Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, if you have a leak in your sink or a dripping pipe in the bathroom, you generally fix it yourself or call a plumber to fix the problem. You don't look at your otherwise functioning house and decide to raze it to the ground because of the plumbing issue. But that is basically what Democrats want to do with our healthcare system.

Our healthcare system certainly isn't perfect, but our system also has plenty of positive things going for it: high-

quality care, choice, access to innovative technology and treatments, and most Americans are pretty satisfied with their health insurance. So a logical thing to do would be to fix the problems with our system and to preserve what is working, but that is not what Democrats want to do.

Democrats want to destroy our current system and replace it with a single, one-size-fits-all, government-run program known as Medicare for All.

What will that mean for Americans? Paying more and waiting longer for worse care.

Medicare for All is estimated to cost $32 trillion or more over 10 years. That is more money than the Federal Government has spent in the last 8 years, combined, on everything. One Medicare expert estimates that doubling the amount of individual and corporate income tax collected would not be enough to cover the cost of Medicare for All. I don't know about the Democrats, but I don't know too many families who can afford to have their tax bills double.

Yet it is not just higher taxes. Medicare for All would eliminate Americans' healthcare choices.

Don't like the one-size-fits-all government healthcare plan? Too bad. You will not have any other option. Private and employer-sponsored healthcare will be a thing of the past. Your only choice will be the government's plan.

Your treatment choices will also be limited. If the government will not want to pay for a particular cancer treatment, for example, you will be out of luck. There will be no switching of an insurer to a better carrier. Unless you have tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars lying around to cover that treatment option entirely out-of- pocket, you are going to go without.

Then, of course, there are the long wait times that are a hallmark of socialized medicine. Patients in Canada and the United Kingdom, both of which have government-run healthcare systems, face tremendous wait times for care. It can take up to a year to get a medical procedure in Canada--one of the reasons you hear so many stories about Canadians coming to the United States for care. Imagine having to wait a year for your child to get a needed surgery. That is the kind of thing that parents can look forward to under Medicare for All.

As I said earlier, there are, undoubtedly, parts of our healthcare system that can be improved, and the Republicans are, in fact, currently working on legislation to increase access to affordable medication and to address the issue of surprise billing, but the solution is not to destroy our current system and force people to pay more for less choice and worse care.

The Democrats' ideology has outrun their common sense. The Republicans are committed to improving America's healthcare system and preserving Americans' healthcare choices. I hope the Democrats will abandon their plan for government-controlled healthcare and switch their focus to helping us.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at 12:45 p.m. today, the Senate proceed to legislative session to consider Calendar No. 94, S. 151; I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time, and the Senate vote on passage of the bill, as amended, with no intervening action or debate; finally, that if passed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

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

Madam President, pretty much every American has had to deal with illegal robocalls. How many times have you answered the phone only to discover it is an automated message saying that you have won a contest that you never entered or asking you to provide personal information like your bank account or Social Security number?

Illegal robocalls, I think we can all agree, are a major nuisance, and too often they are not just a nuisance. Scammers use these calls to successfully prey on vulnerable populations like elderly Americans who are sometimes less technologically savvy. Scammers target the kind of personal information that can be used to steal your money and your identity, and when scammers are successful, the consequences for their victims can be devastating.

Well, there are laws and fines in place right now to prevent scam artists from preying on Americans through the telephone. These measures have been insufficient. In many cases, robocall scammers simply build the current fines into the cost of doing business. On top of this, the Federal Communications Commission's enforcement efforts are hampered by a tight time window for pursuing violators.

That is why I introduced the legislation before us today, the Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act, or the TRACED Act, along with my fellow Commerce Committee member, Senator Markey. The TRACED Act provides tools to discourage illegal robocalls, protect consumers, and crack down on offenders. It expands the window in which the FCC can pursue intentional scammers from 1 year to 3 years, and in years 2 and 3, increases the financial penalty for those individuals making robocalls from zero dollars to $10,000 per call to make it more difficult for robocallers just to figure fines into the cost of doing business.

It also requires telephone service providers to adopt new call verification technologies that would help prevent illegal robocalls from reaching consumers in the first place. And, importantly, it convenes a working group with representatives from the Department of Justice, the FCC, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Commerce, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, State attorneys general, and others to identify ways to criminally prosecute illegal robocalling.

Criminal prosecution of illegal robocalling can be challenging. Scammers are frequently based abroad and can quickly shut down shop before authorities have a chance to get to them, but we need to find ways to hold scammers criminally accountable. When scammers are successful, they can destroy people's lives, and they should face criminal prosecution for the damage they do.

I am very pleased that the TRACED Act has attracted a tremendous amount of support from Members of both parties. In fact, 84 Senators have signed on as cosponsors of this bill. I am especially grateful to Senator Markey for partnering with me on this legislation. I appreciate Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Cantwell for prioritizing this bill as they have assumed the reins at the Commerce Committee.

I am also very pleased that this bill has attracted tremendous support from State governments and industry and consumer groups. All 50 State attorneys general support this bill, and it

has been embraced by the AARP, Verizon, AT&T, CTIA, USTelecom, NTCA, Consumer Reports, and a number of other organizations. It is also supported by all of the current Commissioners at the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission.

I think we all know that the TRACED Act will not prevent all illegal robocalling. I think we can all agree it is a big step in the right direction. It will make life a lot more difficult for scam artists and help ensure that more scammers face punishment for their crimes. I am excited the full Senate is voting on this bill today, and I hope that the House will quickly take it up so that we can get this legislation to the President's desk.

Before I close, I would be remiss if I didn't quickly thank several staff members whose tireless efforts helped get us here today. In my office, I recognize and thank Alex Sachtjen and Nick Rossi. I am thankful for their dedication and expertise. I thank Dan Ball and Crystal Tully, who serve on Chairman Wicker's team at the Commerce Committee, Daniel Greene on Senator Markey's staff, and John Branscome and Shawn Bone on Ranking Member Cantwell's staff. This truly was a team effort. I am glad that we have an opportunity to do something that in a very big bipartisan way will start putting steps forward that will help prevent something that has become a scourge in the lives of so many Americans.

I yield the floor.

I appreciate the comments from the Senator from Massachusetts and also his great work on this. It has been a team effort and a great partnership. He and I--although in many cases we represent different parts of the country, we all represent constituents who care deeply about this issue and want to see their Congress do something about it.

I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member of the committee.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) would have voted ``yea.''

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander), the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) would have voted ``yea'' and the Senator from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) would have voted ``yea.''

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

Mr. President, Monday is Memorial Day. It is the day our Nation pauses to remember all those who laid down their lives in defense of our country, from Saratoga to Yorktown, to Iraq and Afghanistan.

We enjoy tremendous freedoms as Americans, tremendous privileges, but we do not enjoy these privileges by chance. They are hard-fought gains secured for us again and again by each new generation of American soldiers who lay down their lives in the cause of the free. It is important that we do not take what they have secured for us lightly, that we remember our freedoms have been paid for in blood.

Near the end of the film ``Saving Private Ryan,'' the dying Captain Miller tells Private Ryan of the sacrifice that has been made on his behalf. He says: ``Earn this . . . earn it.''

I am not sure we can ever fully earn the gift that has been given to us by those who have laid down their lives in our defense, but we can attempt to live lives worthy of their sacrifice and to defend the cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion.

When we remember the fallen on Memorial Day, there is one other group we should remember, and that is their families. Our Nation's Gold Star families may not have laid down their own lives for our country, but they gave their loved ones, their fathers and brothers, daughters and sisters. For the sake of our freedoms, they live with empty spaces at Thanksgivings and birthdays, at weddings and graduations, at their dinner tables and Little League practices. We owe them a debt also that we can never repay.

I have been privileged to visit more than one veterans cemetery, such as our own Black Hills National Cemetery in South Dakota--which we recently expanded to ensure that our soldiers will have a resting place for generations to come--Arlington National Cemetery, and the American Cemetery at Normandy. There is a special hallowedness to the ground at these places. Valor and sacrifice still linger in the air, and a deep peace abounds--the peace of the warrior who has fought the good fight and found rest from his labors.

General George S. Patton once said:

It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather,

we should thank God that such men lived.

I might disagree with General Patton on the first part, as it is right and proper that we should mourn our dead, but with General Patton, I say: Let us thank God that such men and women lived.

May the memory of our honored dead be eternal.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) would have voted ``yea.''

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) would have voted ``yea.''

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) would have voted ``yea.''

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) would have voted ``yea.''

Madam President, Friday's announcement that the administration had reached an agreement to remove steel and aluminum tariffs on Canada and Mexico was great news for American consumers, producers, and workers. Mexican and Canadian retaliatory tariffs on U.S. products have already been lifted. That is a big deal for American producers, especially for farmers and ranchers, who were hit the hardest by Mexico and Canada's retaliatory tariffs.

Friday's agreement is also important because it removes a significant roadblock to passage of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. With the aluminum and steel tariff settlement and labor reforms recently adopted by the Mexican Government, two major Democratic objections to passage of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement have been addressed. Now it is time for the House Democratic leadership to indicate its willingness to take up the agreement in the near future.

The U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement would boost almost every sector of the American economy, from automotive manufacturing, to digital services, to dairy farming. It would create 176,000 new jobs and increase wages for workers. It is time to take up this agreement. As I said, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada free-trade agreement would be a boon for U.S. producers and U.S. workers.

This is the kind of stuff we should be spending our time on in Washington--measures that grow our economy, increase opportunity, and improve life for the American people. That is what Republicans have been working on. Our policies have helped produce the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years and more jobs and higher wages for workers.

Unfortunately, my colleagues across the aisle seem more interested in relitigating the 2016 election and accelerating their party's rapid move toward the radical fringe left.

While I realize the Democrats are disappointed with the results of the 2016 Presidential election, it is time for them to accept the fact that they lost. It has been more than 2 years now, and Democrats are still more focused on opposing this President than on getting things done for the American people.

When Democrats do get around to talking about legislation, too often, it is proposals from the radical fringe left, which is rapidly swallowing up the Democratic mainstream. Take the Green New Deal, the Democrats' plan for a government takeover of a large section of the economy in the name of clean energy. The estimated price tag for this government takeover is between $51 trillion and $93 trillion over 10 years. To put that number in perspective, $93 trillion is more money than the U.S. Government has spent in its entire history, and $93 trillion is more money than the 2017 gross domestic product of the entire world.

How do Democrats plan to pay for this? Well, they don't actually have a plan. Their usual ``tax the rich'' solution won't work since taxing every wealthy American at a 100-percent rate wouldn't come anywhere close to paying for the Green New Deal. Should the Green New Deal ever come to pass, working Americans would face massive tax hikes for the privilege of having government dictate the design of their house and the type of their car.

Then, of course, there is the Democrats' plan for a government takeover of the Nation's healthcare. Under so-

called Medicare for All, the government would take away Americans' insurance choices and force everyone into a single one-size-fits-all, government-run plan and then tax Americans to pay for it.

Thanks to policies like tax reform, American families are doing better than they have been doing in a long time. They have been taking home more money. They have access to better jobs and more opportunities, and they are enjoying better wages and benefits. To most people, it would seem logical to continue and build on the policies that have gotten us here, but not to Democrats. Democrats want to overturn the policies that have gotten us to this point. Instead of tax cuts, they want tax hikes so they can implement their socialist fantasies. Instead of less government interference in Americans' lives, they want more. They think the government should be directing your healthcare choices, your housing choices, your energy choices, and much more. It is unfortunate that the Democratic Party is being swallowed by its extreme left wing.

Republicans are going to do everything we can to protect Americans from Democrats' socialist fantasies and to continue to expand the choices and the opportunities available to American families.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr).

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr).