Floor Statements

Madam President, I come to the floor today, as I have done twice before over the past month, to sound the alarm about the new administration's attacks on American energy. Yet there is still more to talk about.

President Biden has continued this assault on American energy as well as the American economy. Now he is taking that attack further. He is taking the attack on energy around the world as well as attacking the needs for energy of a number of our allies around the world. President Biden signed an Executive order to cut off all loans for coal, oil, and gas projects in some of the poorest nations in the world.

Now, some of these nations are our friends that we work with and we try to help, and these are people who desperately need affordable energy, and they don't have it.

Democrats close to the administration have reported that what the administration and President Biden are trying to do is to ``isolate'' the Chinese Communist Party.

The Biden administration thinks that by refusing to make these loans to folks around the world, that the Chinese Communist Party will be shamed for using fossil fuels for energy and will shame the Communist Party of China for loans that they make to countries to develop coal- fired powerplants, natural gas plants, and other projects that use fossil fuel.

Let me tell you, the Chinese Communist Party will not be shamed. China has a totalitarian regime; China puts Uighurs in concentration camps. So I am not sure what makes President Biden and his administration think that the Chinese Communist Party will be ashamed of using an affordable reliable source of energy--coal.

In reality, President Biden, by this Executive order, is giving China a gift. President Biden is giving China another advantage on the world stage and putting ourselves at a disadvantage, if you think about it.

If the United States and those that we fund through the World Bank refuse to provide loans to those countries to build the powerplants that they need, that is going to leave a vacuum. They are going to need to use the resources that they have--if they have plenty of coal or natural gas--and the Chinese Communist Party is going to come in and make the loan.

China already funds 7 out of 10 new coal plants around the world, and thanks to President Biden's misguided effort, that is likely soon going to be close to 10 out of 10.

Just like President Biden's other energy orders, this new policy will make China stronger. It will make America weaker. China will have more influence, and the United States will have less.

Now, this order is not going to hurt China at all. The people whom it will hurt are those who look to the United States for help and for friendship. It is going to especially hurt the 840 million people around the world who don't have access to electricity today.

Developing countries desperately need the electricity. They need it to be affordable. They need it to be reliable. So if you help developing countries in terms of helping them get a stable supply of energy, it is one of the best things we can do to help people around the world in their fight against poverty.

Many parts of the world, countries with abundant energy resources, just need our help and turn to us for our help so they can use the resources that they have.

And let me give you a good example, Madam President, because you and I have traveled to various places around the world and had a chance to see men and women in uniform and thank them for their services, as we have done, and gone to battlefields, as we have had family members who have served in the military and defended this country and our freedoms. And it has been a pleasure to be able to do that with you and share that with your family because of our united heritage of fighting or our family history of fighting for the country.

So a good example of what I am talking about is Kosovo. I have been there on three separate occasions specifically to visit members of our troops--the men and women in uniform, people from Wyoming who are serving in Kosovo. I have been there three separate times. I was there in 2019, was there previously for Thanksgiving, was there on Easter Sunday one time to be with the troops.

Well, Kosovo is one of the poorest nations in Europe, but it has vast energy resources. Despite being physically smaller than the State of Connecticut, Kosovo has the fifth largest reserves of coal in the world: small geography, massive resources of coal.

So the World Bank has cut off Kosovo's funding for a new state-of- the-art coal-fired powerplant. They have old coal-fired powerplants. They are burning coal right now.

I have talked to the leaders of the country, and they say: We need to build a new coal-fired powerplant. We need to borrow the money to do it.

Well, the World Bank has said it is only going to support new energy projects from renewable sources. So this is what Kosovo's Minister of Economic Development is saying. He said: ``In a poor country [like] Kosovo . . . we don't have the luxury . . .''--the luxury of focusing only on renewable sources when they don't have that much access to renewable energy. The wind doesn't blow that much; in terms of sunny days, not at all during the winter, and they have this incredible resource of coal.

Well, the Minister of Economic Development is absolutely correct-- because I have been there in the spring; I have been there in the winter; I have been there different times throughout the year. Developing countries cannot afford the elitist environmental agendas of Presidents who become climate elitists, especially those being put in charge of those issues, former Secretary of State John Kerry.

Let me repeat myself so--I want to just make this absolutely clear: We, the United States, have peacekeeping troops in the country of Kosovo. We have them right there in Kosovo. And we, the United States, are driving the Government of Kosovo into the clutches of the Communist Chinese Party because of a holier-than-thou attitude of the climate alarmists in the White House.

So we pay to put our troops on the ground, and then we say: Go to China if you need help providing power to your country.

People need affordable, reliable energy. Traditional energy projects are still the most affordable, still the most reliable.

If we really care about the people in developing countries, then we ought to help them turn on the lights. So I urge the Biden administration to reverse course, to rethink this, to look at all the implications of the decisions they are making.

We need to stop this senseless attack on energy jobs. We need to stop this reckless attack on developing nations. We need to stop pushing our allies into the waiting arms of the Chinese Communist Party.

The American people and our friends around the world--we are better than what we are getting right now from this administration, and we need to reverse course.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor to talk about the $1.9 trillion spending bill that is under consideration before this Congress.

As President Biden has said repeatedly, if you want to know someone's values, look at one's budget. Well, that is what we are doing, because I believe that President Biden is right. If the American people want to know the Democrats' values, all we need to do is look at the budget. The Democrats are making clear what they stand for. It seems that they are standing for teachers unions and job-crushing mandates on American businesses. The Republicans stand for ending the pandemic, for getting people back to work, and for getting kids back to school. The differences could not be more clear.

The Senate has debated the Democratic budget--we did it a couple of weeks ago--and we voted on many amendments. Every Senator had a chance to propose and make some changes to the budget that was brought forth. Every single Senator went on record on a number of amendments and items related to the budget for the United States of America. Now we know where we stand.

I introduced an amendment that had to do with energy production in my home State of Wyoming. Wyoming feels like we are being targeted by President Biden because of his ban on oil and gas exploration on public lands. You know, those projects are a major source of jobs in my home State. They fund our schools, our roads, our bridges, our teachers, our students, and additional services for working families.

My amendment would provide funding for our public schools--schools that have been punished by this ban announced by President Biden. That amendment on this floor received 98 votes out of 100. It got the support of every single Democrat in the U.S. Senate, so I am grateful for my colleagues for that support of the amendment to protect our students and our schools and our teachers. Yet I have to say that by voting for my amendment, the 98 people in this body--specifically the Democrats--are admitting that there is a problem created by the actions of President Biden. They are admitting that President Biden's Executive order, signed on the day he was inaugurated, is hurting families all across the country.

So, to my Democratic colleagues, keep working with us to address the needs of the Nation. Stand up to these overreaching, radical proposals by the Biden administration. On issue after issue, that really has not yet happened.

Many of my Republican colleagues, on this side of the aisle, offered good ideas that the Democrats refused to support. Senator Blunt introduced an amendment to reopen America's schools. Now, that is an idea that science has supported for months. Every Republican voted yes. Every Democrat voted no. I have yet to hear one of my Democratic colleagues make the case for keeping the schools closed; yet that is how they voted when it came to the budget. Just like President Biden, they are trying to have it both ways. They say they want the schools open; yet they don't do what needs to be done.

President Biden has claimed time and again he wants the schools open; yet his Chief of Staff says there is no money to reopen them. Well, that is absolutely wrong. Last year, President Trump signed into law $68 billion for our schools, specifically tied to coronavirus relief. Only $5 billion of that money has been spent. That leaves $63 billion still available. In the Democrats' budget being proposed right now, almost all of the money for schools is not even for this year. Ninety- five percent of the money is for the years 2022 through 2028--after the coronavirus will be behind us.

The Democrats are still putting the teachers unions ahead of students. Joe Biden has surrendered to the teachers unions. They have written to him a ransom note, and he has been happy to pay it. Teachers are putting politics ahead of science, and so is this administration.

I joined with Senator Scott of South Carolina to introduce another amendment to the budget bill of the Democrats. It said that if we give money to States--and there is a lot of money in this proposal to give money to States: New York, Illinois, California--that the States have to give the American people accurate data about the coronavirus and specifically in their nursing homes. People want to know the answers about the coronavirus and the impact on nursing homes because there is a real problem there.

New York now admits that it gave the public false information. The numbers were not just wrong; they were nearly off by half. The Governor's top aide in New York said they were afraid of being investigated by Bill Barr's Justice Department. They were afraid that President Trump would make it a ``political football.''

Don't the people of New York have a right to know the truth about what is happening in the nursing homes in that State when people are losing parents and grandparents and when people with the coronavirus are being moved from the hospital back into those nursing homes to spread the disease to others?

The Governor of New York wanted to cover it up. People would agree it sounds like a coverup, so Senator Scott and I came to the floor and said that it was unacceptable, that States have to tell the truth. Every Republican voted yes. Every single Democrat voted no. Every Senate Democrat voted to protect Governor Cuomo instead of telling the truth to the American people.

During the budget debate, there were some good ideas that some Democrats supported. Yet, even then, in the wee hours of the morning, a number of the Democrats who had voted for those amendments flip-flopped on a later vote to head the other way. What they did is they had another amendment to strip out the amendments that had been put on.

For example, Senator Young of Indiana had an amendment so that money in the bill would go to American citizens, not to illegal immigrants. Eight Democrats voted in agreement with that. They said you shouldn't be sending checks to illegal immigrants. A few hours later, they voted to strip it out. So every Democrat in the Senate is now on the record. Every Democrat in the Senate has voted in favor of taking people's hard-earned taxpayer dollars and giving it to people who are in the country illegally.

Senator Daines brought up an amendment on a different topic. He said we should proceed with the Keystone Pipeline. Remember, President Biden, with an Executive order on the day he was inaugurated, stopped work on the Keystone Pipeline, resulting in the loss of hundreds and hundreds and likely thousands of jobs. Several Democrats voted and said we should reopen the pipeline. Let it go. Let it work. A few hours later, in the wee hours of the morning, they reversed themselves and voted to strip it out.

Senator Braun of Indiana introduced an amendment to prevent President Biden from banning fracking. Now, this

is something that President Biden promised to do during the campaign. Of course, that would end millions of jobs across America, and it would put us at a disadvantage from the standpoint of energy. Seven Democrats voted with Senator Braun to protect American jobs. Hours later, they flip-flopped and took it out of the bill.

The Democrats keep trying to have it both ways. They want to look like moderates, pretend to be moderates, while still getting their leftwing spending bill through. They are not playing it straight with the American people. It is not going to work. The people in their States aren't going to be fooled. They are going to remember the votes, and they will certainly be reminded of those votes in the future.

So we have talked about what the Senate Democrats blocked. Now let's take a look at some of the things the Senate Democrats support.

The bill includes a mandate from Washington, DC, to double the minimum wage. It has nothing to do with the coronavirus. In fact, it would actually make things worse. The Congressional Budget Office took a look at this as to what the impact would be on the economy, and it said that 1.4 million people who have jobs right now would lose their jobs if the Federal Government were to come in with a mandate to double the minimum wage. It is not a stimulus.

According to one report, the new Washington mandate would also raise the cost of childcare by about 21 percent. How is that going to work for hard-working families who are trying to get back to work with the coronavirus and need daycare for their children? With schools closed in so many locations across the country, that is the last thing that working families need--an increase in the cost of providing care for their children.

The big Democratic spending bill also includes a $350 billion bailout for States and local governments. The money is especially targeted to States that have stayed closed the longest. This is money rewarding big cities and States like California and New York and Illinois that have had financial trouble due to financial mismanagement for many, many years. It has nothing to do with the coronavirus. Those States were in trouble long before the coronavirus made it to our shores.

Multiple studies show that State tax revenues are actually up in many States across the country. In some States, they fell, but on average, States are continuing to do quite well. Most States are expecting more tax revenues this year than they had before the pandemic. If a State needs a bailout, it is not because of the coronavirus; it is because of years and years of mismanagement, and this bill rewards mismanagement.

Those are the priorities of the Senate Democrats, not jobs and not opening our schools. The priorities are mandates and bailouts.

Only about $1 of every $20 in this entire proposal goes for public health, but it does contain $4.5 billion for Senator Schumer's New York City Subway system. It does provide $112 million for a subway system in Silicon Valley. It does provide $270 million in funding for the arts and humanities and $12 billion in foreign aid. This is supposed to be for the coronavirus in America, here.

So what does $1.9 trillion get for you? I am asked at home in Wyoming. What does it do for people at home--yes, the American taxpayer? Not much when you look at this Democratic shopping list. It is a wish list of liberal priorities.

As President Biden says, if you want to know somebody's values, look at one's budget. We have just done that. If the American people want to see the contrast between Republicans and Democrats, they should look no further than this bill. The Republicans are offering the American people jobs, a vaccine, and opening our schools. The Democrats are offering excuses and the liberal wish list.

We still have time to fix the final bill, so I would urge my Democratic colleagues to join with us. Work with the Republicans for real coronavirus relief. Help our small communities and small businesses keep their doors open. Get our kids back in school. Target the funding to the American citizens who need it the most. We have done five bipartisan coronavirus bills. A sixth coronavirus relief bill should be done in a bipartisan way as well. That is what the American people, with a 50-50 Senate, are asking us to do.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 653 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, my amendment addresses the serious impacts of the Biden administration moratorium on oil and natural gas leases and the impact on Federal lands and waters.

Wyoming and many States across the West have Federal land where there is oil and gas development. The revenue generated from the lease sales goes to States, which use it for essential services.

One of the many crushing consequences of the moratorium is eliminating hundreds of millions of dollars for K-12 education for students, funding all of these States. In 2019 alone, revenues from oil and gas contributed $740 million to Wyoming's public schools.

This amendment creates a deficit-neutral reserve fund to protect students and schools from this misguided moratorium by restoring these lost funds to the States.

I urge a ``yes'' vote.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, first I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma, who has such a good insight into the impact of the Executive orders of the Biden administration on his State, very similar to my State. The concerns that he heard at home over the last 2 weeks are identical to the ones that I have heard in Wyoming the last 2 weekends.

It is day 15 today of the Biden administration, and on day 1, President Biden--and we listened as he spoke--promised to usher in a new era of bipartisanship, he said, and healing. Well, within his inaugural address, he said the words: ``With unity, we can do great things.''

The Senator from Oklahoma and I agreed with the President and the words that he spoke on inaugural day, but here we are just 2 weeks later, and it seems to me it was all just talk. So far, we haven't seen much bipartisanship from the Biden administration. President Biden has already issued more than 45 Executive actions, and that is more Executive actions in the first 2 weeks than Presidents Trump, Obama, Bush, and Clinton in their beginnings in office.

It is interesting because, as President Biden was rolling out one Executive order after another, even the liberal New York Times, which endorsed President Biden, had this lead headline. And this was Thursday, January 28, so this was a full week ago. It says: Ease up on Executive orders. The New York Times to President Biden: Ease up on Executive orders. When the New York Times has to call President Biden out on Executive overreach, you know that President Biden has abandoned the promises that he made during the campaign and that he made to us on inaugural day.

To just kind of go into the editorial and what they wrote, they said: ``Ease Up on the Executive actions, Joe.'' They said: ``[T]his is no way to make law.'' They said: ``These directives . . . are a flawed substitute for legislation.''

That is what we see the Biden administration adopting, a flawed substitute, as they say, for legislation.

They go on to say that on the campaign trail, President Biden touted his skills at making compromise. I saw that when I served with him in the Senate--before the Presiding Officer got here, but he and I served together in this body. I was on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which he chaired. He does have a history and a skill at finding compromise.

The New York Times went on to say that President ``Biden's legacy will depend on his ability to hammer out agreements with Congress.'' That is why we have three branches of government--the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judiciary branch; all of the branches of government--and, as they say, the legacy will depend on his ability to hammer out agreements with Congress.

The problem isn't just how many Executive orders are being issued, as my friend and colleague from Oklahoma said; it is what is in them.

President Biden has already launched a full-scale attack on American energy. To me, this is the whole Green New Deal dressed up as Executive orders. In fact, a Congresswoman from Michigan who is part of the squad has been actually boasting about it. She said the principles and the values in the Green New Deal are in the Executive orders by President Biden. She went on to say that the Green New Deal pushed the President toward a much more aggressive approach.

I think her statement is accurate. President Biden has already shut down the Keystone Pipeline. He drew a big target on the back of American energy, and then he pulled the trigger, killed the Keystone Pipeline. Hundreds of American workers have already received pink slips. Thousands more will do so. And that will be soon. President Biden banned new oil and gas leases on Federal lands. Half of my State is Federal land, so we know how this works. If this President also keeps his promise to ban fracking, this could lead to a total of millions of Americans losing jobs over the next couple of years.

At a time when 10 million Americans are already unemployed, these figures are shocking. Yet Democrats aren't stopping there. Last week, the Democratic leader came to the floor, and he urged President Biden to go even further, to do even more--much more than was criticized by the New York Times. He said President Biden should declare a national emergency because of climate change--a national emergency, he said, the leader of the Democratic Party, on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Leader Schumer is admitting that this radical environmental agenda doesn't have bipartisan support. It doesn't seem to even have Presidential support to that level, but that is what Senator Schumer is calling for.

Apparently, Senator Schumer isn't just wanting to outsource energy jobs; he seems to want to outsource the work of the U.S. Senate as well. That is not what the American people sent us here to do. They didn't send us here to stand by and watch a President go with one Executive order after another, after another; they sent us here to get things done.

The truth is, despite what Leader Schumer says, there is actually bipartisan support for action on climate change. Just over a month ago, the Senate passed a bill called the USE IT Act, which I authored with Senator Carper. It came through the Environment and Public Works Committee, which I chaired. It was completely bipartisan. It came through the committee unanimously. It doesn't cost a

single American a job. It makes a difference with regard to climate. That is what the American people sent us here to do, to work together to find solutions that work, that don't hurt. Unfortunately, it is not the Biden approach. The Biden approach turns out to be more mandates, less energy production, and fewer American jobs.

Now we see President Biden pushing a $2 trillion spending bill. He says it is to help fight coronavirus. We just passed a $900 billion coronavirus relief bill about a month ago, signed into law, and as a result, our economy is actually doing better than expected.

Now President Biden, with his new bill, wants to send checks to families making in excess of $250,000 a year--a government check, paid for by taxpayers, added to the national debt. Families making over a quarter of a million dollars a year getting a check from the government when they have never missed a paycheck in the first place?

He also wants to give added bonuses for people who are out of work on unemployment. People who are out of work on unemployment need that unemployment but not with the added bonuses to the level that President Biden is pointing to. And I hear about it in Wyoming. I heard about it last week.

If we pass what President Biden is calling for, the average unemployed American would receive a little less than $800 a week total from the government, by their regular unemployment and by the enhance unemployment. That is equivalent to a job making $40,000 a year. People would, in many places, be paid more to not go back to work than they could earn if they went back to work. So the incentive is to keep them out of work. At the same time, we have ``Help Wanted'' signs up around the State of Wyoming.

President Biden's proposal also includes billions of dollars in spending unrelated to coronavirus--completely unrelated--which is something the American people don't understand. They understand we need to fight coronavirus. They understand we need to get people back to work. They understand we need to get kids back to school. But to add extraneous spending unrelated to coronavirus is something Americans don't understand.

Now, this bill includes a mandate from Washington, DC, a mandate to the small businesses all around the country--many of them struggling, many of them having a hard time making their payroll--and the Washington mandate is, you will double the amount of money that you pay right now if you are paying the current minimum wage--doubling the national minimum wage; a mandate from Washington on small business; nothing to do with coronavirus but a lot to do with making it that much harder for the small businesses in the small towns of Wyoming to make their payroll and to stay open.

Now, it makes common sense when you take a look at that impact--and even the Congressional Budget Office has looked at it, and they have come to the same conclusion that I have and that the people of Wyoming have: It is going to cost jobs. The Congressional Budget Office says it will cost 1,300,000 jobs across America if President Biden has his way and forces a double of the minimum wage on small businesses of America.

Now, in exchange for that Federal mandate, the bill pays off States, big cities, blue States with a long history of bad behavior, to the tune of $350 billion. A study from JPMorgan just came out, and the study shows that State tax revenues barely dropped at all in 2020 as a result of the coronavirus. They dropped less than 1 percent. These States do not need $350 billion of additional Federal support. If the State needs a bailout, it is not because of coronavirus; it is because of a long history of mismanagement.

The Biden administration made this proposal without any meaningful discussions with Republicans at all. And the administration is even ignoring the Democrats. Vice President Harris recently went on television in West Virginia and in Arizona. Why? Not to put pressure on Republicans; to put pressure on Democrats--big story in the New York Times today--putting pressure on the two new Senators, Senator Sinema and--the Senators from Arizona--Senator Kelly, the newest elected Senator from Arizona, put on them to vote for the bill. She also went to West Virginia--Senator Manchin. Not only are they not talking to Republicans; now they are trying to pressure Democrats.

Let's face it. The Democrats are trying to cram this bill through Congress. That is what they are going to do with the vote-arama this week.

On Friday there was an article in the Washington Post. The headline is this: ``Biden, Democrats prepare to move beyond efforts to woo Republicans.'' I have to ask, what efforts? Haven't reached out in any serious way. As some of my colleagues have said, we have proven we can work together with coronavirus relief. We did it five times in the last year. We passed five different coronavirus relief bills, and the total relief was $4 trillion.

The article in the Post goes on and quotes Leader Schumer. He says that we must not repeat the mistakes of 2008 and 2009. He is referring to the fiscal crisis back then. Well, that response was then led by Vice President Joe Biden. Yes, there were plenty of mistakes. Leader Schumer seems to think that the mistake was that it was too bipartisan, and that is the wrong lesson. The mistake Congress made under Vice President Biden in 2009 was to spend huge sums of money, completely unrelated to solving the underlying problem. Yet that is what the Democrats seem to want to do once again. The last time the Democrats did that, we had the slowest recovery since the Great Depression. Do you know what got us out of that slow recovery? American energy, which President Biden is now trying to kill. There are a lot of lessons to be learned here.

So, on Monday, 10 Republican Senators went to the White House and made their own proposal on coronavirus relief. I really do hope the President listened because 2 weeks into this administration, the President's inaugural address is not something that is going to be remembered like John Kennedy's inaugural address was in 1960. This inaugural address is going to be remembered for empty rhetoric. President Biden has been trying to govern using a pen and a phone. Remember that from the Obama administration? I would say to President Biden: Time to just put down the pen and pick up the phone.

A Democratic politician famously said that politicians campaign in poetry and govern in prose. President Biden campaigned in moderation, but that is not the way he is governing. He is governing in partisanship. It is not what the American people are asking for. It is not what they voted for.

We have a 50-50 Senate. Democrats have a very narrow majority in the House. I would urge the administration to change course. This--if there is a mandate--is a mandate to move to the middle. I urge my Democratic colleagues to work with us on real coronavirus relief, on producing more American energy, and on creating more jobs across our country. Let us come together and get things done.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss the urgent need to get our kids back in school. Kids deserve to be back in school.

Last week, the White House Chief of Staff was on television. He was interviewed. The interviewer asked him why so many public schools remain closed. His answer--amazingly, astonishingly--was ``money.''

If I may, the record is very clear. Republicans supported more money for schools since last summer--a full $105 billion to get our kids back to school. In fact, the Senate Republicans' targeted coronavirus bill included more money from schools than Speaker Pelosi included in her bloated, liberal wish list.

For months, Senate Democrats obstructed, delayed, and dragged their feet. For months, Democrats played politics with coronavirus relief. In all that time, families across America suffered.

It wasn't until the end of December that Democrats finally agreed to pass legislation to reopen the schools, and it included $82 billion-- less than Republicans had offered the last summer.

Well, the ink is now barely dry on the overall relief bill at the end of last year. It was a $900 billion relief bill. So here we are, just 1 month later, and the new administration says that there is no money to reopen schools.

The White House Chief of Staff goes on television with a supposedly new idea. The idea is that ``we, as a country, should make the investments to make it safe'' to get back to school--astonishing, because we did that.

If the Biden administration really wants their schools to reopen, they ought to be talking to the teachers unions. They should talk to the leaders of the teachers unions based in Fairfax County, VA, just a few miles from here. You know, it is one of the largest school districts in America. Fairfax County teachers demanded a vaccine before they would go back to the classroom. Thanks to Operation Warp Speed, they got the vaccine. Yet they still refused to go back to the classroom, which, of course, means that the students aren't in the classroom either.

In Chicago, the teachers union is threatening to go on strike rather than to go back into the classroom, which, of course, means the students don't get to back into the classroom either.

In Washington, DC, the teachers union would rather go to court than to the classroom, which means that students don't get to go back to the classroom either.

Similar stories are taking place all across America. The union bosses might think this is just a big game. The truth is, this is doing terrible things to our children.

Our teachers do incredible work. Many are working harder than ever in the virtual setting. Many want to go back to the classroom. Yet, because of the union bosses who pull the strings, our kids are being denied access to in-person learning by our amazing teachers.

On Wednesday, the New York Times said it was ``breaking news'' that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention want the kids back in school. That is not breaking news. That is old news. The CDC said it last July.

Experts have been echoing this call for months. One study estimated that because of the lockdown last spring, a typical student entered this school year 35 percent behind schedule in reading and nearly 50 percent behind in math.

The children hurt the most are, of course, the most vulnerable--kids from lower income families, like the millions of kids who receive nutrition assistance, medical care, or counseling in public schools; also, the children of single parents, many of whom--the parents, that is--can't work from home.

According to the National Education Association, a quarter of the families with kids ages 5 to 17 either don't have a computer or don't have wireless internet, so the lockdowns have been especially tough on all of those kids in those settings.

For many children, the lockdown has been far tougher on their health than coronavirus itself would be. That is because serious coronavirus symptoms among healthy children are extremely rare. And Congress has provided funding to prevent kids from spreading the coronavirus. It has done it by improving ventilation, by social distancing, and by disinfecting our classrooms.

So while Democrats were taking their orders from teachers unions, Senate Republicans listened to the science. It is time for Senate Democrats to decide: Are they going to put our kids first or are they going to continue to put the teachers unions ahead of our kids?

Senate Republicans have done our part to reopen our schools with incredible amounts of funding and support. This is no time for excuses, no time for backtracking. The science supports it. We have provided the funding.

Now I would point out that students in Wyoming have been back in school since September. That is where students belong. Kids deserve to be in school. So let's get our kids back in the classroom. It is what is best for kids; certainly, it is what is best for working families; and it is what is best for our future as a nation.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, I come to the floor today to discuss some of the first actions that have been taken by the new administration.

At his inauguration, President Biden spoke about the importance of uniting the country, bringing us together, the importance of unity. Well, I agree. We have been much too divided as a nation. We need to bring America together.

In just a few hours after his inaugural address, President Biden issued one Executive order after another that I believe is only going to drive America further apart. He hasn't really reached out and hasn't really tried to work with us.

At a time when millions of people across the country are struggling with unemployment and the effects of a global pandemic, President Biden has taken actions that will actually raise the cost of living for people all across the country. In particular, President Biden has taken aim at American energy.

Now, in Wyoming, energy production does a lot more than just keep the lights on. It puts food on the table. It does it for thousands of families. It pays for our schools, education, and our roads.

In Wyoming we produce coal, oil, natural gas, and uranium for nuclear power. We also have incredible renewable resources. Wyoming, in many ways, has world class wind. We are experiencing that today in Casper,

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

Mr. President, in the 2020 elections, Americans chose an evenly-divided Senate--half Republican, half Democrat. Evenly divided. Since the Vice President is able to break a tie when it comes to specifically organizing the Senate, Democrats have the majority.

Now some Democrats want to lower the threshold for all the votes so that to pass anything, all they would need to do in case of a tie vote would have the Vice President be the tiebreaker. That is the way that a majority works. When there is a tie and the Vice President is in one party, they get to break the tie in that direction, of course.

What we need to make sure of, though, is that there is fairness in the process. The traditions and how this institution works are that we have a filibuster. Sixty votes is how legislation is passed.

We know that the press and sometimes folks in Congress say it is hard to pass a law. Well, it is not supposed to be easy. It takes discussion. It takes negotiation. It brings people together. That is the idea of needing 60 votes--to bring people together to get a bipartisan consensus so that all the voices are heard; that there is a majority, and the minority voice is heard, and it forces us to find common ground.

Frankly, I think there is too little of finding common ground in Washington already. The last thing America needs is even more divisiveness. This is a big, diverse country. We don't need 50 percent of the country plus one to run roughshod over all the others. That is why our Founders were so careful to protect the rights of the minority. That is why they created the Bill of Rights, why they created the electoral college, and why they created the U.S. Senate. The Founding Fathers didn't want the Senate to be a copy of the House. We are intended to be a check on the House.

There is a story that President Washington compared the Senate to a saucer used to cool down a cup of tea. President Madison compared it to a fence. We are not supposed to be a smaller version of the House of Representatives. The Senate is supposed to cool things down. We are supposed to think things through. We are supposed to stop bad ideas and stop the House from moving too fast. Changing the rules of the Senate would make that impossible.

Lowering the bar to 50 votes could also be a blatant power grab, which is 50 votes and the Vice President. The Democrats could even add States to the Union--specifically States that would elect more Democrats to the Senate. It would give them even more Senate seats, could even give them a permanent majority in the Senate.

With 50 votes plus the Vice President, Democrats could also pack the Supreme Court with liberal activist judges--judges who legislate from the bench, not judges who apply the law as written. That would give them a permanent majority both in the Senate and on the Court.

With a single rule change, one branch of government, one Chamber of Congress, could be under permanent Democratic control. It is no surprise that it is tempting to Senate Democrats and that the far-left branch of that party is demanding that occur.

You remember that when President Trump was in office, Republicans had a chance to do exactly the same thing. In fact, former President Trump repeatedly asked us and told us that we should do just that. In one particularly memorable example, he tweeted: ``The U.S. Senate should switch to 51 votes.'' He said: ``Dems would do it, no doubt.'' More than 30 different times, President Trump asked that Republicans end the filibuster. We didn't. We stuck to the intentions of our Founding Fathers. We protected the rights of the minority, and we put country before party.

If Democrats won't stop the power grab for the good of the country, then they should at least do it for their own good.

Democrats have had 50 votes and the Vice President for only a few days. In fact, when Democrats were in the minority, 33 Democratic Senators said they didn't want to change the rules. They signed a letter, and that letter called for the preservation of the rights of the minority. Twenty-seven of those Democrats are still Members of the Senate today. One of those Democrats is now the Vice President of the United States, Vice President Kamala Harris.

Even President Biden called the idea of eliminating the filibuster ``a very dangerous move.'' The White House Press Secretary told us last week President Biden still opposes changing the rules.

If Democrats go down this road and break the rules of the Senate, they are doing more than just hurting the institution; they are admitting their ideas don't have broad bipartisan support. Think about that. If the Democratic agenda had the support of the American people, then they wouldn't need to change the rules. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass their tax increases, they would leave the rules alone. If Democrats could find bipartisan support to pass the Green New Deal and higher energy costs that come with it, they would leave the rules alone. If they could restrict gun ownership, they would leave the rules alone. They can't, and they know they can't. They know the American people have looked at their progressive agenda and said: No, thank you.

President Biden's inaugural address last week talked a lot about unity. He said that ``with unity we can do great things.'' I agree.

I ask my Democratic colleagues if they agree with the President's inaugural address, or do they really think

that they want to make the U.S. Senate more partisan, more divided. Do they really want to take power away from individual Senators and give it to whoever has 50 votes and the tiebreaker at the moment? If it is hard for Democrats to pass laws, then they should try talking with us. Propose bipartisan solutions to our Nation's challenges. Persuade your colleagues. Make progress together.

As my friend, former Senator Lamar Alexander, said in his farewell address just a month ago--he said: ``We don't need a change of rules. The Senate needs a change of behavior.''

I urge my Democratic colleagues to reject this blatant power grab. Stop this rush to take more and more power. Come to the center. Reach across the aisle. Find common ground.

Senate Republicans are ready to work together to help the American people, to get people back to work, to get our kids safely back to school so they don't fall further behind, and to get the virus behind us. Join us. Let's work together. Let's do what is right for the people we serve.

I yield the floor

Madam President, on Tuesday, January 12, 2021, the 2021 General Session of the Wyoming Legislature got underway. Noticeably absent from the first day of the session was State Senator Henry H.R. ``Hank'' Coe. Hank had been present in Cheyenne for the first day of the annual legislative session for 32 consecutive years.

In March of 2020, on the last day of the 2020 Wyoming legislative session, Hank announced his plan to retire. Senator Coe represented the people of Park County from 1988 to 2020.

Hank was a respected and effective legislator. He earned a reputation for being a kind, thoughtful, persuasive legislator of great integrity.

Hank always had a remarkable grasp of the issues facing the state and his home community. He could see short and long-term needs and offer solutions to address those needs.

During his time in the legislature, Senator Coe served on numerous committees, was elected as majority floor leader, and, in 2001, served as president of the senate.

For 17 years, Hank proudly served as the chair of the senate education committee. He was a strong proponent of local control and high-quality education.

Hank showed students that through hard work and dedication to their studies, there was a world of opportunities within their reach. He understood the importance of investing in our young people, recognizing their achievements, and providing them with the tools needed to succeed.

When I served in the Wyoming State Senate, I had the great honor of working with Hank Coe on one of our proudest legislative initiatives, the creation of the Hathaway scholarship program.

We were able to create a scholarship fund with a $400 million permanent endowment. Income from the fund continues to fund scholarships for Wyoming high school graduates today. The Hathaway scholarship program allows every Wyoming student, regardless of economic background, to qualify for a merit-based scholarship to attend the University of Wyoming or any of our State's seven community colleges.

Senator Coe's leadership was a driving force behind passage of this legislation. Thousands of Wyoming students without the resources to obtain a college education have benefited from this scholarship.

Hank's contribution to public service extended far beyond Wyoming's capitol. He was a mentor to many in his hometown of Cody. He participated fully on local boards and committees. The Cody Chamber of Commerce, Cody Medical Foundation, Cody Yellowstone Air Service, Wyoming Air Service, Buffalo Bill Museum of the West, and the Park County Commissioners all benefited from Hank's committed service.

When Hank retired, he released the following statement, which was printed in the Cody Enterprise on March 13, 2020:

``The Wyoming Legislature continues to be one of the most

effective and civil deliberate bodies in the nation. It is my

sincere hope that this tradition will continue and Wyoming

can be an example to the rest of the nation,'' said Coe.

``Serving in the Senate has been a true honor and a

privilege. I'm eternally grateful to the people of Park

County who put their faith in me to represent them for so

many years. To my community, friends, family, fellow

lawmakers and the exceptional legislative staff, I say thank

you.''

Hank had a calling to serve. He took that calling and ran with it. His life's work has made a difference in the lives of the people in Park County and in every corner of our great State. History will look kindly upon the contributions and achievements of Hank Coe.

Hank passed away today, January 21, 2021. He leaves behind a remarkable legacy, and he will be greatly missed by a grateful State. To Hank's entire family, especially his children and grandchildren: son H.R. and grandson Henry, daughter Carey Coe Johnson and husband Jeff and grandchildren Madeline, Jagger, and Jrakke, and daughter Bethany Coe Boydstun and grandchildren, Jackson, Tyler and Lily--our prayers and well wishes are with you.

I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the remarkable life of Hank Coe. His dedication to service will have a profound impact on our state for generations. Thank you Hank.

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

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, whether you support the ObamaCare law or oppose it--and let me be clear, I oppose it--it remains the law.

This week, a Federal appellate court heard arguments related to the case of Texas v. United States, and I expect it will eventually end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Regardless of the outcome, our commitment remains to protect people with preexisting conditions. As a doctor, as a husband of a breast cancer survivor, I know the importance of making sure patients can have access to high-quality healthcare at an affordable cost.

Since the Obama healthcare law passed, this has not happened for many families to whom I speak at home in Wyoming. They keep telling me that ObamaCare made their insurance unaffordable, and it has made it more difficult for them to get the care they need. Simply put, they know that the Obama healthcare law has failed because they have personally experienced the law's sky-high premiums and fewer choices.

It has taken Washington Democrats a little longer to figure that out. Now they are clamoring for a one-size-fits-all healthcare plan. They want a healthcare system controlled by Washington bureaucrats, and as a doctor, my focus is on making healthcare better for patients, period.

Republicans in the Trump administration are taking on the tough issues facing patients across the country. We eliminated the individual mandate so that patients aren't punished for refusing to buy insurance they cannot afford. We support more insurance choices, such as association health plans, so folks can find the best coverage for themselves and their families. We are taking on the drug companies. Congress has already eliminated gag clauses, and more reforms are on the way. Finally, with the President's support, we are going to end surprise medical bills. Simply put, Republicans want patients to pay less for the coverage they already have.

Democrats want to take away people's health insurance, especially the coverage they get through their work. It is simply wrong. The question is whether Washington Democrats are interested in actually solving the problem or playing politics.

Therefore, I object.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks on this nominee before the vote.

Mr. President, today the Senate is considering the nomination of Peter Wright to serve as the Assistant Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for the Office of Land and Emergency Management. If confirmed, Mr. Wright will lead this critical EPA office that provides policy, provides guidance, and provides direction for the EPA's emergency response and waste programs. Mr. Wright will play a crucial role in helping the Agency respond to disasters and cleanups.

The Office of Land and Emergency Management oversees the Superfund Program, which is a priority for this administration.

There are currently about 1,300 listed Superfund sites across America. On top of those, there are roughly 450,000 brownfield sites that need to be addressed. The EPA needs an Assistant Administrator in place to prioritize those cleanups. Peter Wright is ready for the task. He currently serves as a special counsel at the EPA. Previously, Mr. Wright worked as managing counsel to Dow Chemical Company for nearly 20 years. His nomination has been endorsed by 18 current and former chairs of the American Bar Association's Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources, including John Cruden, former Assistant Attorney General in President Obama's administration.

John Milner, the current chair of the section, writing on behalf of the former chair, said this of Mr. Wright: ``Peter's career, his selfless commitment to the American Bar Association's Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources and the members it serves, and his well-recognized personal integrity exemplify the high standards of the legal profession.'' He goes on to say: ``We enthusiastically and without reservation support the consideration of Peter as Assistant Administrator for OLEM, and believe Peter will serve the office with distinction and honor.''

He is ready to take on this responsibility, and he has been ready for well over a year. President Trump originally nominated Peter Wright to serve in this important role on March 6, 2018. That was 493 days ago. What is the reason for so long of a delay? Obstruction by Senate Democrats. We have seen it before. For over a year, this important EPA office has been without confirmed leadership because of political games being played by Senate Democrats. Now the games have ended, and it is time to get serious.

Senate Democrats are now saying they would delay this vote further because of an error Mr. Wright included on his disclosures. According to career EPA ethics officials, Mr. Wright made an inadvertent error and immediately corrected it. EPA ethics officials found that he did not violate any Federal ethics laws or regulations.

Justina Fugh, who is a career ethics official at the EPA, concluded in her memo reviewing Mr. Wright's action:

In my opinion, Mr. Wright adhered to the federal ethics

laws and regulations. When he became aware of the inadvertent

error, he notified me immediately and corrected that error.

The delays must end. Superfund sites need to be cleaned up, emergencies must be responded to, and this important office needs its Senate-confirmed leader in place. It is time to confirm Peter Wright to be Assistant Administrator of the EPA for the Office of Land and Emergency Management, and I strongly encourage Senators to support this nomination.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.