Floor Statements

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

Mr. President, if I might, again, 9,000 is remarkable--the ``iron'' Senator. And she was asked by the Washington Post 12 years ago why she had never missed a vote, why she made a decision to make every vote. And this is what she said:

I think it's important at this time, when public confidence

in Congress is very low, to demonstrate to my constituents

that I really care about doing a good job for them.

For 27 straight years and 9,000 straight votes, she has delivered every single day for the people of Maine, for the people of this country. And I am grateful to have the privilege and opportunity to serve with her, as I think every single one of us is--not only those who are here today but those who have come before. It is a remarkable achievement.

Senator Collins, thank you. Thank you for your record. Thank you for your example.

(Applause.)

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Hagerty), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Schmitt), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Vance).

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

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

Mr. President, next week, the Biden Federal Communications Commission will take a pointless and destructive vote to reimpose onerous net neutrality regulations. Like the Obama FCC before it, the Biden FCC wants to assert broad new government powers over the internet, using rules that were designed--if you can believe this--for telephone monopolies, back during the Great Depression. If there were ever a solution in search of a problem, this is it.

We have tried the Democrats' heavyhanded net neutrality experiment before, and it didn't go very well. Back in 2015, the Obama FCC implemented the regulatory regime the Biden FCC is planning to impose starting tomorrow. This opened the door to a whole host of new internet regulations, including price regulations, and broadband investment declined as a result. That was a problem for Americans generally who benefit when the United States is at the forefront of internet growth and expansion, and it was particularly bad news for Americans in rural States like South Dakota.

Deploying broadband to rural communities already has a number of challenges, and adding utility-style regulations, not meant for today's broadband market, acted as a further disincentive to expanding access. Recognizing the chilling effect the Obama FCC's regulation were having on internet innovation and expansion, in 2017, the FCC, under Chairman Pai, voted to repeal the heavyhanded net neutrality regulations passed by the Obama FCC.

The prospect was greeted with absolute hysteria from Democrats. You would have thought that the sky was about to fall. So dire were their predictions.

We were told that the internet, as we know it, would disappear, that providers would slow speeds to a crawl, that we would get the internet word by word, that our freedom of speech was threatened.

But the repeal went into effect. And guess what happened. Lo and behold, none of the Democrats' dire predictions came to pass. As anyone who has been on the internet lately knows, the internet has not just survived but thrived. Innovation has flourished. Competition has increased. The internet remains a vehicle for free and open discourse. And internet speeds have not only not slowed down; they have gotten faster and faster. So where, I might ask, is the problem that requires this new onerous regulatory regime? Well, there isn't one.

But, unfortunately, that is rarely enough to stop Democrats, who seem to lose sleep at the thought of some aspect of society not being subjected to heavyhanded Federal regulation.

In fact, of course, the Federal Government already regulates the internet, but it does so using a light-touch regulatory approach that has allowed the internet to flourish. But if the Biden FCC's new regulatory regime goes into effect, those days of flourishing may be numbered. As I said, the last time that these heavyhanded regulations were imposed, broadband investment declined, and there is good reason to believe that the same thing would happen this time.

These new rules could also imperil the United States' position at the forefront of internet innovation. Perhaps most disturbing of all, the Biden FCC's onerous new regulatory regime could spell the end of the free and open internet that is supposed to protect.

Under the regulatory regime the Biden FCC is set to impose, the Federal

Government would be allowed to block or prioritize internet traffic or otherwise interfere with the free flow of information. It is not hard to imagine the Biden administration using this new regulatory power to shape Americans' internet experience for its own ends.

This is an administration that attempted to manufacture a nonexistent voting rights crisis in order to pass legislation to give Democrats a permanent advantage in Federal elections. So it is not hard to see the Biden FCC using its new powers to advance Democrat interests or the Biden administration's far-left agenda.

The Biden FCC's new regulatory regime is a solution, as I said, in search of a problem, and it is likely to create problems where none exist.

On top of that, as former members of the Obama administration have pointed out, it is unlikely to stand up in court because existing law does not give the FCC the powers that it wants to assume. That makes the FCC's upcoming vote even more pointless.

The Biden FCC should be focused on addressing real challenges, such as continuing our efforts to close the digital divide and to ensure that every American has access to high-speed broadband. But as the 3- year crisis at our southern border demonstrates, the Biden administration tends to ignore the real problems facing Americans in favor of expanding government and advancing its far-left agenda.

So I expect that the FCC will vote next week to impose this heavyhanded new regulatory regime. But while the vote may be a foregone conclusion, I am hopeful that the Biden FCC's regulations will be struck down in court.

I will do everything I can here in Congress to overturn them because, if the new Biden regulatory regime is left in place, it may not be long before we will be looking at the very opposite of net neutrality.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I recognize the life and leadership of Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, known as ``the Rebbe,'' the head of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. Since 1978, every U.S. President has commemorated this day as Education and Sharing Day in recognition of the Rebbe's commitment to bettering the education of all people.

Through decades of service and leadership, the Rebbe emphasized that education should not just be about imparting knowledge, but must instill values essential for living a meaningful life, fostering moral character, and contributing to the betterment of individuals and society at large.

The Rebbe promoted America's unique role as a superpower and had meaningful relationships with several of our Nation's leaders who saw him as the moral guide of so many. For the Rebbe, America was a beacon of light to be utilized in influencing the moral betterment of all humanity, and he often pointed to the words ``In God We Trust'' enshrined on our currency as a defining element of the great American story.

Under the Rebbe's leadership, Chabad-Lubavitch became the largest Jewish educational organization and fastest growing Jewish movement in the world. Today, there are more than 3,500 Chabad-Lubavitch centers providing educational, religious, and humanitarian services in 103 countries and in all 50 States, including in my home State of South Dakota.

The Rebbe envisioned that the world would come to a state of peace. He exemplified how humanity, through moral education, charitable deeds, and acts of kindness, can bring our world to the time when ``swords are turned into plowshares,'' with peace and prosperity for all.

On the Rebbe's birthday, today, April 18, it is fitting that we honor him by striving to apply his teachings with greater diligence, embodying his vision of a world illuminated by compassion and goodwill for all.

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

Mr. President, 7,633,650, that is the number of migrant encounters at our southern border since President Biden took office-- 7,633,650. The situation at our southern border is out of control. We have had three--three now--successive years of recordbreaking illegal immigration under President Biden, and we are on track for a fourth.

There have been more than 1.3 million migrant encounters at our southern border since October 1 of last year, which was the start of this fiscal year. That is 1.3 million, just since October 1 of last year. And that number just refers to individuals who are actually apprehended. There have been almost 150,000 known ``got-aways'' so far this fiscal year, and those are individuals the Border Patrol saw but were unable to apprehend. Often, we see migrants turning themselves in to authorities, so it is especially concerning to know that so many individuals have purposely evaded interdiction. And of course, we don't know how many unknown ``got-aways'' there have been.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief Jason Owens, in a March interview with CBS News, said the number of known ``got-aways'' is keeping him up at night. That is ``a national security threat,'' he noted. That is a quote. ``Border security is a big piece of national security,'' he goes on to say. ``And if we don't know who is coming into our country, and we don't know what their intent is, that is a threat and they're exploiting a vulnerability that's on our border right now.''

That, again, from Jason Owens, U.S. Border Patrol Chief.

Well, the situation at our southern border right now is a national security threat. There is no question that the kinds of numbers we are seeing smooth the way for dangerous individuals to enter our country. During fiscal year 2023, 169 individuals on the Terrorist Watchlist were apprehended trying to cross our southern border--more, I might add, than the previous 6 years combined--and that is just the individuals, again, who were actually apprehended. With somewhere around 1.8 million known ``got-aways'' since President Biden took office and an untold number of unknown ``got-aways,'' I think we can safely assume that there are plenty of dangerous individuals making their way into our country without being stopped.

While there are always various factors that affect the flow of illegal immigration, we are on track for a fourth recordbreaking year of illegal immigration under the Biden administration because of the actions that President Biden has taken or failed to take. From the day he took office, when he rescinded the declaration of a national emergency at our southern border, President Biden made it clear that border security was at the bottom of his priority list. And over the 3 years since, he has turned our southern border into a magnet for illegal migration from repealing effective border security policies of the Trump administration to abusing our asylum and parole systems, which are now providing temporary amnesty to hundreds of thousands of individuals here illegally, which brings me, Mr. President, to today.

In just a few minutes, the Senate will be sworn in to consider the Articles of Impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas, one of the chief architects of the Biden administration's lax border security regime. And we expect that the Democrat leader will move almost immediately to dismiss the charges. At most, we expect a few hours of process with no examination of the evidence the House has collected and essentially no consideration of the serious charges before us.

Whether or not Senators ultimately decide that Secretary Mayorkas's actions warrant a conviction, they should be given the time to actually examine the charges. In a courtroom, a case is not dismissed without the court taking the time to examine the facts, and the Senate, sitting as a Court of Impeachment, should be no different. The Senate should be having a full trial and taking the time to examine the evidence that the House has collected, and then Senators should be able to vote guilty or not guilty. Instead, the Senate leader is set to sweep these charges under the rug. It is just more evidence of the fundamental unseriousness Democrats have shown when it comes to the raging-- raging--national security crisis at our southern border.

By the end of the day, the Democrat leader may well have effectively made these charges disappear, but there is nothing that the Democrat leader can do to obscure the failures of Secretary Mayorkas and President Biden. Thanks to their refusal to secure the border, we have experienced three now successive years of recordbreaking illegal immigration, and, unfortunately, there is no end in sight.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I think it goes without saying that the Mayorkas-Biden policies have led to the worst border crisis in American history: 7.6 million people apprehended; 1.8 million ``got-aways''; who knows how many unknown ``got-aways''----

The one thing we know is that 357 people who are on the Terrorist Watchlist were apprehended coming into this country.

Motion to Table the Schumer Point of Order

We have a responsibility to hear these Articles of Impeachment, and therefore I move to table the Schumer point of order.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

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

Mr. President, this weekend, Iran and its proxies in Syria, Yemen, and Iraq fired a barrage of missiles and drones against Israel. The direct attack was a marked escalation on Iran's part. And it is time for the United States, our allies, and nations that support peace and freedom to make it clear to Iran that we are not going stand idly by while Iran threatens Israel and foments terror in the Middle East.

This weekend's attack was a notable escalation on Iran's part because weapons were fired from Iran and not just by Iran's proxies. Iran has been threatening Israel and undermining peace in the Middle East for decades--Hezbollah, the Houthis, Shia militias in Iraq and Syria, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and, of course, Hamas.

Hamas gets approximately 90 percent of its military budget from Iran, and there is reason to wonder whether Hamas would even have had the capability to carry out its October 7 attack without the support it receives from Iran. There is certainly reason to wonder what the Middle East would look like today if Iran hadn't spent decades funding and arming terrorist organizations.

Enough is enough. There have been a lot of redlines drawn for Israel lately. It is past time to draw some for Iran. Unfortunately, the U.S. posture toward Iran under President Biden has too often been one of appeasement. It was President Biden's attempt to reinstate the Obama administration's flawed Iran nuclear deal. Then there was the Biden administration's attempt to unfreeze $6 billion in Iranian assets as part of a deal to free American prisoners. Thankfully, the administration ultimately refroze those funds in the wake of Hamas's October 7 attack against Israel. But unfreezing them in the first place was a serious mistake.

Just last month, for the second time since the October 7 attack on Israel by Iran-backed Hamas, President Biden renewed a sanctions waiver giving Iran access to $10 billion from energy sales. And now, this week, President Biden was quick to take options off the table for what U.S. assistance to Israel might look like in the wake of Iran's bold attack. This only suggests to Iran that there are limits to the United States-Israel partnership at the very time we must be making good on our ironclad relationship with Israel, not telling our ally it has to go it alone.

It is alarming when President Biden seems more intent on preventing Israel from responding to Iran's attack than on making it clear to Iran that there can be no more of these attacks and that Iran needs to cease all of its terrorist operations. Unless President Biden wants to continue to see Israel in danger, American troops threatened, and commerce through the Red Sea disrupted, he has to find a much stronger posture when it comes to Iran.

The United States should be making it clear to Iran that the United States will not allow another Iranian attack like the one that occurred this weekend and that we will not tolerate any more aggression from Iran. And it shouldn't be just the United States drawing this redline. As I said, it is time for the United States, our allies, and nations that support peace and freedom to resoundingly reject Iran's malign agenda.

The United States has an important role to coordinate action to back up the G7 statement and to press members of the U.N. Security Council to take a position on Iran's flagrant attack. The United States must also press forward to broker a deal for the normalization of Israel and Saudi relations, the prospect of which normalization many believe motivated the October 7 terrorist attack by Iran-backed Hamas. And, of course, the United States must continue to push for the return of all the hostages in Gaza and help Israel in its

vital mission to dismantle the threat of Hamas.

Mr. President, there may be no easy solution to peace in the Middle East, but standing up to Iranian aggression would be a good start. Iran spends at least $800 million per year supporting terrorist groups in the Middle East. I ask, again, what would the Middle East look like without the terrorist funding? I suspect it would look more peaceful and prosperous and that our ally Israel and innocent people around the Middle East would be able to sleep more easily at night.

So it is time for President Biden to step up. Continued appeasement and half measures on Iran will only prolong the cycle of violence in the Middle East and increase the risk of large-scale attacks against Israel like the barrage over the weekend. If President Biden steps forward with strength, perhaps the legacy of his Presidency can include something more than an inflation crisis and a national security disaster at our southern border.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer), and the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cornyn), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Cramer), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Romney), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Tuberville).

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be able to speak for up to 7 minutes.

Mr. President, inflation numbers came out this morning, and it won't surprise anyone to discover that it was yet another month of elevated inflation, par for the course for the Biden administration.

Inflation that not only remained well above the Federal Reserve's target inflation rate for yet another month, it actually kicked up in March to 3.5 percent, not exactly a hopeful trend.

It has been a rough few years for the American people under President Biden, thanks in large part to the President and Congressional Democrats' decision to push forward with their American Rescue Plan spending spree, despite, I might add, warnings even from liberal economists that it ran the risk of setting off inflation. But now the entire Biden administration has been one long inflation crisis.

Today, a typical family is paying $1,000 more per month to maintain the same standard of living they enjoyed when President Biden took office. Now, think about that for just a moment. Today, a typical family is paying $1,000 more per month--$12,000 more per year--to maintain the same standard of living they enjoyed when President Biden took office--if, of course, these families even have that money available. There is no question that there are families out there--a lot, I suspect--whose standard of living has diminished since President Biden took office because they simply don't have the money to maintain the same living standard with the elevated prices in the Biden economy.

The list of price hikes in the Biden economy is long. Groceries are up 21 percent since President Biden took office. Energy prices are up 38 percent. Gas prices are up 47 percent and are on the rise. The cost of shelter is up 20 percent. Car repairs and maintenance are up 30 percent. And the list goes on.

I mentioned the increase in grocery prices. The cost of food now takes up a larger share of Americans' disposal income than it has in 30 years.

A recent Bloomberg article noted:

Nationally, seven in 10 consumers say they are very or

extremely concerned about the cost of groceries. . . . Forty-

two percent said they were worried about having enough money

to buy food in December, the last time FMI asked, compared to

26 percent at the March 2020 onset of the pandemic.

Well, that is a pretty grim statistic, and it is not the only one. On the home-buying front, one recent article reported:

The income needed to comfortably afford a home is up 80

percent since 2020.

Let me just repeat that.

The income needed to comfortably afford a home is up 80

percent since 2020.

Mr. President, 80 percent--and I don't need to tell anyone that incomes have not risen by 80 percent over the same period.

President Biden loves to talk about giving Americans ``a little bit of breathing room.'' Well, Americans have lost their breathing room in the Biden economy. They have seen their disposable income dry up. They have had to downgrade their standard of living. They have had to turn to savings accounts and credit cards to make ends meet. It is no wonder that nearly half of voters say their personal financial situation is getting worse or that 55 percent of Americans say they worry a great deal about inflation or that 58 percent of voters say the economy is on the wrong track.

The sad thing is that President Biden has apparently learned nothing from his inflation crisis. He is still set on the same kind of massive government spending that helped plunge us into this inflation crisis in the first place. The budget he released last month was full of massive new spending programs, accompanied by a staggering $5 trillion in tax hikes--tax hikes that would unquestionably have their own damaging economic effects, like discouraging job creation and driving up energy prices for hard-working Americans.

President Biden's first term in office has been characterized by economic misery for Americans, and if the President gets his way, a second term would likely be characterized by economic misery as well. It has been 36 months of elevated inflation in the Biden economy--36 months--and the end is still not in sight. It is starting to look like it won't be as long as President Biden is still in office.

I yield the floor.