Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print my bill for introduction in the Congressional Record. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Defense to use amounts available to the Department of Defense for operation and maintenance to remove munitions and explosives of concern in Guam.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, since President Biden took office on January 20, 2021, he has willfully ignored what has been happening at our southern border. The President and leaders of his administration try to convince people that what they were seeing with their eyes was not a crisis but was merely a challenge. When that flopped, they attempted to blame the previous administration for the flood of humanity coming across the southern border, even though the immigration surge has now reached epic proportions since President Biden took office.

Now, once again, they appear to be ignoring the problem altogether. We have had 17 months with more than 150,000 illegal border crossings each month--17 months, 150,000 migrants each month--and the Biden administration seems to be saying: What is the problem? Their decision, apparently, is to stay the course.

What little attention there has been to the impact on the border crisis tends to focus, though, solely on the migrants, and, of course, that is part of the concern. No one is suggesting that we treat them with disrespect or in an inhumane manner. In fact, just the contrary is true. We know that people coming into the country outside of the legal immigration system endure a brutal journey just to get here. They pay thousands of dollars to cartels and coyotes--or human smugglers--and often the women and girls are raped and abused. Migrants who slow down the coyotes will be abandoned and frequently left to die. We see that particularly in South Texas around the Falfurrias checkpoint, where we see the migrants coming across the river.

Then they are put in stash houses in inhumane conditions and then driven north through the Border Patrol checkpoints. But because of their fear of being discovered, the coyotes tell them: Get out of the vehicle and walk around the checkpoint and meet us on the north side to continue our journey. The problem is, this time of year, the weather and temperatures are brutal. Frequently, ranchers in Brooks County, which is the county where the Falfurrias checkpoint is located, find the bones of migrants who did not make it or otherwise dead bodies.

Migrants are certainly the face of the Biden border crisis, but they are not the only ones being hurt by the failure of the administration to deal with this crisis. When thousands of people a day illegally cross our border, it impacts our entire border security apparatus. We are seeing unprecedented numbers of people showing up at the border, and unfortunately it is part of a plan to overwhelm the capacity of law enforcement to deal with these numbers. This is part of a business model of the drug cartels. Flood the border with migrants. Distract the Border Patrol, who have to leave the frontlines to transport, process, and care for the migrants, creating huge security gaps.

There is no question that the cartels and criminal organizations are exploiting those gaps to traffic dangerous drugs. They are bringing across heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana--name your poison.

The truth is, these transnational criminal organizations--sometimes called cartels--are commodity-agnostic. They are in it for the money, and they will sell anything or anybody to make money.

But without a doubt, the most alarming drug that is crossing the border today is fentanyl, a synthetic opioid. Last year, the Biden administration may have not noticed, but 108,000 Americans died of drug overdoses last year alone, and the vast majority of those drugs came across the southern border because of the business model I just described. The majority of those deaths involve synthetic opioids like fentanyl. Fentanyl is especially dangerous because as little as 2 milligrams can be deadly. That is a lethal dose that fits on the tip of a sharpened pencil.

Customs and Border Protection doesn't track fentanyl seizures by milligrams, although it logs them in pounds. Since October last year, Customs and Border Protection has seized more than 10,600 pounds of fentanyl. And, no, they didn't get it all; that is just what they were able to interdict and seize. But that 10,600 pounds of fentanyl is more than 2.4 billion lethal doses--enough to wipe out the entire U.S. population more than 7 times over.

You would think this would be a matter of serious concern for the administration, an operation which uses migrants to distract law enforcement from being able to interdict a dangerous drug coming into the United States and taking tens of thousands of Americans' lives, but, frankly, it hasn't even registered any kind of reaction by the administration.

The good news is, thanks to the hard-working Customs and Border Protection officers, those 10,600 pounds of fentanyl never ended up on our streets or in our local communities, but the bad news is, there is a whole lot more where that came from.

Cartels exploit the security gaps across the border to smuggle drugs into our country. While the first stop may be Texas or another State along the southern border, these products don't stop there; they are quickly distributed by networks of criminal gangs across America to every community--not just cities but rural communities as well.

Fentanyl poses a unique danger because not only is it incredibly potent, but it is also a lot cheaper than these other drugs. Illicit drug makers will lace substances with fentanyl to cut expenses and to hook the user, and buyers often have no idea what they are actually getting.

This is a big problem in Texas but not just in my State but across the country. But we have seen a surge of fentanyl-related deaths in my State. Last year, more than 1,700 Texans died from fentanyl overdoses, and we continue to see the heartbreaking toll this drug is having on communities of every size. Cities across the State have experienced strings of overdose deaths likely tied to batches of drugs laced with fentanyl.

There is no single profile to describe the victims of these fentanyl deaths that cover every age, every demographic, and every walk of life, but one of the most concerning trends we have seen is a spike in teenage overdose deaths.

Nationwide, 77 percent--77 percent--of all teen overdose deaths last year involved fentanyl. Fentanyl is, believe it or not, the leading cause of death of Americans between the ages of 18 and 45--a shocking statistic. Teenagers may think they are buying prescription opioids-- things like OxyContin or some other drug--but they may be unknowingly taking drugs that contain a deadly dose of fentanyl in addition.

One Texas community is feeling the devastation of this situation at an almost unimaginable degree. In Hays County, situated just southwest of Austin, 2\1/2\ weeks ago, only days into the new school year, a 15- year-old high school sophomore died from a suspected fentanyl overdose. Sadly, this wasn't the first death in the Hays Consolidated Independent School District. It wasn't even the second. In 1 month's time, this school district lost three students to fentanyl-related overdoses. The other two students were both seniors. We are talking about young people who are at the starting point in their lives. They have endless potential and an army of people who want to see them succeed and live happy, productive, and successful lives, but that human potential is lost because this deadly drug has made its way into our country, into our communities, and into our schools.

But Texas isn't the only State confronting a wave of fentanyl overdoses. A few weeks ago, a woman in Colorado found her 13-year-old grandson, Jose, leaning over the bathroom sink, unresponsive. Jose's family said he had no history of illicit drug use, and they believe he received a pill from someone on his way home from school. That pill contained enough fentanyl to kill this energetic eighth grader who had his entire life ahead of him.

Sadly, this is an all-too-familiar story. Earlier this summer, a 15- month-old toddler in Georgia died after being exposed to fentanyl. The same thing happened recently in California, also to a 15-month-old infant.

Law enforcement in big cities and small towns alike have seen a spike in arrests and overdoses connected to fentanyl. The problem has gotten so bad that a number of major cities, including Las Vegas, San Diego, and New York, have installed vending machines to distribute lifesaving shots of Narcan, which is an antidote to fentanyl overdoses--vending machines on the city streets of an antidote for fentanyl because the problem has become so pervasive. This is a crisis facing everyone from toddlers to teens to adults of all ages.

Last year, more than 71,000 Americans died from a fentanyl overdose. That is 71,000 out of the 108,000 drug overdose deaths that I mentioned a moment ago. Given the rate at which fentanyl is coming into the United States, I fear the worst is still to come.

Drug cartels are taking advantage of the security gaps at the border and going to extreme lengths to boost their sales. For example, last month, the Drug Enforcement Administration seized brightly-colored fentanyl tablets in 18 States. Children appear to be the target demographic for what the DEA is calling rainbow fentanyl. They are small, colorful pills that look like candy, as well as pressed blocks of powder that look like sidewalk chalk. Mexican drug cartels and others have turned a dangerous and deadly drug into something that any child would be quick to pick up.

No, there is no question there is a crisis at the border notwithstanding the fact that President Biden and his administration have been ignoring it for the entire time he has been in office. It is certainly hurting the migrants, but it is also having a deadly impact on the American people.

Coming from a border State, I have visited the border many times, and I have spoken often to the officers and the agents who are on the frontlines of this fight. They know well about how the cartels are gaming the system, using the migrants to divert and distract while moving deadly drugs into the country. But, frankly, they cannot stop this humanitarian crisis on their own. They need a change in policy that can only come from Congress working with the administration. But so far, the administration has refused to take any steps--any steps at all--to address the migrant surge, and so the problem continues day after day after day.

I know the mayors of New York and Chicago and Washington, DC, have expressed concern that migrants are being bused to their cities, even though they advertise themselves as sanctuary cities, but, frankly, I think if that is what it takes to get the attention of the mayors of those cities, who can then hopefully get the attention of President Biden and his administration, that it is worth it.

Unless something changes, though, the 108,000 Americans who lost their lives to drug overdoses, including the 71,000 who lost their lives to fentanyl last year, will only go up. More fentanyl will come across the border and find its way into our communities. More cartels and criminal organizations and street gangs will get rich off of our suffering. And more of our children, our neighbors, our friends, and loved ones will die.

We often talk about the need for a humane response to the border crisis. And these conversations largely focus on migrant care, and there is no question these individuals should be treated humanely. But a humane response also involves consideration for the impact this drug infestation is having on the American people.

By allowing our border to descend into chaos, the President may think he has taken a humane route, but he is sorely mistaken. Families are burying their loved ones, children are losing their schoolmates, and our country is suffering while the cartels get richer and richer and richer.

Until we can get this crisis under control, the cartels will continue to move drugs across the border and poison our communities. No, an open border policy is not humane; it is not sustainable; and despite what President Biden may think, it is not benefiting anyone.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print my bill for introduction in the Congressional Record. The bill requires a plan to clarify the roles and responsibilities of officials and organizations of the Army with respect to the force modernization efforts of the Army.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print my bill for introduction in the Congressional Record. The bill requires a plan to clarify the roles and responsibilities of officials and organizations of the Army with respect to the force modernization efforts of the Army.

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

Mr. President, here we are, back in the Nation's Capital, after having had the opportunity to spend a few weeks back home. While it is still hot in Texas at this time of year--so it is nice to get a little bit of respite back here--we certainly have a lot of work cut out for us, but it is always helpful to me to sort of compare what people are focused on here in Washington, DC, with what folks back home care about the most. It is actually the best way to get some feedback on how we can do our jobs more effectively in representing the people we represent--in my case, the 29 million people who call Texas home.

Also, people are not shy about expressing their views on what we have done and even about offering some input on things we are considering doing.

For example, in Corpus Christi, which is on the gulf coast of Texas, I spoke with industry at the Port of Corpus Christi about the untapped potential of hydrogen energy.

In Round Rock, which is just outside of Austin, I sat down with a number of sexual assault survivors, prosecutors, and medical professionals to talk about the need to train more sexual assault nurse examiners, which is a highly specialized form of nursing, to make sure that not only people who are sexually assaulted are compassionately cared for but also that the evidence that is necessary to convict their assailants is selected in a way that is admissible in court.

In Austin, I met with the Texas Association of Counties. We have 254 counties in Texas. Some of them, like in Loving County, have more cattle than people. But it is great to meet or to be able to connect with all of the elected representatives at the local level of our counties in one place and to hear what is on their minds--certainly everything from broadband development/deployment, particularly in the rural parts of our State, and disaster relief for places like Dallas, which experienced 13 inches of rain in 1 day and massive flooding.

In the Rio Grande Valley, close to the border, in Pharr, TX, I got a chance to see how their local police department is partnering with local mental health providers to respond to individuals who commit offenses--maybe because they are going through mental health crises-- and how to train the officers to address those in a way that don't escalate that crisis and potentially cause harm to them as well as to the individual who is causing or is experiencing that crisis. It really is impressive to see a relatively small town like Pharr, TX, really leading the way when it comes to compassionate and effective policing and in providing our law enforcement officials, who are not necessarily trained mental health workers, the additional resources and training they need in order to respond effectively to those situations.

Those are just a few examples of the sorts of folks I got to catch up with over the last few weeks, and I am obviously always grateful to those who share their input and ideas with me. Those conversations and that input are vital to our work here in the Senate because they shed light on the problems our neighbors in our communities are facing, which isn't necessarily the coin of the realm here in Washington, DC, where politics and spin infuse everything.

For example, folks almost universally--particularly small business folks--told me about the strain of the labor shortage on their businesses. If you go to a restaurant in Texas, it may be that they are only operating on fewer hours or fewer tables because they, frankly, can't get the workforce they need to come back and help work at those places.

They are obviously all very concerned about the impact of the spending that we have been doing here in Washington, DC--some necessary and some unnecessary, in my opinion--and its impact on inflation and on family budgets, where they have seen their standard of living reduced because of the inflationary pressures on almost everything, from gasoline to groceries to housing--you name it.

They are also very concerned about high energy prices. I know there has been some talk about the reduction in the price of gasoline. That is primarily a feature of reduced demand because, frankly, people have to make choices about how to spend the money they would ordinarily put in the tank and how to do it selectively--whether to go on a family vacation or to stay at home. It certainly hasn't been because of any increase in supply as a result of our domestic energy policies by the Biden administration.

Then I heard a lot about people's concerns about crime, particularly of the fentanyl crisis that we are experiencing here in America, where 108,000 Americans died of drug overdoses last year alone. About 60 percent of those were from synthetic opioids--from fentanyl--the precursors of which usually come from Asia, mainly China, to Mexico and then across the southern border.

Then, of course, there is the ongoing Biden border crisis as a result of the open border policies of the Biden administration. There are 2.3 million migrants who have been encountered along the border just since President Biden has taken office. Because of the catch-and-release policies associated with asylum seekers, even those people who ultimately will not be able to qualify for asylum, which is roughly 85 to 90 percent of the people who claim it, will have melted into the great American landscape. They may be given a notice to appear for a future court hearing, but because of the backlog of the immigration courts, we are talking years down the line.

These are just some of the things that I am hearing about from my constituents, and these are chronic problems for which, frankly, they do not see an appropriate and adequate response coming from Washington to address the very real impact on their everyday lives: what they can afford to buy at the grocery store; how safe their communities are; whether they feel safe while walking around their neighborhoods or sending their children out to play; whether the family will travel to see relatives for the holidays or whether they will have to stay home in order to save money to put food on the table. Those are not the problems that our Democratic colleagues--or the majority here in the Senate--seem to be focused on like a laser.

When I travel to Texas from Washington, it often feels like I am visiting a parallel universe. You get here, and things don't seem that odd at first. The scenery is different, but the same problems Texans talk about are on display.

You read headlines about the border crisis. You see that the Mayor of Washington, DC, is complaining and claiming there is a humanitarian crisis because, although it claims to be a sanctuary city, when Governor Abbott or Governor Ducey from Arizona provides transportation to these sanctuary cities, all of a sudden, the border crisis that we have been living with for a year and a half now seems very real.

It is nice to see some folks in other parts of the country experiencing what my constituents in border communities have been experiencing for a long time now, together with the additional expense associated with things like deploying the National Guard to back up the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection, all at Texas taxpayer expense--something that is uniquely a Federal responsibility, but when the Biden administration refuses to do its job, it falls to the people who live in those communities along the border and in those States to try to do the best they can.

Despite the fact that our Democratic colleagues are reading the same headlines about crime, drug overdoses, inflation, and the border and despite the headlines here reflecting those concerns, our colleagues here in the Senate and in the White House have chosen to ignore them pretty much altogether. Our friends across the aisle have controlled the Senate now for a year and a half, as well as the House and the White House. They have the power to set any agenda that they see fit. They don't have to ask our permission or for our consent, and they certainly have had every opportunity to do so.

What I have noticed and what my constituents have commented on frequently is this parallel universe in

Washington, DC, where the Democrats aren't using the power they have to address the problems working families are facing. They have chosen to focus on a completely different set of issues.

For example, let's look at the recent reckless tax-and-spending bill. Our Democratic colleagues, although we have worked together constructively on bipartisan legislation, in this case decided to pass a partisan bill to spend $740 billion strictly along partisan lines. All of this money and the tax increases that go along with it won't address the biggest problems families are facing anytime soon. In fact, they are likely to make the problems even worse.

At a time when many people are struggling to pay for gasoline for their cars, our Democratic colleagues decided to give well-to-do people who can afford $80,000 electric vehicles a taxpayer handout of about $7,500 at the expense of the working families who can't afford to buy an electric vehicle of their own at any price.

This ensures that gas prices will climb even higher. This bill will revive the old Superfund tax on American energy production. It will guarantee families will face higher electricity prices this winter by slapping a new methane tax on energy producers. And that is all just the climate portion of the reckless tax-and-spending bill.

Our colleagues decided that it was the smart thing to do to supersize the Internal Revenue Service and giving it even more manpower to invariably audit middle-class America and small businesses. And then they have doled massive handouts to some of their key constituencies like labor unions.

They have chosen to impose socialist price controls on prescription drugs, which will stifle medical innovation and prevent new, lifesaving cures from being discovered. And perhaps worst of all, they raised taxes on the middle class.

I know President Biden promised, and promised time and time again, to never raise taxes on anyone earning less than $400,000 a year, and our Democratic colleagues still claim that this bill makes good on that promise. But that is simply not consistent with the facts. It is not true. The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation has confirmed it.

The JCT found that taxpayers making far less than $400,000 at some point get walloped by higher prices. That includes people making between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. You can read it yourself, the distributional tables, at the Joint Committee on Taxation website.

We know that inflation is outpacing wage growth, which means that workers already are receiving a silent pay cut or silent tax, thanks to overspending here on things that, frankly, are not priorities. And many of those same workers are going to pay even more in Federal taxes.

But perhaps the most insulting part of this reckless tax-and-spending bill that our Democratic colleagues decided to pass unilaterally was they chose to call it the Inflation Reduction Act. Leading economic experts say this bill won't do a thing to address inflation, certainly, in the near term. In fact, over the next couple of years, they predict inflation is likely to get slightly worse.

But that is how things work in this parallel universe known as Washington, DC: Democrats see that families are being battered by inflation, but they don't actually pass legislation that will help. Our colleagues just want to use the plight to come up with a sympathetic title for a radical, partisan bill, and they are happy to stick middle- class Americans with the check.

The icing on the cake came a couple of weeks ago after this bill became law, when President Biden made an Executive decision to cancel half a trillion dollars in student loans. Any family knows, you can't just cancel debt. There is no magic wand that will make it disappear. Every dollar that was borrowed will eventually have to be paid back by someone, but President Biden has just shifted the burden on whom that someone will be. Now the middle-class taxpayers are on the hook yet once again.

Under President Biden's proposal, it doesn't matter if a person took out loans and repaid them already; in other words, did what they said they would do by repaying the money that they had borrowed. Whether they worked their way through school, whether they held two or three jobs, or chose not to attend college at all, their tax dollars will pay for someone else's college debt.

My point is there is a remarkable divide between what Washington Democrats are trying to accomplish and the problems middle-class families are actually facing. Families are struggling to put food on the table, and our Democratic colleagues are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on climate initiatives.

This reminds me of a few years ago, a social movement by the so- called Yellow Jackets--a mosaic of French working-class people who felt disenfranchised from the urban elite who, as they said, ``can focus on the end of the world, while we're worrying about the end of the month.'' That is what average working families in Texas and across the country are concerned about: How do we get to the end of the month with enough money to put food on the table and gas in the tank?

Workers can't afford a full tank of gas, and Democrats are forcing them to subsidize electric vehicles for the wealthy. People are worried about how much their electricity bills will cost this winter, and Democrats imposed a new tax that will send those costs even higher. These policies aren't going to make life better for the middle class anytime soon. They aren't going to help families or businesses that are trying to create jobs and opportunities for their communities. And it certainly isn't going to bring our economy roaring back to life.

The fact of the matter is, since Democrats took control of the government more than a year and a half ago, Texans' lives have gotten harder, not easier. Inflation has skyrocketed, wages have fallen, our economy fell into a recession, and the border is on fire. And our colleagues--certainly, the Biden administration--don't seem to care. In fact, they seem to block out the concerns of middle-class Americans so they can pursue an ideological agenda like there is no tomorrow.

When I am home in Texas, folks talk about the problems workers and families are facing every day. They don't want to send taxpayer handouts to wealthy people buying electric vehicles or help subsidize labor unions or payoff someone else's loans. The sooner our Democratic colleagues realize that, the better off we will all be. But then again, maybe it is going to take an election this November.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, it is good to be back in the Senate. Like a number of my colleagues, after dodging the virus for 2 years, it finally caught up with me last weekend. I spent a week in quarantine and, fortunately, experienced only mild symptoms. I think that is because I was fully vaccinated and boosted and I was glad to have the help of modern science on my side.

There is never a good time to be away from our work here in the Senate, but we all have a responsibility to keep those around us safe as well, no matter how inconvenient. Unfortunately, there are reports that our friends across the aisle may be intentionally disregarding that responsibility. I am deeply concerned by published reports that our Democratic colleagues have adopted a ``don't test, don't tell'' policy to ensure full attendance today.

Allegedly, they are more concerned about ramming through Senator Manchin's tax hike than following CDC guidelines to protect not only each other but the staff members, the Capitol Police, custodial staff, food service workers, and countless others who keep this institution running. These folks could have any number of other health conditions that could lead to more severe COVID experiences than, for example, I had or they could be caregivers for young children or elderly relatives who have a high risk of serious illness.

I sincerely hope these reports are not true. I hope our Democratic colleagues are not selfish enough to put so many people at risk in order to pass this massive tax-and-spending spree. If any of our colleagues are experiencing COVID symptoms, they should do what I did. They should get tested, period.

We know that as soon as this evening, the Senate is expected to vote on Senator Manchin's and Senator Schumer's massive tax hike on middle- class families. You can call it the Manchin-Schumer tax hike of 2022. It sprung to life, unbeknownst, I believe, to virtually all the Democratic Senators, except for Senator Manchin and Senator Schumer. And no one has seen what we will purportedly be voting on later today, even our Democratic colleagues. No one has seen the final product. Once the so-called Byrd bath has

been undertaken by the Parliamentarian, this will be a substitute bill that Senator Schumer will lay down, but nobody has seen it.

When the senior Senator from West Virginia announced this bill last week--or this agreement--every Republican was shocked and, from my view, most Democrats were as well. My private conversations with many of my Democratic colleagues said: Boy, that does not look good to be working so closely together on a bipartisan bill only to spring this on everybody by surprise. It looks like they were trying to pull a fast one. After all, Senator Manchin did put the kibosh on the reckless tax- and-spending spree bill last year, and he doubled down on his opposition just a few weeks ago.

Privately, his Democratic colleagues assured me this was not happening. But then the Senator from West Virginia has engaged in a gigantic Olympic-worthy flip-flop. Senator Manchin will tell you this bill is completely different from ``Build Back Broke,'' but it is not.

We should take a look at some of the elements of this legislation. ``Build Back Broke'' was a roundup of expensive, unnecessary damaging policies, including job-killing tax hikes, which would leave hard- working American families without a way to earn a paycheck, Green New Deal climate policies that would hurt our energy security and drive energy costs through the roof, taxpayer subsidies for wealthy people buying expensive cars and SUVs.

I was listening to the majority whip, the Senator from Illinois, talking about these businesses that are making too much money and so they need to pay more in taxes. That is what I have come to expect from our Democratic colleagues. They are kind of a ``Robin Hood'' party-- take from the rich, give to the poor. Except here, this is a reverse Robin Hood. They are taking from middle-class families who can't afford to buy expensive electric vehicles and giving a tax subsidy to wealthy people who can afford to buy them but are helped with the $7,500 taxpayer subsidy. So you might call that a reverse Robin Hood.

Then they want to supersize the Internal Revenue Service with even more manpower and authority to track everyday American people and perform, I presume, many, many more audits, not just on the rich and famous but also on middle-class Americans.

And then there are the special handouts to powerful friends of the Democratic Party. This isn't the type of legislation that will bring our economy roaring back to life or cool inflation. In fact, that is the first place that this bill is misrepresented. They are calling it the Inflation Reduction Act, but nobody believes that, in the near term, it is going to have a single impact, at all, on inflation.

That is what Penn Wharton said. For the next 2 years, they said, it may actually make inflation worse, but it is a negligible amount. But the one thing we are sure of is that it sure won't go down.

So it is not an ``inflation reduction act.'' It is really an insult to the intelligence of the American people to think that you can spend this money and you can tax individuals and businesses during a recession--something everybody from Bill Clinton to Barack Obama, to Chuck Schumer, to Joe Manchin has said you don't do, which is raise taxes during a recession--but that is exactly what this bill does.

Higher taxes, bigger government, more inflation, and fewer jobs--this is a bill whose time has not come. No wonder when this bill was originally proposed as Build Back Better, Senator Manchin opposed the bill.

So let's see what he and Senator Schumer wrote in secret behind closed doors and then sprung on the American people. And, again, we haven't even seen the final product yet, and yet Senator Schumer said we are going to stay in session until it passes.

Well, it is going to have to take all 50 votes of Democratic Senators and the vote of the Vice President to do that, because not one single Senator on this side of the aisle was consulted, was asked to work on a bipartisan basis to come up with a product that could be supported across the aisle.

This will be a purely partisan exercise, after I think we have had a pretty good run of bipartisan cooperation, and I have been proud to be a part of that. But this is a complete reversal of sort of the spirit of bipartisan cooperation that we have seen, frankly, all summer long, which has produced some pretty good legislation.

Well, there are tax hikes that will leave hard-working Americans poorer. Not only will inflation be roughly 9 percent, which it is today--meaning that for every $100 you earn, you are only going to get $91 in purchasing power--in addition to that, the Joint Committee on Taxation said the impact of this bill will mean that individuals earning as little as $10,000 a year will see an increase in their tax burden, because you can't spend this much money, you can't tax this many people without it having some trickle-down effect on taxpayers, certainly those who earn less than $400,000, which was President Biden's pledge. And I heard the majority leader say that again and, I believe, the majority whip, too, but this is not true.

The Joint Committee on Taxation is the entity here--nonpartisan entity--which provides the final word on those issues. So notwithstanding the denials of the majority leader and the majority whip and others, the Joint Committee on Taxation said that taxpayers earning as little as $10,000 will see their taxes go up--maybe not their income tax, but they will be poorer as a result of this bill.

Again, part of that is because, in addition to inflation, in addition to additional tax burden, you are going to be asking them to pay taxes to subsidize wealthy people to buy electric vehicles or to subsidize people's health insurance, even though they make well above the 400 percent of poverty cap that was initially part of ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act. That cap has been lifted now as well.

We will see what the final product looks like, but the earlier provision showed that people earning up to as much as 750 percent of poverty would then receive taxpayer subsidies for their health insurance.

Well, Senator Manchin and Senator Schumer may have slapped a new name on Build Back Better or ``Build Back Broke,'' but all of the essential elements are still there: tax hikes on families, the Green New Deal, massive electric vehicle subsidies.

Oh, and here is another thing. A lot of the American car manufacturers said we may not be able to access these tax credits because 70 percent of the components that go into electric vehicles are made in other countries, like China. That is how slapdash this bill was put together. If more time, more deliberation, more debate, more bipartisanship had occurred, maybe we could have come up with something that would make more sense.

But this is what happens when you get in a big hurry. You make mistakes and do things that make zero sense, like provide this subsidy to a limited class of car manufacturers when 70 percent of the components of a typical electric vehicle, including the battery, come from overseas.

As I said, this is a misleading-labeled bill. It is not going to do a thing to ease inflation in the near term. The budget experts at Penn Wharton analyzed Senator Manchin's tax hike and bill and completely decimated the argument that this legislation will reduce inflation. If this bill becomes law, inflation will not get any better anytime soon. In fact, I believe Americans can expect it to get worse.

The people at Penn Wharton said the Manchin tax hike bill would increase inflation slightly in the short term and cause it to stick around for 2 more years before it would have any impact. That is what you are going to tell hard-working American families: You are being priced out of your favorite food and grocery products at the grocery store or you can't afford to fill up your car? Just wait 2 more years.

Well, if the Democrats are successful in passing this bill with purely Democratic votes, there will be an accounting, and there will be a comparison by voters in November with, OK, they told us that if we pass this bill, it would reduce inflation, and let's see what inflation looks like in November of 2022.

I am not wishing for higher inflation. I hope inflation will go down. But this is exactly the opposite of what you ought to do if you want to reduce inflation to restore people's purchasing power.

Well, again, several years ago and more recently, our colleague from West Virginia said he didn't think it was wise to raise taxes during a recession. He and the majority leader have tried to convince anyone who will listen, who is gullible enough, to believe that this bill does not raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 a year, but, as I said, the Joint Committee on Taxation explodes that myth.

Next year, more than 60 percent of taxpayers who earn between $40,000 and $50,000 a year will be hit with a higher tax bill. That is what the Joint Committee on Taxation said. It is in the so-called distributional tables. It is a pretty complex calculation, but that is why we rely on the Joint Committee on Taxation to provide this expert information and guidance to us, because, frankly, it is beyond the capability of most of us in Congress. They also said that more than 90 percent of those earning between $75,000 and $100,000 a year will pay more in taxes, and a whopping 97 percent of those earning between $100,000 and $200,000 will see a tax increase.

I heard our colleague the majority whip talk about these big, rich companies--oil and gas companies, pharmaceutical companies--making too much money. But these aren't billion-dollar corporations that they are raising taxes on; these are middle-class families--and for what? To subsidize rich people driving around in fancy electric vehicles? It is a disgrace.

Well, of course, working families aren't the only ones who are going to face a higher tax bill. The Manchin tax hike also hits businesses and is sure to have a devastating impact on--guess where--West Virginia. I am not making this up. Higher taxes require companies to cut costs everywhere.

I think sometimes our Democratic colleagues have this idea that if you raise taxes on businesses, they will simply absorb it and they won't pass it along to their customers. That is a flight of fantasy. Higher taxes will require them either to pass those costs along or to cut costs elsewhere, like to cut off their employees, to not hire as many people as they would otherwise hire.

I was flabbergasted, frankly, when I saw that, according to the Tax Foundation, the industry that will be hit hardest is the coal industry. Now, we know the coal industry has been the primary target of Democrats' green policies, and maybe that is what they have in mind--to put even more coal miners out of a job.

Despite the adverse impact this legislation will have on families and communities across the country, it was written by two people: Senators Manchin and Schumer. They have been working hard since they announced their deal, arrived at in secret, behind closed doors. They have worked hard to try to get this bill to the floor, to see if it complies with the Senate rules. They continue to make last-minute changes--going on even as I speak, which is the reason none of us have seen the final product--but we are unlikely to see those final changes before Senator Schumer asks us to vote on the bill. But still Senator Schumer said he expects every Democrat to fall in line and to vote for this legislation within a matter of hours. They haven't seen the bill either. I have to imagine that Democrats in both the House and the Senate are pretty unhappy with this process.

Experts have analyzed this bill and said it raises taxes on families, and it will have an adverse impact on jobs and keep inflation high-- certainly not cut it--but the top Senate Democrat expects his colleagues to ignore these warning signs and to vote for it anyway.

Like I said, all of us are held accountable by the voters at election time. And I guess ultimately that is what this exercise will be about-- it will be about political accountability.

On average, there have been about 40 amendments in a so-called vote- arama, which we are all familiar with, which we will experience presumably later on tonight. Our colleagues said: Well, there may be some amendments I would like to vote for, but I am going to vote against them because I want to make sure we get this bill across the floor, no matter how ugly the process, no matter what is in it.

Well, Democrats have tried and failed to convince the American people that the biggest problems facing our country aren't really problems at all or certainly their problem.

Despite all the obvious warnings, the Biden administration officials insisted that inflation was transitory, that it is temporary, won't last long. Now they even want to redefine what it means to be in a recession even though we have experienced two consecutive quarters of negative GDP--gross domestic product--growth, which is the textbook definition of a recession.

People in my State and across the country know better than to believe this sort of sleight of hand. Despite what our colleagues are saying today, this bill will increase taxes on families earning less than $400,000 a year. It will stifle medical and pharmaceutical innovation and prevent new lifesaving cures from being discovered. It will threaten our economy and our energy security at a vulnerable moment when we are in a recession.

And it won't do a darn thing to ease the loss of purchasing power due to historically high inflation rates--the highest in 40 years--that consumers and all Americans are experiencing. It won't do a thing. No amount of spin or fast talking can conceal the damage this bill will inflict on the American people.

Senator Manchin likes to say: ``If I can't go back home and explain it, I can't vote for it,'' but for the life of me, I don't know how our Democratic colleagues are going to explain this one in November.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, due to unforeseen circumstances I was unable to be present today for votes on amendment No. 5192 to the Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification for the Accession of the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to NATO. I offer this statement for the Record in support of amendment No. 5192 and in support of the underlying resolution.

Amendment No. 5192, offered by my good friend from Alaska, Mr. Dan Sullivan, would amend existing language in the Resolution of Advice and Consent to say, ``the Senate declares that all NATO members should spend a minimum of 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense and 20 percent of their defense budgets on major equipment, including research and development, by 2024, as outlined in the 2014 Wales Summit Declaration.'' This language is stronger and clearer than the current resolution language, and it would deliver a clear message to the President that Congress expects him to engage our allies on alliance spending obligations.

Finally, the Resolution of Advice and Consent to Ratification for the Accession of the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to NATO would add two excellent allies who will be significant contributors to the NATO Alliance. Finland and Sweden both possess fully funded, modern, self-sufficient, highly capable militaries. Their addition to the NATO alliance will help to share the burden of NATO defense

obligations among NATO allies. This will enable the U.S. to focus its own forces where they are needed most, be that in Europe or in the Indo-Pacific.

Mr. President, due to unforeseen circumstances I was unable to be present today for votes on amendment No. 5186 and 5187 to S. 3373, the Honoring our PACT Act, and to the underlying bill. I offer this statement in the Record in support of all three.

Amendment No. 5186 to S. 3373, offered by my good friend from Pennsylvania, Mr. Pat Toomey, closes an important budgetary loophole by preventing $390 billion in baseline discretionary spending from being reclassified as mandatory spending under the legislation. I support this amendment, and I would encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Amendment No. 5185 to S. 3373, offered by my good friend from Tennessee, Mrs. Marsha Blackburn, would expand care under the Veterans Community Care Program to include toxic-exposed veterans. This expanded care program is essential to ensure that toxic-exposed veterans receive the full range of support that they need. I would encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment.

Finally, S. 3373, the Honoring our PACT Act, creates a presumption that veterans who suffer from certain health conditions, and who were exposed to toxic substances as part of their military service, are eligible to receive Veterans Administration healthcare. This important bill will provide much-needed care to our veterans, including lifesaving early detection and treatment of certain illnesses. I support the passage of the PACT Act.

Mr. President, a few weeks ago, the fate of the CHIPS Act, our collective effort to shore up the vulnerable semiconductor supply chain, was in limbo. Republicans said we would not move forward with what was then known as USICA, the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, while Democrats were crafting a partisan reckless massive tax and spending bill behind closed doors.

Then Senator Manchin, the Senator from West Virginia, made a decision that angered most of his Democratic colleagues--he slammed the door on the climate and tax provisions and reconciliation. He said:

Until we see the July inflation figures--

Which we haven't seen yet--

until we see the July Federal reserve interest rates, then

let's wait.

He noted that families were struggling to buy such essentials as gasoline and groceries and added:

I can't make that decision basically on taxes of any type.

That was what I will call the old Joe.

After we received assurances privately from some Senate Democrats, including the staff of the Senate majority leader, that the tax and climate provisions were off the table, we were able to move forward with USICA and the funding of this vulnerable semiconductor supply chain that is an important part of the bill that the House is voting on today.

So Republicans and Democrats went to work, negotiating in good faith to reach an agreement because we recognized that the vulnerability of our semiconductor supply chain was an economic and national security existential threat because 90 percent of the advanced semiconductors in the world that power everything from your cell phone to the F-35, to the Stinger or the Javelin missiles that are being used in Ukraine today--90 percent of those come from overseas, and the United States makes zero percent of them. That was the vulnerability and the risk we were exposed to, so that is why we worked so hard on a bipartisan basis to pass what used to be called Endless Frontier. I guess it has had about four or five different names so far, but it started, in my mind, with the CHIPS for America Act that Mr. Warner, the Senator from Virginia, and I introduced in June of 2020.

So we all celebrated with a bipartisan press conference just in the LBJ Room over here, but then shortly after that bipartisan announcement, we learned some astonishing news: The climate and tax provisions apparently

were never off the table despite what we had been told.

Apparently, Democrats--specifically, the majority leader and Senator Manchin--just moved those discussions out of the public eye, into a secret back room. And I pretty much believe that other Democratic colleagues were not clued in on those negotiations. That is my impression. It was a secret deal between the majority leader and Senator Manchin.

Well, as I said, the CHIPS Act was part of this larger China competitiveness bill passed around 1 o'clock, and it was just 4 hours later that Senator Manchin sent out a press release that ``Build Back Broke'' was now on track. After saying repeatedly he would not support such reckless policies, he has done an Olympic-worthy flip-flop, and there is simply no denying it.

Let me talk about the new Joe.

It simply can't be overstated how dramatic this reversal is. Democratic Senators called me and texted me yesterday after Senator Manchin's announcement.

One said:

I am so shocked and upset.

Another said:

I am appalled.

A member of the President's Cabinet said:

I hope you know and trust that I had absolutely no idea

this was going on.

Just 2 weeks ago, Senator Manchin said he wouldn't support the climate policies and tax increases out of fear that it would fan the flames of inflation.

Last month, as we will recall, inflation hit a new four-decade high. Everyday expenses for food, groceries, and other necessities of life were up more than 9 percent from just a year ago. Our colleague from West Virginia said he told the Democratic leader it would be ``wrong'' and ``not prudent'' to move forward while inflation was at a record high. Unfortunately, it didn't take long for that sense of fiscal responsibility to fade.

I don't know the details about the secret deal between Senator Manchin and Senator Schumer that resulted in this reversal, but I have to say, it was ugly. Now Senator Manchin not only supports the ``Build Back Broke'' bill, he now said it is his proposal--he, in effect, wrote it--and it includes the same policies that he previously opposed.

Tax hikes on working families and small businesses, Green New Deal climate policies, socialist price controls on prescription drugs, things like subsidies for wealthy purchasers of electric vehicles-- forget the fact that somebody who can't afford an electric vehicle, who has to drive an old clunker, perhaps, or buy a used car--they are the ones subsidizing wealthy people buying electric vehicles--it is all in there.

Democrats could not have picked a worse time to push this reckless, irresponsible bill. This morning's news on the state of the economy confirms what millions of Americans have known for months: that the Biden recession is officially here. Our economy is not just stuck in the mud; it is sinking. Families and small businesses deserve better than a toxic combination of higher prices and feeble economic growth. Instead of helping the people survive this recession, our Democratic colleagues want to push them even deeper into the hole.

In 2008, Senator Schumer himself, the majority leader, said that raising taxes during a recession was a bad idea.

President Obama said exactly the same thing. In 2009, President Obama--in the aftermath of the great recession due to the financial crisis in 2008--President Obama said virtually the same thing that Senator Schumer said:

The last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle

of a recession.

And that is exactly where we are.

The following year, in 2010, Senator Manchin agreed with Senator Schumer and President Obama. He said:

I don't think during a time of recession you mess with any

of the taxes or increase any taxes.

That is the old Joe. That is the same Senator who is now proposing to raise taxes on families in the middle of a recession.

Now, here is the real joke, but I guess the joke is on all of us: They are calling it the Inflation Reduction Act. What an insult to the intelligence of the American people. Do they think anybody will be fooled? Do they think the American people are so stupid that they will believe this is an honest attempt to address inflation? There is not a chance. This proposal is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Our Democratic colleagues can try to rebrand the ``Build Back Broke'' bill that they tried to pass earlier this year all they want, but it is filled with the same rotten policies that will hurt families, small businesses, and energy producers, while the President, by the way, goes to Saudi Arabia hat in hand, asking the leader of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to produce more oil overseas rather than encourage domestic production here in America.

If this bill were to pass, it would eliminate any chance we had of escaping the recession policies that Democrats have landed us in.

Families are being crushed by the worst inflation in four decades. For every dollar you have, it is worth 91 cents in purchasing power because of the broken policies of the Biden administration. But it is not the politicians who pay the price; we are doing just fine. It is the working families all across this country who are paying the price for Democrats' war on American energy, for example. And they are sick and tired of being told by Washington Democrats that you can tax and spend our way out of this mess.

I have some bad news: If the Democratic leader can manage to keep all 50 Democrats on board, it is going to get worse. Our only hope is that a single Democratic Senator will oppose this massive, irresponsible bill, and it only takes one in a 50-50 Senate.

Not only will this bill have a devastating impact on the American people, it will absolutely paralyze this Chamber.

There have been recent discussions about, well, amidst polarization, there is possibility for bipartisan cooperation, and I have been proud to be a part of some of that bipartisan cooperation. I think we have done some important things for the American people.

But the Senate functions on trust. There are only 100 of us, and the relationships and the confidence that we have that when somebody looks you in the eye and tells you something, that they are going to stick with it, is important to negotiating in good faith and building consensus that is necessary to pass legislation. That is the only way we can pass legislation--work in a bipartisan, candid, good-faith way to get things done, like our mental health and school safety bill recently. That trust was eviscerated yesterday.

Senators Manchin and Schumer did not draft this 725-page bill in the 4 hours between the passage of the CHIPS Act and Senator Manchin's press release. They have been working on this the entire time, when they told us it was off the table. How is this Chamber supposed to function if we don't have at least some modicum of trust in what our colleagues tell us? How can we negotiate in good faith, compromise where necessary, and get things done together after the majority leader and the Senator from West Virginia pull a stunt like this?

The American people are sometimes left to wonder whether our institutions, including this one, can work anymore. Well, I can only speak for this Senator when I say: This betrayal is an absolute declaration of political warfare.

For years, many of our Democratic colleagues have claimed that the Senate is broken because of the filibuster. They act as though a procedural vote with the 60-vote threshold is an end of democracy as we know it. But look where we are now. The Democratic leader is crafting secret deals in back rooms. He is keeping members of his own political party in the dark, such that they have to apologize to people like me who have been willing to trust that what people say--that their word is their bond.

Look, if somebody can't agree with me, I would prefer they tell me outright, and then we can figure out where we can agree if we can't agree in some areas. But to look you in the eye and tell you one thing and then to do another is absolutely unforgiveable.

Now the majority leader is trying to abuse the rules of the Senate to pass a $700 billion partisan spending bill in the next week, in the next matter of days--a bill that was only announced in a press release yesterday.

The Senate is not broken, but I am afraid, if this stunt pays off, Democrats are about to break it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be permitted to speak prior to the scheduled rollcall vote: myself for up to 15 minutes, Senator Blackburn for up to 10 minutes, and Senator Tester for up to 5 minutes.

Mr. President, coming to the floor and listening to some of my colleagues talk about their concern for lack of access to contraception--and some have said we need to pass a bill codifying same-sex marriage when that is currently the law of the land by virtue of a Supreme Court decision, the Obergefell case--reminds me of the old story about the little boy who cried wolf. He cried wolf when there wasn't any danger; and then, once there was danger, people didn't come to his aid because they thought it was another phony crying wolf.

I can understand our colleagues--given inflation, given crime, given the broken borders--wanting to change the subject to something else, but that is all this is. This is mere posturing pre-November, pre- midterm elections. This isn't about changing the law because the law already permits ready access to contraceptives. The law already permits same-sex marriage.

So this idea that we ought to spend scarce time here in the Congress, which we have in limited supply, reaffirming rights that already exist, is a clear political narrative designed to divert the American people's attention from things that really are at risk--that is, the paychecks of every American family because of inflation, because of failed energy policies.

We know that the price of gasoline and diesel and fuel to fill up your car so you can go to work or take your child to school or summer camp has increased. We know that our cities are on fire due to spiking crime waves connected to drugs that are coming across the southern border. And, of course, we know that the southern border is completely open with a big red carpet and a welcome mat out for anybody who wants to come to the United States illegally.

And the cartels that are rich and getting richer because of the flow of their human traffic are also getting rich because of the flow of illegal drugs that took the lives of 108,000 Americans last year alone.

We know where those drugs are coming from and that the Biden administration is doing absolutely nothing to stop them. I would want to change the topic too.

CHIPS Act of 2022

Mr. President, on a more positive note, the Senate approved funding earlier this morning to bolster domestic semiconductor manufacturing by a vote of 64 to 33. This funding will help kick-start the development of these

microprocessors, these chips that go into everything from your cell phone to the F-35, to Javelin and Stinger missiles that we send to Ukraine to defend their country from Russian aggression. This funding will help kick-start a domestic production of these semiconductors in a way that will prevent a vulnerability of our supply chain, since 90 percent of those advanced semiconductors currently come from Asia, with 60 percent coming from Taiwan alone.

One other benefit to this bill is that this bill could create roughly 185,000 jobs every year as these new facilities are constructed. Long term, it could bring another 280,000 jobs online. And once these foundries are operational, they will supply ``Made in America'' semiconductors that can be used on everything from smartphones to cars, to airplanes, to missile defense systems.

Semiconductors are the cornerstone of this legislation, but the bill also takes a range of other steps to help propel innovation in the competition we are currently in with the People's Republic of China. This bill authorizes investments in research that will support everything from robotics to next-generation wireless technology.

It also authorizes NASA programs that will keep America at the forefront of space exploration. It extends the authorization for the International Space Station to 2030. This is very important, especially now that Russia has said it will end its commitment to the International Space Station after 2024.

This bill also lays the groundwork for America's continued presence in space after 2030, including language I championed requiring NASA to develop a strategy to retire the International Space Station and transition to a successor platform. It also enhances existing programs that support future exploration missions. This includes the Moon to Mars Program, which is leading efforts to get an American astronaut on the surface of Mars.

Texas is the proud home to the Johnson Space Center, the home of human space flight, but also a range of other universities and companies leading the way in human space exploration. Enabling these partnerships saves money, drives innovation, and gives us a competitive edge over countries like Russia and China.

The broader bill included in the CHIPS Act will support both our economic and our national security and strengthen our efforts to lead the world in scientific innovation. The way we are going to compete with China and to beat them is to out-innovate them because no country in the world has better human capital, better brains, and a better system to encourage innovation, which will keep us ahead of the People's Republic of China.

They don't play by the rules. They certainly don't observe the rule of law. They steal all the technology they can get. But it is important for the United States to be in the game and not be left behind.

I want to thank Mr. Warner, the senior Senator from Virginia, for launching this effort with me 2 years ago. We introduced the CHIPS for America Act in June of 2020, which demonstrates how long it takes to get important legislation passed here in the U.S. Congress. Since the time we introduced it, I have worked with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to secure the necessary funding so we could deliver the benefits for our country.

Countless colleagues have been part of the process over these last few weeks, particularly Senator Young, Senator Portman, Senator Wicker, Senator Sinema, and countless others; and Senator Cantwell and certainly Senator Schumer as well and numerous others have led the charge on this legislation. Their hard work and their willingness to work cooperatively together and to find common ground is the reason for our success.

This has been a long, winding road with a lot of twists and turns along the way, but the end is finally in sight. Speaker Pelosi has promised to bring this legislation up for a vote in the House, and I hope our colleagues across the Capitol do not dally and get this bill voted out of the House and to the President's desk.

Chip manufacturers are watching Congress and waiting to see if this bill passes before they decide where to build new fab manufacturing facilities. And we have been told that, unless this bill passes, these hoped-for manufacturing jobs and these semiconductor manufacturing fabs will not be built here in America but will be built in Europe and other places around the world.

Secretary Raimondo, the Secretary of Commerce, has assured our colleagues that the United States will miss out on big benefits in terms of jobs, national security, and our economy if Congress doesn't pass this bill by the start of the August recess.

Once this bipartisan legislation passes the Senate, our Democratic colleagues are reportedly planning a dramatic pivot from bipartisanship to an ultrapartisan reconciliation process. Apparently, they are willing to work together when it is convenient, but they are also willing to abandon the notion of working together and are preparing to go on another reckless, partisan spending spree.

This isn't the first time. At the start of last year, Democrats spent nearly $2 trillion in unnecessary spending on a party-line basis. People wonder why we have 9 percent inflation. Part of it is our Democratic colleagues are willing to shovel money out the door and chase limited goods with supply chain problems, which means that prices get driven higher and higher--as well as, as I mentioned, flawed energy policies that look for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to increase production rather than to produce more American oil and gas here at home.

Well, our Democratic colleagues succeeded in that $2 trillion bill, and they tried to pass another partisan bill at the end of the year which would have cost the American people nearly $5 trillion. But, thankfully, that entire effort failed.

Now, some of our colleagues are committed--this is their last chance before the August recess--to take advantage of the rules of the Senate and to go on a partisan spending bonanza, and certainly they don't want to miss this opportunity.

We are hearing that our colleagues are frantically piecing together a bill that has not yet even been written and completed and passed the so-called Byrd bath test with the Senate Parliamentarian. So we are waiting to see whether they can meet the time deadline of the end of next week or not.

As I said, the bill is still reportedly being written, so we don't even have a good picture of everything that is in it. But we do have an understanding of the general framework, and it is not looking good for the American people. For example, our colleagues have said their proposal will implement government price controls on lifesaving drugs, a move that will stifle innovation and end up with scarcity. That is what price controls always do.

Then we have heard that they plan to expand and extend the ObamaCare tax subsidies. This all started with a partisan spending bill that became law last year. It expanded the amount of taxpayer assistance people receive, which, in short, gave more money to more people, including lifting the cap on individuals who could receive those subsidies above $400,000.

Of course, at the time, the camel's nose under the tent was that it was designed as a temporary provision. But here we are a year and a half later, and they are already trying to extend it, indicating that there was nothing temporary intended by it.

They claim it is not a permanent extension and that it will only last 2 or 3 years, but I have no reason to believe that Democrats will give up on extending those provisions when they expire. In the words of Ronald Reagan, the closest thing to eternal life on Earth is a government program. Once created, they will not die, even if they are no longer necessary. And of course, a permanent extension will cost the American people a lot of money.

Last week, the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation released a report of the true cost of a permanent expansion, and it is pretty shocking for a number of reasons. First is the financial cost. By expanding the ObamaCare premium tax credits and making them permanent, Democrats will add $248 billion to the Federal deficit over the next decade.

Mr. President, my age and your age--we are not going to be the ones who have to pay that money back. But these young people sitting down here are going to have to pay the price for the profligate spending today, and all Americans will pay the price by adding fuel to the fire of inflation.

For whatever reason--reasons I really can't fathom--the Federal debt and the national debt are of no concern to our Democratic colleagues. They simply don't seem to care. They act as though we are playing with Monopoly money, that we can print and borrow like there is no tomorrow because none of this really matters. But we know that is not true. Every dollar we spend is paid for by taxpayers, and every ounce of debt we accrue will be carried and repaid by our children and our grandchildren. But none of this seems to matter to our friends across the aisle. They are still plowing ahead with this legislation.

Unfortunately, the irresponsible spending isn't even the worst part. Our colleagues claim this extension will allow more Americans to afford healthcare, but the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation told us that under this plan, some 2.3 million Americans will lose their current coverage provided by their employer. Some 2.3 million Americans will lose their coverage provided currently by their employer. Hard-working Americans whose health insurance is currently covered by their employers would be told: You are on your own now. And no matter what you negotiated when you negotiated your salary with your employer, presumably if you are a union member and subject to a collective bargaining agreement where your union negotiated a generous healthcare plan, all of that will be in jeopardy by this reckless expansion of the ObamaCare subsidies.

Our Democrat friends want to continue subsidizing healthcare for six- figure earners. People earning 750 percent of the Federal poverty level would be eligible for taxpayer-funded subsidies--750 percent of the poverty level, you would get cash from Uncle Sam. Our country would be essentially paying wealthy people to lose their current employer- provided healthcare so they can end up on the government subsidy.

This is simply crazy policy: driving up the deficit, kicking people off of their employer-provided health plans, and forcing taxpayers to subsidize health insurance for the rich. This isn't about helping the uninsured; it is a backdoor way to implement Medicare for All. Yes, Joe Biden may be President, but it is the Bernie Sanders agenda at work here.

Of course, Democrats couldn't get enough support for this radical plan, so they are trying to jam it through on party-line votes. Instead of attempting to pass a massive, unpopular bill all at once, they are trying to serve it to the American people in spoonfuls. Bit by bit, they are trying to push America closer to a single-payer health system.

American people do not want Medicare for All. People who have their employer-provided coverage want to keep it. And the American people don't want the Federal Government subsidizing wealthy people who can afford to pay for their own healthcare.

This is a bad idea whose time I hope has not come, and I hope our friends on the other side of the aisle will simply give up on this massive, partisan tax-and-spending spree bill that will do no good and will do a lot of harm.

Madam President, as I was preparing to come to the floor, I was going to say we are going to have a vote tonight to proceed to fill a major gap in our national security, although it looks like Mother Nature and the weather may prevent a vote tonight, and it may be tomorrow. But, still, I expect in the next couple of days for us to address a major gap in our national security.

More than a year and a half after the original CHIPS Act became law, we are finally approaching the finish line in the race to fund it.

You may recall that it was June of 2020 that Senator Warner, the senior Senator, a Democrat from Virginia, and I introduced the CHIPS for America Act to address a frightening supply chain vulnerability when it comes to the most advanced semiconductors in the world, 90 percent of which come from Asia, and 60 percent come from Taiwan.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin recently wrote a letter to congressional leaders saying that ``funding the CHIPS Act is critical to our national defense,'' and last week, former Secretary of State and CIA Director Mike Pompeo also urged Congress to pass this funding, saying:

The cost of compromise on this bill pales in comparison to

the costs we will suffer if we allow the Chinese Communist

Party to one day own and control access to our most critical

technologies.

I agree with both of these statements, one by a Democrat appointee, another by a Republican appointee.

Chips underpin virtually all the technology that we use that keeps us safe at home and protects our troops around the world. And for those not conversant with the role semiconductors play, these microprocessors underpin literally everything that has an off-and-on switch, and obviously our dependency on that kind of technology will do nothing but increase in the days and months and years ahead.

From our major military assets, like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, to everyday technologies that keep our troops safe, like advanced body armor, semiconductors are key. Keeping a ready and dependable supply chain of these defense assets requires a lot of semiconductors, and right now, we are mainly looking to other countries to manufacture them.

As a matter of fact, the United States of America makes zero percent of the most advanced semiconductors in the world. We depend on outsourcing virtually all of the manufacturing to other countries and produce none of them here. Roughly 75 percent of the semiconductor manufacturing globally is concentrated in China and East Asia, and 100 percent of the world's most advanced chipmaking capacity is located in only two places--Taiwan and South Korea. As I said, Taiwan commands 92 percent of the world's advanced chipmaking, and the United States makes zero.

You might wonder, How did we find ourselves in this situation? Well, I think it was probably the supply chain vulnerabilities that we saw from COVID-19 that called into question this assumption that just because something could be made cheaper somewhere else in the world, that that necessarily checked all the boxes. Well, it does if all you are depending on is China to make toys for our children or other nonessential items, but when you are talking about the very brains behind the technology we need, ranging from our cell phone, as I said, to our most sophisticated military weapons, it does not check all the boxes to say we will just import those from abroad, where they can be made cheaper, because that vulnerable supply chain, if disrupted, could cause not only a severe economic depression in America but also threaten our national security directly.

If access to those chips were cut off or restricted, we would be up a creek without a paddle. We couldn't produce a stockpile of Javelin missiles to supply Ukraine or produce the radios and communications devices that keep our troops and our allies connected. That is why shoring up this domestic supply, this manufacturing capacity, is a key national security priority, and this is the best way to protect one of our most critical supply chains and ensure our military readiness will not be compromised by the People's Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party, which has threatened, by the way, to invade Taiwan, where the vast majority of these advanced semiconductors are made. But it wouldn't necessarily require a military intervention. It could be another pandemic, it could be a natural disaster--anything that might block our access to these advanced semiconductors.

While closing that national security gap is the top priority here, we can't ignore major economic consequences that this legislation will deliver as well.

When I introduced this legislation with Senator Warner from Virginia, who is chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on which I also serve, our focus was on national security. Obviously, many of our States will be winners when it comes to the economic consequences of this legislation as well. Texas has been, for example, a longstanding leader in the semiconductor industry and is home to more than 200 chip manufacturing facilities that employ 29,000 Texans. For years, our State has reaped the benefits of semiconductor manufacturing. Most of these are what are called legacy chips. They are the older chips where you are not as concerned about miniaturization or compactness or power--things that, for example, run our refrigerators or TV sets or other consumer electronics or maybe even our cars.

We are already seeing the types of investments that this chips bill will finally bring. Earlier this summer, Texas Instruments, in the metroplex in Dallas-Fort Worth, broke ground on the first of four new fabs in Sherman, TX, about an hour north of Dallas. This is part of a $30 billion investment that is expected to create some 3,000 more jobs. The mayor of Sherman, where this is located in Northeast Texas, described it as ``a watershed day,'' noting that ``it's hard to have a frame of reference for a $30 billion investment in a town of 50,000 people.''

Sherman isn't the only town in Texas preparing for a major chips boom. Last fall, I joined leaders from Samsung--a South Korean company with a large facility already in Austin, TX--when they announced a $17 billion additional investment in a new chip fab in Taylor, TX, just outside of Austin. That facility is expected to directly create more than 2,000 high-tech jobs, as well as thousands of other related jobs, once it is operational because these fabs, or manufacturing facilities, are not stand-alone; they are part of what ultimately will become an ecosystem of suppliers and other affiliated industries that will be built up around them, creating thousands more jobs.

But we also learned from Samsung that they are not likely to stop there if we pass this CHIPS for America funding this week. Samsung is currently considering whether to expand its investment to include 11 new chipmaking facilities in Central Texas.

If it moves forward with this plan, which, again, depends on our passage of this legislation this week, it could lead to nearly $200 billion in additional investments and create 10,000 jobs.

I know that is tough to comprehend--the economic growth and sweeping benefits that would come with a $200 billion investment and 10,000 new jobs; but as exciting as these potential investments are, there is something even better. This is just the beginning.

Companies around the world are eyeing Texas and the United States for new investments in chipmaking. Applied Materials, NXP Semiconductors,

Infineon, GlobalWafers, GlobiTech, and a number of other companies are looking at building or expanding their facilities in Texas or other parts of the country.

GlobalFoundries, for example, is investing $1 billion to boost production in New York. Intel plans to build a $20-billion facility of two fabs in Ohio. And Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company--TSMC, as it is called--is building a $12-billion plant in Arizona. They have already broken ground on that plant, but they made it clear that their willingness to make that investment and complete that fab will depend on our passage of the CHIPS for America Act.

And once this legislation passes, I expect more good news to follow. This is not just good news for our individual States, but also for our national economy and our global competitiveness.

We are not used to providing these kinds of financial incentives to businesses, but when it costs 30 percent less to build these manufacturing facilities across the seas in Asia and our access to that supply chain is potentially jeopardized by very real threats, it is a necessary investment for us to make. And we are seeing other places around the world providing similar incentives, for example, in the European Union. But that doesn't necessarily solve our supply chain problem. We need the jobs and that investment here in America for us to be truly safe and secure and to reap the economic benefits of this investment.

On the economic front, this funding has the support of many groups on the outside, including the bipartisan support that I mentioned earlier; in my State, the Texas Association of Business; the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for example; and we have heard from the National Governors Association, which is a bipartisan organization of U.S. Governors; as well as the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which represent State and local leaders across the country.

My Governor, Governor Abbott, called this bill ``an opportunity to lock even greater economic potential.''

So I am proud to support this legislation. After all this time, I will be especially glad when the finish line is in sight and we cross it successfully later this week.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the business before the Senate is a critical undertaking to shore up our vulnerability to imported microcircuits, otherwise known as semiconductors. You might wonder why this is so important if you haven't been following the debate over the last couple of years.

While this legislation has taken many names, it began as the CHIPS for America Act in June of 2020, which established a new program to incentivize manufacturers of these tiny microcircuits, known as semiconductors, to set up shop here in the United States.

We have tried to fund the program at different times through the Endless Frontier Act; the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, sometimes called USICA; the America COMPETES Act; the Make It in America Act. But no matter what the title is or whatever you call it, the purpose is to eliminate this unacceptable risk that somehow--due to pandemic, due to military conflict, due to natural disaster--our access to the most advanced semiconductors on the planet would be cut off, with devastating consequences to the U.S. economy and our national security.

I know some people wonder, Why should the Federal taxpayer provide financial incentives to semiconductor manufacturing? And that is a perfectly good question. The reason is, we are in a competition with countries all around the world that are providing incentives to build these necessary and essential facilities in their country, and if we don't participate in this competition, we will end up maintaining our dependency entirely on semiconductors imported into the United States. We saw big investments being made in other countries--China, the EU, Germany, France. A number of different countries want this manufacturing capability in their country because they understand its importance to their economy and security.

Now, you might wonder, Why is it necessary? Well, there is a reason-- an economic reason--why these semiconductor manufacturers are almost all based in Asia. The overwhelming majority are made in Taiwan, and that is because it costs 30 percent less to build these facilities in Asia than it does here in the United States.

But COVID-19 exposed a lot of vulnerabilities of supply chains, whether it is PPE--personal protective equipment--or semiconductors, and this idea that just because somebody could build something cheaper somewhere else, that checked all the boxes. It does not check all the boxes. And there are some things we must have access to, and one is a secure source of these microcircuits that run everything from your cell phone to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. We know that semiconductors will get more and more important as the world competes to come up with smaller and more powerful semiconductor chips to operate everything from computers to our weapons systems.

When the pandemic hit, the supply chain vulnerability was demonstrated by empty car lots, backordered electronics, higher prices, contributing to inflation. Consumers who never needed to know what a semiconductor was found themselves impacted by this disruption.

My State is home to companies across a full range of industries that have been impacted, from consumer electronics to defense companies.

Last spring, an executive from Toyota told me that when he first started with the company, he could count the number of chips in a given vehicle on two hands. That certainly is not the case now, with almost autonomous vehicles and certainly with all the sensors that have made driving a lot safer and a lot more convenient added to new cars. Think about the high-tech features in our cars--navigation systems, Bluetooth, automatic braking, backup cameras, and parking sensors. That is on top of standard functions like power steering, air-conditioning, and window wipers. Today, some cars use as many as 1,000 semiconductor chips.

So the pandemic of COVID-19 demonstrated our vulnerability to our supply chains that made getting so many semiconductors impossible.

This wasn't just a problem for automakers; virtually every industry was impacted. In many ways, the global chip shortage served as a wake- up call--certainly to me and I believe other Members of Congress and the Senate who voted consistently to eliminate this vulnerability in our supply chains. It forced us to recognize the vulnerability of that supply chain and then to do something about it, which we are in the process of doing.

As bad as the chip-related shortages have been in the last 2 years, they pale in comparison to what could be coming if we don't act.

As I said, the vast majority of the world's chips are made in Asia, with the bulk coming from Taiwan. Sixty-three percent of the advanced semiconductors in the world are made in Taiwan. Even more concerning is that 92 percent of the world's most advanced semiconductors come from that country. So 62 percent--63 percent of semiconductors come from Taiwan, but 92 percent of the most advanced, the most powerful, the smallest semiconductors come from that same place. None, zero, zip, nada are made in America. None.

Taiwanese semiconductor firms make the chips used in our military's Joint Strike Fighter, the F-35, artificial intelligence, and other military-grade devices.

Now, if you have been paying attention to what President Xi and the People's Republic of China have been saying about Taiwan, they are saying they are going to unify the PRC with Taiwan either peacefully or by military action.

Again, I believe the risk of pandemic, natural disaster, or military intervention makes this risk simply unacceptable.

Last fall, I led a congressional delegation to visit Indochina, the INDOPACOM area of operations, to learn more about the threat of Chinese aggression when it comes to Taiwan. One of the leaders we met with was the commander of the Indo-Pacific Command, located in Hawaii, who described the current power dynamic rather succinctly. He said it is not a question of if China invades Taiwan but when.

We even have a rough idea of when that could happen. President Xi has made no secret of his desire to unify Taiwan with the mainland, saying he wants to be ready to do that by 2027, just 5 years from now. But, as we have learned from Putin's invasion of Ukraine, when one person makes a decision, you can't depend on any particular timeline because it could happen in the blink of an eye.

It is tough to overestimate the impact this lack of access to these advanced semiconductors would have on the United States and our allies. To be sure, our cars, televisions, refrigerators, and washing machines would be impacted, but that is only the beginning. Those would be mere inconveniences. How would we manufacture Javelin missiles that are used in Ukraine? Well, we couldn't because they all run on semiconductors. There is the Stinger that is being used so effectively by the Ukrainians to go after Russian tanks invading Ukraine. The Joint Strike Fighter, the F-35, our most advanced, fifth-generation, stealth aircraft, is chock-full of semiconductors that would be unavailable if our access was cut off for some reason.

Then just think about our critical infrastructure. Think about cell towers. Think about the energy grid. Where would we get the chips that are needed for modern farming equipment? Just as cars have become more and more automated, so have tractors and other farming equipment.

What would we do for the chips that we need to treat water to make sure it is clean and easily available?

So these aren't problems just for consumers; it is a major national security vulnerability.

Back in 1980, President Jimmy Carter gave his State of the Union Address in

which he spoke about the instability of the Persian Gulf and Soviet threats to the movement of oil through the Strait of Hormuz. That was back in the days when we depended almost entirely on imported oil into the United States. But Jimmy Carter said in 1980 that any attempt to gain control of the Strait of Hormuz and to block access to that essential energy source, he said, would be ``an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America.'' That would be a declaration of war.

I think the same argument applies to semiconductors today. In fact, some people have called semiconductors the new oil because it is so essential to our way of life, to our economy, and our security.

Just as the Soviets could have blocked the Strait of Hormuz and choked off the global oil supply back in 1980, the People's Republic of China could seize Taiwan's supply of chips and starve the rest of the world. Will they go into the ventilators and the other lifesaving medical equipment or provide homes with clean drinking water? These are important questions that many of us have been asking and looking to try to find ways to mitigate, if not to eliminate, our dependency on imported semiconductors.

So funding this program in this bill currently before the Senate will shore up domestic chip manufacturing to make sure that we meet the needs of our most critical industries. It would deliver economic benefits to our communities through new investments and jobs. It will strengthen our national security by providing chips that can make their way into markets around the world. It will ensure that we have a reliable supply of chips so we can outinnovate and outcompete any and every adversary, and that is a point worth stressing.

We know we are in competition with the People's Republic of China, but the way we will beat them is to outcompete them. The only way we will do that is with access to the most advanced electronics, including semiconductors, that are made anywhere on the planet, and we need to make them here in America so there can be trusted supply chains and readily available.

So I appreciate all of our colleagues who supported this legislation for the long and winding journey that has brought us here today, and I hope this bill will pass the Senate and the House next week and finally make its way to the President's desk.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, while my friend, the Senator from Delaware, is on the floor, in Texas we are known for oil and gas production, but the truth is, and what I think we really should be known for, is for an ``all of the above'' energy policy.

We produce more electricity from wind turbines than any other State in the country, and that is a surprise to a number of people.

But one reason for an ``all of the above'' energy policy is that during the current hot spell we are experiencing in Texas--I think we have had over 33 days of over 100-degree temperatures in my hometown of Austin, TX. It is hot. Some might say: Well, of course it is hot. It is July in Texas. But what has happened, we have seen this phenomenon where the wind is not producing nearly as much electricity because it is not blowing as hard as it might otherwise do.

So, again, I think if we can encourage an ``all of the above'' energy policy, then different segments of the energy picture can fill in at different times and satisfy our overall need.

I thought while my friend was speaking on that topic I would just mention that interesting lesson that we have learned here recently in Texas.