Floor Statements

Mr. President, I reserve the right to object.

I have a statement to make.

Last week, my friend from Indiana and I were last down here discussing this issue.

There seemed to be a lot of confusion about the Treasury--or how the Treasury would interpret the net tax revenue provision. There seemed to be a fear that this language would prevent States from cutting any taxes whatsoever.

And the good news is that we received some guidance earlier this week from Secretary Yellen that should put those concerns to bed once and for all.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the letter from Secretary Yellen

Mr. President, I will enter this letter into the Record, but I would like to read the key sentences. And to the Senator from Indiana, if I could read this letter to you and to make sure that--I don't know how--I have spoken to my attorney general, who was one of the original cosigners, and I said: Mr. Attorney General, I want to explain this in English because it is very easy to understand. It says this:

Nothing in the Act prevents States from enacting a broad

variety of tax cuts.

Do whatever you want.

That is, the Act does not ``deny States the ability to cut

taxes in any manner whatsoever.''

This comes from the Secretary of Treasury.

It simply provides that funding received under the Act may

not be used to offset a reduction. . . .

That you choose, unless it is COVID related. It makes all the sense in the world. It has to be COVID related.

If States lower certain taxes but do not use funds under

the Act to offset those cuts--for example, by replacing the

lost revenue through other means--the limitation in the Act

is not implicated.

They can do whatever they want to. And if they can show other revenue to offset it, that is great. They just cannot use the Treasury's money that the people have invested in their States for that purpose.

It also says this:

It is . . . important to note that the States choosing to

use the Federal funds to offset a reduction in net tax

revenue do not thereby forfeit their entire allocation of

funds appropriated under this statute.

They have alluded to that, which is not accurate.

The limitation affects States' ability to retain only those

Federal funds used to offset a reduction in . . . tax revenue

resulting from certain changes in [the] state law.

That is it. That is not--and these are all supposed to be educated attorneys that are writing letters wanting explanations.

This is as common sense as it gets. It is a bipartisan guardrail to simply make sure the emergency funds make it to the people who need it most, and the States can do whatever they think they should do and could do.

As a former Governor, I would have been offended if I thought it was hampered. I am not. I have got to make good decisions here. I have other revenue coming in. I want to cut this tax. That is fine. I just can't cut a tax to be popular and then say: OK. Mr. Senators here, please send us money so we can be popular back home but use your money to make us look good. That is about it in a nutshell.

So it is for those reasons, and many, many more, I object.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise to honor the life of a noble veteran, a beloved husband, father, grandfather, friend, brother, uncle, and someone I had been fortunate enough to call my dear brother- in-law, Robert Gutz Thompson.

What I always admired about Bob was his unparalleled work ethic and determination to learn and serve and to inspire those around him. Bob was a graduate of the University of Wyoming, Class of 1961. He then joined the military and entered flight training in 1963, and he was designated as a naval aviator in 1964. From the day he was motivated to join the military to his military retirement in 1983, he showcased steadfast dedication and a commitment to excellence that can only be matched by his loving devotion as part of our family.

Bob proudly served our Nation for more than 20 years and leaves behind a distinguished legacy of military history, including service aboard the USS Intrepid, the USS Randolph, the USS Lexington, and the USS Forrestal. He flew thousands of flight hours throughout his distinguished career. He trained other pilots. He commanded naval units, and he was deployed multiple times, including to the North Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Caribbean, and the Arctic Circle. He earned the Navy Achievement Medal for his performance as Landing Signal Officer during a winter deployment to the North Atlantic.

In 1967, he joined the VS-30 squadron and reported to Key West, FL, as an instructor pilot. In 1970, he was awarded the Navy Commendation Medal for recovering aircraft within the Arctic Circle. In 1972, Bob was selected for and attended the Naval War College in Rhode Island and then was assigned to the Naval Air Station Cecil Field, in Florida, to lead the squadron's relocation operations.

In 1976, he served aboard the USS Forrestal as operations officer. In 1979, Bob assumed command of the VS-30 squadron, where he deployed with his beloved Diamondcutters to the Mediterranean. Later that year, Bob received orders to the Pentagon to work on what is now known as GPS. His assignments were tough--squadron executive officer, squadron commander, instructor pilot, and so many more--but he was always tougher than they were. It is unbelievable the leader he was to all of those who served and served with pride.

Put simply, Bob was one of the most generous, kind, hard-working, and inspirational people I ever knew. My whole family and I adored Bob ever since he joined the family, and Bob's passing has left a deep impact on all of us. This is also an important time to celebrate Bob's life and the profound feelings of joy and pride that he brought to all of us.

While Bob wasn't born in West Virginia, he certainly was a Mountaineer, through and through, in his heart and soul and was a dedicated fan of his beloved WVU sports teams, especially football and basketball.

When visitors come to our little State, I jump at the chance to tell them we are home to the most hard-working and patriotic people in the Nation. We have fought in more wars; we have shed more blood; and lost more lives for the cause of freedom than most any other State. We have always done the heavy lifting, and no one has ever complained.

We have mined the coal, forged the steel that built the guns and ships and factories that have protected and continue to protect our country to this day.

I am so deeply proud of what West Virginians like my brother-in-law Bob Thompson have accomplished and what they will continue to accomplish to protect the freedoms that we all take for granted and hold so dear.

We have every reason to be proud and to stand tall knowing that West Virginia is the reason Americans sleep peacefully at night. It is because of all of our veterans, past and present, that we can proudly proclaim ``Mountaineers Are Always Free,'' and we are all so very, very proud of our Bob for being a vital part of our legacy.

What is most important is that he lived a full life, surrounded by his loved ones. I extend all of our condolences to

my dear sister Janet, Bob's beloved wife of 56 years; his daughter Mary Jo; his son Peter; granddaughter Isabella; his siblings, Mary, Greg, Kathy, and Clark; his 24 Thompson nieces and nephews; his brothers-in- law John and Rock; sister-in-law Paula; and his 45 Manchin nieces and nephews.

Again, we extend our most sincere condolences for our shared loss of this remarkable--absolutely remarkable person. The unwavering love that Bob had for his family, his friends, and our Nation will live on forever in the hearts of all who had the privilege of knowing Robert Gutz Thompson. God rest, Bob.

Reserving the right to object.

Madam President, my good friend the Senator from Indiana--I am hoping this is a misunderstanding, and I hope I can explain it because I was very much involved in this process.

First of all, as a former Governor, I know about the budget process. I know about balanced budgets. I used to meet every Tuesday afternoon. As Governor, I would have my finance people come to my office, and we would sit down and look at the revenue estimates. We had to make adjustments because we had a balanced budget amendment. Isn't that a novelty, a balanced budget amendment? We had to live within our confines. That is something that no one who has ever been in State government or ever run a business understands. I understand that. But it is something that we did very religiously.

The language in this bill, Senator from Indiana, the only thing this bill does--or that language you were concerned about, the only thing it did--you can cut all you want to. You can manage all your money the way you want. You just can't take Federal money and use it if you cut your revenue intentionally. That is all. What we try to do is target where the money has gone.

So the Treasury, you have to go--as a State, you go to the Treasury, and you show the need that you have. You show the cost--what COVID has cost your revenue and you are able to have money to replace that because COVID caused you that problem.

You have also the ability to use this, in your State, for three things: water, sewer, and internet service. So you have infrastructure that can be done.

Also, what we did in this bill is we have it going out to 2024, so you are not going to overheat, if you will--overheat or overcharge the economy. They can spread that out. The State and local moneys go in two tranches: Half this year, half next year is what you can access. The money to every one of your communities--for the first time, 40 percent of that total money goes directly, so your large cities will get money directly from the Treasury. They have to show how they are using it for their backfill, not, basically, having anything to do with what their tax revenue is. They just can't use this money to backfill tax cuts if they want to do that. That is pretty simple because there is not a need for it. If you can reduce your taxes, then you don't need Federal dollars to backfill to show that you are in good shape. But if you need it for anything else, you can use it for that. You can use it for all these things.

I can tell you--I would assure you that every incorporated city in Indiana, every county in Indiana has to be thrilled. They have to be thrilled for the first time to have control of their destiny. That was our intention.

In the first CARES package, that never happened. The first CARES package went directly to the Governors, and if the Governors were very prudent in how they did it--set up a committee, worked through the legislature--some did, some didn't, and there is a lot of money that never got into the basic fibers of your State or my State. Now that is not going to be the problem.

Also, they have the ability, if they have a water project they have been

trying to do forever and never had the resources to do it, they can use their money for that.

If they have a sewer project--I have said this: How do we pick water, sewer, and internet? They are not the sexy things that, basically, Governors and politicians go out and cut ribbons for--a sewer line or a water line that is buried 50 feet down. That is not a sexy thing.

We knew the infrastructure was falling apart city by city and the ages of water lines are over 80 years in most of our cities. So we tried to do something.

They have until 2024, so they don't have to throw it out. It is not shovel-ready. It is a project you have been wanting to do but never could afford.

I assure you, we do not want to impede good fiscal management to make adjustments to do whatever they want to their tax codes. This does not prohibit that. It just prohibits using and going to the Federal Treasury and saying: I have a loss of revenue because I cut $100 billion or I cut $100 million or a billion dollars out of my State budget when I reduced taxes, and now I can't pay my bills.

Also, you can't use this money from the Federal Government for your pensions. That is a responsibility that we have. We call it OPEB, other postponed employment benefits. OPEB is other postponed employment benefits--pensions, healthcare, all the things that when a person retires from their State, these are things that the State has a contract and an obligation for them in their retirement. It is the responsibility of the States to manage that, and that, basically, keeps the State in a good financial position. It keeps your credit rating up or your credit rating low if you have managed yourself through it. This is only to help you with expenses and extraordinary expenses that you incurred during COVID. That is all, sir.

I don't want the State of Indiana or any State to think that they can't do whatever they want to with their taxes. They just can't use the Federal Treasury to backfill something done deliberately, basically, or self-inflicted--a loss of revenue. That is about it in a nutshell.

COVID-19 is the greatest challenge we have ever had. I know you mentioned a few things. I will tell you this because my dear friend from Maine is sitting here. We met quite a bit on the bill in a bipartisan way, even though a lot of it did not get in. The bill was bigger than what my friends--all of you, my friends on the Republican side--could basically vote for. I understand that.

But please understand there are an awful lot of things we talked about that I did everything in my power to make sure the tranches-- spreading them out, not going it all at one time. There is the RESTAURANTS Act. Senator Wicker and Senator Sinema were on the RESTAURANTS Act. There was, basically, the homeless children's bill that Senator Murkowski and myself put in there. There was bipartisanship in that.

There should have been a lot more; I agree. We both know the process sometimes doesn't work the way we want it to. But you make every effort you can to make it work. I did that. Whenever I talked, I said that this had bipartisan input. It didn't come out as a bipartisan vote, but there was bipartisan input into this piece of legislation, the best we possibly could.

I think it is a piece of legislation that we--if you have education, there is not a school in America today that should not be able to have a program where they can make their school the safest environment that a child should be in. Every parent should be safe in thinking their children are in a safe place because of heating, ventilation--things that we have in this bill that allow education to have the resources it needs and, also, your higher education too.

The money that is going out--you have money going to the stimulus payments, going to all of your citizens at $75,000. We put a hard cap. We tried it to put a hard cap at $75,000 and $150,000. We found out the first CARES package--I don't think that anyone on the Republican side or the Democrat side thought someone making $200,000, $300,000 would be getting money. They didn't need a check, but we found out it happened. We didn't intend for that to happen. That is the way the code read, and that is the way it kind of slipped into that. We stopped that from happening here.

So we tried to do everything--and that, again, came from our bipartisan group. If it wasn't for the bipartisan group talking and saying ``This is something we can't do,'' I would have had things I might have missed. I wouldn't have known some things that were of concern to all of us and some of the atrocities that happened that we didn't want to repeat. We did all the things we could to stop that.

I am very reluctant to object to any of my Senators, my fellow Senators, but on this one, sir--if I can work with you on this--I am objecting because I want to have a productive sit-down with you and we can work on something together.

Please tell your Governor that he can cut away if he wants to. He just can't go back to the Federal Government and say: OK, I made a mistake. Now I need your money.

That is about it in a nutshell. If Indiana can cut and it helps you and grows your economy, God bless you. If you have COVID expenses, we are going to help you. If you have projects--my goodness, just infrastructure projects--then there is no impediment there if you have internet services you need, if you have water services, and you have sewer services.

In West Virginia, what we are trying to do right now is put a team together that can basically work from this. The State has money for those three tranches of infrastructure. The counties have it, and the municipalities have it. The unincorporated towns that aren't able to get money directly are going to count on the county and the State.

There is so much good to be done to make it work for you to make sure they understand. They are elated to now have a project they never could finish, like upgrade your services, finish your water line, have internet service you have never had before. These are all unbelievable opportunities that we have never had.

The bipartisan SMART Act that was filed in May 2020 included both of these guardrails, plus another one required maintenance of effort. We have that in there. Maintenance of effort--we put that back then.

The Bipartisan State and Local Support of Small Business Protections Act that was released last December had exactly the same language. This is not new language, sir. This is the same language that has been there.

They have never been able to backfill for, basically, discretionary cuts that they made themselves. It doesn't prohibit them, the same as it doesn't prohibit anybody in their State for having--and being a former Governor, I am very partial to the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, States rights. You have those rights. Now you have the assistance also with those rights.

I am hoping to improve everyone's situation. I know it does in West Virginia. I hope it does in Maine. I hope it does in Indiana, and I think it will.

It is all about making these emergency funds get to the right people. We are trying to target it. It is something we have to keep an eye on. I can tell if we do it and do it right and we are good stewards, this will get us through this COVID challenge that we have because we really don't know.

I am hoping we come out of this guns ablazing in July--we come out of this, and the economy takes off like a rocket. Sometimes when they take off, they tend to level off too.

We want to make sure we are still out there for 2022, 2023, out to 2024. And if they do it and do it right, they can. They can finish their projects and be able to have the moneys as needed for emergencies if it has a dip.

With that, we thought we had worked something, but the language is nothing new. It is not a surprise. It was not anything that was put in; it has been in there. Basically, it is language that spells out pretty directly how you can use your money and what money you can't acquire. That is the only thing we did.

I yield the floor.

Yes, there is objection.

Will the Senator yield?

First of all, I did have a nice conversation with Governor Justice. He and I have disagreed on basic issues on Tax Code legislation, and we are trying to work through all of that. I explained it to him. I said that it doesn't do a thing in that it doesn't impede you at all. If you want to cut, go ahead and cut. He is still moving through with the legislation. He might succeed on that, and he might not.

With that, I will make it very clear that this is not new language. You cannot backfill. You cannot backfill. The only thing you can use your money for is for COVID expenses. Basically, if your revenues were down through no fault of your own, business dropped off, and your tax collections were down through no fault of your own, then that is what this is for. COVID caused you a problem. It caused you an imposition and put strain on the services that you are basically providing to the people of West Virginia and Indiana.

We want to make sure that your first responders are there and your education is there, that everything is still running the way it is supposed to. That is why we have passed five bills in trying to keep things afloat, and we think we have done that. So it does not impede that whatsoever. We have also looked at it constitutionally, and we are solid on the Constitution.

All we are asking is, does the Federal Government have a responsibility to backfill with Treasury dollars a decision that could be self-inflicted? That is all. You should live with that or my State should live with it or reap the benefits. We are not penalized. Even if your revenues went up, you still had COVID expenses you could offset. Those were legitimate expenses that you incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic is what we are talking about. So if your revenues went up after that, we are not penalizing you. If they went down, that is a whole other story because COVID caused that, but you just can't cause it yourself. I think this is it in a nutshell.

Yes, I will yield.

Will the Senator yield?

Senator Braun has always been very kind and very reasonable, and I look forward to sitting down with him on this.

What he has said is absolutely correct in that we are not penalizing. We don't intend to penalize anybody who has made that decision, but the Senator is talking about a State that has a balanced budget amendment year in and year out. There is a time when a Governor has to make a decision and go to his legislature and say: Hey, we are going to be X amount of dollars short, so we need to cut. So they start cutting and cutting services. That is what happens in order to balance the budget usually--services are cut to the people.

We are just saying in our piece of legislation here that we have that we don't want that to happen because it is of no fault of your own, but if you cut your taxes and you are thinking, well, 5 years down the road, we are going to have more revenue, then that is fine. You just can't backfill for that short period of time and use it for something for which you have cut revenues, basically, in a self-inflicting way. It might be a self-ingratiating way to where it will help you down the road, but you still can't backfill for that.

Now, for any COVID expenses you have, absolutely, you can fill that hole. Show that you have had COVID expenses. If you were to say, ``OK. We filled all of our holes for COVID, and now we have water, sewer, and internet''--and trust me, there is not a place in Indiana or in West Virginia that doesn't need help there.

I thank the Senator. I appreciate it

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 3 minutes.

Mr. President, I am pleased to speak today on the nomination of Representative Debra Haaland to be the Secretary of the Interior. Her nomination was carefully considered by the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, which I am privileged to chair.

Her hearing went well, and it went for 2 days. Every member of the committee questioned her. Most asked her two rounds of questions, and some asked three. We then asked her 70 pages of questions for the record--nearly 300 questions, many with multiple subparts.

The committee questioned her closely on her beliefs, her opinions, the President's policies, and what she will do if confirmed. In the end, the committee voted to report her nomination favorably, 11 to 9. I am proud to have voted to report her nomination, and I am proud to speak in favor of her confirmation today.

While I may not personally agree with some of Congresswoman Haaland's past statements and policy positions, as Secretary she will be carrying out President Biden's agenda, the agenda that the voters elected President Biden to pursue.

At her hearing, she confirmed that she and the administration recognize that our country will remain dependent on fossil fuels for years to come, and a transition to a cleaner energy future must come through innovation, not elimination.

She also affirmed her strong commitment to bipartisanship. She understands the need to work across the aisle to find the bipartisan solutions needed to address the diverse needs of our country and has demonstrated that she can do so effectively.

I was also deeply impressed by the strong endorsement she received by Congressman Don Young, for whom I have the utmost respect. Don Young has been in Congress long enough to be able to read people and know their heart and soul. He took the time and trouble to appear before the committee and testified to the productive working relationship he has had with Congresswoman Haaland and her willingness to work with him on important issues. That meant a lot to me, and I hope it will also resonate with my colleagues.

President Biden is in perhaps the most difficult position a modern- day President has ever been in, bringing us back from the brink after January 6. That day changed me, and I feel strongly that with the deep divisions running through our country and the Halls of Congress today, we have to have people who have demonstrated they have the temperament and willingness to reach across the aisle. Congresswoman Haaland has demonstrated she does and she will.

As the President works to bind together a nation split by deep political, racial, social, and economic divisions, he is also trying to assemble a Cabinet that reflects the rich diversity of our Nation, one that looks like America. And 230 years after Washington called his first Cabinet meeting, it is long past time to give a Native American woman a seat at the Cabinet table.

For these reasons, I support Deb Haaland's nomination and will vote to report her and to support her, and I look forward to working with her to protect our public lands and ensure the responsible use of our natural resources in the most bipartisan manner. I strongly support her nomination. I urge all of my colleagues to vote to invoke cloture today and to confirm her nomination next week.

Mr. President, I also proudly rise with my colleague on this piece of legislation.

There is not one of us in this room who doesn't have rising homelessness for our children in your State, not one of us. We are all experiencing that right now. We are 10,000 in the State of West Virginia alone.

These are children--basically, if you look at it, it is estimated that there are one in four homeless children. That is about 420,000 kids who are potentially unidentified and not even connected with a school system, not even connected. They are couch surfing. It is horrible what is going on.

I am so proud. This is such a bipartisan piece of legislation. Less than 1 percent, $800 million, is all we asked for to use for this, and everyone supported it. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Vote on Amendment No. 1233

Mr. President, first, I ask unanimous consent that upon the disposition of the Granholm nomination, the Senate resume consideration of the Cardona nomination.

Mr. President, first of all, I am delighted to speak today on the nomination of Jennifer Granholm to be Secretary of Energy.

I have known Jennifer since we were Governors together more than a decade ago. She served two terms as Governor of Michigan from 2003 to 2010. That was a particularly challenging time in her State's history, and I saw how she handled the difficult challenges facing her during the Great Recession and when the bottom dropped out of the auto industry in her State.

She was up to those challenges. She helped save the domestic auto industry. She diversified Michigan's economy. She brought in new investment and new industry, and she created new jobs, leaving no worker behind.

I know she will continue to apply the mindset at the national level. She has the leadership skills, the vision, and the compassion for people that we need at the helm of the Department of Energy to face the climate challenge and, at the same time, preserve our energy security, protect our national security, clean up the Cold War legacy, and preserve our scientific and technological prowess.

Moreover, she is someone you can talk to and work with. She listens, and she is an honest broker. She may not always agree with you, but she will listen to your concerns and will try to address them.

Finally, she is just simply a good person. That is a quality that I value and expect all of my colleagues would benefit from.

I believe she is extremely well qualified to lead the Department of Energy, and I urge--I truly urge--all of my colleagues to show in this bipartisan vote to confirm her nomination today.

I also yield back the remaining time of our presentation.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, in accordance with rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I submit the rules governing the procedure of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for publication in the Congressional Record.

I ask unanimous consent that they be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I send a question to the desk directed to the House managers.

Please let him explain, Mr. President. Why was it false? What was false about it?

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 775 and ask that it be reported by number.

I also ask for unanimous consent that the time be split between myself and the Senator from Maine.

Mr. President, American families in every corner of our country are struggling right now, and I don't think a single person on this floor would disagree that the decent, compassionate thing is for us to target relief to our neighbors struggling every day to get by, to the families who are struggling to pay rent and put food on the table. This $1,400 will make a significant impact on their ability to get by. These families need our support right now.

Still, there are other families who have not missed a single paycheck as a result of this pandemic. It does not make sense to send a check to those individuals who are still working, earning a decent living over the wages that we talked about.

My bipartisan amendment would simply ensure those Americans who are truly struggling through no fault of their own--

Are given the support they need during this difficult time.

I ask unanimous consent for 30 seconds.

Mr. President, 18 rural hospitals across America closed last year--three in my own State. Do any of you have any sympathy for people who live in rural America?

Twenty percent of the population in America is rural. We only got 6 percent of the money that was associated that we sent out in the last CARES package, and that is 6 percent to rural hospitals.

We need to treat them fair. That is all we are asking for. A 20- percent set-aside is fair. Thank you, and I would appreciate your support.

Mr. President, I also support this and, I think, basically, that transparency is something we all want, and that is all we have asked for--to see the numbers and work from there in an honest fashion.

I support it.

Mr. President, I can't express enough what Chris Cline meant to our home State of West Virginia. He represented the very best of the Mountain State, which is saying a lot. Born in McDowell County and raised a stone's throw from the train tracks in the coalfields of Beckley, Chris's family was wealthy beyond measure in the

only currency that truly matters: love, work ethic, and profound strength of character.

One of my favorite stories about Chris is, when he was a child, he filled bags with dirt for his father, Paul, to use for blasting holes at the mine. His father paid him a penny per bag. It was once the front porch caved in that his father realized he had been getting the dirt from beneath it. Chris said that was how he learned the importance of infrastructure.

He never lost touch with the days he would come home from a shift in the mines as a young man of only 15, his face caked in coal dust. In fact, he kept his first hard hat, battered from years of hard labor, in a place of honor at his home in Beckley. From this foundation, he built an opportunity empire. From the early days of Pioneer Fuel to when Chris founded Foresight Energy, much of the success he gained was returned to the men and women who keep the lights on. He treated his workforce as family, knowing very well what it was like to be in their shoes, and so he invested in the safest, most innovative, and efficient tools and methods.

His coal enterprises took him from Appalachia to Illinois to Canada. He offered cash incentives to his miners, installed advanced and safe mining equipment, and was ahead of his time in anticipating the market for coal. Chris believed it was not enough to be innovative, you need a little luck. At Foresight, his four mine complexes were the most productive underground operations in the Nation. He bought docks on the Mississippi River and built rail spurs to haul coal onto ships bound for India, Europe, and Asia.

Chris understood opponents of burning coal while defending coal and his role in supplying the world with it. He believed that people deserved the cheapest energy they could get. He had a curious mind, was eager to learn about everything, and never stopped learning. As committed as he was to coal energy, for his Big Grand Cay property, he installed solar panels and batteries. Where renewable energy sources made sense, he was eager to embrace them.

There is no greater accomplishment in the world than to be in a position to give back to the community you love, that made you who you are. That is what made Chris the wonderful, inspiring, and generous person he was. Through the Cline Family Foundation, founded in 2009, Chris made a profound impact on Marshal University and West Virginia University. His legacy will remain forever in the hearts of all who had the privilege of knowing him, and he will be remembered through the countless lives he benefited with his generosity to our academic institutions. Chris believed with all his heart that West Virginians are the most hard-working, ethical people in our Nation, and he wanted to ensure they had every opportunity to utilize their skills with the best possible resources to build their lives from the ground up, just as he did. His mission was for each of his accomplishments to pave the way for others to go even further than he did.

Chris was generous with his philanthropy publicly through the Cline Family Foundation, but most importantly, he was generous and compassionate privately, almost daily. The foundation focuses on donations throughout West Virginia in recognition of the community's contribution to his success. It offers scholarships and grants, endows universities, and financially supports charitable organizations that make life better for children and older youth. Chris once said that everyone in West Virginia contributed to his success, and he was determined to repay the favor. He certainly did, and our statewide community is better for it.

Among other donations, the Cline Family Foundation supported Place of Hope, a foster care and adoption organization; Peacehaven Community Farm, a home for disabled adults; orphanages in West Virginia and Haiti; Save the Children; humanitarian aid organizations in Tanzania; churches; and the Raleigh County YMCA, among other organizations, and many needy individuals over the years. He also supported the Benjamin School from which his daughter Kameron graduated in 2015. Few people beyond the recipients know details of Mr. Cline's many and constant personal acts of private charity.

Sharing his adventures with his four children and his lifelong friends was his absolute favorite way to spend his time. He would take crowds of friends and family to the Super Bowl, the Big East Tournament, countless other sporting events, and on his frequent world travels. Chris was an adventure junkie, always looking forward to the next time he could drive a fast car or ride a four-wheeler through the West Virginia hills.

I can't speak enough to what a good-hearted, wonderful person he truly was. I always thought of him as a man for all seasons. No matter the circumstances, he kept a cool head and a warm demeanor, always able to discern the most honorable path forward. It was an honor to call him my friend, and I miss him dearly.

I join all West Virginians in extending my deepest condolences to his children, Candice and her husband James, Christopher, and Alex, for the loss of their loving father and their sister, Kameron. I also extend my condolences to Chris's brothers Greg and Kenneth. It is my hope the entire Cline family is able to find peace, strength, and support in one another.

Madam President, I come before this body, I come before all of those in America to explain a little bit of what we had before the Affordable Care Act and where we are today.

I wasn't here in 2009 when they passed the Affordable Care Act. I was the Governor of the State of West Virginia, my beautiful State. I can tell you about the type of healthcare in a rural State--a rural, hard- working

State--where people have worked hard all their lives. They have been challenged, but they really have given so much to this great country. Most of them did not have insurance. A lot of people across America had some really good insurance, but a lot of working people--hard-working people or people of less means, poor people--did not have access.

Let me tell you what they used. They used the emergency room--the highest cost of entry with no preventive care, nothing at all to maintain health or wellness--but they would go there in an emergency. That is what most people who didn't have any insurance used.

Let me tell you about the people who basically were working and could not afford the copays where they worked or weren't afforded insurance at places where they worked. If they were ill or if they got hurt at home, working, they would go into work on Monday and make a worker's comp claim, again, at a very high cost to all of the States.

At the end of the year, and I think this is in most States, they would come to you--every hospital, every rural clinic would come to their Governor and their legislature; we would call them DSH payments, disproportionate share--and say: Governor Manchin, if you don't help me with $10 million or $12 million--I have given away $20 million in charity care--we are going to have to close.

We had to scramble around, using taxpayer dollars to keep every rural clinic and hospital open for the people. People forget about all of that.

For those who had wonderful access to insurance or were offered insurance, that was wonderful. We want to make sure they still have that opportunity.

Guess what. We have a way to fix this. There have been two bills sitting on Senator McConnell's desk for almost 3 years that would reduce the cost--what we know is wrong with the bill--the Affordable Care Act.

Let me tell you what is right with the Affordable Care Act. I wasn't here in 2009. I would like to have seen changes, but now that I am here, I know what I had before, which wasn't working, and I know what we have now can be a lot better.

In a bipartisan way we have tried to fix this. We have tried to find ways to make sure that people who had good insurance are not going to be exorbitantly charged out of the market or priced out of the market. We are doing everything we possibly can.

I am asking everybody, please, for the sake of humanity, if a person for the first time has ever gotten insurance--and I have told people this. We gave people the greatest wealth card you could ever get, which is a health card, but we didn't give them one shred of evidence as far as information about how to use it--the instructions.

I compare it to this: If you bought a box of Cracker Jacks, you would get the prize inside, and they would show you how to use that little prize. We never took the time, but now they want to throw it out. Let's make an effort to basically teach people how to live a healthier lifestyle, how to use preventive care, how to have a more productive and a healthier life. We haven't done any of that.

For the first time, we know, scientifically, if a person is addicted to drugs--if they are addicted--it is basically a health problem. It is an illness. An illness needs treatment. For the first time, in a State that has been inundated with opioid addiction and drug addiction, people are able to get treatment, get back into a productive lifestyle and get their lives cleaned up. For the first time they want to take that away. Out of 1.8 million people who live in my State, there are 800,000 West Virginians who have some form of preexisting condition because they have worked in the mines and the factories. They were hard workers. Those people, if you have ever talked to them, if you have ever talked to rural Americans in any State, you can ask: How are you doing?

I am OK. I am OK.

How is your health?

Well, I don't want to be a burden to my family.

Let me tell you what they are telling you when they say ``I don't want to be a burden to my family.'' They are saying: I can't afford insurance. I don't have insurance. I am not going to break my family and put them in bankruptcy to try to keep me alive. So whatever the good Lord has planned for me, I will accept.

That is not who we are as Americans. It is just not who we are. This is what we are trying to change.

We have 20 attorneys general, Republican attorneys general. These are people I know. I don't think they are mean-spirited, but to be this insensitive to the real world and what is going to happen--every hospital, every clinic, every provider is going to be in jeopardy of not having a job or being able to provide the services people need. This thing will come unraveled--unraveled.

We are fighting and hoping and praying that this is not upheld in the court system. How it has gotten this far I do not know. I can tell you, reasonable people would not make this type of decision.

When you look at what is going on--let me tell you, in a bipartisan way, my Republican colleagues have admitted that millions of Americans will lose their health insurance if the Republican attorneys general succeed. They have admitted this. It is bipartisan because we all have the same challenges. Senator Tillis from North Carolina and nine other Republicans stated that oral arguments in Texas v. United States will begin September 5, and if a judge rules in favor of the plaintiffs, protections for patients with preexisting conditions could be eliminated. We know that.

My good friend Senator Murkowski from Alaska said, in her own words, that this lawsuit will take away healthcare coverage from people with preexisting conditions. Senator Murkowski said: ``With the uncertainty of the outcome in the upcoming Texas v. United States case, this legislation is needed now more than ever to give Alaskans, and all Americans, the certainty they need that protections for those with pre- existing conditions will remain intact.''

My Republican colleagues know that if these attorneys general win, it will devastate households, our economy, and millions and millions of Americans' health. That is why I have been working with them to fix the problems of the Affordable Care Act. I introduced the Premium Reduction Act with my Republican colleague and dear friend Senator Susan Collins from Maine. It would reduce the cost of health insurance in the individual market by supporting and expanding State-based health insurance.

We owe it to every West Virginian with a preexisting condition to fix our healthcare system.

I would like to introduce you to Aiden Jackson Williams. This is Aiden Jackson Williams right here. Aiden is a 6-year-old cancer survivor from West Virginia. At 9 months old, he was diagnosed with an optic glioma and underwent chemotherapy for 16 months. At 2 years old, he was in remission. Aiden continues to get MRIs every 3 to 6 months, and there is a high chance of recurrence of other tumors in his body due to his condition.

With that said, Aiden doesn't let it bother him. His parents are proud to say that today Aiden is doing great. He and his twin sister Reagan both enjoy sports, and he moves around just as well as anybody. To this day, Aiden is their hero and inspiration.

Kids like Aiden have fought and beat cancer. They shouldn't also have to fight to keep their health insurance.

What we are saying is that if the ACA goes away, Aiden will not have the certainty to be able to have health insurance, to have the MRIs to detect early enough to save his life. That is what we are talking about.

This is life and death. This is life and death. This is not just a matter of the ideological differences that we have. We are going to fight and fight hard, and that is why I am here--for Aiden and all West Virginians with preexisting conditions. They are trusting us to do the right thing, along with my colleagues, the Republicans, in a bipartisan way, to fix what, basically, we have to know and what we do know that can be fixed with the bill before us, the Affordable Care Act, but not throw the baby out with the bath water.

I hope that each one of my colleagues will take this seriously and that they will work with us in a bipartisan way to fix the healthcare for Americans that is so needed.

With that, I yield the floor.