Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about a true humanitarian crisis. This is a crisis that is close to my heart, and that is because it is close to the hearts of so many wonderful people in the State of Michigan.

Michigan is home to a large and welcoming Yemeni American community-- one of the Nation's largest--and we are so proud and happy that they are part of our community. Right now these Michigan residents are horrified to watch what is happening to a country where many of them have family members and friends.

More than 4 years ago, war broke out in Yemen. Imagine 4 years of going to bed every night, wondering if this will be the night that a bomb or rocket will hit your home and destroy everything you have, including your family; 4 years of being unable to send your children to school because it is simply not safe for them to be outside; 4 years of deadly disease outbreaks with little access to medical care or even safe drinking water; perhaps worst of all, 4 years of sending your children to bed hungry every night because there is simply not enough food.

It is bad enough to think about being a parent under those circumstances. Imagine what it is like to be a child. You are 4 years old. You don't understand what is going on. You just know that you can't go outside, you can't sleep at night, and you are hungry all the time. There are 4-year-olds in Yemen today who have never lived in a country that wasn't at war.

Sadly, there are 4-year-olds in Yemen today who will never see their fifth birthday. About 1.2 million children are living in active conflict zones, meaning that a stray bullet or rocket could end their life at any moment. It is estimated that a child in Yemen dies every 10 minutes--the length of my speaking today on the floor, every 10 minutes--from a lack of food or diseases that can be prevented with adequate medical care, including vaccinations.

Overall, the United Nations estimates that no matter what we do at this moment--no matter what we do--250,000 Yemeni people will die within the next year due to malnutrition, dehydration, and by diseases like cholera.

That is astounding and horrible--250,000 people in addition to the estimated 60,000 people whose lives have been cut short due to bombings and violence.

If you are having trouble picturing 250,000 people, it is as if a fully loaded jumbo jet crashed every day for a year and then kept crashing, one per day, until late August.

If these dire circumstances don't change soon, that number could reach 10 million people by this time next year--10 million people. It is astounding. We should all feel a sense of urgency about the United States playing a positive, not a negative, role in stopping this.

I want to say again that 10 million people could die from a combination of famine, dehydration, and disease. That is like the entire populations of New York City and San Antonio being wiped off the map.

We simply cannot sit by and let this humanitarian disaster continue. I was pleased back in March when the Senate passed the bipartisan resolution to direct the U.S. Armed Forces be removed from hostilities in Yemen. I have supported this resolution since the very beginning, the first time it was on the floor. It has been gaining momentum, gaining more and more support from the Senate, and I am thankful that it finally got to the Senate.

Unfortunately, the administration chose to veto the resolution and allow the suffering to continue.

Taking action to end this suffering is more than just the right thing to do; it is our moral obligation as fellow human beings. That is why I am calling on all of the Members in the Chamber, all of the Members in the Senate to stand together to override the veto and end the U.S. support for this conflict. We need a clear strategy on how to take an active role in deescalating the conflict and addressing the accompanying humanitarian crisis.

We should be leading the international response--leading the international response and working with international partners to find a solution, not contributing to the problem.

We should be supporting peace talks that involve all parties, all of which are contributing to this horrible, horrible humanitarian crisis.

We know who not to blame for all of this--those scared and hungry 4- year-olds who have spent every day of their lives just trying to stay alive. Can you imagine how their parents are feeling about this situation that their children are in as well?

Ending this conflict and humanitarian crisis is where we should be focusing our policies and our political might.

I will be voting to override this Presidential veto, and I encourage every Member of the Chamber to join me--join us, together, in doing the right thing. It is time to do the right thing for those 4-year-olds, for all of the people in Yemen who just want to be able to feed their families, send their children to school, have a safe home, and be able to carry on with their lives.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, today I wish to pay special tribute to Olivet College in Eaton County, which this year is celebrating 175 years of educating the people of Michigan.

Let's think back to 1844. Michigan had been a State for only 7 years. The very first women's rights convention at Seneca Falls in New York was still 4 years away, and it would be another 19 years before President Lincoln would sign the Emancipation Proclamation.

It was an era marked by gender and racial inequality; yet a group of leaders led by ``Father'' John J. Shipherd had a different vision: a college founded on the values of inclusion, mutual respect, honesty, and integrity, a Christian institution where neither gender, nor race, nor lack of financial resources would prevent people from attaining an education.

This was a radical idea. Coeducation--women and men learning alongside one another in the same classrooms--was rare at the time, so was admitting Black students alongside White students and poor students alongside the affluent.

It was so controversial, in fact, that Olivet College wasn't formally chartered by the State until 1859. Then in 1863, in the midst of the Civil War, the college honored its first graduating class: Mary N. Barber, Sara Benedict, and Sophia A. Keys.

One hundred seventy-five years later, a lot has changed, but Olivet College's core values remain the same.

Those values include diversity. Comets come from all across Michigan and the United States and nine other nations around the world. Half are the first person in their families to go to college, and half come from low-income families. About 1 in 3 Comets are students of color.

Those values include inclusivity. That is a special focus of the Olivet College Women's Leadership Institute, which helps young women from middle school through college recognize and cultivate their unique strengths and abilities and become Michigan's and America's next generation of leaders.

Those values include community. Comets aren't just responsible for their own education. Whether they are sharing perspectives in the classroom, working together to score a goal on the soccer field, or combining their voices in the Olivet College Gospel Choir, students are committed to the growth of others.

Those values include service; 100 percent of Comets take part in service learning, where students use what they have learned in the classroom to solve real-life problems both in the community and around the world. Just as it did in 1844, Olivet College understands that the future of humanity rests in the hands, hearts, and minds of those who will accept responsibility for themselves and others.

The founders of Olivet College once wrote this: ``We wish simply to do good to our students, by placing in their hands the means of intellectual, moral and spiritual improvement, and to teach them the divine art and science of doing good to others.''

Doing good to others--since 1844, Olivet College has been doing just that. Congratulations to students, faculty, staff, and alumni on your first 175 years.

Thank you.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. President, it seems that every week now, I come to the floor to say the same thing, which is that healthcare is not political; it is personal. There is no part of healthcare that is more personal than the decision regarding if, when, and under what circumstances to have a child. And that certainly is the case when things go terribly wrong, which they sometimes do. These reproductive health decisions need to be made by women in consultation with their doctors, their families, and their faith. That is what the Supreme Court has ruled. They should not be made by politicians--mainly men-- looking to score political points from women's personal tragedies. Yet, once again, that is what the Republicans are doing right now.

I have a question. How dare you pretend to care about the health of women and babies when all of your actions suggest otherwise?

Unfortunately, Republicans haven't noticed, but we have a real healthcare crisis involving women and babies in this country. In most of the world, fewer and fewer women are dying from childbirth--not here in the United States. Our maternal mortality rate is climbing. More women are dying. Our infant mortality rate ranks a shameful 32 among the world's 35 wealthiest nations. That means we have more babies who aren't surviving through the first year of their life because of lack of healthcare, nutrition, and other issues.

The Republican majority should be working with us and taking action to improve health outcomes for moms and babies. Instead, they are busy trying to take away their healthcare.

Between 2010 and 2018, the Republican majority in Congress voted to repeal or weaken the Affordable Care Act more than 70 times--7-0. Now the Trump administration has stepped in to help. Last June and August, they expanded access to association health plans and short-term plans. We just call them junk plans because they don't cover so many basics, like prescription drugs, mental health care, and--you guessed it-- maternity care.

Let me remind everyone that before the Affordable Care Act, most insurance companies did not cover prenatal care and maternity care as a basic part of healthcare. Women had to go out

and pay extra, get a rider to cover something that is a basic part of our healthcare.

Thanks to these junk plans that don't cover maternity care, and other sabotage, it is estimated that right now comprehensive health insurance costs 16.6 percent more than it otherwise would because of these efforts to undermine, sabotage, and take away healthcare. Does that sound like the Republican majority cares about moms and babies?

Now the Department of Justice has announced that it agrees with the Federal judge in Texas who said the entire Affordable Care Act must be struck down. This is something the President has enthusiastically embraced.

The entire Affordable Care Act is at stake, including Medicaid expansion for low-income workers who want to work but now have to choose between working and having healthcare coverage, children staying on their parents' plans until age 26, and protections for people with preexisting conditions.

In other words, if a baby is born with spina bifida, a heart defect, a genetic condition, or any other health problem, insurance companies would once again, under these plans, be able to deny them coverage or subject them to lifetime limits like we used to have. Does that sound like policies that care about moms and babies?

By the way, to emphasize that they support President Trump 100 percent, 2 weeks ago Senate Republicans passed a budget resolution out of committee on a party-line vote that once again has language to repeal the Affordable Care Act with no replacement. Sorry, moms and babies, you are on your own. And don't go looking to Medicaid for health coverage either. The Trump budget would cut $1.5 trillion from Medicaid over 10 years--trillion. That is the same Medicaid that covers half of all babies born in America. When you gut Medicaid, you are keeping moms and babies from getting the healthcare they need. Does that sound as though Republicans care about moms and babies?

If our Republican colleagues really care about the health of moms and babies, here is what they should be doing and joining us to do: They would pass a bill to guarantee that every insurance plan covers prenatal and maternity care, like what is available under the Affordable Care Act. They would reaffirm the Affordable Care Act's protections for people with preexisting conditions, not just saying the words but actually making sure people with preexisting conditions are covered. And they would strengthen healthcare for moms and babies through the Children's Health Insurance Program and Medicaid.

A few years ago, the Finance Committee reported out a bill that I led with Senator Grassley called the Quality Care for Moms and Babies Act. This bill would create a set of maternal and infant quality care measures under CHIP and Medicaid--the Children's Health Insurance Program and Medicaid. The goal is simple: improving maternal and infant health outcomes. We need quality standards across the country.

Right now, half the births are through Medicaid. There are not consistent quality standards across the country to make sure there are healthy opportunities for prenatal care and maternity care.

The Quality Care for Moms and Babies Act would help make sure that every mom gets the best pregnancy care possible and every baby gets a healthy start. If our Republican colleagues care so much about the health of moms and babies, instead of politicizing issues around reproductive health and women's ability to make their own choices-- instead of politicizing what is happening around reproductive health, they would join us in making the Quality Care for Moms and Baby Act a reality.

It is time to stop the cynical, political stunts. It is time to trust women to make the best reproductive healthcare decisions for themselves, their families, and their futures. It is time to take action to resolve the maternal and infant health crisis in this country. It is also time to ensure that every mom and every baby has the healthcare they need for a healthy life.

This is the United States of America; we can do better for our moms and babies than is currently being done. Democrats are ready to take real action to join with our Republican colleagues. It is time they join us in protecting the health of moms and babies.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

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

Madam President, I have come to the floor many times, and I come to the floor today to say something straightforward. Healthcare is personal, not political. Despite all the debates, everything that has gone on around healthcare, for every family in Michigan and across the country and for every one of us, healthcare is personal, not political.

If your child gets sick in the middle of the night and needs to be taken to the emergency room, you don't care who the doctor voted for in the last Presidential election.

If you are diagnosed with cancer or a chronic condition, you are more interested in receiving the care you need than the ins and outs of the insurance plan that provides that care.

If your mom or dad needs to move into a nursing home, you want to make sure they are happy and that they are treated well, regardless of the specific Medicaid reimbursement rate.

Healthcare is personal to each and every one of us, not political, and it affects each and every one of us, whether we watch MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, or don't turn on the television.

That is why, when this administration and Republicans in Congress try to take away people's healthcare over and over and over again, I take it personally. You know who else takes it personally? The American people. Certainly, I know the people of Michigan do.

Back in November, they sent a message at the ballot box. Unfortunately, the administration and Republicans in Congress missed the message. They could be working across the aisle right now to expand access to care and improve quality and reduce costs. This is something I work to do all the time. Instead, they are, once again, trying to take away your healthcare.

If you don't believe me, just take a look at President Trump's budget. This administration wants to pay for a huge tax giveaway for the wealthiest among us by taking away people's healthcare.

Let me say that again.

They are asking us to pay for a budget-busting tax giveaway for the wealthy by taking healthcare away from people who depend on Medicare and Medicaid. Many of us, when this tax bill passed, said that when they were creating almost $2 trillion in deficit, watch out because the next thing will be a discussion to say: Oh. Oh my gosh. We have a big deficit. We have to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, and the other things that directly affect people, with healthcare at the top of the list.

So what happens? Well, the Trump budget would cut $800 billion from Medicare over the next 10 years. That is taking away healthcare from our seniors, people with disabilities. The Trump budget would cut $1.5 trillion from Medicaid over the next 10 years. That is taking healthcare away from half of all the babies born in America who are covered by Medicaid--them and their moms. That is taking healthcare away from two in three seniors who get their nursing home care from Medicaid healthcare. That is taking away healthcare from everyone who has benefited from expanding Medicaid, including low-income, minimum- wage working people, working families, including more than 650,000 people in my State of Michigan covered by a very successful program called Healthy Michigan.

Ninety-seven percent of Michigan children can see a doctor when they get sick or hurt now because of what has happened with Michigan, with Healthy Michigan and other coverage, and the number of people treated without insurance has dropped 50 percent, which means instead of folks dropping into the emergency room who can't pay and everybody else's insurance rates go up to pay for it, people now have their own insurance, and those costs have dropped by 50 percent--the number of people walking in without insurance.

What has that meant for the State of Michigan? Taxpayers had more than $400 million back into the budget in the State of Michigan last year because of the savings because of Healthy Michigan.

We should be building on this progress. Instead, Republicans are, once again, trying to take your healthcare away.

Between 2010 and 2018, the Republican majority in Congress voted to repeal or weaken the Affordable Care Act more than 70 times--70--with no replacement. Now the Trump administration has stepped in to help because they weren't successful in Congress. We were able to stop that because people rose up and said: My healthcare is personal not political. People from across the country engaged and we were able to stop it in Congress. So now the Trump administration has stepped in to do a number of things to sabotage the Affordable Care Act.

Look at what has happened in the last year. Last February, the Trump administration announced it would provide funding to States that want to let insurance plans cover fewer services, encouraging fewer services to be covered.

Last April, they issued a rule that, among other things, allowed insurers

to hike premiums 15 percent without justification.

In June and August, they expanded access to Association Health Plans and what are called short-term plans, which we also call junk health plans because they are a lot cheaper, but they don't cover much, and people don't realize that until they get sick. These plans don't have to cover prescription drugs or mental health or maternity care.

By the way, as the person who led that fight in the Senate Finance Committee, I can tell you that the vast majority of insurance plans prior to the Affordable Care Act did not cover maternity care and prenatal care, which is pretty basic as part of healthcare for women. Remember when being a woman was considered a preexisting condition? That is what we meant. These plans are bringing that back, which means if you are a woman, you have to pay more to be able to get basic healthcare, and that is wrong. We did away with that 10 years ago.

In July, the Trump administration slashed funding for programs that help people enroll in health insurance coverage and began steering people toward the junk plans. So instead of giving people information through healthcare.gov and encouraging people to find out what would be the cheapest plan that would be effective and cover what they need, they made it harder to sign up for comprehensive coverage and pushed people toward these junk plans.

In October, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced that healthcare.gov would be shut down for 60 hours during open enrollment season for ``maintenance,'' so you couldn't even get online to be able to sign up for more affordable, comprehensive insurance that actually would cover things you and your family need.

In November, the Trump administration released information for States on how they could use waivers to undermine consumer protections. Consumer protections are things like not getting dropped if you get sick. Prior to the Affordable Care Act, so many times people said to me: I have paid for insurance all my life and never needed it. I finally need it, and I got dropped after I got sick. What do you mean it only covers 1 day in the hospital or doesn't cover maternity care? What do you mean the insurance company can cap the number of cancer treatments I need? Isn't that up to my doctor?

Well, it is now, and it has been under the Affordable Care Act. Instead, we are in a situation where they are trying to get States to waive consumer protections and put decisions back in the hands of insurance companies.

Thanks to all of this sabotage, it is estimated that comprehensive health insurance costs 16.6 percent more this year than it otherwise would.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my statement, which will be about 2 minutes.

Thank you very much.

It is estimated that comprehensive health insurance costs 16.6 percent more this year than it otherwise would because of all of this sabotage, upheaval, and chaos in the healthcare markets.

In case those sabotage attempts were too subtle, last week the Department of Justice announced that it agrees--the Trump administration now agrees with the Federal judge in Texas who said that the entire Affordable Care Act must be struck down. There would be no more coverage for preexisting conditions, no more consumer protections, no more capacity to have your child on your insurance until age 26, no more capacity to be able to expand what we are doing for minimum wage workers, et cetera.

In other words, if they can't take away your health insurance through the legislative process, they are trying to do it now through the courts, which also goes to what is happening now in terms of changing the rules so they can more quickly put judges through and pack the courts with folks who will agree with taking away people's healthcare.

What is the Republican alternative to the ACA? Unfortunately, these folks still don't have one. Don't worry. President Trump now says that he is going to have a ``really great'' healthcare plan after he is reelected in 2020. Just wait.

By the way, to emphasize the fact that Senate Republicans support what President Trump is doing, they passed a budget resolution out of committee last week through a partisan vote--only Republican votes-- that includes repeal of the Affordable Care Act with no replacement in place.

In the meantime, the Affordable Care Act could be struck down by the courts, and more than 20 million people who gained health coverage through the Affordable Care Act could be out of luck.

Let me say, in conclusion, that just this week I heard from one of those 20 million people. Lisa from Norton Shores graduated with a marketing degree in the middle of a recession and worked a low-wage job at the local hospital for 8 years. When a part-time, temporary job opened up at a local marketing agency, the Affordable Care Act allowed Lisa to take the job and get the experience she needed for a career in her field. She was able to get healthcare separately from her job. That job led to another marketing job with a local company--this one with benefits.

A few years later, the original marketing agency offered Lisa a full- time job. Once again, the ACA allowed her to take it. Lisa wrote this:

It was only through the Affordable Care Act that I have

been able to pull myself up to be a contributing member of

society. It has allowed me to rise to my capabilities.

She added that if the ACA is overturned, ``I will have to leave this job for a position that includes health insurance. It would kill this awesome small business I work for. . . . This will be a top priority for me when I vote in 2020.''

Lisa and millions of other people are sending a message. The only question is, Are folks listening?

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I want to thank my friend and colleague from Maryland for his powerful words, as well as all of my colleagues who are here for their leadership on this incredibly important issue.

Climate change is real. Carbon pollution is real. It is having a real effect in my State of Michigan. We can and must take real action to do something about it. It is not a time for playing political games. Frankly, the stakes are just plain too high. We should be coming together around a resolution that our entire Democratic caucus has put together that simply says this: Climate change is real; climate change is caused by humans; Congress must act on climate change. Let's start there. We can't even get bipartisan support for this, which is so basic. Let's start there and then take specific action.

I was very encouraged a few weeks ago when Chairwoman Murkowski and Ranking Member Manchin on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on climate change. It was the first one since I have been on the committee. It may be the first one ever to talk about the incredibly disastrous impacts of what is happening in Alaska, as well as around our country. We should be working together across the aisle to solve this big problem and to come together with specific actions after the hearing. I am looking forward to that.

Instead, the Republican leader is playing ``gotcha'' politics with an issue that is hurting real people from Bristol Bay to the Missouri River Basin to the Great Lakes. Frankly, it is insulting, and the people who are having their livelihoods upended deserve better.

You don't have to spend much time in Michigan to see the effects, unfortunately. The Great Lakes Basin has warmed more over the last 30 years than the rest of the contiguous United States. That is not a position we want to be in.

Precipitation is up 11 percent since 1900. That means more flooding. Flooding is worse. Between 2040 and 2060--which actually is not that far away, particularly when we are looking at our children and grandchildren--Northern Michigan and the Upper Peninsula could see 500 percent more 100-year floods.

Heat waves in Michigan have tripled compared to the long-term average. It is estimated that by 2040 the dangerously hot days could cause 760 people in the Detroit metro area alone to die each year when they otherwise wouldn't. Rising energy demands will require more than $6 billion in infrastructure improvements. Cold water fish species could simply die off, threatening our $5 billion per year sport fishing industry.

Agricultural productivity could fall to 1980 levels by 2050. Keep in mind that by then, our planet's population will be double what it was in 1980. If agricultural productivity is falling at that point, that will be a disaster, not only for the United States and our people but for around the world.

These changes are already hurting our people in Michigan and our economy. Just talk to a cherry grower who has lost an entire crop because of warm weather in February--which causes his trees to bloom too early, and then the freeze comes and wipes out all the cherry trees--or a family whose fishing and boating business is threatened by invasive species and toxic algal blooms or the family who lost their 12-year-old son when flooding caused the basement of their home to collapse.

Perhaps you are more motivated by the bottom line. If that is the case, you should just talk to insurance company executives. Their companies paid out a record $135 billion from natural disasters in 2017 alone. That is nearly three times as much as the historic annual average. By the way, after we finish voting on this resolution that the Republican leader is bringing up, we are going to be asked to vote on a disaster package to help States and communities that have been impacted by carbon pollution and climate change. We will only see more of that if we don't take real action.

It is not time for words. It is time for action. It is time to focus like a laser on reducing carbon pollution, reversing the damage that has already been done and creating good jobs at home.

I am so pleased that Michigan right now is leading in green new jobs in the Midwest. We need to ensure that the United States--not China--is the global leader on advanced transportation technologies like electric and hydrogen vehicles. We need to invest more in renewable energy and the research that is making it more affordable all the time.

I realize my time is up. Let me just say, in closing, we can do something about this. We have done this before. When we discovered acid rain about 40 years ago, we put together a market-based program and were able to fix that issue. CFCs, chemicals that break down into chlorine and eat away at the ozone layer--today, that hole in the ozone is closing because of actions we took together. Now is the time to take real action on carbon pollution, agree to these basic principles, and then move forward together on behalf of our children and grandchildren.

Would my friend from North Dakota pause for a question?

Will my friend from North Dakota be willing to yield for a question?

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I am here on the floor to ultimately speak regarding Mr. Readler's nomination, but I do want to respond to my colleagues. It is hard to know where we begin because so much is said that doesn't make any sense. It is made up. It is ridiculous.

What I wanted to address as my colleague was speaking was where it said in the Green New Deal that we couldn't have ice cream. I have looked everywhere. I like ice cream, and I was shocked that we weren't going to have ice cream. Sure enough, there is nowhere where it says that they are outlawing ice cream.

For people who like cheeseburgers and milkshakes, I don't see anything in there about that either.

As the lead Democrat in the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, who works with farmers every single day and appreciates the great work they are doing to stop carbon pollution, I would just have to say that it is pretty silly, if it weren't so serious, how the Republican majority and the Republican leader are mocking what is probably the most serious issue of our time.

There are many things that I care about and the people in Michigan care about, but if we don't get a handle on what is happening on this erratic and dangerous weather, it is going to affect every part of our economy and every part of our way of life.

So if the majority leader or others want to say that we are declaring a war to outlaw air travel or the military or ice cream, that is absurd and would be funny if the whole subject weren't so serious.

By the way, in addition to that, the Republican majority leader said that we want to end air travel and cow farts. By the way, just for the record, cows don't fart; they belch.

The fact is that this mocking the serious, serious issue of our time, where we can't get the majority to join us on a simple resolution to say that climate change is real, that it is man-made, and that we need to act and that we have a responsibility to our children and our grandchildren to act. Let's start there.

I don't want to hear that somehow the world is coming to an end if there is a proposal that passes and not have something in its place that addresses what is actually happening in terms of the threats to all of us, our families, our States, and our economy.

This is real. This subject is real. It needs a real discussion. We can have differences. We will have differences on how to address it, and that is fine--but to mock the whole subject of what is happening right before our eyes. We have to make up new names now for weather events in Michigan. Not only do we have polar vortexes where the cold is rolling down because of the warming in the Arctic, but we have cyclone bombs or bomb cyclones--I am not sure which it is--but it is weather, wind events, that come at 60, 80 miles an hour into a community like a cyclone bomb. We are having to make up new terms for what is happening right in front of us.

So I would hope that when it comes to this discussion on what happens with the weather and climate change, that we would put aside the games, stop making stuff up, and have a serious discussion about how we can come together, create new jobs, move the economy, stop carbon pollution, and make sure our kids and grandkids actually have something to be proud of.

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

Mr. President, I have often said healthcare is not political. It is personal, and there is no part of healthcare that is more personal than the decision if, when, and under what circumstances to have a child and who decides the medical course of action in a serious medical crisis.

These decisions need to be made by women, their families, and their doctors. They should not be made by politicians who are more focused on their own political advantage rather than medical tragedies facing pregnant women at the end of pregnancy who want desperately to have a child.

Our Republican friends know very well that nobody--and I mean nobody--in this Chamber supports infanticide. No one. In fact, in 2002, Congress voted unanimously--100 Members, including myself--to reaffirm that it is illegal, period. Suggesting otherwise is insulting and, frankly, disgusting, and it is beneath the dignity of the U.S. Senate.

How dare the majority pretend to care about the health of women and children. If the Republican majority cares about the health of moms and their babies, why are you continuing to try to take their healthcare away? The President and the Republican majority have tried again and again and again to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Let me remind you that before the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies could, and most of the time did, refuse to cover maternity care as basic healthcare for women, leaving parents with bills of tens of thousands of dollars for an uncomplicated birth.

As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I was proud to author the provision requiring maternity care in the Affordable Care Act. I remember the debate. I remember a very specific debate with a former colleague from Arizona, and I remember Republican efforts to strip that provision to cover maternity care from the Affordable Care Act. Fortunately, they were not successful. Now the administration is legalizing and offering junk insurance plans that treat being a woman as a preexisting condition again.

One study found that none--none--of the newly approved plans cover maternity care. Maternity care is not a frill. It is basic healthcare for women, and if we are seeing more and more of these healthcare plans being put on the market, where women assume they are going to be covered and once again will not be, that is outrageous.

Why aren't we passing a bill to guarantee that prenatal care and maternity care are covered for moms and babies as essential healthcare in every insurance plan? I assure you, this medical care is essential, and until parts of the Affordable Care Act began to be unwound by the administration, it was viewed as essential care for every woman.

How dare you pretend to care about the health of women and children while voting to dramatically slash Medicaid and healthcare for low- income working families. When you gut Medicaid, you are keeping moms and babies from getting the healthcare they need. In fact, Medicaid provided prenatal care and maternity care for 43 percent of American moms and babies born in 2016--43 percent. Why aren't we voting to strengthen Medicaid? Why aren't we voting to strengthen Medicaid healthcare for moms and babies? Why isn't that being brought to the floor?

A few years ago, the Senate Finance Committee reported out a bill that I led with Senator Grassley called the Quality Care for Moms and Babies Act. This bill would create a set of maternal and infant quality care standards in the Children's Health Insurance Program and Medicaid. The goal is simple: improving maternal and infant health outcomes. Shouldn't we all want to do that?

Let me be clear. We have no uniform quality standards right now across the country for almost half of the births that occur every year. The Quality Care for Moms and Babies Act will help

make sure every mom--every mom--gets the best pregnancy care possible and every baby gets a healthy start. Why isn't that a top priority for action in the U.S. Senate, to protect the health of moms and babies?

Let's also be clear. We have a real healthcare crisis that we need to address in this country. In most of the world, fewer and fewer women are dying from child birth but not in the United States. In fact, our maternal mortality rate is climbing. More women are dying, and our infant mortality rate ranks a shameful 32 out of 35 of the world's wealthiest nations. The United States of America is 32 out of 35 countries--wealthiest countries in the world--in the number of infants that are dying in birth. That is something we need to have a sense of urgency to act on.

There are a lot of things on healthcare. There are a lot of things to improve outcomes for children and moms and give them a healthy start and a healthy life that we should be doing right now, as well as stopping the administration from undermining basic healthcare for women and children. It is time to stop the cynical political stunts and start protecting--really protecting--the health of moms and babies.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about a vote that we will be having in just a few minutes on the process of moving Andrew Wheeler forward as the EPA Administrator.

This is not a time for talk; it is not time for theoretical debates. This is certainly not the time for an EPA Administrator who, during his time at the EPA, has ignored climate scientists, rolled back climate regulations, and taken action that will lead to more carbon pollution.

Instead, this is a time for bold, decisive action. We need to act today because life on our planet depends on it. The fate of our Nation depends on it. Our children's and grandchildren's futures depend on it.

For those reasons, I cannot support Andrew Wheeler for the critical position of EPA Administrator.

Climate change is real. In fact, it is more than real. It is an existential crisis, and it is already having real impact on Michigan families and Michigan's economy.

Some call it global warming. Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist from Texas Tech, has a better term. She call calls it ``global weirding.'' Ask anybody in Michigan. Things have been weird.

Our lakes are heating up. In fact, Lake Superior is getting about 2 degrees warmer each decade. That could make the lake a happy home for invasive species, like sea lamprey.

As the waters warm, these parasites grow and kill off more trout and salmon and other fish that are key to the Great Lakes' $8 billion recreational fishing industry. It is believed that warmer temperatures contributed to algal blooms on the lake last summer.

Other changes we are seeing are life-threatening.

Thanks to the polar vortex in January, Michigan experienced temperatures colder than Antarctica. Scientists believe that climate change has caused the jet stream to become wobbly--that is a technical term, ``wobbly''--pushing dangerously frigid air south.

Folks say: Well, how can it be global warming when we see the polar vortex? It is about what is happening to destabilize the atmosphere and the planet and the changes that are occurring.

Last weekend, a bomb cyclone hit my State, leaving tens of thousands of Michigan residents without power.

We are having to come up with new terms. I had never heard of a bomb cyclone--60-mile-an-hour winds, ripping up homes and farms and roadways.

The intensity of what is happening is incredible. The travel was so treacherous in Otsego County that all roads were closed--all of the roads were closed. Even drivers on Interstate 75 were getting stuck in drifts. That is our major highway.

We can't link any specific storm to climate change. However, we do know that overall climate change is making storms more intense. They are longer. They are more intense. They are happening more frequently with more intensity.

Last summer in Houghton County, more than 5\1/2\ inches of rain fell in 6 hours. It caused at least $100 million in damage to infrastructure, and a 12-year-old-boy died when the basement of his home collapsed.

Our climate is changing, but you don't have to take my word for it. Just ask insurance company executives. Their companies paid out a record $135 billion--billion dollars--from natural disasters in 2017 alone. That is almost three times as much as the historic annual average, and their projections show it getting worse.

We need to take action on climate change. While it is not widely recognized, I want to speak about something positive that we have done, and that was last year's farm bill.

As you know, the farm bill passed the Senate with a vote of 87 to 13--the most votes in history. While the bill was historic for a number of reasons, one of those is that it includes the most ambitious Federal climate-smart agricultural and forestry policies to date, working with farmers and ranchers as partners.

It helps farmers implement climate-smart policies by revamping USDA conservation programs to prioritize investments in soil carbon sequestration, incentivizing the planting of cover crops, and expanding USDA support for farmer participation in carbon markets.

It also invests in the Rural Energy for America Program, which helps farmers and rural small businesses install renewable energy systems and creates a joint USDA-Department of Energy education grant program to drive carbon capture projects across rural America.

We must also protect forests and farmland, which serve as vital carbon sinks that hold carbon rather than releasing it and making the destabilization even worse.

The farm bill amends the popular Healthy Forests Reserve Program to prioritize carbon sequestration practices programs and discourage the development of forestland. It authorizes new programs to restore national forest landscapes, protect carbon-rich, old-growth trees, and prevent uncharacteristic wildfires and their emissions. It establishes a landmark soil health demonstration trial to keep carbon in the ground and promote healthy and productive farmland.

I am proud of what we did. It was done with the partnership of farmers and ranchers, and I have to say that our farmers understand the importance of protecting our land--their land--air, and water, I think, as much as, if not more than anyone else. No one's business is more impacted by severe and erratic weather than our farmers. They are caught right in the middle of it, and I appreciate their working with us to be part of the solution.

I am also working with my colleagues on policies to ensure that the United States, not China, is the global leader on advanced transportation technologies like electric and hydrogen vehicles.

Meanwhile, Andrew Wheeler and the Trump administration are upending fuel economy and carbon regulations in a way that hurts the auto industry, consumers, and our environment. We need to invest more in renewable energy and the research that is making it more affordable all the time.

Electric utilities in Michigan have committed to dramatically increase renewable electricity, reduce carbon emissions by 80 percent, and stop burning coal.

Meanwhile, Andrew Wheeler and the Trump administration have rolled back the historic Clean Power Plan.

I am proud of the fact that Michigan utilities are moving forward anyway because they know it is the right thing and they know what is at stake. But this administration--Andrew Wheeler--has rolled back the historic Clean Power Plan, the Nation's first regulation of greenhouse gases from the power sector.

We need to be laser-focused on climate change and the existential threat it represents. Meanwhile, Andrew Wheeler and the Trump administration are doing their best to pretend that climate change is no big deal. That is even as the Pentagon recently concluded that two- thirds of critical military installations are threatened--two-thirds of critical military installations are threatened--by climate change.

Climate change is a big deal, and it is time to do something about it that is real--not play political games, but to actually do something thoughtful and real about it.

In the wise words of Hank Williams, Jr., ``We need a little less talk and a lot more action.'' Andrew Wheeler has repeatedly shown no interest in acting. In fact, he wants to take us backward--and is taking us backward--on climate change. He has no interest in reducing, let alone eliminating, carbon pollution. We need to act, and it is clear that Andrew Wheeler is the wrong person to lead the EPA at this critical time for our country.

I urge a ``no'' vote on Andrew Wheeler for EPA Administrator.

Madam President, I wish to pay tribute to a true Michigan and American legend: the Dean of the House and my longtime friend, Congressman John D. Dingell.

Congressman Dingell ably represented his district for 59 years, the longest tenure of any Member in history. However, his service to our Nation started long before that.

He was there on the House floor as a page on December 8, 1941, to hear President Roosevelt declare that the bombing of Pearl Harbor was ``a day which will live in infamy.'' Three years later, he joined the Army to fight against Nazi Germany. He would have been in the Battle of the Bulge if he hadn't been hospitalized with meningitis Later, he was 3 days away from shipping out to the Pacific Theater to take part in a ground invasion of Japan when the atomic bombs were dropped.

So John Dingell proved his patriotism long before he joined Congress in 1955, following the death of his beloved father, who preceded him as Representative for Michigan's 15th Congressional District.

When he joined Congress, there was no Interstate Highway System. Alaska and Hawaii were not yet States, and Medicare and Medicaid did not exist yet. In fact, he helped vote these lifesaving programs into law.

Congressman Dingell was not merely a witness to history. He was a maker of it. His original family name, translated into Polish, meant ``blacksmith.'' That was fitting because this was a man who hammered out our Nation's laws, forging a stronger union that could weather the challenges of the future.

Perhaps his most courageous vote occurred in 1964, in favor of the Civil Rights Act. Advisers told him that vote would destroy his chances at reelection; yet Congressman Dingell had faith in his constituents, and he refused to compromise his principles for the sake of political survival.

Healthcare was one of his passions, one that he inherited from his father. John Dingell, Sr., introduced a bill for universal healthcare in 1945 and continued to fight for it till the end of his life.

John Dingell, Jr., adopted that cause from his first day as his father's successor. He always believed that every American should have access to healthcare, and he never stopped working to make that goal a reality.

As a boy, he lived through America's Great Depression, and as a Congressman, he helped to overcome America's Great Recession.

He witnessed the rise of the automobile industry and saw how those unionized workers built America's middle class. Then he led efforts with me and others in the Michigan delegation to make sure that American autos and American workers could compete on an even playing field.

While scientific consensus was still forming about how pollution threatened our air, land, and water, John Dingell wrote the Endangered Species Act in 1973 and the major expansion of the Clean Air Act in 1990.

He led our efforts to create the first national wildlife refuge in North America and teamed up with me and my friend and former colleague, Senator Levin, to make the River Raisin Battlefield a national park.

John Dingell loved Michigan. He understood the connection our people have to manufacturing, to agriculture, and to the land and our Great Lakes.

Even during the years he spent chairing the House Energy and Commerce Committee, when Congressman Dingell was one of the most powerful Members of Congress, you could still find him riding atop a Ford Mustang convertible at Dearborn's Memorial Day Parade or at a booth at the Monroe County Fair.

The people of his district never doubted his dedication. That is why they would still put ``Dingell for Congress'' signs on their lawn, long after his district boundaries had changed. If a piece of Southeast Michigan was ``Dingell Country'' once, then it was Dingell Country forever.

This was not a man eager to retire; he loved his job too much. He considered it an enormous privilege, one that gave meaning and purpose to his life. He fought for his constituents until his health prevented him from fighting anymore.

And he felt great pride and his constituents felt great comfort knowing that the district would remain in the hands of his beloved wife, Debbie, who was his closest confidant for more than 40 years and understood him better than anyone.

I know that all of us are sending her and their family and many friends our love and support at this time.

He certainly had many, many friends. He gained a whole new generation of fans through his always-pithy Twitter account, and I am going to miss reading his take on the news of the day.

Up until the very end, he was constantly evolving, charging boldly into the future, driven by a very simple principle: ``We are put on this earth to help people.'' That was just what he did.

John D. Dingell, Jr., claimed to be the ``luckiest man in shoe leather.'' I have to say that Michigan and America were very lucky too.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to a Michigan veteran whose bravery, spirit of service, and selfless dedication to his fellow soldiers earned him the Nation's highest military honor and the eternal gratitude of 44 American families.

Charles S. Kettles was Michigan through and through. He was born in Ypsilanti in 1930, and that is where he passed away on January 21, 2019, a couple of weeks after his 89th birthday.

He attended Edison Institute High School in Dearborn and fell in love with flying in the school's flight simulator. Perhaps it was no surprise; his father served as a military pilot during both World Wars.

Charlie was active in the community. He and his brother opened a Ford dealership in DeWitt. He later earned a master's degree in industrial technology from Eastern Michigan University and launched its aviation program. He served on the Ypsilanti City Council and in the local Kiwanis club. He was close to his family and enjoyed his nine grandchildren.

In many ways, Charlie lived an ordinary Michigan life. What made his life truly extraordinary were events that happened far away from Ypsilanti on the other side of the world.

Charlie was drafted into the Army in 1951, attended Army aviation school, and served tours in Japan and Thailand. He retired from Active Duty in 1956, and that could have been the end of his military service, but the Army was in desperate need of helicopter pilots during the Vietnam war. So in 1963, Charlie volunteered for active duty and learned to fly the UH-1D ``Huey.''

Those skills would save lives on May 15, 1967, when then-Major Kettles volunteered to lead a flight of six Hueys on a rescue mission when members of the 101st Airborne Division were ambushed by enemy troops.

The helicopters came under fire, but that didn't stop Charlie. He kept on flying. When he returned to base after his second rescue flight, his helicopter was leaking fuel, and his gunner had been severely wounded.

Then the call came in: 44 Americans still needed to be evacuated. Charlie found a Huey that wasn't leaking fuel, led a flight of six evacuation helicopters back to the landing zone, and successfully rescued the stranded men--or so he thought.

On the flight back to base, Charlie learned that eight troops had been unable to reach the evacuation helicopters. He didn't hesitate. With no regard for his own safety, he turned his Huey around and returned to the landing zone.

His helicopter was hit by gunfire, and a mortar round damaged the rotor blade and shattered the windshield. Despite the damage, Charlie skillfully navigated his helicopter to the landing zone. The remaining troops scrambled aboard, and all 44 finally made it off the battlefield.

Charlie was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the Army's second-highest citation for valor, in 1968; yet when I heard his story, I thought, if anyone was ever worthy of receiving the Medal of Honor, Charlie was.

Typically, the Medal of Honor must be awarded within 5 years of the heroic act. That is why, in 2015, I introduced legislation with Senator Gary Peters and Congresswoman Debbie Dingell to allow Charlie to receive the Medal of Honor. In 2016, that is just what happened.

``In a lot of ways, Chuck is America,'' President Obama said during his Medal of Honor ceremony at the White House. ``To the dozens of American soldiers that he saved in Vietnam half a century ago, Chuck is the reason that they lived and came home and had children and grandchildren. Entire family trees--made possible by the actions of this one man.''

Charlie remained humble about his award.

``Out of all of that, there is really only one thing that means anything--those 40 names are not on the wall in D.C. Awards are nice, but there is far more gratitude in simply knowing that.''

Charlie Kettles was a real-life hero and the very best of Michigan. The people of my State and the families of the 44 men he saved will remain forever grateful for his service and sacrifice.

Thank you.

Madam President, I am very proud to be a cosponsor of the Peters amendment, as well as other amendments that Senator Peters has put forward, and I thank him very much for his leadership.

To me, this is common sense. I am very disappointed that this will not be included in this bill. I will join Senator Peters in advocating in the House for this clarification and other changes that will make it very clear about an individual's right to be able to have freedom of speech in all of its forms.

It is very unfortunate today that we could not have adopted this commonsense approach that would have made this bill, I think, stronger than it is now.

I thank Senator Peters for his hard work on this.