Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following statement be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and service of a decorated veteran, fierce advocate, and great man, Garry Augustine.

As the executive director of the Disabled American Veterans, DAV, from 2013 to 2018 and a 50-year life member, Garry helped shape the legislative landscape for disabled veterans and their families nationwide by advocating before Congress, the White House, and Department of Veterans Affairs.

While Garry is no longer with us, his legacy lives on. On behalf of myself, Congress and my fellow Americans, I would like to extend our deepest gratitude for his life and service to this Nation.

A native son of Cleveland, OH, Garry enlisted in the U.S. Army in August 1969. As a member of the 198th Infantry Brigade in South Vietnam, he served on the Batangan Peninsula. During a combat patrol operation on April 9, 1970, he was severely wounded by a land mine explosion.

After 18 months and multiple surgeries at Walter Reed Medical Army Hospital, Garry returned home to Cleveland, where he continued physical rehabilitation.

Following his time in uniform, Garry's commitment to serving others never faded. In 1978, Garry went on to earn a bachelor's degree with honors from Ohio University and a master's degree in sociology from Cleveland State University in 1983. That same year, he became a life member of DAV Chapter 42 in Mentor, OH.

In Mentor, he served in various positions, including chapter commander and adjutant, and on statewide committees, as well as director of service for the DAV Department of Ohio. He was also selected as one of the Outstanding Young Men of America in 1989.

Along the way, Garry met and married his loving wife Kelly Lambing and raised two children, Chelsea and Kyle. He was rightfully proud of them, and spoke of them often.

He began his tenure with DAV in 1988 as a hospital service coordinator for the Department of Ohio at the Cleveland Wade Park VA Hospital. That same year, he joined DAV's professional staff as a national service officer apprentice and went on to serve as assistant supervisor and supervisor at the national service office in Cleveland.

Eventually, Garry left this role to help lead DAV's efforts nationwide. He was appointed to assistant national service director at DAV's Washington headquarters in 2002 and then deputy national service director in 2004 and national service director in 2010.

He was named as Washington headquarters executive director in 2013, where he was tasked with overseeing DAV's service and legislative programs and leading DAV's advocacy efforts on behalf of more than 1 million DAV members.

As executive director of DAV, Garry was in charge of an organization that has always been at the forefront of advocating for veterans and securing the resources, healthcare, and benefits veterans have earned. In the position, he was a tireless and successful advocate for VA healthcare reform, expanding caregiver benefits, securing critical resources for veterans' initiatives, modernizing the disability appeals system, and improving VA care and services for women veterans.

As the top Democrat on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee and Committee member since 2007, it was a great honor of mine to work with Garry and DAV on countless important pieces of legislation like the Deborah Sampson Act, the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act, and the VA MISSION Act.

These bipartisan efforts, many of which were signed into law, serve as a testament to Garry's dedication and leadership on behalf of all veterans. Future generations of veterans will look at these bipartisan reforms and feel the reach of his mission to serve veterans in their communities.

Garry's enduring legacy lives on at DAV, which--thanks to his leadership--continues to be a cornerstone for communities across the Nation.

After three decades of service to DAV, Garry retired as executive director on December 17, 2018, and moved to Maryland's Eastern Shore. Even in his retirement, he continued to use his experience to serve as a strategic adviser on veterans' healthcare technology.

On March 14, 2022, Garry passed away in Washington, DC at the age of 71 years old. He is survived by his wife Kelly, daughter Chelsea, son Kyle, and grandson Austin, and will be laid to rest at Arlington National Cemetery.

It is my honor to recognize Garry's lifetime of service as a soldier, veteran, and leader of DAV--but also as a loving husband and father. On behalf of myself and a grateful nation, I extend my

greatest appreciation for Garry's enduring sacrifices, service, and advocacy on behalf of all veterans. His work will be felt by veterans nationwide for years to come, and he will be sorely missed.

Mr. President, I want to reserve the right to object.

I have been listening to the arguments that are made here. Let's get to the facts.

The fact is, if we split this Ukrainian funding now, it is not going to get there quicker; it is going to get there slower.

The bottom line is, if you want to help the Ukrainian people out--and I believe the speakers want to help the Ukrainian people out--then pass the omnibus bill that is in front of us.

The Senator from Florida is proposing just to pass one portion of this omnibus appropriations bill, and that is the $13.5 billion in aid to Ukraine.

I want to be very, very clear on what this move would mean. If we don't pass the rest of the omnibus, the Pentagon is going to shut down at midnight on Friday. OK?

Now, all our eyes are on Ukraine, and they well should be, but don't forget for a second that China is a pacing threat to this world. We are going to shut the Pentagon down on Friday? I don't think that is a smart move.

Eleven days ago, all the Senators in this body had the opportunity to go to a classified briefing led by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. I asked him what he needed from Congress to respond to the Russian aggression. Do you know what he said? He said: We need a full-year appropriations bill. That is what we have in front of us today.

And yet, the Senator from Florida is effectively proposing to give the military less than 1 percent of what the Secretary of Defense says he needs to respond to threats around the world. That is $6.5 billion out of $744 billion.

And for the folks who say this $1.5 trillion package is a boondoggle, well, let me tell you, then you should stand up and say half of this bill is a boondoggle because half of it goes into defense to protect this country, to make the world a safer place.

I really don't understand what the Senator from Florida is trying to accomplish, but I want no part of it.

Congress should have passed this budget to cover the military needs and cover this country's needs over 6 months ago.

Passing a bill to cover 1 percent of our troops' funding needs is, once again, kicking the can down the road. It is 110 percent unacceptable to me and to every American who expects their government to keep them safe at home and around the world.

This is really, really, really a bad idea, and we should quit wasting time on these kinds of ideas and get to the point of voting on this omnibus bill, getting it out so that we can deal with the Ukraine situation.

And by the way, in the Defense bill, over and above the $13.5 billion, there is another $300 million for Ukraine. So it is time to get this ball rolling. It is time to get this bill passed in the U.S. Senate.

Quit dilly-dallying around. Let's get `er done. There is too much on the line today to keep fooling around.

I object.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the House is not in session. To say that we are going to pass this and presto chango it goes right to the President's desk--that is not how the process works, Senator Scott. That is not how the process works.

So you can stand up and say, you know, we are blocking this aid. No, no, no, no, no.

The fact is, the person who came up and asked for unanimous consent-- the good Senator from Florida--is blocking this bill or we would be voting on it right now.

You want to talk politics? That is what this is about--politics.

You can be unhappy with the omnibus bill, but the fact of the matter is, it has been negotiated over the last year by Democrats and Republicans, and that is where we are at today.

We need to pass this bill. If you are concerned about Ukraine, we need to pass this bill. If you are concerned about feeding hungry people in this country, we need to pass this bill. If you are concerned about childcare, we need to pass this bill. If you are concerned about housing, we need to pass this bill. If you are concerned about the high cost of gasoline, we need to pass this bill. And if you are concerned about the threat that China is to this country, we need to the pass this bill.

Enough excuses. Let's get the job done.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I want to thank my friend, the Senator from Kansas, Senator Moran, the ranking

member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee.

When we started this Congress, the No. 1 issue that was put forth by the veterans service organizations representing the veterans in this country was toxic exposure. It was incumbent that the Veterans' Affairs Committee do something about toxic exposure. We created the bill called the COST of War.

We are at a point now where we are going to try to implement that bill in phases. The phase we are working on today has six major components to it. No. 1, it expands the screening period of healthcare eligibility for combat veterans who served after September 11, 2001, from 5 years to 10. No. 2, it provides an open enrollment period for any post-9/11 combat veteran who is more than 10 years from separation. No. 3, after we do the first two things, it tells the VA to have an outreach plan to contact veterans who did not enroll during their initial period of enhanced eligibility so that they can sign up for the potential benefits. It directs the VA to incorporate a clinical screening regarding a veteran's potential exposures and symptoms commonly associated with toxic substances. The fifth thing it does is it mandates toxic exposure early education and training for healthcare and benefits personnel who work at the VA. And, finally, it strengthens Federal research on toxic exposure.

This is a big bill; it is an important bill; and it does right by our veterans in this country. Toxic exposure is not something that is new. We have dealt with it since World War I, World War II, Agent Orange, and the Vietnam war, and, right now, toxic exposure due to burn pits.

When we get done with this process, it is not going to take an act of Congress to get the benefits they need to get moving into the future. This is a giant step forward in that regard.

So I want to thank both the minority and majority staffs, the Senator from Kansas, who has been an incredible help to be able to work together to get this to the point where it is today.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 263, S. 3541.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time.

I know of no further debate on the bill.

I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise today to speak in support of Martha Williams to be the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

I represent a State that goes by many names. Most of you know it as Montana, but it is often called Big Sky Country, the Last Best Place, and even the Treasure State. Montana has earned these names through an abundance of beauty and natural resources, and as a result we have fostered a robust outdoor economy that relies on responsible forest management. Folks come to Montana from all over the world to enjoy all that our State has to offer. Thousands of folks make their living by working the land and showing folks the best way to enjoy it.

But the key to preserving our multibillion-dollar outdoor economy is proper stewardship and oversight of our natural resources. That means talking to folks on the ground. It means bringing competing interests to the table to find the most sustainable ways to manage our public lands. Not only do our forests and rivers create thousands of good- paying jobs, but they also create countless memories for families in our country. So it is critically important that we have balanced oversight in place to guarantee that Montana's outdoor economy remains vibrant for generations to come.

The Director of Fish and Wildlife Service plays a central role in this oversight, and that is why I am proud to support Martha Williams' nomination today. As Director, she will be tasked with the management and recovery of our Nation's fish and wildlife and overseeing a large chunk of our public lands--89 million acres, to be exact, from Montana's own Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge all the way to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

As a Montanan and a former Director of the Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, Ms. Williams has demonstrated time and time again her ability to bring folks together to find lasting solutions, to collaborate to find common ground. She always leads with science and has developed State management plans for issues ranging from grizzly bears to aquatic invasive mussels, and she has done it with input from all the relevant stakeholders.

She also has a profound respect and understanding of the bedrock laws that guide responsible land and wildlife management. She will be bringing with her over a decade of legal experience with the Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks as well as a well-regarded legal scholar at the University of Montana.

She has spent her entire career standing up for our public lands and proven herself to be a thoughtful, nonpartisan steward who works collaboratively with folks on the ground to make positive change. Her top-notch ability to find common ground between sportsmen and conservationists alike and her skills as an exceptional problem-solver will make her an outstanding Director at the Fish and Wildlife Service.

She has strong support from sports men and women, biologists, and academics alike and has already received strong bipartisan support from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. She was passed out of committee on a 16-to-4 vote.

Make no mistake about it, we will miss her leadership in the Treasure State, but I am looking forward to seeing her effective management skills at the Federal level. This position is very important for the stewardship of our land and our waters, and I would urge my colleagues to support her confirmation today.

And in that vein, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nomination: Calendar No. 650, Martha Williams, of Montana, to be Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; that the nomination be

confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, could I just get a minute?

Because I know there is a vote coming.

First of all, I would ask my friend from Alaska--I appreciate the fact you are standing up for your constituents to do what is right. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I have no problem with the concerns you brought up on the Russian River and the King Cove Road, although I don't know the issues nearly as well as you do. But my point is this: If you are able to put Ms. Williams in as Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, she has a track record of listening to people. You happen to have a ``U.S. Senator'' in front of your name; you will be at the top of the list. She is not somebody who shuts the door and says: Just because you are Republican, I don't want to listen to you. She is somebody who always brings in people, collaborates, and comes to a decision that will work. I wouldn't be up here advocating for her if I didn't believe that.

Mr. President, had I been present when the Senate voted on vote No. 11 on confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 635 Holly A. Thomas, of California, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, I would have voted aye.

Mr. President, most of you know that I have a real job besides being a U.S. Senator, and that real job includes farming the land, which includes spending--starting in the spring--12 to 16 hours a day on a tractor, where you get an opportunity, after you are going around and around and around, to think about anything you want to think about.

Before I got in this job, I used to do math problems. Since I have gotten in this job, I think about this job when I am on a tractor, and I think about the U.S. Senate. I think about how over the last 15 years this place has been incredibly dysfunctional. I have been here 15 years; I can't speak to what it was like before that. But it has never worked since I have been here. The reason it has never worked is because--I had this idea in my head that, being the U.S. Senate, it would be a place where we could have debate. In the greatest deliberative body, you ought to be able to have debate. I think I saw Senator Durbin once almost get into a debate here, maybe twice. But it just simply doesn't happen, and it doesn't happen because we are not forced to do it because you take the easy way out. All you have to do is put a hold on a bill, and then you can walk out. In fact--I think it was my second year here--there was a Senator who put a hold on a bill and then went back to his home State. He didn't even stick around.

I don't think that is what the forefathers had in mind. I think what the forefathers had in mind is to stay here and have a discussion and have a debate, and when people disagree, don't be disagreeable, but try to find common ground. That doesn't happen but rarely.

So you ask yourself what can be done about it. I have had the opportunity over the last 3 months to work pretty extensively with my friend Senator King and Senator Kaine and Senator Manchin and talk about ways we can move forward in a way that encourages people to come to the floor and debate, and I think there is a proposal to do exactly that. This is a carve-out today, but the truth is that there is a proposal to protect minority rights and encourage people to come here and debate.

We ought to be doing that. It isn't nuking the body. It is not destroying the U.S. Senate. It means we get a chance to stand here in front of these cameras and challenge one another because we have to, because the rules force us to do that--not to go home to our home State, not to put a hold on a bill or a person and then not say a word why, not to be able to justify why you are doing that on the floor.

So I see this in a little different light than has been described by some across the aisle, and I don't think this is blowing the Senate up at all. I think the Senate--if the forefathers looked at the Senate today, they would sit there and shake their heads and say: What has gone wrong?

I think what has gone wrong is, we have gotten lazy. It is the truth. The last place, truthfully, I want to be is on the floor of the U.S. Senate trying to justify my position. I mean, that is a lot of work. It takes time. It takes effort. We ought to be forcing people to do that. That is part of this debate we are having here today.

We ought to realize that there is not a single Member of this body on either side of the aisle who wants to ``blow this place up.'' They might describe it that way. But the truth is, everybody who serves in this body knows that this body doesn't function as the U.S. Senate. It doesn't function. We don't do what we need to do. We don't empower committees. We don't make sure our chairmen are doing what they need to do. We don't debate on the U.S. Senate floor anymore, and we haven't for 15

years and probably a heck of a lot longer.

I happen to sit in the seat of Mike Mansfield. I don't think Mansfield would look at this and say: This body works, and we ought not change the rules because it works so well.

I think Mike Mansfield would say: Do you know what, guys? We did some changes in 1976. You need to take a look back. Things have changed here.

We have cameras now we didn't have in 1976. We have folks who come on the floor and raise a lot of money on this floor by talking to those cameras instead of talking to one another about what is important here, about the policies we need to take up.

So that is first thing. I don't think we should be afraid about adjusting the filibuster to make the U.S. Senate work. I think it is the right thing to do--not blowing it up but making some adjustments to make it work.

Now, let's talk about voting rights for just a moment. I believe there are 19 States in the United States right now that, on a purely partisan basis, have changed the way votes--either access to the polls or the way votes are counted when they are done. I can't imagine anybody in here, when you look at that--and it has all been done on a partisan basis by Republican legislatures--when you would look at that, you would say: Boy, this is moving our democracy forward.

You know what. When I got in the State senate in 1999, I worked with a very conservative Republican on the State Administration Committee to make voting easier. We worked together. We both had the same ideas in mind. We wanted to make voting easier in Montana, and we did it.

Now, it is a different world out there, and I really don't know why. Let me give you an example. When I ran in 2018, there were a record number of votes cast in Montana, and I won. A Democrat won. In 2020, there was even a larger number of votes that were cast in 2020, and a Republican won. This isn't about advantages for Democrats or advantages for Republicans; this is about making it so everybody can have their voice heard--something very basic to this country, by the way. We stand up here and talk on the floor about how people have sacrificed for the rights and the freedoms in this country, and one of those freedoms is the freedom to vote. Lives have been sacrificed for it, but yet we want to limit certain groups of people from voting.

In Montana, for example, they have said that student IDs--a college student ID won't work as an ID to go to the polling place. Are you kidding me? I mean, first of all, what kind of message are you sending to the young people who are going to be running this show--and probably a heck of a lot better than we are--in just a few years? You are saying: Your voice doesn't count. You want to talk about disenfranchising? This is crazy. It doesn't make any sense. It is really hard for me to think how you justify--how do you justify saying this is a good thing to have happen?

Voter registration. OK. Now, we are in this job. We all do this every day, think about it every day. So voter registration is probably no big deal to us. But to working people who have to pay the bills, having to take a half a day off of work to be able to go register when you can't do it on election day--that is a big deal.

We all stand up here, and we always say: We are for working families; they are the heartbeat of this country. And they are. But the truth is, what message are we sending to them when we say: No, you know what, no more same-day voter registration--which, by the way, in Montana, it was a vote of the people, and the legislature, a year ago right now, repealed a vote of the people on same-day registration. So what message are we sending to those folks?

My good friend Raphael Warnock, Senator Warnock, talks about standing in line for 8 or 10 hours to vote. First of all, I don't know that I have the will to stand in line, personally, for 8 or 10 hours to vote. I complained when they moved the polling place 3 miles from my house to 15 miles from my house. But to stand in line for 8 to 10 hours--I mean, that is a commitment to vote. Now we are going to make it tougher? We are going to make it so that when there are Good Samaritans out there handing out water and maybe some soda crackers, we are going to say ``No, that is illegal'' and punish them--breaking the law; punishment by--God knows what. A fine? Jail? I don't know.

What is it?

It is a felony.

This is crazy, guys. We shouldn't be acting like the stuff that is going on in this country right now and has been going on mainly for the last year--and my fellow Senators have talked about why it is the case--we shouldn't act like it is no big deal. It is a huge deal. If we disenfranchise voters in this country, our democracy is on a slide away from democracy.

As my friend Angus King has said many times on this floor, democracies are the exception, they are not the rule in history. They have happened rarely, and they happen because people understand the sacrifices it takes.

We have sacrifices we need to make in this body, and part of it is, we need to ensure that everybody has equal access to the polls so that they can vote. It is fundamental to our democracy. That is why we are all sitting here. If it wasn't fundamental to our democracy, do you know what? I would be doing something else. I would be in my office working on papers or something like that--who knows. But the truth is, this is fundamental to our democracy.

We can try to, you know, move the conversation and say: Why aren't we talking about the economy? Senator Kaine said it very, very well. We have dealt with economic issues. We need to continue to deal with economic issues. We have dealt with supply chain issues with the bipartisan infrastructure bill. We need to continue to work with supply chain issues as we move forward, and we will. But I will tell you, if we disenfranchise enough folks from the polls, we won't have a democracy to talk about anything because it is fundamental to our democracy.

I would just encourage everybody to take a look at the bill that is presented today, the two bills. Look at it. Don't talk about the one that was presented in 2018 or 2019. We can all do that. That distracts from what is really going on. Look at the bill and ask yourself, ``Is this really a Federal takeover of elections?'' It absolutely is not. It is about making it so people can go to the polls and make their voices heard and feel like they are making a difference in the country by voting for the candidates whom they want or, in some cases, voting against the candidates they don't like.

And as far as the filibuster goes, times change, things change. And one of the things that has changed in this body is we don't debate anymore. I am for anything that will get people to the floor so we can debate the issues that are so important to the future of this country.

I yield the floor.

I wasn't going to speak, but I have to speak because I wanted to clear up the record on one thing.

The people in the State of Montana voted for same-day registration. The people of the State of Montana went to the ballot box and voted for same-day registration. The State legislature repealed that. We should ask what the people of Montana really want. They want same-day registration.

Mr. President, I have 2 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, I would like to share a few words today to honor an outstanding leader and friend of mine who recently passed away.

Caleb Shields was the retired Chairman and former Councilman of the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation in Montana.

We talk a lot about service in this body, but everyone in Congress could learn from how Caleb lived his life.

He dedicated himself to service--service to this country, where he served honorably in the United States Navy; service to his Tribe as an elected leader for 24 years and as one of their most tireless champions; and as the author of a 500-page book on his Tribe's history, he served the next generation of the Fort Peck Tribes and the next generation of Montanans who now have access to knowledge that won't ever be forgotten.

Caleb was widely regarded as one of the most influential Tribal leaders in the country during his tenure, a reputation that was well- earned. Among his many achievements are his successful 20-year fight to get a water pipeline and treatment center on the Fort Peck reservation. After they were built, they were both named in his honor, and for generations to come, the name Caleb Shields will continue to serve the Fort Peck Tribe.

Less widely known were the small ways that Caleb showed his love and devotion for the Fort Peck Tribe. I am told that Caleb could recite the record of the Poplar High School basketball team all the way back to the 1970s. Caleb was devoted to that team, and believed strongly that basketball could provide hope and momentum that could propel the dreams of future leaders.

Caleb's legacy, his friendship, and his leadership will be felt for generations. I want to express my deepest sympathy to Caleb's wife of 58 years, Yvonne, to the whole Shields family, and to the Fort Peck Tribes for the loss of this great leader. Caleb made our state and our Nation stronger, and he will never be forgotten.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of Meera Joshi to be the head of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Now, there may be some folks out there who are not familiar with this Agency, but I can tell you Montanans are. I can tell you commercial truckers are because this is an Agency that is critical to tackling our supply chain issues and lowering costs for American families. Let me repeat that again because this issue has been brought up before.

This Agency, of which Ms. Joshi is to be the head of, is critical to attacking our supply chain issues and lowering the costs for American families.

In my real life, I am a farmer. I use a Peterbilt truck to get my product to market, my food to market, so I know more about this than the average person who serves in the Senate.

And I know what a huge role that trucking plays in our supply chain and our economy. And I am going to tell you, the American trucker is one of the hardest working people in this country. I know that because I tried to do it for a while. It is hard work.

They have been on the frontlines of this pandemic delivering goods to every corner of this country. And a strong and a stable, safe trucking workforce that offers good-paying jobs

to millions of truckdrivers is a critical lifeblood of our economy.

Our quality of life in this country is simply not possible without the hard work that truckdrivers put in day and night. They deserve more credit than they get.

And there are a lot of challenges out there: our outdated infrastructure, the COVID-19 pandemic, a historic--a historic--volume of goods moving through our economy that have strained capacity across our supply chain, including trucking.

The Agency is critical in ensuring that goods moving by truck do it safely and efficiently.

Now, as the chairman of the Commerce Committee has already pointed out, the President last month signed the bipartisan infrastructure package into law. It included $568 billion in transportation funding that will improve freight bottlenecks, ease chokepoints across ports, rails, and highways.

The middle-class markets in China and India are expected to be worth a combined $26 trillion by 2030. Now, if we want to grow this U.S. economy, maintain our position as an economic world leader, we must be able to grow our reach to those huge market opportunities.

The bipartisan infrastructure package also included parts of my HAULS Act. The HAULS Act will cut burdensome hour-of-service requirements so that Montana's egg and livestock haulers can do their jobs and do their jobs safely, but we need a head of the Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration to be able to say that earnestly.

If we are going to effectively implement these new guidelines that will boost our economy in rural America and across this country, we need to confirm Ms. Joshi as soon as possible, which is why I am here tonight.

Ms. Joshi is a qualified nominee to lead this Agency. She passed through the Senate Commerce Committee with overwhelming bipartisan support. She is backed by the trucking industry.

It is unfortunate that a few of my colleagues--a minority of the minority--are blocking this confirmation at a time when we need transportation and commerce Agencies fully staffed and empowered to carry out their work, reducing costs for families, smoothing the supply chain, and growing our economy.

The Senate has had an opportunity to address supply chain issues and lower costs by confirming this nominee. I am going to say it again. The Senate has an opportunity tonight to address supply chain issues and lower costs by confirming this nominee.

There is absolutely no reason to keep this critical position vacant, and I urge my colleagues to support her confirmation tonight.

Mr. President, I would also ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 464, Meera Joshi, to be Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

So if you truly want to help the trucking industry, and it sounds like you have personal experience with it--the good Senator from Florida--putting the head of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration would be a great start. If you want to reduce the problems with our supply chain, putting a head into the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration would be a great start. If you want to make our roads safer for everybody--truckers, cars, everybody--I would say putting in the head of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration would be a good start.

I am going to tell you that the objections of the good Senator from Florida ring hollow. I have heard the good Senator from Florida stand up in committee and stand up on this floor and talk about how the administration--this administration--has failed. Yet that very same person who claims that this administration has failed is standing up here and perpetuating the problems that we have because we can't get Agencies staffed up. This is ridiculous.

So you ask yourself: Why can't the Department of Transportation and Department of Commerce come before the committee?

Look, we are all U.S. Senators here. Pick up the phone. Give him a call.

With this kind of attitude--you talked about the fact that food was going up. Why aren't we demanding the Secretary of Agriculture show up?

You said there are small business problems. Why aren't we demanding the Small Business Administration show up?

This could go on forever.

If you really want to fix a problem, let's look for solutions. And the solutions we have here tonight--this one--is to confirm Ms. Meera Joshi to the Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration.

We can make excuses all the time about why we are going to do this, why we are going to do that. Pick up the phone. Give them a call. Ask them to meet with you.

That is all it would take. You don't need to shut down the whole administration, shut down the Motor Carriers by not putting the head in.

This is ridiculous.

Mr. President, I now want to speak of my support for the nomination of Amitabha Bose to be Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration.

Consisting of almost 140,000 miles of railroad track, the U.S. freight rail network is the largest in the world and carries 1.4 billion tons of freight every year worth $430 billion to our economy.

Some estimate that the global demand for freight will triple by 2050, which is why we need to improve the capacity for our system to meet the supply chain needs of today and prepare for the future.

Last month, as the chair of the Commerce Committee has already pointed out, the President signed my bipartisan infrastructure package into law that included $567 billion in transportation funding that will improve freight bottlenecks, ease chokepoints across our ports, railways, and highways. It will lower costs for families. It will grow our economy.

Gosh, does this sound familiar? It is awful lot like the last nominee.

And this legislation also includes the Right Track Act, which I support and which I sponsored. My bill addresses blocked rail crossings--by the way, a bipartisan bill--which improves rail safety at rural train crossings and addresses instances of blocked highway railroad crossings across the United States that put our families in danger and slow down our economy.

I point that out because all too often we have accidents involving a train and a car. Get this person confirmed, and we can hold people accountable.

The infrastructure package also included $15 million to study Amtrak's long-distance passenger rail travel service, including authorization to form working groups, like the Greater Northwest Passenger Rail Working Group, to study and advocate for increased access to long-distance passenger rail travel.

These freight rail programs are administered by the FRA, and grants must get out the door as quickly as possible if we are going to get the bang for the dollar, if the taxpayer is going to get the bang for the dollar.

Holding up Amit Bose's nomination risks delaying these critical resources from reaching local communities.

Now, that might make some people in here happy. There was a bunch of folks--it passed by 69 votes, but there were 30-some folks that voted against it. So maybe they don't want this. Maybe they don't want infrastructure. Maybe they want to turn the keys of the economy over to China. Maybe that is what they want.

But the fact is that these critical resources will end up enriching our communities, improving our freight rail service, and growing our economy.

Additionally, the FRA is working closely with railroads to provide regulatory expertise and assistance to ensure that significant operational changes--including setting up new rail yards that can help move goods across our country, solving the supply chain problem--is done both quickly and safely.

Mr. Bose is a very qualified nominee to lead the FRA, having previously worked in multiple roles at FRA, including Deputy Administrator, Chief Counsel, Senior Adviser, and Director of Governmental Affairs.

He, too, received a strong bipartisan support in committee and, in fact, advanced by a voice vote.

Once again, it is unfortunate--and maybe it won't happen on this one--that some of my colleagues are blocking nominees from confirmation at a time when we can't afford to leave our Agencies understaffed, and they are blocking it because of supply chain issues and because of the high costs for small business. And with the blockage of these nominees, what is ending up happening is that the supply chain issues will get worse, which, maybe, that is what they want.

But that is not why I am here. I am here to get things done, to move this country forward. I know what China is doing right now, and it is why we had 69 people vote for the bipartisan infrastructure bill.

But if we leave the Agencies understaffed, then maybe that is going to help somebody. I don't know who it is going to help. But there is no reason to keep this critical position vacant, and I would urge my colleagues to support his confirmation.

Therefore, I would ask that it be in order to make the same request with respect to Executive Calendar No. 465, Amitabha Bose to be Director of the Federal Railroad Administration.

Mr. President, facts are a nasty thing. Do you know that?

I would ask the good Senator from Florida to read the damn bill. This bill is to put money into roads and bridges, to put money into our electrical grid, to put money into our ports, to make our ports safer, to put money into water systems--the list goes on and on and on.

For you to say that 50 percent of this bill is all that goes into infrastructure is not factual at all, and I will debate you on that until midnight tonight and longer--until Christmas Eve, because it is not factual.

But I will tell you what is factual: The fact is that you, the good Senator from Florida, have stopped Amit Bose from being Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration, thereby stopping any sort of improvements in the supply chain that we have, thereby stopping any sort of lowering of costs for small businesses and working families in this country. That is a fact.

And if you would like to respond to that, I would be more than happy to yield.

That is a fact. The truth is the same people who stand up here and say this administration has got problems are creating those problems, because a minority of the minority are stopping good people from being in positions in this administration. That is a fact.

Very crafty--fifty percent is used on roads, bridges, and seaports, and you make it sound like the rest isn't used on infrastructure.

Since when did water not become infrastructure? Since when did improving our transmission lines not become infrastructure?

The fact of the matter is this bill is a really good bill, and that is why 69 people in this Senate voted for it, and it did not raise taxes on a single American family.

You can make excuses all you want, but the facts are this: That infrastructure bill will help set us up for a vibrant economy for generations to come, and the most important thing that infrastructure bill will do is it will help us compete with China, unless you want to give the reserve currency to them.

And the fact of the matter is, unless the Agencies are staffed up, we can't implement that infrastructure bill. And if that is the impetus for this, shame on the folks who have objected to this, because the last time I checked, we are U.S. Senators, and we are not here for ourselves. We are here for this Nation, to make this Nation great, to keep this Nation great, to move this Nation forward.

Our forefathers worked to do that. They didn't have these kinds of silly arguments on the Senate floor.

So are you suggesting we shouldn't raise the debt and not pay our debts and default? Is that the suggestion?

Did the good Senator vote for the CARES Act?

Did the good Senator from Florida vote for the CARES Act?

Was it paid for?

Yes, it wasn't paid for. It added to the debt. Had the good Senator been here when we passed the Trump tax cuts, that also added $2 trillion a year to the debt, and he would have justified that.

If you want to talk about building our economy, there are two things you could do to build our economy: No. 1 is to invest in infrastructure, and the other one is to invest in education and workforce training.

If we are going to get the infrastructure part of this stuff out the door, we cannot have a minority of the minority on the other side continuing to object to people in the very Agencies that will help get this infrastructure built up. That is the truth.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I heard the Senator from Florida just say that he invested in education, workforce training, and infrastructure. If he would have not had an administration that would have been able to have gotten that money out the door, then he wouldn't have been able to have succeeded. All we are asking is that we offer the President of the United States and this Nation, as a whole, that same opportunity.

Mr. President, I am pleased that the Senate has taken up the National Defense Authorization Act.

There is a 60-year tradition in this body of getting this bill done because the importance of this bill transcends partisanship. In fact, 81 Senators of both parties joined forces earlier this year to override a senseless veto of this important bill by the former President.

Now, while both sides of the aisle can work cooperatively to get this defense policy done, we are now seeing unprecedented--unprecedented-- obstruction by the minority party for passing a budget that will fund the programs that our military and our veterans need.

Now, look, if Republicans succeed in this obstruction, I am going to tell you that the government will be forced to go to a full-year continuing resolution. That is not workable. The result will be frozen spending levels for the Department of Defense and for the Department of Veterans Affairs, which amounts to a $70 billion cut in spending for those two Agencies alone, compared to the appropriations bills prepared in the U.S. Senate.

I serve as chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, and let me tell you what is at stake for America's veterans and their families. Funding will be blocked for priorities like expanding veterans' access to lifesaving mental healthcare services, enhancing women veterans' healthcare, providing housing assistance, and expediting the delivery of benefits and care for those suffering from toxic exposure.

Let me say this again.

If we go to a 1-year continuing resolution, that means we go off of last year's budget, last year's spending bill. We will block priorities like expanding access to mental health services for our veterans. We will block services for expanding women veterans' healthcare. We will block services for housing assistance and for expediting what is one of the most serious issues coming out of the conflict of 20 years in the Middle East, and that is care for those that are suffering from toxic exposure.

The bottom line is this would keep the VA from properly addressing a whole host of issues on behalf of those who would put their lives on the line for this country, and they are going to continue to pay the price for us not doing our job.

As chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I was able to draft a bill that provided a $31 billion increase for defense compared to last year. This military bill is consistent with the spending levels approved by

the bill we are working on today. In fact, in an amendment offered by Senator Inhofe, that amendment passed 25 to 1, which will plus-up this bill.

So why isn't the defense appropriations bill flying through this Senate just like the NDAA?

Well, I will tell you. In September, the Republicans on the Appropriations Committee announced they would vote against all appropriations bills in part because Senator Inhofe's bill doesn't increase defense with enough spending. So the idea here is, just take money and throw it at the wall and hope that it's spent right.

The bottom line is there needs to be plans and there needs to be planning. And I am going to tell you, the last time I checked, the $31 billion increase is a pretty good chunk of dough.

So it is simple. Do we want to fund the VA? Do we want to fund the military? Do we want to fund this country's government?

Or do we want to go back to last year's funding? Which, by the way, would be totally inadequate, but it is what some on the other side of the aisle are advocating right now.

Look, guys, we are in a continuing resolution right now. It expires on December 3. If, in fact, we had a budget deal today, we couldn't get an omnibus out for nearly 5 weeks.

So what I am saying is this: no more finger pointing, no more changing the rules of the game, no more foot dragging. Do what the gang of 10 did on the bipartisan infrastructure package. Let's go into negotiations to get to yes. Let's all work together. Let's not play irresponsible political games with our military and with our veterans and with everybody else who lives in this country.

What are we here for? Are we here to advocate for this country? Or are we here to advocate for a political party?

I am telling you the appropriations bills should have been done last September. We should be sitting at the table today. I am ready to roll up my sleeves and help in any way that I possibly can to make sure these bills get through this body and to the President's desk so we can fund our veterans and fund the needs that they have, so we can fund our military and deal with the threats that are facing us around the world.

It is time, folks. It is time to quit talking, and it is time to start doing.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have 6 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, I rise today to remember a Montanan that made an indelible impact on Washington, DC, and on Montana.

Chuck Lewis was a native Montanan, born in Bozeman, a journalist, and a father. As a young man, Chuck served his country proudly as a Marine Corps Reservist, but he made his career in the news business, which is how many of my colleagues herein the Senate knew him best.

Chuck served as bureau chief here in Washington, DC, for both the Associated Press and Hearst Newspapers, where he spent a lifetime holding the powerful to account and shining a light on the inner workings of our government.

He covered many explosive stories over his career, including the Iran-Contra scandal and the civil rights movement, and won acclaim for his work revealing the truth about friendly fire during the Gulf war. And his legacy is still visible in Washington today, through the scores of young journalists he helped train and mentor throughout the years.

I served in the Senate for the last few years before Chuck retired-- in 2013, he invited me to speak at the Gridiron Club for his inauguration as club president, an honor and a privilege I will never forget.

Chuck was a consummate newsman, a reporters' reporter, and a friend to democracy. He made Montana and his country proud, and I can think of no better way to honor his memory than by enshrining it in the Congressional Record here today.

Madam President, I rise today to honor the life of Charles ``Charlie'' E. White, an outstanding American and decorated Vietnam War veteran.

While Charlie is no longer with us, his legacy lives on. On behalf of my fellow Americans, I would like extend our deepest gratitude for his service to this Nation.

Charlie was born on May 21, 1944, in Kansas City, MO, to Owlen and Lucille White. His parents raised him alongside his brothers Bobby and Jerry and sister Judy in Independence, MO.

Charlie never shied away from service or sacrifice, and when the Vietnam war broke out, he quickly answered the call to duty and enlisted in the U.S. Army. He served our country heroically as a member of the U.S. Army Special Forces, the Green Berets.

As a sergeant in the Green Berets, he engaged in many perilous combat missions in Vietnam, including one where he was wounded by an enemy soldier's bayonet. He donned a scar across his face for the rest of his life from this encounter and was awarded for his exemplary valor with multiple service medals.

After the war, Charlie returned to Kansas and settled into his life as a loving husband and devoted father. Known by many for his hard work ethic and determination, he led a long career working for BNFS Railway and provided a great life for his family.

He is survived by his wife Diane, sons Jack and Steve, daughter Tambra, nine grandchildren, and one great-grandson. His memory lives on through each of them and through his enduring legacy.

I now have the profound honor of recognizing Charlie White with the following honors for his bravery in the line of duty: Bronze Star Medal, Purple Heart Medal, and Silver Star Medal.

These medals represent a small token of our country's appreciation for Charlie's incredible service and sacrifice.

He is an American hero who has made our country proud, and we owe him a great debt of gratitude.

Madam President, I rise today to honor the life of William ``Bud'' LaCounte, a distinguished Montanan and decorated veteran of World War II.

While Bud is no longer with us, his legacy lives on. On behalf of myself, my fellow Montanans, and all Americans, I would like extend our deepest gratitude for his service to this Nation.

Bud's story is one of incredible courage and sacrifice, having survived both American Indian Boarding School and D-day. Born in Bainville, MT, where he now rests, he was a proud member of the Turtle Mountain Tribe of Chippewa Indians. At the age of just 6, he endured the unimaginable when was taken away from his parents and sent to Fort Totten Indian School.

But his commitment to answering the call of duty never faded. And on the eve of the Second World War, Bud enlisted in the U.S. Army. Not long after he joined, Bud deployed to France and fought bravely in the battle of Omaha Beach in Normandy on June 6, 1944.

After the war, he returned to Montana and settled into his life in Billings as a loving husband, dedicated father and grandfather, rancher, dancer, and storyteller. While he has since passed, his memory and spirit lives on in each of us--in his stories, in his children and grandchildren, and in his enduring service and sacrifice to this Nation.

I now have the profound honor of presenting Bud's family with the French Legion of Honor Medal for his bravery in the line of duty. This medal serves as a small token of our country's appreciation for Bud's incredible service and outstanding character.

Let us pay a final salute to Bud, who represents the very best of this great country.