Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dr. Mary Schuh, a fellow in my Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 115th Congress.

Mr. President, I come to the floor to take a few minutes to address the deeply harmful bill House Republicans announced yesterday to be put in place, TrumpCare. Since the election, I have had constituent after constituent come up to me with tears in their eyes wondering what the future holds for their healthcare. They are worried about losing coverage, wondering how they are going to make ends meet if their premiums spike, and they are worried that without protections laid out in the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies will once again have more power to decide what kinds of care are and are not covered.

My constituents and people across the country were listening when President Trump said he would provide ``insurance for everybody'' that would be higher quality and lower cost. They heard Senate Republicans say it is important any new healthcare plan ``do no harm.'' They even saw House Republicans reassure them that they wouldn't ``pull the rug out'' from under anyone on ObamaCare.

This legislation that has now been rolled out represents a broken promise to patients and families. It will leave them sicker, more vulnerable to the chaos Republicans are creating within our healthcare system, and less financially secure. Millions of people who only just gained Medicaid coverage will lose it. Premiums could increase as much as 30 percent for people who lose coverage because they are too sick to work or become unemployed. People struggling with mental illness and substance abuse disorders, including opioid addiction, which is ravaging States nationwide, may find their insurance no longer has to cover the treatment they need. Key public health programs that families across the country rely on would be slashed.

TrumpCare would be a disaster for our workers and our families, but let's be clear about whom it does work for: those at the top. TrumpCare not only harms the same workers and families Republicans promised to help, it does so in order to reduce the tax burden for the wealthiest and for the insurance companies. In fact, this bill even includes a payout for insurance company executives. This is the definition of taking our healthcare system backward.

I also want to make it clear what TrumpCare will mean specifically for women. As someone who has fought time after time to protect women's ability to make their own healthcare decisions, I can tell you, this bill is a wish list by and for the extreme politicians who insist on telling women what to do with their own bodies. It will defund Planned Parenthood. It will undermine key protections for women's healthcare that were included in the Affordable Care Act. By slashing Medicaid, this bill will take coverage away from low-income women and women of color who disproportionately rely on Medicaid to get the care they need.

I cannot oppose this bill more strongly, and I am going to be doing everything I can to fight back against it. I know Senate Democrats are ready to do so as well, and I urge any Republican who is truly concerned about their constituent's health, their well-being, and their financial security, rather than just partisan politics, to do the right thing and join us.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I come to the floor actually on behalf of students across the country, and for those who are so passionate about their education that they want to dedicate themselves to teaching, and to urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution and support strong and accountable teacher preparation in America today.

While this rule may not be the rule that any of us would have written on our own, it is important.

Let me say at the outset that there are many great teacher prep programs that exist around our country, and they are doing a great job preparing our teachers to succeed in the classroom, but there are also teacher preparation programs out there that are struggling and need support to help make sure they produce great teachers for our schools.

Now, as a former preschool teacher and as a mom, I know how important it is to have great teachers in our classrooms, and I understand how a good education, with an amazing teacher, can change a child's life. I am sure all of our colleagues think back on that one special teacher they had who shaped their mind and changed their life. They teach us not only how to read and write and do arithmetic, but good teachers teach us how to think critically, how to be creative, how to form an argument. I know I am not alone in saying that I owe much of what I have to the quality of the public education I received growing up, and I have spent my career fighting to make sure every child in America has the same opportunity I did.

Unfortunately, too many teaching students today are forced to take out huge amounts of student loans to afford continuing their education so they can realize their dream. They are willing to make this sacrifice. They don't complain. The very least we can do for those who want to become teachers is to make sure they are actually getting their money's worth when they make an investment in themselves.

That is what this rule does. It helps make sure students can make informed decisions about the quality and preparedness of their education.

Here are a few of the ways this rule does that--and I am hoping my colleagues will see that this shouldn't be controversial. This rule strengthens and streamlines reporting requirements of teacher prep programs to focus on employment placement and retention of graduates. It provides information from employers to future teacher candidates so they can make an informed decision about their education by choosing a school that improves the likelihood they will find employment after graduation. It makes sure that prospective teachers can access this information they need before they take out massive amounts of student debt.

When teacher programs are struggling, this rule helps States identify at-risk and low-performing programs so States can provide them the support they need to adapt or adjust their programs and help their teaching students succeed.

There is one more reason I would urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution today. Simply put, it would put more power into the hands of Secretary DeVos, and many of us don't yet have the trust that she would use that power to promote the best interests of students in higher education. Secretary DeVos does not come from a higher education background. We don't know whether she supports providing information on teacher placement rates and retention rates before prospective teachers take out student loans. We have no idea what she would do if this rule went away, and I believe it would be too risky to find out.

By investing in our teachers, we are investing in our future generations. Our future teachers have the right to know whether they are receiving a quality education, and they deserve to know that before they take out massive amounts of student debt.

It helps to improve teacher prep program accountability and gives prospective teachers the information they need to make an accurate decision on which program is most likely to make them a successful teacher in the classroom.

It ensures that Secretary DeVos does not have more power to implement unknown policies that could hurt students and reduce the number of qualified great teachers in our public schools.

Without this rule and the information that it ensures, students will have a hard time finding a quality teacher prep program that will help them get a job after they graduate. I think that is simply wrong. We should be working to make sure teaching students have full access to information and options. This rule would give them less.

For all the future teachers out there, I urge my fellow Senators to vote against this CRA because every young adult deserves to know that the program they enroll in is actually preparing them to be a successful teacher in the classroom, and every student deserves to have an amazing teacher in every classroom.

Every Student Succeeds Bill

Finally, Mr. President, I wish to bring up one more thing that is very important to me--the bipartisan Every Student Succeeds Act--and a potential serious threat to it. It seems that Republicans are thinking about bringing to the floor another CRA that would eliminate the rule that provides States with flexibility and guidelines to create their State plans. I want to be very clear. I hope Republicans reconsider that approach.

The Every Student Succeeds Act is a critical part of our bipartisan education law. It is an important part of the civil rights protections it offers, as well as the assurances it made that every student would have an opportunity to succeed, no matter where they live or how they learn or how much money parents make. Jamming through that resolution would weaken it, and it would be a major step toward turning our bipartisan law into another partisan fight.

Rolling back the Every Student Succeeds Act rule less than a month before States have to submit their plans to the Department of Education will cause chaos and confusion in the States, and it will hurt our students, our teachers, and our schools. It will also give Secretary DeVos greater control over that bipartisan Every Student Succeeds Act and give her the tools to implement her anti-public education agenda.

Secretary DeVos's lack of experience and expertise, as well as her damaging track record on school privatization, leaves her unqualified to implement this bipartisan law that governs public education and public schools without the important guardrails that rule ensures. Given her record and her comments, she would almost certainly push for measures that disregard key civil rights protections in the Every Student Succeeds Act and could allow unequal, unfair, and unreliable accountability for schools across the country.

The Every Student Succeeds Act rule is supported by Democrats and Republicans, by teachers and businesses, and by parents and communities. We should not go backward.

I urge my colleagues to reconsider moving forward with that resolution, which I understand they want to bring up later this week, and work with us to continue building on that bipartisan progress that we all worked toward for our students.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 7 minutes.

Mr. President, before I talk about the Republican's reckless move tonight to roll back important worker protections, I do want to address the President's revised immigration Executive order that he signed just hours ago. He may have rearranged some words, but make no mistake, this is still a ban on Muslims. It still flies in the face of everything this country is about and what we stand for.

Slamming the door shut on refugees and immigrants, no questions asked, is un-American. Just like we saw in January, people across this country are already standing up and saying once again this is wrong, and we will not tolerate broad orders that target some of the most vulnerable people in the world.

I urge the President, if you truly want to keep our country safe, work with us, but we will not sit idly by as you continue to push a hateful agenda that betrays our American values.

Mr. President, I want to turn to the vote that is going to occur shortly here on the floor. I thank all of my colleagues who will be joining me this evening. When President Trump was running for office, he claimed he was going to be a President who fought for the middle class. He made a promise that he wasn't going to do what most Republicans have done in recent years and simply work for millionaires and billionaires. He was going to be different. He would be someone workers could count on.

We are just over a month into this Presidency, and it couldn't be clearer; President Trump is breaking that promise, whether it is his Cabinet picks or billionaires and Wall Street bankers and corporate CEOs or his rush to destroy our healthcare system and create chaos for families across our country or what Republicans have chosen to bring to the floor tonight: another effort that would hurt our workers, hurt the middle class, and hurt our economy.

Here is what I think we should be doing in Congress. We should be working on ways to boost economic security for more working families, and we should be helping our economy grow in the way that we know is strongest: from the middle out, not from the top down.

We have made some important progress over the last several years, but I think all of us on either side of the aisle agree there is a lot of work left to be done. That is certainly what has been clear to me as I have traveled across my home State of Washington, listening and meeting with workers and their families. Families are working hard. They are meeting their responsibilities, but far too many are still unable to get ahead.

Again, that is the topic we should be discussing tonight: how to support and empower more workers. Instead, we are here today because President Trump and my Republican colleagues either simply are not getting that message or they are too busy focusing on what is best for the folks already at the top, because today Republicans are poised to roll back a rule which helps protect our workers from wage theft, from discrimination, from unsafe workplaces, and more.

I want to take just a few minutes to make very clear what is at stake for millions of working families if Republicans roll back this rule. Each year, far too many workers are deprived of overtime wages or they are denied basic workplace protections. They have endured illegal discrimination, and they face unwarranted health or safety risks. That is unacceptable, and it has to come to an end.

Last year, Democrats, working with the previous administration, pushed to finalize what is now known as the fair pay and safe workplaces rule. For far too long, the government has awarded billions of taxpayer dollars to companies that rob workers of their paychecks and fail to maintain safe working conditions. This rule helps to right that wrong. Under this rule, when a company applies for a Federal contract, they will need to be upfront about their safety, health, and labor violations over the past 3 years. That way, government agencies can consider an employer's record of providing workers with a safe workplace and paying workers what they have earned before they grant or renew a Federal contract. To be clear, this does not prevent companies from winning Federal contracts. It does not single out companies. It does not deny companies the right to be heard. It simply improves transparency and coordination so government agencies are aware of companies' violations and can work with them to make sure they come into compliance with essential labor laws.

Again, the emphasis on this is not punishment but on helping bring more and more companies into compliance with the law and zeroing in on violations that are, and I quote from the rule: ``Serious, repeated, willful, or pervasive.'' Not only are these measures common sense, but they would have major benefits for our workers, our businesses and, by the way, our taxpayers. It would help hold the worst violators accountable.

American taxpayers should have the basic guarantee that their dollars are going to responsible contractors that will not steal from their workers or expose their workers to safety hazards. It would protect basic worker rights, and that, in turn, will help expand economic security for all working families, and it will level the playing field for businesses that do follow the law.

I think we can all agree that businesses shouldn't have to compete with bad actors that cut corners and put their workers' safety at risk or cheat their workers on their paychecks.

All of this, frankly, is pretty simple. When workers arrive on the job, they deserve to know they will be treated fairly, that they will be provided with a safe and healthy workplace, that their right to collective bargaining will be respected, and they will be paid all the wages they earned. Businesses that contract with the government should set an example when it comes to each of these concerns, and taxpayer dollars should only go to businesses that respect these fundamental worker protections.

As I said, time and again, families nationwide are sending a very clear message at marches, with phone calls and letters, online, and in their communities. They expect and are demanding that their representatives are truly committed to working for them. I, for one, am committed to standing with them. I know my colleagues are committed, and we are prepared to fight back.

Let's be clear, in rolling back these protections, President Trump and his party are yet again breaking their campaign promise to put our workers first. Workers will be hurt, wages will go down, rights will be undermined, lives will be put at risk. Tonight I am here to urge my Republican colleagues to drop this deeply harmful effort, reverse course, and stand with working families once and for all.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Washington State, who has made a really important case. I want to be here today to add my opinion, as well, because over the past 2 months we have heard a lot about President Trump's plan to drain the swamp, which is to reject special interests and the corporate elite and, instead, fight for workers across our country.

There are a whole lot of claims, a whole lot of promises--all great. Fighting for workers is what this Congress should be doing, but the President's actions speak a lot louder than his words. I find it telling that we are here again debating yet another Cabinet nominee sent over from the White House--this time Gov. Rick Perry--whose interests have been more closely aligned with those of Big Oil and corporations rather than advancing our country's energy challenges or fighting for the working families we represent.

So let me be clear. If confirmed to head up the Department of Energy, Governor Perry would join the ranks of other unqualified candidates chosen by this President to lead critically important agencies with very specific and complex functions. It is a big job. I believe that getting the top spot at the Department of Energy--or anywhere else in the President's Cabinet--should not simply be a prize for demonstrating loyalty during an election.

Getting the job should be borne of a solid understanding of the agency, a respect for the tens of thousands of workers they would lead, and, most importantly, a commitment to putting families across the country first. So as a voice from my home State of Washington, where DOE's presence is extremely important, I will vote no on Governor Perry's nomination. I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Washington State is home to the Hanford nuclear reservation near the Tri-Cities. Nearly 75 years ago, this region underwent a dramatic transformation, practically overnight and under top-secret conditions, to help the United States win World War II and later the Cold War.

Families and workers in this region of our State sacrificed immensely for the good of our country and the safety of our world. To this day, there is a massive environmental impact in the Tri-Cities created by decades of nuclear weapons production. Now this cleanup effort is vital, not only to the health and safety of families and workers and the economy in Central Washington but also for communities along the Colombia River.

As I have told anyone elected as President, whether Democrat or Republican, it is the Federal Government's moral and legal obligation and responsibility to clean up Hanford. I know that is not an easy feat, but it is essential. It requires a very deep understanding of a very large and complex cleanup project and a great deal of respect for the workers who show up each day to make progress on this massive project. I remain deeply concerned that Governor Perry and this administration fail to grasp what is at stake.

I am also concerned that they don't get the importance of another national asset not far from Hanford, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. For more than 50 years, the men and women at PNNL have been on the forefront of scientific discovery. It was originally created to support research and development at Hanford, but PNNL has become DOE's premiere chemistry, environmental sciences, and data analytics national lab, tackling some of our Nation's most complex and urgent challenges.

PNNL is a leader in atmospheric research, nuclear detection and nonproliferation, and the Nation's electric grid. Its researchers have taken on everything from high-performance computing to advanced biofuels to analyzing lunar samples from NASA. These are critically important functions that advance our Nation.

I have worked hard with the entire Washington State congressional delegation, not to mention a whole host of leaders at the local and State level, to support this vital research and development hub and its incredible workforce. Just like the workers at Hanford, they also deserve leaders in this administration who respect and value their work. So, if President Trump were truly looking out for workers across our country, he would take this nomination to the Energy Department very seriously.

I understand Governor Perry gave his word during his confirmation hearing that he would work with us and even come to Washington State to visit Hanford and PNNL. If he is confirmed by the Senate, you can bet I will hold him to that because one I thing I have learned in the short 40-plus days of this administration is that we do get a lot of words. But it is the action that truly matters.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. President, thank you, and thank you to some of my colleagues who are going to be joining me on the floor this afternoon.

The day after President Trump was inaugurated was one of the most inspiring I have ever gotten a chance to be part of. Millions of people, men and women, marched in Seattle, in Washington, DC, and in cities and towns in between. They carried signs, they chanted, and they made it absolutely undeniably clear that when it comes to women's rights and healthcare, people across the country do not want to go backward. Since then, they have continued to speak up and stand up.

But we are here today because Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress simply are not getting the message. I want to discuss one crucial example in particular--the possibility that in a matter of days, Senate Republicans could roll back a rule protecting family planning providers from being discriminated against and denied Federal funding.

Let me start by explaining a bit about what family planning providers mean to our community. These providers--part of the Title X program, which has bipartisan history--deliver critical healthcare services nationwide but are especially needed in rural and frontier areas. In 2015 alone, Title X provided basic primary and preventive healthcare services, such as Pap tests, breast exams, birth control, and HIV testing, to more than 4 million low-income women and men at nearly 4,000 health centers. In my home State of Washington, tens of thousands of patients are able to receive care at these centers each year. They often have nowhere else to turn for healthcare. In fact, 4 out of 10 woman who receive care at health centers funded by Title X consider it to be their only source of healthcare.

Taking resources away from these providers would be cruel. It would have the greatest impact on women and families who are most in need. But that is exactly what the law passed in the House, which is now on its way to the Senate, would mean. It would undo a valuable effort by the Obama administration to ensure that healthcare providers are evaluated for Federal funding based on their ability to provide the services in question, not ideology. In doing so, the bill would make it even easier for States, led by extreme politicians, to deny family planning providers Federal funding, not because of the quality of the care they provide or the value to the communities they serve but based on whether the politicians in charge agree that women should be able to exercise their constitutionally protected rights to safe, legal abortion.

It is the 21st century. It is time for politicians to stop telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. That is what the women and men who have been marching and speaking up all over our country believe. That is what I believe. It is what Democrats believe.

If Leader McConnell thinks he can rush this harmful legislative effort through without a fight, we are here to say he is wrong. He can expect Democrats and maybe even some Republicans who are concerned about losing healthcare providers in their own States to fight back. So today I am calling on the leader to commit right now to drop this effort and agree not to bring this bill to the floor. It is well past time that extreme Republicans end their damaging political attacks on women. I think the opportunity to start that is right this minute. So we urge him to take this action and not bring this to the floor. We want him to know that we are going to fight back every step of the way if he does.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to urge my colleagues to vote no on the nomination of Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, a nomination that marks yet another broken promise from the new President to put the needs of American families first over the wishes of big corporations and special interests. And just like we have seen with Betsy DeVos at the Department of Education or Steve Mnuchin at Treasury, we have yet another Trump nominee whose record demonstrates a direct conflict with the mission of the agency they wish to lead. On the EPA's website, that mission is pretty clear--``to protect human health and the environment''--and EPA achieves that by enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress. So I will be voting no on this nomination.

I want to make two points on why Mr. Pruitt heading up the EPA would be wrong for our country and why it would be wrong for the families I represent in Washington State. It starts with his record and clear conflicts of interest.

During Mr. Pruitt's term as the attorney general for Oklahoma, he filed no less than 19 cases to overturn environmental regulations, including one to topple the EPA's Clean Power Plan. These regulations specifically seek to protect public health by reducing harmful air and water pollution and are projected to save tens of thousands of lives each year.

As if it wasn't bad enough that Mr. Pruitt spent so much time filing lawsuits in court and fighting policies designed to protect the health of the environment as well as people, it is pretty shocking that at the same time, he was collecting millions of dollars from the very industries he will regulate if he is confirmed. This is no small conflict of interest between his former and potentially future position, and that he was still nominated to be EPA Administrator is mind-blowing to me.

I echo the sentiments of so many who have expressed serious concerns about Mr. Pruitt's conflict of interest, that his ties to the fossil fuel industry make him more indebted to backing policies that loosen environmental regulations, benefiting big oil and gas companies, rather than backing policies that protect the American people.

Mr. President, I want to voice another concern my constituents have shared with me. It is unnerving to think the President would choose a climate change denier to set our national environmental policy. I don't see how someone who has openly denied the existence of climate change-- the devastating effects of which we are already beginning to see in Washington State and around the country--will effectively protect human health or the environment.

This is about more than just the environment. A report by the Congressional Budget Office last year found that climate change is a serious threat to our economic stability. As the occurrence of national disasters continues to rise, the cost of disaster assistance and rebuilding rises too.

If we want to be responsible about tackling our fiscal challenges-- which I would think the President and Mr. Pruitt would agree on--we need to take the impacts of climate change seriously. At a time when we are already seeing the very real effects of climate change in my home State, from longer, more devastating wildfire seasons to ocean acidification and rising sea levels, it is more important than ever. This brings me to how Mr. Pruitt's confirmation would be devastating for my home State of Washington.

As someone who personally spends a great deal of time fishing and hiking in my home State of Washington, I am committed to conservation and preservation efforts so generations to come can appreciate the high quality of life we enjoy and experience the splendor of America's natural spaces, one of the most important being the restoration and recovery of salmon runs and habitat throughout the Pacific Northwest, which is a vital part of our Northwest economy and its heritage.

I am deeply concerned about whether this support would continue under an EPA Administrator like Mr. Pruitt. I have similar concerns about the Hanford cleanup, a critical part of our State's history that EPA plays a very important role in to protect the health and safety of our Tri- Cities community, Columbia River, and Washington State.

I will fight against any EPA nominee or an Administrator who will not join us in the fight for a better future for generations to come. I sincerely hope the President and Mr. Pruitt truly understand the enormous responsibility of the Environmental Protection Agency, not only in protecting our environment for future generations but for the families we represent who rely on clean air and clean water right now.

For the sake of our children and grandchildren, we need to act now to avoid lasting, irreversible damage to our health, our environment, our economy, and our country's future. I am not confident in putting that future in Scott Pruitt's hands.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the remainder of my postcloture debate time to Senator Carper.

Additionally, I yield the remainder of my time beyond that, of my postcloture debate time, to Senator Schumer.

Thank you very much.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to a close friend, ally, and devoted public servant as Gary Petersen retires from a more than 50-year career in support of our national security, environmental cleanup, and furthering the ever-changing missions of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL, in my home State of Washington.

A graduate of Omak High School in Okanogan County, Mr. Petersen first came to what is now known as the Tri-Cities in January 1960 as a servicemember stationed with the Nike Ajax missile site at the top of Rattlesnake Mountain. After a duty station transfer to Korea, he came home to Washington and attended Washington State University. With a communications degree in hand, Mr. Petersen had a job lined up with Ford Motor Company in 1965, but in a great stroke of luck for Washington State, he chose not to move to Detroit and instead got a job with Battelle, a company that had recently won a contract to operate a research and development lab--now PNNL--at Hanford in 1965. One could say that Mr. Petersen got in on the ground floor at PNNL when its scientists were providing critical support to win the cold war.

While at Battelle, Mr. Petersen worked in communications and was the manager of the news service. One of his chief responsibilities was to give tours of the Hanford site to new employees, elected officials and dignitaries, and later, foreign visitors. Congresswoman Catherine May, the first woman elected to Congress from Washington State, was the first Member of Congress Mr. Petersen gave a tour to, but she was certainly not the last. Senator Warren Magnuson, Speaker Tom Foley, and I, to name a few others, have all crisscrossed the Hanford site with Mr. Petersen. He even helped with President Richard Nixon's visit. By now, Mr. Petersen has probably given thousands of tours of Hanford, and many, including myself, have heard the stories from years past, from bumping into the woman who he would later marry during a tour, to the alligators, to bringing moon rocks from the Apollo 11 mission to Hanford for public display.

Mr. Petersen's work with nuclear management began in 1974 for Westinghouse on the construction, start-up, and operation of the Fast Flux Test Reactor and then the Washington Public Power Supply System, which is now Energy Northwest. After spending some time on the International Nuclear Safety Program through the U.S. Departments of Energy and State, Mr. Petersen returned to Battelle as the director of communications and administration at PNNL in the late 1980s.

When he retired from Battelle in 2002, Mr. Petersen was quickly recruited by Sam Volpentest to help him at the Tri-Cities Washington Economic Development Council in a part-time, volunteer capacity to travel to Washington, DC, to secure funding to support Hanford and PNNL. This part-time job quickly became a full-time job, and Mr. Petersen has been advocating on behalf of the Tri-Cities ever since. Since my first days in the Senate, I have worked with Mr. Petersen, and he has been a key ally during many a funding battle. He knows the budget as well as any staff member on the Appropriations Committee, and this isn't just limited to nuclear waste cleanup, but also includes research and development capabilities that support the PNNL mission, transportation, agriculture, and so much more.

It is clear to me that Washington State has benefited greatly from Mr. Petersen's vision and passion for sharing what the Tri-Cities community, its workforce, the Hanford site, and PNNL have to offer. I have seen this firsthand at home and here in the other Washington. His work is evident in the progress that has been made on environmental cleanup at Hanford, to charting out a future vision for the Tri-Cities that looks past cleanup operations to preserving history through designating the B Reactor as a National Historic Landmark and the Manhattan Project National Historical Park, to growing the workforce safety mission at the Volpentest Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response Federal Training Center, and to seeking out new, emerging opportunities like small modular reactors. Through it all, he has remained as committed as they come. Last October, when I had the good fortune to get one more tour with Mr. Petersen at the Hanford site, I saw that he still carried the same enthusiasm and pride for his work as what I had seen in him on my very first tour years ago.

Mr. Petersen has been critical to my work in the Senate and has made a tremendous impact on the Tri-Cities community, Washington State, and our Nation. Today I join with others throughout the State of Washington in thanking him for his many years of service. I congratulate Mr. Petersen on his retirement and wish him and his wife, Margaret, the best of luck as they write their next chapter.

Mr. President, before I begin to speak about the nomination before us right now, I did want to comment on the breaking news regarding the nomination of Andrew Puzder.

There is some good news today for workers and women and families in America. Back on the campaign trail, President Trump promised to put workers first, but from the start, it has been pretty clear that his nominee for Secretary of Labor, who has now withdrawn, was a clear signal that President Trump had no intention of keeping that promise, and instead he planned to rig his Cabinet with the staunchest allies for Wall Street--big corporations and special interests--that he could find.

So I am not surprised that when workers and families heard about the pride Mr. Puzder takes in objectifying women, that he called his own workers ``the best of the worst,'' and that his vision for our economy is one in which workers are squeezed so those at the top can boost their profits higher and higher, they said no. They spoke up loud and clear that they want a true champion for all workers in the Labor Department.

I just want to thank all the workers who bravely shared their stories in the last few months. It is clear today that your words are powerful, and I am going to keep bringing your voices here to the Senate, and we will keep fighting.

With that, Mr. President, I wanted to be here today to speak about OMB Director Nominee Mulvaney. I submitted comments on this nomination in the Budget Committee, and I want to bring them to the full Senate today.

I am here today to urge my colleagues to oppose Congressman Mulvaney. Mr. President, we all know that a budget is more than just numbers on a page; a budget represents our values and our priorities, the kind of Nation we are now and the kind of Nation we want to be.

Congressman Mulvaney is not shy about where he stands on this. When I sat down with him a couple of weeks ago, he made it very clear that he would use our budget to radically reshape our country in a way that I believe would be devastating to families, to seniors, to veterans, to the middle class, and to many others.

Congressman Mulvaney has said he wants to make drastic, radical cuts to Federal investments, trillions of dollars across the board. His budget proposals would slash Federal funding for education, leaving students across the country with fewer opportunities to learn and to succeed. They would cut investments in jobs and training, leaving our workers scrambling to keep up with the changing economy. They would eliminate support for children and families who need a hand up to get back on their feet. They would eliminate basic medical research that creates jobs and leads to lifesaving cures. They would continue the work President Trump has done to destroy healthcare in America and create even more chaos and confusion. They would lead to dramatic cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, betraying the commitments we have made to our seniors and so much more. He wants to do that while giving away even more tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations and has proposed raising the Social Security retirement age to 70, causing millions of Americans to drop under the poverty line. In other words, Congressman Mulvaney's nomination is another perfect example of how President Trump is breaking the promises he made on the campaign trail to stand with workers and seniors and the middle class.

Just a few years ago, Congressman Mulvaney was at the fringes of the Republican Party. He is one of the most extreme members of the tea party wing of the party who supported the government shutdown when others were working to end it; who failed to show the proper concern about a potentially catastrophic breach of the debt limit and remains cavalier even now, telling me he would advise the President against accepting a clean debt limit; who, by the way, isn't even willing to support the budget deal I reached with Speaker Ryan. He is someone whom responsible members of his own Republican Party scorned just a few years ago and whose budget ideas they rejected as damaging, unworkable, and political suicide. But now he is the person whom Republicans are holding up as a budget leader.

As we see this nomination, as we see Republicans use the budget process to slam through a partisan plan to destroy our healthcare system, it is clearer than ever how far the Republican Party has moved, even from the days of our bipartisan budget deal.

Finally, I am extremely troubled by Congressman Mulvaney's failure to pay taxes and comply with the law. I know I am not the only one who has been here long enough to see Cabinet nominees withdraw over less egregious breaches than this. Congressman Mulvaney's motivations, explanations, and defenses have not been credible. It is hard to believe that every single one of my Republican colleagues feels comfortable with someone with such a serious lapse of judgment in charge of the budget of this administration.

I voted against Congressman Mulvaney in the Budget Committee for those reasons and more, and I am here today to oppose his nomination, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Certainly, we can do better than this.

Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Madam President, before I begin, I wish to note my disappointment about how rushed the consideration of this nominee has been. Calls for a thorough investigation into Congressman Price's ethically questionable and potentially illegal health trades have been ignored.

Hundreds of questions HELP Committee Democrats asked Congressman Price as part of the official committee process have gone unanswered, and the vote to advance Congressman Price's nomination to the floor took place without Democrats getting any notice--a clear break from long-standing committee rules. Unfortunately, those are just a few of the examples.

It is clear that Senate Republicans are doing everything they can to protect President Trump's nominees from tough questions, which is only helping him rig his Cabinet against workers and families. That is really concerning, especially on issues as critical as our families' health and well-being.

As I have said before, when I evaluate a nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, I am interested in whether that person has a record of putting people first--not politics, partisanship, or those at the top. I want to know they put science first--not ideology. Critically, I consider whether their plans for health care in our country will help more families lead healthy, fulfilling, and secure lives, or take us backwards.

Unfortunately, I am very concerned that Congressman Price falls far short in these categories and that his nomination sends another clear signal: President Trump is setting up his Cabinet to run our country in a way that benefits those at the top and their allies, but it really hurts the workers and families we all serve.

I will start with women's health and reproductive rights. I believe that when women have access to quality, affordable health care, when they can afford contraception and exercise their constitutionally protected rights to make their own choices about their own bodies, our country is stronger for it. That is because access to health care, which includes reproductive health care, is fundamental to women's economic independence and opportunity. When women have more resources, more freedom, and more ability to give back in whatever way they choose, we move forward as a country.

Congressman Price has a long record of fighting to take women's health care in the wrong direction. He has advocated for defunding Planned Parenthood, our country's largest provider of women's health care, time and again. He has been determined, since the start, to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, which has really helped millions of women gain coverage and essential benefits. Especially given his background in medicine, he has displayed a shocking lack of understanding when it comes to the need for continued work to help women access birth control. He even suggested there ``was not one'' woman who couldn't afford contraception.

Well, I have certainly heard the opposite. I know for a fact now that Congressman Price has, too, because I made sure to tell him about my constituent Shannon in our hearing.

Shannon has endometriosis and would have struggled to afford contraception, which is often used to treat that condition, were it not for Planned Parenthood. How can a Secretary of Health and Human Services, who won't listen to stories like Shannon's and who can't understand their need to access basic health care, possibly be trusted to work for all of our communities?

Unfortunately, there is more. While President Trump has magically promised now insurance for everybody that is both lower cost and higher quality, Congressman Price's plans would do the exact opposite. From the start, he has led the fight for repealing the Affordable Care Act, even though Republicans cannot agree on what they as a party would do to replace it.

Congressman Price's own proposals, however, would cause millions of people to lose coverage, increase the cost of care, and leave people with preexisting conditions vulnerable to insurance companies rejecting them or charging them more.

I am hearing constantly from the families who are scared about what the future holds for their health care, given Republicans' rush to rip apart our health care system, and plans like Congressman Price's, which would leave so many so vulnerable, are simply not the answer.

Donald Trump campaigned on promises to protect Medicare and Medicaid, but Congressman Price said that he wants to voucherize Medicare in the first 6 to 8 months of the administration, ending the guarantee of full coverage so many seniors and people with disabilities rely on. He has put forward policies that would shift $1 trillion in Medicaid costs to our States, squeezing their budgets and taking coverage away from struggling children and workers, and people with disabilities, and families.

While President-Elect Trump has said that Medicare should be able to negotiate lower drug prices for seniors, Congressman Price has repeatedly opposed efforts to do so. He even went so far as to call legislation to address high drug prices ``a solution in search of a problem.''

Well, I couldn't disagree more.

In addition, I am deeply concerned about Congressman Price's extreme approach to key public health challenges, including his history of opposing regulations to keep tobacco companies from luring children into addiction.

In fact, it is hard to imagine who in America would be better off under Congressman Price's leadership at HHS--certainly not women who can no longer be charged more than men for the same health care; children or their families who get peace of mind from having coverage through the exchanges or Medicaid; workers who know they can still get coverage, even if they find themselves between jobs; communities that count on public health protection; or seniors who shouldn't have to pay more for prescription drugs or worry about what the future holds for Medicare.

All in all, Congressman Price's vision for our health care system is, to me, disturbingly at odds with the needs of families I hear from every day. But what makes this nomination even more troubling are the serious ethics questions that have not been resolved as it has been jammed through the Senate. I would hope that any Member of Congress-- Republican or Democrat--would take seriously the need to ensure that incoming Cabinet Secretaries are free from conflicts of interest, fully prepared to put the public interest first, and have demonstrated a commitment to service for the sake of service, rather than a pattern of mixing personal financial gain with public office. Unfortunately, when it comes to this nomination, Senate Republicans have avoided those questions at every turn.

When reports first came out that Congressman Price had traded more than $300,000 in medical stocks while working on legislation that could impact companies whose stocks he had purchased--including one whose largest shareholder, Representative Chris Collins, encouraged Price to invest in--Democrats called for an investigation before this nomination could move forward. Senate Republicans refused to join us. When outside consumer advocacy groups and an ethics counsel raised concerns, Senate Republicans went ahead with the hearings. The day before a vote on his nomination in committee, when a story broke indicating that Congressman Price misled members of our HELP and Finance Committees in responding to their questions about his investments, Senate Republicans met secretly to jam his nomination through in a closed-door vote.

Congressman Price and Republicans have insisted that everything Congressman Price did was above board and legal. I certainly hope that is the case, but we shouldn't have to take their word for it, and neither should the families and communities we serve. I am deeply disappointed that so many of my Republican colleagues appear to be willing to overlook the need for a thorough independent investigation.

Congressman Price's backward views on women's health, his harmful vision for our health care in our country, and the ethical questions that remain unresolved even as this nomination is headed to a vote, I will be voting against Congressman Price for Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, over the last few weeks, people across the country have continued to make their voices heard in opposition to the nomination of Betsy DeVos--moms and dads, grandmothers and grandfathers, students young and old, and cities, towns, urban, suburban, and rural communities. People are standing up and they will not be silenced. Thousands upon thousands have joined protests in their communities. Hundreds of thousands have emailed or called their Senators, jamming our phone lines, swamping the voicemail system, and shattering records. Millions have engaged on social media, sharing information with their friends, signing petitions, and pressuring their elected officials.

It has made a difference. Every single Democrat will be standing with their constituents and opposing Betsy DeVos. Just last week, two Republicans announced their opposition as well. I can tell you I know for a fact there are other Republicans who are feeling the heat and could come around.

This nomination is dead even right now, on the razor's edge. Fifty Senators, Democrats and Republicans will vote to reject Betsy DeVos. We need just one more Republican to join us, to stand on the side of students, parents, and public education in America and say no to Betsy DeVos.

I come to the floor to kick off the final day of debate on this nomination. On Friday, I spoke at length, making my case for why the Senate should oppose Betsy DeVos. Democrats will hold the floor for the next 24 hours, until the final vote, to do everything we can to persuade just one more Republican to join us.

I strongly encourage people across the country to join us. Double down on your advocacy, keep making your voices heard for these last 24 hours.

Over the past 3 weeks, I have heard a number of Republicans wonder why Democrats and so many parents and teachers across the country were so focused on this nomination in this moment. President Trump has done so much in these first few weeks, and so many of his people he has nominated to run critical agencies have not been people I can support, but what is it about Betsy DeVos that has inspired so much grassroots energy and opposition across this country?

I think I understand. It is very clear to me. For the vast majority of people across the country, public education isn't just another issue, it is different. For those of us who owe everything we have to the strong public education we received, for those who saw our children and grandchildren move through our public schools, for those of us who walked into a public classroom ourselves to teach or have friends or family who have dedicated their lives to teaching, for those of us who see the role strong public schools play in our communities, especially our rural communities, often offering an educational and a community resource where it simply wouldn't otherwise be offered, we believe that a commitment to strong public schools is part of America's core, the idea that every student in every community should have the opportunities that strong public schools offer. This is a notion that is embedded in our values. It is who we are. It is in our blood.

For those people across the country who feel that way, who believe those things, the nomination of Betsy DeVos truly hits close to home. It was a slap in the face because she doesn't approach this the way most of us do. She doesn't cherish public education. She doesn't value it. She is someone who has dedicated her career and her inherited fortune to privatizing public schools, to tearing down public education, to defunding it in order to push more taxpayer dollars into private schools and for-profit charters. She has called public education ``a dead end.'' Where she sits from a distance, she has called it ``an embarrassment.'' She has disparaged those who work in our public schools, saying our best and our brightest ``steer clear.'' She has said education is ``an industry.''

An industry? Well, for someone such as she, a billionaire, rightwing activist who spent her career and inherited fortune buying and selling companies, she just doesn't understand an ``industry'' that isn't focused on profits and that doesn't exist in the free market. When people across the country hear someone such as Betsy DeVos say these things about public education, when they hear a rightwing conservative billionaire more focused on her antigovernment ideology than helping our students, when they see that someone who spent her career trying to destroy public schools has been nominated to lead the Federal Agency dedicated to public education, they start to pay some attention.

In a Senate hearing, when they see that person so clearly lack any of the issues, when they see her unable to explain basic concepts in education policy, unwilling to make basic commitments to not privatizing or defunding our public schools, confused about the need for Federal protections for students with disabilities and so committed to a rightwing agenda that she pointed to the need for guns in our schools to protect against ``potential grizzly bears'' in response to a question from a Senator representing the Newtown families, people across the country pay even more attention, and they start to make their voices heard.

I am not surprised that opposition to Betsy DeVos has caught fire across the country. I am not surprised people are talking about it to their friends, writing letters to the Senators, and showing up to protest when they have never done anything like that before because this is about their kids, their schools, and their communities. It is about the core idea that we are a nation that invests in strong public education and one that strives to guarantee the promise and opportunity it affords to every student in our country--not that public education is perfect, of course not. We have a lot of work to do, but that work should be directed toward strengthening public schools, not tearing them down. Public education is something that should be valued as an important piece of the fabric of this Nation and the expansion of our middle class, not scorned and ridiculed by billionaires who never had any use for it themselves.

Friday I spent a lot of time on the floor laying out my case in detail opposing Betsy DeVos. I talked about the open questions that are remaining regarding her tangled finances and potential conflicts of interest. I ran through the strong concerns with her record, her lack of experience, and her lack of clear understanding of basic education issues. I discussed my strong belief that her vision for education in America is deeply at odds with where parents, students, and families across our country want to go. I went through the process of how Republicans jammed this nominee through our committee, cutting corners and doing everything possible to protect her from scrutiny. I will not go through all of that again now, but I do want to make one more point, one I hope will be compelling to my Republican friends who are still resisting pressure from their constituents and sticking with Betsy DeVos; that is, no matter what you think about Betsy DeVos's policy ideas, no matter what you think of her qualifications to run this agency, no matter

what you think about her personal understanding of the issues or her financial entanglements, one thing is very clear; if she is confirmed, she would enter this job as the most controversial and embattled Secretary in the history of this Department. She would start this job with no credibility inside the agency she is supposed to lead, with no influence in Congress, as the punch line in late-night comedy shows, and without the confidence of the American people.

A vote for Betsy DeVos is a vote for a Secretary of Education who is likely to succeed only in further dividing us on education issues and who may try to take steps to try to implement her anti-student agenda but would do so with people across the country. So many of us in the Senate are on guard and ready to fight back.

I urge my Republican friends--and we just need one more--let's cut this off right now. Let's ask President Trump to send us someone who is qualified, who understands the issues, and who truly cares about public education. Together, let's stand with our constituents and say no to Betsy DeVos.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, over the course of this debate, over the last 9 hours, plus 6 hours on Friday of the 30 hours that we have on this, many Senators have come to the floor to talk about their concerns about the nomination of Betsy DeVos to be Secretary of Education.

There are open questions about her extensive financial entanglements. There are open questions and a clear concern about her lack of understanding of basic education issues. We have heard that time and again, as well as the many ways in which her vision for our education system is really at odds with where families and communities nationwide want us to go.

But let me take just a moment to focus on one major concern in particular. It is a public health threat that I know is deeply concerning for families and communities across this country, and that is the epidemic of sexual violence on our college campuses. One out of five women and 1 out of 71 men are sexually assaulted while in college. In 2013 alone, college campuses reported 5,000 forcible sex offenses, and a recent study indicated that number could be much greater.

There should be no question that sexual violence on our campuses is a great, widespread, and unacceptable problem--one that I expect any incoming Secretary of Education to be informed about, to be concerned about, and committed unequivocally to confronting head-on.

Much of the discussion so far has been about the commitment of a Secretary of Education to our K-12 system. Serious concerns have been raised, but it is important to know in this debate that the Secretary of Education also has responsibility over our higher education institutions.

In our hearing, Betsy DeVos actually agreed with me that President Trump's horrifically offensive leaked comments from 2005 describe sexual assault. She was clear. But I was deeply disappointed, to say the least, in Mrs. DeVos's responses to simple questions about whether she would seek to continue the Obama administration's work to protect students and stand with survivors. When she was asked whether she would uphold the guidance issued under the Obama administration to hold schools accountable for stronger, more effective investigations of sexual assault, she wouldn't commit to that. She would not commit to that. When I asked her whether she would continue key transparency measures, like weekly public reports on active investigations into potentially mishandled sexual assault cases, she dodged the question.

These answers are especially concerning given that Mrs. DeVos has gone so far as to donate to an organization dedicated to rolling back efforts to better support survivors and increase accountability. Let me tell you that again. Mrs. DeVos has gone so far as to donate to an organization dedicated to rolling back efforts to better support survivors and increased accountability.

Let's be clear. The epidemic of sexual assaults on our college campuses means that in States across the country, students' basic human rights are being violated. I am deeply proud to see the work that has been done on this issue over the last few years. Survivors have bravely stepped up to make clear they expect far better from their schools and their communities. By speaking out, by being courageous and speaking out, they have shown other survivors they are not alone.

Key university leaders have made fighting campus sexual assault a top priority by developing new partnerships in their communities and prioritizing prevention. New measures to increase transparency and awareness went into effect in 2013 thanks to the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. These are hard-won steps forward on an issue where some Democrats and Republicans have finally been able to find common ground.

There is much more to do. The next Department of Education should not be standing on the sidelines, much less taking us backward on an issue that is so critical to student safety on campus.

So I hope that as my colleagues are listening to the debate here today, tonight, and tomorrow, that they consider what Mrs. DeVos's leadership at the Department of Education means on this issue, the issue of making sure men and women on our college campuses can go there to learn and not be worried about being a victim of sexual assault and having nowhere to turn and not have the confidence that their voices will be taken seriously.

On another area, nominees for Secretary of Education have largely been people, over the past, who were very committed to our students, who had long careers dedicated to education, and who were focused on keeping public education strong for all of our students and for all of our communities.

Public education is a core principle that our country was founded on, that no matter who you are, where you come from, or how much money you have, this country is going to make sure all young people get an education. That is how our country has been strong in the past. That is how our country has to be in the future. Free public education.

Well, Betsy DeVos is a very different nominee. She has spent her career and her fortune rigging the system to privatize and defund public education, which will hurt students in communities across our country. She is not personally connected to public school--except, by the way, through her work over the years trying to tear them down. She has committed herself for decades to an extreme ideological goal to push students out of our public schools and weaken public education.

I can talk at length about Betsy DeVos's record of failure and her devastating impact on students, but all people really need to do is watch her hearing in our Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Just go back and watch the hearing. This was a hearing that people across the country heard about--and for good reason--from local newspapers, to local news, to ``The Daily Show,'' to ``The View,'' and posts that went viral on social media. A lot of people in our country heard Betsy DeVos for the first time in that hearing. They were not impressed.

She refused to rule out slashing investments in our public schools. She was confused that Federal law provides protections for students with disabilities. She did not understand the basic issues in education policy or the debate surrounding whether students should be measured based on their proficiency or their growth. She argued, as we have all heard, that guns needed to be allowed in schools across the country to ``protect from grizzlies.'' Even though she was willing to say that President Trumps's behavior toward women should be considered sexual assault, as I just talked about, she would not commit to actually enforcing Federal law protecting women and girls in our schools. Her hearing, quite frankly, was a disaster. It was so clear to millions of families how little she really understood about education issues.

I have to tell you, as a former preschool teacher myself and a former school board member, someone who got my start in politics fighting for strong public schools, as a Senator committed to standing strong for public education in America, as a mother and a grandmother who really cares deeply about the future of our students and our schools, I know that we can and we must do better for our children and our students and our parents and our teachers.

The decision we are making here on whether to confirm Betsy DeVos for Education Secretary will help set the course for our public education system for years to come. So I hope, again, that our colleagues are listening to this debate and thinking about it and not just voting rotely on this. This is so important.

Quite frankly, I am disappointed that our Republican colleagues have moved us so fast into this debate. I have been in the Senate a long time. I know what the usual practices are when we go through hearings and listen to nominees from Presidents who are Republican and Democrat, Republican majorities and Democratic majorities. I was here when the Senate was 50-50. There are practices we have to make sure that all Senators get the information they need so they can make a wise decision with their vote for which they will be held accountable.

Quite frankly, the usual practices here were really being ignored. The right thing to do was being ignored. This nominee was jammed through like I have seen none other. Corners were being cut. The minority was being brushed aside. I really think that is wrong.

Earlier this month, Republicans on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee scheduled Mrs. DeVos's hearing even though she had not yet finished her standard ethics paperwork and even though she had not and still, by the way, has not answered my questions about her financial disclosures to our committee. In fact, when we started the hearing, the Republican chairman, the senior Senator from Tennessee, whom I have worked with greatly--we worked together to pass the replacement of No Child Left Behind. I have a tremendous amount of respect for him. But I was shocked and surprised when he preemptively declared that he would be limiting questions for each Senator to just 5 minutes--a shocking and disappointing breach of committee tradition, clearly intended to limit public scrutiny.

Mrs. DeVos is a billionaire. She has extraordinarily complicated and opaque finances, both in her own holdings and those in her immediate family. We know that she has invested in education companies, for- profit companies, for decades. Over 100 conflicts were identified. Her ethics paperwork raises questions about the company in which she plans to remain invested. She still, by the way, has not fully answered my questions about her committee paperwork.

As I told the Republican chairman at our markup, the process that has taken place on Mrs. DeVos's nomination is a massive break in the tradition of this body. We should not have had a vote in this committee until all Senators had received appropriate responses to reasonable questions and until a second hearing was held so that Senators could get these serious concerns addressed and do their job scrutinizing the nominee.

Understand, we had a hearing. We were limited to 5 minutes each. And we did not have all of the paperwork, so we could not do our homework to make sure we were asking the questions we needed that needed to have a public debate. So, again, that is another reason I am deeply concerned about this nominee. We do not yet know whether there are conflicts of interest.

For a Secretary of Education who wields tremendous power over our K- 12 system and our higher education system--as we all know, there have been tremendous questions over the past decade about access to higher education; whether you go to college and get the degree you have been promised; whether institutes have been responsible and accountable; and how we as the Senate and House can come together to make sure that when a student takes out a student loan or invests in a higher education institution, they know they are getting their money's worth and if there are taxpayer dollars involved, that the taxpayers are getting their money's worth as well. So conflicts of interest are extremely important to this nominee. To this point right now, here we are voting tomorrow, and we don't have the answers to those questions.

So these are just a few things. I have been out here on the floor to talk about them. We have heard from many of our other colleagues. It is no surprise to me that this has lit a firestorm across the country. Having a Secretary of Education, someone who is responsible for our children's education--schools are the center of our community. Community members own those schools in their minds. This is where they send their kids to school, where they have basketball games, music concerts. It is where the community comes together. Yes, we all complain about public education. Who hasn't? But at the end of day, we love our local schools, and we want them to know that the Secretary of Education--the highest person in the land to oversee them--has that love, too, and is there because they want to make them better, not because they want to tear them down.

So, yes, this nominee has taken off like no other because of her hearing, because of her conflicts, because she has attacked and gone after basic public education, which so many people

are proud of in their own communities and want to make better. So I, like everybody else, have heard from many of my constituents, more than I can ever remember in my entire Senate career. This has ignited a public storm. I want to share some stories from my constituents who have reached out and urged me to vote against Betsy DeVos because they know better than anybody why their school is so important to them, why their teachers are so important to them, why their children's public education is so important to them.

One of the major concerns I have continued to hear from my constituents about is her disconnect from the working class.

A woman from Marysville, WA, said: Betsy DeVos, a billionaire herself, does not represent the working class and certainly not her family experience with public education.

Betsy DeVos never attended public school or even sent her own children to public school.

In Olympia in my State, an employee at a high-poverty public school says she works with some of the most in-need children in the area. She is very concerned that Betsy DeVos's push toward a privatized public school system would only benefit those in wealthy communities and leave her most vulnerable students behind. She believes Betsy DeVos would absolutely not look out for their best interests.

In our rural communities, there is no private school to get that voucher and send your kids to. The policies she is pushing only mean that those schools will have taxpayer dollars taken away from them to send to other kids with vouchers to go to private schools, who live nearby or have the additional resources to use those vouchers to go to school.

A teacher in Seattle wrote to me with a story that I can't get out of my head. It really inspires me to keep going in this fight. This teacher serves preschoolers with special needs who face a number of challenges. She teaches at a title I school, where most families are low income, and many of them are immigrants and non-native English speakers.

She believes that her children deserve access to the best educators out there and that if DeVos's agenda was put in place--a system of privatized public education--her students would be failed, because without strong public schools, we would fail students who are low income or living with disabilities or impacted by trauma or who belong to racial or ethnic minorities. She says Betsy DeVos does not have her students' best interests in mind, and her students deserve the best, as I believe all of our students do, no matter their financial status, their race, their religion, or any other difference they might have from their peers.

A mother in North Bend wrote to me expressing her worry that vouchers only benefit the wealthy, leaving the middle class and poor without the benefit of a good education. Being part of a middle-class family herself, she is proud that her first grader is already mastering addition and subtraction and is reading and writing sentences all because of her local public school.

My constituent in Auburn said that money and ZIP Code should not determine who gets a better education, and she said that Betsy DeVos's worrisome policies would make that the case. She is strongly urging me to reject a nominee who doesn't look out for those who are the most in need.

A man in Kelso wrote in, saying that the public school system is what ensures we all get a good education. It is what gives so many parents hope that their child can have an even better life than they had, that public education is a great equalizer for everyone to have a chance to succeed, and I couldn't agree more.

Those are just a few of the letters I have gotten from people who are worried that the nominee's push for taking public tax dollars and using them for private schools and for-profit schools only, robbing our public schools of the resources they need, will not be the right choice for public education.

I wanted to share a few other letters from my constituents who wrote to me regarding Betsy DeVos's nomination. One of them was from Seattle. She emphasized how important it is that our Secretary of Education be dedicated to providing a quality education to all students and to strengthening our public education institutions. She strongly believes that Betsy DeVos will not be that kind of Secretary.

A retired teacher in Federal Way asked me to work as hard as I can to protect public education because she believes every child's right to a free and quality public education is at risk with Betsy DeVos's nomination.

Many constituents expressed their disbelief that the nominee for Secretary of Education has absolutely no experience in public education. Her children never even attended a public school.

One, a teacher in Bellingham, is fearful of an Education Secretary who doesn't truly understand what the needs of kids look like today. She asked how someone with no experience can be expected to lead our country's education system.

A woman in Puyallup wrote to me, saying that education is the greatest gift we can give to our children, and she thinks that confirming Betsy DeVos, with her plans to weaken public education, will rob so many children of that gift.

Mr. President, those are just a few of the letters I am getting. There are many more, and later this evening, I will be reading from some of those letters because they tell the story better than I do.

I know some of our colleagues are wondering why this woman set off such a firestorm when her nomination came up and why so many people are calling and writing and rallying and letting their voices be heard.

It is not easy to rally the public. This came from within. This came from many people in this country who understand, as so many of us do, that public education and the right to an education, free--free education is critical and fundamental and a core philosophy of this country that all of us want to be successful and want to be great again.

To have a Secretary of Education who doesn't agree with that, who in fact promotes the exact opposite, who has said that our public education system is a dead end, who has proposed, promoted, and paid for campaigns to take public tax dollars to send to private, for-profit schools, that is not what our country was built on. It is not the foundation that our forefathers put out in front of us.

They said: We are going to build a system unlike any other, where no matter who you are or where you come from or how much money you have or what you look like, in this country, we are going to make sure you get an education, a free education, paid for by all of us, to go to school in your community and to be who you want to be. That is a dream of this country, and we will not stand by and give our votes to a Secretary of Education who does not share that philosophy.

That is why there is a firestorm. That is why parents and teachers and students and grandparents and community leaders and superintendents from across the country are writing us and asking us to vote no. It is not too late. If we have one more Republican who votes no, then we will be able to say to the President: Mr. President, we reject this nominee, and we ask that you send us one who will work with all of us to make sure our public education system is a core principle of this country, is valued by this country, and is pursued by the top person in the Department of Education, our Secretary of Education. It is not too late.

With that, I have many more letters that I will be reading later. I know some of our other colleagues will be over here. Again, I ask everyone to stop and think. This is a critical nomination. It has hit a chord in our country because people do care. They want our country to be strong. They want this country to be great, and they know our public education system is an absolutely critical part of that.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I wish to thank the Senator from New Jersey, who has given us such a compelling reason to remind all of us why we are here at almost midnight and why we all intend to keep talking and keep working and keep trying to convince one more Senator to say no to this nominee. He reminds us of the basic principle in this country that our forefathers dreamed of and that they put into our Constitution and that we have fought for, which is that every child should have dignity and every child should have a public education. That is why it is so important that we have someone who leads this agency who shares that conviction. I really want to thank Senator Booker for his tremendous words tonight.

As the ranking member on this committee, who has been here throughout the Friday debate and through the 12 hours of debate we have had tonight and we will continue to have up until the vote tomorrow, I have had the opportunity to hear many Senators speak passionately. Senator Tester was here on Friday. He is from a very rural State, and he was speaking about how important it is to not have funds robbed away from the public education systems in those small little school districts to go to students with vouchers for private schools that don't exist in those rural communities. He talked about the importance of our public schools and our public school institutions in a slightly different way than the Senator from New Jersey did. He talked about how, when his grandparents settled in Montana, instead of being ranchers like those before them, they were wheat farmers. There were cattlemen and wheat farmers who were fighting and at odds with each other in the community, and where they came together was in their schools, because both cattlemen's kids and ranchers' kids were in the same school, and they played basketball together, and it healed the wounds of that community.

The Senator from New Jersey just talked about the Office of Civil Rights and why it is so important--that no matter what we look like or what this country stands for, this country says you have a right to an education. It is in our public schools where kids from all strata and all economic lives, with different backgrounds and different colors and different religions and different thoughts come together and heal our communities.

That is what is at risk with this nominee, and that is why so many Senators on our side have said: To one more Republican Senator, send this nomination back to the President who campaigned saying: Let's heal this Nation; let's bring people together; send us a nominee who actually does that.

Again, I want to thank the Senator from New Jersey and all of the Senators who have been here to speak about how important it is to have a public education.

I wouldn't be in the Senate tonight without a public education. I come from a family of nine, and my father, who was a World War II veteran, got sick when I was in junior high. He was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. My mom had been at home taking care of seven kids. She didn't have a job. She didn't have skills. We didn't know what was going to happen to us. But we had a public education system that was there for us. Our country was there for us with a public education system--not with a voucher that said you can go to a private school that we couldn't afford even with it or to be able to get one, but a public education school in our community that gave the education to each one of those kids in my family--all seven of us. Then it allowed us to go on to college with Pell grants and student loans, because our government was there for us, even though my dad was sick and my mom had to stay home and take care of him. We had food stamps for a while, and it was tough, but we made it because this country had a commitment to public education for every student, no matter where you lived or where you came from or what challenges you had at home.

That is why I am here in the Senate, and that is why many of us are here in the Senate. It is why this nominee has sparked such an interest across this country. Like many Senators--I think, like all Senators--my office has been inundated with mail and phone calls and emails and rallies and people saying: Please, stop this nominee, and send us someone who can actually work for all of us, because education is a critical piece for each one of us. It is across the country.

I want to share some of the letters that I have received about this nominee. I have received 48,000 pieces of mail opposed to Mrs. DeVos; the number of pro-DeVos emails and letters is in the teens. I have 48,000 pieces, and they are all personal. These aren't rote emails and letters; these are personal pleas. Why and how? Because these people saw this nominee at this hearing, and their expectations for our education system in this country are high. They want someone leading the Department of Education who knows the issues, who believes in public education. They were appalled at what they heard, and they said no.

Mrs. Mary Ann Whittaker, a woman from Longview, WA, a small rural community:

Dear Senator Murray,

As an educator of 30 years and a mother who has helped to

raise and educate five children, I was shocked and dismayed

by the lack of knowledge and depth of understanding that Ms.

DeVos has about education. Our education system needs a

leader who can be a true leader in this arena, with the

background and backbone to do what is in the best interest of

the children of this great country--please do everything in

your power to make sure this woman is not allowed to gain

this position. Thank you--on behalf of thousands of children

and educators in the state of Washington!!

I heard from Joel Puchtler of Seattle, WA. He said:

Please do everything in your power to stop DeVos from

becoming Secretary of Education. She is transparently

incompetent, and will be destructive to the nation's

education system through both intent and ineptitude. Demand a

competent appointee from the president-elect.

I am an educator. My wife is an educator. My grandfather

was the first Commissioner of Education (so called at the

time) under the Johnson administration. He would be thrilled

to see a competent woman in this appointment, but

categorically horrified at the possibility of DeVos, just as

I am.

These are the kinds of reactions I am hearing from my constituents. Why? Because we had this nominee come before our committee. We were allowed 5 minutes each to ask her questions. She has a very complex financial background. We were not allowed to look at those financial background papers before we had a chance to talk to her, so we only had some information. The only thing we could do was ask her questions about what she believed in. Her answers were astounding, and many people saw them, whether it was about IDEA and the ability of children with disabilities in this country to get an education, whether it was about policy debates we are having on education, or what she saw as her drive and her ambition. People in this country want someone who feels passionate about public education, not someone who has used her vast amounts of wealth and her experience to go after what she calls an education system that is incompetent and, in her opinion, needs to go away. Her drive has been to take the funds out of public education and go for private, for-profit education.

I can understand that a woman who is a billionaire with a lot of money invested in companies wanting companies to succeed, but our public education system is not a company. Our public education system is something that is derived from the communities that it is in, from the teachers who are there, from the parents who participate as school board members and teacher volunteers. It is the driving passion of our communities. It is not something people want ripped away, torn apart, or degraded. That is why this nominee has touched a nerve across the country.

I heard from Mrs. Rebecca Blankenship. She lives in Gig Harbor. She said:

Dear Senator Murray,

I am writing to urge you to oppose the nomination of Betsy

DeVos as the Secretary of Education. As a certified teacher

who has taught for many years in Public schools and as a

parent of two young girls in the Peninsula School District, I

find DeVos to be completely unqualified for the position as

she has no public school experience, has actively funneled

money away from schools in need and lacks the fundamental

educational background to make decisions that impact millions

of students.

There is no issue more important to me than our education

system.

I heard from Ms. Carol Pelander, a former teacher, from Tacoma, WA:

As a retired public school teacher, who continues to work

part-time training new teachers, I am extremely concerned

about the potential damage that will be done to public

education if Betsy DeVos is confirmed as the Secretary of

Education. Our mission as educators includes teaching our

kids how to live and work together effectively in a diverse

community, and the proposals brought to the table by Ms.

DeVos to privatize education will further divide us as a

community and significantly reduce our already limited

resources. She is not qualified for this important leadership

position.

I have been in the Senate for a long time. I have gotten a lot of emails, a lot of phone calls, talked to a lot of constituents, and been to a lot of community meetings. These thousands of letters that we are getting are not form letters. These are letters of people telling stories. They are passionate about their public schools. They have spoken louder about this nominee than any other, saying: This is not what I want for my country.

I have heard from many people in our rural communities who are so concerned about privatizing our public education system because they don't have a private school to send their kids to, even if the voucher that she espouses were enough to put them into one.

I grew up in a rural community. I grew up in the small town of Bothell. Coming in to town, I remember the sign that said 998 people, and I remember the day it said that 1,000 people lived in Bothell. Our schools were the heart and soul of our community. It is where your met your neighbors. It is where you sent your kids to play basketball. Everybody showed up for the football games and the music concerts. It was our community. We loved it, and we owned it. Did we say it was perfect? Did my parents say it was perfect? No. But it was the heart and soul of that community, and they did not want to lose it, just as so many other parents in this country want a Secretary of

Education who wants all kids to have a good education.

I have so many letters here. I have one from Adam Brickett, from McClure Middle School in Seattle. He says:

Thank you for your years of service representing our state.

I have never contacted an elected official before--

By the way, many of my letters start with that.

I have never contacted an elected official before but with

the changes happening in our country I feel the need to now.

I'm writing specifically to you today about the nominee for

Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos.

As a middle school teacher for Seattle Public Schools I

work hard every day to ensure that my students get the best

education possible to be successful in their future careers

and lives. I am concerned that Ms. DeVos does not have the

experience necessary nor the best intentions for our nation's

students and schools to be our Secretary of Education. I

believe she would put profits and money ahead of students,

schools and teachers. I felt this way before her nomination

hearing and feel even more strongly after her hearing. I am

worried about the damage she could do to an already fragile

public education system. I know I am not alone as virtually

all the colleagues I have spoken with have expressed similar

dismay with her nomination.

Her record of attacking public schools and funneling money

to charter and parochial schools with little to no oversight

is troubling. Her lack of experience whatsoever with public

education is also very disturbing. Not only has she never

been an educator or administrator but she has never even

attended or enrolled her children in public education.

A high quality, public education is one of the most

powerful tools a society has. Please don't allow someone with

no experience and who is fundamentally against public

education to become the person in charge of it. I

respectfully ask you and your colleagues in the senate to do

what is right by our nation's students and reject Ms. DeVos

as Secretary of Education.

Thank you again for your tireless service to the residents

of Washington.

I have 48,000 letters. My staff handed me a pile of them. They are all very similar. They are very heartfelt. They are not just writing a rote letter to us. They watched the hearings, they listened, they care about our public schools, and some of them are Trump supporters. They want this President to support our public schools.

They did not in this past election have a debate about whether we should privatize public schools. We talked about the debate--and I know my candidate didn't win. But in this country, I never heard a debate about taking public education away, about voucherizing our public schools, about having someone who is the top person--the Secretary of Education--espouse positions that are so fundamentally opposed to what I grew up with and obviously to so many parents, teachers, students, family members, superintendents, people involved in schools, and business leaders. They are writing to us now because they saw the same thing we did in this hearing.

Let me read a letter from Trina Whitaker from Mukilteo Schools. She says:

This is my 16th year of being a teacher in our public

school system in WA State. I am an advocate of public schools

as I feel strongly that all our students deserve the right to

free and quality education.

I am opposed to the nomination of Betsy DeVos for the

Secretary of Education system. Her past actions and beliefs

clearly demonstrate that she is not an advocate for our

public schools. It would be so damaging if we move in the

direction of privatizing public education.

Please consider opposing the nomination of Betsy DeVos in

the best interest for our public school system.

Let me read another letter from Rachel Guim of Seattle. She says:

As a committed public school teacher, I believe in our

neighborhood public schools, which open their doors to all

children, because unlike Betsy DeVos, I see them work for

children and their families every single day. We as a

community are being undermined by charters, vouchers, for-

profit schools and online schools. Precious tax dollars are

being wasted creating a parallel school system (when we're

already underfunded and not meeting the legal requirements)!

Our democratically governed schools--we, the people you have

vowed to represent--need your commitment and support. Choice

is a disguise for school privatization, nothing more. Stop

the takeover of our democratically governed schools. . . . Do

not vote to confirm Betsy DeVos.

And she goes on. Again, there are so many letters from so many people from so many different walks of life, all concerned about having a Secretary of Education who doesn't represent the best values and the best beliefs of our country.

Ms. Amanda Smith, a Kindergarten teacher, wrote to me and said:

Hello,

I am a kindergarten teacher in a public elementary school.

I am very concerned about Betsy DeVos' potential nomination

as secretary of education. As someone who never attended

public school, didn't send her kids to public school, does

not have an education degree and has never taught, she hardly

seems like a fitting candidate for secretary of education.

Can anything be done to stop this nomination?

From Gina McMather, a teacher in Port Townsend, WA:

Dear Patty Murray,

As a recently retired public school teacher, I especially

urge you to fight against Betsy DeVos's nomination for

education secretary. She is not in any way qualified for the

job. Her commitment to charter schools combined with a lack

of experience with public schools could destroy our nation's

educational system.

Public school teachers provide an education for all of our

students. Teachers need more respect and remuneration. We

need the very best college graduates to be attracted to the

profession. I have known so many dedicated and effective

public school teachers during my 25-year career and those of

us retiring baby boomers need the best successors possible.

They need your support. Don't let this undermine our efforts.

Thank you again for all your [work].

What I hear from people over and over again is that they want somebody leading our public school system in this country who actually believes in public schools, who has the education, the experience, the compassion, the willingness to understand what our forefathers did when they created this country and said: We are going to have a country--a democracy--that has a public education system paid for by all taxpayers to assure that everyone, no matter who they are or where they come from, is not denied a public education. They can learn to read and write and communicate and get the skills they need to be successful. They can dream who they want to dream to be and be there.

We do not want to go backward, and we are one vote away from changing where we are on this nomination, sending this back to the President, and asking him to please send us a Secretary of Education who can get the votes in the Senate, who will be an Education Secretary for all people, from all walks of life, from our rural communities and our urban communities, no matter who they are or where they come from. That, I think, is a great possibility and would be a great outcome.

I know that my colleague is on the floor and is ready to speak as well. Again, I have so many letters from so many people--48,000--who have voiced their opinion on this, more than I have ever had with any other nominee in my memory or any other issue in my memory. I thank all those who have written in and spoken out and stood up for public education. It is the foundation of our democracy, and it is our responsibility, our goal to continue that for them.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have been so impressed by the large number of Senators who have come to the floor to tell their stories of why public education is so personal and important to them and to their constituents.

I want to thank all of the staff who were here all night long--our clerks, pages, people in the cloakrooms--everyone who has given time of their own to be here to support us to be able to talk about this critical important nomination, the Secretary of Education.

I think all of my colleagues will agree with me that there has been an unprecedented outpouring of concern from across the country about this Cabinet nominee. Why is that? Why is it that the Secretary of Education has brought such emotion and discussion to this country? For a very important reason: Education is a critical part of everyone's life.

The Founders of this country knew that when they determined we in this country were going to have a free public education system. Why? Because they want to make sure that every citizen had the opportunity to read and write and participate in this democracy, a core principle to assure that all of us would have a voice in who our President and elected officials were so we would understand and be educated and make the right decisions.

That core principle is so important to this country and has allowed us for centuries to be the kind of country where we have a middle class. People who are born into poverty know there is a school they can go to, to learn to read and write and get the skills they need to be a participant in our democracy and in our economy. That is what is at stake in this nomination. People across the country are writing in, calling, holding rallies, talking to their neighbors and friends, and letting us know how important this is because they do not want to lose that principle. In this nominee who has been sent to us is a threat to that very basic core value that so many people believe in, in this country; that no matter who you are or where you grow up or how much money you have and who your parents are, you will have that public education, that public school in your community that you will be able to go to.

I was a school board member before I was a U.S. Senator, before I was in the State senate. Those school board meetings were jammed with parents who wanted to know what was happening in their schools, who would call me at midnight and complain about a school policy and what was going on. As a school board member, I had to listen and respond to that. People value their schools. They want to know they are there. Our schools are the heart of our communities. It is where people from different backgrounds who may be fighting with their neighbor across the street during the day, show up Friday night to cheer together for that football team. It is the center and epicenter of our communities. It is the epicenter of our country, and that is what is at stake in this nomination.

People want the Secretary of Education to be a champion for their public schools. In this nomination that has been sent to us by the President, Betsy DeVos, we have someone who values and speaks out for-- and has used her fortune to fight for--something very different. She has denigrated public schools. She says they need to end. She advocates giving our young kids a voucher and telling them to find a private school, leaving behind kids who can't afford to go hours to another school or to pay the extra money the voucher doesn't cover, leaving kids in poverty, robbing really critical money from our schools and from the kids who would be left behind.

Yes, our kids want choices. This is not a debate about charter schools. Many States, including mine, have charter schools, but the difference is, in those States--in my State and many--those charter schools are held accountable, just like the public schools so you know your child is getting the education they have been promised and that it is held accountable to taxpayers. Mrs. DeVos refused in our committee to say that those charter schools, those private schools, if they take taxpayer dollars--which a voucher is--would be held accountable to the taxpayers. To the parents in those communities who showed up at my school board meetings to tell what they thought of their schools and what we should be doing and had a voice, it would not be accountable to them. I find that wrong, as a principle in this country and our democracy and what we have fought so hard for. That is why so many parents are speaking out. That is why so many Senators have been here on the floor. That is why we have been here all night long and will be here until noon today during this vote.

That is what is at stake. In our higher education system, all of us know that so many young people today want that ticket to success and student loan debt is such an incredibly huge challenge to so many people, a barrier to getting the education they need. They want someone who is going to head up the Department of Education who understands that.

Betsy DeVos has no experience in higher education, none. And she is going to lead the agency and be the voice and be the vision? That is why

parents, students, teachers, community leaders, superintendents, school board members, and families across the country have stood up and said no.

This is so close. We are within one vote of sending this nomination back and asking the President to send us a nominee who can be supported by Members on both sides of the aisle, who can set a vision, who can fight for public schools, who can be that champion and that leader who sets us apart in the world as a country, who values the core principle that every child--no matter who they are or where they live--will get a good education.

The Secretary of Education is not a figurehead. The Secretary of Education spends his or her days trying to make the right decision and being a champion across the country on issues across the board.

They oversee the Office for Civil Rights. Last night I had the opportunity to listen to Senator Booker speak about the importance of their office and what it meant to him and what it means to so many kids today to know that there is in this country an agency, the Office for Civil Rights, embedded in the Department of Education to assure that they will not be denied an education because of the color of their skin.

Isn't that a value we all want to continue? That is why people have spoken out and written letters and made phone calls and had their voices heard. So many parents in this country today want to make sure the basic education law that we have fought for for so long, IDEA, which assures that students with disabilities get a good education, is not put in jeopardy.

When Mrs. DeVos came to our education committee and was asked about this, she had no idea that it was the law of the land. She said to our committee: The States can do that.

Well, no--why is it the law of the land? Why is it a principle of the United States of America to assure that no matter where you live, if you are someone with a disability, you will get access to an education?

I listened to Senator Hassan last night talk about her own young son and the challenges he has had. He is a bright man, but he is unable to speak or move, but he got an education in this country. He can give back, and he can participate.

Disabilities come in all sizes and all different shapes and all different forms. I assure you, when you are a parent of a disabled child, you are passionate and you want to make sure that your child has access to education, and you want a Secretary of Education, the top person in this land to be your advocate, too--not someone who doesn't know the law, not someone who isn't directing her staff to make sure that no matter where you are, if you are a student of disability, you get access to public education and are not denied.

Our country is great because we have these principles. Our country is great because we value each individual. Our country is great and will continue to be great if we continue to do that, but it will not be great if this body gives their imprimatur to a Secretary of Education who doesn't value that.

What does that say to young kids across the country, to parents with students of disabilities, to young people in this country living in poverty or living in a community or having family issues who wants to know that they, too, live in a land of opportunity?

That is why we have heard from so many parents and so many administrators and so many community leaders. This is a core value of our country--the ability to know that you can get an education.

Again, this is not a debate about charter schools. There are charter schools in many States. This is a debate about taking as much as $20 billion from our public education system and using it for vouchers for private schools that are not accountable to taxpayers.

If nothing else, I appeal to my Republican colleagues to think about that, to think about the fact that taxpayer dollars will not be held accountable under Mrs. DeVos's plans and policies. If you give a voucher to a student and they go to a school and they are not teaching what they should be, there is nowhere to go for those parents. It is their taxpayer dollars, and it is our taxpayer dollars. That is why this nominee is so important. That is why so many have stood up on our side and two Republicans have stood up and spoken out against this nominee.

Title IX makes sure that we protect students and makes sure that their rights are protected and that women have the opportunity to go and get a degree without being challenged or being put down or being a victim of sexual harassment. We need a Secretary of Education who knows that law and will enforce it so that students across the country know there is a champion at the top office in this land who is telling their staff to enforce this law and to back up those students. That is what this debate is about.

I heard some of my colleagues on the other side talk about the fact that we have a GI bill, which they essentially called in the debate a voucher for men and women who served our country to go to higher education and likened that to the voucher system they are talking about in K-12. That is not equal. That is given to members of our service, rightly so, to say: You served our country; we will make sure you get an education.

In our country, we value every student in every community. To give them a voucher and say ``Go find a school'' is not a way of providing education. Ask any school board member in this country. Ask any parent in this country. They want that public education school, that school in their community that is valued. They don't want that money taken away from that school, and they want every child to know that just as our Founders said, a public education will assure that every child has that opportunity.

This is an important debate, and we are very close to the hour when we are going to have a vote. It will take only one more courageous Republican to say: You know, I have thought about this. I listened to her testimony--the short testimony that we had. I have looked at her answers to their questions, and I, too, want to send a message to this country that the value of public education is critical.

The President has other people he could send over, a lot of them who value education, who have had experience--unlike this candidate--who will send a message to this country that, truly, we do value public education.

I hope that in the next few hours we can take pause and have that happen. It will not be the end of the world. It will not be the first nominee who doesn't get the votes they need in the Senate, but it virtually will be a moment in the history of this country where we will stand up and are proud to say: Not on our watch; not on our watch. We want a head of the Department of Education who actually values education for all students, public education for all students.

I have a colleague behind me who is ready to speak, and I thank him for being here this morning. We will yield him the floor. I want to say, again, thank you to all the parents, students, family members, school officials, community leaders, and so many people who have called and written and spoken up. Your voice matters. Your country matters. Public education matters. I am so proud to stand with all of you and to fight to make sure that this country remembers that and votes right at the end of the day.

I yield to my colleague.

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

Mr. President, again, I am on the floor, and I want to thank all of our staff and clerks and everyone who has been here throughout the last 20 hours. I thank everyone for speaking from their hearts about the issue of public education, why it is so important to them, and why they want a Secretary of Education who has that value and promotes that value and has the vision of that value, which is really why so many people in this country have spoken out and sent us letters and held rallies and inundated our phones. And I thank all those people who have done that. It has made an impact here and has made a difference. I think it has woken up each one of us to what we care about in this country and what we value and what we want.

Like many people, I received so many letters from my constituents, over 48,000 letters. That is just the letters--not phone calls--that I got, and I want to share some of them with you because they come from people's hearts. They are not form letters. They are not something they got from somebody else and forwarded. These are personal. And I think it is important that we hear these people.

I thank Marie Carlsen from Federal Way. She sent me a letter, and she said:

Dear Senator Murray,

Thank you for your continuing efforts at trying to prevent

Betsy DeVos from becoming the head of the Department of

Education. I have a child who has just started his schooling

in our public school system, and from everything I have read

or listened to about this woman, she has no business in

education at all. She has no knowledge of the laws and

protections guaranteed to our children, no comprehension of

what our educators deal with on a daily basis, and would

regress, gut, and otherwise destroy our educational system if

she were allowed to become the head of the Department. I fear

for my child's education, his safety, and his ability to

compete in a global community in the future. I stand with you

and thank you again for your efforts.

I thank Marie for writing in. Like so many people across the country, she watched the hearing Mrs. DeVos came to where she spoke to our committee. We were only allowed 5 minutes each, which I really regret because I think it is important that we see who is going to be leading this agency, and our inability to ask her questions with full information really gave just a shallow picture of who she was. But like many people, my constituents and those across the country watched and were just shocked that somebody who had been nominated to head the Department of Education had such little experience and knowledge and understanding of the agency they had been tapped to lead.

I heard from Ms. Ina Howell in Seattle. She wrote to me, and she said:

I am writing to express opposition to the nomination of

Mrs. Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary. Mrs. DeVos does not

have any experience in the field of education and, as a

result, will not effectively lead the Department of Education

in maintaining and improving public education in the country.

She did not seem to possess a basic understanding of key

education policies, including the responsibilities of the

IDEA Act.

She did not understand the difference between student

proficiency and student growth measures. She did not

understand simple facts and figures, like the percent

increase in student debt from 2008 to 2016. She failed to

adequately answer questions on equal protection for LGBT

students and their civil rights, confronting campus sexual

assault and the regulation of the for-profit higher education

industry.

This is Ms. Ina Howell--she happens to be with the National Alliance of Black School Educators--expressing deep concerns that the nominee doesn't have the basic issues and knowledge that she should have in running this agency, nor the passion for it, which is so important as the leading spokesperson in the country.

I heard from Dana Hayden from Poulsbo, WA, and she said:

Dear Senator Patty Murray,

I have been an educator in our State since 1984. I have

seen your positive efforts for the citizens of WA firsthand.

Last night, we found out that our family will be welcoming

our first grandchild in July--a girl. I am so joyful, yet

quite worried about the world she is coming into.

Then I saw you on the news. You give me hope! Thank you!

I wonder what kind of school experience the next generation

will have if DeVos is allowed to decimate our education

system, the way Trump is decimating our Nation with orders.

These are people who have not written in before. They are writing long letters, many of them pages long, speaking from their hearts about the value of public education, what it means to them and their grandchildren. They know this country was built on a system of public education that ensured every child would be provided a school in their community to go to so that they could have the opportunity their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents had.

I could read through so many of these. Here is one from Miles Erdly from Kent, WA. He says:

My name is Miles Erdly, and I am the principal of Horizon

Elementary in Kent. As a strong supporter of public

education, I ask that you vehemently oppose the confirmation

of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of the U.S. Department of

Education. Educators and students deserve a Secretary who can

commit to supporting every student in all public schools, and

a leader who will work tirelessly to promote a public

education system that provides each child with the optimum

conditions for teaching and learning. Betsy DeVos's past work

in education and her performance at the recent confirmation

hearing demonstrated neither a depth of experience nor

knowledge base in education policy and on critical issues

facing the community. As a principal, I have spoken with

teachers, parents, students, and community members across the

political spectrum, and there is widespread agreement that

Betsy DeVos is not the right person for the job.

This is Miles Erdly, a principal, and he watched the hearings, like so many people did, and was so concerned that we had in front of us a nominee for the Secretary of Education who didn't share that core value of public education for all students.

Ms. Gabrielle Gersten from Seattle, WA:

As a college student, the idea of Betsy DeVos becoming the

Secretary of Education concerns me for multiple reasons. She

obviously has been fortunate enough to go through school and

a higher education without a worry about money, but that is

not the case for most college students. I, myself, am lucky

enough that my mom saved money for me to attend college, but

many of my friends are working hard on their own to pay for

college education themselves. Also, her zeroing the funds for

title I is worrisome because every State should be held to

the same standard to give children in poverty access to an

education. An educated nation is a stronger nation. Not

everyone can afford to go to private school or have the

opportunity to attend one, whether that be the money or even

finding a way to get to school. She has goals, but they are

not as easy to achieve for everyone, and I don't think she

keeps that in mind.

Additionally, title IX is very important to me, as a female

college student, and the rest of my peers. She needs to

support title IX and keep universities accountable to it.

Mr. President, I couldn't agree more. Title IX is critically important in our higher education system. We have worked on a bipartisan basis to ensure that title IX is enforced. And to have a nominee for Secretary of Education who came before our committee, did not understand title IX, didn't have a commitment to title IX, sends shock waves through students across this country and their parents who have pushed and pushed for us to make sure that title IX is overseen in a way that makes sure our students at schools have the support they need from our highest education person in this country.

I could go on forever. I know several other Senators are going to be here on the floor shortly. Let me just say this: I have had the opportunity to be out here on the floor to hear from so many Senators who gave their personal stories about what education meant to them. Young people growing up in poverty knew that school was there for them. They knew they had teachers and friends who were there for them. Not everyone was perfect. Certainly not every school is perfect. Certainly all of us who have been involved in public education strive for better every day, but that school was there for them.

The thought that we have a Secretary of Education nominee who doesn't share that basic value, who wants to change the system to privatize it--she has said herself that she wants to end public education. Privatizing schools, having some kind of corporation running our schools, is just not what our country is about, is not what we want. We are not even leaning in that direction. They want our country to lean in the other direction--to strengthen all of our public schools, to have taxpayers across the country investing in every student, and that those schools be held accountable and that we ask our elected representatives to hold them accountable. That is not the vision that this nominee has presented to us, and it is a vision that I have worked passionately on through all of my life, and really that is why I am here to oppose this nomination.

I want to thank everybody who has written in and called and been passionate about public education in this country, and I encourage them to keep using their voices to fight for that passion. It is well worth the fight.

With that, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Ohio for his passionate remarks on this topic. I have had the opportunity over most of Friday and over the last 23 hours, to listen to my colleagues come to the floor and speak passionately about an issue they care about, speaking against DeVos. We heard very little passionate speaking for Betsy DeVos, but we heard a tremendous amount of passion against.

I want to thank the Senator from Ohio, in particular, speaking to the issue of the fact that Mrs. DeVos does owe a fine to Ohio that has not been paid. I find it incredulous that we are just dismissing that here and the Senators are voting for her.

The Senator from Ohio spoke passionately about what vouchers would mean for students with disabilities, and their ability to get a good education could be in jeopardy over the vision that this Secretary is about to put forward.

A few moments ago, I listened to the Senator from New Mexico speak about our tribal schools and the fact that this Secretary of Education has no knowledge of tribal education and her role in being in charge of that with no experience and no idea of what that means or how that will be enacted.

Again, I want to just say that we heard from so many people in our States because we clearly have a nominee to run the Department of Education with no experience and a background that is really in opposition to what most of us have stood up for and fought for most of our lives. I have mentioned throughout this debate--as I have spoken numerous times about the tremendous amount of letters that have come to me through our mail over the last several weeks since this nominee came before our committee and the public had a chance to see Mrs. DeVos at our hearing, without the knowledge she needs to lead this agency, with the tremendous conflicts of interest that were portrayed over and over.

I want to again go back and read some of those letters as we get into the last hour of this debate because I think they are quite telling.

I have one from Dr. Jennifer Kay Lynn of Olympia, WA. She says to me:

Thank you for your understanding Betsy DeVos would

devastate U.S. public education. Betsy DeVos's Senate

confirmation hearing underscored how unprepared she is to

serve as America's Secretary of Education. Mrs. DeVos has no

experience in public schools, either as a student, an

educator, administrator or even as a parent. Mrs. DeVos

doesn't understand key policy issues, like proficiency versus

growth, or the Federal role of the Individuals with

Disabilities Act.

Mrs. DeVos would not even commit to upholding current

guidance on preventing sexual assault under title IX. Mrs.

DeVos has no idea of how the arts and public education are

critical for human development, education. All of the arts

help our students grow emotionally, with dedication to task

or more and more connections with the brain, and perhaps,

most importantly, find out how much the arts enhance their

lives. We need a Secretary of Education who will champion

innovative strategies that we know how to improve success for

all students, including creating more opportunities and

equity for all.

Betsy DeVos is not that person, and I urge you to vote

against her for Secretary of Education.

Those aren't my words. I didn't talk to Jennifer Lynn. She wrote to me because she saw this candidate come before our committee. She has looked at her record and has said: This is not what our country is about.

I got a letter from Jamie Michaelson of Oroville, WA, very small community.

Senator Murray, as a public school administrator, I am

extremely concerned about Betsy DeVos' lack of knowledge and

support for public schools. Having never been a teacher or

administrator is bothersome enough, but to have not attended

a public school herself, nor sent her kids to one, makes her

ill-equipped to making educational decisions.

Furthermore, I worry about her understanding of small,

rural districts. We have our own unique needs, which include

funding professional development for teachers, Federally-

funded programs for at-risk youth, and support to recruit and

retain high quality teachers.

As a strong supporter of public education, I ask that you

oppose the confirmation of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of the

U.S. Department of Education. We must have a Secretary who

can commit to supporting every student in our public schools,

and provide leadership that will help our neighborhood

schools succeed. Betsy DeVos' record in education and her

performance at the recent confirmation hearing proves she is

the wrong candidate for the job.

As a principal, I have spoken with teachers, parents,

students and community members, who agree that America's

future depends on a strong investment in our Nation's public

schools.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I understand

that you are being inundated with emails concerning Cabinet

picks. I feel the nomination of Betsy DeVos is political.

Students, families and educators deserve a highly-qualified

candidate that understands our complex educational system. I

am not writing to you because I have a political motivation.

Instead, I am looking for the best of the best for the

Secretary of Education position. Unfortunately, in my

professional opinion, Betsy DeVos is not the right person for

this job.

I couldn't agree more. Shouldn't we have the best of the best at the top of our education system today? That is what my constituents are asking--and I know many across this country are hoping that just one more Republican Senator will agree. That is what will occur in about an hour.

I see my colleague on the floor who has come here to talk. I appreciate him being here, and I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I have had the opportunity over the last almost 24 hours now to hear from a wide swath of our Democratic conference speak out against the nomination because they feel so strongly that in this country public education is a core principle. I know a number of my colleagues will be participating with me in these last few minutes, but I want to thank, again, everyone who has written, who has called in, who has expressed their opinion on this critical nominee that this President tapped to oversee education policy.

I yield to the Senator from Hawaii for a question.

Well, I thank the Senator from Hawaii for his question.

He is absolutely right. I did ask Betsy DeVos, when she came before our committee, if she would commit to not privatizing our schools or cutting a single penny from public education, and she would not do that. She would not do that.

To me, that sends a very clear message, and it did obviously to parents, students, and administrators across this country, that she was not committed to the core principle of public education, that our tax dollars in this country always have and should continue to be to make sure that every student, no matter where they are, will have the opportunity to participate in education. Her answer clearly meant that she was going to take money from our public education system, from our schools--big, small, rural, urban, and suburban--to go to private schools. That would mean a devastation for many communities.

So I thank the Senator from Hawaii for his question.

I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire.

Mr. President, I deeply share the concern of the Senator from New Hampshire. She came to the floor last night to speak eloquently about the challenges that our students with disabilities have and the promise that this country has made now for decades that if you are a student with a disability, you will be able to go to a public school and get the education that you need.

She spoke eloquently. For everyone who didn't hear her, I ask you to go back and look at the Record and listen to it.

Yes, I am deeply concerned that this nominee whom this President has sent to us is not committed to that basic premise that, no matter who you are or where you come from or what you look like or if you have a disability, you get a public education. But I am not only concerned that she doesn't have a commitment. I am deeply concerned that she didn't even understand that it was current Federal law.

How can someone be a Secretary of Education in this country and not understand that basic premise and not give that commitment to people across the country that, if it is your child or someone you love or someone you know, they, too, can go to school and get what they need.

So I want to thank the Senator from New Hampshire. And, yes, I am deeply concerned, as we all should be in this body and across the country, that this nominee is not prepared or qualified to make that basic assurance for all students in this country.

Mr. President, I want to thank the Senator from Minnesota, who came the other night to talk passionately about her own mother, who was a teacher and her favorite course to teach was about the monarch butterfly and how she would come dressed up as a butterfly and how she impacted a young student in her classroom who is now a young adult and still remembers the learning experience that her mother, as a teacher, gave to him. That spark is so important for every child in this country--that spark for education--no matter who you are, your disability, or what brings you to school that day. That is what is so important about the term ``public education.'' Every child in this country deserves a public education and to reach their full potential, no matter what they look like, how they come to school that day, whether they have been fed or have a disability. That spark is what is so important.

That is why so many people have spoken out in this country about this nominee, who knows nothing or very little about IDEA--not even that it is a Federal law that is under the jurisdiction of the Department that she is seeking and that she would oversee and protect those students. That, to me, is deeply disappointing. It says to me that this President should say: I don't want this nominee to go forward. I will send you someone who understands this law.

I appreciate the question from the Senator from Minnesota.

I yield for a question.

The Senator is correct. The essence of what she has promoted and used her vast wealth for and has worked for throughout her experience is to take money away from public education and put it into private schools.

I thank the Senator for her question. I just want to say that she is absolutely right. The money is not magic. It doesn't just get printed to give vouchers to schools. It comes from our public schools. As she stated so eloquently, there are many schools--some in rural areas, some in urban areas, or mostly in rural, and there is no private school to send your kids to. That voucher money, that public money, those taxpayer dollars will come away from those schools. They will have less money, but it won't go to the advantage of those students, and they will be left behind.

I yield for a question.

Well, I want to thank the Senator from Michigan for that question because it is at the heart of what this entire debate is about. We

have a nominee who has come forward who is quite successful in private business--a billionaire herself--whose idea and vision for our Nation's education comes from a private business perspective.

The Senator from Michigan is absolutely right. Our schools are not about profits. They are not profit centers, and we can never run them that way because there is a core principle that this country was founded on that our forefathers very wisely thought of. They wanted to make sure that every young person in this country, no matter who they were and how much money they had, would get a public education.

You can't run that as a for-profit business because there are kids who come to our schools who are very hard. Maybe they come without having had a parent home the night before, they come hungry, they come with disabilities, they come with challenging education experiences. We can't throw those kids out because there are other kids who come with parents who are very active and are really bright and we want to keep them because they are better for profit. We have to run our public education schools so every child has that opportunity because who knows who that young child is going to be who takes that nugget of public education and ends up sitting here in the U.S. Senate. That is the foundation of our country.

I really appreciate the Senator from Michigan for raising that because that is the core essence of why so many people have spoken out against this nominee, who stood up and have written us letters and made phone calls and stood at rallies and spoken out--many people who have never spoken out on issues before who have never really paid attention before, but this is about the core principles our country was founded on, a public education for all--not a profit education for all but a public education for all.

I will yield to the Senator from Oregon.

Let me thank the Senator from Oregon for his question because he raises a very important point. No one is debating whether we want our kids to have a choice. The debate here is about whether or not those schools that take taxpayer dollars through a voucher system are accountable to the taxpayers who are paying for those vouchers.

This nominee came before our committee and very clearly stated that she would not equally hold accountable private schools. Now, I was a former school board member, and I can tell you, I was there late many nights listening to parents who stood before us and talked about the fact that they wanted to make sure that their school had good teachers or their school had good policies, and we were accountable to that because we were an elected board, and we had to make decisions based on what our constituents thought was important.

These are our constituents who are paying their tax dollars to this country, and they want to know that their taxes are used accountably. Yet we have a nominee before us at the Department of Education who has said she wants to take those taxpayer dollars--your money--and send it on to private schools with no accountability. What does that mean? That could mean that those private schools don't necessarily have to provide a strong curriculum in specific topics. It means they can let kids out of school and say: We don't want to keep you here anymore. You are too tough to teach.

It can say that they will not keep records of dropout rates so we know whether or not they are encouraging these tough kids to go to another school. They can actually deny access to students with disabilities or who come from tough backgrounds who may not meet their standards, and they will not be held accountable under the policies that Ms. DeVos proposes. So the Senator raises an absolutely critical question. At the end of the day, each elected official in this country is held accountable to their taxpayers to assure that the money they give out in their taxes is used in a way that our country agrees on, and this Secretary of Education says: Nope. We want to change that. We want your tax dollars to go to schools that are not accountable to you.

Mr. President, we have a number of Senators who have been on the floor who are here now and who would like to speak, and I ask unanimous consent that I continue this dialogue with Senators until a quarter to 12, and the last 15 minutes be equally divided between the chairman of the committee and myself.

Mr. President, let me revise my request. I ask unanimous consent that we continue to have this conversation until a quarter to 12 p.m.; that at a quarter to 12, I will give my final remarks and divide equally the last 15 minutes so the chairman of the committee has the last 7\1/2\ minutes.

I will yield to the Senator from Illinois.

I want to thank the Senator from Illinois, who is an amazing new and great Member of our Senate. She comes from Illinois. She comes from an incredible background and is asking a critical question about whether our students with disabilities should have access to education.

It is a passion many of us have feelings about, it is a principle that our country has supported, and it is a principle that this nominee is uniquely unknowledgeable about and, to me, that is reason enough for any of us to vote against that nominee.

I will yield to the Senator from Minnesota for a question.

I say thank you to the Senator from Minnesota, and I want to thank him for being a committed part of our committee, really helping us all recognize that this nominee is not qualified.

I see the Senator from Hawaii who has, I believe, the last question.

I will yield to the Senator from Hawaii.

I thank the Senator from Hawaii, and I think that is the question all of us should be posing to ourselves as we get down to the final few minutes. Is this the best of the best?

Is this a knowledgeable candidate who understands the Federal law?

Is this a candidate who comes to us without conflicts of interest?

Is this a candidate who is willing to stand up and be the defender of all young children in schools?

To me and to many of my colleagues who have been out here speaking, she is not.

I want to thank all of my great colleagues who have been out here speaking from their heart about a passion that they have in this country for a candidate to lead the Department of Education who is qualified, who is prepared, who is ready to stand up and fight for every child no matter where they live or where they come from.

With that, Mr. President, I believe we are down to the last 15 minutes before the vote, with the time equally divided.

Mr. President, as I noted, Democrats have been here on the Senate floor for the past 24 hours straight, talking about the importance of public education, sharing stories from parents and students and teachers in our home States, highlighting all of the reasons for Senators to stand with us and stand with their constituents, stand with other Republicans who are doing the right thing, and urging them to say no to Betsy DeVos and her plans to privatize public school and destroy public education in America.

But I come to the floor today to make one final push before this vote, to make the case one last time, because we are so, so close and because this is so important and also because we have a real shot right now to show people across the country that the Senate can actually listen to them, that their voices matter, and that their Senators put them and their kids and their families and their futures above loyalty to a party or a President.

I have talked about my frustration with the fact that Republican leaders did everything they could to jam this nominee through the Senate. They cut corners and rushed into a hearing before her ethics paperwork was in. They blocked Democrats from asking more than 5 minutes of questions, forcing a vote before all of our questions were answered about her tangled finances and her potential conflicts of interest, and rushed straight from the committee vote to the shortest possible floor debate they could manage.

So I won't spend more time on that today because the truth is that despite Republicans' best efforts, people across the country have learned a whole lot about Betsy DeVos over the past few weeks, and the more they have learned about her, the less they have liked and the more outraged they have become.

Over the past few weeks, people have learned about Betsy DeVos's tangled finances and potential conflicts of interest and how she and her family have given hundreds of millions of dollars to Republicans and extreme conservative groups. They have learned about her failed record, how she spent her career and her inherited fortune pushing anti-public school policies that have hurt so many students in her home State of Michigan and across the country. They have learned about the extreme rightwing ideology that drives her, how she wants to bring her anti-government, free-market-above-all philosophy to an education system that she has called nothing more than ``an industry, and a dead end.''

When people saw her in her hearing, they learned even more. When they watched Betsy DeVos in that hearing room, when they saw it live on the evening news, on ``The Daily Show,'' on ``The View,'' and on many other shows covering it, and one of the many clips that went viral on social media or shared by a friend or a family member, a whole lot of people were introduced to Betsy DeVos for that first time in that hearing, and they were not impressed. People across the country saw a nominee who was clearly ill-informed and confused, who gave a number of very concerning responses to serious and reasonable questions.

In that hearing, Betsy DeVos refused to rule out slashing investments in or privatizing public schools. She was confused that Federal law provides protections for students with disabilities. She didn't understand a basic issue in education policy--the debate surrounding whether students should be measured based on their proficiency or their growth. She argued that guns needed to be allowed in schools across the county to ``protect from Grizzlies.'' And even though she was willing to say that President Trump's behavior toward women should be considered sexual assault, she would not commit to actually enforcing Federal law protecting women and girls in our schools. Those were just a few of the moments in that hearing that made it clear why Betsy DeVos is not qualified to do this job. There were many more.

What people saw in that hearing wasn't just a nominee who didn't understand the issues; they saw a nominee for Secretary of Education who clearly didn't think about public education and public schools the way they do. For most people, public education hits really close to home. It is part of who we are, our families, and our communities. So many of us owe everything we have to public education. We have watched our kids and our grandkids and our neighbors get on the bus to go to their local public school. Many of us have taught in public schools or have family or friends who walk into classrooms every single day to help our students learn. And so many of us believe in a commitment to strong public schools that offer an education and opportunity to every student. It is a core part of the American promise.

So when we saw someone nominated to this position who knows so little about public education, who so clearly cares so little about public education, whose strongest connection to public schools is through her dedication to tearing them down, that struck a real chord with a whole lot of people, and they decided to make their voices heard.

Over the past two weeks, we have seen an unprecedented level of engagement from people on this nomination--tens of thousands of calls, thousands of letters, hundreds of people calling in, social media, and many of them have never been involved or made their voices heard before. It made a difference. Right now, every single Democrat is opposing this nomination, and two Republicans who listened to their constituents are joining us. So we are dead even--the first time in history that the Vice President will be called on shortly to cast a tie-breaking vote on a Cabinet nominee. We just need one more Republican to join us to prevent that from happening, one more to help us show the people across this country that their voice matters in this debate, one more to stand with people across the country and say no.

So I am here to finish this debate where we started--standing with students and parents and teachers, with the people of my home State of Washington and across the country who strongly support public schools and true education opportunity for all, and with Democrats and Republicans across the country who have poured their heart and soul into opposing this nominee. I stand with you.

I urge one more Republican to join us.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.