Floor Statements

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, I rise today in support of the nomination of Kristen Clarke to be Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.

In the 4\1/2\ months since she was nominated, my Republican colleagues and their rightwing allies have engaged in a coordinated smear campaign to distort Kristen Clarke's record. It is past time to set things straight.

Kristen Clarke is a supremely capable and qualified nominee to lead the Civil Rights Division. I would argue that she is among the most well-credentialed and qualified nominees ever to serve in this role.

During her career, she has served as a trial attorney in the Division's voting section; a prosecutor in the Division's criminal section; an assistant counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund and later as the codirector of its Political Participation Group; as the civil rights chief of the New York State Attorney General's Civil Rights Bureau; and as president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the Nation's preeminent civil rights organizations. Kristen Clarke's credentials for this job are unimpeachable.

Unable to undermine her nomination on the merits, Senate Republicans have engaged in a vicious smear campaign against Kristen Clarke because they are afraid she will actually do her job. They are afraid she will enforce our civil rights statutes, challenge discriminatory voting laws, combat systemic racism in policing, and protect the LGBTQ community.

This work is urgently needed after the Civil Rights Division endured 4 years of intentional neglect and outright hostility during the Trump administration. During its 4 years in office, the Trump administration brought only a single case--one--under the Voting Rights Act, even as States like Georgia, Ohio, and Wisconsin worked to suppress the vote by targeting people of color.

The previous administration also effectively ended the use of consent decrees to bring police departments into compliance with the Constitution. It abandoned this critical tool at the worst possible moment, as the Nation watched Black Americans like George Floyd and Breonna Taylor killed by officers sworn to protect and serve.

President Biden nominated Kristen Clarke to lead the Civil Rights Division because she is precisely the leader we need at this critical moment. But for 4\1/2\ months, my Republican colleagues have tried to tear down this highly qualified woman of color with unfounded smears and outright lies. They feign outrage over a satirical letter Ms. Clarke wrote as an undergrad at Harvard in 1994, over 25 years ago.

I don't recall any comparable Republican outrage when Michael Truncale, then a practicing attorney for decades, disparaged President Obama as an ``un-American imposter [who] bows to Arab Sheikhs and other world leaders.'' Instead, they confirmed him to a lifetime appointment as a judge in the Eastern District of Texas.

Senate Republicans have also tried to paint Ms. Clarke as some sort of anti-Semite--again, reaching back 25 years to criticize a speaker Ms. Clarke invited to campus as an undergrad. They conveniently ignore that Ms. Clarke has addressed their concerns head-on and demonstrated a long track record of defending religious rights throughout her career.

Her work in this area has earned her the support of the National Council of Jewish Women and the Anti-Defamation League, among other organizations. And if we needed any more evidence to rebut this outrageous claim, we should all look to the words of Attorney General Merrick Garland, who forcefully said: ``I'm a pretty good judge of what an anti-Semite is, and I do not believe she is an anti-Semite.''

Republicans are also trying to derail Kristen Clarke's nomination by pushing the lie that she supports defunding the police. It doesn't matter how many times they repeat the lie, it will never be true. Ms. Clarke has clearly expressed her support for shifting resources to social workers and mental health professionals so that police officers are no longer called upon to address every problem in society. This is not defunding the police, no matter what twisted definition is used.

As the Senate Judiciary Committee prepared to vote on Ms. Clarke's nomination, several Republicans took this baseless criticism to a pathetic, ridiculous new low. The junior Senator from Texas claimed that voting for Ms. Clarke--and, previously, voting to confirm Vanita Gupta as Associate Attorney General--put ``every single Democratic Member of the United States Senate. . . . on record supporting abolishing''--abolishing--``the police.'' ``Abolishing the police''-- that is what he said--not defunding, not reforming, abolishing. What a crock.

Unfortunately, we have come to expect these laughable exaggerations from our colleague from Texas. He would rather smear a nominee with baseless charges than engage with the facts, because neither Kristen Clarke nor Vanita Gupta has ever supported abolishing the police. Neither of them has said anything remotely close to this. If they had, I am sure it would come as news to the Fraternal Order of Police, the Major County Sheriffs of America, and the International Association of Chiefs of Police, all of whom endorsed Vanita Gupta's nomination. You might also want to ask the Major

Cities Chiefs Association and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives why they endorsed Kristen Clarke if she is looking to put their members out of work. The fact is, she is not. This smear is only one example of the baseless, personal attacks Kristen Clarke has endured by those seeking to derail her nomination.

This week, the Senate can and should repudiate the vicious rightwing smear campaign against Ms. Clarke and confirm her as the next leader of the Civil Rights Division.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I have a request for one committee to meet during today's session of the Senate. It has the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders.

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

Committee on Foreign Relations

The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Monday, May 24, 2021, at 6 p.m., to conduct a closed hearing.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 2 minutes.

Madam President, I would like to thank Senator Tillis for working with me on this amendment, amendment No. 1517, to the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, which comes from our work on the IDEA Act, a bill that passed the Judiciary Committee last month with bipartisan support.

Promoting innovation is key to ensuring the United States remains competitive in an increasingly competitive global economy. Unfortunately, the limited data that is available suggests large segments of American society are not engaging with a key component of the innovation economy, the U.S. patent system.

Women make up only 13 percent of inventors. Black and Hispanic college graduates patent at approximately half the rate of their White counterparts. Closing these patent gaps would turbocharge the U.S. economy.

One study found that including more women and Black Americans in the early stages of innovation could grow our economy by 3.3 percent. Hold that thought. Another found that eliminating the patent gap for women with science and engineering degrees alone would grow the economy by another 2.7 percent. We are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars of growth to our economy.

But if we have any hope of closing these patent gaps, we must first get a firm grasp on who is and who is not using the patent system. Unfortunately, the PTO--Patent and Trademark Office--does not collect demographic data on applicants. As a result, researchers are forced to guess an applicant's gender based on his or her name, determine an applicant's race by cross-referencing census data, or explore other options that are time-consuming, unreliable, or both.

Our amendment solves this problem. It would enable the PTO to collect demographic data from patent applicants on a volunteer basis. I want to repeat that. This is on a volunteer basis. Nobody is forcing anyone to provide this kind of information. This data could then be analyzed by the PTO and outside researchers to identify where patent gaps exist and how to address them.

Let me be clear. Simply providing researchers more data would not solve

the patent gaps facing women, racial minorities, and so many others, but it is a critical first step. We need to have data with which to make decisions.

I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act of 2021. This important legislation would expedite the visa process for adult children of Filipino World War II veterans, so they can reunite with their relatives in the United States. Today, fewer than 6,000 Filipino World War II veterans remain. Many of these veterans are now in their late 80s and 90s, and have been separated from their loved ones for far too long.

During World War II, more than 250,000 Filipino soldiers fought under the American flag to protect and defend the United States in the Pacific

theater. These Filipino soldiers fought shoulder to shoulder with U.S. servicemembers, and approximately 60,000 died in battle. The U.S. government promised these veterans compensation and benefits in exchange for their loyal service to our country. However, after the war, Congress passed the Rescission Act of 1946, denying Filipino veterans many of the benefits conferred to other World War II veterans.

Filipino World War II veterans were not awarded U.S. citizenship until 1990, more than 40 years after they risked their lives for our Nation. Although the Immigration Act of 1990 granted U.S. citizenship to approximately 26,000 Filipino nationals who served during World War II, the law did not confer citizenship or residency to their children. Therefore, the children of the Filipino veterans are required to apply for family-based green cards which are subject to an annual limitation as well as a country cap. Under the cap, only seven percent of recipients are permitted to come from a single country. These limitations have created a large backlog of people trying to reunite with family from the Philippines and as a result, some Filipino applicants must wait nearly two decades before their petitions can be considered.

In an attempt to partially resolve this issue, in 2016 under the Obama Administration, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) established the Filipino World War II Veterans Parole (FWVP) program to reunite veterans and their surviving spouses with their adult children and siblings. Under FWVP, USCIS can grant parole on a discretionary, case-by-case basis, to a veteran's family member so that they may come to the United States as they wait for their immigrant visa to become available. This policy recognizes the extraordinary contributions and sacrifices of Filipino veterans while also allowing these elderly veterans to be cared for by family. Despite the value of this program, the Trump Administration announced its intention to terminate FWVP and in December 2020, published final steps to end this program in the Federal Register. I joined Rep. Ed Case in sending a bicameral and bipartisan letter with colleagues to President Biden in February, urging the new administration to rescind the termination efforts and renew FWVP.

The threat to end FWVP persists to this day. The legislation that I am introducing, the Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act of 2021, would resolve this issue permanently and fulfill our nation's promise to honor the Filipino World War II veterans' service to our country. This bill would help to reunite these families by exempting the sons and daughters of Filipino World War II veterans from immigration limitations in the Immigration and Nationality Act. This change in law would benefit only a few thousand surviving Filipino World War II veterans who desperately want to be reunited with their children in their last years.

I call on my Senate colleagues to quickly pass this bill.

Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the `I Am Vanessa Guillen Act' that addresses longstanding systemic problems in the way that the military responds to sexual harassment and sexual assault. I thank Representative Speier and Representative Mullin for reintroducing this important legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Army Specialist Vanessa Guillen disappeared from her Fort Hood, Texas, Army base in April 2020. Tragically, last June, Fort Hood officials confirmed that remains found near the Leon River in Bell County, Texas, were Vanessa's. Vanessa had told other soldiers at Fort Hood that she was being sexually harassed and confided to her family that the perpetrator was a fellow Army Soldier. A separate fellow Soldier was suspected of beating Vanessa to death with a hammer, and then, with his girlfriend, dismembering, burning, and burying Vanessa's body about 30 miles from Fort Hood. This other Soldier--the suspect in question--fatally shot himself when confronted by authorities for questioning off post. His girlfriend has been charged in federal court with conspiracy to tamper with evidence.

The Army finally acknowledged that Vanessa did report being sexually harassed by a superior in her chain of command in the months leading up to her murder. Vanessa's family has called for changes to how the military handles reports of sexual harassment and assault and has asked for a law to allow a third-party investigative team to look into reports of sexual harassment within the military. They are right to demand better from the military--as should we all.

Despite on-going efforts to root out the toxic culture of sexual harassment and sexual assault in the military, it is still very much alive. And that's not just my opinion--the Army itself has confirmed that sad fact in recent months following their release in December 2020 of the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee Report, which shockingly included as one of its findings that the Command Climate at Fort Hood has been permissive of sexual harassment and sexual assault.

How long will victims of sexual harassment and assault continue to be afraid to report their abusers? It seems that the military justice system is rather the military system without justice where survivors of these crimes cannot have confidence to know that their reports will be confidential, taken seriously, and adjudicated properly.

We need to address this injustice now. An effective and strong military unit is one that relies on the trust between all members of that unit. Sexual harassment and sexual assault have no place in our military--they break that critical trust. It is a betrayal of every Soldier, Sailor, Airman and Marine if leaders do not do everything possible to eradicate the toxic culture which allows sexual harassment and sexual assault to fester and erode good order and discipline within the ranks.

To ensure our military readiness, we need to do everything possible to help ensure victims and survivors of these heinous crimes are supported, treated with respect, and not traumatized again, and that their perpetrators are held accountable in a military justice system they can trust. These are fathers and mothers, daughters and sons, sisters and brothers, who have volunteered to give the ultimate sacrifice when called upon. They should not have to fear their fellow servicemembers at home nor feel that when they raise concerns, they are not taken seriously.

Therefore, I am reintroducing the ``I Am Vanessa Guillen Act''. The provisions in this legislation will move prosecution decisions on sexual assault and sexual harassment cases outside of the chain of command to an Office of the Chief Prosecutor within each military service; create a standalone military offense for sexual harassment; establish trained sexual harassment investigators who are outside of the chain of command of the complainant and the accused to investigate all claims of sexual harassment; implement the recommendations of the Fort Hood Independent Review Committee Report to strengthen the independence and effectiveness of the Army's Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) Program; require both DoD and the Comptroller General to conduct separate evaluations of the military services' sexual assault prevention and response programs; and establish a process by which servicemembers can make claims for negligence against DoD in the case of sexual assault or sexual harassment. I was quite pleased to hear that DoD's Sexual Assault Independent Review Commission recently released initial recommendations to the Secretary that tracked closely with several of the provisions in this legislation: moving prosecution decisions on sexual assault and sexual harassment cases outside of the chain of command to an Office of the Chief Prosecutor within each military service and requiring all sexual harassment allegations to be investigated outside the immediate chain of command.

These changes will encourage survivors to come forward to report sexual assault and sexual harassment, more effectively bring justice for survivors, and strengthen the ability of the military services to protect its most important resource--the people who wear the uniform of the United States.

We need to pass the `I am Vanessa Guillen Act' to fix a broken military justice system.

Mr. President, as the author of this bill, I totally disagree with characterizing it as having had a bitter partisan beginning, but my colleague is exercising his free speech right, so there you go.

After 2 weeks of hard work and bipartisan collaboration, the U.S. Senate is poised to take real action to confront the wave of anti-Asian hate sweeping our country. Although we still have some damaging amendments to defeat, I am confident that, in a few hours, the Senate will pass the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, as amended, with the substitute Hirono-Collins amendment. By doing so, we will send a powerful message of solidarity to the AAPI community that the Senate will not be a bystander as anti-Asian violence surges in our country.

Over the past years, hate crimes targeting the AAPI have risen 150 percent, as noted. More than 3,800 incidents have been reported across all 50 States and the District of Columbia. These statistics paint a disturbing picture of what is happening in our country, but they only quantify part of the problem. Why? Because hate crimes and other incidents are notoriously underrepresented.

These attacks have not ceased in the 2 weeks since the Senate began debating this bill. Last Sunday, an 80-year-old woman and her 79-year- old husband, both of Korean descent, were taking an evening walk in a local park near their home in Southern California. Suddenly, without warning, an assailant approached the couple and punched them in their faces. That same assailant is also suspected of threatening Sakura Kokumai, a Japanese-American Olympic karate athlete, who, incidentally, was born in Hawaii.

These unprovoked, random attacks and incidents are happening in supermarkets, on our streets, in takeout restaurants--basically, wherever we are. These disturbing and horrifying attacks are in many ways a predictable and foreseeable consequence of the use of racist and inflammatory language like ``Chinese virus'' or ``Kung flu'' to describe the pandemic.

I have been heartened by the steps President Biden has taken to denounce this language and confront this epidemic of hate. Under his leadership, the executive branch is doing its part, and in a few short hours, Congress will do ours by passing the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act.

This is not a controversial bill. It focuses Federal leadership to investigate and report hate crimes and other incidents, and it provides resources for our communities to come together to take a stand against intolerance and hate.

Over the past 2 weeks, I have worked with Senators in both parties to make changes that broaden support for this bill while retaining its original purpose. In particular, I want to acknowledge and thank Senator Collins for her good-faith efforts to amend this bill and build support for it in the Republican caucus.

I also want to thank Senator Duckworth for her leadership on this issue; Senators Blumenthal and Moran, whose NO HATE Act is now included in our legislation; and Senators Warnock and Grassley, who contributed important findings to this bill.

This moment would not have been possible without the determined efforts of Leader Schumer and Chairman Durbin and the excellent work of my friend and colleague in the House, Congresswoman Grace Meng.

I am grateful that the Senate will soon be taking action to confront anti-Asian hate in our country, but ours is not the only community suffering right now. Earlier this week, a jury in Minneapolis delivered justice and accountability for the murder of George Floyd, but make no mistake: One conviction cannot and will not erase the enduring legacy of systemic racism and disparate policing in our country. It is my sincere hope that we can channel and sustain the bipartisan work done on this important piece of legislation into debating and passing the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, and I understand that bipartisan talks are underway. We are in this together. We are in this together.

Senator Collins, I really appreciate your work on this bill. We would not be here without your support.

I yield the floor.

Vote on Amendment No. 1456

Mr. President, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. Discrimination against Asian-American students or any students on the basis of race is already prohibited by Federal law.

This amendment is a transparent and cynical attack on longstanding admission policies that serve to increase diversity and provide opportunity to students of color in our institutions of higher learning. This amendment also threatens colleges and universities with the loss of all Federal funding for pursuing or using policies that our courts have upheld repeatedly.

I urge everyone to reject this amendment.

I yield back.

Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. President, in just a few moments, the Senate will take a strong stand against anti-Asian hate in our country.

Passing the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act sends a clear and unmistakable message of solidarity to the AAPI community, and this moment would not be possible without the collective efforts of so many people, including, of course, my Republican colleagues--one person in particular who just spoke before me.

But I want to especially thank Majority Leader Schumer for making this bill a priority for the Senate and working closely with us to shepherd its passage.

I also want to thank my colleagues in the House, especially Congresswoman Grace Meng for being the dogged advocate for our community during this process, as well as Members of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, led by Congresswoman Judy Chu.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this legislation.

Mr. President, I echo the sentiments expressed by my colleague from Minnesota, and I rise today in support of the nomination of Vanita Gupta to be Associate Attorney General of the United States. Today, I am focusing my remarks on Ms. Gupta, but I will have some words of support for Kristen Clarke later.

For 4 years, Donald Trump treated the Justice Department like his personal law firm. He ordered that the Department's attorneys drop charges or reduce sentencing recommendations against his friends and cronies. He ordered investigations and prosecutions against his political enemies. He even had the Department step in to defend him against the defamation claim relating to an allegation of rape.

By the end of the Trump administration, the Justice Department's reputation was tarnished and the morale of its employees was lower than at any point since Watergate.

Thankfully, President Biden has named a professional, highly qualified team to lead the Justice Department and to restore its place of prominence and moral authority in following the rule of law.

It is significant that the Senate confirmed Merrick Garland as Attorney General and will shortly confirm Lisa Monaco as Deputy Attorney General with strong bipartisan support.

I am disappointed that Vanita Gupta, a similarly well-qualified nominee, is not receiving the same bipartisan support.

A few weeks ago, I sat in the Judiciary Committee for nearly 2 hours, listening to my Republican colleagues smear Ms. Gupta with lies about her record--lies like that she wants to decriminalize all drugs, that she wants to defund the police, that she is somehow responsible for the production of crystal meth in Mexico.

When Chair Durbin finally called for a vote, not a single Republican supported Ms. Gupta's nomination. As I sat there listening to these lies and smears, I asked myself a question, and I am still pondering that question today: What exactly are Republicans afraid of?

Unlike many of President Trump's nominees, Vanita Gupta is actually qualified to help lead the Justice Department. Throughout her career, Ms. Gupta has shown the strategic acumen, dogged determination, and coalition-building skills necessary to navigate the challenges facing our country.

As a young attorney with the ACLU, she worked to exonerate 38 wrongfully convicted men and women in Tulia, TX. Mostly people of color, these individuals had been convicted of drug crimes based on the testimony of a single undercover police officer and sentenced to prison for periods of up to 434 years.

Ms. Gupta was able to show that the officer was racially biased and had a reputation for dishonesty. She demonstrated that he falsified reports and misidentified defendants. In light of this evidence, the court found that the officer ``may be the most devious, non-responsive law enforcement witness this Court has witnessed in 25 years on the bench in Texas.''

The case was so compelling that then-Texas Governor Rick Perry pardoned 35 of the defendants. It was such a miscarriage of justice that those pardoned individuals ultimately received a $6 million settlement.

Ms. Gupta later went on to lead the Justice Department Civil Rights Division. In this role, she stood up to the rights of transgender students and prisoners, fought discrimination against servicemembers, and defended the right to vote.

From there, Ms. Gupta served as President and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights where, among other things, she played a key role in passing the most significant criminal justice reform package in years.

Ms. Gupta's qualifications are borne out in this experience and in the widespread support that she has received. Conservative leaders and longtime Republicans like Michael Chertoff, Grover Norquist, and Michael Steele have praised Ms. Gupta as a consensus builder on critical issues like voting rights and criminal justice reform.

Every major law enforcement organization, including the Fraternal Order of Police and National Sheriffs' Association, has endorsed Ms. Gupta's nomination.

In light of this widespread support, it is tough to take the criticisms I hear from my colleagues on the other side seriously. If Ms. Gupta supported defunding the police or decriminalizing all drugs, how did she manage to get universal support from the law enforcement community? If she is such a radical progressive, why are people like Grover Norquist and the former general counsel and senior vice president of Koch Industries endorsing her nomination?

Republican criticism of Ms. Gupta is also hard to take seriously after they spent the past 4 years--4 years, and I was there--pushing through some DOJ and judicial nominees who were either wholly unqualified, openly supported disenfranchisement of Black Americans, or were even credibly accused of sexual assault.

After 4 years of permissive deference to Donald Trump, it is rich to hear my Republican colleagues attacking and demeaning a strong, smart, and highly qualified woman of color like Vanita Gupta to serve in the Justice Department. Their attacks aren't an exercise of the Senate's constitutional duty to provide advice and consent. It is pure partisan politics at its worst.

President Biden nominated Vanita Gupta to serve as Associate Attorney General because she is the best person for the job, and the Senate should confirm her without further delay.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, on March 29, Vilma Kari was walking to church near Times Square in Manhattan when a man pushed her to the ground and violently assaulted her in broad daylight.

A silent video of the incident captured by a security camera inside a luxury apartment building showed the attack in vivid detail. In it, we can clearly see the assailant pushing Ms. Kari to the ground and kicking her repeatedly in the head and torso before leaving the scene. This video, which has gone viral, is disturbing enough to watch, but it doesn't capture the full picture of what happened. Witnesses to the attack recounted the assailant's repeatedly yelling ``You don't belong here'' to Ms. Kari--an immigrant from the Philippines who has lived in our country for decades.

Now recovering from multiple injuries, including a broken pelvis, Vilma Kari has become one of the latest victims in a surging wave of hate crimes targeting the Asian-American, Pacific Islander community during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Over the last year, we have seen businesses defaced with anti-Asian graffiti, elders verbally accosted on the street, women assaulted, and eight people murdered in cold blood at Asian-owned businesses in Georgia during unprovoked attacks. All told, people of Asian descent have reported more than 3,800 hate incidents across all 50 States and the District of Columbia.

These attacks are disturbing and horrifying, but they are, in many ways, a predictable and foreseeable outgrowth of the use of racist and inflammatory language, like ``Chinese virus,'' ``Wuhan virus,'' and ``Kung flu,'' to describe the COVID-19 pandemic. Last year, as some political leaders, including the former President, started using this language, the FBI warned of a potential surge in hate crime incidents targeting people of Asian descent.

At the same time, public health experts warned of the danger of singling out the Asian-American community as being responsible for the virus. These warnings proved prophetic. A study recently published by the American Journal of Public Health found there was a dramatic increase in tweets using anti-Asian phrases after the first time the former President tweeted using the hashtag ``China virus'' on March 16, 2020.

This rise in hate crimes targeting AAPIs over the past year has shown the extent to which this inflammatory rhetoric has normalized racist attitudes toward and the stigmatization of Asian Americans with devastating consequences. The Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism, for example, assessed that, in 16 of the Nation's largest cities, hate crimes targeting AAPIs spiked nearly 150 percent during the pandemic.

The current dramatic rise in hate crimes targeting Asian Americans might be a recent development, but we all know that racism is never far below the surface in our country, sadly. Asian Americans have always been targeted as the ``other'' in our country--considered the perpetual ``foreigner.'' It is what drove the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and is what led to the incarceration of 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II. It is also what drove two Detroit autoworkers, during the height of hysteria about Japan's growing economic strength, to murder a Chinese-American man named Vincent Chin in 1982 because they thought he was Japanese. Outrageously, neither of Vincent's killers received prison time. Nearly 40 years later, we can see clear parallels between the racism that motivated Vincent Chin's murder and the ongoing surge in anti-Asian racism and hate crimes. We can also see the parallels in the wave of activism both unleashed.

Today, the AAPI community is uniting, once again, to confront this epidemic of racism, discrimination, and hate. We are marching, speaking out, and demanding action in cities and States across the country. As part of our activism, we are working to dispel the model minority myth that all Asians are successful and integrated in society. This racist and discriminatory stereotype devalues the struggles and experiences of an extraordinarily diverse community. The AAPI community is comprised of people from more than 48 distinct ethnic groups who speak over 300 languages. Some of these groups have been in this country for over 100 years. Others have grown in size through waves of immigration in recent decades.

Like other communities of color, elements of the AAPI community have traditionally suffered from a variety of health, economic, and other disparities for years, and the COVID-19 pandemic has only made them worse. AAPIs are contracting and dying from COVID-19 at much higher rates than White Americans and at comparable rates with Black and Hispanic Americans.

Our community has suffered too much over the past year from the two epidemics of racism and COVID, and confronting both will continue to present challenges, but it has been a relief to have a President capable of demonstrating care and empathy and who shares our sense of urgency in confronting this wave of hate.

In his first week as President, Joe Biden issued an executive memorandum that condemned racism, xenophobia, and intolerance targeting the AAPI community and directed the Federal Government to actively combat it. In recent weeks, following the brutal murder of eight people, including six Asian women in Georgia, President Biden took additional action. He announced new investments for research into anti- Asian xenophobia through the National Science Foundation, directed $50 million in support for victims of hate crimes, and established a COVID- 19 equity task force to combat anti-Asian hate.

Members of President Biden's administration have followed his lead. Attorney General Merrick Garland, for example, pledged to prioritize hate crimes enforcement during his confirmation hearing and has taken additional steps to help local law enforcement agencies investigate bias crimes.

Under President Biden's leadership, the executive branch is doing its part. Now it is time for us--it is time for Congress to act.

I am encouraged that in just a few minutes, the Senate will vote to proceed to the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act on a strong bipartisan vote. This is not a controversial bill. It would focus Federal leadership to investigate and report hateful acts of violence and provide resources for our communities to come together to take a stand against intolerance and hate.

The COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act directs the Attorney General to designate a person whose responsibility it will be to expedite review of anti-Asian hate crimes and report them. It also instructs DOJ to issue guidance to State and local law enforcement on culturally appropriate public education campaigns and on the collection of data on hate crimes or incidents. Such culturally-sensitive, in-language outreach is an important element for strengthening trust and awareness in impacted communities, and it will help overcome established hesitancy to report hate crimes or incidents to law enforcement.

At a time when the AAPI community is under siege, this bill is an important signal that Congress is taking anti-Asian racism and hatred seriously. Significantly, Democrats and Republicans are working together in good faith to come to consensus to pass this bill. For example, I wholeheartedly support a bipartisan amendment from Senators Blumenthal and Moran to attach their NO HATE Act to this bill. Their amendment improves the data collection and reporting of all hate crimes so that we can better understand their prevalence and implement effective policies to prevent them. Senator Collins and I are also working on additional language to broaden support for the bill.

The ongoing wave of anti-Asian violence and hate crimes has touched virtually every single member of the AAPI community. We are talking about millions of people in the AAPI community. Many of us are changing our daily routines. Until recently, I usually have my earbuds in, listening to an audio book whenever I leave my apartment to go for a walk. I don't do that now.

An attack on one group in our country is truly an attack on all of us. By passing the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, we can come together on a bipartisan basis to show that the U.S. Senate will not be a bystander to the wave of racist, anti-Asian violence in our country. So let's get it done together.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, during the last year we have all experienced the impacts of the coronavirus on everyday life. The coronavirus has shuttered businesses, closed schools, cancelled events, and overwhelmed hospitals and other health care facilities. It has fundamentally changed how we live our lives.

I can think of few better examples of where this has been the case than in our K-12 schools. Hawaii public school students, parents, and teachers have told me about how they have been impacted by the coronavirus. I have learned about the challenges they have faced with school closures, and heard about how they have adjusted to distance and hybrid learning--two terms that were pretty unfamiliar just a year ago. They are ready to return to the classroom.

But they need to return safely. That's why Congress recently provided an additional $130 billion for K-12 schools--to make sure that when they do reopen, they have the necessary resources to provide healthy and safe learning environments for students. If nothing else, the coronavirus has demonstrated how important these environments are for student success.

Unfortunately, however, we know that even before the coronavirus many students lacked access to these environments--including students in federally impacted school districts.

In many ways it comes down to school facilities. A recent survey identified $4.2 billion in school facility needs in federally impacted schools. These were basic health and safety needs to address issues like lead and mold remediation; electrical, HV AC, and plumbing upgrades; leaky roofs; expired boilers; outdated technology; and others--hardly conditions where students can be expected to succeed.

We need to make bold investments. We need to make them now.

That's why I am reintroducing the Impact Aid Infrastructure Act (or ``IAIA'') for the 117th Congress. IAIA provides $1 billion in supplemental funding for Impact Aid Construction Grants in FY2022. Specifically, the bill provides funding for competitive and formula grants that would help our federally impacted schools build, renovate, repair, and otherwise improve their facilities.

With these funds, federally impacted schools that are severely disadvantaged when it comes to raising revenue to finance projects would receive much-needed assistance.

We can certainly do more for these districts, but this investment is a start.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President. I rise today to condemn violence and discrimination against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) that has surged during the COVID-19 pandemic. Since March 2020, Stop AAPI Hate has received nearly 3,800 reports of discrimination and hate incidents nationwide. Unfortunately, the recent surge in xenophobia and hate specifically targeted against AAPIs is not new.

More than 180 years ago, when the first Asian immigrants came to the United States, members of the AAPI community experienced prejudice and legalized discrimination. Xenophobic policies such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the Federal government's incarceration of more than 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II, were born from fear, ignorance, and anti-immigrant hostility. More recently, after the 9/11 terrorist

attacks, Arab, Muslim, Sikh, and South Asian Americans faced a wave of hate incidents and blame similar to what AAPI individuals are experiencing today. As George Santayana said, ``Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.''

The former president espoused and amplified virulent intolerance using slurs such as the ``China virus'' and ``kung flu'' to characterize the COVID-19 virus, putting the lives of 23,000,000 AAPIs at risk, including more than 2,000,000 AAPI frontline workers. Every day, these heroic individuals put their personal health and safety on the line to serve other Americans as health care professionals, first responders, transit operators, and in supermarkets and other essential service industries. However, AAPI frontline workers are not immune from discrimination and hate, which impacts both their personal and professional lives. Some AAPI nurses and doctors have reported workplace harassment from other staff and patients who refuse their care, while others have experienced terrifying encounters, including being violently shoved, spit on, and called racial slurs during their evening commute.

The rise in attacks against older AAPI individuals are both alarming and unconscionable. In January 2021, three AAPI elders were violently attacked in separate incidents in California. Tragically, one of these individuals, Vicha Ratanapakdee, died from injuries he sustained during an unprovoked assault, which his family believes was racially motivated. This discrimination which includes acts of physical violence is an additional threat elders now face as a result of the pandemic. Older adults are at higher risk of contracting severe COVID-19 and AAPI elders, particularly those who are recent immigrants or have limited English proficiency, may face additional challenges in obtaining health care, enduring economic insecurity, and suffering from language isolation.

Recently, on March 16, 2021, eight people, including six women of Asian descent, were shot to death at three Atlanta-area businesses. During a year of increasing racism and attacks targeting AAPIs, this latest senseless act of violence adds to the pain and fear felt by many in the AAPI community. Our leaders must step up and confront racial hatred and violence.

At Merrick Garland's hearing to be Attorney General of the United States, I highlighted the surge in discrimination and hate crimes against the AAPI community. In contrast to the Department of Justice under the Trump administration, then-Judge Garland recognized the harm and fear that these incidents have caused and pledged that under his leadership, the Civil Rights Division would vigorously review and prosecute these cases. This is the kind of leadership we need in order to combat these crimes. I will continue to raise the issue of anti- Asian hate with other nominees and officials to call attention to the alarming rise of hate crimes against AAPIs and the critical need for action.

The legislation that I have introduced, the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, will help to address the ongoing surge in violence against AAPI communities. It will focus federal leadership to investigate and report hateful acts of violence, and provide resources for our communities to come together and take a stand against intolerance and hate. The actions of our leaders matter, and I call on my colleagues in the United States Senate to condemn anti-Asian racism, and swiftly pass the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act during the 117th Congress.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will help to improve adult vaccination rates throughout this country. I am thankful to Senators Capito, Whitehouse, and Scott of South Carolina for their partnership on this important legislation.

Before there were vaccines, nearly everyone got measles, and diseases like whooping cough, polio, and rubella were commonplace among children and adults. Luckily for us, vaccines are now a cornerstone of our nation's disease prevention efforts. They have a demonstrated record limiting the spread of debilitating and potentially deadly conditions-- from measles to flu to pneumonia--saving lives and reducing health care costs. A successful vaccination campaign is also essential to fully reopening society and preventing future COVID-19 outbreaks.

Unfortunately, adult vaccines rates are not nearly as high as they could and should be. Prior to the pandemic, more than 50,000 adults per year died from vaccine-preventable diseases in the United States, while millions more became ill as a result, causing them to miss work and leaving some unable to care for those who depend on them. The health care costs associated with low adult vaccine rates are enormous--each year, the U.S. spends $15 billion treating Medicare beneficiaries alone for these vaccine-preventable diseases.

Because the immune system deteriorates as people age, adults 50 and over are especially susceptible to many vaccine-preventable diseases and account for a disproportionate number of deaths and illnesses from these disease. As Americans age, the impact of these diseases and their complications is likely to grow--unless we quickly and substantially improve use of and access to adult vaccines, especially among Medicare beneficiaries.

By increasing vaccine access, we can save thousands of lives and potentially billions of dollars. Unfortunately, older adults seeking access to and coverage for vaccines encounter many barriers. They may not know where or how to get vaccinated and cost can be an obstacle for both patients and providers.

That's why we've introduced the Protecting Seniors Through Immunization Act of 2021. The bill improves vaccine information and education for Medicare beneficiaries, including the risks and consequences of vaccine-preventable disease, and ensures older adults know what vaccines are right for them at the right time.

The bill also eliminates the cost burden of vaccines on our nation's aging population. Vaccines are available for free under private insurance, but under Medicare, vaccine coverage is split between Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D. Seniors can access vaccines covered under Part B--such as flu, pneumonia and Hepatitis--with no cost-sharing. However, vaccines covered under Part D, such as shingles (herpes zoster) and pertussis (Tdap), can include a wide range of cost- sharing requirements. For seniors, many of whom live on fixed incomes such as Social Security benefits, these additional costs may preclude them from being vaccinated.

A 2018 study of Tdap and herpes zoster vaccine claims under Medicare Part D demonstrated that higher out-of-pocket cost-sharing is associated with higher rates of cancelled vaccination claims--in other words, when the costs of vaccines are too high, seniors can't or won't get them. The study found that cost-sharing of $51 or greater is associated with a 2 to 2.7-times greater rate of cancelled vaccination claims compared with $0 cost-sharing.

There are more than 300,000 cases of shingles reported in the U.S. each year. About 50 percent of people who experience shingles will have postherpetic neuralgia, a debilitating, painful, and long-lasting disease. This is just one example of the types of conditions that vaccines can prevent.

We have a lot of room for improvement for uptake of these vaccines. Passing the Protecting Seniors Through Immunization Act of 2021 will help us to do so. By reducing cost barriers and improving access and raising awareness, we can implement these vaccines better and set the stage for healthy aging.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the COVID-19 Disinformation Research and Reporting Act. I thank Representative Jennifer Wexton for working with me on this important piece of legislation, which will help shine a light on the ways social media and other online platforms amplify and spread misinformation and disinformation about the coronavirus pandemic to the detriment of public health. I also thank my colleagues--Senators Booker, Blumenthal, Klobuchar, Warren, and Reed--for cosponsoring this bill.

As I stand here today nearly 30 million Americans have been diagnosed with COVID-19 and over 540,000 have died from the virus.

The numbers alone are staggering. But when you hear and read the personal stories of individuals and families who are suffering, it is truly tragic. It makes you mournful that for many of the individuals who died, they died alone in the absence of their loved ones.

While many things contributed to this massive loss of life, I am here to talk about one in particular: the insidious spread of coronavirus- related misinformation and disinformation online. This ``infodemic'' has undercut the efforts of public health officials at every turn, and threatens to prolong the virus's impact on the health of our people and economy long after a safe and effective vaccine is available.

The online spread of misinformation about public health is nothing new.

Claims that the 2014 Ebola epidemic was a form of population control spread across social media. Anti-vaccination groups have long used Facebook and YouTube to share junk science and recruit new members.

However, social media platforms' response to coronavirus was supposed to be different. Early in the pandemic, the major social media platforms announced new measures to combat misinformation while making sure users had access to accurate, authoritative information about the virus. Facebook added a COVID-19 Information Center to the tops of users' News Feeds and announced it would remove misinformation that could contribute to imminent physical harm. Twitter verified accounts that provided credible updates on the pandemic and committed to removing false or misleading content that contradicted information from health authorities. YouTube began directing users who searched for COVID-related information to the WHO or other health authorities and banned false information contradicting health authorities on treatment, prevention, diagnosis, or transmission of COVID-19.

Unfortunately, these measure proved lacking and insufficient. The conspiracy film Plandemic was viewed more than 8 million times across social media platforms, and the sequel was viewed over 100,000 times on YouTube during its first week alone. An August 2020 study by advocacy group Avaaz found that misinformation about vaccines and other health topics had been viewed an estimated 3.8 billion times on Facebook in the previous year--four times more than factual, authoritative content from institutions like the WHO and CDC. The study found that only 16% of previously fact-checked health misinformation on Facebook carried a warning label.

Spend even a small amount of time on the internet or social media and you will find rampant misinformation and conspiracy theories about COVID-19. Some examples of these falsehoods include: Bill Gates created the virus to use a vaccine as cover to implant microchips into Americans. No, actually, Dr. Fauci created the coronavirus to seize political power. You shouldn't wear a mask to protect against the coronavirus, because wearing a mask actually weakens your immune system. And do not worry if you catch the coronavirus--you can treat it by drinking bleach.

These claims might seem ridiculous, but they have real word consequences. A study published in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene found that 5,800 people had been hospitalized and at least 800 people died in the first three months of 2020 alone as a direct result of coronavirus-related misinformation. As recently as August, the Georgia Department of Health and the Texas Poison Control Center had to warn people not to drink bleach to treat COVID. A recent poll found that only 51 percent of people wear a facial covering in public, despite its proven efficacy in preventing the spread of COVID. And, perhaps must troubling, polls suggest that over 30% of the U.S. population will not get a COVID vaccine.

If we hope to get past the coronavirus and avoid similar public health crises in the future, we must understand where misinformation originates, how it spreads, and strategies to stop it.

This is exactly what the COVID-19 Disinformation Research and Reporting Act will do. It directs the National Science Foundation to partner with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study on the spread of COVID-19-related disinformation and misinformation on the internet and social media platforms. This study will provide critical information on the roles disinformation and misinformation have played in the public response to COVID-19, including public acceptance of and demand for COVID-19 vaccines; the sources of COVID-19-related disinformation and misinformation and the ways it has influenced the public debate; the role social media plays in the disseminating and promoting this disinformation and misinformation; and potential strategies for combatting misinformation and disinformation in the future.

This information will not stop the next pandemic from coming. And, it will not force the next Administration to take it seriously and follow the advice of doctors and scientists. But it can give us the knowledge and tools necessary to avoid another infodemic and ensure the American public receives accurate and authoritative information when it is most needed.

I therefore encourage my colleagues to support the COVID-19 Disinformation Research and Reporting Act.

Madam President, I rise today in support of the nomination of my friend and former colleague Xavier Becerra to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.

Xavier and I served together in the House of Representatives from January 2007 to January 2013. While we sat on different House committees, we were both very involved in one of Congress's most significant achievements during that time--passage of the Affordable Care Act, ACA. The ACA promised to greatly shrink the number of uninsured Americans and rein in health care costs that were increasing rapidly. It also led to false, harsh, partisan accusations by Republicans that the law was going to ration health care and death panels were inevitable.

Despite years of sabotage and dozens of attempts to repeal it, the Affordable Care Act has lived up to its promise: more than 20 million Americans gained

health insurance thanks to the ACA, and the ACA reduced health care spending a total of $2.3 trillion between 2010 and 2017.

As a senior member of the Health Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee, Xavier Becerra played a significant role to help write and pass the ACA and defended the law from near continuous Republican assault as California's attorney general. Most recently, he has been leading litigation at the Supreme Court to reinstate the ACA after an ideologically-driven district court judge struck down the law in its entirety.

These efforts demonstrate the leadership, experience, and health policy expertise Xavier will bring to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Despite these bona fides, Republican Senators are actively smearing Xavier's reputation and misrepresenting his qualifications to prevent him from becoming the first Latino to serve as HHS Secretary.

First, they claim Xavier isn't qualified because he isn't a doctor. Republicans clearly didn't believe this was a deal breaker when all but one of them voted to confirm Alex Azar--a former executive at Eli Lilly--as Donald Trump's HHS Secretary. I think most Americans would rather have an HHS Secretary like Xavier Becerra, who successfully sued hospitals to lower healthcare costs, than a person in charge of running a pharmaceutical company. Republicans have also claimed that Xavier lacks ``extensive health care experience.'' This is particularly rich coming from the same people who voted to confirm Betsy De-Vos to become Education Secretary. She not only had never worked in a public school, she had never even attended one. These same Republicans voted to confirm Rick Perry to become Energy Secretary, when he didn't even know the Department of Energy was responsible for the Nation's nuclear arsenal.

Throughout his 12 terms in the House of Representatives, Xavier Becerra was a leader on health policy issues. He helped write the most sweeping change to our healthcare system in more than a generation, and now, as the California attorney general, he is defending that law in court. He has the experience needed to lead the Department of Health and Human Services.

Republicans are also attacking Xavier's nomination on the grounds that he is somehow ``extreme'' and ``a radical'' because he supports a woman's right to have an abortion. The Supreme Court first recognized a woman's constitutional right to an abortion in 1973. That is nearly 50 years ago. Supporting this fundamental right is anything but radical, it is a position shared by almost 70 percent of the American people. But that hasn't stopped attacks on a woman's right to seek and have one.

What is ``extreme'' and ``radical'' are Republican efforts to undermine this right--if not completely eliminate it. Just last week, the Republican Governor of Arkansas signed a law that bans all abortions unless they are necessary to save the life of the mother. This law is directly contrary to the Supreme Court's command that States cannot prohibit abortion prior to viability. It does not even include an exception for pregnancies that are the result of rape or incest.

The junior senator from Arkansas has called Xavier Becerra ``extreme'' and ``a radical'' for defending a woman's constitutional right to an abortion, while his State wants to force women who have been raped to carry their pregnancies to term. What planet are we living on?

On Thursday night, Xavier Becerra will be confirmed to become the next Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. In any normal world, the vote would be bipartisan and it would be overwhelming. I strongly support his nomination and call on my colleagues to do so as well.

(At the request of Mr. Schumer, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)