Floor Statements

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

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

I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, this week the Senate will consider the nomination of Zahid Quraishi to be judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

Judge Quraishi has had an amazing public service career, and since 2019 he has served as a U.S. magistrate judge. Once confirmed, Mr. Quraishi of New Jersey will be the first Muslim American in U.S. history to serve as an article III Federal judge.

The son of Pakistani immigrants, Judge Quraishi was born in New York City and grew up in Fanwood, NJ. He graduated from Rutgers Law School and joined a law firm in his home State of New Jersey. But his time in the private sector was cut short by a strange, tragic twist of fate. His first day of work was September 11, 2001.

Those events of that day inspired Judge Quraishi to consider a career in public service. He applied to the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General's Corps, where he was commissioned as an officer and attained the rank of captain. Judge Quraishi was twice deployed to Iraq, in 2004 and 2006. For his service, he was awarded the Bronze Star and Combat Action Badge.

After leaving the Army, Judge Quraishi continued to work in public service, first as an assistant chief counsel in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and then as a Federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey.

Before becoming a U.S. magistrate judge, Judge Quraishi served as a partner as well as chief diversity officer at a law firm in New Jersey. During his time, he was recognized as a New Leader of the Bar by the New Jersey Law Journal and awarded the Professional Achievement Award by the Asian Pacific American Lawyers Association.

Judge Quraishi received a unanimous rating of ``well qualified'' from the American Bar Association. He also has strong support from his home State Senators, Senators Booker and Menendez, and received broad, bipartisan support in the Judiciary Committee, with eight Republicans joining all Democrats in voting to advance his nomination.

I urge my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of this historic nomination.

I yield the floor.

I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith), is necessarily absent.

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

Mr. President, one of the major responsibilities of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which I chair, is the selection of judges to serve our Nation. It is important not only because it is a question of measuring their standards of integrity, honesty, and judgment but also because these are lifetime appointments. Literally, the women and men who are chosen for these slots will have an impact on the future of America in their courts which could last for many years and decades. That is why we are careful with the Biden administration to not only bring good nominees before the Committee but to make certain they bring the necessary qualities.

This week, the Senate will consider several of President Biden's judicial nominees. I believe they understand the role of a judge in our system. They will bring much needed experiential and demographic diversity to our Nation's courts.

I have tried throughout my career, and many others like me have tried, to choose men and women for the bench who will reflect the diversity of America. The face of justice is often as important as the fact of justice, and if people appearing before our courts feel that there is at least a chance for success based on the background and experience of a judge, I think it is a positive thing.

Given the background of these judges in trying cases, arguing appeals, and issuing rulings from the bench, I believe, and the committee agreed, that these judicial nominees are ready for service.

Today, I would like to speak in support of two of them: Julien Neals, nominated to the District Court of New Jersey, and Regina Rodriguez, nominated to the District Court of Colorado.

New Jersey is really in desperate need of Federal judges. They are facing a judicial emergency. In each of the States' six judicial vacancies, they have been designated as a judicial emergency status by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

Today, we can begin to address this judicial emergency by finally confirming Julien Neals to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. He is an extraordinary public servant. He has served the people of the State of New Jersey for decades. As an expert in municipal law, he handled several legal disputes that were tried to verdict, judgment, or final decision, including multiple--multiple-- jury trials. He was the chief judge of the Newark Municipal Court. He presided over 6,000 cases in that capacity.

He received a unanimous rating of ``well qualified'' from the American Bar Association. He has the strong support of his home State Senators, Senators Cory Booker and Bob Menendez. He has received broad bipartisan support in the Judiciary Committee, with five Republicans joining all the Democrats in supporting his nomination.

I urge my colleagues to support him.

This week, the Senate will also consider the nomination of Regina Rodriguez to be a judge in the District Court of Colorado. What a life story she brings. Ms. Rodriguez is the daughter of a Japanese-American mother, whose family was interned during World War II, and a Mexican- American father who was one of the first Hispanic coaches in the National Football League. Her father's job as a coach took the family across the country.

Although Ms. Rodriguez was born in Colorado, she spent several of her formative years in my home State of Illinois. When she was 17 years old, Ms. Rodriguez thought she might want to be a lawyer, so she put on her best suit, as she says, and knocked on doors in Macomb, IL, until she found a lawyer who said: ``Come on in. I'll show you the ropes.''

Lucky for us, Ms. Rodriguez held on to that passion that first developed when she was a teenager. Over the past 30 years, she has served as a talented litigator who has tried 35 cases to verdict.

She has a range of experience in government and the private sector. In the public sector, she served as an assistant U.S. attorney and rose to become the first Latina Chief of the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Colorado. In private practice, she represented a broad array of clients, from individuals to Fortune 500 firms. During her tenure as a litigator, Ms. Rodriguez has demonstrated that she understands the importance of applying the law to the facts in a fair manner. She has represented plaintiffs, defendants, government, and those who have sued the government. As a woman of color, she has risen as a partner in several leading law firms--no mean feat.

Ms. Rodriguez has taken out time from her demanding schedule to mentor young attorneys, just as that lawyer in Macomb, IL, did for her.

She has received a unanimous ``well qualified'' rating from the American Bar Association, as well as positive

blue slips from both Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper. Her nomination is also supported by the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, the Latinas First Foundation, and the Colorado Lawyers Committee.

She has earned support across the aisle. On May 20, Ms. Rodriguez was voted out of the committee by a vote of 17 to 5, with the support of six of my Republican colleagues.

When confirmed, she will be the first Asian-American judge to serve not only in the District of Colorado but in the entire Tenth Circuit. Her historic, well-deserved confirmation will bring our Federal judiciary closer to reflecting the lives and experiences of all Americans. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for Ms. Rodriguez's nomination.

The judicial nominees we are voting on this week illustrate something that is substantial and profound. They illustrate that President Joe Biden is dedicated to appointing legal experts with outstanding credentials and a wealth of experience.

During his first several months in office, President Biden has nominated public servants who will bring to the bench a variety of professional perspectives and personal experiences. Too often, those things have been missing in previous nominees. By confirming judges who reflect the experience of all Americans and who demonstrate fealty to the rule of law, we can continue building a justice system that works for everyone.

Over the last 4 years, we have seen a concerted effort on the Republican side to fill vacancies. They broke records, in some respects, in the number of nominees that they brought before the Senate for approval. Some of the records are not ones to be proud of, from my perspective, and 10 of the nominees who were submitted for consideration during the last 4 years before the Senate Judiciary Committee were found unqualified by the American Bar Association. Nevertheless, most of them made it to the bench in lifetime appointments.

Many nominees came before us, of the Trump administration, who were seeking lifetime appointments to become a trial judge and had no personal experience in a courtroom. It is hard to imagine that anyone would be thrust into that situation and expected to perform as a professional. Imagine, if you will, the parties to those lawsuits, many of whom stake their lives and reputations on the outcome, to find a judge who couldn't find their way through the Code of Civil Procedure if they were forced to. That, unfortunately, was the standard that was used. As long as these nominees in the past had the blessing of the so- called Federalist Society, that was good enough for many of my Republican colleagues.

Joe Biden is really responding to that by suggesting nominees who meet much higher standards. I want to work with the Biden administration to continue in that tradition, so at the end of the day we can fill the vacancies with women and men who are not only competent and honest but have the integrity and experience, both legal and otherwise, to serve our Nation for the rest of their lives, should they choose, in these judicial capacities.

I commend these two nominees who passed out of our committee with a strong bipartisan votes. To my colleagues on the floor today, I hope they will join me in supporting them.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) is necessarily absent.

Mr. President, last week, China announced that it would now allow families to have three children--a profound shift from their previous one- and two-child policies.

Why the change? China looked to the future and realized that its population policies would hamper economic growth. Now, the U.S. Government will never tell families how many children to have. That choice is profoundly personal. Yet we must ask ourselves the same questions China is asking: What kind of changes will lead or deter the United States from a future of economic growth and prosperity? How can we enhance America's competitiveness? And more than just compete, how can we make sure America comes in first?

The answer is obvious: Invest in American creativity. China is investing heavily in electric vehicles, critical minerals, energy production, computer chips--the list goes on. In all of these areas, China is beginning to pull ahead of the pack. They are aiming for first.

And what underscores all of their efforts? Research. Every breakthrough, every new technology, every scientific step forward opens new markets and drives their economy into the future at high speed.

Unfortunately, it is a different story in America. For decades, in both the public and private sectors, we have downsized our discovery and innovation investments. Since the days of the space race, we have stepped away from the great challenge of discovery. If we were to commit the same percentage of our national budget to research today as we did in the Apollo era, we would invest $900 billion over 5 years. That kind of an investment puts people on the Moon. That kind of investment puts us in first.

So how do we get there? The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act would set us back on track and at a fraction of the cost of Apollo-era spending. As we debate and hopefully pass this bill, we must keep asking: What are we willing to do to be No. 1?

One important way we can compete with countries like China is by increasing support for domestic manufacturing and strengthening our domestic supply chains. The legislation before us does exactly that. It provides $52 billion in emergency funding to boost our domestic semiconductor manufacturing capabilities. In 1990, the United States produced 37 percent of the world's semiconductors, but today, just 12 percent of semiconductors are manufactured in the United States. Now, we are facing a global shortage of microchips, which is impacting jobs in my State and many others.

I am proud that Illinois has long been a leader in auto manufacturing, thanks to dedicated workers like those at a Stellantis plant in Belvidere, IL, who assemble Jeep Cherokees. Unfortunately, that plant was forced to shut down in March due to the global shortage of semiconductors. And last month, Stellantis announced that as many as 1,640 employees at the plant could be laid off in July--again, because it does not have enough microchips. After briefly resuming operations last week, the plant already has had to shut down again for 2 weeks because of this shortage. Last week, I spoke to representatives from Stellantis who shared that the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act could make a real difference in terms of boosting supply of these chips.

This funding is not just important for the assembly plant in Belvidere. Sadly, we are seeing similar impacts of the semiconductor shortage at Ford's Chicago Assembly Plant, which supports 5,800 jobs. That plant was idled through April, with shutdowns extended into May.

We urgently need to act to address this global microchip shortage to provide certainty to the workers whose livelihoods depend on a stable supply of semiconductors. The legislation before us will not only address our immediate market needs but it will also help prevent these shortages again the future. This investment supports jobs across the entire supply chain, from construction of new facilities, to manufacturing and development of chips, to workers in the auto industry who depend on a reliable supply of semiconductors, to American consumers.

The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act is the result of weeks of negotiation and bipartisan work. I was puzzled by some of my Republican colleagues' arguments for voting against cloture on this bill. If you don't want China's products and values to dominate the global marketplace, why would you cede that marketplace to China--or anyone else, for that matter? If you believe in America's products, values, and most of all, its people, then do the smart thing: Invest in them. Although some of my colleagues seem to believe otherwise, invective isn't going to win this global competition. We need investment to remain No. 1.

No one bill will secure America's economic prosperity or national security or resolve all of the outstanding issues in our relationship with China, but strengthening America's role as a global leader in science and technology is an essential piece of our effort to preserving American leadership in this world. So I put it to my fellow Senators: Let's take a step forward today. Let's invest in the research, the jobs, and the future that all Americans deserve. I plan to vote in favor of the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Let's not settle for second best. Let's put America in the lead.

Madam President, there are still millions of women across this country today who are doing the same jobs as their male colleagues and are being paid less. It is more clear than ever that we must take steps to close loopholes that allow for pay discrimination and empower women to hold their employers accountable when pay discrimination occurs. Nearly 60 years after passage of the Equal Pay Act and 12 years after passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, women still only earn 82 cents for every dollar paid to men on average. For women of color, the wage gap is even worse. Black women make only 63 cents for every dollar paid to White men, and Latina women make only 55 cents. Mothers make just 75 cents for every dollar paid to fathers.

Throughout the pandemic, too many families have wondered how they will feed their families, keep their homes, and care for their children amid an unprecedented public health and economic crisis. For working mothers, it has been especially challenging. The labor force participation rate among women has dropped to 57.4 percent, the lowest it has been since 1988. A survey last fall found that almost 40 percent of working mothers in Illinois lost their jobs or were working reduced hours. Nearly half of working mothers of color reported the same.

Why has this economic crisis been so economically devastating for so many women? The reasons are clear. Women tend to be overrepresented in the industries that were hit hardest by the pandemic, such as restaurants, retail, and leisure and hospitality. And many women are the primary caretakers for their families. With schools and childcare programs closed, what choice did mothers have other than to step back from work?

The economic hardship women have faced during the pandemic has only been made worse by the wage gap. From wage discrimination to the unavailability of childcare, women are not getting a fair deal. That means working families are not getting a fair deal, and it must change.

This week, we have the opportunity to pass legislation that would close the loopholes that allow paycheck discrimination to continue. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which prohibits gender-based pay discrimination, was the first bill signed into law by President Obama back in 2009. Unfortunately, it is hard to enforce because employers still maintain policies that punish employees who voluntarily share salary information with their coworkers. Women can't demand equal pay if they don't know they are being underpaid.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would ensure workers cannot be retaliated against if they disclose their wages. It also would prohibit employers from asking prospective employees about their salary history. And it would require employers to prove that pay disparities exist for legitimate, job-related reasons--not just because they believe ``women's work'' is worth less. I am happy to join Senator Murray and my Democratic colleagues in supporting this important legislation.

Women have carried America's families through this pandemic, but it may take years for women to recover from the economic and career setbacks they have suffered. By passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, we can take an important step toward helping women and their families fully recover from this pandemic and economic crisis.

I am disappointed that Republican opposition has previously prevented the Senate from passing this bill. I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can agree it is time to pass this commonsense measure that will help put more money in the pockets of women and their families across the country.

I announce that the Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand) is necessarily absent.

Madam President, for over a year now, people worldwide have experienced immeasurable pain, suffering, and loss. This pandemic has tested each and every one of us in ways that we didn't know possible.

But perhaps no one has been more tested than our Nation's frontline, essential healthcare workers. They, like so many other frontline workers, did not have the option to telework, to socially distance, to remain in their homes, with their families, while the coronavirus ravaged our communities--no, just the opposite. They showed up more than ever before.

Not only did our Nation's doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals put their own health concerns aside to treat COVID patients, they continued to see all their other patients who couldn't afford to delay treatment, the heart attack and stroke victims, the chemotherapy and dialysis patients, the pregnant moms and new babies, people who had been involved in car accidents or were victims of gun violence.

When the rest of the world was being encouraged to stay home and avoid interactions with people, our medical providers continued to report to hospitals, community health centers, doctor's offices. They did so even when they weren't provided the proper personal protective equipment. They did so even when it meant that they had to quarantine from their own families. They did so even when it meant extra shifts on little to no sleep. They did so even when it meant spending each day watching dying patients say their final goodbyes to loved ones over Zoom. And they did so even when, in the midst of all of this, they were subjected to racism, sexism, and hate.

An essay that appeared in the New York Times last month detailed one doctor's experience. Dr. Chaya Bhuvaneswar--a female, Asian-American, Boston-area physician--recalled an incident last April, when a patient spit on her and said she ``brought the sickness.''

Anti-Asian bigotry is, sadly, nothing new in this country, and the rise of it during COVID was certainly fueled by our former President, who seemed to delight in coining hateful, racist terminology to describe the coronavirus. Like so many others, our healthcare providers, whether they are Asian American or African American, or members of other minority groups, are subjected to racism, simply in the course of doing their jobs.

Racism is inexcusable always, but imagine how much worse it must have felt this past year, risking your life every single day to help a nation in the midst of a deadly pandemic, only to be subjected to racial slurs, offensive stereotypes, and vile actions. If this past year has taught us anything, it is that our Nation still has a long way to go on issues of race and immigration.

Consider this: One in six healthcare and social service workers are immigrants. Yet our broken immigration laws prevent many immigrants from contributing more fully to the battle against the pandemic.

As long as I am a U.S. Senator, I will continue to come to fight for all immigrants. We must ensure that the hundreds of thousands of immigrant workers in our essential workforce are not forced to stop contributing when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become American citizens. They have waited long enough.

I hope that, even in these divided times, we can come together in Congress to quickly aid our immigrant healthcare heroes and other essential workers. Whether we are witnessing horrific, racially motivated acts of police brutality on the nightly news or reading about bigoted verbal and physical assaults in our hospitals, it is clear that the epidemic of racism, which long predated this pandemic, has not gone anywhere.

It is my hope that, someday soon, we can look at one another and see how much more unites us than divides us, but for now, let me just offer another word of thanks to our Nation's healthcare workforce: You have all given so much and endured so much. We are eternally thankful for all you have done and all you will continue to do.

Madam President, imagine this: In one of the great nations of the world, there is a controversy over transition of power, the peaceful transfer of power. And in this country, those who are about to lose power are concerned--so concerned that their backers are turning to the streets. They plan on demonstrations against the supposed new leadership in their country, and people fear violence.

It was against this background that Nadav Argaman, the director of Shin Bet, Israel's internal security service, made a rare public intervention on Saturday night, warning of discourse that is ``liable to be interpreted by certain groups or by individuals as one that permits violent and illegal activity that is liable, heaven forbid, to reach mortal injury.'' Without mentioning any politicians directly, Mr. Argaman added, ``It is our duty to come out with a clear and decisive call to stop immediately the inciting and violent discourse. The responsibility for calming spirits and reining in the discourse rests on all of our shoulders.''

I bring this matter to the floor of the Senate because it parallels what we endured and experienced just a few months ago. I am sure you remember it well, Madam President. I do. The election last November, which was won by Joseph Biden over Donald Trump, the incumbent President, by some 7 million votes--one of the largest turnouts, if not the largest turnout, in the history of the United States. It was a decisive electoral college victory in the same margin that Trump had triumphed over Hillary Clinton just a few years before. Yet, because of the Big Lie and the denial by Donald Trump, he inspired his followers to come to Washington, DC, and participate in a rally to protest, and not to come just any day but to come on January 6, 2021, of this year because that is when the electoral college votes would be counted.

We know what followed. We know that mob was turned loose in the streets of Washington and turned loose on the Capitol Building, and those who were here that day will never forget it. I can recall the Vice President of the United States being pulled from that chair you are sitting in, Madam President. He was taken out that door. It was about 2:15 in the afternoon. Then a member of the Capitol Police stood before us and warned us: Stay in your seats. This will be a safe place to be. We are going to gather all the staff around the walls here. Just sit tight.

Ten minutes later, he came back and said: Change of plans. The mob is advancing on this Chamber as we speak. Leave immediately.

Everyone picked up as fast as they could and left.

It was a scene that seemed so unrealistic, you wouldn't imagine it could happen in the Capitol of the United States of America. But the insurrectionist mob inspired by President Donald Trump was here for business. They were here to stop the ordinary course of business in the Senate and the House, which would announce at the end of the day the selection of Joseph Biden as our new President.

Now a parallel is taking place in Israel, and a new coalition to replace Benjamin Netanyahu is being contested by those who are going to march in the streets. The Israeli leaders--at least those in the security services--are begging people not to do it.

I put that in context to think that that idea in the United States somehow has taken root in Israel. I pray that nothing happens. I want nothing to happen there. But we should be forewarned to take this seriously. There are forces at work in the United States and Israel and other countries to stop the orderly transfer of power in a democratic nation. We ought to take that seriously. We ought to take it so seriously that we appoint a bipartisan Commission to investigate what happened here on January 6, 2021.

Just a few weeks ago, Republican Members of the House of Representatives were dismissing the January 6th events, the mob action here in the Capitol, and saying that they were somehow ``orderly tourists.'' That is what one of the Congressmen said, a Congressman from Georgia, a Republican. Those were ``orderly tourists.'' Look at those videos and imagine under any circumstance that you would describe them as ``orderly tourists.'' They weren't orderly tourists when you see five people losing their lives as a result of their actions and 140 of our law enforcement officials being personally attacked, many of them still bearing the scars of that day.

I bring this to the attention of the Senate and the American people because I think the answer is obvious. Israel is taking it seriously. They don't want a Trump-like mob to take control in their country.

We shouldn't be allowing this to happen, nor should we stop with what we have done and say no more will be said. This was a direct attack on our democracy. We cannot find, unfortunately, in the Republican leadership one Republican leader who will support this idea of a bipartisan Commission. When it comes to January 6, the job isn't finished.

The last point I will make is, we received a letter--an anonymous letter--from the Capitol Hill Police asking us to form this Commission and to get to the bottom of it. To think that we walk through this Capitol every day and those men and women are risking their lives for us and we would not even allow a bipartisan Commission to look into that day and the threats to the lives of those policemen on that day is shameful. It is disgraceful. It is unacceptable.

Senator Schumer said we will vote on it again. I hope we do, and frequently, so we can remind the American people who is taking this matter very seriously and who is not

I announce that the Senator from Maine (Mr. King) is necessarily absent.