Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 619, which is at the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Thursday, March 2; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the Lawless nomination postcloture; further that at 11:30 a.m., the Senate vote on confirmation of the Lawless nomination and the motion to invoke cloture on the Gallagher nomination; that if cloture is invoked, all postcloture time be considered expired and the confirmation votes on the Simmons and Gallagher nominations be at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader; further that the Senate recess following the cloture vote on the Gallagher nomination until 1:45 p.m.; and that at 1:45 p.m., the Senate vote on confirmation of the Grey nomination; finally, if any nominations are confirmed during Thursday's session, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's actions.

Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of Senators Lankford and Cruz.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Trudy Perkins, my communications director and the former acting chief of staff of my office, as she moves on to a new, well-deserved chapter--retirement.

Trudy's career has been unparalleled to say the least. She has spent 20 years working in Congress. Her service has made a difference for her colleagues and for so many Americans.

She grew up in Albany. If you take Route 90 just about 150 miles west--well, about 200 miles west, you will hit Cleveland. If you drive about 110 miles west, you will hit my wife's hometown of Ashtabula, OH. It is fitting that her final role in the Senate brought her back to a city on I-90.

Trudy is a proud member of the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority and is an alumna of the State University of New York at Oswego. She spent the early years of her career working in television news, first in Albany-- I know, in the Presiding Officer's State, you say ``All-ba-nee,'' but up north, we say ``All-buh-nee''--and then in Baltimore.

In 2002, she started on Capitol Hill with one of the real superstars in the House, now the late Representative Elijah Cummings, where she worked her way up to communications director and deputy chief of staff during her almost 20 years with that office. She served as an invaluable adviser to Representative Cummings. He trusted her with anything and everything. He often gave her phone number out to constituents and told them ``Why don't you call Trudy'' because things always got done. You know how Members of Congress don't always get them done, but people like Trudy Perkins do. He knew, no matter what the task was, that Trudy wouldn't just deliver, but she would do it kindly; she would do it with a smile; and she would do it with a positive attitude. It was easy for anyone to see her dedication to public service and always, always, always to the constituents she served. She was dependable. She was hard-working. She was an integral member of their team and of the Cummings' office family.

Trudy has been an integral and trusted leader in my office. We were so lucky to have inherited her, in a sense, after the death of Representative Cummings. In January 2020, she joined my staff as the communications director. At the time, she was the only Black communications director serving in a Senate personal office. She had a talent for communications and press and the experience to prove it. That was clear to me before we ever spoke.

As I got to know her, I learned how much she cared about the issues that I care about and that Senator Wyden does and Senator Warnock, the Presiding Officer, does. I learned how much she cared about those issues that matter most: civil rights, labor rights. She understood this from the writings about Dr. King's speeches, when Dr. King spent a lot of time talking to labor unions. Dr. King, in his last weeks of life, went to Memphis because of a labor strike of sanitation workers, and she understood, as I do and as John Lewis did, how Dr. King wove workers' rights and civil rights and women's rights and human rights all together. Trudy gets that.

From day one, she proved to be such an asset in our office by stepping in and leading a robust communications team during some of the most tumultuous years in the Senate that I have ever seen. In her first month, we faced domestic and foreign crises that she navigated with a steady hand. During her second month, the COVID-19 pandemic broke out. It was an uncertain time. We all know that, and all of us in the country know that. We had never seen anything like it. Trudy stepped up and delivered for Ohioans and for her team in our office.

She transitioned our press shop from an in-person operation to a virtual one. It was a transition nobody had ever tried before that brought challenges and technical difficulties but also new opportunities to connect with Ohioans and with the Ohio media. At every turn, Trudy Perkins led with grace. She made sure that Ohioans got the information they needed to navigate the pandemic. She made a difference for so many in our office and in our State.

Her impact can't be measured just by her ability to meet challenge after challenge as her leadership also extended far beyond the technical aspects of a difficult job. She was a compassionate resource for everyone on her staff.

She took time to get to know the team and understand how they operated as a unit and who they are as individuals. She listened. She truly cared. And for the communications team, Trudy Perkins was a rock. She was a smiling face on Zoom calls. She organized virtual game nights and made a

difficult time a little easier as our office and world settled into a ``new normal.''

A couple of years later, when our chief of staff took a temporary leave from the office, it wasn't even a close call. We knew Trudy was the right choice to lead the entire office in the interim. It was a big job to take on. She stepped up. The transition was seamless. She led the office through a historic year that brought so many wins for Ohioans: the CHIPS Act, the PACT Act, the Inflation Reduction Act. She led our shift back to an in-person work.

To say the least, it has been an eventful 3 years. Through it all, Trudy has been a dedicated member of this office. She has been a leader. This office wouldn't be the place it is today without her.

As a communications director, she always had her team's back. She went to bat for them. She supported them in and out of the office, attending events on her personal time, like choir concerts, to cheer them on.

As a manager, she gave junior staff the room they needed to grow. She listened. She recognized potential. She invested in every member of our team. She made sure everyone was set up for success so they would move forward even after she would leave.

She is a trusted adviser, a talented brainstormer. She is an advocate for women, especially for women of color, across the Senate. She makes colleagues feel appreciated and seen.

Most of all, Trudy believes in this office and this institution and the good that each of us can do for Ohioans and Americans.

Every member of our staff--from the interns to the senior staff--have learned from Trudy Perkins, whether it is her communications expertise or how to stay calm in stressful situations or even just to show kindness and smile after a long day.

We have certainly picked up a few of her sayings along the way, like ``no ma'am pam'' and ``hot diggity dog.'' She doesn't always talk that way, but sometimes.

We will miss her sense of humor. We will miss her laugh, which you can hear from any corner of the office. And if the microphones were loud enough, you could have just heard it then from this corner. I know every member of Team Brown will miss having her as part of this team.

At the beginning of this Congress, I asked each member of my staff to share a meaningful memory from the 117th Congress--and this is where the Presiding Officer comes in. Trudy reminded me of the Letter from a Birmingham Jail reading that she organized after former Senator Jones asked me to continue the tradition. We chose three Republicans and three Democrats to read Dr. King's immortal words. Trudy asked that Senator Warnock read the final section, as Raphael is the first Black Senator from Georgia and serves as the senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, where Dr. King attended and Dr. King's father was the pastor.

It was a moment of immense symbolism and joy as he read his predecessor's words on the Senate floor. That letter also includes perhaps my favorite Dr. King quote:

Human progress never rolls in on the wheels of

inevitability.

I will say that again:

Human progress never rolls in on the wheels of

inevitability.

Progress rolls in because we make it so. It rolls in because we organize, we push, we work every angle for as long as it takes. Progress rolls in because of people like Trudy Perkins who dedicate their lives to fighting to make a difference in this world. Our country is a better place because of her service and because of her leadership.

Trudy will be spending more time with her mother in Maryland. Her dedication to her family has always been unwavering.

Trudy, you will be missed more than you know. We will continue to fight for the values that you hold dear and make a difference in the lives of all Ohioans.

On behalf of everyone in our office, the staff on the Banking and Housing Committee, some of my colleagues who know Trudy, and all those who have had the honor of working with her, we congratulate Trudy Perkins on her career. We wish her well in retirement. We thank her from the bottom of our hearts for her terrific service to our Nation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print the following rules adopted by the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs into the Congressional Record.

Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing and celebrating the Ohio University E.W. Scripps School of Journalism on their centennial. One hundred years ago, Scripps first opened its doors and, since then, has shaped generations of journalists and reporters and writers. The E.W. Scripps School of Journalism is one of our Nation's best journalism schools and provides a unique experience where faculty empower students to think critically, write clearly, and expand their horizons. The curriculum extends far outside of the classroom with student newspapers, internship opportunities, and student-run media platforms to ensure that students have the skills necessary to excel after graduation.

Scripps students go on to do great things. Scripps alums are leading their industries, whether it is broadcast, print or digital media. They are producing award-winning content, reporting at the national, State, and local level and delivering the stories that matter most to Ohioans and Americans. Scripps journalists tell the stories that impact our daily lives and dig for those that might not be told otherwise. They are tenacious and dedicated in their pursuit of knowledge. They ask tough questions, challenge conventional wisdom, and connect us all with our communities and our world. That wouldn't be possible without their time at Ohio University.

Most importantly, Scripps is rooted in the values essential for a democratic society, the values of truth, accuracy, and independence. I can't think of better values to instill in the next generation of journalists.

In recent years, we have seen attacks on the free press, making it even more important that the journalists of today and tomorrow are prepared to fight for truth and transparency. A free, independent press is vital to our democracy. It is enshrined in our Constitution. And Scripps journalists uphold it daily. To the faculty and staff at Scripps, the students, and the alumni: Thank you for all you do to make Scripps the institution what it is today, an institution respected around the world for its ability to create the leaders of tomorrow. Thank you for your commitment to journalism and dedication to the college. And thank you to Dr. Hugh Sherman and Dean Scott Titsworth for your leadership.

I am proud that Scripps calls Ohio home, and I look forward to its next hundred years. Congratulations on the centennial.

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

Mr. President, this is becoming a regular appearance on the Senate floor to talk about Social Security. It is something that most Americans think that Congress supports almost unanimously.

It is a program that has been with us. President Roosevelt, on August 14, 1935, signed the Social Security Act. Out of that came Medicare, when a Democratic Congress in 1965, with President Johnson's signature, signed it.

We know what Medicare means. We know what Social Security means for people who live longer, healthier lives. No matter your income, no matter if you have been a Senator for 20 years, no matter if you are a CEO, no matter if you are a UAW member and at a Ford plant in Avon, no matter if you are a low-income worker at the Hilton Hotel on West Market in Akron, no matter your work, you are eligible, at a certain age, for Social Security and Medicare.

So what is the debate about? Well, the debate is philosophical, and I am not even sure what. It is partly my conservative colleagues who generally want to privatize Medicare and Social Security. For them, it seems to be something philosophic or ideological or sometimes it is just people wanting to support the insurance industry because if you privatize Medicare and Social Security, yes, it will help the insurance companies; yes, it will help the banks. If you privatize the VA, like many want to do--the Veterans' Administration--undermining what veterans have earned by serving their country, it may help some private sector corporations. It will help pad their bottom line. It will help many CEOs make even more money, but it is wrong. When work has dignity, people have a secure retirement, veterans have benefits, and pensions are protected, Americans can count on Medicare and count on Social Security.

A secure retirement shouldn't be a partisan issue. It wasn't a partisan issue, particularly in the 1930s. It is not a partisan issue to the American people. I don't think you can tell a Republican from a Democrat who is 70 years old or 80 years old drawing Social Security and Medicare. They know they have earned it. They have paid into it for decades. As I have said, they have earned it.

It is one of the most unifying institutions in the country. Americans want to protect Social Security and Medicare. They want to make those programs stronger, Americans do. But elected officials--far too many people on this side of the aisle, as the Senator from Connecticut knows--far too many people from this side of the aisle think that we should privatize those programs; that they will be more efficient or some such philosophical jargon that they throw forward. But we know what will happen: insurance companies will make more money, banks will make more money, and people who have worked in this country and played by the rules all their lives get squeezed.

Today, down the hall--especially straight down the hall in the House of Representatives down there--the Republicans are threatening, in order to raise the debt limit--the debt limit is simply, we should pay our bills. The Trump administration and all administrations have run this deficit up. We should pay the bills. That is what it is about. They are refusing to pay the bills our Nation owes, and they are saying that if we don't do what they want to do, then they are going stop Social Security checks from going out. They are going to try to privatize Social Security.

They want to take this country and the American economy to the brink of default. They want to leverage their fiscal lunacy. It really is leveraging their fiscal lunacy, frankly, to cut your Social Security. It is that simple.

Then, as I said, there is privatizing Social Security. The details differ. The terms may change, but the goal is the same.

I have been in the Senate now, this is the beginning--it is my 17th year. Every couple of years, a few of the ``wunderkinds'' on that side of the aisle want to try to find a way to privatize Social Security, privatize Medicare, and privatize the Veterans' Administration. It is nothing less than an attempt to go back on a bedrock promise.

(Ms. CORTEZ MASTO assumed the Chair.)

The Senator from Nevada understands that people pay into Social Security every paycheck. They tend to pay into Medicare every--well, that is not actually true. If you are really, really, really rich, you only pay into Social Security for the first part of the year because you have already paid enough for the year, and it is some philosophy that I don't really understand.

But it is a bedrock promise to all of us. You pay in; you get those benefits.

Last year, I introduced a resolution--the Senator from Nevada cosponsored it--affirming the Senate's commitment to protecting and expanding Social Security. It was pretty simple. It simply said we affirm, we pledge we will protect Social Security and Medicare from any kinds of cuts from the far right that doesn't believe in the program. Almost every Democrat signed on. Not one Republican signed on. Not one Republican committed to our promise, recommitted to our promise to the American people, that if you work hard all your life, Social Security will be there for you.

So Americans shouldn't have to worry that politicians, secure with their government pensions, are going to try to take away their retirement. I urge my colleagues to do what the American people want us to do overwhelmingly. They want us to protect and expand Social Security and Medicare.

As I said, just look down the hall in the House of Representatives. There is a new majority there--a new majority controlled by the far right--of what used to be a pretty centrist Republican Party, from the far right, that--whenever they try to privatize Social Security and Medicare, they get all kinds of contributions from the rightwing and from Wall Street and from some big healthcare companies and some big energy companies and all that, and it is wrong. We know it is wrong. Whether it is Nevada, whether it is Las Vegas or Cleveland, whether it is Reno or Columbus, whether it is Carson City or Dayton, we know that overwhelmingly people in this country want a strong Social Security that will always be there for our kids and our grandkids and our great- grandkids. They want a Medicare that will provide healthcare to people regardless of your wealth, regardless of your income, regardless of your station in life.

That is my pledge. I know the Senators on the floor from Connecticut and Nevada also support that commitment and pledge. It is where we are as a country. It is not, unfortunately, where some of my colleagues sit.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, thank you for your leadership and your desire to continue to lead in our country.

Everything I do here, everything that most of us do here, I think, should come back to the dignity of work--the idea that hard work should pay off for everyone, no matter who you are, no matter whether you punch a clock or swipe a badge, no matter if you are management or labor, no matter if you are self-employed, where you live, what kind of work you do. When work has dignity--by definition, the ``dignity of work,'' brought to us originally by Leo XIII, ``the labor Pope'' of 120 years ago--with the Presiding Officer's faith, he knows about Leo XII-- and brought to us by Dr. King--when work has dignity, people have a secure retirement. It means you count on Social Security and Medicare. It means we protect people's pensions. It means the VA continues paying benefits that you earned if you were exposed to Agent Orange or to these massive football field-size burn pits. It means people make enough money for retirement and for a rainy day.

It is why in this body, just 2 years ago--in March, slightly fewer than 2 years ago--we saved the pensions of 100,000 Ohioans, tens of thousands in Virginia, a million around the country, people who worked their whole lives. They earned the pension and the peace of mind in retirement for themselves and their families.

Think about what that means.

It is why we are still fighting for the Delphi retirees who, again, lost their pensions through no fault of theirs. It is why we will always--always, always--fight back against attacks on Social Security, attacks on Medicare, and efforts to privatize the Veterans' Administration.

A secure retirement should never be a partisan issue. On August 14, 1935, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. Ever since that time, it should not--it was partisan then. Most Democrats were for it, and most Republicans were, I will just say, less for it. But it has become a partisan issue far too often.

Social Security and Medicare are two of the most popular, most unifying institutions of the country. It is our government's promise to working men and women, a promise that they will be able to retire with dignity. You pay in every paycheck--twice a month, whatever--and you are guaranteed that benefit.

Support for Social Security cuts across party lines. It cuts across racial lines. It cuts across geographic lines. Americans not only want to protect Social Security and Medicare--that goes without saying, although many of my colleagues want to undermined it--but they want to make these programs stronger.

But that is what Republicans--I don't want to make this into a partisan issue, but it has been, unfortunately. It is not what the Republicans in Congress want to do.

I want every American to understand that Republicans in Congress are planning to hold your Social Security hostage. They have done it several different ways over the years. So let's talk about it today.

They have threatened not to raise the debt limit. Raising the debt limit sounds complicated and sounds expensive. It is not. Raising the debt limit, said another way, is about paying our bills, paying the bills our Nation owes and keeping our word. We did this three times under Donald Trump with no drama. Their refusal to pay our bills undermines U.S. global leadership.

For seniors, it would be a disaster. It means that Social Security checks would stop going out. It would mean that seniors won't get their Social Security checks if we don't keep our promises and pay our bills. It is the first way this year that Republicans will attack Social Security.

Second, they want to take this country and the American economy to the brink of default and then leverage their fiscal lunacy to cut your Social Security. Ten years ago, 15 years ago, Republicans didn't act this way. It is this new--just going down the hall here, you can see the other place, the place where the other ones work. The people who are the most extreme in that body clearly are trying to bring this country to the brink. They are willing to take the U.S. economy hostage and only agree to pay our bills--bills we have all run up, including a huge part of that with President Trump and the Republican Congress with the big tax cut giveaway to the richest people in this country--they are willing to take the economy hostage and raise the debt limit if Congress cuts Social Security. The only way they are going to pay their bills is if Congress cuts Social Security. That is what they are saying.

Let that sink in. Congressional Republicans intend to use the fact that we need to pay our bills, pay our bills that already have accrued--to pay our bills is their tool for cutting Social Security. You might disguise their policy as a commission. Every time you hear the word ``commission'' and then they describe the next part of the sentence to reform Social Security, you know what it means. Their plan is to leverage this: We are going to not pay our bills to cut your Social Security.

Finally, there is privatizing Social Security. The details differ. The terms may change, but the goal is the same: to kill off Social Security by shrinking it and privatizing it and undermining public support.

It doesn't matter if you voted for this Republican or that Republican who sits at these desks or Senator Casey or Senator Wyden or Senator Kaine. Overwhelmingly, people who go to the polls and vote support Social Security and don't want Social Security privatized.

What is happening is nothing less than an attempt to go back on the bedrock promise made to America's middle class that Social Security would be there for them.

On August 14, 1935, Franklin Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. In 1940 or 1941, for a woman in New Hampshire, I think her first check was $24. I believe she was a retired schoolteacher and got the first Social Security check.

It doesn't matter to them, to Social Security beneficiaries, about all the politics here. But we know that for Social Security checks, people paid into the program their whole entire working lives. Our government should work for people who paid into Social Security, not against them.

When work has dignity, we honor the retirement security people earned. I urge my Republican colleagues in this body--colleagues, I point out, with healthcare and retirement plans; all of us with healthcare and retirement plans paid for by taxpayers--our retirements aren't at risk. Why should it be for Social Security beneficiaries? None of my colleagues over here are saying: Let's privatize the retirement system for Members of Congress.

They never say that. They say: Let's privatize Social Security. Let's privatize the Veterans' Administration in Richmond or Cleveland or Cincinnati. Let's privatize Medicare.

They never talk about privatizing their benefits.

But think about the generations of Americans who have benefited from Social Security and the generations to come relying on the promise of Social Security and Medicare.

For the last part of my remarks, Mr. President, I introduced a resolution affirming the Senate's commitment, last year, to protecting and expanding Social Security.

Dozens of my colleagues got on this bill, including, I believe, the Presiding Officer--a resolution affirming the Senate's commitment to protecting and expanding Social Security. But you know what? Not one Republican signed onto this resolution; not one recommitted to the promise of the American people that if you work hard all of your life, Social Security will be there for you.

What is more American, what is more basic, what is more family- oriented than: I pay into Social Security my whole life, I pay into Medicare, and if I get prematurely sick or disabled or when I retire, why would we not honor that commitment? Why do some Members of Congress want to privatize this program? Because we know what happens when they are privatized. The investors come in, the banks come in and end up undermining it, and there is less dollars--fewer dollars available and less public support.

Americans shouldn't have to worry that politicians secure with government pensions are going to try to take away their retirement benefits that they earn. I will again introduce that resolution-- probably next month--affirming the Senate's commitment to protecting and expanding Social Security, opposed to privatization.

I will again ask all my colleagues to sign on. I assume we will get many. I am hopeful this time--hopeful--that some Republicans join us. Republican seniors in Ohio would support it. It is just, their elected officials so often don't.

People shouldn't have to worry if politicians who put our entire economy at risk by using this debt limit fight--this ``are we going to pay our bills or not'' fight--to cut social security, but here we are.

I urge my colleagues to do the patriotic duty to raise the debt limit, without condition, without threatening economic calamity. And I ask that you work with us to do what the American people overwhelmingly want: protect and expand Social Security and Medicare and VA benefits.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the nomination of Martin Gruenberg to be a member and chairperson of the board of directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation--what most of America knows as FDIC. Mr. Gruenberg is an extraordinary and qualified nominee who came out of the Banking and Housing Committee with bipartisan support. He has been confirmed by the U.S. Senate, unanimously, five times.

Senator Toomey, the ranking member of the Banking Committee, someone whom I have not always agreed with on nominations, voted in favor of Mr. Gruenberg's nomination as part of a bipartisan package to fill the FDIC Board.

I thank my departing friend from Pennsylvania for his support and his cooperation.

Mr. Gruenberg's credentials speak for themselves: a career public servant, the longest-serving member of the FDIC board. As I said, the Senate has confirmed him unanimously five times. He has been nominated and confirmed over and over again.

He first joined the FDIC in 2005 after spending 25 years on Capitol Hill and working as a senior counsel on the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee for Senator Sarbanes.

As the Presiding Officer knows, this committee has just been known as the Banking Committee for some time, and the Banking Committee was, essentially, Wall Street's committee. When I took over as chair, we emphasized this committee is Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Its priorities are housing; its priorities are public transit; its priorities are making the banking system safer, not just to do the bidding of Wall Street.

Since joining the FDIC, Mr. Gruenberg served as chair, as vice chair, acting chair, and member of the FDIC. Take a minute and think about that in his qualifications: chair, vice chair, acting chair, and member.

I have served on the Banking and Housing Committee since 2007. I don't remember any FDIC nominee, or I am not sure I remember any nominee for anything that has had that kind of experience, that level of expertise.

Since becoming acting chair in February 2022, Mr. Gruenberg has wasted no time getting to work for the American people. He has focused on strengthening the Community Reinvestment Act to expand access to credit and investments in low- and moderate-income communities.

He is reviewing the FDIC's bank merger process to ensure it assesses the impact bank mergers have on competition and on access to financial services in communities across the country.

We all know that as banks have gotten larger and larger, gargantuan in many ways compared to what their sizes were during the disaster of 15 years ago--and we know that that can be a problem for our economy. So he is going to look at that much more closely than others.

Under his leadership, the FDIC evaluates the risk posed by cryptocurrencies and digital assets to consumers and to the overall safety and soundness of the banking system.

As I said during his nomination hearing, Mr. Gruenberg has seen our financial system at its highest and its lowest points. During the financial crisis when Wall Street and big corporations crashed our economy, Mr. Gruenberg worked on a bipartisan basis with then-FDIC Chair Sheila Bair to pick up the pieces.

He helped to restore--alongside her, helped to restore--a Republican, I would add--trust and confidence that our money in banks is safe.

He helped implement reforms passed by Congress to strengthen capital requirements and protect depositors from future financial crisis.

He brings this experience and dedication with him as our country emerges from the pandemic. I can think of no better person to serve as chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation than Marty Gruenberg.

Before I conclude, I want to note that, in addition to Mr. Gruenberg, the Senate is considering the nomination of two other seats to the FDIC Board. Once we have Mr. Gruenberg and the other two FDIC nominees, Travis Hill and Jonathan McKernan, confirmed--both Republicans--the agency will have in place for the first time since 2015 a full board of directors. So almost a decade it has been, three-fourths of a decade since this FDIC has had a full board of directors.

I credit President Biden for making this a priority. I credit Laura and Mohammad and others on my staff for making this a priority, and I credit the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs for doing this: first time since 2015, a full board of directors.

I urge my colleagues to support Mark Gruenberg's nomination to the FDIC Board.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, it is always an honor to speak on the Senate floor, and it is especially an honor when the Presiding Officer is one of my favorite Members of the Senate and especially an honor when I am going to be followed by the other Senator from Ohio, about whom I spoke yesterday.

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

Madam President, I wanted to just say a few words--not a formal speech--about my junior partner, the junior Senator from Ohio. He is only the junior Senator not in intellect or actions but only in seniority,

which is the way it works here. I know I am talking when the Presiding Officer has such a record of bipartisanship and working with others in the Senate--the junior Senator from New Hampshire and the work she has done. And I just wanted to talk for a moment about RobPortman.

I was at the last speech he gave, his retirement speech, last week. I wanted to just say a few words about his work. He and I, on the big issues, no surprise--Senator Portman, from Cincinnati; I live in northern Ohio--have looked at the world differently on big trade issues, on tax issues. I mean, he was for the Trump tax cut that gave big tax breaks to corporations and, I think, squeezed middle-class and low-income taxpayers. But on the big issues, we, in a sense, canceled each other's vote out, and we talk about that sometimes. But on a lot of Ohio-specific things, we are able to work together on really, really important problem-solving kinds of issues. And a few of them come to mind, like ``level the playing field''--the first issue--and then ``level the playing field'' 2.0,'' which will help the United States enforce its trade laws.

While Rob was for NAFTA and I was against it--or for PNTR with China, and I was against it--we did come together in making sure our trade laws are enforced, which helped Ohio businesses and Ohio manufacturing. That is one example.

Another example is what we were able to do in the infrastructure bill. He was a leader on writing the infrastructure bill, always thinking about how important it was--the Brent Spence Bridge in Cincinnati and the Western Hills Viaduct on the western side of Cincinnati, but also what we did on the 71-70 interchange in Columbus, what we were able to do on small township roads around small counties in rural Ohio, what we were able to do in Appalachia, what we were able to do in major transportation projects.

Another example, Rob Portman cared a lot about the environment. He loves canoeing. We worked on issues that matter on the Ohio River and especially issues that matter on Lake Erie. One of my favorite statistics is that Lake Erie, the smallest of the Great Lakes in area, the most shallow, only 30-feet deep, and around Toledo, 90-feet deep, around my wife's home county of Ashtabula. Lake Erie is 2 percent of all the water in the Great Lakes but has 50 percent of the fish, and Lake Superior, the largest lake, has 50 percent of the water and 2 percent of the fish. We know how important Lake Erie is to fishing. We know how important Lake Erie is to our water supply. And we know how important Lake Erie is just as one of the beautiful parts of the Great Lakes that matter to all of us.

So when I think about Rob, I regret he is leaving. I look forward to working with Senator Vance. I am hopeful that we can be as cooperative and effective as Rob and I have been on issues that are Ohio-specific, and we will continue to search out those issues.

Another one was NASA Glenn in Cleveland. We have one of the 10 NASA facilities in the country. NASA Glenn is particularly important, with the Armstrong Center in Sandusky, to the State's economy, and to our space program. That is in my part of the State. Rob has been helpful there. I have been helpful in his part of the State with Wright- Patterson Air Force Base, one of the key facilities for our U.S. Air Force.

So on issue after issue, many of them, Rob and I have each cosponsored dozens of bills that have become law--some 35, I believe, with each other, that have become law, and dozens more with other Senators in both parties, including Senator Hassan from New Hampshire, who has been one of the real leaders on doing bipartisan work.

So those kinds of issues don't get the attention of the media, and I don't blame them. They would rather cover when Rob and I disagree than when we agree. But my job, as Senator Portman's job, has always been to look for opportunities to do things together. We found dozens of those opportunities in our 12 years together.

I came in 2006, and he came in 2010. He is retiring at the end of 2022. We had 12 years together, and we were able to accomplish a lot of things for the State. I will miss him. I will miss his leadership. I will miss his reasonableness. And we will continue, I hope, once he retires, in working on other things that are State-specific for my State.

I thank the Presiding Officer for allowing me to speak for a couple of minutes about my friend Rob Portman.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.