Floor Statements

Mr. President, first, I just want to say for the record that it has been 36 days since Republican colleagues voted down the strongest border security bill in decades. So that is a reality.

But what I wanted to speak about was the President's budget. When he was growing up, President Biden's dad used to say this: Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I will tell you what you value.

Well, President Biden's budget just came out, and I will tell you what he values. President Biden values investing in the middle class so that families are able to work hard and get ahead and build a better life for their children. He values ensuring that teachers and firefighters aren't paying more taxes than billionaires. And he values Social Security and Medicare, programs that have lifted up millions of older Americans out of poverty--a whole generation--a great American success story.

Meanwhile, we have the Republican nominee, the former President, in a CNBC interview vowing to cut Medicare and Social Security.

Show me your budget, and I will tell you what you value.

The Biden budget invests in growing our middle class, continuing the policies that have made our economy the strongest in the world.

Since President Biden and Vice President Harris took office, the economy has added about 15 million new jobs, the most ever in the first term of a President.

The unemployment rate has stayed below 4 percent for 2 years in a row. We haven't seen that in more than 50 years.

Wages are up. The stock market is up. New small businesses are up.

Meanwhile, the Republican agenda slashes investments in our families while cutting taxes for the wealthy.

Republicans like to talk about cutting the deficit. Meanwhile, President Biden is doing it. His budget would reduce the deficit by $3 trillion by making the wealthy pay their fair share and cracking down on tax cheats.

The Biden budget lowers costs for families in a number of ways. It invests in affordable childcare so that working families aren't scrambling to find quality care at a price they can afford. It increases affordable housing and helps American families buy their first home and achieve their dream. Meanwhile, it makes higher education more affordable and cuts the burden of student debt, and it continues to lower prescription drug costs, helping people afford the medications they need.

And, best of all, it restores the expanded child tax credit, which was enacted as part of the American Rescue Plan. The expanded child tax credit helped cut child poverty in half in 2021. And President Biden's budget brings it back, giving families some breathing room.

We also know that families are concerned about our national security. The Biden budget invests in a secure border through technology that detects fentanyl, more Border Patrol officers, more immigration judges, and more asylum officers so decisions can be made quickly on who should be allowed to remain in the country.

And, finally, the Biden budget protects and strengthens Social Security and Medicare. These aren't just government programs. They are a promise that, after a lifetime of hard work, you will be able to retire in dignity.

Meanwhile, Republicans continue, through their Presidential nominee, to focus on cutting programs that break that promise.

Show me your budget, and I will tell you what you value. A thriving middle class, safe communities, security for our seniors, and ensuring that the wealthy pay their fair share--that is what the President values.

We have come a long way. It is time to build on our progress.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, first of all, I want to thank Senator Murphy for his extraordinary leadership. He and Senator Lankford and Senator Sinema came together, leading an effort that was amazing-- intense, hard-fought negotiations on something so very, very important. And they got it done. They got it done--a bipartisan border security bill, the toughest in our generation.

I want to thank Senator Murphy for that and for his continual advocacy and putting a spotlight on the fact that we can still do this. We have this bill. We have this bill in front of us.

The President of the United States, President Biden, has gone to the border to say: Pass the bill, the bipartisan bill.

Donald Trump has gone to the border to say: Yay, more chaos. Keep it coming.

The truth is--and we hear it all the time; I have heard it my whole time in the Senate--Republicans like to portray themselves as being the party of national security. If you want your family to be safe, you need to vote for Republicans.

Well, 22 days ago and counting--we will see how high this number gets--22 days ago, we had a chance to boost our national security by voting for the strongest border security bill in our lifetime; and 22 days ago, they killed it. That is a fact, and we all know why. Donald Trump told them to do it, and if Donald Trump tells Republicans to jump, the only question they ask is, How high, sir?

Democrats are committed to solving the challenges at the border. There are multiple issues that need to be addressed and that are addressed in this bill, and we know it is critical that we give President Biden the tools he has been asking for, ever since he came into office, to be able to resolve these issues. Again, that is exactly what this legislation would do. It is bipartisan. It meets all of the tests that people have been asking for for months.

And, if it passed, it would significantly improve our Nation's security in a number of important ways. It would reform our broken asylum system so that decisions would be made more quickly on who should be allowed to remain in the country and who should be deported. Those allowed to stay would be provided authorization to work so that they could take care of themselves and their families and fill crucial jobs in our economy while waiting for their cases to be resolved.

The legislation would create a new emergency authority that would allow the President of the United States to pause the processing of asylum claims of migrants who arrive between ports of entry when cases rise beyond a certain number.

The legislation provides important resources to increase our border security: more border security agents and more equipment that our agents have been asking for over and over again and that the President has asked for over and over again. This is one of the reasons that the border security union strongly supports this as a major step forward that will make a major difference in solving the problems at the border.

And, so importantly, this legislation included the FEND OFF Fentanyl Act, which would make our communities safer by helping government Agencies more effectively disrupt the flow of opioids and penalize traffickers. By the way, that is the whole country impacted by that. People in Michigan, families in Michigan, are impacted by that, not just those at the border. Oftentimes, people forget that Michigan is, in fact, a border State. We are a border State.

This bill would provide up to $75 million in grants that are critically needed for our State and local communities and Tribal law enforcement Agencies to help secure our northern border.

You know, Republicans say they care about our national security, but actions speak otherwise. Growing up, I had heard over and over again from my mom, ``Actions speak louder than words,'' and it has never been more true than on this issue of border security.

Democrats stand ready. We have been ready. We are ready. We are ready tomorrow. We are ready next week to

pass this critical legislation to improve our border security and keep our communities safe. Now, 22 days have gone by--22 days have gone by-- since the Republicans said no. Let's come together and do the right thing. It is not about just talk; it is about action. The American people deserve action, and we are ready to act.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, unfortunately, due to COVID-19, I was unable to attend the September 30 rollcall vote No. 247 on passage of the bill H.R. 5860, a bill making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2024 and for other purposes, which passed by a vote of 88-9. Had I been able to attend, I would have voted in support of passage.

Mr. President, as everyone knows, I am a proud graduate of Michigan State University. If I accidentally cut my finger, I am going to bleed green and white. But just for this week, I am setting aside my Spartan loyalties because, how about those national champions, the University of Michigan Wolverines? Go blue.

I speak for my entire State when I say that we are so proud of this team. They are among the best in the school's history--winning the Big Ten Championship, the Rose Bowl, and the National Championship last night. What a game.

In fact, they won every game they played during their undefeated 15- and-0 season with a suffocating defense and a relentless ground game. They are the first team in school history to reach 15 wins in one season and the first college football program in the Nation to win 1,000 games--1,000 games.

Like any team, they had their challenges, especially coming back from the 2020 COVID season. But through it all, they remained focused and, importantly, supportive of one another. And that focus and support paid off in a big way last night in Houston.

Michigan dominated the game under the leadership of quarterback J.J. McCarthy--amazing--running back Blake Corum, Donovan Edwards, and defensive back Will Johnson. And we can't forget that incredible late interception by Mike Sainristil that sealed the deal. The final score: a decisive 34 to 13 victory against the University of Washington team that was itself undefeated.

I am definitely looking forward to collecting some wonderful Washington products, thanks to the friendly wager I made with my dear friend and colleague Senator Maria Cantwell. We actually came into the Senate together in 2000. Usually, we are on the same side fighting issues; last night, on the opposite sides of the field.

I am so very proud of this team, Mr. President. Congratulations to the National Champion Wolverines. And ``Go Blue.''

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I rise today to pay tribute to someone I was honored to work alongside, and I know that many other Members on both sides of the aisle feel the same way.

Herb Kohl wasn't the most outgoing Senator. Some people might have called him quiet or even shy. But he was never quiet about fighting for the people of Wisconsin. And he was never shy about standing up for the things he believed in. He was absolutely passionate about protecting our Great Lakes, our land, and the people in Wisconsin and across the country who depend on them for their livelihoods. Wisconsin's dairy farmers and rural communities had no greater champion, and they are so fortunate that Senator Baldwin has carried on Senator Kohl's good work.

He was also a champion for American families and for ensuring that they have access to fresh, healthy food. As chairman of the Agriculture Appropriations panel, he fought to expand nutrition programs for children and to fund the WIC Program, which helps make sure American moms and babies have the food they need to thrive. And as chairman of the Special Committee on Aging, he was laser-focused on the needs of older Americans, including through improving the quality and safety of nursing homes.

Of course, we all know what a huge sports fan he was as the longtime owner of the Milwaukee Bucks and a member of the team that brought the Brewers to Wisconsin. It was wonderful that he was able to watch his beloved Bucks win the NBA title in 2021, and he even rode in the championship parade.

Perhaps he will be most remembered for his generosity. His Herb Kohl Educational Foundation has provided more than $34 million to support Wisconsin schools, teachers, and students since 1990. And he made a lasting impact at his alma mater, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where the Kohl Center Arena and the Herb Kohl Public Service Research Competition still carry his name.

But beyond the sports teams and beyond his legislative legacy, Senator Kohl was kind. He was humble. He believed in treating everyone with respect. He knew how fortunate he was, and he spent his life ensuring that as many other people as possible could share in his good fortune. I firmly believe that the Senate--and our country--would be a kinder, better place if more of us would follow his lead. Senator Kohl was a statesman, and he was my friend. I am grateful for the time we worked together in the Senate.

I want to offer his family, friends, and the entire State of Wisconsin my deepest condolences.

I yield the floor.

Reserving the right to object, Mr. President.

Mr. President, first of all, my friend and colleague, esteemed member of our Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee is making me hungry. I am thinking about growing up with cookies and milk.

I grew up with dairy farmers in my family. So I am certainly a supporter of milk and the dairy industry, certainly in Michigan as well. And this is a really important conversation today to have and to continue to have.

I fully support healthy options for students. Dairy is a very important part of a balanced meal. But one thing is clear, and that is that school meal standards, currently based on dietary science, should continue to be based on dietary science, not based on which individual food products we support or are in our States.

USDA is in the process, right now, of updating school meal standards. It is important that the administration rely on the latest dietary science to make decisions about what is best for our children to eat and to drink. Intervening in that process creates, I think, a very unfortunate precedent and will lead to other ideas and options that may be coming forward about individual products.

So I encourage groups to be reaching out to the USDA and to engage in the process of updating meal standards. But, at this point in time, I do not believe it is in the best interest to be able to move forward on this bill. So I object to this UC request.

Madam President, I am so pleased to be joining with my colleagues today to talk about something that is so fundamentally important for our families.

So many times, I have heard from folks saying: We are paying more for childcare than our mortgage payment and trying to keep our house together.

It is very frightening for many families trying to juggle those costs. So we have an urgent need for our families, for our economy, for our future.

Every morning, millions of families in Michigan and across the country go through the very same ritual. Sleepy children are roused out of bed, clothes are chosen, breakfasts are eaten, faces are washed, teeth are brushed, snacks are packed, and then it is a scramble out the door. Car seats are buckled and off to the local childcare center. Only then can mom or dad's workday begin. For millions of families, this essential daily routine is at risk of falling apart.

The American childcare system, already under severe strain before the pandemic, now is in danger of collapse. During the pandemic, I am so proud that we as Democrats cheered critical emergency funding that helped keep 10 million children in childcare. That funding expired, as colleagues have indicated, on September 30. Without it, more than 700,000 childcare programs could close--700,000--and 3.2 million families could be left scrambling.

As programs are forced to close their doors, quality care will be harder and harder to find, and what care is available will be harder and harder for families to afford.

Some people may say: You know, I don't have kids in childcare. Why should I care?

You will care when your doctor or dental appointment gets canceled because the nurse or the hygienist can't find anyone to watch their children that day. You will care when your favorite coffee shop shuts down because the owners can't find enough workers. You will care when your very best employee has to drop out of the workforce and stay home with her baby because she can't find quality, affordable childcare.

The childcare industry is like the scaffolding that our entire economy rests on. When that scaffolding collapses, down goes the economy. President Biden understands that, and he has requested the critical funding needed to keep this crucial scaffolding standing. It is time that we come together on a bipartisan basis and act. American families, American parents, and children just can't wait.

Just as importantly, we have another challenge we need to be meeting right now that relates to families, to moms and kids. We need to ensure that American moms and American babies aren't going hungry on our watch.

We have this wonderful program that has been supported on a bipartisan basis since the beginning called the WIC--Women, Infants, and Children--Program. It is a program that provides critical food assistance, medical screenings, breastfeeding support, baby formula, and nutrition education to pregnant moms, new moms, and children under age 5.

Right now, we also have a funding cliff happening and a critical need for funding. Since 1997, WIC has been fully funded to cover all eligible moms and babies and prevent waiting lists. Now, we can all come together. We should all be coming together to want healthy babies--pregnant moms being healthy, delivering healthy babies, and having the nutrition available for moms and babies during the early years of a child's life. That is what WIC does, and it has been fully funded since 1997.

Congress has always understood there can't be a waiting list for pregnant moms. How do you have a waiting list when the whole pregnancy lasts 9 months? It makes no sense. To get the nutrition that moms need and that babies need, we have to make sure there are not waiting lists, and newborns just keep growing whether they have the food they need or not.

But now there is a $1 billion shortfall in the funding of the program. Without funding, full funding, moms and babies are at risk of being put on waiting lists for the first time ever in the history of the program in the United States or of seeing critical nutritional support cut. This would take away essential nutrition assistance during a critical time in a baby's life. Soon, States are going to start making decisions about their budgets, and we need to provide assurance to States that they can continue to serve everyone and keep their promise--our promise--to moms and babies.

As anyone who has done it knows, raising a family is a tough, tough job. The last thing parents should worry about when they are trying to wash those faces and find those coats and get the kids out the door is whether or not their childcare center is going to be open and available or whether they will lose the baby formula that their baby needs.

American families are raising the next generation. We always say children are our future. The fact is, they

don't wait to grow up. Whether we act or not, they just keep growing. We need to have a sense of urgency about this. We all care about our children. We need to act to make sure quality, affordable childcare is there and the nutrition support for our moms and babies is there as well.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to strongly support the nomination of Brandy McMillion, whom President Biden nominated to serve as the U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of Michigan.

Ms. McMillion is an outstanding nominee with extensive experience in both civil and criminal cases. She will be a great judge because she has always been committed to the law and has the right values, certainly.

From the time she was 6 years old, growing up in Ohio, Ms. McMillion wanted to be a lawyer. It was her dream, and she never wavered from it.

Ms. McMillion was raised in Michigan since she was 12 years old. She earned engineering degrees at the University of Michigan, and then she earned her law degree from George Washington University Law School.

Ms. McMillion then worked in private practice, where she gained significant experience in law and in labor and employment, intellectual property, and financial services.

But she didn't stay away from her adopted State for long. Since 2015, she has served as an assistant U.S. attorney in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Michigan, and, last year, she became chief of the office's general crimes unit, where she prosecutes offenses including bank robberies, gun crimes, and Federal crimes against children.

So it is no surprise that the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary unanimously voted Ms. McMillion as ``well qualified.''

When she is not at work, she spends a lot of time behind the wheel, she says, driving her kids to all their sporting events and other activities. ``Mom CEO'' is what she likes to say.

She is also active in her community. She is a very involved member of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority. She also mentors moms through the organization Warrior Women Against Poverty, which aims to change lives one woman at a time. Ms. McMillion knows better than anyone how the right support, at the right time, can change a woman's future.

The Senate, I hope, is going to strongly confirm Ms. McMillion to the Federal bench. I know that she is someone who is thoughtful and experienced. She will serve the Eastern District well. We thank everyone for the vote yesterday--the cloture vote--to move her now to her final vote, and I urge my colleagues to support this outstanding nominee to be on the Federal bench.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, first, I will speak more tomorrow about Brandy McMillion, whom we just forwarded to a final confirmation vote tomorrow. She is an extraordinary nominee for the district court in Michigan, and I so appreciate the bipartisan support today.

S.J. Res. 38

At this moment, Madam President, I rise in opposition to S.J. Res. 38.

The result of passing this resolution is actually the opposite of what the sponsor is going to say. It reminds me a lot of last week when we were debating school meals and when what was argued was exactly the opposite of what it would do. This is one of those similar kinds of situations. So let me just explain this.

Last Congress, we worked hard to pass the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act despite the opposition from the senior Senator from Florida, who is authoring this resolution, by the way. From fixing our roads and bridges and airports and railways to expanding high-speed internet and creating jobs, this was a great bill with a great bipartisan effort. We are now seeing the profound effects of this historic law in every corner of the country.

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act included my Make It in America Act, which created, for the first time, a Made in America Office. This office is charged with reviewing waivers that have been around for a long time, toughening them up, requiring more transparency, in that any waiver be put on a website for businesses and workers and taxpayers to be able to see, and it ensured complying with other ``Buy America'' laws.

So, as we are going forward on electric vehicles and electric vehicle charging, we have the administration now looking at waivers. We have a longstanding waiver called the Manufactured Products General Waiver. This

blanket waiver has been in effect since 1983, and it has allowed foreign manufactured products to be used by the Federal Highway Administration.

Our administration, the Biden administration, doesn't want to see that continue. So it put in place a short-term waiver. It took EV chargers out of that and put in place a short-term waiver until next July and said: We will give you a little bit of time, but then you are going to have to have American companies that are making EV chargers if we are going to buy them with Federal taxpayer dollars.

So it was very significant in expanding ``Buy America'' policies. Now, you will somehow hear the opposite. This is expanding ``Buy America'' policies by basically saying: Instead of a permanent waiver, we will give you until July 1, 2024, to ensure that new chargers can meet ``Buy America'' requirements, and we can move forward with American-made products. So the key is temporary. This is temporary.

Therefore, this resolution would actually weaken ``Buy America'' requirements. The resolution would result in EV chargers not needing to meet any U.S. manufacturing or any ``Buy America'' content requirements far in the future. This would significantly set back American jobs and American manufacturing. If you want American taxpayer dollars to be required to purchase American-made products, including EV chargers, you need to vote no on this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do that.

I am so pleased to be here with another wonderful champion on this issue, Senator Tammy Baldwin from Wisconsin, who has really championed this effort in a very, very effective way.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for up to 1 minute.

Madam President, I just want to make clear, as the person who authored the Make It in America Act in the infrastructure bill--which my colleague from Florida did not support--that we have a Made in America Office now, and I am so appreciative of what the Biden administration is doing to make sure that we are not giving waivers unless absolutely necessary.

We had a general manufacturing waiver for years--years and years and years. What they have done is taken the EV chargers out of that and said: OK, we will give you until July of next year. We will phase out any kind of a waiver because we want these American made. We want these American made.

And so the effect of voting for this resolution is to forever have EV chargers as part of the waiver, where they never have to be American made. They can always be Chinese made.

We want them American made, and I urge a ``no'' vote on this resolution.

The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read a third time.

Vote on S.J. Res. 38

Mr. President, also from Michigan, it is wonderful to see you in the Chair.

Mr. President, I want to explain how we got here today because you are going to hear a lot of things that are just false today and, frankly, are things that, I believe, are mean and using some of our most vulnerable children for political stunts.

But let's start. Why are we having this discussion? Well, the Supreme Court has ruled that discrimination based on sex includes sexual orientation and gender identity. In general, it makes sense. The administration, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is simply updating its policies to comply with the law.

Now, last year, 22 Republican attorneys general took the Department of Agriculture to court based on the argument that you will hear today from this resolution's sponsor. Everything you will hear they sued the Department of Agriculture over, and the court just dismissed the case. They completely dismissed the case. In fact, the opinion dismissing the lawsuit called the Republicans out for their political stunt. This is the judge saying this, stating that this case had nothing to do with bathrooms or sports teams. And the judge then said that this case is about food stamps and nutrition--not bathrooms, not sports teams, not free speech, and not religious exercise. It is about whether or not the USDA--how they administer food benefits: school breakfast, school lunch, after-school snacks, and other kinds of school and other food programs. And the judge said: The plaintiff States want to ignore a Federal statute and discriminate against poor people who do not conform to traditional conception of sex.

So this is about food programs.

And then the judge went on to say: The plaintiff States' insistence to the

contrary is no more than an invitation to join a political discussion untethered to applicable statutes or precedent. The court will instead simply apply the law.

So I urge the rejection of what has been called a political stunt by the Federal court. I am calling it a political stunt because it is very clear that children are being used to address what some colleagues have said is just ``red meat'' to Republicans, to feed the cultural wars.

Now, I want to say that I am really glad that my Republican colleagues are so concerned about feeding kids, and they should be happy to know that the USDA food and nutrition policies have nothing to do with school bathrooms and nothing to do with school sports. The USDA food programs have nothing to do with funding the rest of the school programs. The Federal nutrition money is not used on anything else. It can't be withheld on anything else or for funding anything else, other than the school meals. That is what it is all about.

This whole exercise is nothing more than a political stunt using children, as I said before, to stoke the made-up cultural wars. Every child deserves to enjoy school breakfast or lunch without being singled out for being LGBTQ+, period. That is all this is about.

I also want to just add that the Biden administration is focused on making sure the kids have access to meals and families can put food on their table, and it is absurd that anyone would say otherwise. They have increased access to free meals for students, expanded local food options, and are making meals healthier.

And we came together, at the end of last year, Senator Boozman and I, and led an effort to expand summer meals. It was a wonderful bipartisan effort to make sure, in the summer, that we have 29 million children, who would otherwise not eat healthy meals, have a chance to get a healthy meal.

So we should be working together on bipartisan efforts to provide healthy food for our children. This exercise does not accomplish that. It is nothing more, unfortunately, than a cruel political stunt.

I urge my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleague for his comments.

This is so serious for children. But let me be clear. Clear. The U.S. Department of Agriculture nutrition programs do not fund anything related to school bathrooms or school sports. This is a rule about making sure all children have access to school meals. They are not discriminated against. The children aren't blocked from getting school meals if they are gay or nonbinary or transgender.

And it is true, there were 22 Republican attorneys general who took the Department of Agriculture to court. Do you know why? The case got thrown out. The case got thrown out, and the judge called it a political stunt.

The USDA has not threatened to withhold food from any child in school. In fact, the case that my friend talked about was a California statute, not USDA. The USDA has not threatened to withhold food from any child in school, period.

So I am committed to advancing real policies that make a difference to our children but not wasting the Senate's time on political stunts.

I urge my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak about rural communities like my hometown of Clare, MI. It was a great place to grow up. My dad and my grandpa ran the local Oldsmobile dealership on Main Street, and my mom was director of nursing at the local hospital, and my relatives were dairy farmers.

And I saw how hard they worked every single day, rarely taking a day off. In fact, on Thanksgiving or Christmas, they were not there most of the time. They had to run back and milk the cows. So I so appreciated how hard they worked. I had many jobs growing up, but my first real job was at the local Dairy Phil, where I learned the art of filling a cone with soft-serve ice cream.

It wasn't a big town. It still isn't. But there was a real sense of community there. People shopped at local businesses, attended local events, cheered for the local high school sports teams, and rallied around local families when they needed help.

Places like Clare still exist, of course. In fact, in August, I was there to celebrate the Dairy Phil's 70th anniversary. But small towns and rural communities have seen a lot of changes over the years, and not all of them have been good. When I graduated from high school in 1968, about 1 in 4 people lived in rural communities. Today, only 1 in 7 call rural America home. There are fewer people and a lot fewer farms.

Among other things, trade wars started by the Trump administration helped fuel this consolidation, causing dramatic drops in crop prices and billions in ad hoc inequitable Federal trade assistance payments. As people have left and as our economy has changed, many smalltown Main Streets have a lot more empty storefronts. Other towns have lost their schools, and more than 190 rural hospitals have closed since 2005.

Our small towns and rural communities are under a lot of pressure, and that is something that we all should care about. These communities are important. They are a crucial part of the fabric of our Nation. And I am so proud of the investments we have made over the last few years to strengthen that fabric.

We invested in healthcare and rural hospitals during the pandemic. In the American Rescue Plan, we invested in telehealth to bring healthcare providers to people where they were when they needed healthcare. In fact, telehealth visits by people in rural areas skyrocketed from 9,000 visits in 2019 to more than 830,000 visits in 2020. We invested in keeping critical rural hospitals open, like where my mom worked as a nurse.

We also know that healthcare above the neck is as important as healthcare below the neck. Farmers and ranchers have always been a stoic group, more likely to tough it out than to talk about it. That can make anxiety and depression and other mental health issues worse. In fact, farming is one of the occupations with the highest risk of suicide today.

We took big steps towards getting folks the help they needed by investing in our bipartisan certified community behavioral health clinics. I so appreciate the Presiding Officer's support in that.

There are now more than 500 of these clinics operating across the country, many of them in rural communities. It is the largest investment in behavioral healthcare in our Nation's history.

Our rural communities have also been pummeled by the climate that is changing right before their eyes. Last year, our country saw 18 separate billion-dollar disasters--18--costing 474 Americans their lives and over $175 billion in damages. This year, we have already seen 24 separate billion-dollar disasters so far. But it doesn't take a billion-dollar disaster to destroy a family farm. Think about the cherry farmer who loses an entire crop when warm weather causes the trees to bloom early only to be wiped out in a cold snap a few weeks later. Or a wheat farmer whose hard work is leveled when a violent summer storm pummels her fields with hail. Or a family who

have to slaughter their entire population of turkeys when their farm is struck by avian flu.

Farming has always been a tough way to make a living. With the climate crisis, it is getting even tougher. That is why it is so important that we invested almost $20 billion in new funding for voluntary conservation programs to support our farmers and ranchers as they work to mitigate their risks from violent, unpredictable weather events and as they lead in our country's efforts to tackle the climate crisis.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, we also learned how important high- speed internet is. All of a sudden, the lack of good internet connection meant our kids couldn't make it to class--maybe they would sit in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant to try to get Wi-Fi. And folks couldn't see a doctor.

It proved the point that I have been making for years that high-speed internet is infrastructure. And I am so proud we came together in a bipartisan way to address this.

In our bipartisan infrastructure law, we invested $65 billion to help ensure that all Americans, whether they live in a big city or 30 miles from the closest highway--have access to high-speed internet.

We also remember how hard it was to get basic food staples when supply chains broke down during the pandemic. It was even harder in small towns and rural communities. That is why we invested in strengthening food supply chains that build connections between local farmers, communities, and businesses.

Small and regional processing operations also bring jobs back into the community instead of shipping them off to large, consolidated centers hundreds of miles away.

Our food systems should be at the heart of our communities. This is about how we get local products from local farmers and producers onto local tables.

It is also important to note that when we invest in rural America, we are not just investing in the families who live there--which is important to do, of course--but we are investing in all of us because each and every one of us depends on our farmers and local communities.

Why am I saying all this? First of all, we have multiple needs in small towns and rural communities. We have spent the last 2\1/2\ years--and I want to thank the Biden administration for investing in so many ways to support our small towns and rural communities. They need it. They need our support.

But right now, we have the opportunity and responsibility to come together to build on those investments, those things that relate to quality of life and economic opportunity. And that is called the farm bill. The farm bill is our next opportunity to truly revitalize rural America.

I am committed to passing a strong, bipartisan farm bill as soon as possible. This is actually the sixth one that I have been involved in. It is the sixth farm bill that is coming to Congress and the third one that I have been leading.

You know, our committee is unique. We don't just sit at a raised dais facing witnesses. Instead, we sit around a table, much like families do after a long day of work, and we face each other.

That is part of our bipartisan tradition. To get a farm bill done, it needs to be bipartisan. It must pull together the broad coalition of support that has been the cornerstone of this process for decades. Since Ranking Member Boozman and I started working on a bipartisan farm bill in April of 2022, the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and its subcommittees have held more than 20 hearings. There has also been countless farm bill listening sessions around the country.

I appreciate so much the community input and the bipartisan work of our committee Members. The success of a farm bill is always based on finding bipartisan solutions to the problems we need to address and bipartisan ways to address funding priorities. In this farm bill, that means protecting our critically needed conservation funding for our farmers, and it means keeping nutrition funding in the nutrition title for our families.

Having said that, I have committed to finding ways to bring additional resources to meet other needs in the farm bill that are so important to producers.

I am very grateful that Leader Schumer is committed to find several billion dollars in additional resources through bipartisan offsets outside the farm bill to help us achieve that goal.

I have to tell you, it is almost unheard of, because I remember not that long ago when the Senate leadership was telling us to cut--cut-- $23 billion from the farm bill. So I am grateful for this unified commitment to get this done.

There are a lot of people counting on us to get this done. More than 21 million Americans depend on the food and agriculture industry for their jobs.

In Michigan, that is one out of four people that are in agriculture and the food industry. Another 4.6 million Americans work in the growing biobased manufacturing industry that I think is so exciting.

But the farm bill isn't just about jobs. It isn't just about our economy. The farm bill has three goals in my mind: We want to keep farmers farming; we want to keep families fed; and we want to keep rural communities strong and build on the investments that we have done in the last 2\1/2\ years.

The farm bill is the foundation of the farm safety net. During our oversight hearings this year, every single group representing farmers told us that protecting and strengthening crop insurance was their No. 1 priority. They asked for more options to make it more affordable, and I support that.

Crop insurance covers over 130 different crops, large and small, and it is continuing to expand to more crops and regions.

Coming from Michigan where we grow more than 300 different crops, I am proud that I have been known as the specialty crop champion. During my time in the Senate, I have led efforts to expand crop insurance protection, especially for my State's fruit and vegetable growers. I am continuing to work on ways to expand crop insurance for specialty crops and other farmers.

Time and time again, from small producers in Michigan to national groups like the American Farm Bureau, we all hear from farmers across the country that we must protect and enhance crop insurance. I agree. It is the number one risk management tool for farmers.

It can be tailored and evolve to meet the individual needs of farmers. Most importantly, farmers will see the benefits of any changes that we make to crop insurance immediately. Any changes we make to reference prices in the commodity title, for instance, will not have any impact until the fall of 2025, at the earliest. This is why I am currently exploring a proposal that would make crop insurance premiums more affordable on area-based crop insurance plans. No mandates--just new options to support our producers.

The Agricultural Risk Coverage and Price Loss Coverage programs are very important to many of our farmers as well, and we built a solid base in improving those programs in the 2018 Farm Bill.

There is good news here. In 2022, farmers recorded the highest farm income in history, and 2023 is projected to be the seventh highest in the last 21 years.

But we know that farmers have also experienced a lot of challenges and that not everyone has benefited from the recent high prices.

We know input costs have been rising. And though the costs of diesel fuel and fertilizer are declining, we need to ensure farmers have effective tools to address their costs so they can keep farming.

Fortunately, USDA is using its authority to help farmers long-term by supporting the development of lower cost, American-made fertilizer and implementing innovative fertilizer technologies. This will create more jobs, provide more choices for farmers, and make us less reliant on foreign supplies of fertilizer.

In many ways, the farm bill already helps farmers address higher input costs.

The dairy safety net is structured around the difference between the cost of feed and the price of milk. Crop insurance can also expand and adjust to provide similar policies for a broader group of farmers.

There is other good news. In the 2018 farm bill, we were able to improve the PLC program by including what was

called an escalator--an escalator provision that is projected to increase reference prices for most commodities--there are 20 commodities in that commodity title--and most will see a 10 to 15 percent increase by this 2025 crop year under existing law without any changes. So because of this escalator, we are going to see reference prices for many commodities increase by 10 percent to 15 percent by 2025.

I can't claim any credit for this provision. It was a bipartisan idea championed by the former House Republican chairman, Mike Conway, of Texas.

But I know it is important to find other ways to include ARC and PLC for the 22 crops that benefit from this program as well. As we do so, I believe it is important to find the best ways to help all of our farmers, both beginning farmers who are crucial for our future as well as medium- and large-established operations.

But we can't lose sight of the fact that the farm safety net extends far beyond title I, the commodity title, and title XI, the crop insurance title. The ``farm'' does not need to be put back into the farm bill; it is on every page. The farm safety net is support for research. It is access to affordable credit and loans. It is specialty crop block grants and dairy and sugar programs and disaster assistance and trade. It is protecting the health of our livestock, and it is voluntary conservation programs.

I strongly believe--and I know I have colleagues on both sides of the aisle who agree--that conservation programs are a vital part of risk management for our farmers today. As I said earlier, you don't need to explain to a farmer what the climate crisis is. They see it in their orchards and their pastures and their fields every day. Farmers want to make their operations more resilient in the face of the climate crisis. They want to build healthier soil by keeping carbon in the ground. That is why we are seeing record demand for popular voluntary conservation programs that we have passed, and the good news is we now have more funding to meet their needs.

The farm safety net is also about building markets, and we have received some great news on that front. This week, Secretary Vilsack announced $2.3 billion in investments from the Commodity Credit Corporation to invest in trade promotion, markets. That is what our farmers are saying are the top two things: crop insurance and markets. They want to be able to trade. So Secretary Vilsack has announced $2.3 billion to invest in trade promotion and important in-kind international food assistance. It is so critical. This will support American farmers and help people in need around the world.

I very much appreciate Secretary Vilsack's responding to my request, the request I sent with Senator Boozman. I very much appreciate that he responded and said yes to what Senator Boozman and I had asked. Secretary Vilsack's continued commitment to meet the needs of our agricultural community, as well as his partnership with us to get a bipartisan farm bill done, is so important.

This new CCC funding doubles the amount available for trade promotion for the next 5 years. We never see that, and we are able to do that now. It also creates an opportunity to spread the money out more evenly over 10 years. This would allow us to grow permanent baseline funding for trade promotion programs in this farm bill and in every subsequent farm bill--something that has not happened since 2006.

Our farmers are looking to sell their products across the ocean, but they are also looking to sell their products across the country, across the State, and across the street. When our growers can get their apples on lunch trays at the local elementary school or sell tomatoes to their neighbors at the Saturday morning farmers' market, that puts money in their pockets and keeps our local economy going.

Farm bill trade promotion programs, international food assistance, bioeconomy programs, local foods programs--all of these increase market opportunities for our Nation's farmers to be successful. And we all want farmers to be successful, not just those who are already doing well but those who are new or who are struggling. That is why I am laser-focused on ensuring that the farm bill includes targeted support for beginning farmers, for our organic farmers, and for our BIPOC farmers and urban growers.

While the farm bill is the backbone of the farm safety net, its nutrition programs are the backbone of the family safety net. So we want to make sure that we keep farmers farming, but we want to make sure that we keep families fed as well. I believe that no parent should have to worry about whether or not their child is going to be able to eat, and no American senior should have to go hungry because their food budget simply won't stretch far enough. It would be unconscionable to further cut the modest assistance of $6 a day that helps millions of Americans put food on the table and make ends meet.

I also reject the premise that we must choose between supporting farmers and supporting families. The needs of farmers and families are interconnected. Farmers benefit when families can afford to buy the food they produce, and the economy benefits as well. In fact, every dollar in SNAP--every dollar in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program--generates $1.50 in economic activity. Someone is buying food. They are going to the grocery store. It is the farmers, the transportation; it is the grocery store. It is one of the quickest ways to create economic opportunity.

Just like the farm safety net, these nutrition programs expand during times of need and contract during times of plenty. We have already seen participation in SNAP decline as the country continues to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic--just like the program is designed to do.

Nutrition assistance is also much more than SNAP. It is what we call Double Up Food Bucks, which started in Michigan, with the idea of being able to support families in going to the local farmers' market and buying fresh fruits and vegetables that are more expensive by giving double the value of their SNAP dollar. This has been so successful that we are now expanding it to grocery stores, and it is widely successful across the country.

This is also about the wonderful work of our local food banks. It is getting fresh local foods to children in school. It is ensuring that those same children aren't going hungry in the summer or when school isn't in session.

I am extremely proud that, in December, Senator Boozman and I led the successful effort to establish the first permanent investment in child nutrition in over a decade, which will provide summer meals to 29 million children--29 million children--every summer, and it is providing support for farmers' markets, which strengthen connections between growers and the communities they feed.

So our goal: Keep farmers farming; keep families fed; and then, finally, keep rural communities strong.

A strong farm safety net and a strong family safety net build strong small towns. Every American, no matter where they live, deserves a great quality of life and the chance to be successful. That is why we have put money into high-speed internet. That is why we have supported rural hospitals. That is why we have supported telehealth. That is why, in the last 2\1/2\ years, we have invested in rural communities.

The truth is, we need strong small towns. We need thriving rural communities. We need young folks to go off to college and want to come home, work on the farm, start a small business, and raise their families in the communities where they grew up. We need small towns to have strong schools and quality healthcare, high-speed internet, and vibrant Main Streets. We need the Dairy Phil in Clare, where I worked, to teach young people the art of creating the perfect soft-serve ice cream cone and so many other life lessons. We need them to do that for another 70 years.

Getting the farm bill done won't be easy--it never is--but I am committed to doing so. Unfortunately, it looks like this is going to take a little longer than I would like, but it would be irresponsible to allow vital programs and the farm safety net to lapse and revert to Depression-era policy in January. We cannot allow that to happen. And, given the chaos in the House, I know we will need an extension.

But let's be clear: It would be equally irresponsible to take our focus off of a 5-year farm bill that provides stability

and certainty for our farmers and communities. I am laser-focused on delivering a bipartisan farm bill that keeps farmers farming, families fed, and rural communities strong and on getting it done in the coming months. It is critical that we give rural America and agriculture the certainty of a 5-year farm bill.

The unifying principle behind the farm bill is that it is a safety net for farmers and families. When crops fail or when disaster strikes, the farm safety net steps in to provide stability and security. When a pandemic hits or the economy takes a turn for the worse, it is the family safety net that steps in. The farm bill is designed to--and it must--support both.

Senator Boozman and I have a strong working relationship, and we have already accomplished so much together. I know that we can come together with colleagues on both sides of the aisle and agree on a bipartisan farm bill that addresses the important needs of agriculture and rural America. Together, and with the bedrock support of the broad farm bill coalition, everyone, from farmers to climate to nutrition advocates--we can get this done. Communities, farmers, and families are counting on us.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to salute the people of Michigan past and present who have served in our Armed Forces and to honor their families.

There are few actions as selfless as serving in our military. When our Nation called, these brave Michiganders stood up. They were willing to be sent anywhere--at any time--in order to protect our Nation, our people, and our values. Some of them never came home. Others came home, but were never quite the same. And many continue to serve their communities long after their military commitment is fulfilled: a U.S. Marine veteran from Holland who walks across the State each year to raise awareness of mental health issues and to highlight organizations that serve veterans; an Air Force veteran in Mid-Michigan who shares her own painful story about trying to fit in to help support other historically excluded veterans; an Upper Peninsula veteran who has spent decades coaching and mentoring young people through youth sports.

These veterans have our backs. It is crucial that we have theirs, too. That is why I was so pleased when President Biden signed the bipartisan PACT Act into law last year. This law helps ensure that veterans who were exposed to Agent Orange, burn pits, and other toxic substances during their service receive the healthcare and benefits they have earned.

One year later, the Department of Veterans Affairs has received more than 780,000 disability claims under the PACT Act and approved more than 348,000. And more than 111,000 veterans have enrolled in VA healthcare, including nearly 10,000 in Michigan. These 10,000 Michigan veterans served honorably and bravely. Sadly, they have paid a price for that service. And just as they were there for us in our Nation's time of need, now we can be with them in theirs.

Whether it is healthcare, education, a chance at a good job, or military recognition, veterans should not stand at the back of the line for anything. That is what my dad--a World War II veteran--taught me, and I have spent my time in public service ensuring that we keep our promises to our veterans. The PACT Act is one more promise kept.

On this Veterans Day and every day, I salute everyone who has served in our military and their families. I thank them for their service, their sacrifice, and their deep dedication to our Nation. Every day, they show us what patriotism is all about.

Madam President, I would ask unanimous consent that John Schmidt, a detailee in my office, be granted floor privileges until December 31 of this year.

Mr. President, first let me just say ``Amen'' to my friend and colleague from Arizona.

Mr. President, I would ask, first, unanimous consent that following my remarks, Senator Schmitt be permitted to speak for 5 minutes and Senator Cardin be permitted to speak for 5 minutes prior to the scheduled vote.