Floor Statements

Madam President, Senators spent last week in our home States. We got to hear firsthand updates about the real issues facing real families that we all represent. I was especially glad to return to Western Kentucky to keep working on our recovery from the catastrophic tornadoes that hammered our State in mid-December.

Kentuckians are tough. They are resilient. But many are still reeling from the impact of these storms. They have lost homes, businesses, even loved ones.

I spent last week meeting with local leaders, small business owners, and Kentuckians in the hardest hit areas. We talked about our work here in Washington and the help they can expect to receive from us.

Kentuckians in the affected areas have been grateful for the quick and efficient way that FEMA has begun distributing recovery aid. We know recovery will be a very long process, but my office and I will be standing with our people every step of the way.

And the entire State is excited to improve our roads, bridges, railways, and broadband thanks to the bipartisan infrastructure deal that Congress struck last year.

But like working people across America, Kentuckians also have serious concerns about significant headwinds. Kentucky families are feeling the pain of the worst inflation in 40 years. Our country has been hammered by 7 percent inflation over just the past year. Employers are trying hard to keep up.

Even as they face inflation across all their expenses, businesses across our region have significantly upped their spending on wages and benefits, and many workers have gotten raises. But, actually, it is only on paper because the historic inflation on the Democrats' watch has more than canceled the average increase in wages. Inflation is turning pay raises into pay cuts. This is just one of the many significant problems we confront.

Madam President, after a year of record-setting bloodshed in America's streets, violent crime is still forcing too many to live in fear.

The historic humanitarian and security crisis that unfolded at our southern border on Democrats' watch has actually gotten only worse.

The Biden administration's war on affordable and reliable American energy has put consumers in a bind.

And half a world away, in multiple regions, growing storm clouds are darkening the international stage with major implications for America and for our allies. Across the Middle East, from proxy terrorist attacks to nuclear and missile development, Iran keeps reminding us it has no intention of playing by the rules.

In Eastern Europe, Vladimir Putin himself is spelling out the reality of Russia's threat to the international order, one armored vehicle at a time.

I am encouraged that President Biden finally appears inclined to reinforce Eastern European treaty allies with U.S. forces, and those deployments must take place sooner rather than later. And other NATO allies should join us in defending our eastern flank allies.

Likewise, American and allied efforts to support Ukraine's ability to defend itself must occur not at the speed of bureaucracy but at the speed of relevance. Unfortunately, Washington Democrats have spent months focused on one distraction after another from these pressing challenges.

Months before Russia began massing forces for an invasion of Ukraine, our colleagues on the Armed Services Committee produced a bipartisan Defense authorization bill that would reassert our commitments to our allies and partners in Eastern Europe, as well as Asia, and help our own forces stay on the cutting edge of competition with China and Russia.

But instead of moving this legislation forward to prompt passage, the Democratic leader left the NDAA in limbo until almost the last minute.

In the meantime, Senate Democrats spent months trying to assemble a massive reckless taxing-and-spending spree, packed with policies that nobody was asking for outside of the radical left. Our citizens were fighting for their economic lives, trying to fight off gas prices, grocery prices, car prices, housing prices, and here Democrats were claiming the way out of inflation was to spend trillions on windmills and welfare.

And, of course, the multitrillion-dollar debt explosion wasn't even the most radical thing Democrats have recently tried to ram through.

Earlier this month, the vast majority of Senate Democrats tried to break--break--this Chamber's most fundamental rule for the sake of appointing themselves the entire country's board of elections on steroids.

Well, I hope our friends across the aisle can spend 2022 recommitting themselves to the actual problems that families are facing on their watch. This razor-thin Senate majority owes the American people at least that much.

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

Mr. President, tomorrow, our Nation's Capital will once again host many thousands of Americans gathering peacefully to support the most basic human right--the right to life. For 49 years, the March for Life has united people from diverse backgrounds, different faiths, and all 50 States to celebrate the dignity of human life and confront the ways our society fails to protect it.

This year, the marchers will arrive in a Washington controlled by a Democratic Party that has grown increasingly radical on this issue. Today's Democrats work overtime to keep our country one of just seven nations on the planet that have abortion on demand even after the unborn children can feel pain. Our shameful company includes China and North Korea. Fewer than 30 percent of Americans endorse this view, but Democrats have made it party dogma.

On President Biden's watch, Washington Democrats have even turned against the longstanding bipartisan Hyde Amendment. Both parties used to agree that at least Federal taxpayers should not be forced to fund abortions. Now Democrats on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue declared war on even this.

So I warmly welcome the marchers from Kentucky and across the country. This radical version of the Democratic Party needs to hear your voices now more than ever.

Today marks exactly 1 year since President Biden became our fourty-sixth President. This all-Democratic government has had 365 days to start delivering on some of their core promises.

So what were those promises, in their own words? ``Crushing the virus,'' ``strengthen[ing] our alliances,'' and, above all else, ``lower[ing] the temperature'' and reuniting a divided country.

Remember, upon taking office, this administration had historic tailwinds at its back. President Biden inherited lifesaving vaccines and a distribution system that was already up and running. He inherited a string of bipartisan rescue packages, including one that was only just a few days old. He inherited an economy that was prime for a roaring comeback. Those were the promises. That was the inheritance.

So let's take a look at the progress report. Last spring, against expert advice, the Biden administration dumped another mountain of borrowed cash on an already white-hot economy. As a result, we are now being hammered by the worst inflation in 40 years. Practically everything families need and want have gotten much, much more expensive. Constant shortages disrupt family shopping. Households are being hit with soaring heating costs if they stay home and soaring gas prices if they go out. Our economic trajectory looks shakier today than it did when Democrats were sworn in.

Of course, we have continued adding back jobs from COVID lockdowns. That was certainly going to happen. But job creation has massively underperformed Democrats' own projections for job creation with their super costly springtime stimulus package.

When 2021 was said and done, the country had added roughly the same number of jobs that we were on track to create before Democrats implemented one policy or spent one dime. They managed to literally blow $1.9 trillion but only barely beat the starting trajectory they inherited.

They call that spending a COVID package, but less than 10 percent of the money went to the actual medical fight, and that certainly shows.

Americans are entering their third year of this pandemic with too few tests, too few treatments, too many new cases, and too many school closures; muddled guidance on boosters that caused FDA experts to resign in protest, and needless divisive vaccine mandates that were not even constitutional.

One year in, the coronavirus is decidedly uncrushed.

And COVID wasn't the only epidemic sweeping American streets. Take violent crime. Far-left rhetoric and anti-law-enforcement local policies have led major cities to set all-time records for homicide in 2021.

Or take fentanyl. This deadly imported poison was the leading cause of death for Americans aged 18 to 45, last year. The No. 1 killer of Americans in their prime--fentanyl.

So why aren't Democrats treating this like an emergency? When was the last time President Biden even talked about this?

And drug deaths are not the only consequence of our weak borders.

Candidate Biden's rhetoric incentivized a historic flood of illegal immigration, and then President Biden's weak policies lit the fuse. The result? The biggest surge in illegal border crossings in 60 years--60 years.

All these issues are priorities for American families, but the Biden administration spent most of 2021 focused on none of those. Washington Democrats spent months chasing a reckless taxing-and-spending spree packed with far-left policies that citizens never wanted. We spent half of 2021 trying and failing to blow $5 trillion on windmills and welfare.

When that effort faded, Democrats abruptly pivoted and started shouting that American democracy was on death's door. They propagandized that some evil anti-voting conspiracy was sweeping America, and the only solution to this grand crisis was a gigantic partisan election takeover bill that Democrats had conveniently written years before the events which they say now prompted it.

The American people didn't buy the fake hysteria. One-half of one percent of the country thinks election laws are our top issue. In fact, more Americans believe voting laws are too loose than too tight.

Oh, but Democrats went all in on this obsession. A few days ago, the sitting President of the United States called millions of Americans his domestic enemies and analogized--analogized--U.S. Senators to Jefferson Davis.

Well, last night, the fake panic drove 48 Senate Democrats to walk the plank on a failed effort to shatter the Senate itself for short- term power. And now Washington Democrats appear to be launching an absurd and reckless campaign to delegitimize the next election in advance, in case they lose it. Sound familiar?

Yesterday, the President told reporters that he might not accept the 2022 election results as legitimate if his election takeover bills do not pass Congress first. It all sounds eerily familiar.

This morning, the House majority whip followed suit. He was asked if the legitimacy of our elections is contingent on Washington Democrats passing these bills, and he replied: ``I am absolutely concerned about that.''

The Democrats who preached countless sermons about accepting voter decisions are now saying the midterms may be illegitimate, unless they win.

So America, after all of this, do you feel unified? Do you feel healed? Do you feel like our core institutions are being protected?

Now, Senate Republicans have met this administration more than halfway. In 2021, the Senate built and passed a major infrastructure bill. We passed bipartisan legislation on competing with China.

But beyond that, this administration deliberately chose to build their whole

governing strategy around the party-line reconciliation process.

So the President cannot deflect blame for his disappointing first year. The American people know where the buck stops, and if our Democratic friends do not change course, before long, the buck will stop somewhere else.

Now, on a related matter, President Biden also campaigned on strengthening America's partnerships and renewing our global leadership. Well, how has the administration done?

The administration that campaigned on restoring alliances abandoned a coalition of loyal partners with its disastrous and fatal retreat from Afghanistan.

The Biden administration green-lit Vladimir Putin's Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and the Democrats blocked us from sanctioning it. This pipeline will help Putin gain even more leverage over Western Europe and, of course, further isolate Ukraine.

As we speak--right now--Putin has amassed more than 100,000 Russian troops along the border of Ukraine. If these forces cross into Ukraine, it will not be a new invasion or a ``re-invasion.'' It will represent a major escalation of an ongoing occupation.

Ukraine has been fighting a Russian-backed war on its own now for 8 years. Eight years ago, I tried to warn President Obama that Putin is only deterred when the world imposes real costs--real costs--on his misbehavior.

But the Biden Administration sent Ukraine nonlethal support, and the sanctions it imposed and coordinated proved not to be as tough as advertised. The Obama-Biden administration failed to end Putin's invasion or compel compliance with the Minsk accords. Now the Biden- Harris team must not repeat the Obama-Biden grave mistakes.

But yesterday, on live television, President Biden telegraphed passivity--telegraphed passivity--and weakness, exactly when our allies can least afford it. Our President seemed to state--and, I pray, unintentionally--that he expects Putin to escalate in Ukraine, and, in any case, Putin can do what he wants.

Here is what the President said: ``That decision is totally, solely, completely a Putin decision. . . . I suspect it matters which side of the bed he gets up on.''

What on Earth does that mean?

Further, the President said: ``My guess is he will move in.''

The President said: ``My guess is he will move in. He has to do something.''

So President Biden thinks Putin has to do something. What does that even mean? Why is our President speculating like a passive observer on the sidelines?

He isn't a pundit. He isn't Putin's psychoanalyst. He is the President of the United States.

So will America hold Russia accountable if it escalates? Here was the message from our Commander in Chief: ``It depends on what Russia does. It's one thing if it's a minor incursion''--a minor incursion--``and then we end up having to fight about what to do and not do, et cetera.''

``It is one thing if it is a minor incursion''? Does this mean President Biden will not actually authorize the tough response that his own administration officials have spent weeks--weeks--promising?

This was a moment to deliver a powerful warning to the Kremlin that Ukraine's sovereignty is inviolable; that we would stand with her people; that the cost of escalation would be devastating.

It was a moment to reassure our partners in Kiev and our allies along NATO's eastern flank that America had their back.

It was a moment to call for NATO's unity, not to expose and appear hamstrung by NATO's divisions. It was a bizarre and devastating performance--especially, I would add--for our friends on the frontlines.

President Zelensky's Defense Minister has already shot back. This is from Ukraine's Defense Minister:

We should not give Putin the slightest chance to play with

quasi-aggression or small incursion operations. This

aggression was [already] there since 2014. This is the fact.

I suspect our own Secretary of State, who is in Europe to meet with our allies and the Russian Foreign Minister--was also shocked by what the President had said. Minutes later, White House staff put out a frantic statement laying out a completely different position than what President Biden had just expressed. By then, of course, significant damage had been done.

But, alas, the damage can be undone. The President of the United States is never powerless. President Biden needs to clean up his remarks. He needs to clearly state American resolve and clearly demonstrate American leadership. He should call President Zelensky and NATO's allies most threatened by Russian aggression. He should rally allies and partners around the world to defend Ukraine and the international system that is being threatened by Putin.

His administration should be using every waking moment right now-- right now--to expedite our delivery of real defensive capabilities to Ukraine.

The President must cut the indecision and redtape that has slowed us and our partners down. President Biden should finally, at long last, get around to nominating an Ambassador to Ukraine, a position he has left empty for 12 crucial months.

He should send U.S. forces to shore up NATO's eastern flank--not if-- not if and when Putin escalates, but right now, before it is too late.

He should encourage our treaty allies to do likewise. But while alliance unity is important, the lowest common denominator of NATO's most nervous members cannot be allowed to restrict American action.

Whatever course other nations choose to chart, we cannot afford to let Moscow underestimate our resolve to impose serious--serious-- crushing costs in response to any further incursion against Ukraine.

Our friends and America's reputation deserve nothing less.

Mr. President, the Democratic Party has had control of Washington for exactly 364 days. Tomorrow will mark exactly 1 year since President Biden was inaugurated on the West Front and promised to ``unit[e] our people,'' ``lower the temperature,'' and brin[g] America together.'' But today, the President and his party will try to use fear and panic to smash the Senate, silence millions of Americans, and seize control of our democracy.

Now, there is no shortage of real crises Democrats might consider tackling: the worst inflation in 40 years, the seemingly endless pandemic, soaring homicides, the border crisis, and Russia flirting with war in Europe.

But the administration and this Senate majority are focused on none of that. Instead, they have been consumed by a fake panic over election laws that seem to exist only in their own imaginations.

So let's put a few basic facts on the table. Fewer than one-half of 1 percent of American adults believe that election law is our country's most important problem. When polls ask people what new Federal election laws they want, the most popular response is ``none of the above.''

Actually, more Americans believe current voting laws are too lax than believe they are too restrictive. Let that sink in. You could have taken in hundreds of hours of leftwing rhetoric and media coverage over the past year and had no inkling of this basic fact. Significantly more Americans believe current voting laws are too loose and insecure than believe are too restrictive.

Professional liberals have spent 3 straight years talking down our democracy, except a short period after they liked an election result and questioning elections was, at least briefly, off limits. But the American people are not buying that. Democrats have spent years stoking fear and panic over voting laws and the American people simply do not buy it. But while Washington Democrats' fake panic has failed to persuade the country, it could still deal permanent damage.

Today, the Senate will need to prevent this factional frenzy from damaging our democracy, damaging the Senate, and damaging our Republic forever.

First, our democracy. Professional liberals' fake hysteria over State voting laws is literally collapsing before our eyes. Even normally friendly media outlets are asking Democrats why a law like Georgia's is supposed to be outrageous when it is objectively more open than rules in blue States like Delaware and New York. President Biden's false statement about one State law earned him--listen to this--``four Pinocchios'' in the Washington Post. That is not easy to get. There is no factual standard by which any State in America is creating a civil rights crisis, not compared to their own prepandemic baselines, not comparing across with other States.

What is more, Democrats' own paper trails refute the notion that this is about new State laws from 2021. Three years ago, in 2019, Leader Schumer was already giving interviews about supposed voter suppression. The same conspiracy theories were being pushed back then. The same ominous buzzwords were in vogue. And 3 years ago, in 2019, Democrats had already introduced their first version of the legislation they will be pushing today.

This party-line push has never been about securing citizens' rights. It is about expanding politicians' power. That is why their bill tries to weaken voter ID laws that are popular with Americans of all races. That is why their bill is stuffed with strange policies that have zero relationship to ballot access, new powers for bureaucrats to police citizens' speech online, new schemes where the Federal Government would directly fund political campaigns.

This is not some modest bill about ballot access. It is a sprawling takeover of our whole political system. It was never even intended to attract bipartisan support. This partisan Frankenstein bill that the House Democrats slapped together was intended to do one thing, just one thing only: Give the Senate Democratic leader a pretext--a pretext--to break the Senate.

Later today, this Chamber will host a sad spectacle that has not been seen before in living memory. A sitting majority leader will attempt a direct assault on the core identity of the Senate. Our colleague from New York will try to kill the character of the institution he is supposed to protect and to serve.

Now, the Democratic leader once said that breaking the rules to kill the filibuster would turn the Senate into a ``rubberstamp of dictatorship,'' make America a ``banana republic'' and trigger ``a doomsday for democracy.''

Several years ago, with no connection to this particular issue, he began talking about shredding minority protections if--if--he ever got power.

And now he wants to press that doomsday button.

The legislative filibuster is a central Senate tradition. It is the indispensable feature of our institution. It makes the Senate serve its founding purpose--forging compromise, cooling passions, and ensuring that new laws earn broad support from a cross section of our country.

The Senate is not supposed to be a duplicate House of Representatives with fewer Members and fancier desks. This body is not supposed to amplify huge swings in Federal law with every election. It exists to slow those swings and to bring stability.

The legislative filibuster is the only reason the Senate provides what James Madison called a ``complicated check'' on ``improper acts of legislation.'' It embodies Thomas Jefferson's principle that ``great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities.''

Killing the legislative filibuster--any way it happened--would hugely damage the Senate, but doing so by nuking the rules would destroy the Senate. As I have explained at some length, this is true on the most practical level. A Senate in nuclear winter would not be a hospitable place for either side.

As then-Senator Obama explained a decade and a half ago, ``If the majority chooses to end the filibuster, if they choose to change the rules and put an end to democratic debate, then the fighting and the bitterness and the gridlock will only get worse.''

Please note that, even in the Democratic leader's manufactured case, even when he presumably wanted the most persuasive theater he could possibly muster, the Senate will have only spent about a day and a half on this bill before he tries to ram it through. Since when does the Senate pass any significant bill in a day and a half, much less a gigantic elections overhaul? Our colleague is not trying to conclude an unending discussion that

he cannot stop; he is trying to short circuit a debate that he cannot win. This is just the kind of shortsighted power grab this body was actually built to stop.

The case that most of our Democratic colleagues are making this week boils down to a claim that everything is somehow broken. The Senate is broken because they can't get everything they want. Our democracy is broken because Democrats sometimes lose elections. Entire States are broken because voters vote the wrong way, and so their voices in this Chamber should be totally silenced. Millions of American voters should be denied any say whatsoever in this Chamber. Really? Really? Our Democratic colleagues claiming our entire Republic is broken? That is what their anger and pessimism boils down to.

They say that we are hopelessly divided; that governing institutions that have served us for centuries need to be smashed and steamrolled; that we are fated to keep escalating brute-force battles with no end in sight. This is exactly the kind of toxic world view that this President pledged to disavow, but it is exactly what has consumed his party on his watch. You can literally hear it in their voices.

In the last few days, our President and his top allies have been reduced to shouting angrily at reporters and at the American people. They are so certain they know best. How dare the rules, how dare the facts, the Republicans, and millions of voters all obstruct their unique wisdom?

Well, the good news is that the fear is false. The rage is misplaced. And today, factional fevers will not carry the day.

The Senate is not broken. We have passed major, bipartisan bills this year, and we have stopped partisan bills that lack support; exactly-- exactly--the mixture the Framers imagined and Senators on both sides praised--praised--until the last few months. Our democracy is not broken either. Citizens across America have ample opportunity to vote and say so to anybody who will listen to them. Our Republic is not broken. Even with all the crises that Democrats' policies have created, we remain fellow citizens who are blessed to live in the greatest country on Earth.

Today, it appears that a narrow, bipartisan majority of Senators will vote to save the Senate. With hope, with confidence, we will stand up and say that our institutions are worth protecting; that rules matter; that no American deserves to have his or her voice in this Chamber silenced. Ah, but a partisan minority will do the opposite. They will try to smash and grab as much short-term power as they can carry.

For both groups of Senators, this vote will echo for generations. Before we part ways tonight, all 100 of us will have marked our legacies in permanent ink. Who will vote with hope and confidence in our people, and who will vote from anger, fear, and fake panic? Who will vote to protect checks and balances, and who will try to purchase power at any price? Who has the courage to protect every single American voice in this Chamber, no matter their home State, no matter their politics, and who will vote to silence millions of citizens for the sin of voting for the wrong team? The American people deserve to know, and from this day forward, they will.

Excuse me. No.

Mr. President, well, I think we can all agree on one thing: It has been a long day. Almost everybody has had something to say, and the reason for that is this is an important day in the history of the Senate. It could be argued it is the most important day in the history of the Senate as an institution. This very day that we are just wrapping up is, in all likelihood, the most important day in the history of the Senate as an institution.

This evening, fewer than 60 Senators voted to advance a piece of legislation so it didn't move forward. It is pretty common around here. It happens frequently. In fact, it happened less than a week ago, as we know, when our Democratic colleagues used the 60-vote threshold to block sanctions against Putin's pipeline.

In 2020, the Democrats used the filibuster multiple times to delay the CARES Act, kill Senator Tim Scott's police reform bill, block bipartisan protections for unborn children.

Senate minorities can apply the brakes to small majorities. Senate minorities can apply the brakes to small majorities. This institution makes major changes earn major buy-in. This institution requires that major changes receive major buy-in. For decades, Americans on all sides acknowledged this.

Believe it or not, 15 years ago--several of us were here 15 years ago--there were 180 civil rights organizations--180 civil rights organizations--that weighed in in support of the filibuster because, at that particular point, the filibuster was being used to stop judges appointed by Bush 43. So over 100 civil rights organizations wrote us a letter saying the filibuster is indispensable. It served their purpose at that particular time.

For decades--literally, decades--Senators on both sides agreed. We have quoted each other back and forth here, eloquent filibuster defenses from colleagues across the aisle when it benefited them to make those speeches.

But, colleagues, a leader's true colors are not revealed when long- term principles and short-term power line up together. That is easy, when what you are trying to achieve lines up with the tactics. The measure of a leader is not what he or she chooses; it is what they choose when those two paths diverge, go in a different direction.

Now, half of us, on this side of the aisle, just spent 4 years--4 years--when we were in the majority and we had a President of our party asking us to do what they are trying to do tonight, and we had a one- word answer: No. No. We are not going to fracture the institution to achieve some short-term advantage.

And actually, astonishingly enough--Grassley was here then--in 1994, the best Republican off-year election, arguably, in American history took the House for the first time in 40 years, got the majority back in the Senate.

Tom Harkin--Chuck Grassley's colleague from Iowa, the Democrat--on day one of that session, through the regular order, offered a rule change to lower the threshold to 51. So who would have benefited from that? This brand-new, enthusiastic majority just having swept the country would have been the principal beneficiary of lowering the threshold to 51. Not one single Republican in the new majority voted to give themselves an advantage that would break the Senate--not one. So we have been consistent on this side of the aisle in support of this institution as long as I have been here.

They face the same decision now. They have a choice. They could break the institution to achieve what they want or defend the institution. And so they pivoted. And that is why so many of them look so foolish because they have been on the opposite side of this, not a long time ago but quite recently. And so they tried to carve out a special category here that somehow this issue is different from all the other issues and should be treated differently.

Well, on the merits, as we have discussed ad nauseam here, this is something they have been trying to do for a long time. The rationale for it has changed periodically, depending upon what seemed to make sense. But dial it up any way you choose to, this is a plot to break the Senate--a plot to break the Senate. Over the issue they have chosen, one-half of 1 percent of the American people say election law is their most pressing concern--one-half of 1 percent of the American people.

Actually, Americans, as a number of you have said during the course of this long day, believe voting laws are actually too loose, rather than too strict, and as you have said over and over and over again, Georgia's new law is arguably more progressive than New York or Delaware. All of you have said that all day long.

And this? This is the basis upon which the President of the United States calls people like us racists, traitors? Over this? Over how many days of early voting you are going to have? Really? This is the basis on which 40-plus Senate Democrats want to not

only break their word but break the Senate.

Now, the so-called talking filibuster proposal is smoke and mirrors, just smoke and mirrors. There is really only one question we are dealing with here, just one. It is not complicated. Will it take 60 votes to pass massive changes or a simple majority to ram them through? That is what is at stake here, nothing else. Will slender majorities need to build coalitions across the aisle or not? Will huge chunks of Federal law reverse themselves whenever gavels change hands? We have talked about this all day long. That is what this is about.

But, colleagues, something even more fundamental is at stake tonight. Everyone in this Chamber knows that factional fires are burning hot all across our country. As I look around, I don't know if this many of us have actually gathered in this Chamber since January 6 of last year. We were all in here then. I stood up that day, and I said self-government requires shared respect for basic ground rules. I said we couldn't keep drifting into two tribes and delegitimizing the few institutions we still share.

Yes, the divisions run deep. Compromise is certainly challenging. But it would not serve a divided country if two factions take turns ruling over one another with an iron fist.

Here is a solution for a divided country: Thoughtful compromise everywhere we can agree, and, when we can't agree, it just doesn't happen.

The American people are closely divided. We are reflected here with a 50-50 Senate, for the longest time in American history.

There is not a mandate to fundamentally transform America into something it has never been. It is not what the voters voted for. We have a narrow majority trying to jam through, one after another, proposals to fundamentally turn us into something we have never been.

Well, here is the good news: The Framers custom built--custom built-- the Senate to stop this kind of thing. That is why this institution was constructed in the first place. We are sitting in the place designed to stop this kind of thing, and we have an opportunity to do it here tonight.

This is the first time in history that a Senate majority leader, who is supposed to safeguard this institution, has convinced--convinced-- nearly all of his party to attack the institution. That hasn't happened before.

Tonight, for the first time in history, almost an entire political party will write in permanent ink that they would shatter the soul of Senate for short-term power--shatter the soul of the Senate for short- term power. But the brave bipartisan majority of this party is about to stop them--about to stop them. We will stop the Democratic leader from silencing the voices of millions upon millions of Americans who have a right to be heard in this Chamber, many of them represented by us who come from small States. They derisively look down on us as a flyover territory, a place nobody wants to stop.

The Senate was designed to represent those people. Every State gets two Senators. Some States have only one House Member but two Senators. We are here to protect middle America, and the supermajority threshold in the Senate makes that even more possible. So they can't run roughshod over us. They can't run roughshod over us and the people we represent.

When our country needs leaders to fight the fires of factualism, almost half the Senate over here wants to literally dump more gasoline right on top of it.

When our institutions needed defending, a sitting President and a majority leader have made smashing the Senate an unofficial part of their party's platform. The President of the United States and the majority leader of the Senate have made breaking the Senate a central part of their plan for America.

Thanks to the courageous position of at least a few of their Members, they will not succeed. This country will be shielded from their radicalism tonight. And make no mistake about it, this is radicalism designed to fundamentally change America in every conceivable way, to the disadvantage of virtually all of the constituents represented by people on this side of the aisle--and theirs as well, if they were willing to admit it.

So the Senate will be safe tonight. The Senate will be safe tonight. America can breathe a sigh of relief. This radicalism will have been stopped, and it is a good day for America.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, very few people find the time to lead their city's largest law firm, serve on a university's board of trustees, represent their country at the United Nations, and remain active in civic life in their hometown. Even fewer can accomplish these things before the age of 40. But Jennifer Barber of Louisville, KY, has managed to do all this--and more. Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Jennifer for her recent career milestone and for her years of service to the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Jennifer, the daughter of Chinese immigrants, grew up working alongside her parents in the family's restaurant, learning to value sacrifice, ambition, and effort. She became the first member of her family to graduate college, earning both her bachelor's degree and juris doctorate from the University of Kentucky. From there, she developed a specialty in tax law, taking her expertise to Frost Brown Todd in 2013 and working her way up the corporate ladder.

Jennifer's professional and academic successes only tell half the story of her remarkable career. She has also dedicated her time, energy, and talent to a range of important Kentucky organizations, from the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, to the Kentucky State Fair Board, to the Kentucky Bar Foundation. In 2020, she took a brief break from her law firm to take her talents to the global stage, serving as a special adviser to the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and a U.S. Delegate to the United Nations where she helped advance American priorities on human rights and foreign aid.

Jennifer's professional accomplishments are so exciting because she achieved them at such a remarkably young age. Jennifer has done incredible work to improve Kentucky and serve our Nation, and I am confident her recent promotion is just the first in a long list of successes yet to come.

Louisville Business First highlighted Jennifer Barber's new role in a recent article. I ask unanimous consent the article be printed in the Record.

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

Mr. President, late last week, our Democratic colleagues briefly paused their quest to destroy the Senate's 60-vote threshold just long enough to use the 60-vote threshold themselves to block a bill.

Republicans supported sanctioning the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline that would give Russia even more leverage to bully Europe. Most of our Democratic colleagues bowed to the furious lobbying from the Biden administration to protect Putin's pipeline. There were 55 votes to pass the bill that our friends, like Ukrainian President Zelensky, desperately wanted passed, but Democrats blocked it by denying 60.

Now, many of these same colleagues have spent weeks thundering-- literally thundering--that the Senate's 60-vote threshold is an offensive tool of obstruction, a Jim Crow relic, declaring that simple majorities should always get their way. Ah, but late last week, they literally wielded the 60-vote threshold themselves--a useful reminder of just how fake--fake--the hysteria has been.

We already knew Washington Democrats didn't have any principled opposition to Senate rules. Democrats repeatedly filibustered the CARES Act in March of 2020, while insisting on changes. Democrats filibustered and killed Senator Tim Scott's police reform bill.

You only have to go back a few years to read vigorous defenses of the filibuster from our Democratic colleagues and their allies.

The Democratic whip, Senator Durbin, put it this way:

We need to protect the right of debate in the Senate,

preserve checks and balances so that no one party can do

whatever it wants. We need to preserve the voice of the

minority in America.

Dick Durbin.

The Democratic leader himself said in 2017 that we need to ``find a way to build a firewall around the legislative filibuster''--build a firewall around the legislative filibuster.

Then, in a letter that same year by 32 Senate Democrats, our colleagues demanded--demanded--that the 60-vote threshold stay right where it was.

Until the last couple of years, Senators on both sides have understood the Senate is not here to rubberstamp massive changes by thin majorities. This institution exists to do exactly the opposite--to make sure major laws receive major buy-in and have major staying power, and, historically, Democratic allies outside this Chamber have recognized this as well.

Let's go back about 15 years ago when Republicans controlled the Senate. A leftwing organization called The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights published a lengthy statement defending-- defending--the filibuster, including--listen to this--its relationship to civil rights.

Here is what they had to say when Republicans were in the majority here in the Senate:

On behalf of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the

nation's oldest, largest, and most diverse civil and human

rights coalition, with more than 180 member organizations, we

urge you to oppose--

oppose--

any efforts to eliminate the 216-year-old filibuster in the

United States Senate.

That is a coalition of 180 member organizations called The Civil and Human Rights Coalition.

They went on.

The elimination of the rights of the minority as embodied

by the filibuster is contrary to the founding fathers' vision

of the Senate as a body of equals designed to protect against

the tyranny of the majority.

This statement continued.

The civil rights community has recognized and accepted the

value--

The value--

of the filibuster even when it frustrated efforts to advance

civil rights legislative goals. During the 1950's and 1960's,

countless civil rights bills were filibustered. The Civil

Rights Act of 1964 was not passed until it survived 75 days

of the longest filibuster in history and the Senate voted 71-

29 to end debate and finally passed the bill. This

legislation was enacted because of long, hard work

to build support across partisan, ideological, and regional

lines. We worked to bring Americans together--not to push

them farther apart.

They concluded:

We never demanded the end of the system of checks and

balances. In the end, we won the battle by changing votes and

not--

Not--

by breaking the rules.

These were leftwing activists writing less than 20 years ago.

So let's spell this out. Democrats want the American people to believe the filibuster was not a Jim Crow relic in 2005; it was not even a Jim Crow relic in 2020; just miraculously became a Jim Crow relic in 2021; briefly stopped being a Jim Crow relic last Thursday, but it is now back to being a Jim Crow relic this week.

Now, to be clear, the partisan election takeover bills that Democrats want to ram through this week are not--not--in any way successors of the civil rights legislation from the mid-20th century. It has been, is today, and will remain illegal to discriminate against voters anywhere in America because of their race--period. That is the law now.

Targeting Americans' online speech and sending government money to political campaigns is not about civil rights. It is about tilting the playing field. Weakening wildly popular voter ID laws and making it harder to produce accurate voter rolls is not about making voting easier; it is about making cheating easier. Changing the laws so that our partisan Attorney General can rewrite voting laws without even having to win in court is not about promoting justice; it is about short-circuiting justice. This is about one party wanting the power to unilaterally rewrite the rule book of American elections.

Now, interestingly, the Biden administration staff has gone out of its way lately to highlight my--my--long, strong record on real civil rights and real voting rights. The President's Press Secretary explained that I have ``a pretty strong record of supporting voting rights.'' She is right about that. And that is exactly why I have no patience--none--for the unrelated partisan takeover that some Democrats are trying to rebrand with that banner.

The Democratic leader argues that his proposed elections takeover and his efforts to break the Senate are last resorts because of new State laws that passed in 2021. He says it is irrelevant that 2020 saw record turnout and--listen to this--94 percent said voting was easy because this debate is exclusively about what happened in 2021. But Democrats have been pushing these same policy charges in the same Chicken Little rhetoric since 2019, a year and a half before 2020 election, which Democrats now call a high-turnout success.

The Democratic leader gave an interview claiming that evil Republicans were trying to attack voting and disenfranchise people. Of course, when Democrats went on to win the White House, the 2020 election went from presumptively illegitimate to exemplary and unquestionable overnight. Around the same time, mid-2019, Senator Schumer began floating a nuclear attack on Senate rules. It is completely untethered from the elections issue. He just thought breaking the rules would make for a livelier stint as majority leader.

Washington Democrats have wanted the power to rewrite the rules for political speech and election laws long, long before the events that are supposed to justify it, and the Democratic leader's effort to break the Senate long predates the latest pretext.

We have strong disagreements about the substance of these bills, but, even more broadly, we see decreasing trust in our democracy among both political sides. We have a sitting President of the United States shouting that U.S. Senators are on the side of Bull Connor and Jefferson Davis for refusing to shatter the Senate.

Was the Senate created to make these kinds of factional fevers worse or to help break the fevers? Does the Senate exist to help narrow majorities double down on divisions or to force broad coalitions to build bridges?

This fake hysteria does not prove the Senate is obsolete. It proves the Senate is as necessary as ever.

Republicans have supported this limitation on the majority's power both when we have been in the minority, which these rules protect, and when we have been the majority, which they inconvenience.

And last week, some of our colleagues across the aisle reconfirmed that they have the courage and the principle to keep their word and to protect the institution as well. But too many of our colleagues across the aisle still want to respond to a 50-50 Senate with a rule-breaking power grab.

Voting to break this institution will not be a free vote or a harmless action, even if their effort fails. An unprincipled attempt at grabbing power is not harmless just because it fails. Voting to break the Senate is not cost-free just because a bipartisan majority of your colleagues have the wisdom to stop you. It is amazing that our colleagues are this in thrall to radical activists.

We have inflation, a pandemic, rampant violent crime, a border crisis, and possibly a war on the European continent. But rather than work on any of that, Senate Democrats want to march their own legacies with a reckless--reckless--procedural vote they know will fail. A faction this desperate for unlimited short-term power is a faction that must be denied it.

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

Madam President, a recent survey asked Americans for their view of the most important problems facing our country. Of course, we know what Washington Democrats view as their top priority. President Biden and Senate Democrats have been shouting--actually shouting--at the American people that an evil, racist, anti-voting conspiracy will destroy democracy forever unless Democrats get total one-party control of the entire government, starting next week.

But are the American people buying any of it? Is this what working families want prioritized? So let's take a look. In a recent survey, Gallup asked citizens for their priorities, what they thought we ought to be doing.

Do you know what share of Americans said election law? Less than one- half of 1 percent--one-half of 1 percent. Nobody in this country is buying the fake hysteria that democracy will die unless Democrats get total control.

Here is what people do care about: The top response at 21 percent was poor government leadership. About a year into the Biden administration, the American people's single greatest concern is bad leadership. And when you dig into the other issues, you can see why.

Some of the next largest concerns were either general economic problems or inflation and rising costs, in particular, and no wonder-- no wonder. New figures, just yesterday, show our country continues to experience the worst inflation in 40 years--40 years.

Gas prices are nearly a dollar higher than a year ago; grocery prices are up 6.5 percent; and across the economy, inflation has exceeded 5 percent every month for 7 straight months. There is no working family who has not been hurt directly by this.

Another huge chunk of Americans said their chief worry is the coronavirus--certainly no surprise there. A year into the administration that promised it would shut down the virus, well, what do we have? Record-setting new cases. Shortages of testing. Shortages of important treatments, in part, because of the Biden administration's decisions.

We have reports of multiple States potentially limiting or excluding patients from lifesaving treatments on the basis, believe it or not, of their ethnicity.

And still, 2 years into this, notwithstanding abundant vaccines and a milder variant, we have Big Labor bosses in big cities being permitted to lock vulnerable kids out of the classroom.

Oh, and when kids are in the classroom, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice try to persecute concerned parents who dare ask what their kids are learning.

So these are just a few examples of real problems. These are the kinds of places where the American people need this dramatically unpopular administration to entirely refocus.

Yesterday, a new poll indicated that 33 percent of Americans approve of the President--33 percent. When he was inaugurated and pledging to govern for all Americans, to heal and unite the country, this White House enjoyed impressive approval ratings. But as the far left has been handed the reins, the support has cratered.

Now, there is a path forward for my Democratic colleagues to respond to the country they have so badly disappointed, but it isn't to try to break the Senate and rewrite election laws. It is to actually start tracking the issues that American families need tackled.

Now, there are also countless other issues which may not make national headlines but matter hugely to those who are affected. For example, next

week, I will again travel to Western Kentucky to visit some of the areas hit hardest by last month's devastating tornado outbreak. The national news cameras may have left, but families in this part of the Commonwealth are still trying to pick up the pieces of their lives after losing homes, businesses, and loved ones.

I am profoundly grateful to everyone contributing to the recovery process.

Our utility workers are taking on the herculean task of restoring public services. The Kentucky National Guard has played a crucial role in distributing supplies. Private individuals have donated food, clothing, and blood.

The Kentucky General Assembly just approved a State-funded relief package, and Kentucky's entire Federal delegation joined together to advocate directly for increased Federal aid.

This is going to be a long process. It will require consistent support on the local, State, and Federal levels. Rebuilding will take literally months and years--not days and weeks.

Well, I will be with these communities every step of the way.

Finally, beyond our shores, there remains no shortage of forces that wish to harm America and our interests. Senators will vote today on a measure to impose sanctions on Nord Stream 2. We can send a strong warning to Putin that he won't be allowed to use energy as a weapon. We can signal strong support for Eastern and Central European partners that have long opposed Putin's pipeline.

Even Democratic Senators who now oppose the sanctions they used to support acknowledge the pipeline is ``a tool of malign influence of the Russian Federation.''

Really, the Government of Germany should have shelved this project itself a long time ago. Berlin can still make the right call.

These sanctions, like the prior Nord Stream 2 sanctions that had overwhelming bipartisan support here in Congress, are not about driving a wedge in Europe. The pipeline itself is the wedge. That is the whole point. That has been Putin's goal--decoupling Ukraine from Europe and making Europe even more reliant on Russian gas.

So for Senators who seem more concerned about standing with Berlin than with Kiev, this bill includes a waiver. We expect President Biden would actually exercise the waiver.

But a clear bipartisan message would still be sent, just like when 98 Senators voted to enact CAATSA in 2017, just like when Democrats signed off on the previous bill to sanction Nord Stream 2 in the 2020 NDAA.

So I hope each of our colleagues will support Senator Cruz's measure. The Senate must show we are focused on real-life threats to democracy, to security, and to our friends.

As we speak, Russia is literally preparing to escalate its military assault on Ukraine. It has amassed more than 100,000 troops on Ukraine's border. Deterring Russian aggression and preparing for the very real threat of a major war on the European Continent will take far more than these sanctions.

It will take urgency and seriousness from the administration. Time is of the essence. Our delays in getting emergency assistance to Ukraine approved do not inspire much confidence.

The administration cannot move at the speed of bureaucracy. That won't cut it. Humanitarian and military support to Ukraine cannot wait. Reinforcing American and NATO positions in Europe cannot wait.

We must not pull our punches out of some fear of provoking Putin. What will encourage Putin is if he senses American weakness. Ukraine and our eastern flank NATO allies deserve our support.

They are on the frontlines of a much broader war that Russia and China are conducting against the democratic international order itself. This order helps America. It benefits our national interests, and it benefits our allies, but it is not going to enforce itself. It will not defend itself. And our allies will not act if America fails to lead.

Our Nation's contest with China and Russia is the biggest challenge we face. It will entail significant risks and perhaps, God forbid, serious sacrifice.

Meeting these challenges and preventing the worst will take the kind of unity and bipartisanship that President Biden promised--not the outrageous--outrageous--and divisive partisanship he has embraced.

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

Mr. President, 12 months ago, a newly inaugurated President Biden stood on the west front of the Capitol, and here is what he had to say:

My whole soul is in this: bringing America together,

uniting our people, uniting our nation.

Yesterday, that very same man delivered a deliberately divisive speech that was designed to pull our country further apart.

Twelve months ago, this President said we should see each other not as adversaries but as neighbors. Yesterday, he called millions of Americans his domestic ``enemies.''

Twelve months ago, the President called on Americans to ``join forces, stop the shouting, lower the temperature,'' but yesterday, he shouted that if you disagree with him, you are George Wallace. George Wallace? If you don't pass the laws he wants, you are Bull Connor. And if you oppose giving Democrats untrammeled one-party control of the country, well, you are Jefferson Davis.

Twelve months ago, this President said ``disagreement must not lead to disunion.'' Ah, but yesterday, he invoked the bloody disunion of the Civil War--the Civil War--to demonize Americans who disagree with him. He compared--listen to this--a bipartisan majority of Senators to literal traitors. How profoundly--profoundly--un-Presidential.

Look, I have known, liked, and personally respected Joe Biden for many years. I did not recognize the man at the podium yesterday.

American voters did not give President Biden a mandate for very much. He got a tied Senate and negative coattails in the House--the narrowest majorities in over a century. The President did not get a mandate to transform America or reshape society, but he did arguably get a mandate to do just one central thing that he campaigned on. Here is what that was: Bridge a divided country; lower the temperature; dial down the perpetual air of crisis in our politics. That is the one central promise that Joe Biden made. It is the one job citizens actually hired him to do. It is the one project that would have actually been consistent--consistent--with the Congress that voters elected. Ah, but President Biden has chosen to fail his own test.

The President's rant--rant--yesterday was incoherent, incorrect, and beneath his office. He used the phrase ``Jim Crow 2.0'' to demagogue a law that makes the franchise more accessible than in his own State of Delaware. He blasted Georgia's procedures

regarding local election officials while pushing national legislation with almost identical language on that issue.

The President implied that things like wildly popular ID laws are-- listen to this--``totalitarian.'' Totalitarian? Ironically, on the same day, Washington, DC's Democratic mayor told citizens to bring both a photo ID and a vaccine card anytime they leave the house.

The President repeatedly invoked the January 6 riot, while himself using irresponsible, delegitimizing rhetoric that undermines our democracy.

The sitting President of the United States compared American States to ``totalitarian states.'' He said our country will be an ``autocracy'' if he does not get his way--if he does not get his way.

So the world saw our Commander in Chief propagandize against his own country--his own country--to a degree that would have made Pravda blush. There was no consistent standard behind anything the President said. He trampled through some of the most sensitive and sacred parts of our Nation's past. He invoked times when activists bled and when soldiers died, all to demagogue voting laws that are more expansive than what Democrats have on the books in his own home State.

Georgia has more days of early voting than Delaware or New York. Georgia has no-excuse absentee voting, which Delaware and New York do not have. If Georgia or Texas presents Jim Crow emergencies, then so do a whole lot of Democratic-run States.

The Senate Democratic leader has gone on cable TV saying Georgia ``is greatly restricting or eliminating early voting.'' That is a lie, provably false. Georgia has more early voting than New York. The Democratic leader has tried to fearmonger about one rural Georgia county that condensed multiple voting locations into one--one rural Georgia county. Well, the county is overwhelmingly red. They were clearly not involved in trying to suppress Democratic votes--70 percent Republican in that one county in 2020.

So take a step back for a minute. President Biden's story is that democracy is on death's door, but he spent 9 months chasing a reckless taxing-and-spending spree before addressing it. It must not be that much of an emergency. Citizens are meant to believe a return of Jim Crow is on the table, but this was only President Biden's sixth priority after he was blocked from spending $5 trillion on windmills and welfare. Democrats' own behavior refutes their false hysteria.

Twelve months ago, the President said that ``politics need not be a raging fire destroying everything in its path.'' That was just 12 months ago, but yesterday, he poured a giant can of gasoline on the fire.

Twelve months ago, the President said every disagreement doesn't have to be a cause for total war, but yesterday, he said anyone who opposes smashing the Senate--smashing the Senate--and letting Democrats rewrite election law is a domestic ``enemy'' and--listen to this--a traitor like Jefferson Davis.

One week ago, President Biden gave a January 6 lecture about not stoking political violence--1 week ago. Yesterday, with the world's largest megaphone, he invoked the literal Civil War and said we are on the doorstep of ``autocracy.'' He talked about domestic ``enemies''-- rhetoric unbecoming of a President of the United States.

In less than a year, ``restoring the soul of America'' has become this: Agree with me or you are a bigot. Agree with me or you are a bigot--from lowering the temperature to invoking totalitarian States and the Civil War.

This inflammatory rhetoric was not an attempt to persuade skeptical Democrat or Republican Senators. This whole display--this whole display--in fact, you could not invent a better advertisement for the legislative filibuster than a President abandoning rational persuasion for pure demagoguery. You could not invent a better advertisement for the legislative filibuster than what we have just seen: a President abandoning rational persuasion for pure--pure--demagoguery.

A President shouting that 52 Senators and millions of Americans are racist unless he gets whatever he wants is proving exactly why the Framers built the Senate to check his power.

This whole display is the best possible argument for preserving-- preserving--the Senate rules that extend deliberation, force bipartisan compromise, and let cooler heads prevail. Nothing proves it better than this episode. It offers a perfect case study in why Senator Biden was right about the filibuster and President Biden is wrong.

One respected scholar explained it this way:

The smallest majority we've ever seen in our politics is

trying to change the rules for how people get elected in

every [single] state. . . . That's just about the best

argument for the filibuster you could possibly imagine.

The citizens of the greatest country in the world deserve for their elected officials to treat them like grownups. The adults of America deserve to hear from the adults in Washington, DC.

I will close with some basic truths.

Obviously, our country is more divided than it should be, no doubt.

In recent years, I have vocally criticized people across the political spectrum who have sought to legitimatize elections when they win and delegitimize democracy when they are polling badly or when they lose.

I criticized the top Democrats' hysteria after 2016, when their rhetoric had 66 percent of Democrats across America falsely convinced that Russia had hacked our voting machines and changed the tallies. Sixty-six percent of Democrats thought that after 2016. I criticized Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats who spent the runup to 2020 hyping conspiracy theories and suggesting the election would presumptively be illegitimate if their side lost.

In December 2020 and January of last year, our side of the aisle defended our constitutional process despite political pressure, and we had, of course, a literal mob. But now it is President Biden and Leader Schumer and other Washington Democrats who don't like their poll numbers. So they are reversing their tune yet again. The people who spent November 2020 through January 2021 preaching sermons about the strength and the sanctity of our democracy are now undertaking to delegitimize the next election in case they lose it.

We have a sitting President--a sitting President--invoking the Civil War, shouting about totalitarianism and labeling millions of Americans his domestic enemies.

We have a Senate Democratic leader who now frequently calls American elections ``a rigged game.''

Look, this will not be repaired with more lies, more outrage, and more rulebreaking.

Unfortunately, President Biden has rejected the better angels of our nature. So it is the Senate's responsibility to protect the country. This institution was constructed as a firewall against exactly-- exactly--the kind of rage and false hysteria we saw on full display yesterday. It falls to the Senate to put America on a better track. It falls to us. So this institution cannot give in to dishonorable tactics. We cannot surrender to this recklessness. We have to stand up, stand strong, protect the Senate, and defend the country.

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

Mr. President, something disturbing is happening in Washington this week. A group of politicians are trying to set aside election results, overrule American voters, and break--break--our institutions to get a political outcome they want.

I am speaking, of course, about the Senate Democratic leader and the radical left. The Senate Democratic leader is trying to bully his own Members into breaking their word, breaking the Senate, and silencing the voices of millions of citizens so that one political party can take over our Nation's elections from the top down.

In January 2021, a mob tried to intimidate and change the Senate, and they failed. In January of 2021, the Senate stayed true to itself, and it stood strong.

But in January of 2022, some of the Senate's own Members want to permanently damage this institution from within. They want to shatter its central feature. The Democratic leader is using fake hysteria--fake hysteria--about 2021 State laws to justify a power grab he began floating actually back in 2019 and an election takeover that was first drafted in 2019.

President Biden has spread so much misinformation about the basic facts of State voting laws that he was called out and debunked by-- listen to this--the Washington Post. A sitting President of the United States who pledged to lower the temperature and unite America now invokes the brutal racial hatred of Jim Crow segregation to smear--to smear--States whose new voting laws are more accessible than, for example, Delaware. Ten days of early voting and excuse-only absentees in Delaware is just fine, but 17 days of

early voting and no-excuse absentees in Georgia is racist Jim Crow?

The Senate Democratic leader pretends it is a civil rights crisis that Georgia has enshrined more early voting and more absentee balloting than his own State of New York has ever allowed. This is misinformation. It is a Big Lie designed to reduce faith in our democracy, justify a top-down election takeover, and justify smashing the Senate itself. Some years back, a veteran Democratic Senator explained:

[The] nuclear option is ultimately an example of the

arrogance of power . . . [it] would transform the Senate from

the so-called cooling saucer our Founding Fathers talked

about . . . to a purer majoritarian body.

That was then-Senator Joe Biden. He continued:

At its core, the filibuster is not about stopping a nominee

or a bill, it is about compromise and moderation.

Now, before President Biden abruptly reversed this position he held for decades, he was actually in very good company. Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the legendary Senate institutionalist, was this crucial tradition's fiercest defender. The current Democratic leader has tried to invoke Senator Byrd in support of this push to vandalize the Senate. This is more misinformation. Senator Byrd went out of his way to rebut Leader Schumer's arguments, years in advance. Here is a direct quote from Senator Byrd:

Proponents of the so-called nuclear option cite several

instances in which they inaccurately allege that I blazed a

procedural path toward an inappropriate change in Senate

rules. They're dead wrong--

Said Senator Byrd--

Dead wrong. They draw analogies where none exist and create

cockeyed comparisons that fail to withstand even the

slightest intellectual scrutiny.

That is how Senator Byrd felt about it. Down to his final public statements before his death in 2010, Senator Byrd was completely consistent:

I oppose cloture by a simple majority, because it would

immediately destroy the uniqueness of this institution . . .

minority rights would cease to exist in the U.S. Senate.

Senator Byrd, shortly before his death.

That Democratic leader knew how to serve and protect the Senate.

This Democratic leader wants power so badly he will misrepresent his own late predecessor if it helps him get it. Senator Byrd's successor, the current senior Senator from West Virginia, has eloquently restated the very same points. Our colleague Senator Manchin published an op-ed explaining why ``there is no circumstance in which I will vote to eliminate or weaken the filibuster''--Senator Manchin.

He pointed out that finding compromise across party differences and differing regional interests was ``never supposed to be easy . . . but it is the work we were elected to do.'' He noted that current rules guarantee ``that rural and small states and the Americans who live in them . . . always have a seat at the table.''

Our colleague also pointed out that the 60-vote threshold keeps Federal law durable and predictable:

If the filibuster is eliminated or budget reconciliation

becomes the norm, a new and dangerous precedent will be set

to pass sweeping, partisan legislation every time there is a

change in political control . . . our nation may never see

stable governing again.

This has been a key point for Senators on both sides going back generations. In his farewell address before retirement, our former colleague, Lamar Alexander, put it this way: The Senate rules exists to ``force broad agreements on controversial issues that become laws that most of us will vote for and that a diverse country will accept.''

In other words, major changes need major buy-in. Otherwise, every policy would ping-pong wildly whenever the gavels change hands.

This is a point which our colleague, the senior Senator from Arizona, has explained powerfully. As Senator Sinema wrote just a few months ago, ``the 60-vote threshold . . . compels moderation and helps protect the country from wild swings . . . and radical reversals in Federal policy.''

Sometimes the effect of the filibuster is to block bills outright. Republicans are using the tool to stop one-party election takeovers. In 2020, Democrats used it to kill Senator Tim Scott's police reform bill. But as President Biden argued decades ago, the filibuster is about more than what gets blocked. It shapes almost everything the Senate actually does pass. It gives all kinds of citizens and all kinds of States a meaningful voice in nearly everything.

By breaking the Senate, this Democratic leader wants to silence the voices of millions and millions of Americans. He wants to throw whole regions of the country into a political power outage because those voters don't agree with his radicalism. We will see which Senators have the courage and the principle to put a stop to it.

Finally, on a more practical level, I want to make something very, very clear. Fifty Republican Senators, the largest possible minority, have been sent here to represent the many millions of Americans whom Leader Schumer wants so badly to leave behind. So if my colleagues try to break the Senate to silence those millions of Americans, we will make their voices heard in this Chamber in ways that are more inconvenient for the majority and this White House than what anybody has seen in living memory.

Last year, the Senate passed major bipartisan legislation on infrastructure, on hate crimes, on government funding, on competing with China. Last year, Senators helped speed through noncontroversial nominations.

So what would a postnuclear Senate look like? I assure you, it would not be more efficient or more productive. I personally guarantee it.

Do my colleagues understand how many times per day the Senate needs and gets unanimous consent for basic housekeeping? Do they understand how many things would require rollcall votes, how often the minority could demand lengthy debate?

Our colleagues who are itching for a procedural nuclear winter have not even begun to contemplate how it would look. Our colleagues who are itching to drain every drop of collegiality from this body have not even begun to consider how that would work.

If the Democratic leader tries to shut millions of Americans and entire States out of the business of governing, the operations of this body will change. Oh, yes, that much is true. But not in ways that reward the rulebreakers, not in ways that advantage this President, this majority, or their party--I guarantee it.