Floor Statements

Mr. President, there has been a lot of discussion about the Democrats' decision to load up their partisan spending bill with liberal items that are completely unrelated to the pandemic.

We are at a key turning point in this crisis. The Nation has just endured a historically painful year. This virus has stolen half a million American lives. It has thrown millions of children out of classrooms and workers out of jobs.

But on every front there seem to be signs we are actually turning the tide.

New cases, hospitalizations, and deaths have been declining. The CDC reports that one in five adult Americans has already received at least one vaccine dose. That is 50-plus million people. One in 10 has gotten both shots. And the supply of vaccines is continuing to ramp up with yet another authorized just last weekend.

Meanwhile, science keeps confirming it is quite safe to get kids and teachers back in the classroom with simple precautions that we can accomplish right now. All indications suggest our economy is poised for a roaring comeback for workers and for families.

This crossroads should give Washington a golden opportunity. We could get together on a bipartisan basis like we did five times last year-- five times--and pass more targeted policies to help finish the fight and get the American people their jobs, their schools, their lives, and their country back.

A number of Senate Republicans went to the White House just days after President Biden was sworn in, proposing we continue the streak of overwhelming bipartisanship that has designed the COVID-19 response all this time. Our Democratic colleagues said no; they wanted to go it alone. And when you look at their partisan bill, you can certainly see why.

Less than 9 percent of their massive proposal would go to the core healthcare fight against COVID-19. Listen to this: Less than 1 percent goes to vaccinations.

You see, they had to leave room for all the completely unrelated, leftwing pet priorities, like sending $350 billion to bail out long- mismanaged State and local governments, multiple times the expert estimate of COVID needs; things like massive expansion and ObamaCare subsidies that would disproportionately benefit wealthier people; things like handcrafted tweaks to Medicare so it pays more money to just three States: Rhode Island, New Jersey, and the President's home State of Delaware. You might call it a special kickback for the Acela Corridor.

They had to make room to bankroll things like underground rail in Silicon Valley, upgrading a bridge from New York to Canada, and giving Planned Parenthood access to taxpayer money meant to rescue mom-and-pop Main Street businesses.

Sadly, the parts that actually do relate to the pandemic aren't much better. At the same time that Democrats refuse to follow the science on in-person schooling, they want to pass a massive new set of deluxe benefits for Federal Government employees, including 15 weeks of paid vacation for folks whose children have the option--just the option--of virtual or even hybrid learning.

They want to keep schools closed and then pay a special bonus only to parents who are Federal employees because--because their schools are closed.

Now, this isn't a recipe to safely reopen America. To the degree that it even addresses the pandemic, it is more like a plan to keep it shut down.

Mostly, it is just what Democrats promised almost a year ago: taking advantage of the crisis to check off unrelated liberal policies.

Now, Mr. President, on another matter, we recently learned that Iran has balked at the prospect of direct nuclear negotiations with the United States and Europe. This sort of resistance and gamesmanship is nothing new. We have seen this before.

Iran has long flouted international restrictions on its nuclear program, played hide-and-seek with U.N. inspectors, and failed to disclose the full scope of its nuclear research. This happened before, during, and after the Obama administration's Iran deal.

Now, thanks to the firm approach taken by the Republican administration which restored much of the leverage President Obama had thrown away, President Biden inherited a much, much stronger negotiating position.

Let me make it clear. Republicans do not oppose nuclear diplomacy. We hope the administration will secure a better, stronger, and more lasting deal than President Obama's, but to do so, President Biden's team must avoid the mistakes of the JCPOA.

Here is how you do that: coordinate closely with the partners and allies who are most immediately threatened by Tehran; treat Congress as a partner to be consulted, not a problem to be managed; and, most importantly, don't give up any leverage for free.

Of course the mullahs are playing coy. They want concessions before they even come to the table. In December, after President Biden was elected, Iran's Parliament reaffirmed their intent to continue acting out if sanctions were not eased.

Well, I hope it is only the Iranians and not the administration's negotiators who need this reminder: Look, the United States holds all the cards. President Biden is the Commander in Chief of a superpower. There are no circumstances--none--in which Iran should get money for nothing. And there is no need to rush into the talks.

The administration should take care not to squander our upper hand just to spite the last administration, nor should President Biden's team discount the value of the growing regional unity against Iran that is embodied in the new Abraham Accords.

Every day, headlines remind the world of the threat Iran and its proxies pose to peace and security. For example, the Iranian journalist, Ruhollah Zam, was lured back to the region from Europe, kidnapped, and hanged after a sham trial just in December.

The Lebanese activist, Lokman Slim, was an outspoken critic of Hezbollah until he was shot dead in his car.

The regime has kept escalating its support of the Houthi rebels in Yemen, sending in deadlier, longer range weapons, and inciting terrorist threats.

The Houthis have escalated attacks on Yemen's neighbors, including in civilian areas, and launched a military offensive that jeopardizes the peace negotiations being undertaken by U.N. Special Envoy Martin Griffiths.

Just last week, an Israeli civilian shipping vessel pulled into port with gaping damage from a missile attack, and Tehran's pet militias in Iraq have fired rocket barrages against our own American diplomatic and military facilities. They are communicating to the Biden administration in the mullahs' preferred language: violence.

Like I said over the weekend, President Biden is right to respond to this threat by authorizing strikes against targets belonging to Iranian proxy groups--the right decision--and he is right to recognize the need for new binding and enforceable constraints on Iran's nuclear capabilities, but, ultimately, we need a comprehensive approach to confronting Iran. It must be built on bipartisan foundations to endure for administrations and Congresses yet to come.

To get there--to get there, the administration must continue to meet Iranian aggression from a position of strength and consult closely with Congress for the sake of our own security and that of our friends and partners in the Ayatollah's backyard.

Madam President, once again, our communities across my home State of Kentucky are enduring the aftermath of severe--very severe--weather. From east to west, heavy rains have drenched the Commonwealth. Sadly, some of the hardest hit areas were still in the midst of trying to recover from last month's dangerous ice and snow. Emergency crews, first responders, and now the Kentucky National Guard are continuing to work around the clock to prevent this bad situation from becoming entirely tragic.

An entire nursing home in Magoffin County was evacuated as a safety precaution. Feet of water submerged vehicles and caused power outages in Calloway County.

Wolfe County firefighters followed the light of a cell phone and saved a family of five who had been trapped in their car.

Once again, Kentucky's brave first responders are stepping up at a time of need. We are all grateful for their dedicated efforts and praying for their safety.

All Kentuckians can help the first responders by continuing to follow the recommendations of local emergency personnel. My team and I are closely monitoring the situation, and we will be ready to assist however we can.

On another matter, at about 2 a.m. on Saturday morning, House Democrats rammed through the bonanza of partisan spending they are calling a pandemic rescue package. Only Democrats voted for it. Both Republicans and Democrats voted against it.

Last year, under a Republican Senate and a Republican administration, Congress passed five historic coronavirus relief bills--five of them. Not one of the five bills got fewer than 90 votes in the Senate or less than about 80 percent over in the House.

Ah, but alas, this time Democrats have chosen to go a completely partisan route. Even famous liberal economists and liberal editorial boards are saying their half-baked plan is poorly targeted to what families needed.

We have gone from passing public relief with 80 percent and 90 percent bipartisan supermajorities last year to the Speaker of the House ramming this through with just 50.7 percent of the House on Friday night. The bill contains all kinds of liberal spending on pet projects with no relationship whatsoever to pandemic relief.

Remember, we are almost to the 1-year anniversary of a leading House Democrat admitting they see this whole crisis as ``a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.''

So, sorry to all the American families who have just been hoping to get their jobs back, their schools back, and their lives back. Democrats are more interested in some restructuring. That is why only 1 percent--1 percent--of this huge package goes directly to vaccinations--1 percent for vaccinations. That is why it proposes another 12-digit sum of Federal funding for K-12 schools, even though science shows those schools can be made safe right now. About 95 percent of that funding won't even go out this fiscal year. Ninety-five percent of the school funding in this bill won't go out this year. And this is an emergency package?

That is why they are pushing economic policies that would drag down our recovery--like the House's vote for a one-size-fits-all minimum wage policy that would kill 1.4 million jobs or continuing to pay laid- off workers a premium to stay home that would extend well into a recovery where job growth and rehiring will be pivotal.

Whenever their long-term liberal dreams came into conflict with what Americans actually need right now, Democrats decided their ideology should win out.

Well, it doesn't have to be this way. We could have built more practical policies to help the American people move forward. Some Senate Republicans literally went down to the White House and proposed that both sides work together, like we did five times last year. The administration declined. So this is where we are: a bad process, a bad bill, and a missed opportunity to do right by working families.

Now, on one final matter, last weekend brought disconcerting headlines for the supporters of freedom and democracy in Asia. In Burma the military junta's month-long coup turned bloody. Eighteen protesters have been murdered and at least a thousand civilian officials have been imprisoned on farcical grounds.

In Hong Kong, China's puppet regime arrested 47 democracy advocates, including some who helped draw millions to the streets in peaceful protests in 2019, and are now holding them without bail.

Unfortunately, in both places, this sort of repression has become a familiar part of life, and it could be a dark preview of developments elsewhere if the free world does not act.

Even as Burma's civilian government made history in 2015, the military made clear it would keep using cronyism and constitutional manipulation to obstruct real popular control. In last year's election, the people overwhelmingly demanded true democracy and economic transparency, but that also raised the risk for those working publicly to make permanent reforms.

The military's detention spree has hit Burma's civilian leaders, including people like Mya Aye, a longtime Muslim pro-democracy leader. It has also swept up some of the brightest economic reformers working to fight corruption and grow prosperity--brave men like Bo Bo Nge, who spent years locked away in Burma's Insein prison in the 1980s and 1990s, built a successful life abroad, and returned to help the civilian government craft economic reforms.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that this Washington Post article detailing Bo Bo Nge's story be printed in the Record.

Madam President, even foreign nationals have been subjected to unjustified detention. The world is closely watching the case of Sean Turnell, an Australian scholar who has spent years helping Burma's civilian leaders unlock its economic potential.

The administration has been right to condemn the junta and to consult with Congress on an appropriate response. But as Burma's protesters begin to pay the ultimate price for speaking out, the United States must make it clear that military and police officials will face crippling costs of their own. This should include the military-owned holding companies, which have deep roots in Burma's economy. It is time to lead an international effort to support the people of Burma.

It is also time to strengthen our calls for an international response to China's shameless human rights abuses, beginning with Hong Kong. Another round of arrests in the last several days has sent a new wave of student activists to prison with no due process. They join veteran pro-democracy performers like my friends Martin Lee and Jimmy Lai, who were already rounded up.

The United States cannot outsource our moral authority in championing democracy around the world. When we stay silent, the voice of the international community is channeled through forums where the most notorious human rights abusers preside over their own trials.

The ironically named U.N. Human Rights Council boasts a membership including such paragons of virtue as the Russian Federation, which has begun sending residents to prison for non-state-sanctioned religious beliefs; and Venezuela, whose rap sheet the

State Department spells out as ``arbitrary detention,'' ``forced disappearances,'' and ``extrajudicial killings''; and Cuba, whose government exports repressive tools to countries like Venezuela; and, of course, the People's Republic of China itself, where the hypocrisy stretches from repression in Hong Kong to internment and torture of the Uighur people in Xinjiang.

The Biden administration has advertised a foreign policy focused on human rights and democracy and quite publicly announced its intention to rejoin the U.N. Human Rights Council. Fine, let Burma and Hong Kong and Xinjiang and Belarus be tests of this administration's approach to the council. But the White House must not put much trust into this corrupted institution. We should be uniting like-minded democracies around actions that the United Nations panels are either unwilling or unable to take. With respect to Hong Kong, the prior administration took several concrete steps, from closing PRC investment loopholes in Hong Kong to opposing targeted sanctions.

Now is the time for the Biden administration to show its resolve as it confronts serious tests of its own.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, next week, House Democrats say they will try to recycle failed legislation that would have Washington Democrats grab unprecedented power over how America conducts its elections and how American citizens can engage in political speech.

For several years now, we have seen the political left grow less interested in having normal policy debates within our governing institutions and more interested in attacking the institutions themselves to tilt the playing field in their side's favor.

When their side loses a Presidential election, it is not their fault; it is the electoral college's. When they don't like a Supreme Court's decision, it is time to threaten the Justices or pack the Court. When longstanding Senate rules threaten to frustrate far-left proposals, it is the Senate rules they want to change. And now House Democrats want to try to use their slim majority to unilaterally rewrite and nationalize election law itself. They want to use the temporary power the voters have granted them to try to ensure they will never have to relinquish it.

This year's version of the House Democrats' legislation contains the same bad ideas as their efforts 2 years ago. For example, when the Federal Election Commission was created after Watergate with the sensitive job of regulating American politics, it was designed to require bipartisan consensus. House Democrats want to scrap those rules and turn the FEC from an even-numbered body, bipartisan body, to an odd-numbered partisan body so Democrats can dominate it. Then they want to hand the newly partisan FEC new authorities to scrutinize and regulate an even wider share of political speech and private citizens' activities. Or take election law itself--House Democrats have looked at the division and the disunity of the last several months and decided that what American elections really need is a one-size-fits-all partisan rewrite by one side here in Washington.

In our country, States and localities run elections. Those of us in the Federal Government do not get a stranglehold over the ways in which voters decide our fates. But House Democrats want to change that. Their bill would take prudential questions about early voting, registration, and no-excuse absentee balloting and resolve them one way for the entire Nation. They want to force all 50 States to allow the absurd practice of ballot harvesting, where paid operatives can show up at polling places carrying a thick stack of filled-out ballots with other people's names on them. They want to forbid States from implementing voter ID or doing simple things like checking their voter rolls against change-of-address submissions. They want to mandate no-excuse mail-in balloting as a permanent norm, post-pandemic. And--I promise I am not making this up--their bill proposes to directly fund political campaigns with Federal tax dollars. They want to raise money through new financial penalties, which the government would then use to fund campaigns and consultants. It is a strange idea. It takes a minute to kind of wrap your head around it. They want the Federal Government itself to send money for things like political ads that half the country disagrees with. What a bizarre concept that nobody is asking for.

This sweeping Federal takeover would be exactly the wrong response to the distressing lack of faith in our elections that we have recently seen from both political sides.

After both 2016 and 2020, we saw significant numbers of Americans on the losing side express doubt in the validity of the result. As recently as late last September, fewer than half of Democrats said they were confident the 2020 election would be free and fair. Just weeks later, however, by mid-November, once things had gone the way they wanted, Democrats' confidence in the election magically skyrocketed up to 90 percent. We cannot keep trending toward a future where Americans' confidence in elections is purely a function of which side won.

A sweeping power grab by House Democrats, forcibly rewriting 50 States' election laws, would shove us further and faster down that path. In this country, if the people who win elections want to hold on to power, they need to perform well, pass sound policies, and earn the support of the voters again. House Democrats do not get to take their razor-thin majority, which voters just shrunk, and use it to steamroll States and localities to try to prevent themselves from losing even more seats the next time. Protecting democracy cannot be a partisan issue

Mr. President, on a completely different matter, this week, the institution of the Senate is losing a talented leader who has spent 6 years as one of our top officials.

The Secretary of the Senate is a truly unique position in American Government. She or he is essentially the chief administrative officer of the institution itself. Back in the 18th century, that meant keeping the minutes and records and making sure people had ink for their quills. Today, it means managing a sprawling array of offices packed with career professionals, everything from parliamentary procedure to payroll, to public records, to the Senate Library and the page school and much more. The Secretary also fulfills key institutional functions. She or he signs every act that we pass. They carry formal messages to other branches of our government.

It takes major smarts, guts, integrity, and people skills just to survive in this mammoth job, let alone to actually thrive in it, but for the last 6 years, Julie Adams hasn't just survived, she hasn't just personally thrived; she has strengthened the entire institution of the Senate.

I first met Julie back in 2003 when we hired her to help out our press team. I was just starting my time as Republican whip. Julie was new to Washington, but she wasn't new to policy or to politics, and she knocked everyone's socks off right from the start. She combined diligence and professionalism with a heart of gold. She mastered her day job, volunteered for tasks above and beyond, and became the whole office's favorite teammate.

Of course, nobody is perfect; for example, Julie is not a Kentuckian. She is a proud daughter of Iowa. But trust me, she has become an honorary citizen of the Commonwealth many times over.

A few years later, she was stolen away to do important work for First Lady Laura Bush, but in 2009, we brought her back to coordinate operations and administration across both my personal office and my leadership office. She brought great judgment, a quick mind, stellar instincts, and a meticulous eye to a big job and made us all a whole lot better. From short-term crises to long-term relationships, Julie can do it all.

While perpetually juggling 10 tasks for herself, she always found ways to look after everyone else. She made sure each of her colleagues, down to the most junior, got the attention and the resources they needed. Everyone was included. Everyone mattered. She made sure of it.

Her talent and skills made Julie an easy choice for Secretary of the Senate after we took the majority in 2014. Now, there is always the potential for sensitivity when a new leader, appointed by a Senate leader of one party, comes in to oversee huge numbers of dedicated, long-serving, nonpartisan specialists. Not surprisingly,

Julie rapidly won the admiration, affection, and trust of the men and women under the Secretary's umbrella. She has championed the professionals who make this place go. She empowered them. She stuck up for them and made sure they were properly insulated from political pressure.

Everyone knows Julie puts this institution and its rules first. Staff trust her. Senators on both sides trust her. Leaders across other branches of government trust her. She plays everything down the middle with total integrity.

And amid all of this, she maintained the generous spirit that everyone admires. Whether she is delivering official Senate correspondence to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or the Secretary of State or checking in with a Senate employee on a birthday or during a tough personal time, everyone gets the same friendly ``hello'' and sincere kindness from Julie Adams.

Alas, it is customary to have a new Secretary of the Senate when there is a change in party control. Tomorrow is Julie's last day. I am really, really sorry to say good-bye to such a key player.

So on behalf of the whole Senate, I want to thank Julie's proud parents, Dr. Harold and Leah Adams; her siblings, John and Jessica; and her beloved canine companion Maggie for sharing this great friend and essential colleague with us for many years.

Julie, you made your family proud, you made me proud, and, most importantly, you have been a great credit to this institution. Thank you, sincerely, for your service.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, yesterday, I discussed the K-12 crisis facing American families. The science shows that in-person schooling can easily be made safe. Private and religious schools and schools in Europe have been open for months.

But Washington Democrats have apparently bought into Big Labor's myth that schools cannot reopen without even more Federal funding, even though their own plan would only spend about 5 percent--5 percent of the money this fiscal year.

This is just one illustration of how Democrats started with preconceived ideological goals and actually worked backward, instead of starting with the actual needs of American families.

Let's take a look at the economy. When we had to stall our economy to protect our health system, the Senate wrote the bipartisan CARES Act, the biggest rescue package in American history. It spent $2.2 trillion to save the healthcare system, find vaccines, and support families. We refilled many of those programs with another $920 billion just last December.

Today, we stand at a very different kind of crossroads. More than 13 percent of Americans have received at least one dose of the vaccine. Manufacturers expect vaccine supply to keep ramping up dramatically in the weeks ahead.

The trillions we spent on rescue policies in 2020 had the economy prepped to come roaring back as health conditions keep improving.

Unemployment today is already lower than where, at one point in this crisis, the Federal Reserve predicted it would be by the end of the year. In some blue-collar sectors, both total employment and job openings are already higher than they were before the pandemic. Retail sales just smashed experts' predictions. Many manufacturers can't keep pace with demand.

Remarkably, even as economic output obviously shrunk in 2020, overall household personal income and personal savings actually went up. That is because of the relief Congress delivered.

There is no question that some American families are still struggling. Nobody thinks our health or economic fight is finished yet, but on a broad national scale, households are sitting on an historic pile of pent-up cash, waiting for the economy to reopen.

The former head of President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers says:

We have no historic parallel with anything like this level

of excess saving.

He says we have never seen this much ``dry powder.''

Even mainstream liberal economists agree that our country does not need another massive fire hose of borrowed money. This is not April of 2020. This is a different chapter. Washington should focus on practical policies to finish this fight: accelerate vaccinations; get kids back in school; help the families and small businesses that actually need help; and get laid-off Americans matched with job openings ASAP.

Unfortunately, the Democrats' partisan proposal would not just be wasteful but, in certain ways, actually counterproductive. It would have Washington go out of its way to discourage hiring, discourage a return to work, and actually keep things shut down longer.

Take the minimum wage policy. The CBO says this abrupt, one-size- fits-all change would kill about 1\1/2\ times as many jobs as the number of workers it would lift out of poverty.

Or take their proposal for another long-term extension of a big Federal supplement to unemployment benefits. Even in the middle of last year, it was questionable policy to pay people more to stay home than essential workers were earning while actually on the job. Now another long-term, flat supplement would make even less sense.

Here is how one leading economist puts it:

In an expanding economy that is putting the virus behind

it, paying people more in unemployment than they could

receive from working is an act of substantial economic self-

harm. It would keep workers on the sidelines, stop the

unemployment rate from falling as rapidly as it otherwise

would, and slow the overall recovery.

Then there is the $350 billion bailout for State and local governments, many of whom have already seen revenues and receipts rebound. It is several multiples of any sober estimate of the actual need. Apparently, even Senators on the Democratic side are trying to pare back this absurd request--just one more way this proposal seems to be stuck back in April of last year.

I haven't even talked about the hundreds of millions of dollars for pet projects without a shred of relevance to the pandemic or the recovery--money for ``climate justice,'' transportation earmarks for the Democratic leader's home State--all kinds of liberal wish list items that would do nothing to help American families put COVID behind them. Just about 1 percent of the money is for vaccines, so either the new administration has completely taken their eye off the ball or they were not actually starting from scratch at all, like they claimed. Only 5 percent of the education funding would even go out this fiscal year. Only 5 percent of the education funding would go out this fiscal year.

Our own Senate Democratic colleagues are reportedly admitting parts

of this are poorly targeted. Liberal economists and the Washington Post's editorial board are saying Americans deserve more bang for their buck--a predictably chilly reception for a partisan bill that started with an outdated, ideological wish list instead of the current needs of American families.

Mr. President, millions of American kids in the public school system have been robbed of a year, and counting, of anything resembling a proper education. It has been a historically tough year. That is why Americans are so excited our Nation appears to be approaching a major turning point.

Here are just a few recent headlines:

A U.S. Vaccine Surge Is Coming, With Millions of Doses

Promised

Another headline:

America's vaccine rollout has been among the best in the

world

Another headline:

CDC finds scant spread of coronavirus in schools with

precautions in place

Here is one from my home State:

COVID-19 cases plummet in Kentucky nursing homes, a key

target for the vaccine

So let's take a look at the economy:

U.S. Retail Sales Surprise With Sharpest Advance in Seven

Months

Blue-Collar Jobs Boom as COVID-19 Boosts Housing, E-

Commerce Demand

Another headline:

Consumer Demand Snaps Back. Factories Can't Keep Up.

To be clear, this isn't over. The battle is not won yet. But the day is approaching when we will be able to end this defensive crouch and safely reclaim our normal lives.

Last year the Senate built the largest peacetime fiscal expansion in American history. We spent $4 trillion on five overwhelmingly bipartisan packages. The most recent became law just 2 months ago. Funding for hospitals and providers kept our healthcare system above water. The Paycheck Protection Program saved Main Street small businesses. Direct relief and extra unemployment aid helped working families endure the shutdown. Operation Warp Speed laid the groundwork for our historic sprint toward vaccinations.

These were strong, bipartisan policies, targeted to what families specifically needed to wage the war, but today Democrats are steamrolling ahead with a massive spending plan on a completely partisan basis. It did not receive a single House Republican vote in committee yesterday because their partisan plan is not targeted toward helping Americans reclaim their lives and their country from this invader. Instead, here is what it is: a combination of miscellaneous, non-COVID-related, liberal wish-list items and the kinds of bandaid policies that make a defensive crouch slightly less painful but don't help get us back on offense.

Let's take a look at K-12 schooling. Until very recently, the new administration's own scientists had been crystal clear. Earlier this month, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said:

There is increasing data to suggest that schools can safely

reopen.

A major CDC study found in-person schooling does not--not--fuel community transmission.

Last month, Dr. Fauci said:

It's less likely for a child to get infected in the school

setting than if they were just in the community.

But Big Labor special interests didn't appreciate science undercutting their political goals. The empire struck back, and the Democratic leaders who love to claim the mantle of science ran away from the science as fast as they could. Now the CDC Director admits that ``the lived experiences''--whatever that is--of government employees got between the hard science and the final guidance. It is a lot of points for candor.

The unions had spoken. The goalposts were on the move. And the White House keeps endorsing the idea that schools need the Democrats' new spending plan to reopen, when the science disagrees. And furthermore, just 5 percent--5 percent--of what they propose to spend on schools would even be spent this year. Let me say that again. In this big COVID package, only 5 percent of what they propose to spend on schools would be spent this year. In other words, the spendout is over years ahead. You would think their view is, we are never going to get over the coronavirus.

The United Kingdom just announced they will have kids back in school in less than 2 weeks--2 weeks. Countries like Spain and France have had kids in classrooms for months already. The European Centre for Disease Prevention has no problem affirming the science--that closing schools is ``unlikely to provide significant additional protection of children's health.'' Even here at home, private and religious schools have been teaching kids in person for months without causing any explosion in the spread of the virus.

Science tells us unambiguously that in-person schooling can be quite safe and that having young children spend all day staring into a laptop is a nightmare. The evidence is crystal clear. Big Labor bureaucrats keep refusing to follow the science.

In my hometown of Louisville, our union-backed school board vice chairman now asserts, with no evidence:

I think we're probably likely to see better instructional

outcomes . . . if we stay [remote] for the rest of the school

year.

Ridiculous. No facts. No evidence. Just a personal whim. These are the people controlling our kids' futures and their parents' lives.

One anonymous teacher told reporters:

We already have a schedule and a routine going. We don't

need to be babysitting for six weeks because parents are

upset.

Let me say that again.

One anonymous teacher told reporters that we already have a schedule and a routine going. We don't need to be babysitting for 6 weeks because parents are upset.

By the way, failing grades in middle schools are up 388 percent in our county. Failing grades in middle schools are up 388 percent in our county while these kids are stuck at home.

The Biden administration has a clear obligation to tackle the special interest madness head-on. Our kids are suffering, not because science says they must be--it doesn't. It is just because a small group of powerful grownups has decided they prefer it this way. Instead, the White House keeps parroting the anti-science myths. They back this notion that schools need the Democrats' new spending plan before they can reopen, except that science completely disagrees--completely; except that only a tiny fraction of the funding request would even be spent this fiscal year.

Our children's futures are literally at stake. The administration has got to stop taking orders from the public sector unions that give generously to Democratic campaigns. This is exhibit A in why relief legislation must be targeted to the actual needs we face now. American families should be the starting point, not preconceived political priorities.

Madam President, families across Kentucky are recovering from a week of punishing winter weather. As many as 154,000 Kentuckians lost heat and power, particularly across the eastern parts of the Commonwealth. Treacherous road conditions and fallen power lines made it a challenge to get help to those in need. Over the weekend, we learned that multiple lives were tragically lost in the aftermath of these storms, but as they always do, Kentuckians sprang into action.

Electric co-op linemen, first responders, and the Kentucky National Guard worked around the clock to clear debris and to restore power. Crews set up warming shelters and performed countless wellness checks. Churches, local businesses, and citizens distributed food, blankets, and other supplies.

So we are grateful for those who joined the response to help their neighbors and to help them stay safe.

Unfortunately, while temperatures are climbing above freezing, thousands remain without power. My staff and I continue to stay in close contact with local and State officials. Along with the rest of the Kentucky delegation, we are focused and ready to help in the recovery.

Mr. President, for nearly 50 years, Steve Gilmore has been making his mark on the city of Ashland. As an educator, a parks commissioner, and finally as a mayor, his contributions to northeastern Kentucky have shaped a legacy anyone could be proud of. Today, I would like to recognize this incredible public servant and wish him well as he begins a richly deserved retirement.

Steve got his start in public service at 29 as a member of the local parks board. In the following years, he led the renewal of Ashland's public spaces, pushed for the repainting of its iconic bridges, and helped champion a major renovation of the riverfront. In 1978,

Steve made his first run for the city commission. Time and again, the people of Ashland put their trust in him. In 2002, Steve became the city's mayor. He made history soon after as the first Ashland mayoral candidate ever to run unopposed.

I would like to mention one of Steve's accomplishments in particular. Over the years, Ashland has taken tremendous advantage of its geography and scenic beauty on the banks of the Ohio River. I had the opportunity to work with Steve about a decade ago to revitalize downtown Ashland and to make a dramatic investment into its river heritage. With more than $10 million in Federal funding I brought to the project, Steve and his team created an impressive new venue right on the water. Now, the Veterans Riverfront Park is a center for recreation and entertainment across the region. I am especially proud of their decision to dedicate the park to the men and women who sacrificed to protect our country.

Steve ended his first stretch as mayor with remarkable success. Then, he took on a new challenge as superintendent of Ashland Schools. He accepted the responsibility to keep making a difference for his city not just today, but for years into the future. Thousands of students and graduates continue to benefit from his leadership.

When it came time to close the book on his career as an educator, Steve knew he had more to give to his beloved city. In 2016, he was reelected to the mayor's office. With a team of city commissioners and devoted public servants, Steve began once again steering the community toward growth. He continued renovating the face of Ashland and making it a destination for visitors and employers.

Steve plans for a retirement filled with spending more time with his family doing the things they love. Perhaps he will take a few more trips down to the river along the newly dedicated ``Steve Gilmore Way.'' He has certainly earned it. On behalf of the Senate, I would like to express my thanks to Steve for his decades of service and leadership in Kentucky.

Mr. President, January 6 was a disgrace. American citizens attacked their own government. They used terrorism to try to stop a specific piece of domestic business they did not like. Fellow Americans beat and bloodied our own police. They stormed the Senate floor. They tried to hunt down the Speaker of the House. They built a gallows and chanted about murdering the Vice President. They did this because they had been fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on Earth because he was angry he lost an election.

Former President Trump's actions preceding the riot were a disgraceful--disgraceful--dereliction of duty.

The House accused the former President of ``incitement.'' That is a specific term from the criminal law.

Let me just put that aside for a moment and reiterate something I said weeks ago. There is no question--none--that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their President, and having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories, and reckless hyperbole which the defeated President kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth.

The issue is not only the President's intemperate language on January 6. It is not just his endorsement of remarks in which an associate urged ``trial by combat.'' It was also the entire manufactured atmosphere of looming catastrophe; the increasingly wild myths--myths-- about a reverse landslide election that was somehow being stolen in some secret coup by our now-President.

Now, I defended the President's right to bring any complaints to our legal system. The legal system spoke. The electoral college spoke. As I stood up and said clearly at that time, the election was settled. It was over. But that just really opened a new chapter of even wilder-- wilder--and more unfounded claims.

The leader of the free world cannot spend weeks thundering that shadowy forces are stealing our country and then feign surprise when people believe him and do reckless things.

Now, sadly, many politicians sometimes make overheated comments or use metaphors--we saw that--that unhinged listeners might take literally, but that was different. That is different from what we saw. This was an intensifying crescendo of conspiracy theories, orchestrated by an outgoing President who seemed determined to either overturn the voters' decision or else torch our institutions on the way out.

The unconscionable behavior did not end when the violence actually began. Whatever our ex-President claims he thought might happen that day, whatever reaction he says he meant to produce, by that afternoon, we know he was watching the same live television as the rest of us. A mob was assaulting the Capitol in his name. These criminals were carrying his banners, hanging his flags, and screaming their loyalty to him.

It was obvious that only President Trump could end this. He was the only one who could. Former aides publicly begged him to do so. Loyal allies frantically called the administration. The President did not act swiftly. He did not do his job. He didn't take steps so Federal law could be faithfully executed and order restored. No. Instead, according to public reports, he watched television happily--happily--as the chaos unfolded. He kept pressing his scheme to overturn the election.

Now, even after it was clear to any reasonable observer that Vice President Pence was in serious danger, even as the mob carrying Trump banners was beating cops and breaching perimeters, the President sent a further tweet attacking his own Vice President. Now, predictably and foreseeably under the circumstances, members of the mob seemed to interpret this as a further inspiration to lawlessness and violence, not surprisingly.

Later, even when the President did halfheartedly begin calling for peace, he didn't call right away for the riot to end. He did not tell the mob to depart until even later. And even then, with police officers bleeding and broken glass covering Capitol floors, he kept repeating election lies and praising the criminals.

In recent weeks, our ex-President's associates have tried to use the 74 million Americans who voted to reelect him as a kind of human shield against criticism--using the 74 million who voted for him as kind of a human shield against criticism. Anyone who decries his awful behavior is accused of insulting millions of voters. That is an absurd deflection. Seventy-four million Americans did not invade the Capitol. Hundreds of rioters did. Seventy-four million Americans did not engineer the campaign of disinformation and rage that provoked it. One person did it--just one.

Now, I have made my view of this episode very plain. But our system of government gave the Senate a specific task. The Constitution gives us a particular role. This body is not invited to act as the Nation's overarching moral tribunal. We are not free to work backward from whether the accused party might personally deserve some kind of punishment.

Justice Joseph Story was our Nation's first great constitutional scholar. As he explained nearly 200 years

ago, the process of impeachment and conviction is a narrow tool--a narrow tool--for a narrow purpose. Story explained this limited tool exists to ``secure the state against gross official misdemeanors''; that is, to protect the country from government officers.

If President Trump were still in office, I would have carefully considered whether the House managers proved their specific charge. By the strict criminal standard, the President's speech probably was not incitement. However--however--in the context of impeachment, the Senate might have decided this was acceptable shorthand for the reckless actions that preceded the riot. But in this case, the question is moot because former President Trump is constitutionally not eligible for conviction.

Now, this is a close question, no doubt. Donald Trump was the President when the House voted, though not when the House chose to deliver the papers. Brilliant scholars argue both sides of this jurisdictional question. The text is legitimately ambiguous. I respect my colleagues who reached either conclusion.

But after intense reflection, I believe the best constitutional reading shows that article II, section 4 exhausts the set of persons who can legitimately be impeached, tried, or convicted. It is the President. It is the Vice President and civil officers. We have no power to convict and disqualify a former office holder who is now a private citizen.

Here is article II, section 4: ``The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.''

Now, everyone basically agrees that the second half of that sentence exhausts the legitimate grounds for conviction. The debates around the Constitution's framing make that abundantly clear. Congress cannot convict for reasons besides those. It therefore follows that the list of persons in that same sentence is also exhaustive. There is no reason why one list--one list--would be exhaustive but the other would not.

Article II, section 4 must limit both why impeachment and conviction can occur and to whom--and to whom. If this provision does not limit impeachment and conviction powers, then it has no limits at all. The House's ``sole power of Impeachment'' and the Senate's ``sole Power to try all Impeachments'' would create an unlimited circular logic, empowering Congress to ban any private citizen from Federal office.

Now, that is an incredible claim. But it is the argument the House managers seemed to be making. One manager said the House and Senate have ``absolute, unqualified . . . jurisdictional power.'' Well, that was very honest, because there is no limiting principle in the constitutional text that would empower the Senate to convict former officers that would not also let them convict and disqualify any private citizen--an absurd end result to which no one subscribes.

Article II, section 4 must have force. It tells us the President, the Vice President and civil officers may be impeached and convicted. Donald Trump is no longer the President.

Likewise, the provision states that officers subject to impeachment and conviction ``shall be removed from Office if convicted''--``shall be removed from Office if convicted.''

As Justice Story explained, ``the Senate, [upon] conviction, [is] bound in all cases, to enter a judgment of removal from office.'' Removal is mandatory upon conviction. Clearly, he explained, that mandatory sentence cannot be applied to someone who has left office. The entire process revolves around removal. If removal becomes impossible, conviction becomes insensible.

In one light, it certainly does seem counterintuitive that an officeholder can elude Senate conviction by resignation or expiration of term--an argument we heard made by the managers. But this underscores that impeachment was never meant to be the final forum for American justice--never meant to be the final forum for American justice. Impeachment, conviction, and removal are a specific intragovernmental safety valve. It is not the criminal justice system, where individual accountability is the paramount goal.

Indeed, Justice Story specifically reminded that while former officials were not eligible for impeachment or conviction, they were-- and this is extremely important--``still liable to be tried and punished in the ordinary tribunals of justice.''

Put another way, in the language of today, President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office, as an ordinary citizen--unless the statute of limitations is run, still liable for everything he did while he was in office. He didn't get away with anything yet--yet. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation, and former Presidents are not immune from being accountable by either one.

I believe the Senate was right not to grab power the Constitution doesn't give us, and the Senate was right not to entertain some light- speed sham process to try to outrun the loss of jurisdiction.

It took both sides more than a week just to produce their pretrial briefs. Speaker Pelosi's own scheduling decisions conceded what President Biden publicly confirmed: A Senate verdict before Inauguration Day was never possible.

Now, Mr. President, this has been a dispiriting time, but the Senate has done our duty. The Framers' firewall held up again. On January 6, we returned to our post and certified the election. We were uncowed. We were not intimidated. We finished the job. And, since then, we resisted the clamor to define our own constitutional guardrails in hot pursuit of a particular outcome. We refused to continue a cycle of recklessness by straining our own constitutional boundaries in response.

The Senate's decision today does not condone anything that happened on or before that terrible day. It simply shows that Senators did what the former President failed to do: We put our constitutional duty first.

That is correct. I know of no further questions on our side.

Oh, I am sorry.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join the majority leader's request.

January 6 was a day of fear for those who work here in the Capitol and of sadness for many more watching from afar, but that awful day also introduced our Nation to a group of heroes whom we in Congress were already proud to call our colleagues and to whom we owe a great debt.

In the face of lawlessness, the officers of the U.S. Capitol lived out the fullest sense of their oaths. If not for the quick thinking and bravery of Officer Eugene Goodman in particular, people in this Chamber may not have escaped that day unharmed. Officer Goodman's actions reflect a deep personal commitment to duty and brought even greater distinction upon all of the brave brothers and sisters in uniform. So I am proud the Senate has taken this step forward, recognizing his heroism with the highest honor we can bestow.

(Applause, Senators rising.)