Floor Statements

Mr. President, today, I am joined by Senator Cortez Masto in introducing the Private Markets Transparency and Accountability Act, a bill that will address a disturbing trend in our capital markets. Increasingly, some of America's largest and most important companies are exploiting weaknesses in our securities laws to stay or go dark; that is, they are avoiding requirements to enter the public markets, where disclosure and transparency are required under law. Instead, they are remaining indefinitely in the private markets, where there is less visibility into the health and activities of the company.

Why should average Americans care? First, they are invested in these companies through pension plans and mutual funds. Second, transparency is the lifeblood of fair and efficient markets. And third, these companies have incredible influence over our society and way of life.

This legislation will address this disturbing trend by requiring the Nation's largest and most important private companies to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission, SEC. Requiring registration would put these companies on par with publicly traded corporations with regard to ongoing public disclosure about their business practices and financial condition.

The most significant development in the capital markets over the last decade has been the explosive growth of the private markets. According to consulting firm McKinsey, annual private market fundraising reached a record of almost $1.2 trillion worldwide in 2021 up from $380 billion in 2011. More money has been raised in the private markets than in the public markets each year over the past 10 years. Many large companies find the allure of virtually no public transparency or oversight that is available in the private markets irresistible. Under current law, they find that it is all too easy to stay private forever.

Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Exchange Act, a private company

must register with the SEC after reaching 2,000 shareholders ``of record.'' But this requirement is easily circumvented because a single Wall Street broker or bank, which holds securities on behalf of thousands of underlying investors, is counted as one recordholder. The SEC estimates that under this threshold, 89 percent of public companies could choose to transition to the private markets and go dark tomorrow.

This threshold desperately needs reform. Former SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro has testified before the Banking Committee that ``since the definition of `held of record' was put into place, a fundamental shift has occurred in how securities are held in the United States.'' And Harvard Law Professor John Coates recently testified before the committee that ``there is much to be said for revisiting the thresholds that are built into the [Exchange] Act, thinking about them in a different way, [and] not simply counting numbers.''

It should be alarming when private companies can become extremely large and influential in our economy and raise unlimited amounts of capital from an unlimited number of investors, while circumventing the basic disclosure and governance requirements that Congress sought to apply. That is what is happening today. A central feature of the Exchange Act has effectively been gutted.

Again, these are not small or inconsequential companies. Former SEC Commissioner Allison Herren Lee has observed that very large private companies are ``notable not just for their size, but for their transformational impacts on our way of life. They have, for example, changed the transportation and travel habits of millions across the globe, spawned billions of dollars in litigation, changed the legal underpinnings of entire markets, and launched civilians into space. Yet, despite their outsize impact, there is little public information available about their activities. They are not required to file periodic reports or make the disclosures required in proxy statements. They are not even required to obtain, much less distribute, audited financial statements. This has consequences for investors and policymakers alike, which in turn may have consequences for the broader economy.''

The Private Markets Transparency and Accountability Act would restore the Exchange Act in order to provide the public with the essential insight it needs to make informed decisions. Under our legislation, private companies would be required to register with the SEC if they either reach a valuation of $700 million, excluding shares held by affiliates, or have at least 5,000 employees and $5 billion in revenues. These companies would enter the public disclosure system that Congress established in the Exchange Act and would have powerful incentives to conduct public stock offerings and list their shares on stock exchanges.

Our legislation would provide mom-and-pop investors in the private markets with nearly all of the same protections that they are entitled to in the public markets. Pension plans that invest in companies through private equity funds would finally be able to obtain basic information about those companies, such as their audited financial statements, and employees who get compensated with company stock and options would be able to determine the true value of their shares. They would no longer need to fly blind when deciding whether to take another job and face the potentially enormous financial consequences of relinquishing their stock or options.

By mandating that very highly valued or large companies register with the SEC, our legislation would raise the bar on governance for companies that control huge swaths of our economy. The ability to stay private forever has directly led to the dramatic rise of ``unicorns,'' or private companies with at least a $1 billion valuation. At the start of December 2021, the United States had nearly 473 unicorns. Some of these unicorns have been plagued by scandals and toxic cultures, without needing to comply with governance requirements for public companies designed to curb waste and force management accountability. Still others have been exposed as outright frauds. In these situations, investors suffer losses while fund managers keep their fees and company executives keep their bonuses. Arguably, greater transparency would have protected investors from unnecessary losses. Indeed, some unicorns that received sky-high valuations in the opaque private markets saw those valuations tumble when they faced the discipline and scrutiny that comes with public market transparency.

Finally, our legislation helps markets allocate capital more efficiently. When risks are obscured in dark corners of our markets, then capital may not be directed towards the most deserving companies. When similar companies in similar industries of similar size are subject to wildly different disclosure requirements, market participants have less information to value those companies. That means the shares of many public companies may not be accurately priced. Without accurate prices, retail investors cannot have confidence that they are getting reasonable returns on their hard-earned savings.

Our capital markets depend on disclosure and transparency. As more companies remain private indefinitely or go dark, we lose those features and weaken the foundational strengths of our economy. We need to restore these bedrock requirements and ensure that they apply to all major companies whether they are in the private or the public markets.

I thank the bill's supporters, including the AFL-CIO, the Consumer Federation of America, the North American Securities Administrators Association, the Healthy Markets Association, Public Citizen, former SEC Commissioner Robert J. Jackson, Columbia Law Professor John Coffee, and Harvard Law Professor John Coates.

I would like to thank Senator Cortez Masto for working with me on this legislation, and I urge our colleagues to join us in supporting the Private Markets Transparency and Accountability Act.

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

Mr. President, I want to thank my colleagues who voted yesterday, on a bipartisan basis, to advance the nomination of Lara Montecalvo to be a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. I look forward to her confirmation later today.

She will soon fill the seat that is being vacated by Judge O. Rogeriee Thompson, who is a trailblazing and outstanding jurist whom I was proud to recommend and who is taking senior status. She will continue to hear cases on a more limited basis, along with Judge Bruce Selya, another distinguished judge from Rhode Island who has taken senior status and who continues to hear cases on the First Circuit.

Like Judge Thompson and Judge Selya, Lara Montecalvo is someone with great integrity, intellect, and capacity for judicial independence. I am delighted that President Biden nominated her for Rhode Island's traditional seat on the First Circuit. I am pleased that the Judiciary Committee reported her nomination on a bipartisan vote. And I am grateful to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who voted yesterday to advance her nomination.

Her resume speaks for itself. As Rhode Island's chief public defender, Ms. Montecalvo has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to upholding our constitutional rights, including the Fifth Amendment right to due process and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Ms. Montecalvo was a gifted student, who holds degrees from Swarthmore College and Boston College Law School, where she graduated magna cum laude in 2000.

After graduating from law school, she was immediately drawn to public service. She started her legal career at the Department of Justice for 4 years, focusing on civil tax matters in the Federal courts. In 2004, she joined the Rhode Island Public Defender's Office and has risen through the ranks to lead that office.

Ms. Montecalvo has more than 20 years of experience as a trial and appellate attorney. She has appeared in just about every court in Rhode Island, including in the State's highest court. Her extensive courtroom experience will add valuable perspectives to the deliberations of the First Circuit.

But it is more than her resume. Within the Rhode Island legal community, Ms. Montecalvo is known for her zealous advocacy for her clients and her keen sense of justice. She has won accolades from judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials. And individuals across the political spectrum have endorsed her nomination, including five Rhode Island attorneys general and two former U.S. attorneys, one appointed by President Obama and one by President Trump.

I know Ms. Montecalvo will serve on the First Circuit with honor and distinction as she has at every step of her legal career.

I urge my colleagues to confirm this highly qualified nominee to serve as a judge on the First Circuit.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the swift passage of the Inflation Reduction Act.

In the wake of COVID-19, global supply chains have been strained. There has been shipping disruptions, and Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine has added to this. As a result of these many factors, inflation is up in almost every single country across the globe. The United States is among the world's wealthiest and most productive and diversified economies, but no nation on Earth is immune to the forces of inflation, particularly when it comes from so many different directions.

Let's remember also, 2021 was a huge year for U.S. economic growth. In fact, last year, the U.S. economy grew at its fastest pace since 1984. Our unemployment rate is back down to 50-year lows, wages have risen for many, and there is a job literally for any American who wants to work and is looking for work. Nobody thought that type of growth was sustainable, especially with the global economic headwinds we are facing and will continue to face.

The fact is that Americans are forced to pay inflated gas prices at the pump because of the immoral and illegal invasion of Ukraine by Vladimir Putin, because of the cartel--OPEC--that controls prices, and because of our failure so far to invest in clean energy, and that has made our economy crack.

So the question before us is: How do we help our economy gain firmer footing and lower prices for consumers; how do we make our country more energy independent; and how do we strike a blow for fairness and financial responsibility and make things better for families, businesses, and communities?

The Inflation Reduction Act accomplishes all of those goals. It makes forward-looking policy adjustments and investments to shore-up the economy. It takes long overdue steps to help lower out-of-pocket costs for things like energy, prescription drugs, and healthcare. It will strengthen America's energy independence and enhance our national security by moving production lines and jobs from China and other places back to the United States.

And don't just take my word for it. A wide array of economic experts have confirmed this bill will ease inflation in three ways: by lowering energy costs for families and small businesses, by cutting healthcare costs for millions of Americans and by ensuring wealthy Americans and large corporations pay their fair share.

Republican and Democratic Treasury Secretaries have said this, as have over 120 of our Nation's leading economists, including seven Nobel Prize winners. The Inflation Reduction Act will also reduce the deficit by more than $100 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. And budget experts agree, it will save another $200 billion by empowering and equipping the IRS to crack down on tax cheats and enforce tax laws already on the books.

So independent arbiters are clear: This bill is good for the family budget and for the national budget. It is good for the health of our communities and our planet.

And here are some of the highlights. Let's start with the cost of prescription drugs. According to Families USA, nearly 3 in 10 American adults--that is about 80 million people--have not taken required medicine due to its high cost. For decades, the drug companies have taken advantage of every avenue to keep prices high.

They argue that the cost is justified in order to fund research and development, but that is not really what is happening. The bottom line is, drug companies are not playing fair. In fact, they are charging inflated prices even

on old medications, insulin being the classic example. Developed more than 100 years ago, the developers basically made their product available to everyone. They did not insist upon patent protection. Yet, the price of insulin, of a 100-year old drug, has gone up dramatically.

The Inflation Reduction Act will put the brakes on this type of profiteering. Under this bill, the government will finally be allowed to directly negotiate lower drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries. And I am fighting to include, as I mentioned before about insulin, a $35 cap on insulin costs for millions of Americans in this bill. And I must applaud Senator Warnock for his leadership on this effort.

It is long past time to get this done. The Department of Veterans Affairs already does it and saves veterans and taxpayers billions of dollars a year. The Inflation Reduction Act would also limit drug price increases to the rate of inflation. It also caps out-of-pocket costs at $2,000 annually for older adults buying prescriptions from pharmacies. It would also provide free vaccinations for seniors, and it helps keep health insurance affordable for millions of Americans.

Let's not forget, cutting healthcare costs for millions of Americans is a direct attack on inflation. So the benefits here are both health- related and economic.

Now, let's talk about how the bill will reduce energy costs and address climate change. The American people recognize that climate change is a serious threat. It fuels extreme weather, environmental degradation, and natural disasters. We are witnessing these phenomena at this moment all across the country. And, frankly, I haven't seen the kind of rapidity and severity of storms like this in sheer number in my time.

This is a result of our neglect of the climate crisis. And I must also applaud my colleague Senator Whitehouse because he has been a voice since his first day here in this Chamber about the dangers of climate change, the cost to families, and the cost to our environment.

Of course, all of these climate effects lead to food and water insecurity, economic disruption, and, indeed, human conflict. One of the areas which is most concerning to our Defense Department officials is the follow-on effects of famine and disruption of economies. It usually creates a whole generation of young people without any gainful employment but with access to weapons, which leads to instability and violence--threats to the whole world. And eventually threats to us.

Just this week, we had a hearing in the Banking Committee on the economic costs of climate change. One witness cited a particularly eye- popping statistic from OMB, that our lack of action on climate change costs the Federal Government up to $2 trillion per year. That is $2 trillion with a T. So the cost of our efforts to reduce this will be more than exceeded, according to this number, by the benefits. And good economic analysis suggests, when you have a proposal in which benefits far outweigh cost, that proposal is something to consider.

The Inflation Reduction Act stops kicking the can down the road and takes urgent, overdue action to confront climate change and economic challenges head on. I don't have to remind anyone here that we have been talking about climate change for years and years and years. And now, we have a real opportunity to take positive steps. And if we don't, what we see now is upsetting, to say the least, but it is accelerating and you can sense the economic crises and the environmental crises we see all around us will grow.

Now, this legislation would invest $369 billion in affordable clean energy, energy security, and initiatives to help combat climate change and make America more energy independent.

I will give you a very good example up in Rhode Island. We have the first offshore wind field in the United States off of Block Island. It was built and provided up to 300 workers--union workers mostly--with good jobs. It will continue to help employ people as it is maintained. It has provided us, the whole region, with an example of where to go. And now, you have significant wind farms that are being proposed in Federal waters off of Massachusetts and off of Long Island. This will bring energy without pollution. That is something that will benefit all of us, both in our pocketbook and in our well-being.

This is really a historic investment. And the savings will pay off for families and the planet month after month, year after year. It is something that we owe the next generation because right now, we are prepared to hand off to the sons and daughters and grandsons and granddaughters a world that is environmentally challenged, to say the least. And they will look back on us and say: You had an opportunity, and you failed.

We cannot fail.

Now, a report by nonprofit group Rewiring America found that the tax incentives included as a part of the $369 billion dedicated to climate change initiatives in the bill would save the average household $1,800 per year on energy costs. This will incentivize the use of heat pumps, the use of solar panels--a much more practical and cost-saving energy tool than what is available today.

The Inflation Reduction Act also sets up America to out-innovate and out-compete other countries and strengthens domestic clean energy manufacturing and reinforces our supply chain, making America more energy independent and self-reliant.

I want to make the important point that under the Budget Act, this bill must be paid for. And rather than cut Medicare or Social Security as some of my colleagues on the other side like to suggest, this bill strikes a blow for fairness when it comes to our Tax Code. It sends a signal to the middle class that wealthy individuals who wish to avoid taxes will no longer be able to easily evade taxes because we are enforcing the auditing mechanisms at the IRS so that the laws are followed more scrupulously, and that will result in benefits to all of us.

It sends a signal to working families that the 150 most profitable companies will pay a minimum tax of 15 percent rather than zero, as is sometimes the case. It is not fair for a multi-billion dollar company to game the tax system to avoid any payment, while a truck driver or a custodian is paying 20 percent of their income to taxes--or even more.

It sends a signal that private equity and hedge fund managers who claim their income is carried interest will have to step up and pay more. Indeed, as the President stressed, this bill is written so that no family that makes under $400,000 will see their taxes go up. That is what the President promised, and that is what this legislation will do.

So no one should be out making the claim that this hurts the middle class and the tax cuts will be paid for by them. In fact, it increases the taxpayers in our system. And any examination of our present system shows it is grossly unfair.

I will end with the words of the five former Treasury Secretaries, including one appointed by former President George W. Bush, who all agree that the Inflation Reduction Act will, in their words, ``help increase American competitiveness, address our climate crisis, lower costs for families, and fight inflation--and should be passed immediately by Congress.''

Let me also quote over 120 leading economists who shared a similar message, writing: ``This historic legislation makes crucial investments in energy, health care, and shoring up the nation's tax system. These investments will fight inflation and lower costs for American families while setting the stage for strong, stable and broadly-shared long-term economic growth.''

This isn't a partisan issue for economists, and it shouldn't be a partisan issue in Congress. The bottom line is that Congress has an opportunity to help lower prices for consumers and invest in scalable new energy technologies and solutions that will strengthen our economy and make the U.S. and the planet more secure, more prosperous, and more resilient.

We must seize the moment. The time to act is now. Generations from now, they will look back at this moment and ask the question: Did we stand up for them, for this country, for the planet, and for the future, or did we fail?

I urge us all to stand up and succeed.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to discuss three civilian nominees: Mr. Robert Storch, Ms. Tia Johnson, and Mr. Russell Rumbaugh, who are each nominated to hold critical positions within the Department of Defense. They have been on the Executive Calendar for months. Yet I am unaware of any objections to these nominees related to their qualifications for the positions for which they have been nominated.

I need not remind my colleagues, with Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the increasingly aggressive actions of China, how critically important it is to ensure the Defense Department has the people power it needs to do its job well.

I would also like to note that in the past, my colleagues have been very cognizant of this need for the smooth workings of the Defense Department, and nominees for the Department--both civilian and military--have been voted out of committee and off the floor quickly, typically by unanimous consent. I find it ironic now, at a time when we see unparalleled threats to our national security, that nominees for the Department of Defense would be held for months on end, with no objections on qualifications, without any path to confirmation other than a cloture vote.

There are presently eight Defense Department nominees waiting on the Executive Calendar. At the end of next week, it will be 12. Today, I would like to discuss these three individuals.

Mr. Robert Storch is nominated to be the Department of Defense inspector

general and was favorably reported out of the Armed Services Committee on March 8, 2022.

The Defense Department has not had a Senate-confirmed inspector general since January 8, 2016. I will repeat that. The Defense Department has not had a Senate-confirmed inspector general since January 2016. The last nominee, put forward by then-President Obama, was withdrawn by President Trump on February 28, 2017.

Mr. Trump designated the Honorable Sean O'Donnell as the acting DOD IG on April 6, 2020, but the GAO recently issued a decision that Mr. O'Donnell's continuing service as the acting inspector general is in violation of the Vacancies Act. As such, there is really no effective inspector general in the Department of Defense--the largest Agency in the Federal Government.

For these reasons, in addition to the fundamental importance of the IG's work, the Senate needs to confirm Mr. Storch as soon as possible. The Department has been without a Senate-confirmed IG for more than 6 years, and we cannot wait any longer.

Ms. Tia Johnson was reported out of the committee on April 5, 2022, and would become one of five judges on the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, often referred to as the ``Supreme Court of military law.'' The court's next hearing is scheduled for October 12, 2022, where it will consider important jurisdictional and substantive issues in military criminal law.

Importantly, the FY22 NDAA implemented extensive changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including a statute that would criminalize sexual harassment under some circumstances. Ms. Johnson will play a critical role on the Court of Appeals in reviewing challenges and issues with the recent sexual assault and sexual harassment statutes, including defendants' rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Without Miss Johnson, the court risks deadlock, which will further hamper the military's ability to provide good order and discipline, which is fundamental to any military force.

Mr. Russell Rumbaugh was nominated on March 21, 2022, to serve as the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Financial Management and Comptroller. This nomination was privileged, so it did not require a hearing and was intended to move expeditiously. The committee sent policy questions to Mr. Rumbaugh and received his answers on April 25, 2022. The committee reported out his nomination on May 12, and pursuant to S. Res. 116, his nomination was moved 10 days later to the appropriate section of the Executive Calendar and was ready for confirmation by the full Senate. So his confirmation has been waiting for 2 months.

The Navy has not had a confirmed Assistant Secretary for Financial Management and Comptroller since July 2020. This role is critical to managing the budget and financial readiness of the Navy and the Marine Corps, to include the Department's audit. Many will point out and criticize, with some reasonableness, the fact that the Department of Defense has not yet passed an audit. Well, it is very difficult to pass an audit if you have critical individuals who are not in place to help you prepare for and pass such an audit. That is another reason I think we need--the Navy needs a comptroller.

Each of these positions are critically important to the Department of Defense. The sooner they assume their offices, the better for the Department's ability to tackle these challenges on behalf of servicemembers and their families and the Nation. And, indeed, the sooner they are there, the more we will be able to support the men and women in uniform in the United States who are deployed across the globe. They need that kind of support here in Washington.

With that, Mr. President, I would ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: No. 843, No. 861, and No. 972; that the nominations be agreed to without intervening action or debate; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. President, the Senator from Missouri has objected, and I believe he is the only individual Member of the Senate who objects. In that case, I think I would be prepared to offer another unanimous consent that would allow debate upon these members. That, I think, should be satisfactory to the Senator, because it will give him an opportunity to express his objections to these individuals and why they are not qualified to be in office.

With that, I renew my above request, except that I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed to executive session; that there be 1 hour for debate, equally divided in the usual form on the nominations en bloc; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote on the nominations in the order listed; and that following disposition of the nominations, the Senate resume legislative session.

Mr. President, I believe I retain the time, but if the Senator would like me to make a short statement and then object--

I think the easy thing to do is let me yield such time as the Senator requires.

Mr. President, I reclaim my time.

I respectfully disagree with the Senator from Missouri on this matter. The Senate Armed Services Committee conducts and has conducted extensive oversight on Afghanistan. Committee actions include seven public and closed hearings regarding the War in Afghanistan, lessons learned, and ongoing regional counterterrorism requirements

since the withdrawal last August. And Senator Hawley has participated in all of these.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 contained a provision, section 1092, that mandated the Department of Defense deliver quarterly briefings, in both unclassified and classified form, on the security situation in Afghanistan and ongoing counterterrorism efforts.

The classified briefings have taken place on January 20, April 14, and July 21. The unclassified briefings have taken place on February 14 and April 25. An additional unclassified briefing will be held tomorrow, coincidentally, and Senator Hawley has full access to all of these briefings.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 also contains a provision, section 1069, which requires a yearly assessment of our over-the-horizon counterterrorism capabilities in Afghanistan. While the first installment has not yet been delivered to the committee, Senator Hawley will have access to those assessments, as well as will all of my colleagues.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 further mandated the establishment of the Afghanistan War Commission, which will spend 3 years examining all aspects of the 20-year war in-depth. All the Commissioners have been appointed, and we expect the Commission to commence work in the near term. And Senator Hawley will have the same access to the Commission's findings as everyone else.

What I think the Senator does not understand is that the events that took place at Abbey Gate were not unique to that moment in time. They were the culmination of 20 years of actions by Presidents from both sides, by commanders on both sides. And in order to understand what truly happened at Abbey Gate, we have to look at all of those periods.

What was the effect of Donald Trump's agreement with the Taliban, excluding the legal government of Afghanistan, to essentially leave? And what other events created the situation that led directly to the situation at Abbey Gate? Without that context, this will simply be a way to vilify the administration, a way to point out shortcomings, and it won't get to what we really should be focused on: What profound lessons can we learn from 20 years in Afghanistan that will assist us in the future, that will protect our men and women in uniform?

Again, if the focus is on political retaliation and retribution, that is part of this organization. But if we want to focus on protecting today the lives of men and women who serve and their families who will grieve if they are lost, then we have to take a broader view, which we are doing in the Commission, which we are doing when we bring our experts in on a frequent basis to talk about Afghanistan--and which we must do by filling these positions in the Department of Defense.

Without the support of a functioning Department of Defense, we will be in a situation where we are putting at risk the soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and guardians who protect this Nation.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, among the many financial worries for average Americans, particularly young families just starting out, is finding a safe, affordable place to live. The simple fact is that we don't have the supply of housing to meet demand. Indeed, we have a shortfall of 7 million affordable housing units according to the National Low-Income Housing Coalition.

Certainly, the COVID-19 pandemic reduced housing production and created kinks in the supply chain for important raw materials like lumber, but the truth is that we were lagging when it came to building and maintaining affordable housing long before COVID-19.

Back in 2020, a Rhode Island family earning the State's median income could not afford to buy a home at the median price anywhere in the State. It has only gotten worse since then. Across the country, home prices have risen 13.4 percent from last year, with the national median price now at $416,000.

In my State, the Rhode Island Association of Realtors reports that the median price of homes sold in June 2022 reached an alltime high of $430,000. That is 11.7 percent higher than a year earlier.

A large reason that home ownership is out of reach for many Americans is the inventory levels are so low. In recent months, sales have dropped as interest rates have increased, but we are still nowhere near a balanced market. In a healthy housing market, there is usually a 6- month supply of homes available for sale at any given time. Right now, our country has less than a 3-month supply of homes, and Rhode Island has less than a 2-month supply.

As potential home buyers are priced out of the housing market, they remain in the rental market, adding additional pressure to rental prices. According to apartmentlist.com, rent has grown 14.1 percent nationally from last summer. In Providence, RI, rents have jumped 23.8 percent from last year.

When supply is tight and rents go up, it is harder for our more vulnerable community members to afford housing. That is our seniors, people with disabilities, and the unhoused. People who have been a part of the fabric of our communities for decades are no longer able to afford staying. It is a scary prospect that is facing too many Americans.

This didn't happen overnight. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, the number of homes with low monthly rents declined by 4 million between 1991 and 2017.

And the underbuilding of starter homes for decades has caught up to us, creating a major housing supply crunch that has led to soaring rents and home prices. Developers have more incentives to build six- bedroom ``McMansions'' and luxury apartments. That doesn't help folks who just need a safe, affordable place to live in their community, and it doesn't meet the needs of young families who just want about 1,800 square feet, four walls, and a roof. We now have a housing market where police officers, firefighters, teachers, and nurses cannot afford to live in the communities that they serve. Simply put, our current housing stock does not have homes to match what families want and what families need.

Also contributing to the problem, our housing market has been flooded with speculators, private equity firms, and large institutional investors who are starting to come in looking for big profits. This is why Chairman Brown, Senator Warren, and I have called on HUD to stem the flow of single-family homes to institutional investors and help level the playing field between families and large investors.

In this kind of market, it is hard for everyone, especially first- time buyers.

Over the last 2 years, the Federal Government has made substantial investments in affordable housing, helping people experiencing homelessness, and keeping people stably housed. Without the measures we adopted, the housing situation for millions of Americans would be even worse.

I was part of the bipartisan working group that negotiated the CARES Act, which was a step toward keeping people safe, protecting public health, and preventing an affordable housing crisis from becoming an eviction disaster.

But, clearly, the CARES Act wasn't enough. That is why I introduced a bill to provide rental assistance and homeowner assistance to families. That legislative initiative led to the influx of more than $46 billion in emergency rental assistance to help renters who have struggled to pay their rent and utilities during the pandemic. Those funds have also been used to help with housing stability, particularly for unhoused individuals. In total, emergency rental assistance has helped over 34,000 families in Rhode Island alone.

And I also worked with colleagues to deliver nearly $10 billion under the Homeowner Assistance Fund to help homeowners who experienced COVID- 19 hardships keep up with house payments and stay in their homes. Over $50 million in this fund is helping homeowners in my State.

Rhode Island and other States are also committing their American Rescue Plan dollars toward building new affordable housing. It is hard to overstate the impact that this cushion of support has had for families in our State and across the country.

Putting a historic emphasis on housing support helped eliminate a major potential economic hardship that could have been catastrophic for millions of Americans. Without the worry of how to make rent or mortgage payments, families didn't need to scramble to find shelter and uproot themselves from their support systems. Kids had safe homes and could stay in the same school. It helped parents keep their jobs, helped seniors stay connected to their communities, and kept all of us healthier and safer. We need more of this kind of support for families, not less.

Measures like the Emergency Rental Assistance Program and the Homeowner Assistance Fund were temporary, and those programs are going to be wrapping up in the next few months. As we look ahead to the future, it is time for us to think, What have we learned? What are the acute needs of housing today?

There is no question we need to build more affordable housing. We need to invest in rehabilitating old homes but also in building new homes, specifically for low-income families.

We need to fortify the Federal programs that incentivize private investment in affordable housing, like the National Housing Trust Fund, the Capital Magnet Fund, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and HOME Investment Partnerships. That includes extending available low-income housing tax credits by reinstating the 12.5-percent boost that expired at the end of 2021. It also means passing the bipartisan LIFELINE Act introduced by Senators Leahy, Collins, Wyden, myself, and many others so that we can maximize the impact of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds from the American Rescue Plan when States put those funds toward building and maintaining affordable housing.

We need to invest in apprenticeships and training programs to create a more skilled construction workforce with a focus on attracting more diverse workers.

We need more innovation, with quicker building techniques and high- tech materials. This is not a pipedream. Rhode Island has already shown the world how to get innovative in the housing space with ONE Neighborhood Builders' Sheridan Small Homes and Bowdoin Street Rowhouse. These are innovative construction projects--small homes with many energy-saving aspects. They are the future, and we have to invest in that future.

And as I said, we have to build to focus on a green future that includes the effects of climate change. That means we need to pass the Green Retrofits Act, which I introduced with Senator Collins. This bill would boost energy efficiency in thousands of multifamily residential homes nationwide by bolstering public-private partnerships to make healthy home upgrades and creating a new program to distribute energy efficiency grants and loans.

We need to increase our assistance and our commitment to homeless assistance grants. That includes funding for the Continuum of Care Program, which serves over 750,000 people experiencing homelessness each year, and for emergency solution grants, which support over 350,000 who are in emergency shelter each year.

We need to fully fund housing choice vouchers, make them easier to use in communities, and incentivize landlords to take these vouchers, which is being done presently in Rhode Island.

Investing in housing will not fuel the fire of inflation; it will tackle one of the key contributors to rising costs and help stabilize family budgets.

On many of these fronts, State and local action is also needed to move the ball forward. State and local governments must address the issue of exclusionary zoning. In far too many places, there are barriers to building multifamily homes or townhouse and too-high minimums for lot sizes, making it very challenging to build affordably.

It should be easier for people to convert their garage into living space for a family member, such as an in-law suite above a detached garage. And that is just one example.

Some of these challenges can be traced back to ``not in my backyard'' attitudes, which we must all do our part to overcome.

Every family should have a decent, affordable place to live, and we need to commit ourselves to making the investments and adopting policies to make that possible.

And emphasizing, once again, investment in housing will lower costs to families, which will be an effective way to help overall--not immediately--but overall to lower inflationary pressures on our working families.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. President, I would like to talk today about a health epidemic that is claiming the lives of tens of thousands of Americans each year. I am speaking about the epidemic of suicide.

I will talk more about this in detail in a moment, but if there is one thing I would like those listening to my remarks to remember is the number 9-8-8--9-8-8, because 9-8-8 is a three-digit number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline.

If you need help, please dial 9-8-8.

Over the last several years, we have all observed the increasing mental health needs in our country. Indeed, the isolation of the COVID- 19 pandemic made those needs more pronounced, particularly among children, adolescents, and young adults.

In October 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the Children's Hospital Association--organizations representing experts in children's mental health--declared a national emergency in child and adolescent mental health. According to these organizations, ``Rates of childhood mental health concerns and suicide rose steadily between 2010 and 2020 and by 2018 suicide was the second leading cause of death for youth ages 10- 24. The pandemic has intensified this crisis: across the country we have witnessed dramatic increases in Emergency Department visits for all mental health emergencies including suspected suicide attempts.''

According to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, nearly 20 percent of high school students report serious thoughts of suicide, and about 9 percent have tried to take their own lives.

During the pandemic, children faced challenges we couldn't have imagined just a few years ago. Children isolated from their friends and family members to limit the spread of COVID-19. But this meant that many children were separated from loved ones and other trusted adults like teachers who can help keep kids safe. And kids were isolated from their peers, impeding social learning and development. And in these tough times, rates of domestic violence and child abuse tend to increase. On top of all these challenges, more than 140,000 children in the United States lost a caregiver to COVID-19. And it is no wonder that so many of our children and young adults are in crisis.

These hardships are not unique to young people. Adults are feeling them as well. Regrettably, suicide remains the leading cause of death in the United States. In 2020, suicide claimed the lives of 45,979 Americans, according to the latest data from the CDC. This is about one death every 11 minutes. More people died by suicide in 2020 than in motor vehicle accidents. The number of people who think about or attempt suicide is even higher. In 2020, an estimated 12.2 million American adults seriously thought about suicide, 3.2 million planned a suicide attempt, and 1.2 million attempted suicide.

Now, there are no easy solutions, but there are things we can do to prevent suicide and improve access to mental health treatment. And we have made some progress. Almost two decades ago, we passed legislation to ensure parity in insurance coverage for mental and behavioral health. We have more work to do to enforce the law, but it was an important first step. And one of the most significant investments we have made in mental healthcare was in passing the Affordable Care Act. We expanded health insurance coverage for millions of Americans and made sure that coverage included mental and behavioral care, which was often excluded from health insurance before the ACA.

We need to do more though. More and more people need mental and behavioral healthcare and do not have the resources to get such care. And those with the resources find that there aren't enough providers to see them, even with good healthcare insurance. There simply aren't enough clinicians for the need. And lastly, we need to better help people in crisis. We can't get people into effective care for the long term if we haven't stopped the immediate crisis. That is why suicidal prevention efforts are so critical.

As I alluded to earlier, last weekend, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline made the switch from its longstanding 10-digit number to an easy-to-remember 3-digit number, 9-8-8.

In 2019, I joined my colleagues Senators Tammy Baldwin and Jerry Moran and former Senator Cory Gardner in introducing legislation requiring this switch. Our bill was signed into law the next year, and we have been working since then to make sure that 9-8-8 has the funding to be able to handle the influx of new callers. It is estimated that the Lifeline will receive millions more calls with the new number, so we need trained people on the other end of the line ready to get people the help that they need.

When we started this effort, the Lifeline only received about $7 million in Federal funding each year. Last year, with the help of President Biden, Chair Murray and Chairman Leahy, we were able to secure nearly $300 million for the Lifeline, and we are working to get the number up to $700 million next year. This level of funding will help ensure that calls are answered quickly and locally so that people calling can talk to someone from their State who will know exactly where to find nearby resources. We are also working toward a system in which mobile response teams can respond in real time and be deployed to help people in crisis who call.

While the switch to 9-8-8 over the weekend was a huge step forward, we are just beginning to build a much broader system to help people in crisis across the country. I introduced the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Improvement Act with Senator Moran last year to help move the Lifeline toward a more comprehensive system. The Health, Education, Labor, and

Pensions Committee passed this bipartisan bill unanimously almost a year ago. It is time for the full Senate to take it up and pass it.

Senator Moran, I must point out, has been a true leader in these efforts. Recently, we have teamed up in introducing the Suicide Prevention Act to try and intervene with those who may be in crisis but may not know to call 9-8-8 or reach out otherwise. The Suicide Prevention Act would fund prevention programs in hospital emergency departments to better screen for suicide or mental health crises. This is important because over 90 percent of people who attempt suicide have seen a healthcare provider--often a visit to a hospital, particularly an emergency room--in the weeks and days prior to their attempt. As these people are accessing the healthcare system, the mental health issues that really are driving them to seek medical attention are often overlooked. There are evidence-based strategies that healthcare professionals can employ to intervene before it is too late, but they need the training and the resources in order to do so. The bill would also strengthen data collection on suicide so we can better direct resources where they are needed most.

We also need to respond to the challenges facing young people. Back in 2004, I joined my former colleague Senator Gordon Smith in introducing the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act, which was named for his son Garrett, who tragically lost his life to suicide the day before his 22nd birthday. This tragedy drove home the realization that suicide and mental health crises are so common among young people.

Our legislation authorized new funding for youth suicide prevention programs in States and on college campuses. Since it was first enacted, the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act has delivered roughly $750 million in suicide prevention funding nationally. And I am pleased that Senator Lisa Murkowski, another longstanding partner and champion on this issue, joined me in introducing the reauthorization of this law so we can continue funding programs to support youth and young adults.

Mental health and suicide have for too long been subjects that have been difficult to talk about, much less confront. In meeting the challenge of this mental health crisis, we must be relentless. We cannot just do one thing or even a few things because there is no single solution.

A few days ago, President Biden signed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which included new resources for mental healthcare, including an additional $150 million for implementation of 9-8-8 and billions of dollars for other mental health services such as the nationwide expansion of the Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic model. But that cannot be the end of our work.

Each of the efforts and bills I have mentioned represent our continuing and unfinished work. They would add another layer to help prevent suicide and strengthen our mental healthcare system.

So I urge my colleagues to work with me and my colleagues like Senator Moran and Senator Murkowski to pass the Suicide Prevention Act, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Improvement Act, the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act reauthorization, and to undertake many other efforts spearheaded by my colleagues. We should move forward with these measures without delay to prevent another 45,000 Americans from falling victim to suicide.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kiana Kekoa, a Coast Guard fellow in my office, be granted privileges of the floor for the remainder of the 117th Congress.

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

Madam President, we are on the brink of passing meaningful gun safety legislation, and it is regrettable that it took the deaths of 31 people, including 19 children, in the recent Buffalo and Uvalde mass shootings to provide the needed momentum to break the hold that the National Rifle Association and the gun lobby has had over Congress.

I commend my colleagues on both sides who have stepped forward to reach a compromise. This bill is a big accomplishment that can save lives, but I feel an inescapable dread that we will face the horror of another mass shooting if we do not take further steps.

As a veteran, I have shot many of the weapons we have heard debated on the floor this week. I know their power, and I know they were designed for killing people.

Now, I know that some of my colleagues hold the view that more firearms in the hands of more people is the antidote to gun violence, but I have to ask: Will more and more guns and more and more people carrying guns in public make our schools, our churches, or our streets safer? Is that really a vision for this country? I don't think so.

According to an academic study by the Council on Foreign Relations, the United States, with less than 5 percent of the world's population, has 46 percent of the world's civilian-owned guns, and it has the highest homicide-by-firearm rate of the world's most developed countries.

Indeed, Americans kill each other with guns at a rate 25 times higher than other high-income countries. In addition, Americans use firearms to harm themselves in alarming numbers. According to the CDC, in 2020, there were more than 45,000 firearm-related deaths in the United States, and roughly half of those deaths were suicides.

That is the academic data. But what grips me and so many other Rhode Islanders are the mass killings of Americans, particularly children, over the last quarter century: Columbine, Sandy Hook, Parkland, and now Uvalde. Hospitals, concert venues, houses of worship, and military installations have also been targeted. People have been targeted based on race, sexual orientation, and religious beliefs. Innocent lives have been taken again and again, and many more lives have been shattered. The common element

is a firearm; and while correlation isn't necessarily causation, these mass killings have become more and more common as more and more guns have been marketed and sold.

Roughly two-thirds of Americans do not own a gun, and the majority of Americans agree on a commonsense solution like expanding background checks. But groups like the NRA have lined up to block these efforts even in the face of devastating loss.

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act before us today represents progress. It represents a momentary break in the NRA's stranglehold on reform. This bill will establish a 10-day waiting period for firearms purchases for individuals under 21 years of age. It will close the ``boyfriend'' loophole that allows abusers to access guns. It will strengthen requirements for gun sellers to obtain a Federal firearms license. It will establish clear penalties for straw purchases and gun trafficking, and it will invest in violence intervention programs and mental health solutions in communities across the country. Those are real changes that are worthy of support on their own.

I am also encouraged that the bill includes incentives for States to adopt extreme risk protection orders, or a red flag system, similar to the legislation I have introduced. State red flag laws have proven effective in keeping guns away from individuals who have demonstrated clear warning signs of danger to themselves and others, and we should be encouraging every State to adopt a red flag system.

I would also like to talk about the mental health aspects of the bill. First, it needs to be repeated that a person with a mental health condition is more likely to be a victim of violent crime, not the perpetrator. The most reliable predictor of future violence is actually a history of violent behavior, not a diagnosis of mental illness.

That being said, we do have a mental health crisis in this country that demands attention. In Rhode Island, families and providers have been asking for more resources for treatment and more training for mental health workers, particularly resources dedicated to children with mental health needs. I am pleased that the negotiations over the gun control package so far include new resources for mental health care, including a national expansion of the certified community behavioral health clinic model, which would provide sustainable funding to expand mental health and substance abuse treatment and services at the community level. I have worked with my colleagues Senator Stabenow and Senator Blunt for over a decade to move this provision forward.

I am also pleased that this agreement invests new funding in a National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. Next month, the Lifeline will be making the switch to an easy to remember three-digit number: 988. We need to make sure that call centers have the staff and capacity to handle call volume and make sure people who reach out for help get appropriate follow-up care. As I mentioned earlier, half of all gun deaths each year are suicides, and firearms are the most lethal method of suicide. In addition to keeping guns out of the hands of people in crisis, we need to make sure we have well-funded and organized systems in place for people who reach out for help in these times of crisis, like the Lifeline. Again, I would hope every American, and particularly those who face these mental health challenges, remember 988. It could be a lifesaver.

I hope we are able to consider bipartisan efforts to strengthen our mental health care system over the coming weeks and months. For example, we should pass the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Improvement Act, which I introduced with Senator Moran last year. The HELP Committee reported the bill out of the committee unanimously nearly a year ago, but this bipartisan bill still has not yet come before the Senate.

The bill also includes critical resources for schools, not only to implement measures to address physical safety, but also to ensure that schools have the resources to address the social, emotional, and mental health needs of students and staff. Our educators have not just been on the frontlines of the pandemic. Too often--much too often--they are on the frontlines of the gun violence epidemic. And they are also on the frontlines of our mental health crisis. Finally, because of this legislation, some help is on the way.

The gun violence bill we are debating will hopefully prevent some tragedies going forward. Though we cannot help but celebrate any progress on gun violence, we should not lose sight of the fact that we need more comprehensive action than this bill if we are really committed to preventing gun violence in our Nation.

There is no single law or regulation that we can pass that would have stopped every single one of these tragedies we have seen over the past few decades. But in my view, Congress should do more, including reinstating the assault weapons ban, cracking down on illicit ghost guns, and, most importantly, eliminating the near total immunity of the gun industry, which has an unparalleled level of liability protection.

The gunman in Buffalo bought a semiautomatic weapon, but he was able to ``illegally'' transform it into a fully automatic weapon. If you go to your cell phone and get YouTube, put in something like ``transform AR-15 to fully automatic,'' you will have a host of videos. One of them lasts 1 minute and 38 seconds. Why is this happening? Well, when you have no liability for the consequences of building a weapon that can be easily transformed from semi to fully automatic and you can wink-wink to your potential market and say, ``Yes, this is semiautomatic,'' we need legislation to get that immunity removed.

Now, I am proud that in the days following the tragedy, my home State of Rhode Island took the decisive action of banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, raising the minimum age for buying shotguns and rifles from 18 to 21, and prohibiting loaded rifles and shotguns from being carried in public. Congress should do the same by passing the bill before us and then pressing on with additional reforms.

I will vote for this bipartisan bill. It is a significant step, but it cannot be the last step.

50th Anniversary of the Pell Grant Program

Madam President, I rise to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the enactment of the Pell grant, which was named in honor of its author and my predecessor, Senator Claiborne Pell--I might add, a mentor, a friend, and a remarkable example to me.

Senator Pell believed in the power of education to transform individuals, communities, and our Nation. He worked to put the power of education in the hands of the people.

When Senator Pell introduced the legislation to create what would become the Pell grant, he said:

There is no greater investment this country can make than

in the education of its youth. Our young people, who are

simultaneously our responsibility, our legacy, and our key to

problem-solving in the future, must be enabled to pass easily

into the realm of postsecondary education, and our

institutions of higher education must be equipped to

accommodate and train them.

His words were prophetic and profound. The Pell grant became the cornerstone for broadening access to postsecondary education. Because of the Pell grant, over 80 million students and counting have been able to attend college. In 1972, before the Pell grant, less than half of high school graduates immediately enrolled in college. Today, two- thirds make that transition. Since the establishment of the Pell grant, the percentage of people ages 25 to 30 with a bachelor's degree has doubled.

Today, the Pell grant supports nearly 7 million students across the Nation, including nearly 24,000 in Rhode Island. It remains one of the most effective Federal programs in assisting low-income families, with most recipients coming from families with annual incomes of $40,000 or less. It is one of our greatest tools to promote equity and opportunity in the United States. Yet, despite this success, today we find ourselves at a crossroads when it comes to fulfilling the promise of the Pell grant.

We have seen declining enrollment over the past 5 years. Even more alarming is that the institutions that enroll the lion's share of low- income and first generation college students--our community colleges and public 4-year colleges--have seen some of the most significant declines.

We have seen an explosion of student loan debt, now standing at more than $1.7 trillion--debt that threatens to foreclose on educational opportunity for this generation of Americans. We need to correct course.

We have made a start with the bipartisan, $400 increase to the maximum Pell grant in the fiscal year 2022 appropriations act, but we need to do much more. The Pell grant used to cover over three-quarters of the cost of a public 4-year college. Today, it covers less than a third.

When I was growing up and later with the passage of the Pell grant, it was relatively--I wouldn't say easy--but less challenging to go ahead and work your way through college with a summer job and a Pell grant, graduating with very little debt and moving on in the community and this society and this economy. Today, it is much, much more difficult. So it is time to double the grant.

We also need States and institutions to step up. Affordability is a shared responsibility. Fifty years ago, Senator Pell led the effort to ensure costs did not keep talented and committed students from pursuing a college education. In his farewell speech in the Senate, he called on us to continue his commitment to educational opportunity. He said:

In education, I want us to be known as the nation that

continually expanded educational opportunities, [the nation]

that brought every child into the education mainstream, and

[the nation] that brought the dream of a college education

within the reach of every student who has the drive, talent,

and desire. We should always remember that public support for

education is the best possible investment we can make in our

Nation's future. It should be accorded the highest priority.

So, as we commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Pell grant, it is time to renew our commitment to college access and affordability. Let's work together to double the Pell grant, rein in college costs, and reduce the burden of student loan debt. Let's do our part to realize Senator Pell's vision for a country that continually expands opportunity.

One final point: Getting to know Senator Pell, it always impressed me that, I think, one of the formative periods in his life was the beginning of World War II. Senator Pell came from an old family. Pelham, NY, was named after his family. I was once with him when he informed me that his family once owned Fort Ticonderoga, but then they donated it to the State of New York.

He could have very easily, in 1941, gotten a promotion, gotten a rank, and served comfortably in some office. He chose not to.

He enlisted in the Coast Guard as a cook and sailed across the Atlantic in multiple convoys in dangerous waters. I think there, he learned the potential of the American people--those other cooks who would never be able to go to college because they didn't have the money, but they had talent and, in some cases, more talent perhaps than the Senator himself. I think that image, that impression, drove him in many respects to make the Pell grant a reality.

Now, of course, it is quite a tribute to a gentleman who could have avoided the difficulties and dangers of war and chose, just like other Americans, to go into the fight. And we have to have that same spirit as we address the Pell grant.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Historic Lighthouse Resiliency Act with Senator King. This legislation would authorize the Army Corps of Engineers to partner with State, local, and nonprofit organizations, which own and operate historic light stations, to improve lighthouse resiliency and ensure continued public access to these valuable landmarks.

Our Nation's historic lighthouses are important parts of communities across the country and our maritime history. They serve as beacons of history, education, recreation, and often are associated with the unique character and identity of a community. Yet these historic structures are facing increased risk for catastrophic damage due to sea level rise, flooding, and aging infrastructure.

Indeed, in my State of Rhode Island, these historic lighthouses are interwoven in the fabric of our communities and our State's history. Rhode Island was home to perhaps the most famous lighthouse keeper in history, Ida Lewis. During her tenure as the Keeper of Lime Rock Lighthouse, Ida Lewis rescued at least 18 people and earned the title of ``Bravest Woman in America.'' Beavertail, Watch Hill, and Castle Hill Lighthouses, just to name a few of the 21 lighthouses remaining in my State, are iconic structures dotting the Rhode Island shoreline.

These historic landmarks must be protected and preserved for future generations. This bill would allow the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct projects that restore damaged lighthouses and increase their future resiliency to the adverse effects of climate change, including sea level rise and severe weather events. To conduct repairs and other improvements, the Army Corps would partner with public or nonprofit entities that have acquired light stations through conveyance under the National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act. Additionally, it would require the Army Corps to conduct an assessment and maintain a database of all lighthouses nationwide.

Congress has already recognized the importance of preserving these structures and ensuring public access in the National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act of 2000. However, these historic light stations must not only have the appropriate caretakers but must also have the appropriate funding to invest in infrastructure needs. Federal investment in lighthouse resiliency requirements will ensure they are maintained and accessible for future generations.

I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this commonsense legislation.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Historic Lighthouse Resiliency Act with Senator King. This legislation would authorize the Army Corps of Engineers to partner with State, local, and nonprofit organizations, which own and operate historic light stations, to improve lighthouse resiliency and ensure continued public access to these valuable landmarks.

Our Nation's historic lighthouses are important parts of communities across the country and our maritime history. They serve as beacons of history, education, recreation, and often are associated with the unique character and identity of a community. Yet these historic structures are facing increased risk for catastrophic damage due to sea level rise, flooding, and aging infrastructure.

Indeed, in my State of Rhode Island, these historic lighthouses are interwoven in the fabric of our communities and our State's history. Rhode Island was home to perhaps the most famous lighthouse keeper in history, Ida Lewis. During her tenure as the Keeper of Lime Rock Lighthouse, Ida Lewis rescued at least 18 people and earned the title of ``Bravest Woman in America.'' Beavertail, Watch Hill, and Castle Hill Lighthouses, just to name a few of the 21 lighthouses remaining in my State, are iconic structures dotting the Rhode Island shoreline.

These historic landmarks must be protected and preserved for future generations. This bill would allow the Army Corps of Engineers to conduct projects that restore damaged lighthouses and increase their future resiliency to the adverse effects of climate change, including sea level rise and severe weather events. To conduct repairs and other improvements, the Army Corps would partner with public or nonprofit entities that have acquired light stations through conveyance under the National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act. Additionally, it would require the Army Corps to conduct an assessment and maintain a database of all lighthouses nationwide.

Congress has already recognized the importance of preserving these structures and ensuring public access in the National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act of 2000. However, these historic light stations must not only have the appropriate caretakers but must also have the appropriate funding to invest in infrastructure needs. Federal investment in lighthouse resiliency requirements will ensure they are maintained and accessible for future generations.

I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this commonsense legislation.

Mr. President, as we all know too well, rates of suicide have risen to epidemic levels in the United States, with suicide now the 10th leading cause of death in the country. On average, there are 130 suicides every day, roughly 1 every 11 minutes. These are staggering statistics behind which there are tragic stories of loss. That is why I am joining Senator Moran to introduce the Suicide Prevention Act.

Our bipartisan, bicameral bill would provide new resources to help turn the tide on this disturbing trend. It would authorize new funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, partner with State and local health departments to improve surveillance of suicide attempts and other incidences of self-harm. Data collection efforts regarding suicide often occur years after the fact, which limits the ability of State and local health departments, as well as community organizations, to recognize trends early and intervene. CDC has already begun some of this work as a pilot program, but the Suicide Prevention Act would expand these efforts and enhance data collection so we can respond to new trends quickly and save lives.

We know that emergency healthcare providers are often at the frontlines of responding to suicide attempts. Approximately 37 percent of individuals without a previous history of mental health or substance abuse who die by suicide make an emergency department visit within the year before their death. According to the Suicide Prevention Resource Center, the risk of suicide is greatest within a month of discharge from the hospital. To help ensure our emergency healthcare professionals have the tools to respond, the bill would also authorize funding for a grant program within the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, SAMHSA, to help better train emergency department staff to implement suicide prevention strategies, screen at- risk patients, and refer patients to appropriate followup care. The legislation would also require SAMHSA to develop best practices for such programs, so that healthcare providers are able to provide their patients with the best possible care and advice.

Nationwide, suicide rates have skyrocketed over the last decade. In 2020, nearly 46,000 Americans lost their lives to suicide. That same year, there were 1.2 million suicide attempts. We must renew our efforts on suicide prevention and take a holistic approach. In addition to the Suicide Prevention Act, we must reauthorize the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act, which I am working with Senator Murkowski to do. Despite the troubling national trend, programs under this law have contributed to declines in the youth suicide rates in my home State of Rhode Island over the last decade.

We must also invest in the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline and the new nationwide three-digit 9-8-8 number, which is scheduled to go live this summer. Senator Moran and I have teamed up on the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Improvement Act that will increase funding for the Lifeline and make key improvements, such as enhance texting capability.

Today, I am pleased to have the opportunity to partner with Senator Moran once again by introducing the Suicide Prevention Act. This bill is one more step Congress can take to combat the mental health and suicide crisis in our country. I look forward to working with Senator Moran and advocates in Rhode Island and across the country to make a difference in addressing this epidemic.

Mr. President, as we all know too well, rates of suicide have risen to epidemic levels in the United States, with suicide now the 10th leading cause of death in the country. On average, there are 130 suicides every day, roughly 1 every 11 minutes. These are staggering statistics behind which there are tragic stories of loss. That is why I am joining Senator Moran to introduce the Suicide Prevention Act.

Our bipartisan, bicameral bill would provide new resources to help turn the tide on this disturbing trend. It would authorize new funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, partner with State and local health departments to improve surveillance of suicide attempts and other incidences of self-harm. Data collection efforts regarding suicide often occur years after the fact, which limits the ability of State and local health departments, as well as community organizations, to recognize trends early and intervene. CDC has already begun some of this work as a pilot program, but the Suicide Prevention Act would expand these efforts and enhance data collection so we can respond to new trends quickly and save lives.

We know that emergency healthcare providers are often at the frontlines of responding to suicide attempts. Approximately 37 percent of individuals without a previous history of mental health or substance abuse who die by suicide make an emergency department visit within the year before their death. According to the Suicide Prevention Resource Center, the risk of suicide is greatest within a month of discharge from the hospital. To help ensure our emergency healthcare professionals have the tools to respond, the bill would also authorize funding for a grant program within the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, SAMHSA, to help better train emergency department staff to implement suicide prevention strategies, screen at- risk patients, and refer patients to appropriate followup care. The legislation would also require SAMHSA to develop best practices for such programs, so that healthcare providers are able to provide their patients with the best possible care and advice.

Nationwide, suicide rates have skyrocketed over the last decade. In 2020, nearly 46,000 Americans lost their lives to suicide. That same year, there were 1.2 million suicide attempts. We must renew our efforts on suicide prevention and take a holistic approach. In addition to the Suicide Prevention Act, we must reauthorize the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act, which I am working with Senator Murkowski to do. Despite the troubling national trend, programs under this law have contributed to declines in the youth suicide rates in my home State of Rhode Island over the last decade.

We must also invest in the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline and the new nationwide three-digit 9-8-8 number, which is scheduled to go live this summer. Senator Moran and I have teamed up on the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Improvement Act that will increase funding for the Lifeline and make key improvements, such as enhance texting capability.

Today, I am pleased to have the opportunity to partner with Senator Moran once again by introducing the Suicide Prevention Act. This bill is one more step Congress can take to combat the mental health and suicide crisis in our country. I look forward to working with Senator Moran and advocates in Rhode Island and across the country to make a difference in addressing this epidemic.