Floor Statements

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, Republicans continue to be totally shocked by the leak of a draft Supreme Court decision. But what is truly shocking is the fact that we have a radical, rightwing majority now on our Supreme Court, thanks to three Trump Justices who are poised to take away a constitutional right that women in this country have relied upon for almost 50 years.

The Supreme Court has never overturned a constitutional right it has earlier conferred. And yet today, in 2022, women across the country are going to wake up and no longer have control over their own bodies once the Supreme Court stays its course to overturn both Roe and Casey. The Republican Party has sabotaged the Supreme Court, and women and girls across the country are going to pay the price.

In 13 States, the minute Roe is overturned, abortion will be illegal, and dozens of other States will move to do the same. These States are prepared to outlaw abortion with only narrow exceptions, if at all.

Imagine this. If a child is raped, Republicans will force her to give birth. If a woman's life is in danger, Republicans will force her to give birth, despite the fact that the United States already has the highest maternal mortality rate of any developed country. If a woman cannot afford to raise a child, Republicans will force her to give birth anyway. And then, once that child is born, all of a sudden, their concern for that child pretty much goes out the window.

They have done little to support women and families. They have repeatedly blocked Democratic efforts to provide healthcare, childcare, paid family leave, and more. There is nothing pro-life about that. And if a woman chooses to get an abortion for any reason, whether it be rape or medical necessity, Republicans stand ready to throw in jail women, doctors, and even those who help people access the procedure.

And make no mistake, if Republicans take control over the House and Senate, they will press to pass national legislation that will outlaw abortion throughout the country.

I have been an advocate for reproductive freedom for decades. When I was in college, abortion was not legal. It was the first time I wrote a political letter to the members of Hawaii's congressional delegation asking for their position on abortion. Abortion is one of the reasons I became an activist. And I fought against concerted efforts to limit abortion in Hawaii during the 14 years that I served in the Hawaii State Legislature. I knew then, as I do now, that women should be able to control our own bodies.

And, sadly, the threat to women's freedom is as real today as it was when I was first advocating for this right decades ago.

I am proud that Hawaii was the first State in the country to decriminalize abortion before Roe. So regardless of the Supreme Court decision, women's reproductive freedom in Hawaii will be protected. But for how long? So many women across the country do not live in States like Hawaii that protect the right to an abortion.

Barriers to abortion access have always existed--barriers like finding childcare, taking time off from work and travel and transportation and more. The number of women dealing with the obstacles to get the essential healthcare they need will skyrocket if Roe is overturned.

And we know who is going to be harmed the most: people who can't travel, including people with low incomes, people with disabilities.

Due to systemic barriers and this country's legacy of racism and discrimination, Black, Latino, indigenous, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, and other people of color disproportionately feel the effects of abortion bans and restrictions.

We know this is true because we have seen it play out in Texas. Already, women in Texas have to travel hundreds of miles to seek abortion services. Many women in Texas do not have the means or the opportunity.

When you read Justice Alito's draft opinion, it is quite clear that this Justice has harbored a desire to overturn Roe for the 16 years he has been on the Supreme Court. And, now, thanks to the three Trump Justices, his radical opinion on abortion is no longer dissent but the majority opinion. This is our worst fears coming true.

Meanwhile, I listened to Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, this morning, who kept calling Democrats ``extreme'' in our view--in our commitment to supporting a woman's right to abortion. He said that he would never support ``smashing'' the filibuster on this or any issue. Well, he had no problem smashing the filibuster when it came to Supreme Court Justices, and that is the very reason that three radical Trump Justices got on the Supreme Court in the first place and the reason why women are about

to lose a constitutional right that we have relied upon for almost 50 years.

Make no mistake, these radical Justices are just getting started. Alito's draft opinion, which denigrates any privacy basis for Roe, casts doubt on other privacy rights. Without privacy rights, the States are basically unfettered in what they do.

And now that the radical rightwing Justices are on the cusp of getting what they wish regarding abortion rights, Justice Alito is already signaling what is next: revisiting Obergefell, the marriage equality decision. And we know so much more is at stake.

We cannot sit back and accept this as our new normal. We cannot go back to a time when women had no autonomy over our own bodies. We cannot go back to a time when members of the LGBTQ+ community were treated as second-class citizens. And we cannot go back to a time where basic human rights were left up to the States--to the States--to decide.

Since when do States get to decide whether or not a constitutional right exists? That is what we have the Supreme Court for, and that is what the Supreme Court is not making sure that we continue to protect.

So here we are. Not only do we have to push to codify Roe nationally, but we have to take this fight to the ballots in November. As Justice Alito, in his draft opinion, cavalierly said, basically: All you women out there, go out and vote. So, yes, he is calling on the women of this country to use our energy and our resources to fight for a right, a constitutional right, that women in this country relied on for nearly 50 years. And, yes, that is exactly what we are going to do.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Sexual Harassment Independent Investigations and Prosecution Act, also known as the SHIIP Act, which addresses longstanding systemic problems in the way that the military investigates and prosecutes sexual harassment. I thank Senators Booker, Gillibrand, and Feinstein for being original cosponsors and Representative Speier for introducing this important legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

It has been 2 years since Army SPC Vanessa Guillen was murdered after she reported being sexually harassed by another servicemember. Her tragic death was the catalyst to an investigation that led the Independent Review Commission to recommend key changes to the way the Department of Defense handles sexual assault and sexual harassment. Some of these changes, including the codification of sexual harassment as a crime, were established last year through the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. Others, unfortunately, were left out.

We must continue to build on the important work of the Independent Review Commission and the steps taken in the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act for the sake of our servicemembers. This includes codifying the requirement that any sexual harassment or assault complaint to be reviewed by a third-party investigator outside the chain of command. This change is essential to restoring the trust between soldiers and their superiors. Servicemembers would no longer have to fear their voices being stifled or dismissed altogether.

That is why I am introducing the SHIIP Act to require that all complaints of sexual assault and harassment be reviewed by a specially trained investigator outside the chain of command. The provisions in this legislation will move prosecutorial decisions on sexual harassment cases to the new special trial counsel, created by the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act, and require that independent sexual harassment investigators be outside the chain of command and trained to investigate sexual harassment. These changes are essential to ensure servicemembers feel safe reporting any misconduct and that their complaints are investigated properly.

I urge my colleagues to pass the SHIIP Act as another step forward toward restoring faith in the military justice system.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Sexual Harassment Independent Investigations and Prosecution Act, also known as the SHIIP Act, which addresses longstanding systemic problems in the way that the military investigates and prosecutes sexual harassment. I thank Senators Booker, Gillibrand, and Feinstein for being original cosponsors and Representative Speier for introducing this important legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

It has been 2 years since Army SPC Vanessa Guillen was murdered after she reported being sexually harassed by another servicemember. Her tragic death was the catalyst to an investigation that led the Independent Review Commission to recommend key changes to the way the Department of Defense handles sexual assault and sexual harassment. Some of these changes, including the codification of sexual harassment as a crime, were established last year through the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. Others, unfortunately, were left out.

We must continue to build on the important work of the Independent Review Commission and the steps taken in the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act for the sake of our servicemembers. This includes codifying the requirement that any sexual harassment or assault complaint to be reviewed by a third-party investigator outside the chain of command. This change is essential to restoring the trust between soldiers and their superiors. Servicemembers would no longer have to fear their voices being stifled or dismissed altogether.

That is why I am introducing the SHIIP Act to require that all complaints of sexual assault and harassment be reviewed by a specially trained investigator outside the chain of command. The provisions in this legislation will move prosecutorial decisions on sexual harassment cases to the new special trial counsel, created by the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act, and require that independent sexual harassment investigators be outside the chain of command and trained to investigate sexual harassment. These changes are essential to ensure servicemembers feel safe reporting any misconduct and that their complaints are investigated properly.

I urge my colleagues to pass the SHIIP Act as another step forward toward restoring faith in the military justice system.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

You may well ask: ``Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches

and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?'' You are

quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the

very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks

to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a

community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced

to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue

that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of

tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may

sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not

afraid of the word ``tension.'' I have earnestly opposed

violent tension, but there is a type of constructive,

nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as

Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in

the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of

myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative

analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for

nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society

that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and

racism to the majestic heights of understanding and

brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to

create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably

open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in

your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland

been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue

rather than dialogue.

One of the basic points in your statement is that the

action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is

untimely. Some have asked: ``Why didn't you give the new city

administration time to act?'' The only answer that I can give

to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must

be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will

act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of

Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to

Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person

than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to

maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell

will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive

resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without

pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must

say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil

rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure.

Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged

groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily.

Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give

up their

unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us,

groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never

voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by

the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct

action campaign that was ``well timed'' in the view of those

who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation.

For years now I have heard the word ``Wait!'' It rings in the

ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This ``Wait''

has almost always meant ``Never.'' We must come to see, with

one of our distinguished jurists, that ``justice too long

delayed is justice denied.''

We have waited for more than 340 years for our

constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and

Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political

independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace

toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it

is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of

segregation to say, ``Wait.'' But when you have seen vicious

mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your

sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled

policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and

sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty

million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of

poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you

suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering

as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she

can't go to the public amusement park that has just been

advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her

eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored

children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to

form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to

distort her personality by developing an unconscious

bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an

answer for a five year old son who is asking: ``Daddy, why do

white people treat colored people so mean?''; when you take a

cross country drive and find it necessary to sleep night

after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile

because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day

in and day out by nagging signs reading ``white'' and

``colored''; when your first name becomes [a racial slur],

your middle name becomes ``boy'' (however old you are) and

your last name becomes ``John,'' and your wife and mother are

never given the respected title ``Mrs.''; when you are

harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are

a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite

knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears

and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a

degenerating sense of ``nobodiness''--then you will

understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a

time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no

longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair.

Mr. President, throughout 2 days of questioning in front of the Judiciary Committee on which I sit, Judge Jackson proved, without a shadow of a doubt, what we all knew to be true: She is eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court of our country.

Judge Jackson has the intellect, the integrity, and the temperament befitting an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and she doesn't have an ideological axe to grind. Judge Jackson is exceptionally qualified and well regarded across the political spectrum.

And yet not a single Republican voted to advance Judge Jackson's nomination out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and only three Republicans have publicly expressed support for her.

So I ask my Republican colleagues: What is it going to take? What is it going to take to put politics aside to support a nominee like Judge Jackson? Because, clearly, intelligence, extraordinary breadth of experience, and support from prominent conservatives--conservatives-- did not suffice. Clearly, a candidate who has support from organizations from across the political spectrum--from the Black and Hispanic U.S. Chambers of Commerce to the National Education Association, with thousands of teachers; to the Fraternal Order of Police, the largest police union--they would not be supporting somebody who is soft on crime--to child advocacy groups that would not be supporting her, either, if she was not being appropriate in her sentencing of child pornography defendants. So even with this breadth of support, she didn't make the cut with the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee. So, clearly, a nominee who was uniformly called ``brilliant,'' ``beyond reproach,'' ``first rate,'' and ``impeccable'' by her colleagues across the Nation was not enough.

So, truly, what will it take?

Sadly, some of my Republican colleagues resorted to unfounded and misleading attacks in an unsuccessful attempt to smear her character. To highlight how ridiculous the attacks around the sentencing of child pornography offenses were, I asked Judge Jackson about the history of the sentencing guidelines for these crimes and the concerns that these guidelines do not reflect what is happening with child pornography offenses.

And these facts bear repeating. A decade ago, the U.S. Sentencing Commission first addressed the issue of sentencing in this area. Even way back then, only 40 percent of convicted offenders were receiving sentences within the guidelines. Now, 10 years later, even fewer offenders are receiving sentences within the guidelines. In 2019, just 30 percent of non-production offenders were sentenced within the guidelines. In the DC Circuit, in which Jackson served, the average goes down to just 20 percent of offenders. This puts Judge Jackson well within the mainstream in her sentencing in this area. She is not an outsider.

I named numerous other judges nominated by President Trump and supported by the Republicans on the Judiciary Committee who have also sentenced offenders to sentences well below the sentencing guidelines. So these judges also expressed concern about how the sentencing guidelines do not reflect the circumstances in the child pornography cases of today.

I will repeat this. Judge Jackson is a mainstream judge. She has issued decisions and sentences similar to other judges across the Nation, including those nominated by both Republicans and Democratic Presidents. Despite some of my Republican colleagues' attempts to distort the truth to get more likes on Twitter, what Americans across the country saw was an incredibly impressive, highly qualified individual demonstrate that she has the intellect and the temperament to serve on our highest Court. Throughout the course of this week, Americans also learned about her character.

I was particularly moved to hear the testimony of an individual who has known Judge Jackson for nearly 38 years--when they were in elementary school. He said, in part:

Ketanji's incandescent brilliance was obvious to all of us

from day one. But even more importantly, she has always been

one of the kindest, warmest, most humble and down-to-earth

people I have ever met. All this, while still possessing

boundless charisma, drive, maturity, and grace.

These qualities, apparently from a young age, have clearly guided her throughout her life and her career, particularly when it comes to treating every single person she encounters with dignity and respect.

During the hearing, I asked Judge Jackson the same two questions on sexual assault and harassment that I ask of all nominees--male and female. In follow-up questioning, I named judges who had committed such misconduct and asked Judge Jackson what she does to ensure her court is a safe and inclusive place to work. After Judge Jackson's hearing concluded, a woman who had clerked for one of the judges I named who had engaged in this kind of harassing behavior reached out to me. And this is a person who had clerked for one of the judges that I had named. During her clerkship with this judge, she endured extreme and pervasive sexual harassment. She came forth publicly about this judge's conduct, an experience she described as ``a harrowing ordeal.''

She went on to a second clerkship, this time for Judge Jackson. In Judge Jackson's court, she said, she was treated like a valued and talented employee who could make meaningful contributions to the law. She says clerking for Judge Jackson was the most meaningful professional experience she has ever had. She stated:

Judge Jackson is the reason I am still a lawyer. I have no

doubt I would have left the profession were it not for the

way she treated me the year after my ordeal.

Judge Jackson is exactly the kind of judge and individual we need on the U.S. Supreme Court: experienced, evenhanded, with dignity, integrity, and humanity. Moreover, Judge Jackson is not just extremely qualified to serve on the Supreme Court; her nomination is a historic one.

The Supreme Court has existed for over 233 years, and of the 115 Justices in the history of the Court, only 5 of them have been women, only 2 have been Black, and not a single one has been a Black woman. This is the Court that has decided cases that have had sweeping impacts on our lives, including decisions that have solidified rights for LGBTQ-plus people, empowered women, strengthened unions, and more. But this is also the same Court that has throughout the course of history upheld slavery, Jim Crow, and the unlawful internment--incarceration-- of Japanese Americans in World War II.

So it is about time. It is about time we have a highly qualified, highly accomplished Black woman on the Supreme Court. It is about time our highest Court better reflects the country it

serves. It is about time that Black women and girls across the country can finally see someone who looks like them sitting on the highest Court, making decisions that will impact their lives--our lives. And they will know that the possibility is there for them.

I close by noting that during the hearing, Judge Jackson told the committee that as a freshman at Harvard, she wondered whether she could fit in or whether she could make it, and a Black woman she didn't know leaned into her as they were walking by, probably in Harvard Yard, and said to Judge Jackson--she wasn't a judge then: ``Persevere.'' That is something that a lot of us can relate to: perseverance, including myself, who came to this country as a poor immigrant kid, persevering to learn the language, to learn the culture of a country I knew nothing about. Judge Jackson being on the Supreme Court would send such a powerful message of perseverance to everyone in this country.

I will be honored to vote to confirm Judge Jackson. I look forward to calling her Justice Jackson.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I was listening very carefully to my friend, my colleague from Texas, on his comments regarding the process by which we give our advice and consent to all of our judicial nominees, but, of course, particularly our responsibility with regard to Supreme Court nominees.

There seems to be some concern that we are rushing the nomination process for Judge Jackson. Nothing could be further from the truth because everybody remembers the speed with which nominee Amy Coney Barrett was put on the Court, from the time of her nomination to the hearings, to her being sworn in.

There will be enough time for all of our Members of this body to consider Judge Jackson's nomination, not to mention that we have already confirmed her twice, once to the district court and another time to the circuit court. It is not as though she is unfamiliar to us.

Also, any connotation that somehow President Trump's nominees were ill-treated--again, nothing could be further from the truth because the whole process, especially with regard to Justice Kavanaugh, was with the utmost desire on the part, particularly, of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee to get to the bottom of certain allegations against Justice Kavanaugh that were highly serious.

To cast any kind of doubt or aspersions on the work of the members of the Committee--especially the Democrats on the Committee--with regard to President Trump's nominees is not well-taken.

Mr. President, let me move onto why I am here this afternoon. It is not an exaggeration to say that we are at a crisis point. Republican legislatures all across the country are continuing to pass bills that control our bodies and, at the same time, Trump Supreme Court nominees are closer than ever to overturning Roe v. Wade.

There are 26 States across the country that are likely, if not certain, to ban abortion if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. There is no question that these restrictions that have been enacted by States all across the country have an incredibly discriminatory impact and will disproportionately harm those who are already facing far more obstacles when it comes to accessing healthcare, including women of color, women with low incomes, people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ individuals, rural women, and many more.

For over 50 years, Roe v. Wade enabled women to make the decision about whether or not they wanted to

start a family. But, today, because of new abortion care restrictions, 90 percent of counties in the United States do not have an abortion provider. Women are faced with impossible decisions and, as a result, will be forced to have babies they can't afford, didn't plan for, or are unable to care for, or faced to have babies under life-threatening conditions. And, tragically, women may also die because they lack the access or resources to safely end pregnancy. Abortion bans are a matter of life and death.

Women across the country are under attack and so, too, are the healthcare professionals who provide safe and legal abortions. Today is Abortion Provider Appreciation Day. This day was established to honor Dr. David Gunn, who was killed on March 10, 1993, outside his abortion clinic in Pensacola, FL, by a White supremacist, anti-abortion extremist.

Abortion providers are compassionate, credentialed, and highly trained professionals who allow women to actually make choices about their own bodies, their futures, and whether or not they want to start a family, and they do so without judgment and in the face of violence.

Tragically, Dr. Gunn's murder was just the first known instance of a murder of an abortion provider. Across the country, abortion providers experience intimidation, harassment, threats, and violence from anti- abortion extremists.

According to NARAL, between 1977 and 2015, there were over 7,200 acts of violence carried out against abortion providers by anti-choice extremists. These included 42 bombings, 185 arson attacks, and thousands of death threats, bioterrorism threats, and assaults. Every single day, even right here in DC, anti-choice extremists station outside of abortion clinics and harass staff and patients.

Fourteen States and the District of Columbia have needed to enact laws to protect abortion providers and patients, including laws that prohibit blocking the entrance to a clinic, threatening or intimidating staff, damaging property, and more. Three States have even had to go so far as to establish a ``bubble zone'' to protect people within a certain distance of a clinic. These doctors, nurses, and staff fear for their lives just to provide access to reproductive care.

Being an abortion provider is a dangerous profession in this country. What other medical profession deals with this level of harassment and violence just to provide medical services, medical care? For what other medical profession do we have to create a bubble zone of protection?

On Tuesday, I joined Senator Peters and my colleagues in the House to introduce a resolution to honor all healthcare providers who keep patients safe and healthy and do their part to help provide access to reproductive care, including abortions.

Today, on Abortion Provider Appreciation Day, I stand on the Senate floor to affirm my commitment to ensuring the personal safety of all abortion providers and clinic staff. I thank these fearless individuals for maintaining abortion access to communities across our country. A big aloha and mahalo to these courageous people.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Women and Climate Change Act of 2022. This bill affirms the U.S. commitment to supporting a group of people who are most often negatively impacted by climate change, yet too often left out of decisionmaking and policy development--women. The bill creates a Federal interagency working group, established by the Department of State, that will collect data and develop policies and strategies to address the effects of climate change on women both at home and abroad. Communities all across the United States and the world are currently feeling the impacts of climate change. The time to empower women to respond to this crisis is now. As we commemorate International Women's Day today, we are reminded of the important roles that women play in communities across the world and seize this opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to working towards equity.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCC, highlights that the majority of the world's poor is made up of women who rely on natural resources in their daily lives and are least likely to be able to respond to extreme weather events. These women disproportionately face the brunt of climate change impacts, yet too often have little power or say over how they, their families, and their communities are able to combat climate change. UNFCC notes that when women are allowed a role in developing strategies that address climate change, it often results in great responsiveness to local needs, enabling resilience and capacity building, and delivering peace across communities.

The rising costs of climate change to communities at home and abroad, both in terms of fatalities and expenses, are sobering. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, last year the United States alone experienced 20 weather and climate disasters that cost at least $1 billion each, netting a $145 billion price tag and resulting in 688 deaths. Data from NOAA indicates a trend of increasing billion-dollar disasters each decade since the 1980s, with the expectation that the trend will continue.

According to Christian Aid, a relief agency in the United Kingdom working to address poverty, the 10 worst global climate disasters in 2021 cost $170 billion. These included Hurricane Ida, which impacted the east coast of the United States and resulted in at least 95 deaths, flooding in Europe that caused 240 fatalities, and July floods in China that killed over 300 individuals.

The latest report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, last month highlights the consequences that the world will face if countries do not take immediate and significant action to address climate change. These consequences include extreme heat, floods, wildfire, drought, and famine that could result in malnutrition and displacement of people across the globe. The report also noted that between 2010 and 2020, extreme weather events fueled by climate change killed 15 times the number of people in poor countries as in wealthier nations. The report underscores how women will continue to face mounting challenges as the world experiences more severe and costly climate-fueled disasters. Women play a critical role in combating climate change--both within their communities and on a global scale. By including them at all levels, from planning to implementation, and providing them with the platform and support to carry out these strategies, we have the opportunity to create fair, effective, and sustainable solutions to respond to the climate crisis.

This bill is a companion to H.R. 260, which was introduced by my colleague Representative Barbara Lee early last year. I thank her for her leadership on this bill and look forward to continuing our work to see that women all across the world are empowered to help confront this global crisis.

Groups in support of this bill include Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, the Women's Environment and Development Organization, Madre, Outdoor Afro, California Environmental Voters, Oxfam America, League of Conservation Voters, and Schools for Climate Action.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Women and Climate Change Act of 2022. This bill affirms the U.S. commitment to supporting a group of people who are most often negatively impacted by climate change, yet too often left out of decisionmaking and policy development--women. The bill creates a Federal interagency working group, established by the Department of State, that will collect data and develop policies and strategies to address the effects of climate change on women both at home and abroad. Communities all across the United States and the world are currently feeling the impacts of climate change. The time to empower women to respond to this crisis is now. As we commemorate International Women's Day today, we are reminded of the important roles that women play in communities across the world and seize this opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to working towards equity.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCC, highlights that the majority of the world's poor is made up of women who rely on natural resources in their daily lives and are least likely to be able to respond to extreme weather events. These women disproportionately face the brunt of climate change impacts, yet too often have little power or say over how they, their families, and their communities are able to combat climate change. UNFCC notes that when women are allowed a role in developing strategies that address climate change, it often results in great responsiveness to local needs, enabling resilience and capacity building, and delivering peace across communities.

The rising costs of climate change to communities at home and abroad, both in terms of fatalities and expenses, are sobering. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, last year the United States alone experienced 20 weather and climate disasters that cost at least $1 billion each, netting a $145 billion price tag and resulting in 688 deaths. Data from NOAA indicates a trend of increasing billion-dollar disasters each decade since the 1980s, with the expectation that the trend will continue.

According to Christian Aid, a relief agency in the United Kingdom working to address poverty, the 10 worst global climate disasters in 2021 cost $170 billion. These included Hurricane Ida, which impacted the east coast of the United States and resulted in at least 95 deaths, flooding in Europe that caused 240 fatalities, and July floods in China that killed over 300 individuals.

The latest report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC, last month highlights the consequences that the world will face if countries do not take immediate and significant action to address climate change. These consequences include extreme heat, floods, wildfire, drought, and famine that could result in malnutrition and displacement of people across the globe. The report also noted that between 2010 and 2020, extreme weather events fueled by climate change killed 15 times the number of people in poor countries as in wealthier nations. The report underscores how women will continue to face mounting challenges as the world experiences more severe and costly climate-fueled disasters. Women play a critical role in combating climate change--both within their communities and on a global scale. By including them at all levels, from planning to implementation, and providing them with the platform and support to carry out these strategies, we have the opportunity to create fair, effective, and sustainable solutions to respond to the climate crisis.

This bill is a companion to H.R. 260, which was introduced by my colleague Representative Barbara Lee early last year. I thank her for her leadership on this bill and look forward to continuing our work to see that women all across the world are empowered to help confront this global crisis.

Groups in support of this bill include Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, the Women's Environment and Development Organization, Madre, Outdoor Afro, California Environmental Voters, Oxfam America, League of Conservation Voters, and Schools for Climate Action.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.