Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, well, the Biden administration's reckless economic policies have hurt American workers and families right from the beginning. Right from the start of their one-party government, Democrats used party-line votes to light trillions-- trillions--of dollars on fire and supercharge inflation that is still hammering the country right up to the present.

After 2 years of reckless policies and human pain, the American people voted for checks and balances. They

elected a Republican House and a narrowly divided Senate to literally pump the brakes on this radicalism. But there is an old saying in Washington that ``personnel is policy.'' So while the American people put a stop to reckless legislation last November, President Biden continues to send reckless nominations to the Senate. They want to accomplish through Big Government regulations what the voters have stopped them from doing here in Congress.

This morning, for example, the HELP Committee is hearing from Julie Su, President Biden's nominee to run the Department of Labor. Ms. Su has a lengthy track record for all--all--the wrong reasons.

Before entering the Biden administration, she presided over a disaster as head of the State labor department out in California. Tens of billions of dollars in fraudulent payments went out the door on her watch. The State auditor found Ms. Su and her department were totally asleep--totally asleep--at the switch on antifraud efforts. Even the Los Angeles Times had to label her performance--listen to this--an ``epic failure.''

Our supply chains are already in enough peril, due in part to high- stakes labor negotiations. Think about the negotiations to keep open the ports on the west coast. Think about the ripple effects. Our national economy cannot afford a track record of ``epic failure'' leading our Department of Labor.

She also supported and helped implement a controversial new California law that essentially--listen to this--declared war on independent contractors and tried to give Big Labor special interests veto power over the entire gig economy. In essence, these far-left Democrats want every ride-share driver, hairdresser, or personal trainer to be reclassified and handled more like a corporate employee, all so that part of their paychecks could be vacuumed up and donated to leftwing political causes.

The same partisan inflexibility has defined Ms. Su's time here in Washington as Deputy Secretary of Labor on the national level. From the powerful No. 2 job, she helped President Biden try to force that California model into our entire economy, a giant gift for Big Labor bosses at the expense of workers and consumers alike. She also signaled that she wants to help lead the far left's crusade against the current joint-employer rule, yet another effort to give big-money union bosses even more power to squash innovation and skim money from workers' paychecks.

What they can't get through legislation, they fully intend to push forward through regulations. So it is no wonder that an unending parade of small business leaders, independent contractors, and other job creators have written the Senate literally begging us--begging us--to demand a fairer and more mainstream Labor Secretary. Confirming this nominee would compound the economic pain the Biden administration has already caused.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, if I may say to our colleague from Washington, I remember, as you certainly do, that 1992 was declared the ``Year of the Woman,'' and a number of women were elected to the Senate. But you were the leader of the group, and you have had an extraordinarily successful career, and I wanted you to know that people on both sides of the aisle admire your service. And congratulations.

The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Hawley).

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Braun) and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. President, we are 2 years into the latest chapter of Washington Democrats' war against our own domestic energy. America spent decades working toward affordable, reliable energy independence, and Democrats have tried to reverse it all, turned it all around: less exploration for American oil and gas, more dependence on immoral Chinese supply chains. Even as the left wants Big Government to gamble our whole grid on less reliable new technologies, they don't even want to let us mine here in America on our own soil for the rare earth minerals those technologies actually require.

The Democrats have fundamentally misunderstood both the economics and the geopolitics of American energy. So the result is going to be fewer jobs for our workers, bigger bills for our families, less security for our country, and more vulnerability to foreign actors who don't like us.

Just last week, the Biden EPA announced it will try to slap a radical and unprecedented new mandate on our country regarding electric vehicles. The same people who can't handle inflation and can't secure our border want to stick their noses into Americans' garages and our driveways. The administration's radical plan would cut down the marketplace of affordable and reliable vehicles that most Americans actually want to drive. It would massively increase demand on already highly taxed electrical grids with no workable plan to grow capacity, and it would force rich liberals' lifestyle choices onto the whole country.

Good luck--good luck farmers, ranchers, rural Americans. California wants to dictate what you drive. See, California is the proving ground for these bad ideas. They have already set their own punitive targets for electric vehicle sales, and--surprise--the math actually doesn't work. At the same time Governor Newsom is mandating his citizens buy electric vehicles, he is telling people not to plug them in--don't plug them in--for fear of blackouts.

California expects to see 15 times more electric vehicles on the roads and on their electrical grid by 2035--the same California that already had to spend last summer begging citizens to turn down their air-conditioning because their grid can barely survive as it is right now.

Democrats want less American energy, less production, and, of course, less reliability. Republicans want more, more, and more--more production, more independence, more affordability, and more security.

The House Republican majority's landmark H.R. 1 goes right at this very issue. It would be a huge shot in the arm for American energy. But here in the Senate, the Democratic leader controls the floor, and he has declared the bill ``dead on arrival''--dead on arrival here in the Senate.

It is the clearest possible contrast. Republicans are fighting for cheaper and more reliable power, stronger supply chains, and a stronger America on the world stage; and Democrats, they are actually fighting us.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Alabama (Mrs. Britt) and the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Cotton).

Mr. President, I want to address an extremely unusual request that our Democratic colleagues have made with respect to the Judiciary Committee.

Our dear friend Senator Feinstein is a titanic figure and a stateswoman. Elaine and I have been honored to count the Senator and her late husband Dick as close, personal friends for many, many years. We miss our colleague. We wish her the very best for a speedy recovery and a smooth return.

In the meantime, our colleague's temporary absence has really not ground the Judiciary Committee to a halt. So far this Congress, the committee has reported out 40 judicial nominees--listen to this--more than half of them--more than half of them--on a bipartisan basis.

Let me say that again. More than two dozen judicial nominees have been reported out this Congress on bipartisan votes.

There are more than a dozen article III judges already waiting on the Executive Calendar, and a whole bunch of the nominees currently in committee are likely to receive bipartisan support as well. So the administration does not face any obstacle to moving nominees who are remotely qualified for the job. People who are mainstream and qualified have a path forward.

Yet some of the same far-left voices who have attacked Senator Feinstein in the past are now suggesting that the Senate move her off the Judiciary Committee indefinitely--indefinitely. The stated reason, the supposed emergency, is that Senate Democrats are unable to push through the small fraction of their nominees who are so extreme--so extreme--and so unqualified that they cannot win a single Republican vote in Committee.

Let me say that again. The far left wants the full Senate to move a Senator off a committee so they can ram through a small sliver of their nominees who are especially extreme or especially unqualified.

There are four main nominees whom our Democratic colleagues are currently unable to move. One of them threatened an underage abuse victim while representing her prep school. One of them didn't know what article II of the Constitution says. One of them didn't know what a Brady motion is. The fourth one argued that the sex offender registry-- listen to this--does not help keep children safe. Those are the four they are having a hard time moving. They are not on track to get bipartisan support.

It is purely the Democrats' political choice to hold relatively more reasonable nominees hostage so the unqualified ones can move in a pack. So even though they could move a number of less controversial nominees right now--right now--they want to sideline Senator Feinstein so they can ram through the worst four as well.

I understand our Judiciary Committee colleagues report they cannot find a single past example where their committee let a Member be temporarily replaced in this fashion that some Democrats are advocating.

So let's be clear. Senate Republicans will not take part in sidelining a temporarily absent colleague off a committee just so Democrats can force through their very worst nominees.

Mr. President, I would like to recognize a beloved family business, native to Kentucky, that celebrates its 150th anniversary this year. Reid's Orchard started in a similar fashion to most entrepreneurial success stories in this country: an immigrant who journeyed to America in search of a better life for himself and his family. Allan Reid left his little village in Scotland in 1873, setting up shop in New York City with his two brothers in the tobacco industry. Allan started out bookkeeping, but the young and ambitious Scot quickly realized that it wasn't bookkeeping or tobacco that interested him, it was

peaches, which he found wildly outpaced the quality of fruit available back in Europe.

Allan soon left New York City to set up a peach and apple orchard in Daviess County, KY--where the business is still run today. His orchard quickly became a well-run enterprise and a leader in agricultural production and technology. In admirable fashion, Allan gave back to his community in more ways than just his delicious fruit. This peach pioneer would go on to serve two terms as a Kentucky State Representative and play an instrumental role in the construction and expansion of roads throughout this region of the Commonwealth. Allan's sons, Robert Reid, Jr., and John, would later join the family business with this same sense of community until Allan's great-grandson, Billy, would enter the business and form Reid's Orchard, as it is known today.

Since taking the helm, Billy has brought the orchard to new heights, expanding his family's business into a successful year-round operation, a popular community-gathering point, and a local staple of Owensboro. Today, Reid's Orchard caters to Kentuckians across the Commonwealth, offering a wide array of delicious produce and seasonal favorites that include apples, cider, strawberries, flowers, pies, pumpkins, and my personal favorite, peaches. My staff will tell you, amusingly, that peach-picking season is a highly anticipated event for me. Every August, I look forward to sampling Billy's peaches.

To the delight of many, the orchard's success has allowed the family to expand beyond its farm business. Each year, the orchard puts on an annual summer festival, hosting some of country music's biggest names-- an impressive feat for a family-run business in Western Kentucky and a further testament to Reid's widespread popularity. For 37 years straight, the orchard would also host its popular Apple Festival. In fact, this festival is so popular locally that the Owensboro community plans to carry on the tradition each fall.

When it is not hosting popular community events, Reid's Orchard regularly welcomes families who have traveled far and wide to pick produce in the orchard, learn about farm life, and let their kids roam free across its 250 acres.

Billy's impressive stewardship of the family business and commitment to his local community have earned him the admiration of Owensboro locals, as well as Kentuckians across the Commonwealth. I am proud to call Billy a long-time friend, a friendship that extends beyond his delicious peach deliveries and spans over 20 years.

From Allan Reid's early love for peaches to Billy's thoughtful expansion of his great-grandfather's legacy, the story of Reid's Orchard has been defined by hard work and ingenuity. It is an American story, a story that renews our gratitude for this Nation, its opportunity, and its promise.

On behalf of the Senate, I would like to recognize the Reid family for their countless contributions to the Bluegrass, and congratulate Reid's Orchard for 150 years in operation of the American Dream.

Mr. President, it is good to be back.

I want to thank all of my colleagues for their warm wishes shared over the past few weeks. Suffice it to say, this wasn't the first time that being hardheaded has served me very well.

We are truly lucky and blessed to get to serve in this remarkable institution, represent our home States, and serve our country. Needless to say, I am very happy to be back.

There is important business for Congress to tackle. We should be working to undo this administration's mistakes. We need to secure the border, reduce crime, fight inflation, and invest in America's strength and our security.

On an even more basic level, President Biden and his administration are literally ``on the clock'' to negotiate a debt ceiling solution with Speaker McCarthy and the Republican majority over in the House. The President's economic advisers say the deadline for a solution is not far off, but his political advisers apparently think the White House's position should be--listen to this--no talks and no reforms.

This extreme position is not even holding up in their own party. Even Washington Democrats are breaking

ranks from the administration's position of no talks and no reforms.

One of our Senate Democratic colleagues wrote an entire Washington Post op-ed calling on the President to sit down with Congress and reform spending. Reports indicate that a whole group of House Democrats are already talking about negotiations and about compromise.

Just a few years ago, the Democratic leader, Leader Schumer, said this about the debt ceiling:

[It] gives another ample opportunity for bipartisanship,

not for one party jamming its choices down the throats of the

other.

So President Biden does not get to stick his fingers in his ears and refuse to listen, talk, or negotiate, and the American people know that. The White House needs to stop wasting time and start negotiating with the Speaker of the House.

The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Barrasso), the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. Cotton), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Sullivan), and the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young).

Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch) would

have voted ``nay'' and the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Young) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. President, there is a regrettable and un- Presidential thread that has been woven throughout the whole Biden Presidency. Whenever this President finds himself facing bad headlines, he tries to change the subject by fearmongering about civil rights and voting rights and pretending we are in the 1950s or sixties.

Remember early last year when the full impact of the Democrats' inflation was coming into focus? That is when President Biden flew to Georgia, screamed that Jim Crow was coming back and our democracy was on death's doorstep, and compared Republicans--listen to this--to Bull Connor and Jefferson Davis. He compared us to Bull Connor and Jefferson Davis.

Well, here he goes again. Last weekend, down in Alabama, the President suggested that the right to vote in America is ``under assault'' today, on par with Bloody Sunday on the Edmund Pettus Bridge nearly 60 years ago. Nobody believes this. Nobody seriously believes that race relations or voting laws or any of these issues are anywhere near--anywhere near--where they were back in the 1960s. This is utter nonsense.

President Biden again referenced the Republican State's voting laws that he last year called Jim Crow 2.0, as if all of that hysteria had not been completely disproven in the meantime.

Last November, the exact same Georgia voting law that the Democrats called evil and racist and the death knell for democracy created record-high turnout, lightning-fast voting lines, and a supermajority of African-American voters reporting that the voting experience was-- listen to this--excellent.

Do you know the share of Black voters in Georgia who described their voting experience under the new Republican law as poor? Let me say that again. Do you know the share of Black voters in Georgia who described their voting experience under the new Republican law as poor? It is zero. Zero. President Biden said this law was the second coming of segregation, and zero percent of Black voters said they had a poor voting experience.

Ah, but here he goes again with the same lies, the same hysteria. We are back in this bizarre, bizarre twilight zone where the President of the United States periodically says these utterly absurd, apocalyptic things with zero basis in reality, and everybody just carries on like it really didn't happen: Well, there goes the leader of the free world, shouting unhinged--unhinged--and false things about the end of democracy one more time. Oh, you know, just another day. What else is on TV?

It is utterly surreal and, frankly, embarrassing, the President walking on stage every couple of months, shouting angry things and appearing confused--confused--about whether it is 2023 or 1963--utterly confused. And nothing happens. The world keeps turning. The Republicans keep passing popular, commonsense laws that make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. Voters of all races continue having good voting experiences. The President, his advisers, and a few radical activists are the only people stuck--stuck--in this fake parallel universe.

Our democracy is in fine shape no matter what a few extreme voices are shouting. It is this White House's grip on reality that is truly concerning.

Now, Mr. President, on an entirely different matter, a man stabbed to death in a public library, a woman kidnapped and mugged in broad daylight, a construction worker assaulted by suspects who fled in a stolen car--this is just a small sampling of life in Washington, DC, in recent months.

Carjackings and car thefts have become a daily routine. Homicides are racking up at a rate of four--four--per week. There have been so many attacks on people riding public transportation that civilian volunteers have had to create their own patrols on Metro trains and platforms.

We are the greatest superpower Nation in history, and this is our Capital City, but local politicians have let its streets become a danger and an embarrassment.

Earlier this year, local Democrats tried to respond by going even softer on crime and putting violent convicts back on the streets even more rapidly. Well, Republicans say: Enough is enough. Enough is enough. We have brought forward a resolution here in Congress that will overrule the left's effort to make this catastrophe even worse.

Democrats were not happy. The White House put out a formal statement opposing us. The vast majority of House Democrats voted against us. But then President Biden had an epiphany. He reversed himself. The public pressure was so great that the President now says he wants to sign the same Republican bill that he had previously announced he opposed.

The headlines tell the story: ``Biden's About-Face on DC Crime Bill Shows Democrats on [the] Defensive.''

The Democrats' flip-flop is good news for the residents of the District of Columbia and the 300-plus million Americans who deserve-- deserve--to be able to visit their capital in peace.

But our Democratic friends are not getting off the hook this easily. They are not going to be able to duck the heat for the violent crime surge to which their policies, their rhetoric, and their political movement have directly contributed. What about all of the Americans who live in cities and neighborhoods all across our country? In my hometown of Louisville, violent crime has become an unwelcome daily fixture. Since the start of the pandemic, over 500 lives have been lost to homicide--dozens of the victims have been children--and last fall, a car was stolen, on average, every 2.5 hours. Minneapolis has seen 19 percent more vandalism than at this point last year; San Francisco, 18 percent more robberies. In Chicago, this year's rate of car thefts is already 138 percent higher than last year's. In St. Louis, kidnappings are up 113 percent.

Over the weekend, in Atlanta, dozens of rioters attacked and laid siege to the site of the city's future public safety training center-- public safety training center. These people lit construction equipment on fire and aimed fireworks and Molotov cocktails at police officers. Twenty-three of these radical leftists have been charged with domestic terrorism.

This is what happens when the political left spends years--years-- spotlighting anti-law enforcement rhetoric.

This is what happens when Democrats at all levels decide we need fewer arrests, shorter sentences, and more generosity to criminals at the expense of less justice for victims and for families.

This is what happens when far-left dark money flows to radical candidates for district attorneys' offices and the liberal DAs simply refuse to prosecute whole sections of the Criminal Code.

This is what happens after every single Senate Democrat voted on party lines against additional police funding just last year. Every Democratic Senator voted in lockstep against Senator Rubio's amendment that would have redirected some of their massive, reckless tax-and- spending spree to actually fund law enforcement.

Look, nobody will confuse Washington Democrats' last-minute reversal on this one resolution for a ``road to Damascus'' moment on the crime issue. The American people are a lot smarter than that.

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

Mr. President, 1 month ago, the Biden administration published an official statement opposing Republicans' bill to block a disastrous new soft-on-crime law right here in our Nation's Capital. The administration was on the record against it.

Then the overwhelming majority of House Democrats voted against our commonsense resolution when it passed the House. The proposition behind our bill is simple. It goes like this: The answer to skyrocketing violent crime in the District of Columbia is not--not--to reduce criminal penalties even further. On what planet should this even need to be said in the first place?

The murder rate in Washington is 34 percent higher today than it was at this time last year. Auto thefts are up 110 percent right here in the Nation's Capital. Longtime DC residents are locking their car doors at every red light. Tourists visiting their own capital are worried about walking the streets.

Just yesterday, the chief of the Metropolitan Police lamented that the average homicide suspect that his department encounters has already been arrested--listen to this--11 times before, 11 times.

Here is what the police chief said:

What we've got to do--if we really want to see homicides go

down--is keep bad guys with guns in jail. Because when

they're in jail, they can't be in communities shooting

people.

That is the police chief here in the Nation's Capital.

But the radical politicians who run the city tried to do exactly the opposite. The liberal city council cooked up a soft-on-crime overhaul of the Criminal Code that would have made it even easier for repeat offenders to get back out on the streets. It would have brought the mandatory minimum sentences for crimes like robbery and carjacking down even lower than they already are. And it would have gummed up an already backlogged and dysfunctional criminal justice system by massively expanding jury trials--listen to this--for misdemeanors. It is like these local Democrats have never met a single criminal they actually want locked up behind bars. It is truly remarkable.

This is exactly why our laws give Congress the final say--the final say--over how our Nation's Capital is governed because we can't have the craziness and dysfunction of a few local politicians jeopardizing the basic public safety in the Federal district that houses our national government. So Republicans wrote a resolution to overturn this nonsense.

But bear in mind, this limited resolution would not even toughen criminal penalties. At this point, we are talking about keeping things where they are and stopping even further--even further--backsliding.

The first step is to use this legal tool to stop the unhinged local politicians from making the totally unacceptable status quo even worse. But even so, this is a bridge too far for the vast majority of Washington Democrats.

Just a month ago, the White House issued an official statement opposing House Republicans' commonsense resolution saying:

Congress should respect the District of Columbia's

[authority] to govern its own local affairs.

And listen to this: 82 percent of House Democrats fell in line behind the Biden administration and voted no. But then something amazing happened.

I think somebody at the White House may have shown the President his latest poll numbers on this issue--fewer than one in three Americans approve of the way he is handling crime--because Washington Democrats started panicking and reversed themselves on a dime. The President came here last week, pulled a 180, and told our Democratic colleagues he won't veto the resolution after all.

Now there appears to be a different kind of jailbreak brewing right here in the Senate, and a number of Democrats may jump ship at the eleventh hour, trying to act like they have been tough on crime all along. But our colleagues will not be getting off the hook that easily.

It is not an act of heroic political courage for Democrats to help Congress do our basic minimum job and stop the DC Council from making an unacceptable status quo even worse, and none of our colleagues get to erase their entire records with this one vote.

Remember, just last summer, every single Senate Democrat went on record against a proposal to redirect a portion of their massive taxing-and-spending spree to fight surging crime.

Let the record reflect what actually gets Washington Democrats' attention and what does not. It did not get their attention when rates of violent crime in America's major cities were accelerating this time last year. It did not get their attention that compared to prepandemic levels, homicide nationwide are up 34 percent. It hadn't gotten Democrats' attention when the streets of our own Federal district are where repeated offenders are driving spikes in carjackings and murder.

But now that even the mainstream media are beginning to hold them to account for their negligence, now Washington Democrats are finally trying to change their tune. Innocent citizens getting shot in our streets didn't do it, but when Democrats take political shots in the press, that finally gets their attention.

So, look, we will welcome any of our Democratic colleagues who can recognize basic sanity and want to be on the winning side for our Republican resolution later this week, but local, State, and national Democratic Party officials will not be getting off the hot seat as quickly or as easily as they have got convicted felons getting back on the streets.

Washington, DC is only 0.2 percent of our Nation's population. What about New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Portland, Philadelphia, even Louisville? Don't these citizens deserve some sanity as well? Don't the families and children and elderly people and young women of these communities deserve to walk their streets with safety and security too?

We cannot only have public safety in this country in exceptional cases when a Republican House and a narrowly divided Senate can force Democrats to do the right thing against their will.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.