Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to speak about the devastating tax- and-spend policies we will shortly be debating here.

First, I want to differentiate between the bipartisan infrastructure legislation we are currently debating and the separate, looming debate on my Democratic colleagues' $3.5 trillion reckless tax-and-spend proposals.

Senators on both sides of the aisle have long agreed to the need to modernize and expand our hard infrastructure, including transportation systems and broadband networks. We have done so in a bipartisan manner. Infrastructure investments have traditionally been accomplished through bipartisanship and regular order. Traditional hard infrastructure investments include the funding of roads and bridges, transit, rail, airports, drinking water, and wastewater infrastructure, ports and inland waterways, water storage, and broadband infrastructure.

The bipartisan infrastructure bill we are considering today focuses on those core elements and is built around several vetted, unanimously consented committee-passed bills. It includes a number of priorities important to Idaho, including billions of dollars for roads, highways, and bridges; funding for high-speed internet and broadband infrastructure deployment; millions in water infrastructure, including for groundwater storage and conveyance; funding for resiliency against natural disasters, like wildfires and droughts; a reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools program; and much more.

It does not raise taxes.

It reprioritizes the use of certain unused COVID relief funds from previous spending bills away from bailouts and idle funds and toward supply-side investments that will provide benefits to the American people for many years.

Because this infrastructure spending focuses on long-term productivity rather than near-term demand, it will not be inflationary. In fact, it will counteract the inflationary pressures we are now seeing as a result of the excessive spending in this Congress. This is especially critical right now, as rising prices are impacting families and small businesses across America.

In June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that consumer prices were up 5.4 percent over 1 year ago--the largest increase since August 2008. Consumer price inflation has been accelerating since the beginning of the year, and American families pay the price. In the past year, gas prices have increased 45.1 percent. The cost for major appliances has increased 13.7 percent. Airfares have increased 24.6 percent, and the list goes on.

A recent University of Michigan survey showed that consumers expect prices to rise 4.8 percent over the next 12 months, and a National Federation of Independent Business survey found that 47 percent of companies are increasing average selling prices, up 7 percentage points from May and the highest share in four decades.

Economists on both sides of the aisle have warned that excessive, nonproductive spending could put us in this position.

And despite these warnings, in March, the Democrats passed nearly $2 trillion in purported COVID relief spending on top of the nearly $4 trillion that had already been spent. A fraction of this $2 trillion was actually pandemic-related.

That poorly targeted package has grown the national debt, spurred inflation, and discouraged workers from returning to the workforce. Now Democrats are proposing to spend an additional $3.5 trillion to balloon the Federal Government even more, and that is just the advertised price.

According to the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, the Democrats' new legislation will actually cost closer to $5 to $5.5 trillion over the next 10 years. Democrats intend to couple this runaway spending with job- and growth-killing tax hikes to create and establish their reckless spree of tax-and-spend policies. They intend to go it alone with this social spending spree through another budget reconciliation process in a 50-50-tied Senate, which is willfully partisan.

Yet, amazingly, despite having the tools to raise the debt limit within this process, Democrats want to ignore the debt implications of their reckless budget. If the Democrats are going to cram down this massive tax-and-spending spree, they will have to deal with the debt limit themselves. Yet they don't include dealing with their irresponsible growth of our debt in their bill.

What about offset proposals?

The Democrats' budget proposals include provisions that will cause immediate and long-term damage to our economy and send many of our most successful businesses--and the jobs they provide--abroad.

One, they propose increasing taxes on all kinds of businesses, large and small, leading to lower wages, fewer jobs, and higher prices for consumers.

Two, they would allow and encourage rival countries to change the international tax system for the worse.

Three, they want to raise our taxes on our businesses in hopes that other countries may raise theirs sometime in the indefinite future, while ceding U.S. taxing rights to our competitors today.

Four, they propose enacting a double death tax, particularly harmful for family farms and small businesses.

Five, they want to substantially increase taxes on investors, entrepreneurs, savers, and retirees.

Six, they want to drastically expand the powers of the IRS, while limiting its accountability, and turn banks into private investigators for monitoring law-abiding Americans.

Seven, their ideas will raise taxes on middle-class individuals and families, and not just those earning over $400,000.

At the very same time, they want tax relief for some of the wealthy living in the high tax-and-spend States.

And, finally, they are also seeking to impose government price controls on the pharmaceutical industry that will stifle medical innovation.

Let's go back into a little detail on this.

Business taxes. The Democrats plan to hike the tax rate paid by all types of businesses, including corporations, ignoring the fact that a significant portion of the tax burden is paid by workers. As the U.S. Chamber of Commerce notes, most corporations are small businesses, with 84 percent of them having fewer than 20 employees. As to those who actually bear the burden of a corporate tax increase, estimates say

that workers share anywhere from 20 to more than 70 percent of this burden.

A higher corporate tax rate would hit the nest eggs of everyone saving for retirement. This stealthy but very real tax hike would hit retirement savers across the spectrum, falling most heavily on the middle class and the elderly through retirement accounts and pensions, and clearly violating President Biden's pledge not to tax anyone making less than 400,000.

Any business tax increase will directly hit the very small businesses and workers that the administration claims it wants to help.

International taxes. The Democrats' tax plan would reverse the smart policies of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act adopted in 2017, once again raising the relative cost of doing business in America and punishing American businesses selling their products or services overseas. They fail to acknowledge that the tax increases in their plan will rocket the United States back into the outlier position it once occupied compared to peer nations. Once again, we will have the highest tax rates of the developed world. We are very near the top. The Democrats are intent on winning a race to get to the top of the heap in terms of international corporate tax rates.

Their international tax proposal would more than double the minimum rate paid by U.S. businesses on their foreign earnings to 26.25 percent. This hike far outstrips the 15 percent minimum rate promised by some of our largest international competitors at the OECD. If the administration wants to promote economic growth that will benefit American workers and savers, why is it sharply increasing taxes on its global businesses when no other country even levies such taxes?

The administration's international tax proposals seem designed to reignite the job-crushing inversions and foreign acquisitions of American companies that the Obama administration faced. There is no reason to tax our businesses into moving abroad, as the Democrats' proposals will do.

Family farms and small businesses. Today, family businesses passed down at death are subject only to estate tax and not an additional income tax. Instead, a business's tax basis is increased or stepped up to fair market value, sparing the next generation a large capital gains tax bill. President Biden wants to create a double death tax by eliminating the benefits of this step-up in basis, including for small businesses, farms, and ranches passed down from one generation to the next at death.

More insidiously, the Biden plan would tax these businesses on simple inflation, sticking them with a bill for reckless, inflationary tax- and-spend policies enacted by politicians in Washington.

Capital gains tax. For decades, the Republicans and Democrats have recognized the importance of encouraging people to save for their future goals, including starting a business, saving for retirement, achieving financial independence, or even buying a home or a car.

Members of both parties have long agreed on a key tool to encourage these goals for all Americans, specifically, a lower tax rate on long- term capital gains.

President Biden wants to nearly double this tax rate from 23.8 percent to 43.4 percent, which will be the highest rate--and hear me on this: the highest rate--in a century. In many cases, when combined with similar State taxes, the government would take more than half of an asset's appreciation in taxes. This is the appreciation that lower income, middle-income, and all income categories of workers and earners in the United States will have to pay. This supersized tax hike would be a powerful disincentive to small businesses, savers and retirees, and entrepreneurs and innovators who power our economy, and harm all Americans, regardless of their financial circumstances or goals.

IRS funding and bank monitoring. The Biden administration has proposed nearly $80 billion in additional IRS funding, of which $72.5 billion would be accountability-hindering mandatory spending. Nearly doubling the IRS' budget without increasing its accountability opens the door to repeating and supercharging the Agency's past abuses of power.

Further, the administration's proposal would press financial institutions--private-sector financial institutions--into reporting the deposit and withdrawal flows on their customer's accounts of greater than $600 in value.

Now, think about that. This isn't big corporations. It is not even just corporations. It is small businesses and individuals that have a financial account that has more than $600 in it. And what we are going to see is a dragnet pulling law-abiding Americans into this, exposing sensitive data to future breaches, burdening financial institutions, and encouraging the growth of shadow banking--what a huge violation of the privacy of all Americans. As if this proposal could not be worse, the data provided to the IRS would have almost no value in fighting tax evasion.

The era of big data should not be viewed as an opportunity for Big Brother.

The SALT deduction cap. While my colleagues are proposing reckless, across-the-board tax increases on businesses and families, they are simultaneously proposing to expand a tax deduction for the wealthiest-- those living in high-tax States. Democrats are fighting to reverse the cap on State and local taxes, or what is called the SALT tax--these deductions--stoking a tax break for the very wealthy.

Democratic silence on who benefits from their proposal is telling. Per a 2020 Brookings Institute study, 96 percent of its benefits would go to the top quintile of earners, 57 percent would go to the top 1 percent of earners, and 25 percent to the top one-tenth of 1 percent of earners--a huge tax break for the wealthy.

And, finally, price controls on pharmaceutical manufacturers. Thanks to the genius of science, private-sector innovation, and the success of Operation Warp Speed, America is ready for its comeback. Unfortunately, my Democrat colleagues are proposing sweeping governmental price controls on the very innovators who have enabled our return to normalcy. Under the guise of negotiation, the government would be empowered to set a maximum fair price for drugs and apply bureaucratic standards that determine the value that cures and therapies bring to American lives.

As the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has confirmed, this type of scheme will lead to fewer new medications, threatening access to lifesaving healthcare options for our most vulnerable citizens. One of these forgone therapies could treat pancreatic cancer; another could cure ALS. While every patient should be able to afford lifesaving medications, their proposal has the potential to eliminate the existence of these very inventions and innovations.

Congress should come together in a bipartisan way to make all healthcare services, including prescription drugs, more affordable and accessible, and I have introduced legislation to do just that. We do need to reduce the cost of prescription drugs, but using the savings from this misguided government price control scheme to pay for unrelated partisan priorities is not the answer to the high cost of healthcare.

Before the pandemic, a combination of reduced regulatory burden and pro-growth policies, including the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, helped to create one of the strongest economies of our lifetime, with all-time high median household income, a 50-year low unemployment rate, and real wage gains month after month, especially and most for the low-income workers. Inflation-adjusted weekly median earnings grew 4.9 percent for the 2 years between 2018 and 2019--the fastest 2-year growth rate in real earnings since 1998 and 1999.

Polling showed Americans' general satisfaction at the highest level in 15 years.

We would do the American people a disservice if we mortgaged their future while undermining the foundations of their past successes, and, sadly, this is the approach that many of my colleagues are seeking to take as we move into the next step of this debate.

We should, instead, be building on time-proven, pro-growth policies, not reversing them to fund a reckless spending spree.

Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch, Representative Mike Simpson, and Representative Russ Fulcher, I honor Allen Thomas Noble, a stalwart of the city of Boise and a great Idahoan.

Allen Noble was a visionary, who loved our country. He was a native Idahoan, born in Idaho Falls. He graduated from Kuna High School and started out in farming in the Happy Valley of Idaho. Allen married Vera May Shulz, of Kuna, and they had five children: Susan, Linda, June, David, and Mark. As his obituary reads, ``He loved farm equipment and in 1958 bought an interest in Nampa International Harvester and moved his family to Nampa.'' Allen's deep love for farming was evident in his agricultural advancements, including his development of ``high lift pumping'' that advanced farm irrigation capabilities in the Dry Lake area and later near Glenns Ferry. In 1965, Allen married Billie Dee Jolley Johnson and added

four more children to the family: Linda Sue, Cindee Lou, Kate, and Rusty. He later expanded into John Deere dealerships, as Campbell Tractor Co., and extended his appreciation for aviation into agricultural spraying and Idaho Helicopters, Inc.'s firefighting and air medical operations. His helicopter operations have served as the primary life flight service in the Pacific Northwest, saving countless lives. This service has been instrumental in serving Idaho's backcountry and moving patients quickly from accidents to medical care.

In addition to his success and advancements in agriculture, Allen gave generously of his time, talents, and resources to many organizations and efforts in the community. He was a longtime supporter of Boise State football, and he contributed for decades to the Boise State athletic department. This included backing the expansion of Albertsons Stadium and helping to establish the Allen Noble Hall of Fame Gallery, named in his honor. He served on the Bronco Athletic Association Board of Directors and earned the Bronze Bronco Award. He also served on the board of directors for the Idaho First National Bank. Additionally, he was an initial outside investor in Micron Technology and served on its board of directors, playing a key role in the start and growth of the company.

Allen's light shined brightly over the 92 years we were blessed to have him as part of our world. He has been fittingly described as a great man who had an innovative mind, a passion for progress, and a pioneering spirit with the drive and determination to accomplish anything he put his mind to. He was also warmhearted and giving, and his encouragement and support touched many lives over the years.

He is remembered as a loyal friend who was open and generous with his life. We offer our heartfelt condolences to his many friends and loved ones, including his siblings, children, grandchildren, and great- grandchildren. Multiple lifetimes may not have been long enough for all Allen Noble had in mind and was so capable of accomplishing, but he certainly made his time on earth count--putting strong foundations under his ideas and steadfastly helping others.

Madam President I rise today to remember and honor Ian F. Fergusson, Specialist in International Trade and Finance in the Foreign Affairs, Defense and Trade Division of the Congressional Research Service, CRS. Ian passed away on Thursday, June 17, after a brief serious illness that unfortunately struck at the height of a distinguished career of more than 20 years at CRS, serving Congress on international trade and economic policy issues.

Ian exemplified the very best of CRS during his years of direct support for Congress. He achieved a remarkable record of accomplishment through his many reports, confidential memoranda, committee prints, and confidential consultative work for Members and congressional staff. Ian played a vital role in Congress's consideration of important legislation, including on export

control reform when I chaired the Senate Banking Committee. He also was intricately involved in major trade policy legislation and debates before the Senate Finance Committee, including its work on renewing and reforming Trade Promotion Authority--TPA--and the committee's and Senate's deliberation over the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement--

Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representatives Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher, I congratulate Ron Pisaneschi on his remarkable more than 35-year career with Idaho Public Television.

Ron is retiring after serving as Idaho Public Television's general manager since August 2013. He joined Idaho Public Television in 1985 and served in numerous positions for the station prior to his managerial role. This includes serving as director of content, director of programming, director of public information, and director of marketing and development. We understand under his leadership of the station, Idaho Public Television has been one of the most watched and best supported Public Broadcasting Service, PBS, stations

per capita in the Nation. Douglas Balfour, president of the Friends of Idaho Public Television, wrote, ``With his leadership, IdahoPTV has focused on the wonderful people and places we have in the Gem State, with local productions like Idaho Reports, Outdoor Idaho and Idaho Experience. Ron will be missed, but we will carry on in the tradition he established.''

Ron has also contributed extensively of his time and talents to serving in various roles throughout the community, State, and Nation. This includes his service as vice chair of the NETA board of directors, chair of the Idaho State Broadcasters Association, and member of the board of directors of American Public Television. Ron dedicated more than 25 years to serving on the PBS Children's Advisory Committee. He also served on the board of directors of the Public Television Programming Association from 2002-2007, serving as president in 2006. From 2002-2012, he served on the board of directors of the Idaho Humanities Council, where he served two terms as chairman. These are just a few examples of his longtime involvement in numerous leadership roles and advisory panels. His dedicated work has earned recognition, including Ron being named the 2005 Programmer of the Year by his colleagues in the PBS system.

Ron, thank you for your commitment to advancing public discussions in Idaho for all these years. Your curiosity, ingenuity, and thoughtful advocacy for Idaho interests have no doubt contributed significantly to broadening understanding, educational opportunities, and public discourse across Idaho and well beyond our State's borders. We will miss you at the helm of Idaho Public Television but wish you all the best in a well-earned retirement.

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

Madam President, along with my colleague Senator Jim Risch, I congratulate Jack Buell, of St. Maries, ID, on his extraordinary 46 years of public service as Benewah County commissioner. We thank him for contributing his time, talent, and resources to the people of St. Maries, Benewah County, and to Idaho.

Throughout his time in leadership, Jack has earned deep respect and admiration for his unwavering commitment to the community and county he loves. Jack Buell was first elected Benewah County commissioner nearly five decades ago in 1974, and he served steadily as commissioner until December 2020. Jack is known as someone who can be counted on to help meet the needs of the community. For example, Jack made his own property available to the U.S. Forest Service to use as a fire base. There are many other examples of his generosity and outstanding service, as he seems to never tire of doing what needs to be done.

Jack is truly a stalwart of our great State. He and his wife Eleanor own Jack Buell Trucking based in St. Maries. This business has long been a pillar in the community, providing jobs that support families and contributing to Benewah County's economic base. In addition to his business and service as Benewah County commissioner, Jack has supported and served on boards for many local and State organizations. He has been formally recognized for his contributions to the community and State, including his 2012 induction into the Idaho Hall of Fame and receiving the Idaho Distinguished Service Medal in 2021.

Jack is someone with great integrity, dedication, experience, wisdom, and institutional knowledge. He adds humor, curiosity, know-how, humility, and hard work to the countless challenges he has faced throughout his remarkable career. Jack has led by example for decades, and despite all he has done, he is not resting from service. We understand his ongoing efforts include increasing safety on the roads of St. Maries.

Thank you, Jack, for all you have done and continue to do for Idahoans. We are honored to join many others in expressing our gratitude to you for a lifetime of exceptional service.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I call up my amendment No. 1562, as modified with the changes at the desk, and ask that it be reported by number.

Madam President and Members of the Senate, what we are going to be voting on shortly here, Senate Amendment No. 1562, is an example of the bipartisanship that can be achieved if we put in the hard work to work out the details and the differences between us on very critical issues.

This is not just an amendment on one topic; this is an entire title, the Finance Committee's title. The chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Wyden, and I have worked for months

together to identify that intersection--which is a big one, as you will see--between Republicans and Democrats here in the Senate on trade policy to help us to put together a package of strong trade policy that will help us to stand up our efforts in pushing back against China in one of the most critical arenas that we face: trade, our economy, and working against the very nefarious activities that China is engaged in to try to undercut us economically and to undercut our American companies in our trade relationships.

Senator Wyden and I worked hard together to get this done, and I am glad that we now have a package that can be put forward. As I said, it is not just one provision; this is an entire trade title. Let me summarize just some of the things that are in it.

It provides a comprehensive approach to combat China's manufacturing imbalances, threats to free and fair trade, and illicit activity, which undermine America's leadership in innovation. This legislation will level the playing field for American consumers and companies, including workers, farmers, fishers, families, and taking aim at China's worst practices.

The amendment itself carries a bipartisan approach into a Senate-wide effort to ensure that the United States is positioned effectively to compete on a fair playing field globally--not just with China, globally, but especially with China.

It bolsters efforts to prohibit goods made with forced labor from reaching the United States by strengthening our Customs and Border Protection enforcement efforts and through better use of the Seafood Import Monitoring Program.

It provides modernized trade enforcement tools to U.S. Trade Representatives to address anti-competitive digital trade and censorship practices, like China's great firewall, by requiring the USTR to identify trading partners that disrupt digital trade.

It appoints a USTR official to oversee information communication technology and provides advance notice and text of proposals for any digital trade agreements 5 days before they are tabled to facilitate our efforts here in Congress to oversee an effective trade policy.

It requires a review of trade in essential supplies, including the sources of imports, and analysis of any vulnerabilities, as well as additional tools for businesses in the United States seeking reliable suppliers.

It strengthens oversight over U.S. trade policy by providing an inspector general to the USTR and by ensuring the application of section 301 tariffs related to China are calibrated to provide the necessary leverage to support American competition while ensuring U.S. competitiveness in manufacturing.

It reauthorizes, critically, the miscellaneous tariff bill--what has been called the MTB--and improved generalized system of preferences, the GSP. That will promote human rights, the environment, women's economic empowerment, and the rule of law and digital trade, and restarts and reforms the critical section 301 product exclusion process. These things might sound complicated, but it is our way of standing up our American competitors in a very anti-competitive environment dealing with China.

It expands the duties of the Interagency Center on Trade Implementation, Monitoring, and Enforcement to include investigations of practices, diffuse impacts on the economy and workers of the United States where there is systemic impacts on the resiliency of multiple critical domestic supply chains. Standing up and building out our supply chains is critical in this economic competition.

It requires the U.S. Trade Representatives to initiate talks with the Quad countries to develop a strategy on critical minerals to counter China's dominant share of that global supply.

It requires the CBP to submit a report to Congress on achieving supply chain transparency. CBP is seeking greater supply chain transparency to address merchandise made with forced labor, with counterfeits, and through a 21st Century Customs Framework Initiative.

It requires the USTR to brief Congress on the findings of a forthcoming report by the Comptroller General of the United States related to that critical 301 exclusion process.

It directs the USTR to enter into negotiations with allies to stop the importation of goods made with stolen intellectual property into the United States and allied countries. The theft of American intellectual property is becoming critical to our ability to be effectively competitive against China.

This list goes on. This is a major Finance Committee title that will significantly strengthen U.S. competitiveness in response to the malign activities that we continuously see growing from China. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this important amendment.

Before I finish, I want to say what I was going to say at the beginning of my remarks, and I alluded to it briefly. Senator Wyden and I have had a very close and strong negotiation going on, and I appreciate deeply the ability that we have to work together in a bipartisan fashion to build this, and we will be building other very important policies for this country. I just wanted to thank my colleague Senator Wyden for his partnership in this effort.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I and Senator Wyden and Senator Schumer may be able to complete our remarks before the vote.

Mr. President, I rise today to speak on amendment No. 1565 to the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, or USICA, the underlying bill.

My amendment preserves the constitutional authority of Congress over international trade. It does so by ensuring the President cannot waive or modify congressionally approved trade agreements, including the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, or TRIPS--the TRIPS Agreement. And the reason is that the TRIPS Agreement, like the USICA, contains provisions that facilitate the leadership of the United States in scientific and technological innovation.

China is challenging that leadership through predatory practices aimed at our highest value sectors, including our pharmaceutical sector. Plain and simple, China wants our intellectual property.

Remarkably, the administration announced, without consulting Congress, that it would support a waiver of U.S. intellectual property rights under the TRIPS Agreement with respect to vaccines. Moreover, the U.S. Trade Representative declined to confirm that she would oppose letting this waiver extend to China.

Colleagues, there are vaccines precisely because the innovative U.S. firms exist because of strong IP protections. The problem with access to vaccines is not intellectual property. The problem is the manufacturing capacity.

This amendment I am proposing allows the administration to proceed, providing it is willing to make the case, including by presenting evidence and respecting Congress's authority. The outcome is subject to congressional approval, just like the original TRIPS Agreement.

I also demand real consultation with Congress. My colleague's amendment provides only that the administration will provide relevant proposals and pertinent documents to Congress related to the final agreement. There is no reason to grant this leeway to the administration given its existing failure to consult with us.

My amendment requires the administration to provide the text of any U.S. proposal to Congress 5 business days before it is tabled in a trade negotiation, not after it has agreed to amend a congressionally approved agreement.

With respect to that agreement and the other WTO agreements, we have spoken clearly as a body that the United States can withdraw from these agreements if, and only if, Congress passes a resolution to that effect.

For example, it requires reports on issues central to whether the administration's decision makes sense and provides for consultation by the administration with the public and Congress concerning its proposal. This will facilitate transparency, identify any national security risks presented by the administration's proposal, and, importantly, will stop an action that does not further vaccine access or present a risk to our national security.

Accordingly, if the administration's proposal is determined by the administration's own Agencies not to present a risk to U.S. national security and that it positively facilitates vaccine access, the administration may continue negotiating and seeking an outcome for a waiver.

It must not be the case that once Congress approves a trade agreement, the administration can simply withdraw rights or obligations under a congressionally approved trade agreement or alter its terms however it sees fit. Yet that is exactly what the administration is seeking to do here.

If we were to accept that proposition, what is the point for Congress's approving any future trade agreement if the administration can simply alter it without again coming to Congress to make that change?

This amendment ensures that the administration's proposal will, in fact, get a vote by applying fast-track-like procedures to its conclusions. It also prohibits our IP from going to China or Russia.

I have only one redline, which I suspect all of you share: The administration may not waive U.S. IP rights under the TRIPS Agreement to China and Russia. Congress approved the entry of these two countries into the WTO precisely because we wanted to hold them accountable to WTO rules.

Russia and China are a threat to American innovation and the principle reason why the USICA is before us on the floor of the Senate today. So why would we then allow the administration to legally bless their malfeasance?

If we must stand together and waive the IP rights of Americans, the least we can do is insist that China and Russia, which tout the successes of their own vaccines, not be allowed to take hard-earned U.S. technology.

This concern is particularly valid since the Chinese Government is actively trying to steal mRNA technology, and its efforts to develop such technology is led, in fact, by an arm of the Chinese military

USICA is a sincere, bipartisan effort to promote American innovation in the face of China's predations. My amendment complements that effort and must likewise be considered.

I encourage all of my Democrat and Republican colleagues to support it.

Mr. President, I yield back my time.

Mr. President, along with my colleagues Senator Jim Risch and Representative Mike Simpson, I congratulate all those who worked on the completion of the Idaho Gold Star Memorial Monument to honor Idaho's fallen servicemembers and commemorate the enormous cost of our freedoms shouldered by their families.

We commend the members of the Idaho Gold Star Families Memorial Monument Committee on their work to see this project through to completion. Bringing together the partners, volunteers, and many supporters to make the monument happen was no small undertaking. We extend a special thank you to the committee's chairperson, Gold Star mother Rebecca Webb, for leading the establishment of the memorial. You have turned your profound sorrow for the loss of your son, MSG Christopher Webb, and the grief of all Gold Star Families, into a profound tribute to the great strength and devotion of our Nation's servicemembers and their families.

Mr. President, every year, the Senate unanimously passes a resolution honoring each law enforcement officer who died in the line of duty during the previous year. Their names are also added to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington, DC. Currently, this memorial contains more than 21,000 names. This year, one more Idahoan will be added to this memorial.

Wyatt Christopher Maser was born April 19, 1997, in Thermopolis, WY, to Christopher Michael Maser and Sandra Lorene Reid Arnold. After growing up in Casper, WY, Wyatt joined the U.S. Air Force, serving as a senior airman from 2015 to 2018.

After returning to his home and marrying the love of his life, Paige, Wyatt began his career in law enforcement, moving to Idaho Falls, ID, and joining the Bonneville County Sheriff's Office and graduating from the Idaho Law Enforcement Academy in 2019. Shortly before graduating, he and Paige welcomed a beautiful baby daughter, Morgan Emily.

He served as a sheriff's deputy with Bonneville County Sheriff's Office for 13 months. At the graveside service honoring his life, his career was characterized in two words: ``friendship'' and ``service.''

It takes a special person to serve in our Nation's Armed Forces and an even better one to continue to serve one's community after leaving the Air Force. By all accounts, Wyatt was that person, befriending everyone he met.

On May 18, 2020, while attempting to help a woman in mental crisis in the middle of Bone Road, he was struck by another deputy's vehicle and was pronounced dead at Eastern Idaho Medical Center.

Wyatt left behind his wife, Paige; his young daughter, Morgan; his mother and stepfather, Sandy and Bill Arnold; his father and stepmother, Chris and Cheryl Maser; his siblings, Cole, Taylor, Jesse, and Alexys; and grandparents, uncles, and pets galore.

The Law Enforcement Officers Memorial preserves Wyatt's name in stone. Yet Deputy Maser was so much more than an Air Force veteran and a law enforcement officer. An avid waterfowl hunter, Wyatt and his fellow members of the Delta Waterfowl Snake River Chapter were building a hunting blind for disabled hunters to help those with limitations enjoy the pastime he loved so much. That blind is still being completed and will be named the ``Maser Blind'' in his memory.

Deputy Maser, your memory will not be forgotten.

To Paige and Morgan, I am so sorry for your loss, and thank you for the opportunity to join in honoring Wyatt.

The Book of Isaiah, chapter 6, verse 8, states:

And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ``Whom shall I

send, and who will go for us?'' Then I said, ``Here am I!

Send me.''

Sheriff's Deputy Wyatt Christopher Maser answered that call with the ultimate sacrifice, and for that, we say thank you.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that we begin the vote now, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, first of all, I want to respond to Senator Kennedy.

The first thing I want to say to Senator Kennedy is that I am impressed. He did this in only five pages. I wish we could all learn to write our legislation

in five pages or less. I don't disagree with the history Senator Kennedy went through, with his powerful declaration, in that this is a critical issue that we must deal with, and I don't disagree with the fact that we have to have some serious pressure built here in the U.S. Congress to get this over the finish line.

That being said, I think we just got this language last night, and what Senator Kennedy is asking us to do today is to bypass the committee and go immediately to the floor with his language. There are several reasons I am going to have to, ultimately, object to that.

The first is that he is correct. I and a number of my colleagues who would be here if I were not standing here have a real problem with the solution, the mechanism, that Senator Kennedy has chosen--just outright price-fixing. Senator Kennedy doesn't even try to deny that. It goes beyond imposing government regulatory price controls in government-run programs by going through the private market as well. That is a solution mechanism that I have opposed and many of my colleagues oppose in terms of dealing with this issue. That is one of the key reasons for my objection.

The other one, though, is that the Committee on Finance, of which I am the ranking member, is working on this. I know that this is not an answer, because the Committee on Finance has been working on this now for a year or 2 or more, but there is work underway in a number of different arenas to try to get a handle on how to solve this without having to take the drastic step of just having the government come in and take control over the private sector market.

I will just point to, for example, what happened under the Trump administration in just the last couple of years. Through the Trump administration's effort to try to deal with this, a demonstration project has been operating under Medicare Part D in which the effort was to try to get the monthly cost of insulin down to $35 a month, and they have had some success in that program to demonstrate how it can be accomplished.

Now, look. I get that Medicare Part D is different than private sector insurance and that it is different than Medicaid and that it is different than other pieces of our healthcare system; it is also different than CHIP, but in one sector, a pretty significant sector, we have some solutions that are starting to show real potential.

In addition, as Senator Kennedy knows, I drafted legislation in the last Congress and am working on that legislation in this Congress that will deal not just with insulin but with many different other pieces of drug pricing in our system.

I can tell you that Senator Wyden himself, my counterpart on the Democratic side on the Finance Committee, has been working on his own ideas, and he and I have been working hard to prioritize this to get to a solution in the committee. I know, as I talked to Senator Wyden just before I came to the floor, that Senator Wyden and I both welcome the opportunity to work with Senator Kennedy as we try to put together that bipartisan solution.

I know that there would be other Senators on the other side of this issue who would stand here if I were not today and say they don't like this solution because they want it to go further in the other direction. They want to see a complete government takeover of the entire market and move to a single-payer system, that single payer being the government. That is another thing that some on my side have been working hard not to have happen.

There is a lot of political controversy over what the mechanism must be, and that is the primary reason I want this to be able to be worked on in the committee, in the proper way that we manage legislation in the Senate. I commit to Senator Kennedy that he can be as engaged as he wants to be with us in that as we move forward, but it is not the time right now to come and bypass that whole process.

I think Senator Kennedy would probably make a very powerful rejoinder that we have heard that we are working on it a lot and we need to now get to the point where we put solutions here on the floor for the entire Senate to consider, but today is not the day to do it by a unanimous consent request, and for that purpose I do object.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the rollcall vote scheduled for 11:45 begin now, and I ask for the yeas and nays.