and our summer meal programs had easy-to-use flexibilities so they could continue to feed hungry children who were no longer physically in school or no longer able to go to a meal site in the summer because of COVID.

All across America now, because of a lot of hard work on a lot of people's part, our kids are now back in school, which is great. But 90 percent of our schools are still struggling to provide children healthy food as a result of higher food prices, less available staff, and more supply chain delays and shortages that we know about all the time. In fact, part of that relates to this bill which was just passed on shipping. This is part of the supply chain breakdown that has affected the ability for our schools to be able to get what they need for our children.

We have 90 percent--all this in red, across the country--of the States saying: We need these flexibilities that have been in place from the very beginning of COVID. We extended the flexibilities before, and they need them to continue to be able to feed children in our country. School cafeterias, summer meal providers--everybody is working as hard as they can to get back to normal, but they need time to transition so our children aren't hurt in the process. The USDA, school administrators, local mayors, even school food suppliers themselves have said they need these flexibilities to continue for another year.

Back in January, the Agricultural Secretary, Secretary Vilsack, called on Congress to once again extend what we call the nutrition waivers so that schools and meal providers had the flexibility they need to feed hungry children who may have their only meal at school or their only breakfast or their only lunch at school or, in the summer, through the feeding programs.

We have been working in good faith, as we always do, across the aisle to make this extension happens. We were working on having that happen as part of the omnibus. It was a real shock to me and to many of the Senators who care deeply about our children when Republican Leader McConnell refused to agree to extending the school nutrition flexibilities as part of the omnibus bill that we just passed, that we know was critically important to pass. We don't want the government to shut down. We had essential, critical resources for Ukraine and so many other issues. But our kids were left behind in this one, and it is not right. We need to fix it.

We are in a critical transition period right now, but we are not out of the pandemic yet. Without having these flexibilities extended, without this support, up to 30 million children who get their food, their only healthy meals at school will see their breakfast and lunch disrupted, and that makes absolutely no sense. Millions of kids will show up at their summer meal program this July and could very well see a ``closed'' sign.

That is why, today, Senator Lisa Murkowski and I are introducing the Support Kids Not Red Tape Act, along with Senator Collins and all 50 Members of our Democratic caucus.

Let me stress that this is a temporary extension with a clear end date and a lot of procedures put in place to safely get schools and summer meal programs back to normal operations. We want to give them time to transition.

I am so grateful for our colleagues' support--52 colleagues. We only need eight more. We only need eight more Republicans to join us to get this done right away, just like we did the shipping bill.

Our schools need time. Our kids need time right now rather than having this abruptly end June 30, which is not very far away. So let's be clear. To abruptly pull the lunch tray away from hungry kids at the end of June is just plain wrong.

Since the pandemic started in March 2020, food insecurity for families and their children has jumped by nearly two-thirds. We all know the stories. We have all seen the lines. People across the country are engaging to support each other. One in five kids comes to school hungry, and school and summer programs may be the only meal that they get. During the pandemic, it was even worse. Now, because of all the challenges continuing, we are not out of the woods on this yet in terms of feeding our children.

How have these flexibilities helped our children be able to get healthy meals? One example is in Rapid City, SD, where the local school district has partnered with Meals on Wheels in the summer to deliver meals to where the kids are. It makes sense. This has been a lifesaver for hungry children in their rural communities who had no way to get to the one school meal site that was miles and miles away.

In Arkansas, the food insecurity rate among children skyrocketed to over 32 percent during the pandemic, 32 percent of the children being food insecure, not being able to have a healthy meal.

Fayetteville and Bentonville schools' summer meals programs have provided weekly meal pack pickups with a week's worth of breakfast and lunch. So rather than a parent who is working trying to figure out, how do I get my child to a place to get a healthy breakfast, and by the way, I may have to take them back again for a healthy lunch--by the way, in the rural community, there is not a lot of public transportation. It certainly affects everyone in urban areas, suburban areas, and rural areas, but the distances in rural communities are an extra burden oftentimes. So they put together the capacity to do a week's worth. Those were the flexibilities we gave them that we want to continue.

In Edgecombe County, NC, resourceful schools found a way to get meals to 100 kids during the summer by using

the schoolbus. The schoolbus wasn't being used, so they put the food on a schoolbus and went out to the neighborhoods, out to the kids.

As a result of these flexibilities, twice as many kids got summer meals during the pandemic, which is something we also need to learn from. Just as we have learned the importance of high-speed internet after the pandemic, and we have addressed that, which is great, we have now learned that we need to rethink some of these things here, in terms of the flexibilities for our schools and how we deliver summer meals, how we address schools during the school year.

So it goes to show you what a big difference it makes for hungry kids when we don't make them or their families or their meal providers jump through all kinds of hoops to get something as basic as a healthy meal.

In schools across Kentucky, from smalltown Madison County to metropolis Jefferson County, these flexibilities have kept kids from getting caught in the redtape and going hungry if their struggling parent just missed one piece of paper on a form.

It has been a relief to school food service directors in small towns who are already working with half the staff, twice the stress of putting together healthy meals with all the food and supply chain shortages we have talked about.

Right now, school food service directors in Utah are placing orders for next year, knowing that many of the items they need are currently not available and the ones they can find have doubled in price.

The flexibilities and increased funding to deal with these costs--the things we have given them to deal with this--have made it possible to make substitutions when basic items like ground beef are not available or fruit is not available, to be able to put together something healthy in a different way.

Losing these flexibilities will cut their budgets by 40 percent and force meal providers to make pretty dire choices on which children to feed and how schools are going to pay for it.

Without our bill to support kids and cut redtape, all of these desperately needed flexibilities are going to go away at the end of June. They are just going to go away--all the support for schools, all the support for children, all the new creative things that have been able to be done to help children get healthy meals, done.

School meals, summer programs will have to scale back. Some will have to stop feeding kids altogether. Children will once again go hungry because of paperwork and bureaucracy outside of their control. I mean, you think about this: Are we on the side of bureaucracy or are we on the side of kids?

This legislation is on the side of kids. My colleagues supporting this bill and sponsoring this are on the side of kids, not redtape.

The unnecessary stress is going to be felt by families in every part of our country, from small towns to big cities, to suburban areas. So our bill gives us a clear, easy path forward to make sure children and to make sure schools have the time and the support they need to get back on their feet as we recover from the pandemic and to be able to plan for how this phases out. Schools across the country are telling us that these flexibilities are critical to continuing--absolutely critical.

So it is time for us to listen to them and to do the right thing for our children. I urge my colleagues to pass the Support Kids Not Red Tape Act as soon as possible.

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

Mr. President, if you know anything about Michigan, you know we love our cars. We put the world on wheels, and we have been keeping Michigan moving ever since. But recently this love affair has hit a rough patch.

Nearly everyone in Michigan drives--to work, to school, and to the lake on the weekends, and it is getting warmer and warmer to be able to do that. And high gas prices have made this Michigan way of life a lot more expensive.

I am thinking of the driver who uses his own car to deliver meals and other essentials to families in Detroit. Gas prices have gone up so much, he is barely breaking even. I am thinking of the student who drives 40 minutes every day to attend classes at Michigan Tech in Houghton. She is training for a great career, but the price at the pump is cutting into the money she needs to pay her tuition and her rent. And I am thinking about farmers. Fuel is absolutely essential to power our tractors and produce fertilizer and keep the world fed.

But income is tight even in the good times, and in the tight times, the folks who grow our food can struggle to fill their own refrigerators.

High fuel prices hurt Michigan families, our businesses, and our economy. And that is why it is so frustrating when oil and gas companies make choices that keep prices high to boost their own bottom lines.

It is true that part of the reason gas prices are so high is because demand is so high. Thanks to President Biden and Democrats in Congress, our economy came roaring back from COVID-19. Now, with all the challenges of the supply chains and the cost issues we are dealing with--but the foundation of our economy is strong, and that is a good thing.

But a roaring economy requires energy, and production isn't keeping pace. It is not that we don't have enough oil. In fact, the United States is the world's largest oil-producing country. And we could be producing more. There are currently 9,000 approved oil leases that the oil companies aren't even using. Yet the oil companies have made a conscious decision to hold back production, to raise prices, and pad the pockets of their shareholders. One CEO even admitted as much last month when he said that his company is ``capturing value from higher prices for gas.''

Let me translate that. ``Capturing value from high prices for gas'' really means taking money out of your pocket and my pocket and putting it into the pockets of their shareholders.

It is working for them. His company's revenue nearly tripled during the fourth quarter, and they are not alone. In fact, the 25 largest oil and gas companies raked in $205 billion in profits last year--$205 billion in profits last year--while price-gouging now at the pump.

And they used that money to buy back $40 billion of their own stock and pay their shareholders and top executives $50 billion in dividends. And they are not particularly eager to pass on any savings to anybody else, unfortunately.

It is interesting. The last time a barrel of oil was $96, gas was $3.62 a gallon. Last week, a barrel of oil was again $96, but this time gas was $4.31 a gallon.

What is the difference?

Well, the truth is, they set the price based on what they can get away with,

arguing a global economy and supply and so on, a supply which they determine, and they set the price with what they think they can get. And that is called price-gouging right now; taking advantage of situations around the world, our willingness to sacrifice to be part of supporting the Ukrainians and what is happening.

And instead of doing their part to maybe say: OK, $205 billion in profits last year, pretty good. OK. Maybe we can, like, do our part here--instead, the prices at the pump go up and up and up, and it has got to stop.

A single mom of three in Michigan is standing at a gas pump right now with a knot in her stomach, watching her bill go up and up and her monthly budget for everything else go down.

So that is the problem. What is the solution?

First of all, the Senate Commerce Committee is calling for the CEOs of the major oil companies to testify before the committee, and I am really looking forward to that hearing and what they have to say for themselves on why. I want to thank the chairwoman, Chairwoman Cantwell, and the committee for their leadership.

Secondly, I introduced the Gas Prices Relief Act with a number of my Democratic colleagues. This gas tax holiday is immediate relief--yes, short term, but it would save Michigan drivers nearly $650 million at the pump this year.

I also think it is about time to stop subsidizing these oil companies that are doing just fine on their own. They don't need our tax dollars to subsidize them anymore. For more than 100 years, Congress has given major, permanent tax benefits to the fossil fuel industry. This decade, they have received $35 billion in fossil fuel-related tax breaks. Do the American people really need to keep subsidizing an industry whose pollution is responsible for creating the global climate crisis, all the while enjoying record profits and picking people's pockets? The answer is no. Yet our Republican colleagues stand with the oil companies over and over again.

I just came from an Environmental and Public Works Committee meeting on this very topic and heard over and over again the rationale for letting the oil and gas companies keep doing what they are already doing with no accountability and no real effort for us to move in the direction of clean energy where we need to move.

Most importantly, it is time to shift to new clean sources of energy. For more than 100 years, scientists have known that burning fossil fuels creates carbon pollution that builds up in our atmosphere, and that traps heat. It just stays there. For more than 100 years, we just kept on burning fossil fuels anyway. And the industry has spent billions trying to convince us it is not really happening. We really aren't seeing the climate change. No, this isn't happening. Don't look up.

Well, it is time for a change. We can start by using more homegrown and cleaner burning biofuels to save consumers money. It is time to allow the year-round sale of E15--a change I have encouraged the administration to make. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, E15 is 10 to 15 cents per gallon less than standard gasoline and cleaner.

There is no time like the present to accelerate our shift to clean energy production, which I know the Presiding Officer cares deeply about and has been a leader in, and the use of electric vehicles. We know that part of that is moving to clean energy electricity--power as well as electric transportation. Both are very, very important.

Buying an amazing Michigan-made EV means you can drive right on by the gas station. You don't even have to stop. That is what I am looking forward to. You don't even have to pay attention to what is on the sign--won't matter.

The exciting thing is, we can take action to make this happen more quickly by ensuring that electric vehicles are affordable for more families and, critically, that they are built right here in America-- not in China, not somewhere else around the world, in America--and I am laser-focused on making that happen.

The good news is, we will tackle the climate crisis at the same time because the transportation sector is the single largest source of carbon pollution.

Shockingly, a few weeks ago, a fossil fuel executive said this about his industry:

You've made a promise to be more disciplined about getting

cash back to shareholders with these dividends. The question

is, are you going to keep your promise? Or are you going to

be patriotic?

Hmm. It is pretty clear whose side the oil companies are on, and it isn't the side of the American people. It is time for them to stop price-gouging and try a little patriotism.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am here today with my great friend, the senior Senator from Missouri, to talk about an issue we both care passionately about and that we have partnered on now for a number of years.

I ask unanimous consent to proceed in a colloquy with Senator Blunt.

Mr. President, on October 31, 2013, Senator Blunt and I stood here on the Senate floor to mark a very important anniversary. It was 50 years to the day after President Kennedy signed into law the Community Mental Health Act. It was the last piece of legislation he was ever able to sign.

As we know, his life was tragically cut short, and one important part of his life's work, that of providing full funding for comprehensive mental health services in the community, never came to happen. Instead, behavioral health is funded far too often through grants, and while these grants are important, they are just not enough.

You would never say to somebody who needed heart bypass surgery, ``Yep, you need surgery, but so sorry; the grant ran out,'' which is what happens to someone with a mental health crisis or an addiction all the time. You wouldn't say to somebody with bipolar disorder or substance abuse--well, we actually would say, ``So sorry; the grant ran out,'' and we should not be saying that.

Why should healthcare above the neck be funded differently than healthcare below the neck?

This is something that Senator Blunt and I started to work on. We know that that should not be true. Healthcare is healthcare. President Kennedy understood this, and so does my friend Senator Blunt.

Right, Senator Blunt?

Senator Blunt, I couldn't agree with you more.

I don't know about you, but when we first started and knew this was going to be a step-by-step process, we weren't able to go nationwide. We had to prove the concept would work with, really, providing comprehensive services, not just what is done in most States, like in Michigan, where there was Medicaid funding for people who were seriously mentally ill, but if you weren't seriously mentally ill, there was no support for anybody else.

So doing a concept like federally qualified health centers, which I have been so proud to be your partner on--where you say, ``OK. If you meet high standards, we will fully fund your capacity then to provide services if you meet high standards''--is what the whole point is. After only 2 years of doing that with the eight States' demonstration project, I was really blown away, and I think you were, too, in that, after only 2 years, the kind of results that they were able to get were so meaningful. HHS--by the way, both Democratic and Republican Presidents have embraced this and supported this, which has been wonderful. But, after only 2 years, they found 63 percent fewer emergency room visits.

I remember being in one of the press conferences we did with a police chief from Oklahoma, who was talking about how it was so difficult if they had someone who needed care. They would drive hours and go sit in the emergency room with them, and an officer would be off of their regular duties all day, sitting with somebody in the emergency room.

So, with a 63-percent reduction in the number of folks sitting in the emergency room because they couldn't get help and then to have a 60- percent reduction in the amount of time in jail, I am not surprised that sheriffs and police chiefs and law enforcement officials across the country are our biggest supporters in terms of having comprehensive community behavioral health clinics. They want people to get help. They don't want them going to jail, just sitting in jail.

The other thing that was so important, I thought, was that there was about a 41-percent decrease in homelessness. Oftentimes, with the iPad that you are talking about, there may be someone on the ground, on the street, and an officer will be asked to respond. The fact that they can put someone--a social worker or a psychologist or someone--on the iPad, on FaceTime, basically, to talk to someone and get an initial diagnosis of what is going on, what kind of help they need, where they should go, and so on has been so effective and I know, for law enforcement, such a relief in that they have tools that they can use, and we are seeing that over and over again.

One of the things we require, of course, is to be able to get this full funding as healthcare so that you have a 24-hour psychiatric crisis operation, which I think has been one of the most important pieces of it.

I don't know about you, but the results, to me, have been amazing, and we now have 10 States in the demonstration projects, and we are ready to offer this opportunity to States across the country.

I agree.

You know, when I think about COVID and all the increased stress on children and young people and, as you said, the increase in number of suicides--all the pressure is on everyone, from those on the frontlines who are taking care of patients in the hospitals and the stress of families and so on.

We know that it is even more important that we eliminate the stigma of what it means to ask for help--mental health help--or if you have an addiction to be able to ask for help.

It is not enough just to eliminate the stigma; you have to have the service. You have to have the service in the community. It has to be quality services. It has to be funded in a structural way where you are supporting the staff and, again, modeling this after community health centers, which are widely supported--every community in the country, strong bipartisan support.

By our picking up that model and basically saying, We need to do that for mental health and addiction as well as physical health, we are just extending something that has shown such success in the community. And now, because of what has happened and all the pressures of COVID and so on, it is even more important that folks who need help can be able to get that.

You know I think of someone who has struggled with addiction their whole life and they finally get the courage up; they are going to ask for help. The ability to walk into a clinic and say, ``I need help'' and to have somebody say, ``Come on in''----

Right.

Right.

Absolutely.

And we invite all of our colleagues to join us. We have a great bipartisan effort going on with our Excellence in Mental Health and Addiction Treatment legislation of 2021 that would open the door for all States. We know that many, many States and certainly local communities are very interested. We can do this. We can actually get this done.

When I heard the President speaking about this, I know I had a big smile on my face--and I think you as well, Senator Blunt. We were like, All right, this is the next step.

I am so excited to see the President agreeing with this and speaking about it in his State of the Union. I am looking forward to his including this in his budget, which will be coming out very soon, and his supporting and embracing a nationwide program.

I am just so very, very pleased that this is a model that, frankly, has survived both Democratic and Republican Presidents, Republicans, Democrats, House Members, Senate Members, local communities, Governors because it works. Everybody is looking at this. Everybody is looking at this.

Yes.

It really is about families.

So, Mr. President, I just want to close by saying I am so grateful for the partnership that Senator Blunt and I have had. He thinks he is retiring at the end of the year. I am actually going to put him in a closet and not let him leave because he has been such a champion both in his role on appropriations as well as partnering for long-term funding. This is important; this is something real and tangible and meaningful that we can all do together; and I am excited and hopeful we are going to take the next step this year together.

Absolutely. Thank you.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. President, across America, our schools are open and our children are back in the classroom, and that is great news for everyone.

Unfortunately, providing our children healthy food has been a real challenge for schools thanks to supply chain challenges that are happening in many places and almost in every State.

This chart shows the supply chain disruptions across the country, with the red being almost 100 percent of the schools having supply chain challenges and disruptions.

Over 90 percent of the schools in the majority of the country are having challenges just buying the food they need for the children. That is why, during the pandemic, Congress made sure schools and meal providers had flexibility to continue to feed hungry children.

Ninety percent of our schools, from rural Alaska to downtown Louisville, are still relying on these flexibilities to keep their children fed. Extending these bipartisan tools in the omnibus package is essential to helping schools ease back into regular operations for our children.

Nutrition operations at schools are working hard. They are working as hard as they can to get back to normal, but it takes time, and the waivers help. When basic staples like chicken and whole grains cost double, waivers help schools in Caribou, MN, for instance, keep feeding kids. When supply chain limits available food options like ground beef or fruit, schools in Bismarck, ND, for instance, can use substitutions to put together healthy lunches.

Hunger doesn't go away just because school is out. Thanks to these waivers, communities from Michigan, to Kentucky, to Utah were able to feed more children over the summer, particularly in rural communities.

If schools or meal providers are unable to serve meals because of ongoing challenges, that hurts all of our children. Over 2,000 groups, from the School Nutrition Association, to Feeding America, to local school boards and superintendents and administrators, have all called on Congress to do what is right and extend these waivers.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have these letters printed in the Record.

We all want life to get back to normal. Right now, we need our Republican colleagues to support the bipartisan tools that will help get us there.

This amendment is a short extension. There is a clear end date when schools will be back to normal operations, but in the meantime, these waivers are key to helping schools stay open and operate in person for our children.

Taking these waivers away would leave schools and summer meal programs scrambling, and that hurts up to 30 million kids who eat school meals--30 million kids. Smaller rural schools and their students would undoubtedly be hurt the worst.

It is time for Congress to stand with our schools and with our children. So would the Senator agree to modify his request to include a vote in relation to Stabenow amendment No. 2994?

Mr. President, it is my privilege to recognize and honor Dr. Sally Rockey, the inaugural executive director of the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research, and a pioneer in Federal research, on the occasion of her well-earned retirement.

Dr. Rockey's career has improved countless people's lives through research, and she continues this mission today. She has been a leader in the advancement of research programs in both agriculture and biomedicine. She spent almost 20 years with the U.S. Department of Agriculture managing competitive research grant programs, and she was with the National Institutes of Health--NIH--for 11 years as the NIH Deputy Director for Extramural Research, where she led the operations of the world's largest extramural research program.

Together with Senator Pat Roberts, I established the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research in the 2014

farm bill. Under Dr. Rockey's leadership, the foundation has become a significant force in the agriculture research community by developing innovative private-public partnerships to fund rigorous food and agriculture research. During Dr. Rockey's 6 years at the helm, the foundation awarded more than 250 grants in collaboration with over 550 partners. Her engagement with a broad swath of partners helps leverage $1.40 for every dollar allocated by Congress. To put this into perspective, with Congress' investment of $385 million over 10 years, along with the matching funds, the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research is on track to invest nearly a billion dollars in agriculture research, an impressive feat for a new initiative and a testament to Dr. Rockey's leadership.

Dr. Rockey's legacy is not only audacious research--and the lives that are impacted by this research--but also the invaluable support the foundation provides to the next generation of scientists. During her tenure, the foundation established several programs that specifically prepare today's young scientists to address the food and agriculture challenges of tomorrow.

Dr. Rockey's future-focused perspective has led the foundation to create AgMission. Founded in partnership with U.S. Farmers and Ranchers in Action and World Farmers Organization, AgMission is an unprecedented global collaboration of farmers, ranchers, and scientists co-creating and rapidly expanding innovation, adaptation, and the adoption of climate-smart technologies. AgMission embodies our shared vision that agriculture can be mobilized to address the climate crisis.

I want to personally congratulate Dr. Rockey on the conclusion of her spectacular career in public service and wish her the best of luck on the start of the next chapter of her life.

We wish you well, Sally.

Madam President, I am not sure where to start, having just heard my colleague from Florida. I just have to say that who he is describing I don't recognize, either, because I don't recognize that at all of anyone who is here.

I just want to start by thanking my Democratic colleagues, first of all, for voting for the American Recovery Act that, among many other things, is helping to focus on ways to bring down the cost of food and our food supply chain, to help fix it, and a number of other issues that unfortunately not one colleague on the Republican side voted for-- not one.

So we have heard a lot today about how we should be focusing on the needs of the American people. I think there would be a collective ``amen'' from our side about that. We would love to have our colleagues join us, frankly, in that effort. But nothing is more fundamental to our democracy than preserving our freedom to vote as Americans, and that is really what the debate and the votes are all about today.

We know there are people willing to use violence to stop accurate, legal certifications of our national Presidential election. How do we know this? Because we were here. We were here a year ago on January 6 and witnessed the violence and the death and the destruction.

We also know there is a coordinated Republican effort across the country to limit the freedom to vote and make it easier to intimidate and remove election officials who won't do their bidding. And how do I know this? Because it is happening in Michigan as I speak.

Today's vote on the legislation in front of us is the fundamental act we must do to stop this destructive, partisan movement, and we also know that in order to make this happen, we have to return the Senate to its original principle--the original principle of majority vote.

Our Nation's Founders had a lot of opinions about the type of country we should be and the type of government we should have. At times, the discussions got heated--and not just because it was summer in Philadelphia, Senator Casey. They were actually wearing wool at the time, so it got heated in a number of different ways. However, there was one thing they agreed on: Government should be run by the will of the majority--not a minority, not a King. They agreed on this because they saw what happened when a nation is held captive to the views of the minority.

The very first Constitution of the United States, the Articles of Confederation, was, frankly, a dysfunctional mess. That is why they gathered in Philadelphia to try again and to get it right this time, and getting it right meant majority rule.

James Madison said that majority rule is fundamental to our democracy. Thomas Jefferson said that ``the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail.'' In Federalist 22, Alexander Hamilton wrote a lengthy description of the problems that arise when a minority can override the will of the majority.

The Founders didn't have an opinion on the Senate filibuster because it didn't exist. It didn't exist. However, over time, Senators figured out they could slow down legislation through unlimited debate.

We know that, at first, the filibuster was rarely used--mainly by southern Senators who wanted to block civil rights legislation. Yet, over time, it has evolved from a procedural tool into a weapon, and we all know this. This weapon is increasingly used to stop our Nation from making progress on issues that are so important to the American people and so important to our families and crucial to the future of our country.

We are here today because the most basic freedom in our democracy is the freedom to vote, and across the Nation, Republicans are pushing legislation to take that away, including in Michigan.

In 2020, Michigan voters clearly and resoundingly chose Joe Biden to be our President and Kamala Harris to be our Vice President in the largest voter turnout in our Nation's history. They won by more than 150,000 votes, and that is 14 times more than Donald Trump's margin was in 2016.

Now, I very much appreciate my friend Senator Thune saying he accepted his first loss to the Senate. None of us like to lose. It is not fun. President Trump should have done the same thing, but instead, Donald Trump's campaign and his allies filed eight lawsuits in Michigan. They lost every single one of them. In the only case that was appealed to the Michigan Supreme Court, the court declined to hear the case despite having a majority of Republican justices.

The people of Michigan voted. Michigan Republican and Democratic counties verified the vote, and our State, on a bipartisan vote, certified it. There is no evidence of fraud that would suggest we need legislation to now restrict our voting.

So why are Michigan Republicans trying to make it harder to vote with 39 different bills they have introduced? Well, they just don't like who Michiganders voted for. Think about it. Because they didn't like the result,

Michigan Republicans decided to target Michigan voters as part of a coordinated, nationwide assault on this fundamental right that my friend, the late Congressman John Lewis, called precious, almost sacred.

That is why we must pass the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act today. I know that some folks think any legislation we pass to protect the freedom to vote must be bipartisan to be legitimate. But when it is time to vote, we are told not 1 Republican will join all 50 Democrats-- 50 Democrats--in voting for the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act; therefore, they say, the bill shouldn't pass. Yet the attacks on democracy in Michigan and the other States are strictly partisan.

In Michigan, Republicans are even using a loophole in our constitution to go around the Governor's veto and take away people's freedom to vote without the capacity to veto the legislation. They are doing it by a simple majority, and they are doing it with not one Democratic vote--not one--in Michigan. But they are still doing it.

Republicans are making it harder for people to vote using a simple majority. Yet we are told that protecting people's freedom to vote needs a supermajority to do it. That makes no sense. And--wait--I think I hear Hamilton, Jefferson, and Madison rolling over in their graves.

Today, we each will choose to protect every American's freedom to vote or allow those supporting the Big Lie to limit people's freedoms and undermine our democracy. Today, we will choose to stand with our Founders and our Constitution as written or maintain Senate procedures that are seriously broken.

It is time to restore the Senate to majority rule, as it was intended by the Founders, so we can protect--protect--the American people's right to vote.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today, along with colleagues, to look back at a year ago, January 6, 2021--I wish this was actually a bipartisan coming together today--a horrible, tragic day in our Nation's history.

But it is not enough to look back. We also need to look at what is happening today because the threats against our democracy didn't go away when those black metal fences came down. Some of these threats against the democracy have found fertile soil right in this very Chamber.

January 6, 2021, will go down in history as one of the worst days our Nation has ever faced. It was disturbing. It was frightening. It was enraging. I know that I will never, ever forget it. Many people who were working here that day still carry scars. Some can be seen, and some can only be felt.

The Capitol Police, the DC Police, the National Guard members, our other first responders, Capitol staff who were there that day are really heroes, and they deserve our thanks and our continued support.

What we all witnessed that day was nothing less than a violent insurrection against the very seat of our democracy and our American form of government. It was sparked by a big lie, concocted by a political loser, and fueled by a network of his supporters.

So let me take a moment to remind everyone that Donald Trump lost the 2020 election fair and square. In my home State of Michigan, in the middle of a pandemic, more people voted than ever before, 5\1/2\ million people. And Michigan voters clearly and resoundingly chose Joe Biden to be our President and Kamala Harris to be our Vice President.

But instead of accepting defeat gracefully, like every other President in our history, Democrat or Republican, Donald Trump claimed that the election had been stolen from him. No one likes to lose an election. I have done both, winning and losing. It is not fun. But the election was not stolen from him.

But this Big Lie has fueled the entire movement, people who will stop at nothing, including deadly violence, to undermine our Constitution and our country. They attacked our Capitol a year ago today, on January 6. They will use and incite violence to disrupt future elections if they feel they need to.

And now, they are organizing on the State level to challenge the rules and take away people's freedom to vote. And tragically, our colleagues across the aisle are standing by and allowing this continuing attack on our democracy. We should be standing together, Democrats and Republicans, saying no to this assault on our Constitution and our country.

Republicans said the right things that day. The senior Senator from South Carolina said, soon after the riot, that he was humiliated and embarrassed for our country and that Trump should ``count him out.'' But a few short weeks later, Trump counted him in for 2 days of golf and dining at Mar-a-Lago.

And then there is the Republican leader. He said that the January 6 rioters were ``fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on earth because he was angry he lost an election.'' He added that Trump was ``practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day.'' And he was right.

Then the Republican leader and the majority of Republicans voted no on impeachment. They opposed a bipartisan commission to investigate the events of January 6. They blocked three bills to protect our freedom to vote, and they endorsed a Senate candidate who agrees with Trump that the 2020 election was stolen from him.

In total, 147 Republican Members of the House and Senate--147--voted to overturn the results of the 2020 election. And a number of those eight Republican Senators still won't admit that Joe Biden is our duly- elected President.

Why am I focusing on this?

Because our country has reached a critical crossroads: either we are going to come together as Americans, defend our democracy, and look back on January 6 as a painful low point in our Nation's history, or we can turn our power to a mob that is willing to do anything and say anything to dismantle our democracy and destroy--

I would be happy to.

Mr. President, let me just conclude by saying that either we are going to come together as Americans, which I hope and pray we do, to defend our democracy and look back on January 6 as a painful low point in our Nation's history or we can turn over power to a mob that is willing to do anything and say anything to dismantle our democracy and destroy this grand experiment called America.

The January 6 insurrection tried to overthrow our Capitol, and their sidekicks in suits and ties are trying to overthrow our elections. Just as we shored up our security here to protect the people's House, we need to upgrade our election laws to protect people's freedom to vote.

Today is a day to remember, to be grateful for all of those who risked and lost their lives to protect us, to be grateful for all of those who stood up for democracy and continue to stand up every single day. Today is a day to be grateful that we live in this great democracy called America, and it is a day to reconnect ourselves to protect our freedoms for our children and our grandchildren.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I am so pleased today to rise to speak about two incredibly competent women who are going to be coming before us for votes for the Michigan Federal district bench a little bit later today.

First of all, I rise in support of the nomination of Judge Shalina Kumar to be the U.S. district court judge for the Eastern District of Michigan. During her nomination hearing, Judge Kumar spoke about her father, Dr. Krishna Kumar, who moved to the United States from India. Dr. Kumar taught all of his children to believe in themselves and that they could be anything if they put their minds to it, and that is just what Shalina Kumar has done.

She was born in Royal Oak, MI, received her undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan, and graduated from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. She spent a decade in private practice before being appointed by Governor Jennifer Granholm to the Oakland County Sixth Circuit Court in 2007.

She has since been elected by Michigan voters, and since January 2018, Judge Kumar has served as the chief judge of the circuit court. During her time as a judge, Judge Kumar has presided over more than 10,500 cases, and she has served as presiding judge of the Adult Treatment Court, which allows people to avoid jail time by getting mental health treatment, help with employment and education, which is so important. During her nomination hearing, Judge Kumar talked about the amazing transformation she sees in people and how grateful they are for the opportunity to contribute to society.

She has also served as the chairperson of the Oakland County Criminal Assignment Committee, a member of the Michigan State Bar professionalism committee, and a member of the Executive Committee of the Michigan Judges Association.

If confirmed, Judge Kumar would be the first Federal judge of South Asian descent in Michigan, and there is no doubt that her father and her home State of Michigan will be very, very proud. I enthusiastically support this nomination and hope that my colleagues will do the same.

Nomination of Jane M. Beckering

Mr. President, secondly, I rise also to give strong support as well for the nomination of Judge Jane Beckering to be U.S. district court judge for the Western District of Michigan. I can think of few people more qualified or more respected and more ready to serve the people of Michigan in this new role.

Jane Beckering is a native of West Michigan. She attended the University of Michigan and then the University of Wisconsin in order to carry on her family's legacy. Both her father and her grandfather were trial lawyers--two of the world's finest, according to Judge Beckering. They believe that America's system of justice was the best in the world, and they taught Judge Beckering that civility, integrity, and respect for others are the trademarks of the legal profession.

Judge Beckering has spent her career upholding these ideals. During her more than three decades of legal experience, she has presided over and issued an opinion on more than 4,000 cases. Since 2007, she has served as a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals and is the chief judge pro tempore of the court. She was first appointed to the court by then-Governor Jennifer Granholm and later elected by the people of Michigan.

Before that, Judge Beckering was a trial attorney in Grand Rapids, and she has been actively involved in the West Michigan legal community. She has a broad range of experience in a wide range of cases, including multi-State commercial litigation, product liability, personal injury, and wrongful death cases.

For all of these reasons, Judge Beckering was strongly supported by the Western District Judicial Nominations Advisory Committee. She was unanimously rated ``well qualified'' by

the American Bar Association, and she received bipartisan support in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

She is just the type of person we need in the Federal judiciary, and I am eager for her to begin her new role. I wholeheartedly support this nomination and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Both Judge Kumar and Judge Beckering are extremely qualified and competent judicial nominations that are in front of us today, and I hope everyone will be supporting them as strongly as I am. And I know people in Michigan are very, very proud of both of them.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.