Floor Statements

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, on November 18 of 1923, a young couple living in Indianapolis, IN, George and Gertrude Stevens, welcomed their third child to the world, and they named him Theodore Fulton Stevens-- ``Ted,'' for short.

And like all new parents, I am sure that George and Gertrude were filled with hope and optimism about their boy's future: the things that he would do, the places that he would go, the life that he would have. But I suspect that even they didn't realize what an extraordinary life he would lead, a life of service and accomplishment during which he earned his place as a giant in the history of this Chamber and certainly in my State of Alaska.

So we are looking forward to the 100th anniversary of the birth of the late Senator Ted Stevens. This is coming up on Saturday. So I have come to the floor this afternoon to make sure that all of us who serve here and all who are listening know why it is important that we continue to remember and celebrate this truly great man.

Ted's service to our country began during World War II when he enlisted in the Army Air Corps as a pilot. He supported General Chennault's Flying Tigers in the China-Burma-India theater, flying missions over the Hump many, many times behind enemy lines.

After the war, Ted Stevens completed law school. He moved ``north to the future,'' to Alaska, where he served as a U.S. attorney in Fairbanks. It was just a few years later, during the Eisenhower administration, that he joined the Department of the Interior, where he served as Secretary Fred Seaton's right-hand man in the successful fight for Alaska's statehood. Then, after statehood, Ted was elected to the Alaska House of Representatives. That was 1964.

He was then appointed to the U.S. Senate in 1968. He would go on to win reelection to the Senate seven straight times, receiving almost 80 percent of the vote back in 2002. In all, he served his State and his country for a total of 40 years and 10 days as a Senator--pretty extraordinary.

And Ted was a pretty busy legislator. He chaired four different committees, including Appropriations. His colleagues chose him to be their minority whip, the majority whip, and the assistant Republican leader. He led the Senate's Arms Control Observer Group, the U.S.-China interparliamentary group, and he also spent several years as our President pro tempore.

Ted was, by all accounts, a very powerful legislator, but he used his power for a single purpose, and that was to help his country and to help his State. For him, it was pretty basic.

He helped us settle Aboriginal land claims and create Alaska Native corporations. He secured the authorization to build the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, which remains, to this day, our State's economic backbone and provides for our energy security.

Ted was an outdoors guy. He loved fishing. He was able to write the framework that continues today to guide Federal fisheries management. That is the Magnuson-Stevens Act. He was a champion for national defense as well as international competitiveness, and he truly helped America become a superpower and, I believe, the economic envy of the world.

He helped to fund breast cancer research. He promoted women's participation in sports through title IX. It was incredible what he did for women's athletics and sports.

He also--very proudly and unabashedly; sometimes maybe even gleefully--brought home what I imagined to be billions of dollars. We are calling those now congressionally directed spending. It used to be earmarks back in the day. But they were specifically targeted to build basic infrastructure and to meet community needs across our still young and undeveloped State.

We have terminology in the Senate for those who have been around for a while who observed the traditions and the history of the Senate, but Ted was really an ``old bull'' in Senate parlance. He was a statesman. He was a patriot. He was a force to be reckoned with.

He was known to have just a little bit of a temper; although, I found that, oftentimes, that temper was just used for effect. He would don an Incredible Hulk tie just to show you all that he really meant business, and on those days when you saw him on the floor and he was wearing the tie, you would know maybe it was best to stay out of his way that day or, certainly, to be with him when he was fighting for Alaska's interests.

But as much as he was a fighter in that way, he was also one who worked across party lines. He legislated in the good old-fashioned way. He had a relationship with Senator Dan Inouye from Hawaii--often referred to him as his brother--and they led as a model, that duo of Alaska and Hawaii. They would rotate--literally rotate--on Appropriations being the senior appropriators. One Congress, one would be the chairman; the next Congress, majorities come and go. And there would be no daylight between the two of them. It was an extraordinary relationship built on respect and an understanding that you stand up and you fight for your State's needs.

Ted was one of those who really tried to let the politics stand down and just focus on what was good. He had a saying, and it is certainly one that has been emblazoned on many things that I have seen in these past couple of decades. But he would say:

To hell with politics. Just do what's right for Alaska.

And those are words that many of us still follow and that I think those in the Senate here would do well to live by: Do what is right for the people that have sent you here. Do what is right for your State.

I am so immensely fortunate to have worked with Ted. I was actually a high school intern for Ted Stevens when I graduated from high school-- and then to have the privilege to serve alongside him, to have him as a mentor, a friend, a partner over the course of so many decades.

I have said and have been quoted in different articles about the role that Ted played in Alaska's history:

There is nothing that has happened in my lifetime, there is

nothing that has happened since statehood, that Ted Stevens

did not touch, that he did not build, did not create.

He had that much influence. There really was no one like him. He had a vision. He was determined to achieve it no matter who or what stood in the way.

He won medals for his distinguished military service. He was chosen as ``Alaskan of the Century.'' For the entire 20th century, we designated that honor, that respect for him, for his remarkable service in statehood and in the Senate.

Now, it is true that a Federal investigation and extreme prosecutorial misconduct tipped an election that prematurely ended Ted's time in public office. That type of debasement would cost many their faith in the institutions that they had served for so long. But not with Ted--not with Ted. He kept his faith in the institution, not only in the institution of the Senate but in the institution of the judiciary. He knew he was innocent and maintained that, and he was ultimately exonerated.

But he left a reminder with all of us when he gave his departure speech in 2008. He left the Senate saying that ``my future is in God's hands. Alaska's future is in yours.''

We actually have had buttons made up with Ted's smiling face--I believe it is exactly this picture--and it says:

Alaska's future is in your hands.

Believe me, I look at that every single day. I take it very seriously.

We tragically lost Ted in a plane crash, just 2 years later, after he left office. This was August of 2010. It is still really hard for me to believe that he has been gone for 13 years. But, in so many ways, he is still with us; he is still around.

I see it in my office. I have the same office in the Hart building that he had. The same totem pole that he had in his office is now in my office. I visit his portrait here in the Capitol right outside that door there and visit his grave in Arlington National Cemetery.

At the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, which I am flying in and out of just about every week, it seems there is a statue that sits in kind of a main open area, and it is life size, with Ted sitting there with a briefcase at his feet and just kind of talking extemporaneously. And I walk by and give that hand a little squeeze every time I leave to go somewhere.

I certainly continue to pay my respects, but I often think about how Ted would face the issues that we confront today--not only the issues but how we are confronting them as legislators and lawmakers.

I mentioned Ted's legendary temper. And, understand that we all have different ways that we can respond and react, but, in fairness, I think that Ted would be very discouraged by what he is seeing with the politicization, the disrespect, I think, that sometimes we see with whether it is name-calling or just not treating one another with the level of decorum that the office demands.

As I say, he was an institutionalist. He believed in this institution, as I do, and I think he recognized that if we don't show respect for others, for one another, how can we expect that that respect will be reciprocated from others who are observing us?

Ted sometimes referenced the ``pace of forgetting.'' It was his recognition that times change, people come and go, and how things happened or why they mattered isn't always recorded. Only 26 out of the 100 Members of the current Senate--barely over a quarter of this Chamber--ever had the privilege of serving alongside him. But, while Ted may be gone, he is certainly not forgotten. You don't forget legends like Ted Stevens, not here in the institution that he loved, and, certainly, not back home in Alaska.

We remember ``Uncle Ted''--that is what we still call him--Senator Ted Stevens. We miss him. But as we near his 100th birthday, we will celebrate him. We honor his service and thank him for his life of dedicated work on our behalf.

And just a couple of days from now, on Saturday, November 18, I would encourage everyone to just stop for just a second and think about the contributions of great leaders like Ted Stevens. Certainly, I am going to be standing by to wish this great man a happy 100th birthday and to count the blessings he left behind.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record, following my remarks, a really great editorial from the Anchorage Daily News, which was published on Sunday, November 12, about Senator Steven's birthday.

With that, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 2 p.m.

Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to an extraordinary Alaskan, Victor Fischer, who passed away on October 22, 2023, after an incredible 99-year life where he made an indelible mark on the State of Alaska. Vic's legacy of dedicated public service continues to touch the lives of all Alaskans, and we will miss his kindness, compassion, and mentorship.

In his early life, Vic Fischer witnessed firsthand the regimes of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. He came to the United States at 15 years old and quickly immersed himself in his new country, first through education and later through military service. His service in the Army during World War II took him to France, Germany, and the Philippines. This experience, along with his early years in Berlin and Moscow, helped shape his lifelong belief in the intrinsic value of democracy and human life, values which influenced his many contributions to the State of Alaska. After the war, Vic obtained a graduate degree at MIT and then came to Alaska in 1950 as Anchorage's first city planner, drawn by the promise of adventure and the freedom of opportunity.

Vic's many contributions were invaluable to the formation of Alaska as we know it today. He served in the last territorial legislature and was an active participant in Operation Statehood from its inception, believing strongly that Alaskans should be able to make decisions for their own communities as full members of the Union. As a member of this legislature, Vic cosponsored the repeal of Alaska's death penalty, work he remained proud of throughout his life as someone who witnessed the power of an authoritarian state to kill its citizens. He played an important role as a delegate to the Alaska Constitutional Convention, helping draft the Alaska Constitution for our new State. Several decades later, as a State senator, Vic worked with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to improve Alaskan education, promote women's rights, social infrastructure, fishing rights, and much more. He remained politically active until his final months, educating Alaskans about our constitution, governance structures, and advocacy at all levels. As the author and journalist Charles Wohlforth wrote shortly after Vic's passing, ``Time on Earth is only an opportunity. Fischer had a large share, and made use of it all. He remained optimistically engaged deep into his 90s, always making friends, always committed, always connecting.''

Generations of Alaskans will remember Vic Fischer as a kind man with strong, clear values who committed his life to serving Alaska. Vic had a fundamental belief in the value of democracy, encouraging people to participate in their local communities, their State, and their government and to stand up against authoritarianism. He opposed discrimination in any form and emphasized the need to dedicate time and effort to those without power. Above all, he encouraged Alaskans to exercise the civic power to vote, believing that we all have an obligation to each other and to our State to do so. Vic's lifelong work and political activism reflect his belief that Alaskans can come together to solve any problem, provided we share a love for Alaska and a willingness to do what is right.

The life and legacy of Vic Fischer will continue to inspire Alaskans across our State, and we will all miss his integrity and friendship. Our condolences are extended to his wife Jane Angvik, his children, and grandchildren.

Madam President, we just heard from the Senator of North Dakota talking about the imperative of ensuring that our borders are secure, particularly at the southern border.

We had an opportunity yesterday in the Senate Appropriations Committee to hear from Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken about the administration's supplemental funding request. If there were one common thread there that was underscored over and over, it was the dire need-- the immediate need--of support for our allies, our allies who are locked, really, in two existential wars that threaten both their sovereignties and their people. So the support for Israel and the support for Ukraine, in my view, is one that I shared with the two Secretaries: that they are inextricably linked and our support for both must be inextricably linked.

We have all watched with horror as Hamas has unleashed this terrorist attack on civilians, killing more than 1,400 Israelites and taking at least 240 Israelites hostage; then in Ukraine, with Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine homeland killing over 70,000 Ukrainians in just a hellbent mission to reclaim their old Soviet territory.

It is times like this when I think we look to the role that the United States should be playing. We are not--no, we are not--the police force for the world. We are not there to fight the wars for others. But when the world is watching democracy face direct assaults from terrorists and from authoritarian regimes, this is the time that the United States must be leading from the front. We have a responsibility to our allies, and we have a responsibility to the world at large, whether that is providing humanitarian aid, promoting stability, or lending support through the most powerful military in the world.

This is the United States. These are responsibilities that, I think, are significant, and, again, others from around the world look to us for that leadership.

Now, there are some who would suggest that we have supported Ukraine enough; that we should move and direct our attention only to our own borders; that the situation in Israel is such that we should focus exclusively there. As we heard yesterday in the Appropriations hearing, we do not have the luxury of dealing with one crisis at a time. That would certainly make things easier, but we do not have that.

So to those who would suggest that we must abandon our allies in their most desperate hour, I would remind them that this defense spending comes right back to the United States through our own defense industrial base, providing an opportunity to refresh outdated war- readiness items, making the United States stronger in return as well as providing jobs to Americans. So this is not just about providing aid to others outside our borders. This is also helping to strengthen us.

There was a comment that I had read: The United States can lead through the power of example; but in order to be most effective, we need the example of our power.

It is that industrial base that we know we have work to do there.

Then, to those who say we need to be looking at home--again, as the Senator from North Dakota mentioned--we do. We must pay attention to those who are coming across our border illegally, those who would threaten us from within. We cannot ever, ever lose sight of that obligation and the responsibility; but I think it is important to recognize that this supplemental request does include support for our Department of Homeland Security to strengthen our border. It also provides over $1 billion toward combating fentanyl--just the devastating drug that has taken the lives of far, far, far too many Americans. So that also must be part of this.

What we are talking about with this supplemental is, effectively, four legs of a chair. Think about what makes

that chair that you are sitting in stable. You have got four pillars here. One essential imperative: We must be there to support our friends in Israel. We must be there. An imperative is to continue our support for Ukraine. We must address our southern border--an absolute imperative. Then that fourth underpinning that provides for that greater stability is the threat from the Indo-Pacific.

So I think we know that, within the contours of this package that the President has sent to us, there is room to move things around; there is room to subtract or add. But I think it is these four fundamental pillars here that are so inextricably linked that we cannot lose sight of what it means and what our role here in the United States is.

The violence that we see may be across the globe, but the eyes of the world are squarely on us. Our enemies are probing. They are waiting for our response. They want to see what the United States is capable of. Can they only do one thing at a time? Can they only do one thing? And, if they can only do one thing, who are they going to choose? Are they going to be there for their allies in words only or, when things get hot over here, are they going to walk away over there? We have seen how that failure in Afghanistan has reverberated around the world and what it has meant to our friends and allies.

I would suggest that this supplemental package is measured, and it is necessary as a strategic response. I will tell you, our opponents are praying that we fail to take this up--as, again, that balance. So we will and we should discuss and debate the contours within, but I would hope that we would stand together and unite on a package that is good, that is solid, and that is stable for our country and for our friends and allies.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am pleased to be able to follow my colleague from Nebraska in urging us as Members of Congress--really, us as Americans--to come together in a show of solidarity as we speak about the awful war that we are seeing unfold in Israel; of the unspeakable actions that we have seen by the terrorist group Hamas; of the awful, the barbaric, the genocidal violence and murders that we have witnessed that have been committed against thousands of innocent Israelis, beginning on October 8.

None of us can unsee what we saw that morning, throughout that day, and then in the ensuing days that followed. We may be thousands of miles away here in the United States, but we are reminded of it daily when we turn on our televisions, when we open the newspapers, when we open our social media--the atrocities, the brutality, the kidnapping of civilians, the murdered children, elders, women. These coldblooded crimes that have been committed by Hamas terrorists are unimaginable and absolutely unforgivable; and our hearts are just heavy.

In just talking with people, as I have had an opportunity to be on multiple coasts this week, from Alaska to Tennessee to California to here in Washington, DC--on the airplanes in between--people are just heavy with sadness, with grief, for what we are seeing in Israel, for what we are seeing as to the Israeli people. It is hard to imagine what so many families are going through right now.

So, at a time like this, when sometimes you are not quite sure how to proceed or how to move, it is so important to make sure of those words of commitment, of those words of support: that we stand with you, that we unequivocally--unequivocally--support Israel.

We unequivocally support Israel's right to defend their people from these brutal terrorist attacks. We unequivocally stand against Hamas, which, as Secretary of Defense Austin has said, has deliberately committed acts that match and even exceed the absolute evils inflicted by ISIS. We must assure the world that we stand with Israel and against the brutal genocide that we see from these terrorists. We must be unwavering; we must be ironclad; we must be resolute in our commitment to Israel. And we use these words time and time again.

Here in the Senate, there is a resolution that has been introduced-- signed by almost every single Member of this body--that reaffirms Israel's right to self-defense; that calls on all countries to unequivocally condemn Hamas's war on Israel; demanding that Hamas release--safely release--all hostages; condemning Iran's support for global terrorism, including its support for terrorist groups such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad; calling on the United States to lead an international effort, including through sanctions--as the Senator from Nebraska was just outlining--to deprive of Hamas and Iran and other Iranian groups their sources of funding.

So these words of support, whether through a resolution or words on the floor, are so important as they are, but they also have to be matched by our deeds, by our actions. For Congress, that means ensuring that the Israel Defense Forces has the resources that they need to defend their people.

First and foremost, the Iron Dome must be at full strength to protect civilians from short-range rockets. The enormous strain that these Hamas attacks have placed on the Iron Dome, of course, means that the system is low on interceptors. We can and we must resupply Israel and help ensure rockets launched by Hamas cannot penetrate their defenses.

Congress must come together to provide funding and all the munitions and equipment that Israel may request. This is not a time for us to hem and haw here. We can't bog down in political infighting. This is their time of greatest need. We must provide Israel and her people with everything that they ask of us. We have to be there. We must be there for our strongest ally--today, tomorrow, and going forward.

So for those Americans at home who are asking, ``What can we do?'' we can individually--we can individually--step forward. You can support our efforts here in Congress, but you can also support our Jewish friends and our neighbors who are seeing a surge in anti-Semitism at home and abroad.

In Anchorage, over the weekend, there were several different gatherings of solidarity for Israel. I had an opportunity--I wasn't able to participate. I was there virtually. I was on an airplane for the first one, but I was able to meet with Rabbi Greenberg the day after. It was heartwarming to hear the solidarity that came out from so many in our Anchorage, in our Alaska community embracing our Jewish neighbors.

But I tell you, it was very heartbreaking when he showed me a picture of the assembly of armed security that had come together for this event to be there to provide protection. To know that security and protective details are needed in our domestic synagogues where people of Jewish faith gather is heartbreaking, and it is heartbreaking to acknowledge that this is a reality here in this country.

The FBI just released a statistic that showed anti-Jewish incidents were the most common religion-related hate crimes, totaling 1,124 reported incidents in 2022 alone. Not a single one of us should accept those numbers or the acts behind them, nor should we accept

the fact that they are growing worse in these months ahead.

So, please, check in. Check in on friends who not only have to confront the existential threat their homeland, Israel, is facing but who are also facing hatred here at home. Anti-Semitism comes in many forms, and we must do everything we can to combat it.

Of course, we have all seen the story in the news of the 6-year-old Chicago boy who was killed because he was Muslim--stabbed, stabbed by his landlord, and his mother stabbed. To see this peaceful family who had nothing to do with the conflict in Israel destroyed by an act of racist violence is beyond comprehension.

We must never tolerate hate in any form against any people in Israel, in America, or anywhere else.

So we join countless Americans in prayer--prayer for the families of those who have lost loved ones in Hamas's terrorist attacks on Israel, those who are held as hostages, prayer for the innocents in Gaza, and prayer for the Americans who have to watch their loved ones face danger at home and abroad.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, there will be many opportunities in the next few days and in the weeks following to reflect on the life and the contributions of Senator Dianne Feinstein and, as has been noted, the significant legislation that she advanced over three decades here, what that meant to her State, to her constituents, really, to her country, but also to us.

And as I think about the work that we all take on here, we know that we are capable of much, but we are made even more capable by extraordinary staff. And one of the things that I have noted over the years is the extremely loyal staff that Senator Feinstein had built around her. I know that they are grieving today, as is Dianne's family and so many friends. But I think we acknowledge them at the same time of this very significant loss of not only a colleague but of a friend.

And I think it is important that people understand that, here in the U.S. Senate, a place that can be so divisive at times, true friendships actually exist. And whether it is the Republican leader and his wife over the years dining together or, as Senator Collins has stated, just the very generous nature of Senator Feinstein sharing--sharing her works, sharing her art, sharing a purse--I still have that seersucker suit.

I still have that seersucker suit. When we all engage in the annual ritual of donning the seersucker suit--mine is now 20 years old; I think yours is, too--our reality is, it is a direct reminder of the spontaneous generosity of a woman.

Dianne Feinstein was generous. She was gracious. She was thoughtful. She was kind. There were many times when

we were looking into a weekend when we were going to be here, and she, being from California, and I, being from Alaska--recognizing that probably neither one of us was going to be making it to that other coast, she would say: ``Lisa, let's go to dinner.'' Sometimes, we would just spontaneously make that happen, and other times, we would just make the plans. But that was that outreach to do so.

What she did as one of the female leaders in our women Senators group was she made sure that the dinners we have engaged in over the years, that those continued. She would come and say, ``Isn't it about time we have another dinner?'' And she would be right, and we would organize it. It was, again, a reminder of what it means to come together as colleagues, yes, but really the more that we can do to build those relationships that make a hard job just a little bit easier. Dianne was able to focus on that in a giving and, again, a very generous-- generous--way.

I think it pained us all--it certainly pained me--in just these past months to see what I believed to be grossly unfair attacks on a woman who was in failing health. And I think for some who would focus on that, they would fail to appreciate what this extraordinary woman, what this extraordinary leader had contributed not only to the Senate but, again, to her State and to her country.

So as we speak of the beauty of Dianne Feinstein and all that she gave to this country, I hope we reflect on the words that Senator Murray shared with us--that her commitment to this job, her commitment to the people was so much that she would put her physical health, how she was feeling--some days, we just don't feel like coming in, you know? Senator Feinstein was here. Senator Feinstein was with an institution that she cared about. She cared deeply about it. She wanted to make sure that we were the best of the best and we reflected that.

I think she would actually be really pleased with the resolution about dress. I don't need to go into that on the floor. But Senator Feinstein was a woman who was put together--put together in her presence and in her bearing. I think she wanted to see the Senate in a dignified and a respectful manner at all times.

As I walked in this morning, I thought she probably wouldn't approve of my shoes, and I am sorry, Dianne. But I share this because I think it demonstrates again where the commitment of this woman was. It was to the people she served, but it was also to an institution that she loved and she dignified with everything she did right until the end.

We have lost an extraordinary woman, and we have lost a friend. But they never leave. They will always be with us, as will Dianne.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I am really very pleased to be on the floor with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to talk about this.

As my colleague from North Carolina has pointed out, it was pretty clear--it was more than pretty clear; it was crystal clear--what the intent of this provision was. The intent was really designed to prevent gun violence. What this administration is doing with this interpretation is so far afield of where we were with the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that it is almost breathtaking.

I had an opportunity less than a week ago to be back home in Fairbanks, and I went to the Tanana Valley shooting range. I was greeted by about probably 25, maybe even 30 high school students from Hutchison, from West Valley, and from Lathrop who were all part of the rifle team. They were there, pretty proud of what they were doing and how they were doing it; but they wanted to know, they wanted to understand how we could possibly--we here in Washington, DC, we in the Congress could possibly be doing something that was going to be limiting or restricting opportunities to understand more about firearms and firearm safety and hunting safety.

This is hunting season in Alaska. It is moose season. It is duck season. We all have our firearms out as we are providing for our families. In my family, one of the first things that you learn in a household that has firearms is about gun safety, firearm safety. Those schools that have those programs that provide for hunters' safety, those are the ones we all want our kids to be part of. It is not just the hunters' safety, it is the archery programs.

Again, when you are thinking about programs that help build young people in strong ways--in leadership skills, in safety, in discipline-- that is what these kids from the Fairbanks area schools were telling me.

I said: What else do you learn other than, really, being a sharpshooter?

They said: A sense of discipline--discipline and respect. They said: Every single one of us--there is not one of us in this room here who has been subject to any kind of discipline from within the school. We kind of look out for one another. There is a respect that comes when you are operating around a rifle.

The other issue that they raised was, they said: We understand that the way the Department of Education is interpreting this is not only hunters' safety programs would be at risk, not only archery programs would be at risk, but culinary programs where you have to use a knife with a blade that is in excess of 2\1/2\ inches, I believe it is.

So how do you work with a student when you are trying to chop celery in a classroom if you can't use a chopping knife? What do you do in a rural school where all aspects, practically, of your curriculum surround those matters that are relevant to you, subsistence? So as part of your science class, you are cleaning or preparing a skin from a seal or a walrus, and you are using an ulu. Believe it or not, the Department of Education would say that that ulu that, basically, is preparing your food for your family, would be a dangerous instrument and you can't teach that in the classroom.

Trying to explain what the Department of Education has interpreted this to mean as separate from what we, as the lawmakers who help put this into law--trying to explain to them made no sense.

Do you know what their message was? Can you just fix it? That is what we are here on the floor to do today.

It has not only been the work that Senator Tester has done with his bill, the work that Senator Cornyn has done with his bill, the work that Senator Barrasso has done with his bill, the letters that have gone out--we have given the Department the ample opportunity to fix it on their own. But if they don't, we have got to do the legislative fix, and I am standing with my colleagues to do just that.

Mr. President, in Alaska, we have no shortage of scenic wilderness to explore. From the unrivaled beauty of a bluebird day in the Prince William Sound, to the peaks of the Denali National Park and Preserve, to the winding tributaries of the glacier- fed Tanana river, my bias may be showing, but Alaska is the Nation's undisputed leader in outdoor recreational opportunities, both in sum and splendor.

But one of Alaska's most treasured locales is not just an exemplary jewel case of our outdoors, but a labor of love from the outstanding volunteers and employees who have put their heart and soul into making it a world-class nature center. The Eagle River Nature Center is the crowning centerpiece of the Chugach State Park, located in Southcentral Alaska within the municipality of Anchorage. And the driving force behind the Eagle River Nature Center has been its cofounder and executive director, Asta Spurgis. Sadly, for the many Alaskans and out- of-state visitors who frequent the Eagle River Nature Center, Asta is leaving her post.

From 1993 through 1995, the park's budget was dropping off, and the center could no longer afford to operate year-round, forcing them to have limited hours only in the summer. In stepped the Friends of Eagle River Nature Center, Inc., a nonprofit formed in 1996 that revived the park by forging new trails, offering maintenance for public use facilities, and stepping up in the day-to-day operations of the park that helped it become a destination for guests across the world. At the head of that effort was Asta Spurgis, whose passion and dedication for ensuring

that the park was accessible and pristine meant finding new and innovative ways to fund the operations.

From its inception as a bold experiment to where it stands now, as a shining model of what public-private partnership can look like, Asta Spurgis has been at the helm. Alaskans will miss her commitment and leadership, but her legacy can be seen in the students who visit and get firsthand classes on natural sciences and the tens of thousands of Alaskans and tourists who get to explore the Chugach State Park. I commend Asta for her lifetime of work in making Alaska's wilderness a more beautiful and more accessible space to explore.

Mr. President, I join my colleague in supporting this very important reauthorization, the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act, NAHASDA. This has been 10 years in the making. This has seen process, this has seen input, this has seen extraordinary effort, and, as the chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee has noted, this process has led to a place where we were able to incorporate this into the NDAA last Congress. Earlier this year, we moved it out of committee by voice vote.

We need to move it. People need housing. It is a priority in so many of our States. I thank those who have been working with us over the years to

accomplish this, and I would ask for strong support in this body for housing within our American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian communities.

Mr. President, my dear friend, Robert Clark Penney, passed away on March 14, 2023. As we prepare to say our final goodbyes at a memorial ceremony this coming weekend, I am among many Alaskans who are reflecting on the legacy Bob created across our state and especially along his beloved Kenai River.

Named Alaska's Ambassador for Sport Fishing by our State legislature in 2017, Bob was known for his success in business and his tireless advocacy of the iconic Kenai River watershed. But, like many Alaskans, he started with humble roots in the lower 48. Bob was born in Portland in 1932, where he showed his business acumen early. At the age of 10, he and his sister Patsy were gifted a pony. While his sister was gathering her friends for a free ride, Bob was on the next block with the pony, selling rides for a dime apiece.

As he grew up, Bob played on the high school tennis team and worked part-time after school hours. He also loved the outdoors, hunting birds and fishing for salmon in the local rivers near Gresham, OR.

Bob answered the call to head north to Alaska in 1951, when the lumber company he worked for expanded into what was then still a U.S. Territory. When Bob was just 19, the company offered him the job of managing their new Alaska prospect. Bob excelled there, but it was a job he took at Wade Trailer sales in 1956 that inspired him to enter real estate, where he would really make his mark.

After learning the ropes at Wade's, Bob opened Penney Trailer Sales in 1959, selling mobile homes. Bob soon grew the business to include RVs and housing for construction camps. In just a few short years, he was the largest mobile home dealer in our new State. During that time, Bob also began to invest in real estate and building development. He built everything from single-family homes to massive commercial real estate ventures spanning the west coast and Mexico. Through it all, Bob always gave back, seemingly more by the year. His philosophy in both life and business was to ``wear the other guy's shoes'' and ``always leave a little bit for the next person.'' Bob served on the boards of the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce, the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation, and the Alaska Regional Hospital Board of Trustees. He was a philanthropist, starting the Anchorage Mayor's Charity Ball, which has now raised more than $4 million for charitable organizations in our State's largest city.

When the oil industry started to boom in Alaska, Bob felt the State needed greater community involvement to bring attention to this opportunity and others like it. He formed the Organization for the Management of Alaska's Resources--OMAR--later renamed the Resource Development Council--RDC--and included many State leaders in the effort. RDC is now Alaska's largest resource trade association-- encompassing the fishing, forestry, mining, oil and gas, and tourism industries--and its advocacy remains critical to growing our economy and reaching our potential as a state.

Bob also had a distinguished tenure as a member of the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council. The federally chartered council is critical to the sustainable management of Alaska's commercial fisheries, one of the largest employers and economic drivers in our State. Bob's service on the board contributed to the health and well- being of the largest fishery in America, but his true passion was the conservation of the fishery of the Kenai River in southcentral Alaska.

Bob was always delighted by Kenai Chinooks, or ``Kings,'' the largest salmon in the world. He loved to take friends and visitors out on the river and the pictures of happy anglers and their catch of the day adorned the walls of his riverfront home. Bob realized these fish are an amazing resource for the State and for Alaskans, as more than half our population can access the river by road in a matter of hours. Bob knew that Alaskans could feed their families and fill their freezers from this river in perpetuity if it was managed correctly.

So, in 1986, Bob founded the Kenai River Sportfishing Association. Under his direction, the association grew into Alaska's premier sportfish and fish

habitat conservation organization, helping to ensure the long-term sustainability of the river.

Bob and two of his friends, Senator Ted Stevens and Bix Bonney, utilized KRSA to start the Kenai River Classic, an invitational fishing tournament held each August. The tournament has brought in elected officials and industry leaders from across America, educating them about the Kenai River and its needs. It has raised over $25 million for conservation of the local watershed, enabling the rehabilitation of critical fish spawning habitat, opportunities for youth, and better access to the river for both subsistence and sportfishing.

``Alaska's Sport Fish Ambassador'' was true to his name and title, but family and friends were the driving force in his life. Bob met his wife Jeannie in 1973 at a dinner party in Girdwood; they dated and got married on New Year's Eve in 1974 on a sailing schooner in Kawela Bay off Oahu. Since the vessel was ``just outside the limits,'' their marriage license lists the latitude and longitude, instead.

Bob always had big ideas for Alaska. He couldn't walk through a room without taking up one cause or other. He followed through, helping to build our young State. But Bob was always happiest holding court at his home, ``River Presence,'' on the Kenai, surrounded by his family and friends.

Bob is survived by 4 grown children, 10 grandchildren, 7 great- grandchildren, and leaves a remarkable legacy, from economic development to philanthropy, to world-class fishing on the Kenai River. My family and I knew Bob for decades, were proud to call him our friend, and are grateful for all he did to enrich our great State.

Mr. President, this past weekend, on July 15, 2023, Alaskans marked a milestone as we recognized a century of operations for the Alaska Railroad Corporation.

The Railroad, as we call it, along with all of its builders, operators, and leaders, has been a critical catalyst for our still- young State's growth and development. For 100 years now, the Railroad has transported passengers between Alaska's largest cities, bolstered tourism and commerce across hundreds of miles of terrain, helped build some of our State's most critical infrastructure, and supported our Nation's wartime efforts.

It took decades for the Alaska Railroad Corporation to become the entity we recognize today. The Alaska Central Railway, later renamed the Alaska Railroad, laid its first track in Alaska in 1903. It started in Seward and extended 50 miles north. The Alaska Central Railway reorganized in 1910 as the Alaska Northern Railway Co., later extending the railroad to Kern Creek, 71 miles from Seward.

In 1914, the U.S. Congress, understanding the intrinsic value in the Railroad's expansion, funded the construction and operation of a railroad from Seward to Fairbanks. On July 15, 1923, President Warren G. Harding drove a golden spike to unite the track at Nenana, marking the completion of the Alaska Railroad as we know it today. From 1940 to 1943, the Railroad was integral to our Nation's efforts in World War II, hauling military and civilian supplies across the State.

In 1962, the Railroad established its first car-barge service in Whittier, followed by train-ship service in June 1964, which revolutionized the State by enabling rail cars from the lower 48 to be shipped to any point along its route. In the early to mid-1970s, the Railroad supported construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System by shipping and storing pipe and construction materials between Valdez, Seward, and Fairbanks, where it was then trucked to the North Slope. In 1981, the Alaska Railroad entered into agreements with Fairbanks and Anchorage school district career centers to create a tour-guide program to train high school students to serve as hosts onboard summer passenger trains. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the authorization of the transfer of the Alaska Railroad to the State of Alaska. In 1985, the railroad became the property of the State of Alaska, and the Alaska

Railroad Corporation, or ARRC, was born.

Today, the Alaska Railroad Corporation operates regularly scheduled public transportation service that connects roughly half a million Alaskans and visitors to communities from Seward to Fairbanks each year. Passengers can access remote regions of our State, including areas off the road system. Some of the most popular Alaskan treasures that local residents and tourists alike can visit include the Chugach National Forest, Kenai Fjords National Park, and Denali National Park and Preserve.

The Railroad is also a vital part of our supply chains, linking the Alaskan interior to Seward, Whittier, and the Port of Alaska in Anchorage. The Railroad hauled 3.7 million tons of freight last year, including natural resources, industrial goods, and more.

As we reach this 100th anniversary, I join Alaskans in recognizing that our Railroad is a lot more than locomotives and rails. Many talented men and women have dedicated their lives to its safe operation and to carrying passengers and freight across wide expanses, rivers, and mountains, showcasing our State and contributing to our economy.

I join the rest of the Alaska delegation in congratulating the Alaska Railroad Corporation on 100 years of operation and look forward to a new century of investment, expansion, and service ahead to meet the continued needs of our State and Nation.

Mr. President, more is happening with minerals around the world than ever before. We are seeing global demand driven by growth and technology, legislation and regulation. Everything is just skyrocketing. Yet the global supply is often tenuous. Really, it is very thoroughly dominated by China, and there are clear warning signs that we here in the United States urgently need to reduce our foreign dependence by rebuilding our domestic supply chains.

As we stand here today, our Nation's lack of mineral security is a glaring vulnerability. It is a threat to our security. It is a threat to our competitiveness. It is a threat to our geopolitical power and our ability to lead on industries of the future. The obvious solution is to do a lot more in this space, which makes sense, but it starts with mining, and until we have achieved stable, affordable supplies of as many minerals as possible here at home, that vulnerability will continue.

We have begun to put a framework in place to do that. We did this through the legislation that I had introduced, the American Mineral and Security Act. We also did some with the bipartisan infrastructure law and with the provisions that Chairman Manchin added to the Inflation Reduction Act. These are a good start, but there is no shortage of minerals where meaningful action is still needed.

So we could talk about copper--the ``metal of electrification'' as my friend Dr. Daniel Yergin puts it--where forecasts of shortages in the twenties and thirties are becoming commonplace. Now, I would be the first one to acknowledge that we cannot produce copper everywhere it is found--I think there are just a few places that are too, too sensitive--but we need to make up for this by approving projects in locations where it does make sense, and that is simply not happening right now.

We could also talk about gallium and germanium. Just before the Fourth of July, our Independence Day, China announced export controls for both of these critical minerals as part of their escalating war over semiconductors. So what is our domestic reaction to that? Well, it is not independence. It has really become more of a scramble. We have seen with the Department of the Interior that they have repeatedly delayed a good project in Alaska--this is the Ambler Access Project-- that would provide access to long-term supplies of both germanium and gallium.

What we are doing here is giving China leverage. They have certainly seized on it in what could well become a pattern across dozens of minerals and materials. In a very real sense, in many ways, we are giving them bullets for the gun that they will hold us hostage to. And it is not just here in the United States. We saw it just few years back when China cut off supplies of rare earths to Japan in an effort to utilize that leverage.

Today, I have come to the floor to discuss a different type of critical mineral, and that is graphite.

Graphite is described by the U.S. Geological Survey as a ``soft, crystalline form of carbon'' that ``occurs naturally in metamorphic rocks such as marble, schist, and gneiss.'' Graphite ``exhibits the properties of a metal and a nonmetal,'' which include ``thermal and electrical conductivity'' as well as ``inertness, high thermal resistance, and lubricity.'' Graphite is valued because it is relatively lightweight. Yet it is very dense. It is a good semiconductor, a good conductor, and more stable than many of the alternatives.

Now, most of us are most familiar with the graphite that we know in pencils. Pencils don't contain lead; they contain graphite. It is also used in things like brake linings, steelmaking, headphones, and today, perhaps most crucially, advanced rechargeable batteries and fuel cells. So if you care about smartphones, if you care about EVs, if you care about climate change and the energy transition, there is really no way around it--you will need to care a lot more about graphite than you probably currently do.

Lithium-ion batteries typically require far more graphite than lithium--up to 15 times more. Graphite can account for more than a quarter of those

batteries' weight and up to 95 percent of their anode materials. That makes graphite both fundamental to our mineral security and really very irreplaceable for many technologies.

I am not a materials scientist, and I think most aren't, but for those who aren't, Bloomberg's Liam Denning recently summarized graphite's use in EVs as follows. He said:

Graphite is the main material for the battery's anode,

which takes in and holds lithium ions during charging and

releases them when energy is needed. . . . [G]raphite's

combination of high thermal and electrical conductivity with

chemical inertness makes it very useful when you want to

cycle through lots of energy flows without stuff degrading or

blowing up. A typical 60 kilowatt-hour EV battery might hold

160 pounds of graphite compared with perhaps 20 pounds of

lithium. And while the exact mix of other metals such as

cobalt and nickel in the other electrode--the cathode--may

change, graphite's place in the anode is more or less fixed.

So more technical than most of us would want, but just to put it in very simple terms, if we want more smartphones and we want more EVs on the roads, we are going to need a lot more graphite for them. That is one of the main reasons that Chairman Manchin and I, along with Senators Risch and Cassidy, urged President Biden back in March of last year to declare graphite and other key battery minerals as ``essential to the national defense'' under the Defense Production Act of 1950. I appreciate and I thank the President for doing just that and then working with us to secure hundreds of millions of dollars in Federal appropriations for projects to produce them.

My view is, we don't have any more time to waste here. One rough estimate is that every additional 1 million EVs will require 80,000 tons of graphite. That is why Benchmark Minerals projects the world will need 97 new graphite mines by 2035 compared to just over 70 that are operating today. It is why the International Energy Agency, the IEA, projects that demand for graphite for clean energy technologies could increase 25-fold--that is 2,500 percent--by the year 2040.

So you have to ask the question, are we on track to produce any of that? The answer is no--not even remotely. A consultancy by the name of Project Blue has projected an annual deficit of about 856,000 tons of graphite by the year 2030.

Some of the anticipated demand can be filled by synthetic graphite, which is made from fossil fuels such as petroleum coke, but a large portion will need to come from newly mined natural graphite. Here is the problem with that: The United States has not produced natural graphite for about three decades now--since at least 1990 and perhaps as far back as 1950, depending on your source. Instead, the United States is entirely import-dependent, bringing in 100 percent of our supply each year. Last year, that amounted to 82,000 metric tons of natural graphite. And where did we get it from? China was the No. 1 source of our imports--at least 100 percent foreign dependence.

You might think it can't get any worse than that, but trust me, it can, and it is. We can always import more volume, and that is exactly what is happening. According to USGS, after a few down years in 2019 and 2020, our natural graphite imports rose by 48 percent in 2021 and by 55 percent in 2022. So we are just--we need the stuff. Where are we getting it? We are getting it imported. Where are we importing it from? China.

Another part of the problem is that even if the United States begins to produce graphite again, we won't know exactly what to do with it. That is because we also lack the processing capabilities to turn natural graphite into useful advanced material for batteries and other products. This is, again, another area where China leads, and we are paying very little attention here.

It will take a sustained effort to catch up on graphite processing, so the question is, How long is this going to take? What will it cost us? Who will our partners in these efforts be?

There has been some speculation that China's warning shot on gallium might be a precursor for something that really hurts us, like restrictions on graphite. According to Benchmark Minerals, China is responsible for 61 percent of global graphite production and 98 percent of processed graphite materials. EVs previously failed because the technology just wasn't there. Yet it isn't hard to imagine them failing again because the minerals and the materials aren't there.

If you are thinking ``OK, this is bad,'' you are right. It is bad. But there is hope. There is hope on the horizon in the form of Graphite One. This is a project in northwest Alaska. This is about 37 miles outside of the community of Nome, AK.

This is not a picture of Nome, AK, although in the wintertime, it could be just about that white. But what I want to demonstrate here is what could be considered a crude writing utensil. I will just write my name there. This is a hunk of graphite. This is solid graphite. It gets your fingers a little bit dirty. This is a piece of graphite that I picked up at the mine site in Nome. If I were to give you this piece of graphite and you were to hold it in one hand and you were to hold your cell phone in the other hand, you would be holding two pieces of graphite. This is graphite. This is graphite. But this graphite from Alaska would probably be the first piece of American graphite, of domestic graphite that you have ever held in your life, because there is nothing domestic about the graphite that goes into our cell phones today.

This is just a small part, a small sample of what we can glean from the Graphite One project, which USGS reports is North America's largest natural graphite deposit. It is a world-class deposit. It is absolutely massive compared to others around the world.

I mentioned that I was out there in Nome 3 days ago. On Saturday, I was on the Graphite One property. It consists of well over 100 mining claims on non-Federal land. This mine project is not new. They actually mined this back in the early 1900s and then stopped production some time ago. But I was able to visit the base camp there in Nome, the Graphite Creek field camp, as well as a drill pad where the core samples are being taken as part of the summer season. Of course, summer in Alaska out in that region just means that is when the mosquitoes are the most intense.

It was eye-opening to see how Graphite One is moving forward as they are doing further exploration with this absolutely critical resource. I have always supported Graphite One and what they are doing in Alaska, but really, after my site visit there on Saturday, I am convinced that this is a project that every one of us--those of us here in Congress, the Biden administration, all of us--needs to support.

Graphite One's vision is to build a complete domestic supply chain for natural graphite. Their project would be anchored by responsible mining of the Graphite Creek deposit, producing tens of thousands of metric tons a year. But it would also extend to a battery anode manufacturing facility in Washington State, which would be colocated with a battery recycling plant--which is why their CEO, Anthony Huston, often describes Graphite One as ``a technology company that mines graphite.''

This is a major opportunity for us. Previously, I have expressed some disappointment to Secretary Granholm that the Biden administration is heavily subsidizing a graphite processing plant in Louisiana that imports graphite. They import graphite from Mozambique, an unstable regime with a poor human rights record, a region where there has been significant labor unrest and where ISIS is reportedly active.

It is not too late to realize the immense value that Graphite One holds for our economy and our security. This project will give us a significant domestic supply, breaking our wholesale dependence on imports. This will be a secure supply of natural graphite from day one. This stuff is pretty pure. Let me tell you, this was not just a random piece of graphite; this graphite is literally under your very feet, that you pick up with your hands. It is solid, solid material. It will be a secure supply of natural graphite from day one without the political and the security risks associated with so many projects that are located abroad.

The health and environmental standards for Graphite One will both be exceedingly high and fully transparent. The company's leadership is working hard to ensure the project creates opportunities for the people who live in the region in Nome, as well as the Inupiaq communities of Brevig Mission, Mary's Igloo, and Teller.

This is where I want to end my comments because, during my tour of Graphite One, I saw firsthand how even in these very developmental stages, this project is already benefiting these Alaska Native communities.

Graphite One is committed to Alaska hire. They are working with a program that they call Arctic Access to help place disadvantaged individuals into meaningful jobs. We were able to talk a little bit about that program.

One of the individuals who really struck me was a gentleman by the name of John. He was from Brevig Mission. He had been the water treatment operator there in Brevig for some years. He was hired to run Graphite One's very sophisticated water and wastewater system. John told me he knew next to nothing about this state-of-the-art system there, which could have been disqualifying in some places, but at Graphite One, it didn't matter. Rather than hiring somebody from the lower 48, they hired people to train him, and he is now succeeding. The guy was just beaming from ear to ear about the opportunities and the excitement that he has not only for the job but what this mine meant for the region.

For people like John and other Alaskans, Graphite One is doing it right. I am proud to have them operating in Alaska.

This is an opportunity for us as a country. Again, when we think about our dependence, when we think about our vulnerability on others for critical minerals and particularly our growing vulnerability on one country--China--everything we can do to responsibly address this is a step forward, and Alaska has a significant opportunity in front of us.

I would hope that every Member of the Senate and every member of the administration will look at these as opportunities and join in doing everything we can to support this important work.

With that, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that privileges of the floor be granted to my second session summer interns, who are Madisen Lundamo, Jackson Church, Claire Moreland, Zev Katz, Sierra Sterling, McKinley Rhoades, Lillian Yang, Cameron Paison, Emma Mullet, Shanone Tejada, and to my Senate Committee on Indian Affairs interns, who are Morgan Gray and Micah Wimmer, for the month of July 2023, as well as to my Coast Guard fellow, Amanda Klawinski, for the duration of the 118th Congress.

Mr. President, I rise to honor the life and legacy of William ``Bill'' Deshay English, an Alaskan who passed away on January 11, 2023. The stories of Mr. English's remarkable life began on a dog sled in a remote part of our State during the cold, snowy depths of winter. After seeing a ``giant mosquito'' buzzing in the sky as a child, he saw his passion and would go on to become a pilot.

Alaska prides itself as the ``flyingest state'' in the Nation and it is individuals like Bill English who pioneered that reputation. Even today, nearly 80 percent of our communities are not connected to the road system, so we rely on exceptional pilots to keep Alaskans safe as we travel across some of the most rugged terrain on the planet. Bill English was one of the best. Across more than 36,000 hours of commercial flight, he maintained a perfect safety record. That led to his selection as an Alaska Living Aviator Legend in 2012 and his induction into the Alaska Aviation Hall of Fame 2 years later.

A celebration of life was held for Mr. English in Anchorage last week, where guests shared stories and pictures of his life, including his service to our Nation during World War II, his flying adventures, and his acts of kindness. I join Mr. English's family and friends in mourning his loss, while remembering his quintessentially Alaskan life and the nearly 100 years he contributed to our beautiful State.

Mr. President, I request that Bill English's obituary be printed in the Record.

The material follows:

Obituary for William Deshay English

William (Bill) Deshay English's life began on January 31,

1923, with an often-told and much-loved story. After going

into labor, Bill's mother, Agorak, mushed her dog team into

the dead of night and subzero temperatures. She was embarked

on a harrowing ten-mile journey from her home in Wiseman,

Alaska to Coldfoot where the region's only midwife resided.

Charged with running the general store, Bill's father,

William Sr., stayed behind in Wiseman while he awaited the

arrival of his newborn son. When Agorak drove her team back

to Wiseman with infant Bill wrapped in furs, his father's

worry burst into a celebration throughout the remote, scenic

Arctic village on the banks of the Koyukuk River. It was here

that Bill spent his childhood as a happy, active village kid.

During the late 1920s, aviator Noel Wien made an historic

excursion above the Arctic Circle in his open cockpit

biplane, landing on a gravel bar near Wiseman. Young Bill was

entranced by the ``giant mosquito'' buzzing in the sky, a

fascination that would eventually turn into a deep passion

for the art of flying and a dream of becoming a pilot.

When Bill reached adolescence, his parents sent him to live

with his father's family in California. Despite the culture

shock, Bill excelled academically and developed a passion for

track and field. He found that sports offered a way for him

to connect with his peers despite coming from a very

different background. He graduated from high school in

California, after which he returned to Fairbanks and enlisted

in the U.S. Army, serving from 1943-1945. Following World War

II, Bill was able to pursue his childhood dream of becoming a

pilot. He quickly earned his license and applied to work for

the very same man, Noel Wien, who had inspired his dream two

decades earlier.

In 1948, Bill married Shirley Nelson, a Seattle-native who

moved to Fairbanks in 1946 to study English at UAF. Their

romance began when Shirley, watching the planes land at Weeks

Field in Fairbanks, spotted Bill, clad in caribou mukluks

made by his mother, stepping out of his Cessna 140. Love

blossomed, and the two would develop an enduring bond that

would last 72 years and lead to three children, Sharon

(1949), Bill Jr. (1950), and Tamara (1968).

After joining Wien Airlines in 1946, Bill became one of the

first Native Alaskan commercial pilots and began a 37-year

career as Captain that would take him to the far reaches of

Alaska and eventually to a seat on Wien's board of directors.

Along the way, he became the first Native Alaskan pilot to

earn an Airline Transport Rating and the first to serve as an

FAA examiner. He retired with more than 36,000 hours of

commercial flight and a perfect safety record.

During his early tenure at Wien in Fairbanks, Bill helped

promote the World Eskimo-Indian Olympics and became its first

Master of Ceremonies--a position he proudly served in through

the early 1970s. After Bill retired from Wien in 1983, an

Anchorage businessman seeking a sure, experienced pilot with

solid credentials hired Bill to fly his private jet, a

Lockheed Jet Star, around the globe.

Bill was a huge proponent of lifelong education. In his

middle-aged years, he earned a Bachelor's in Business

Administration degree with a major in Transportation from the

University of Washington. He understood the economic and

political influence that ANCSA corporations possessed to

advance the education and well-being of Native Alaskan youth.

In his retirement, he served on the CIRI Board of Directors

and the Cook Inlet Housing Authority Board.

For his long and dedicated career in which he contributed

to the evolution, growth, and safety of aviation in Alaska,

he was honored in 2012 as an Alaska Living Aviator Legend,

and in 2014, was formally inducted into the Alaska Aviation

Hall of Fame. In response, he spoke with humility and

gratitude for the support he received from fellow Alaskans

throughout his life. He was grateful for the opportunity to

give back to the State, communities, and people who had made

possible the flying career he loved.

Bill passed peacefully on January 11, 2023--nearly 100

years after that first ride in a dog sled. He was at home in

Anchorage, surrounded by his loved ones. He will be

remembered for his good-natured humor, quiet energy,

curiosity, and the enduring peace with which he moved through

the world. He will be dearly missed.

He is predeceased by his parents William and Agorak, sister

Dishoo, his wife Shirley, and daughter Tamara. He is survived

by his daughter Sharon and son Bill Jr., grandchildren Gretta

and Wiley; numerous relatives in the Kotzebue area and in the

Oakland, California area.

Bill's family is eternally grateful to the many individuals

and organizations who helped care for Bill and Shirley in

their final months including the Providence Hospice team,

Alzheimer's Resource of Alaska, and Veterans Affairs of

Alaska.

Mr. President, I would welcome the majority leader to stay and listen to my comments this evening because I am speaking about the Arctic, and as a Senator from New York, he could certainly appreciate the role that the Arctic plays.

The majority leader is invited to the Arctic at any time of his choosing. January is a fine time.

Mr. President, I do share with colleagues--they hear it from me quite frequently--that the United States is an Arctic nation. Hailing from the fine State of Georgia, in the South, the Presiding Officer might not think or appreciate the role that your State plays in the Arctic, but each of our 50 States--each of our 50 States--sees benefit, sees opportunity because we are an Arctic nation. And we are an Arctic nation by virtue of the fact that, in my home State of Alaska, parts of it sit above the Arctic Circle.

It is our status as a nation. It is our good fortune, I think, as a nation. We have opportunities to come together as Arctic nations and work on its common challenges and shared opportunities, and we had such an opportunity

just a couple of weeks back when, here in Washington, DC, we were able to be an Arctic host nation in welcoming the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region for our conference. We held it here in the Capitol.

I think many have heard of the Arctic Council. The Arctic Council is the governing body. It is the primary institution for intergovernmental cooperation in the Arctic. You may know that, currently, as of this moment, the Arctic Council is chaired by Russia. Obviously, it is very challenging right now, at a time when Russia is engaged in this horrible war against Ukraine.

I will have an opportunity to speak, in just a few moments, to that, but as we think about the Arctic Council, I think it is also important to recognize that the standing committee--the Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region--is also a body that is quite important. It facilitates a biennial gathering of representatives from the various parliaments and legislatures of the eight Arctic nations. There are also permanent participants, indigenous groups that are part of the Arctic parliamentarians, as well as representatives from the Nordic Council and other councils. As an entity, then, the standing committee helps to make recommendations to the Arctic Council itself.

But the standing Committee is made up of policymakers, again, from these Arctic nations coming together, talking about the issues in our respective regions and how together we can guide the broader Arctic toward a more sustainable future. I have been involved as a member of the standing committee for nearly my entire tenure here in the U.S. Senate.

I am the United States' sole representative on the standing committee, and I am now very privileged to serve as its vice chair and have done so now for the past 3 years.

We hold our conferences in, obviously, other parts of the Arctic. We have been to Helsinki in Finland. We have been in Reykjavik in Iceland. We have been up to Norway, Sweden, and several times in Alaska itself, one meeting in Anchorage and then a ministerial meeting held in Fairbanks.

And then, as I mentioned, just a couple weeks ago now, we held our conference for 2023 here in Washington, DC. It is not exactly an Arctic capital here--I get that--but it is a place where we could all come together to convene and discuss the challenges and the opportunities that we face in the Far North.

So we were proud to welcome representatives from five Arctic nations at the conference. In addition to the United States, we had delegates present from Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden.

(Mr. KELLY assumed the Chair.)

And I am going to share with you and those here in the Chamber a map of the Arctic region. I think, when most people think about the Arctic, they think about the globe, and there is the top of the globe. You have that piece up there that looks so far and so remote. The Presiding Officer is probably the only one in this Chamber who has had an opportunity to see the Arctic as it really is. The Presiding Officer was up there in space and had a chance to see the Arctic region laid out as it is.

Here is Alaska here, Canada, Greenland, and Iceland, just on the outside; obviously, Russia, with the vast, vast territory above the Arctic Circle; Finland, Sweden, Norway above here.

But not only do we include in our delegation representatives from the Arctic nations, but we also include those from the European Parliament.

We had a representative from the Nordic Council, the West Nordic Council, the Saami Council, the Gwich'in Council International, the Aleut International Association, and the Arctic Athabaskan Council.

We were able to meet over in the Capitol Visitor Center for a morning of open discussion. We began with remarks from the chair of the Standing Committee, Aaja Chemnitz Larsen. Aaja is from Greenland. She is a member of the Danish Folketing.

We take care of the business and presentations from not only our perspective here in the United States. We had a good strong discussion about the United States and our role, how we have stepped into a greatly amplified role when it comes to Arctic leadership, personnel, policies, as well as infrastructure.

Following our meetings, we were able to go over to the Norwegian Embassy and held a policy-focused panel. We had a reception with the Fulbright Arctic Scholars and a pretty robust Arctic working dinner. We called it our Arctic salon to kind of close out the day. But it was an opportunity to really come together and share many of the issues that these Arctic nations are dealing with today.

Obviously, climate change was front and center as part of these discussions. We talked about the threats from coastal erosion and increasing wildland fires that we are seeing in the tundra and taiga areas, the challenges that a warming climate brings with food security issues, and, certainly, from Alaska's perspective, the challenges that we are seeing with our fisheries--a subsistence identity that is key and central to so many of not only our Native people around the State but so many who live a subsistence lifestyle.

So many of us, as Arctic nations, share common challenges like lack of core infrastructure, our need for sustainable economic development, and the priorities for our First Peoples. We talked about what we see with the rise of shipping and trade, as well as new industries, such as mariculture. There are a lot of real positives that I think we are seeing, but we are also seeing significant shared challenges.

So many are facing outmigration of young people. We are certainly seeing that in my State, but also in the Far North, in Canada and in some of the other areas, and, certainly, an issue in Greenland.

We talked about housing shortages and what that means in Arctic environments. We talked a lot about mental health issues and the challenges that so many in the northern regions face, and public safety issues.

There was so, so much that was on our plate, and, again, talking about challenges but also talking about some of the best practices. And, of course, you have to talk about the geopolitical landscape and how it is impacting these shared challenges and really how we move forward to address them.

And you can't avoid this. You can't avoid these geopolitical discussions because the largest Arctic nation, Russia, is typically part of the standing committee. They are one of the eight Arctic nations. But this year they were not present. They were not welcomed. They were not represented due to their own doing, due to this catastrophic war in Ukraine.

And the Presiding Officer and I know that is what happens when you move to declare war against a free and sovereign nation. There are extensive, there are far-reaching consequences. So they are not part of the discussions within the Arctic Council. They are not part of the discussions within the Standing Committee of the Arctic Parliamentarians. But I think we know that even though they are not part of these discussions, Russia continues to lean in, to exert its influence, its dominance, in the Arctic.

After Finland's accession into NATO, we saw Russia step up its military drills in the Arctic. In recent years, we have seen increased military buildup. Again, even while Putin is prosecuting this awful criminal war in Ukraine, he is pushing resources to, again, put his military influence in an area that, for a period of years, has been relatively dormant.

Just a couple of weeks ago, Russia has signed an agreement to strengthen cooperation with China in the region, signaling very clearly that, perhaps, for the multilateral discussions in the Arctic that they had been part of, as with the Arctic Council, now they are seeking to pursue a more bilateral strategy.

So Russia is absolutely--absolutely--not stepping off the gas when it comes to its engagement and interest in the Arctic. So even though Russian parliamentarians might not be sitting with us, it is not as if we can ignore the elephant in the room.

I think that the conversations that the parliamentarians had, again, a couple weeks ago, are worth sharing here, worth an entry into the Congressional Record, because the future of the Arctic is literally being defined as we speak--as we speak.

There is more attention that is being paid to the Far North by more people and more nations with more varied interests than we have ever seen before,

and I think that there is a greater need for us here in the United States for cooperation and sharing best practices with friends and those with similar interests.

Just last week, I had an opportunity to sit down with a member of the Japanese House of Representatives, Ms. Kamikawa. She is the head of the Polar Caucus, and she shared with me Japan's plans to build an icebreaker designed for research in the area.

They are not an Arctic nation. Japan does not pretend to be a near- Arctic nation, as China has self-labeled themselves, but they do believe that the area, the region is so significant and so important, and so how can they be a helpful participant? How can they help in that shared research? So to be able to cooperate in these ways, I think is key.

I think those of us here in the United States, especially those of us who serve as policymakers, need to be aware of those other non-Arctic nations that are looking at the Arctic with a heightened sense of interest and desire to be either a participant or how they might take advantage of the Arctic.

Don't get me wrong: We have got a very strong and inviting commitment from nearly all of our Arctic partners to work together to find solutions to the challenges and the issues that we face. I believe equally strongly that the United States has got to be a leader in advancing those solutions. For a long while, the United States was lagging behind. I had suggested we were not at the table, we were not in the game; but I can assure you, we have taken some very important steps. We have made progress. It has been noted by other nations, and it is good to see.

We have taken some steps to put people and policies in place that will guide our actions in this very, very dynamic region. We are investing billions of dollars now in core infrastructure.

Again, I need to remind colleagues, we are not talking about earmarks or even congressionally directed spending for Alaska. We are talking about national security investments--investments in our national Arctic strategy.

You can't have coverage of the U.S. Arctic if you don't have a deepwater port. Right now, our deepwater port is down in the Aleutians--Dutch Harbor. It is 800 to 1,000 miles to get yourself up there into the Arctic.

So we have moved ahead. The Port of Nome is coming on. It is going to be significant. It is going to be important. Hopefully, there will be just a system of deepwater ports in the Arctic.

Investment has been made in broadband connectivity. You cannot have this extraordinary mass and be blanked out when it comes to Arctic communication--so everything we have done to invest not only in communications to communities in the North Slope but what it means to be in these waters--to be in these skies.

I have had a pretty good day and a half. I just came back this afternoon from Alabama and Mississippi, where I was able to visit shipyards that are in the process now--Alabama shipyard is building out offshore patrol cutters--OPCs--that are going to be significant to us in the region.

Even more exciting--I have been waiting for this for, I swear, 20 years now--but I was able to go to Bollinger Shipyard down in Pascagoula and to actually see--actually see--where we are going to be building--hopefully, cutting steel by the end of this year--the first polar security cutter. It is the first polar security cutter that this country has built since the early 1970s. We are well, well, well overdue.

We have authorized now six icebreakers. We have fully funded two. We are pushing hard to advance commercially available icebreakers. My hope is that we will get that resolved this year. The Coast Guard is committed to it. The administration is committed to it. We are all-in, and we need it. We need it because, right now--this is no great secret--but the United States has no icebreaker--no polar-strength icebreaker that is in our waters.

We do have a polar-strength icebreaker, but she breaks out Antarctica. That is the requirement. She has been doing it for a long, long time. But that vessel doesn't see these Arctic waters. We have a medium-strength vessel that is very capable, the Healy, but we need to have our polar security cutters. We need them in the water. I was really encouraged to see the forward movement. It is coming. These ships are coming, and it is going to make a difference. They are part of our Arctic strategy.

We have got an updated national strategy for the Arctic region. This came from the White House. We have got a new Goals and Objectives Report from the U.S. Arctic Research Commission. Every branch of the military has now developed its own strategy for the Far North. We have reestablished the Arctic Executive Steering Committee featuring the Deputy Secretaries or their equivalents from the Departments in the key Agencies. We have revived the Arctic Energy Office at DOE. We stood up the Ted Stevens Center for Arctic Security Studies. This is located in Anchorage. It is part of the Department of Defense; but like the other security centers that look out over the Pacific or Europe or Africa, this is specific and unique to the Arctic only with brilliant people who are thinking about where we sit in this extraordinary space.

We have also convinced the State Department to establish an Ambassador at Large for the Arctic region, as many, many countries have already done. So the President has nominated a great guy. He is a fellow Alaskan, Dr. Mike Sfraga, to be the first person to hold this position. I am really looking forward to the Foreign Relations Committee--hopefully, they will be able to consider his nomination later this month and get him confirmed.

I met with the Ambassador from Norway. Norway is set to assume the chairship of the Arctic Council on the 11th of May. This week, it is going to transfer from Russia to Norway.

I asked the Ambassador what can the United States do to be most helpful to Norway as you resettle the Arctic Council. And he said: Confirm your Arctic Ambassador. So we need to do that.

We made important progress in recent years, but what has happened so far is really only the beginning of what we need to do in and for the region, as we continue to face major challenges that I think take all of us to address.

The Arctic's future must always be determined by the people of the Arctic. But having said that, there is good reason for us here in Congress to pay attention and a role for us to play in how to guide its future. And I have a pretty long list in that regard.

I am dusting off my Arctic Commitment Act. It is a comprehensive package focused on security, shipping, research, and trade policy improvements.

I mentioned the Arctic Ambassador position. We need to codify the Arctic Ambassador position into law. We need to grow our diplomatic capacity and our soft power.

I feel pretty strongly. We need to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty. We need to do this. We need to ensure that our rightful claims in these areas aren't snapped up by those who want to control as much territory and resources as possible.

We need to do more to invest in our defense. Again, I mentioned our icebreakers, but also our Coast Guard, a naval presence, a missile defense, and advanced fighter jets that can respond to all threats, whether it is Russian Bear Bombers that are coming over just right here--coming right there--or whether it is these unidentified aerial objects the whole country is tracking as they are coming right up through the Bering Strait and across Alaska. We are on the frontlines.

We need to invest even more in core infrastructure like water and wastewater, broadband--I mentioned--so that all those who live in the U.S. Arctic have access to basic necessities and a modern standard of living.

We need to tap into some of the new opportunities, including for food security. I have got a measure that I am going to be introducing--we call it our ``Arctic ag'' bill--focusing on not necessarily traditional agriculture, so to speak, but things like mariculture, which will contribute to our growing food economy.

We need to produce the resources that we need now and that we will need for decades to come. This means not just the recently approved Willow Project that was approved within the National Petroleum Reserve--and we are thankful that the administration saw the benefit of that--but we also

need to be looking to the commercialization of our vast natural gas resources, the build-out of our renewables and clean technologies like advanced nuclear power, the approval of new mines that can produce the minerals that we are going to need that is going to power our future. We need to do all of this while we work to address the issues of climate change by dramatically working to reduce our emissions and also finding solutions for adaptation which is just as critical.

We have to be ready for new threats as they arise. As I mentioned, the enhancer, that growing relationship between Russia and China strengthening their ties--what we are seeing coming out of Russia right now is a move to ship oil to China through the Northern Sea Route. So they will be moving their oil through the Northern Sea Route, coming right through the Bering Straits here to deliver--to go down to China.

When you look at choke points. It is 57 miles--57 miles--between mainland Russia and mainland United States right here--not a lot of room. We have got two islands across the middle: the Big Diomede and the Little Diomede, one Russian and one United States. But I am worried that what we may see are non-Polar Code-compliant tankers coming through these waters at a time when Russia is looking to do everything they can to evade Western sanctions. But I am concerned that we may see an accident. We may see some kind of a spill. And our response capacity is extraordinarily limited--potentially thousands of miles away.

So there is a lot that we are watching; there is a lot that we have got to do. And I think that there is still not enough of us giving the Arctic the attention that it deserves. It is still harder than it should be to secure critical Arctic policy and investment.

I know more and more Members of Congress are visiting the region. I think, maybe, I may have gotten a commitment from the majority leader to come and visit the Arctic--maybe not in January--but he says he likes the Arctic. But people need to see it for themselves to understand what we are talking about. So welcome all of you.

But for those of you who aren't able to visit and, frankly, don't understand the significance of the region, I think--I think some still ask the question: Why bother? Why is the Arctic important? Why does it matter?

And the answer to that--my answer to that is that the future of the Arctic matters more to the future of the Nation than most can possibly imagine. The Presiding Officer probably well-recalls a famous general by the name of Billy Mitchell. And General Mitchell, back in 1935, said:

I believe that in the future, whoever holds Alaska will

hold the world. I think it is the most important strategic

place in the world.

Billy Mitchell said that in 1935, and I think it is fair to say that the future has arrived, because General Mitchell is absolutely right. Alaska is the most strategic place because of our location, because we are part of an Arctic nation, and because we are sitting right on top of the world. We are sitting in the center of it. We are, oftentimes-- oftentimes--on the frontline of our Nation's sovereignty and defense. Now new cargo, new shipping trade routes are creating challenges, yes-- I have mentioned--but also economic opportunities that can deliver benefits all over the country--the investment in ships and planes and manufacturing facilities and everything else that that involves in creating jobs and furthering opportunities in every State in the country.

When I was at the shipyard this morning, they had a map of the Lower 48 States with the number of dollars--and I don't believe it was just dollars--but I think it was the number of dollars that comes to each State because of investments that are made purchasing, whether it is raw materials or built parts. You look at--48 States on that map now; there wasn't Alaska. We are not building any of that yet, but we are going to be hosting this. So it points to the value, whether you are from Arizona or whether you are from Georgia, in that you have a stake in the Arctic.

As fellow Arctic parliamentarians, we say, in coming back to our conference, what happens in the Arctic doesn't stay in the Arctic. We know that it isn't frozen in time. It is not frozen in place. It really affects every single one of us and, I think, more by the year. I think the sooner folks realize that, the better, and the time is really now.

On the heels of our meeting of the standing committee, as I mentioned, later this week, we will transition the chairship of the Arctic Council from Russia to Norway. We are hoping that transfer is going to be very quiet, very uneventful. There will be, I think, a fair amount of anticipation and, hopefully, relief on the 12th of May that we will begin to really renew our intergovernmental collaboration as Arctic nations, with Norway at the helm, working together to work through some common challenges but to do so much more to share best practices. I think here in the United States, we meet this with determination and commitment as we work to do our part as an Arctic nation.

With that, I invite the Presiding Officer as well to come to the Far North and to the Arctic.

I yield the floor.