Floor Statements

I am going to try not to use my full time, Madam President.

It has become in vogue in Washington to talk about government waste, and I am glad. I think that is a good thing. It has become in vogue to talk about inefficiencies and reducing spending, and I think that is a good thing.

I remember when I first got here back in 2017, one of my early Appropriations Committee meetings. I was green as a gourd. We had just passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. I thought to myself, you know, we are going to run some deficits for a while because we just cut taxes.

And there was an item in the budget for, I think, a 3- or 4-percent automatic pay raise for our Federal employees. They get it every year. I am not saying they don't deserve it. A lot of people deserve more money. I never heard anybody around this place stand up and say: I have a bad idea, and I need money for it. It is always a great idea. So I am not begrudging Federal employees.

But I told my colleagues: You know, if we are going to run deficits, maybe we ought to skip the pay raise this year. And I made a motion.

I remember some of my colleagues looked at me like I had a sexually transmitted disease or something. I mean, I made this motion, and I didn't think it was that big a deal. I got--I don't know how many members on the Appropriations Committee there are--35, 40. I got two votes. Everybody else suddenly had an important message on their phone.

So I learned a good lesson. I like to say my mother didn't raise a fool, and if she did, it was one of my brothers. But I was a fool then. But I am glad things have changed, and I hope we follow through.

Now, government waste takes many forms. But I will tell you one form. It is the purest form. It is when the Federal Government has taxpayer money and it doesn't belong to the Federal Government, but the Federal Government refuses to give it back. And that is the case we have in the Department of Treasury.

I don't want to be too hard on my friends at Treasury because they have come around. It has taken 8 years, but they have come around. The Department of Treasury is holding 95 million--not 950,000--95 million unredeemed and fully matured savings bonds.

I will explain what that means in a second.

The value is $38 billion. Now, there are only 335 million Americans. So this is probably not realistic, but if one unredeemed bond--if you assess one unredeemed bond to one individual American, that is 30 percent of our country.

What is a matured, unredeemed savings bond? A savings bond, as you probably know, is just a loan to the government. That is all it is. You want to invest your money, and you want to help the government. Say you want to--in World War II, we sold a lot of bonds to help pay for World War II. You say, give money to the government, and over a long period of time--usually 20 or 30 years, sometimes 10 to 15--at the end, you will get back money, plus interest.

It is not like a regular bond where you get quarterly interest payments. You give your money to the Federal Government. The Federal Government takes your name and address. You get a piece of paper. And at the end of however long of a bond you buy--say, 20 years--you get back your principal, plus interest.

A good example is--there are all types of savings bonds, and I don't want to get too far down in the weeds. But let's take an EE U.S. savings bond. Suppose I buy one. I go to the Federal Government, I give the Federal Government $200. They take my name; they take my address; they give me a sheet of paper. They used to give you an actual bond. They don't do that anymore. I say, great, I just invested 200 bucks. In 20 years, I can go back to the Federal Government, and they will give me 400 bucks--my original 200 bucks, plus the interest. It is a great deal. It used to be parents would buy savings bonds for their children. And during World War II, the government financed part of the war selling savings bonds.

There is just one problem with this scenario. I have known this for a long time. The Federal Government has 95 million--$38 billion worth of savings bonds over at Treasury. They have the names, and they have the addresses of all of these people. And the people who are owed that money, many of them are dead. But when those bonds matured, they didn't come get their money. You say: Well, that is OK. If you gave them $200, it will just keep earning interest. No, it won't. It becomes interest- free. If I buy a 20-year bond, at the end of 20 years, if I don't come get my principal and my interest, I don't get any extra interest.

For a long time, the Department of Treasury has had the names of these 95 million people or their heirs, and it totals $38 billion.

So, naive as I was, I went to the Department of Treasury and said: We need to give this money back to people. What is the problem? You have got names. You have got addresses.

After a while, you didn't have to be Einstein's cousin to figure out they weren't going to cooperate.

Now, finally, I got--I want to give him full credit--I got Secretary Mnuchin's attention. I mean, I understand Steve was busy. It wasn't a priority. But he directed his people to cooperate with me, and some of them did, and some of them didn't.

Then President Trump got defeated, and Secretary Yellen came in. Secretary Yellen--she tried to help, but multiple people opposed my idea.

So I finally just went and passed a bill. I passed the Unclaimed Savings Bond Act--and I want to thank President Biden for signing it-- directing Treasury to give people's money back. I mean, how hard can this be?

Well, after I passed the law, I went to see the folks over there, and they said: Well, there is a problem we didn't tell you about. All of these records, these names and addresses, are in storage, and they have to be digitized. They are just a mess, OK. They have to be digitized.

I said: OK.

I went and got money put in the budget to digitize the records, and we have done that. About 97 percent of them have been digitized.

Then Treasury said: You know, it is not really our job to go look for people. We can put up a toll-free number.

I said: Here is what we will do. I want you to cooperate with the States. Every State has an unclaimed property program.

What is unclaimed property? When a business or government--supposed to be the case--has your money and they can't find you, they can't keep it. If you go rent an apartment, for example, and put down a $1,000 deposit and you move, that apartment owner is not supposed to keep your $1,000. That apartment owner is supposed to turn it over to the State treasurer and the--all State treasurers do a wonderful job. They put your name on a website, and people can go and look it up and see if they have money.

Every State has an unclaimed property program. I mean, it is old bank accounts; it is stocks; it is bonds; it is mutual funds; it is royalties, royalty payments; it is health insurance proceeds; it is old tax refunds. Every treasurer--you can go to their website and put in your name or a friend's name and check to see if they have money.

When I was State treasurer, I had a program--it is a long story--when I was State treasurer and even before then, when I was a State tax collector, we returned about $400 million to people in Louisiana.

So there is an infrastructure set up. Treasury doesn't have to do a thing--not a damn thing. Again, I want to give Secretary Mnuchin and Secretary Yellen full credit because they have been great, but it has been hard to get some of their people up off their ice-cold, lazy butts. But we passed the law, we got the records digitized, and my purpose of being here today is to try to tell folks after 8 years, we are--this summer, in about 6 months, we are going to take all those digital records, names and addresses, and they are going to be sent to the State treasurer in every State. The State treasurers are anxious to put names and addresses on their websites. They already publicized their programs. They are going to encourage their people to go to their State's website, and if they have an unredeemed, matured savings bond or, more likely, their mom or dad did or even their grandmother and they can prove that they are the child or the grandchild, as the case may be, they can get the money. They can get the money.

I know some folks at Treasury are upset about me. They loved having $38 billion of taxpayer money sitting there on the books that they can use. But it is not right. You can call it waste if you want to. You can call it inefficiency if you want to. I don't care what you call it--it is not right.

So, this summer, I will be back to tell you when we turn the program on, but we are going to send 95 million names out to every State treasury in the Union, and they are going to start giving this money back. I hope all people have to do is go to a website and check their name, and the treasurer will take it from there.

I want to thank Secretary Yellen and I want to thank Secretary Mnuchin for working with me on this. I want to thank President Biden, and I want to thank President Trump. I want to

thank the people at Treasury who cooperated. I am sorry those who made it so difficult did, but we finally got it done.

So thank you. I think I did that quicker than 30 minutes.

With that, I either yield to Senator Durbin--well, he doesn't want to speak.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, Senator Welch is my friend, and he is very eloquent. I just listened to his eloquent remarks in support of Senator Sanders' resolution.

And Senator Sanders is my friend, but he is wrong. He is wrong. Senator Welch talked, as he should have, about the right thing to do. The right thing to do and the smart thing to do is not to pass Senator Sanders' resolution.

I don't know why this is--if I make it to heaven, I am going to ask-- but there is some people in this world, they are not mixed up, they are not confused, they are not sick, it is not that their mama or daddy didn't love them enough--they are just bad people. And they hurt other people, and they take other people's stuff. Why? Because they can.

And some of them are running countries, and they hate America. They hate Americans. They want to kill us and drink our blood out of a boot. That is just a fact.

Now, you do not have to be Einstein's cousin to see what is going on in the world. President Xi in China is working with President Putin in Russia who is working with the Ayatollah in Iran. Sometimes they allow Kim Jong Un from North Korea to come along, but mostly as a mascot to get them coffee.

President Xi is running the show, but that doesn't mean that President Putin of Russia and especially the Ayatollah in Iran are not right there by his side.

And what is their objective? Their objective is to have Russia dominate Central and Eastern Europe. Their objective is to have China dominate the Indo-Pacific--about which I will speak in a moment--and to have China dominate Sub-Saharan Africa and to have China have the ability to roam free in South America.

And their objective is to have Iran--the Ayatollah--dominate the Middle East, which it has done until Israel decided to fight back, which it has done through Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis rebels. Now that is just a fact.

And one of our best friends in the world--maybe, on some days, our only friend in the world--Israel--patient people, principled people but realistic people--they have decided to stand up to Iran. And in standing up to Iran, we are finding out very quickly they are also standing up to China and Russia. But I will save that subject for another day.

They have decided to stand up to Iran. They have beaten Hamas in Gaza. They are beating Hezbollah in Lebanon. They had to do it despite the obstacles thrown up against them every step of the way by President Biden and Vice President Harris.

And if we support them, Israel will beat the Ayatollah in Iran. Israel will cause a regime change. Because I can tell you, the people of Iran--not its leadership--the people of Iran are fed up with their leadership.

We have a duty--not a legal duty, a moral duty--to support our friend Israel. We have agreed to do it. But besides that, we have a moral duty to do it. And my friend Senator Sanders' resolution would turn our back on one of the few friends that I think America--real friends that America has in the world. And it would precipitate a foreign policy crisis.

I don't say these words very often, but we ought to listen to the words of my friend Senator Schumer. He is going to vote against Senator Sanders' resolution. Senator Schumer is right. Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then. Senator Schumer is right: We need to defeat this resolution. It will precipitate a foreign policy crisis.

And it is not the only one we would have in the world. I want to talk for just a few minutes about another crisis that is going on quietly as we speak.

This is the Indian Ocean, as the Presiding Officer well knows, one of the most important parts of the world. Here is China; here is India. China is trying to dominate all of these sea lands for military reasons and for commercial reasons.

Here in the middle of the Indian Ocean is a group of islands called the Chagos Islands. You may not have heard of them; I hadn't before I was alerted of this crisis. America has a military base in the Chagos Islands. There are about 40 to 60 islands. One of the islands is called Diego Garcia. And we built a military base there. And it is not just any military base. It is an extraordinarily important military base.

Our military base is one of the few in the world where our military can reload submarines--hugely important. Our military base on Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands houses a number of Navy ships. Our military base there houses long-range bombers that we use to carry out missions around the world.

Now, we have to--we and the United Kingdom--I will explain why the UK is involved in a moment--we have to work hard every day to police our military base, not just the base itself, but the land--or, rather--the water surrounding it, because China--China knows how important this military base is to the security of the world. China is constantly sending craft trying to spy on our military base there.

And we and the United Kingdom--again, I will explain in a second the United Kingdom's relevance--are constantly having to patrol and fight off the espionage of China. In fact, China has breached the security of American military bases over 100 times in the last few years. They are very aggressive.

Now, why am I talking about this military base? Because President Biden and Vice President Harris, as we are all working here trying-- like a bunch of ants on a sugar bowl, trying to wrap up our work for the year, President Biden and Vice President Harris are giving away this military base. They are giving it away.

The Chagos Islands is a territory of the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom gave America permission to build our military base here.

Now, the Chagos Islands has a rich history. It has a relationship with another island in the Indian Ocean, Mauritius. And I mention that because to understand what is going on, you have to understand the relationship.

Mauritius and the Chagos Islands used to be partners. The Chagos Islands were what is called a dependency of Mauritius. And Mauritius, many, many years ago, beginning in 1715, was a colony of France. And while Mauritius was a colony of France, Mauritius established a relationship with the Chagos Islands.

And then, beginning in 1814, France said: Look, we are going to cede Mauritius and now the Chagos Islands--where we have our military base-- to the United Kingdom. And they did.

Mauritius and the Chagos Islands, 250 years ago, they might have been close, but they are not today. They don't share the same culture. They don't speak the same language. They don't visit each other. In fact, many of the people from Chagos lived in the United Kingdom.

But here is what President Biden is doing and Vice President Harris. They say we need to grant independence to the Chagos Islands but not let the people of the Chagos Islands run their country. We need to give the Chagos Islands back to Mauritius. Why? I mean, no offense, but that is cell-deep stupid.

Why? Mauritius and the Chagos Islands don't have a relationship anymore, and we have a military base there.

I will tell you why. The United Nations--the United Nations, and particularly the International Court of Justice, which has no jurisdiction over the United States of America and has no jurisdiction over the United Kingdom and which currently controls the Chagos Islands, they have scolded the United Kingdom.

They said the United Kingdom is a colonizer, and the United Kingdom, the people of the United Kingdom are bad people.

Now, remember, this is coming from the United Nations. This is the same United Nations that has the following countries on its human rights council: Somalia, Iraq, Venezuela, China. That is who thinks we ought to get rid of this military base. OK? I mean, this is not some act of justice here.

But in any event, the United Nations is saying: United Kingdom, you bad people, give the Chagos Islands back--but not let the Chagos Islands be free; they want to give the Chagos Islands back to Mauritius. And President Biden could stop it and so could Vice President Harris. But they are for it, all in an effort to curry favor with the people at the United Nations who walk around with their NPR tote bags and their organic broccoli and have great relationships with members of the media who they think write history. Why on God's green Earth would we do that? Why?

China, of course, is delighted. Why is China delighted? Now, the United Nations says: OK, we don't want to be too mean-spirited here; America can keep its military base for 99 years, but you have to sign a lease. And we got to start paying Mauritius to stay there.

China says: Fine. That sounds good to us. Why? Because, No. 1, China has already started currying favor with Mauritius, and No. 2, Mauritius will now be in charge of the security of the Chagos Islands and our military base and the water surrounding it.

China, Xi Jinping, he is as happy as a gopher in soft dirt. He will be hacking the Mauritius security as soon as the trade is made.

Now, President Trump, I hope you are listening to this. My good friend Senator Rubio, soon-to-be Secretary of State, I hope you are listening to what I am talking about.

What we are debating today is important. I don't mean to say that. And I am not kidding you. I am not going to bubble wrap it. If Senator Sanders' resolution passes, it will precipitate a foreign policy crisis. But this foreign policy crisis is being perpetrated--or prosecuted right now, and it is another foreign policy crisis, and it is going on all because President Biden--all because President Biden and Vice President Harris want to appease the United Nations and China.

President Trump, please, pretty please with sugar on top, pick up the phone and call the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and say: Don't sign that treaty. Don't give away the Chagos Islands. Don't give away America's military base. Don't do it.

If we object, they won't. If we don't say anything, they will.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following intern from my office be granted floor privileges until November 21, 2024: Jameson Sheehan.

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

Three quick points, Madam President: No. 1, I rise, first, to thank the Bloomberg Foundation. I had made notes from which I was going to speak, but I lost them. So I am going to kind of wing it here.

Over the past couple of years, the Bloomberg Foundation has spent millions of dollars--I want to say the figure is $30 to $40 million--to try to help really smart kids from low-income families access some of our finest colleges in the country. And America does have the best system of higher education in the world, by the way. We have the best quality colleges.

What the Bloomberg Foundation was focusing on was that these were just really smart kids from low-income families who had great grades and great standardized test scores and great extracurricular activities, but many of them just didn't know about the opportunities that were out there in the world for them. The Bloomberg Foundation wasn't concentrating on race or gender or sexuality or a part of the country or any of those things. They were just looking to try to help really smart young women and young men in high school with great grades and great standardized test scores access some of the finest universities in the country. And they spent 40 million bucks doing it, working with some other groups.

Well, it didn't work out like they thought. They just didn't have as much success as they wanted to. But they learned from the experience.

What they learned was, in order to reach these young people, you can't just text them. You can't just call them. You can't send them an email--in part, because today, when all of us receive emails and text messages from people who we don't know, we automatically assume it is some kind of scam. So that is what Bloomberg and its contractors found--that people, including our young people, they are just very suspicious, and so they weren't able to reach that many kids. And those that they didn't reach--and by the way, the folks from Bloomberg contacting them would never meet the kids. They wanted to reach as many kids as they could, so they were doing it digitally. They just found out it wasn't that effective. But they also learned that the way to reach these kids is to see them in person and, in part, go through the kids' high schools' guidance counselors and placement offices.

So I am hoping that Bloomberg is going to start again. I am not saying that Bloomberg had no success. They had success, but it just wasn't as much success as we all wanted. But, by God, they tried, and they deserve thanks.

This wasn't any taxpayer money; it was the money of the Bloomberg foundation. They tried, and they learned a lot from it, and I wanted to thank them for trying. I hope they won't give up, and I hope they will use what they learned to try to reach these young people again.

Madam President, No. 2, I want to repeat very briefly what I said last week. Katherine Foster is a member of our Cloakroom staff. Katherine is not here. She is in the back doing her job. Today is her last day, and I wanted to thank her again for her service. As I said last time, she has taken a very prestigious job in the private sector, and I wish her well, and I hope she makes bucket loads of money.

To those who don't know, we have--by ``we,'' I mean the Republicans and the Democrats--what we call Cloakroom staff. These are people who work with us to make this place work. On any given day, the Democratic Cloakroom staff and the Republican Cloakroom staff are the nicest and the smartest people in this building, and they just do an incredible job. They work hard, and they have to be here at all kinds of ungodly hours, and they have to put up with back-sass from U.S. Senators. It is a very hard job. And that is true on both the Democratic side and the Republican side.

But, anyway, Katherine is one of that group, and she is leaving. We are sorry she is leaving, but we are happy that she is leaving because she is going to make more money than the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. So we wish her well.

But I also wanted to use this opportunity to thank our entire teams on both the Democratic and the Republican side for their incredible work.

I will buy her a pony too.

Let me go to plan B. What I will do is, I want to hit ``pause'' because I don't want to do this behind Ron's back. Let me hit ``pause,'' and I will ask that we go into a quorum call. When Ron gets here, I will ask to be recognized so I can assert my motion, and Ron can agree with my splendid bill, and then we will go pick out a pony.

So I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, my friend Senator Wyden is here, so I would like to proceed. I am sorry he missed my speech. It would have given him goosebumps if he had been here to listen to it. But maybe you all can tell him about it, and I hope he will find it convincing.

In the meantime, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 8292, which is the bill I talked about passed by the House almost unanimously, which was received from the House.

They couldn't hear me? Let me start over. All right.

Madam President, I am sorry. I didn't have my mic on.

The Presiding Officer recognized my request that we suspend the quorum call?

Madam President, Senator Wyden is here. I thank him for coming out. I hope he heard my speech. I hope he was persuaded. I know him to be a reasonable man, so I took my best shot. So I am going to go ahead and make my motion now that he is here.

Madam President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 8292. That is the bill I talked about that was passed almost unanimously by the House. That bill has been received from the House. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I thank my friend Ron for his point of view. I hope we can sit down and talk about this and perhaps work something out because this bill is not about changing the tax rate; it is just about everybody's tax return is their own business.

I also thank, Madam President, your courtesy and time and attention in this matter.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, with me today is one of my colleagues from my office, Mr. Henson Webre, whom I thank for giving so much to our State and our country.

Madam President, the first topic that I want to touch briefly on today provokes both sorrow and pride.

I am sorry to report that, last week, my people in Louisiana were hit by yet another hurricane, Hurricane Francine. It was a category 2. It was right on the line between a category 1 and a category 2. We had winds of 100 miles an hour. We had 9 to 10 inches of rain. We had a vicious storm surge.

My people did what they always do: They got ready for it. They reacted to the storm with grace and with pressure. My people filled sandbags, and we checked on our neighbors, and we listened to our local officials. We said prayers for our first responders. My people are as tough as a pine knot. They are also compassionate. And we made it through.

Some have said: Well, compared to past hurricanes, Francine was not as bad as some in the past.

And that is true. It could always be worse. But that is cold comfort--cold comfort--for the thousands of Louisianians who sustained damage from that storm surge and those ferocious winds and that rain. And I want to assure my people that, as we have in the past, we will persevere, and we will make it through.

I have never, in my years in the Senate, voted against providing relief for any of our sister States and my fellow Senators who have asked for it and who have been the victims of a natural disaster, and I never will. That is the first role of government. It is to protect people and property. And I will never vote against aid for one of our sister States that, through no fault of its own, is struck by nature.

I say that because I will be asking the American people to help Louisiana one more time. We won't ask for a penny more than we need. The help that I will seek will be in the form of personal assistance in housing, for example; infrastructure assistance; and mitigation grants.

I want to thank President Biden and Governor Landry, with whom I toured by helicopter the damage last week. Governor Landry asked for a disaster declaration from the President, and President Biden was quick to agree. I want to thank him for that. I want to thank our FEMA Administrator, Ms. Deanne Criswell. She came to Louisiana immediately after the storm passed through, and I want to thank our Administrator for being on the ground and her personal touch.

One of the things I talked to the Administrator about is, as you know, FEMA has implemented a new flood insurance premium program called Risk Rating 2.0, which is breaking the backs of every insured in the Flood Insurance Program. Premiums have gone through the roof. I can assure you that the damages would have been much worse with respect to Francine had it not been for the investment that the American taxpayer and the taxpayers of Louisiana have made in new flood protection systems and new levees. And with that money that we have spent-- including but not limited to the money by Louisiana citizens, who taxed themselves to build these levees--our people should be given credit on their flood insurance premiums for that investment they have made.

All you have to do is take Terrebonne Parish as an example. In Louisiana, we call our counties ``parishes.'' Terrebonne Parish, at the southern part of my State, has spent over $1 billion of their money-- and we are not a wealthy State. My people in Terrebonne taxed themselves to help build a levee system called the Morganza to the Gulf levee system, which will mitigate the damages from this last storm.

Had it not been for the levee that my people taxed themselves to build--and,

look, I don't want to be unfair. The Corps of Engineers and the American taxpayer helped us, too, but we did our fair share. Had it not been for those levees that my people contributed to, the damages would have been billions and billions and billions of dollars just from the storm surge in South Louisiana, for a category 2 storm that moved through quickly. And that investment by taxpayers should be reflected in the flood insurance premiums, and they should go down.

Madam President, topic No. 2: This is not a news flash. Americans are struggling to pay their bills. The reason, of course, is inflation. The inflation that the American people--and let me strike that. I don't want to call it inflation. Let me call it what it is--those high prices. Those high prices were made in Washington, and they are a cancer on the American dream. As a result of the high prices, people are struggling to pay their bills.

I was looking at a report this week--and I know the Presiding Officer feels this in her State. People are having to borrow money to pay their bills, and they are having to borrow money on their credit cards. I don't need to tell the Presiding Officer that the interest on credit cards has gone up dramatically as a result of inflation. The interest on the credit card is not like going to your bank where credit is tight. Because of inflation, the interest rates on those credit cards has gone through the roof. The credit card interest rate in March was 21.51 percent. Back in 2019, it was 15 percent. Delinquent payments on credit cards are also through the roof--9.1 percent--the highest in a decade. Credit card balances are higher too.

Auto loans: The average interest rate on a 60-month new car loan was 8.2 percent last May. That is up from 5.3 percent in 2019. And delinquency rates on auto loans are the highest they have been in 10 years.

If you look at consumer debt, last year, it hit $17 trillion--not billion, not billion--$17 trillion. It hit that number last year for the first time. Inflation-adjusted debt is at its highest level since 2009.

Now, I know some folks who are thinking, yes, but inflation has come down. Yes, it has, and I want to thank the Federal Reserve for that because they had to do it alone. They sure didn't get help from Congress.

But what does that mean? When inflation comes down, that is called disinflation. What does that mean? When inflation comes down, that just means prices are not rising as quickly as they were. That is all a reduction in inflation means. Prices are still going up, but they are not going up as quickly as they were. That is called disinflation. But prices are not going down. If prices were to go down, that would be called deflation. That would be called deflation.

As Federal Reserve Chair Powell and Treasury Secretary Yellen have both testified in front of the Banking Committee--and I hate to say this--unless we do something, these high prices are permanent. They are permanent.

Now, there are only two ways to reduce these prices. One is to go into a recession. China is in a recession. Prices in China are going down. It is too big of a price to pay. I don't want us to go into a recession. People would lose their jobs in order to get prices down.

The only other alternative is to grow out of the inflation--to lift people up; to increase wages at the low end of the wage scale, at the middle, and at the upper end of the wage scale--to help everybody. Five thousand years of human history has taught us that you cannot increase wealth, you cannot increase individuals' incomes--it can't be done-- without increasing output.

So we in the Senate are going to have to put our heads together and figure out how to grow this economy, not at 1\1/2\ percent, not at 2 percent, which has become the norm. We break 2 percent GDP growth now, and we want to have a toga party. We shouldn't settle for 2 percent. We need 3 percent growth to lift everybody up.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for up to 20 minutes prior to the scheduled votes and that Senator Cardin be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes prior to the scheduled votes.

Madam President, I want to speak for a few minutes about a favorite son in Louisiana, but to do that, I have to give my remarks a little context.

I think, like most Americans and, I know, like the Presiding Officer, I love animals. I grew up in a rural area in Louisiana. And let's see. We had dogs--not all at the same time, but we had dogs. We had cats. We had hamsters. We had chipmunks. We had squirrels. We had alligators, baby alligators.

Now, the danger of a baby alligator is that they become a big alligator, and we used to keep our little, baby alligators--their names were Tim and Tubo--in a big washbasin in our backyard, and we put wire on the top. The alligators--they were about this long--were in the tub. Why would we keep wire on the top? Because the neighborhood cats would try to get in there and eat them.

Well, Tim and Tubo grew, and they grew, and they grew, and, one day, we forgot to put the screen wire on the top of the washbasin with the water in which Tim and Tubo were residing. By this time, they were about this long. And one of our neighbor's favorite cats, all of a sudden, just had three legs. And we had to release Tim and Tubo at that point.

Dad said: No, Tim and Tubo are too big. We have got to release them back to the swamp.

Well, I remember we had a baby possum, and I am probably leaving some varmints out. But I love animals. I especially love dogs. I have two at home. I wouldn't ask Becky to choose between me and our pups. And I love when people bring their dogs to work.

I am not going to wade into this fierce debate about what kind of pet and what kind of animal is best, but I think we can all agree that there is a special bond between our species and our animal friends. Animals can teach us a lot. Animals teach us love. Animals teach us patience. Animals teach us compassion. Animals, especially dogs, teach us responsibility. Animals teach us to appreciate God's creation. Through our connection with animals, including but not limited to dogs, we all gain a deeper respect for the world around us.

Now, in Louisiana, we are blessed to have many animal havens. Some of our animals, of course, are wild. I can remember in my State when alligators were almost extinct. Now we have more alligators than people. By the way, the alligators are surprisingly well organized. So be careful.

But we also have a lot of zoos. We have aquariums, none better than those in New Orleans, and those of you who have been to New Orleans may know this. New Orleans is home to what we call the Audubon Nature Institute. That is a nonprofit that we set up in Louisiana. It operates the Audubon Zoo in Uptown New Orleans; the Audubon Aquarium on the riverfront, down near the French Quarter--the Audubon Aquarium and Insectarium we call it; the Audubon Louisiana Nature Center; the Audubon Center for Research of Endangered Species; and the Audubon Coastal Wildlife Network. It is sort of our group of institutions all under the umbrella of the Audubon Nature Institute, and they also do world-class research and work in conservation.

Every year, the Audubon Nature Institute and all of its institutions that make it up bring thousands of Louisianians and hundreds of thousands of visitors in our State closer to nature. It fuels our love for wildlife, and it fuels our love for the outdoors.

Audubon Park, where our zoo is located--our first institution before we added the aquarium and the other animal havens--wasn't always a prized institution. It wasn't. One man--one person--had a lot of help, but one person

led the effort to turn what most of us once referred to as an animal ghetto--our zoo in Audubon Park. It was. It was an animal ghetto but what today we call both an animal haven and an animal heaven. That man's name is Ron Forman--Ron Forman.

Ron joined the Audubon Park and Zoo in 1972. That seems like yesterday to me, but to our pages here in the front row, it is a long time ago. Ron started when he was young. He started as a liaison to city hall in New Orleans.

At the time, the zoo in Audubon Park was a disaster. It was just a disaster. The enclosures for the animals were small. They were dirty. They were really filthy. They were prison-like. Ron was asked to describe them one time.

He said:

They are prison-like.

This is unacceptable. The condition in which we placed our animals was an embarrassment to the city. It was an embarrassment to the people of Louisiana, and the people knew it. Ron Forman sensed that. He had the vision to be able to say: You know, I can lead an effort. I am not just going to go to government and ask for a bunch of money. I can lead an effort, Ron said, in the community to build support for the zoo, and he did.

He not only improved the zoo--we have an aquarium. We have an insectarium. We have an R&D--a research and development--park. We have a conservation park. Ron Forman delivered. He delivered for the human species, and he delivered for our animal friends.

By 1977, Ron had climbed the ranks, and he became director of the Audubon Zoo. Then he took off and so did our zoo and our animal havens. He led the effort to transform Audubon Park, which you know is right across from Tulane University, into the Audubon Nature Institute, which, as I said, is the nonprofit conservation and zoological system we know today.

Ron helped--and he had a lot of help. I mean, there are thousands of people who contributed, but Ron led the charge. He helped transform a cramped and dirty zoo into a state-of-the-art conservation network, including a zoo, an aquarium, an insectarium, gardens, research institutions, and conservation efforts. And the Audubon Nature Institute has thrived. It hasn't been easy, but it has thrived in large part, in substantial part because of Ron Forman.

Now, we got hit by Hurricane Katrina, and it was bad. When we did, the Audubon Zoo and the insectarium and the aquarium and Audubon Park were terribly damaged. Ron didn't get discouraged. He saw the zoo, for example, as a beacon of hope--not as an object of depression but as a beacon of hope.

First of all, because of the precautions that he and his team took, we only lost three animals in the storm at the zoo. And if you have been to the zoo, there are trees everywhere. It is just a small miracle. God smiled on us in that respect. The aquarium, unfortunately, down on the river, suffered substantial, substantial losses.

It wasn't easy to rebuild all of those facilities. It was very, very hard, but Ron Forman understood. He understood instinctively that we needed to get these institutions back up on their feet because families needed a place to go to forget their hardships.

Hurricane Katrina hit in late August. Ron Forman stood up. I thought he had lost his mind. He stood up, and he said: I am going to have Audubon Zoo reopened by Thanksgiving weekend.

We were hitting August. Forman stands up in front of God, country, and Louisiana and says: I am going to have the zoo open by November.

I thought Ron had been day drinking. I said: It can't be done.

I didn't say that publicly. I thought, if anybody can do it, Ron Forman can. He did.

This is what he said. He said: We are a city without kids and families, and a city without kids and families right now--because so many of our families and kids have left--is a city without soul. It is a city without heart. So we just thought it was critical to get the thing open for Thanksgiving weekend.

And he did. The zoo opened on Thanksgiving weekend. We were able to give thousands of parents and children a sense of normalcy and optimism during the holiday season at a very difficult time for my State and for my city.

Now, Ron also led us through the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many businesses and many institutions, the Audubon Zoo and Aquarium and Gardens had to close or restrict attendance to try to help stop the spread of the virus. Attendance at the zoo dropped 50 percent--50 percent. We had almost no cashflow. Under different leadership, we wouldn't have made it. We wouldn't have made it, but we had a secret weapon. We had Ron Forman, because Ron had the passion, and he had the business sense, and he had the support of the community and the support of government to guide the nonprofit through the pandemic.

Now, for the first time in 50 years, Louisiana is looking for a new leader for the Audubon Nature Institute because Ron is stepping down.

I am sad to see him go. I am happy for him. He is still going to stay on as president emeritus, and we are still going to be able to access his big heart and tap his big brain, but we are going to have a new leader. But thank God Ron is going to stick around for a while to continue his advocacy while we look for a new CEO.

Ron Forman made the Audubon Zoo--he made New Orleans home to one of the country's--one of the world's best zoos. He made New Orleans home to one of the world's best aquariums and best insectariums and best research and development centers and best conservation efforts. He didn't do it alone, but he led us, and that is why I wanted to rise today. I just wanted to thank Ron. I wanted to thank Ron Forman for his vision. I wanted to thank Ron Forman for his guts. Some of the things Ron did were not always popular. They were right. But it took courage. I want to thank Ron Forman for his dedication. I want to thank Ron Forman for his love of animals, and I want to thank Ron Forman for his love of people. He brought us all together in New Orleans. I just will never forget him for what he did for us.

So, Ron, if you are listening, thank you, my friend, for giving so much to our animal friends. Thank you, Ron Forman, for giving so much to the people of Louisiana and the people of America. Thank you, Ron Forman, for your leadership.

I yield to my colleague.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following people, who are my colleagues from my office for the summer, be granted floor privileges until August 2, 2024, and I am going to read their names. They are Kelly Weinstock, Zane Jones, Grayson Noles, Thomas Rhymes, Brooklyn Hemphill, Camryn Runyan, and Tim Breslin.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session and that at 1:45 p.m. today the Chair execute the order of July 9, 2024, with respect to the Meriweather nomination.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that our rollcall vote begin immediately.