Floor Statements

Mr. President, they did it in a closed room. No one in the public was allowed to watch. They did it by a voice vote so that there would be no physical record of how individual Congressmen--how they voted. And they decided to remove a Member of the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives this morning in that fashion. These proud, courageous disciples of Donald Trump didn't want to be on the record publicly as to where they stood on the fate of Congresswoman Cheney.

This is the same Congresswoman Cheney who was reelected to leadership in the House just a few weeks ago. This is the same Congresswoman Cheney who is one of the most ideologically conservative Members of the House. She voted with President Trump nearly 93 percent of the time while she was in office. With a name like Cheney, it is hard to question her Republican credentials.

No, the decision, in private, in secret this morning by a voice vote, was not about a disagreement over policy but the issue as to whether or not Liz Cheney dares to tell the truth.

She refused to defend or ignore the big lie that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump, and in today's Republican Party, it seems like that is all that is necessary for grounds for removal.

More than 6 months after the 2020 election was held, it is clear that the big lie has been spread in a big way. And that lie is not just a threat to the future of the Republican Party, it is a threat to our democracy.

Since the start of this year, Republican State legislatures, inspired by Donald Trump's big lie that the election was stolen, have introduced more than 360 bills with restrictive voting provisions in 47 States-- one of the most notorious examples, the State of Georgia.

Remember, the State of Georgia--hotly contested in the 2020 election, and then the Trump troops came in and went to court over and over and over again, suggesting there was election fraud and dishonesty in the Georgia election. And the Georgia election officials, virtually all Republicans, stood up and said it was an honest election, a close one, but it was an honest election. They were challenged over and over again, to the point where the former President of the United States, while he was still in power, called an election official in Georgia and basically threatened him; that if he didn't change the votes and give President Trump what he thought he needed to win, he would pay a price for it. It went that far.

To his credit, this election official stood up and said: The results are accurate and I stand by them and I am not going to change it.

It went that far.

And there was a big turnout in Georgia. In fact, there was an amazing turnout in the runoff elections for the two Senate seats won by Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock, our colleagues here in the U.S. Senate. So even with that big turnout and even with the certainty that that election was honest from start to finish, the Georgia Legislature decided to change the laws for voting in Georgia. It wasn't volume they were looking for; it was loyalty. They wanted to make sure that the voters in the future would be friendlier to the Republicans.

And so they changed the Georgia election law and made it harder for people, particularly people of color, young people, the elderly, and people of limited means, to vote. That law--that Georgia voting law-- represents a blatantly political effort to subvert our democratic process.

Republicans of conscience know this, but it seems there is no future for those Republicans, if we reflect on the vote taken this morning in the House of Representatives Republican caucus. Liz Cheney's expulsion from her role in the Republican conference is just the latest example of what happens to Republican officials who dare to speak the truth about the 2020 election. They are not only silenced, they are purged from the party ranks.

Our own colleague Senator Mitt Romney, not long ago a Republican candidate for President of the United States, was just censured by a Republican county organization in his State because he refuses to support the big lie of Donald Trump. The unfortunate reality is that, today, the loudest voices within the Republican Party have joined Donald Trump in declaring war on the basics of our democracy.

That is why we in Congress need to do something. Immediately. This week, the Rules Committee held a markup on a measure that would combat voter suppression and protect our democratic process. It is known as the For the People Act.

This is a democracy defense plan. It will ensure that all eligible Americans can exercise their constitutional right to vote without facing burdensome barriers at the ballot box. The For the People Act invests in election infrastructure, provides State and local officials with resources to run safe, secure elections

In addition to combating voter suppression, the bill also reforms a broken campaign finance system that gives wealthy donors and big corporations far too much influence over our electoral process. By passing it, we will say, loud and clear, that America's elections are not for sale to the highest bidder. Above all, this legislation will strengthen the integrity of our democratic process and put more power in the hands of the people.

Now, I know some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are attacking the bill as a ``takeover'' of the Nation's election system. The truth is, American elections have already been taken over by special interests. This bill will start to restore our democracy and make it more accessible to every eligible American.

I would love to know what my Republican colleagues find so objectionable about the legislation's core provisions. Listen, it automatically registers American voters when they get a driver's license; it guarantees at least 15 days of early voting; ends partisan gerrymandering nationwide; and brings greater transparency to the campaign finance system. These are reforms that will make our democracy whole again, and they are desperately needed, particularly at this moment in our history because in the world's greatest democracy, people shouldn't have to wait in line for hours on end to have their voices heard. And yet that is the reality for voters in States just like Georgia. And it is not an accident; it is intentional. Look at the people standing in the lines, and you can understand why they are being discouraged from voting by waiting so long.

Let's be honest about these restrictive voting provisions being passed in State legislatures across the country, because they are grounded in one lie after another. The truth is that President Trump's own officials at the Department of Homeland Security declared that the 2020 election was the most secure election in American history.

The truth is, judges across the country, including many appointed by President Donald Trump, threw out more than 63 lawsuits that his followers filed, challenging the results of last year's elections. Why? There was no evidence, no basis in fact for the big lie.

But the truth is, the big lie won't just die with the 2020 election. It will sow distrust in our electoral system for years to come, unless my Republican colleagues act with courage. A few have done so. This morning, one paid a heavy price.

The question to all of us is: Are we prepared to either discredit democracy or defend it?

Rejecting the big lie is the defense of our democratic process. We have to join together in making certain that every American's right to vote is protected.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) is necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), are necessarily absent.

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.

Mr. President, I have 15 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Committee on Environment and Public Works

The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs;

The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 9:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Committee on Finance

The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Committee on Foreign Relations

The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Committee on Indian Affairs

The Committee on Indian Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Committee on the Judiciary

The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

Committee on Veterans' Affairs

The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Select Committee on Intelligence

The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 2 p.m., to conduct a closed briefing.

Subcommittee on Personnel

The Subcommittee on Personnel of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Subcommittee on Strategic Forces

The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to met during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 4:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Subcommittee on Health Care

The Subcommittee on Health Care of the Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Subcommittee on Federal Spending Oversight and Emergency Management

The Subcommittee on Federal Spending Oversight and Emergency Management of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety

The Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety of the Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. President, I listened carefully to the statement by my friend from South Dakota about radical socialism--radical socialism. I think what he is categorizing as radical socialism is the suggestion by the President of the United States, Joe Biden, that we should really care about providing safe, affordable, quality daycare for women who want to go to work. Radical socialism?

I am concerned about some trends that we are noting. The census reports that the birth rate in America is going down. Fewer children are being born in this country. I ask a basic question: What does that say about our country and about our future?

What it tells me is that raising a family for many is a struggle. They have to work to bring money home, and they want to have the peace of mind when they go to work that their kids are safe. That is not a radical suggestion, and the solution isn't socialism.

The solution is just caring. What do you care about? President Joe Biden does, and he has suggested, as part of his plan for American families, that the wage earners don't have more than 7 or 8 percent of their income dedicated to daycare. I don't think that is radical. I think it is realistic. It says they have some skin in the game, some investment on their own part, but they have affordable daycare affordable to them.

Republicans say they are all about infrastructure. We want to build the best highways--I do, too--the best bridges and best airports and such so that Americans in business can move from one place to another. Sign me up. That is basic infrastructure, and I agree with it. But, if I have the best highway from my home to a good place of employment and still can't find affordable daycare, many people--especially women who are out of work--can't buy into this infrastructure investment. That is not radical. Socialism, to give a mother a helping hand so that she has a safe place to leave her child during the course of the day?

And how about the other suggestions of President Biden? Is it radical socialism to suggest that we have available for all families in America--all families in America--2 additional years of training and education for children before kindergarten? I don't think it is radical.

I have the best little granddaughter in the world, who is going to be 2 years old in just a few days. She started her school experience already. We are proud of her, and I think it is going to help her to socialize with other children, learn in a classroom atmosphere, and I am glad she is there. I wish every family in the city of Chicago and the State of Illinois had the same option. But many cannot.

President Biden thinks that is a good idea. So do I.

Who would characterize that as radical socialism--2 additional years for children before kindergarten?

Here is another thing he suggests. Let's have 2 additional years after the 12th grade. The President said 2 years of community college. Is that radical socialism, to expand the offering of education an additional 2 years? If you visit community colleges and see what is going on there, you realize that many young people are making really life-changing decisions about their careers and their future.

Radical socialism? I don't think so. I think most families would say it is just common sense. It is not radical, and it is not socialism if government gives a helping hand. We have done that since the 1950s when it came to college loans. We do that today when it comes to helping school districts across this Nation. Not radical, not socialism, just common sense commitment to the American family.

So they can make the speeches all they wish, but that is the reality.

There has been an awful lot of talk on the Senate floor about infrastructure, as I mentioned. Many of my colleagues across the aisle think it is just roads and bridges and nothing more. I think that is a priority, but I don't think that is the entire challenge.

When we consider infrastructure, we ought to look to the future. We should ask important challenging questions. What kind of infrastructure investment will help us for decades to come? What does the next- generation economy in America need? What tools will our children and grandchildren need to lead healthy, productive, satisfying lives?

Tough questions, but President Biden's American Jobs Plan and the American Families Plan face these questions honestly. Broadband, education, clean energy, paid family leave, electric vehicles, daycare--the President's plan envisions all of these things and more as the future of infrastructure.

What does that future look like in practice? I had a visit last week which was amazing. I wanted to share just a little bit of my visit with you. Last Thursday, I visited a town in central Illinois called Normal. During my visit, I toured a new manufacturing plant, the Rivian plant, where production will begin in a few weeks on brand-new electric trucks, SUVs, and delivery vans. This is not a small-scale operation. Amazon has already placed an order for 100,000 emission-free delivery vans--100,000.

Not long ago, 6 years ago, in fact, another car company, Mitsubishi, occupied a plant where Rivian is today, and they left town, putting 1,000 people out of work in the process. We were pretty down on our luck at that point and despondent about the future of that facility. It sits out by Interstate 55.

Guess what happened. A year later, thanks to the leadership of many people, including my friend the mayor of Normal, IL, Chris Koos, who found a buyer for the old Mitsubishi plant. By the end of 2021, that plant will be back in business full scale with more than 2,500 employees producing the next generation of electric vehicles.

It is a manufacturing jobs boom in Normal, IL. I couldn't be more excited or happy for the people who live nearby. It was made possible by leaders and investors who refused to hang on to the past. Here was this young CEO who decided that electric vehicles were our future. He came up with that idea 5 years ago, and he has created a large class of believers.

Folks in this town will tell you infrastructure is about more than roads and bridges. For them it is about taking transportation in America to the next generation, and the President of the United States, Joe Biden, understands that.

His American Jobs Plan includes a $174 billion investment in electric vehicles and charging stations. Is this some big radical socialist government idea? No. Listen to the major producers of automobiles in America today talk about where they think the market is headed. Every one of them is talking about electric vehicles. The funds that President Biden proposes would support the growth of companies like Rivian and accelerate the installation of charging stations across the country.

I went from Normal, IL, to a multimodal facility--Amtrak, cars, buses. They all gathered downtown in a building which I helped to build. And we went to several levels of parking in this facility. At each level there were electric charging stations. That is the future.

Imagine the future where you drive from Normal to Chicago or St. Louis, or anywhere in this country, without burning a drop of gasoline? This is the new normal, a place where hard-working Illinoisans produce next-generation vehicles, and companies come together with local leaders to move us toward a cleaner, stronger economy.

Normal, IL, is stepping up to the plate to ensure the United States continues to lead in the global economy, even as competitors like China ramp up their own electric vehicle production.

Make no mistake. If we follow the lead of the Republicans and step away from investing in electric vehicles and the training and the other elements that are necessary to develop it, the Chinese are not going to drop out of the competition. They are going to unfortunately be very successful at our expense.

Normal isn't going it alone. All around my State, I am proud to say, we see efforts to create this electric vehicle future. Last week, Governor Pritzker and Lion Electric announced plans to open a new electric vehicle manufacturing plant in Joliet, IL--a $70 million investment that will create 700 new jobs.

Beginning in 2022, the plant will produce 20,000 zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. That means electric school buses and trucks built right in my home State.

A Netherlands-based manufacturer of charging stations, EVBox, set up its U.S. headquarters in Libertyville, IL, this past summer. They have plans to produce more than 200 fast-charging stations a week.

The electric transportation industry and its surrounding infrastructure already employs more than 5,000 people in my State of Illinois. One recent report projects that electric transportation employment in Illinois will grow to more than 9,500 workers by 2024. That is an 83-percent jump in 3 years.

Illinois is poised to have a nationally important role in the development of electric vehicles. Why are the companies coming to Illinois? I have a theory. Illinois has been setting the stage for this electric vehicle revolution for years.

Look at our labs--Federal labs. Scientists and engineers in our national

labs have pushed the boundaries of vehicle and battery technology for decades, always looking ahead. Today, their pioneering work will produce batteries that will last longer, charge faster, and can be recycled safely.

Look at our universities. The University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign produces some of the best engineers in America. In Normal, you can find Illinois State University and Heartland Community College, which produce a direct pipeline of new talent to companies like Rivian.

Illinois recognizes that science and research are the backbone for the economy. Our labs and universities prove it time and again. This research drives the electric vehicle industry forward, and companies want to be right in the middle of that environment.

Beyond batteries, Illinois leads the way in research in clean energy technology, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and many of the other technologies we need to be part of the economy of the 21st century.

President Biden understands that we need research, too. His American Jobs Plan proposes $180 billion in investment in research and development for things just like electric vehicles. We have the opportunity to not only electrify but to supercharge our future.

Federal funding that matches the President's bold plan could transform more towns like Normal or Joliet into powerhouses of American manufacturing.

I listen to Republicans on the other side say: We shouldn't spend so much. We shouldn't spend it on so many things that might affect our future. Take it easy. Take it slow. Wait and see what happens.

I couldn't disagree more.

The Republican plan is a solid strategy for second place in the world. I don't want to be part of an effort to bring the United States second in any competition in the world. We may not always be first, but we should always strive to be first. Stepping away from President Biden's plan for manufacturing and jobs and families is, unfortunately, an easily predicted outcome. We will not be able to succeed and create the jobs of the future.

I will continue to support robust, sustained funding for electric vehicle infrastructure and innovation. I hope that both parties will. I hope my colleagues will join me in thinking in a big way about the future of America when it comes to the economy and infrastructure. I have seen the future it can create in Normal, IL, last week, and it is a bright one.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

I announce that and the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) are necessarily absent.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) are necessarily absent.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today in support of the Congressional Review Act resolution to rescind the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's ``True Lender Rule.'' This rule was rushed through by the previous administration with complete disregard to the harm it would cause already struggling working Americans.

The true lender rule undercuts important consumer protections at the State level and greenlights high-cost ``rent-a-bank'' schemes. These schemes let predatory lenders evade State interest rate caps by funneling high-interest loans--loans that are illegal under State law-- -through national banks.

We know these lenders prey upon those struggling to make ends meet and are more likely to operate in areas with higher concentrations of poverty. And they offer complicated loans that are designed to trap consumers in an endless cycle of debilitating debt.

What is especially troubling is that this rule was finalized in November of

last year at a time when so many were reeling from an unprecedented public health and economic crisis. And while so many American families struggle to put food on the table and make their rent or mortgage payments, the OCC's rule makes it easier for predatory lenders to prey on those most vulnerable, exacerbating the economic hardship of millions.

Currently, 45 States and the District of Columbia have instituted interest rate caps on installment loans to protect consumers. Earlier this year, my home State of Illinois passed into law a 36-percent cap on interest rates for consumer loans. These protections are essential to ensuring that hard-working Americans are not exploited.

The true lender rule would allow predatory lenders to evade these important State-level consumer protections. Twenty-five State attorneys general, including Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, recently wrote to me and my colleagues to underscore the dangers of the OCC's true lending rule. They say in their letter, ``The OCC's Rule would be exploited by lenders seeking to circumvent these state interest-rate caps and invite, indeed welcome, predatory consumer-lending partnerships . . .''

I agree with the concerns raised by Attorney General Raoul and his counterparts. The Federal Government should be doing more to protect the financial security of Americans, not less.

Congress needs to take action--now more than ever--to protect working families from predatory lending practices. We must rescind this harmful true lender rule. However, addressing the harm of this rule is not enough. More must be done to protect vulnerable American consumers. For more than a decade, I have pushed for a Federal interest rate cap of 36 percent on all consumer loans. This standard is not radical or new. The Federal Government already affords similar protections to military servicemembers and their families. We should expand those protections to all Americans.

COVID-19 has devastated the lives of millions of Americans and brought significant economic challenges to so many households. We need to be protecting the most vulnerable populations who are just trying to get back to normal and get a fair shot at the American dream.

Let's come together on a common goal: to protect American consumers from predatory lending practices. Passing today's CRA resolution would bring us one step closer to that goal.

I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Heinrich), is necessarily absent.