Floor Statements

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the previously scheduled vote occur immediately.

Mr. President, I wish to recognize LaShawnda Smith on her retirement after 29 years of service with the Senate Appropriations Committee.

LaShawnda first joined the committee in 1993 as a detailee from the Department of Veterans Affairs, working on what was then the Subcommittee on the VA, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies. She later accepted a role at the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Congressional Affairs. It was not long, however, until she would find herself back on the committee as a detailee, this time on loan from HUD.

LaShawnda eventually joined the committee full-time in 1995 under the leadership of then-Chairman Mark Hatfield and Vice Chairman Robert Byrd. Since then, LaShawnda has faithfully served under the Republican leadership of Senators Ted Stevens, Thad Cochran, Richard Shelby, and now me, providing support to the committee and its various subcommittees.

Anyone who has worked with LaShawnda knows what a dependable member of the Senate community she has been. She has helped the wheels of the Appropriations Committee move forward in service to the American people throughout her career. LaShawnda will be missed by her colleagues and friends, and she deserves this Chamber's collective thanks for her dedicated work as she leaves to spend time with her family in Tennessee, including her daughters Dominique and Briana, two granddaughters Nyelah and Nyani, and two grandpups Lucci and Cairo.

The committee will miss LaShawnda's steady, stabilizing presence, and we wish her all the best in her well-deserved retirement from the Senate and in her new full-time role as a doting grandmother.

Madam President, before I begin my remarks on the continuing resolution to fund the government, I do have to take just a moment to note that today is National Lobster Day, and that is extremely important to the State of Maine.

Just last week, I treated the Members of my caucus to a wonderful lobster lunch, complete also with Maine potatoes and Maine wild blueberry pie. That should be an incentive for people to become Republicans, I would think, to get that annual lobster lunch. But it is an iconic industry in my State. If you ask people about the State of Maine, lobster always comes up.

So I do want to acknowledge that Senator King and I have once again this year noted that September 25 is National Lobster Day, and we appreciate the support of our colleagues.

Government Funding

Now, Madam President, I rise to urge passage of the government funding measure that was approved by the House of Representatives earlier today. The bill, which is known as a continuing resolution, or a CR, is straightforward. Most important of all, it prevents a government shutdown.

Government shutdowns are inherently a failure to govern effectively. They have negative consequences all across government. They require certain essential government employees, such as Border Patrol agents or members of our military or air traffic controllers, to report to work but with no certainty that they will be paid. We simply cannot allow that to occur.

Other harmful impacts have been outlined by the Secretary of Defense and all of the service Secretaries who point out that new defense programs cannot be started when there is a government shutdown--that inevitably increases costs to the taxpayers--and programs that should be terminated or trimmed are continuing to be funded at current levels. So we can't have--or stopped altogether, as people cannot do their work--so we cannot have a government shutdown.

This continuing resolution is not perfect, but it is an effort to extend current year program levels through December 20, with limited exceptions aimed primarily at preventing program disruptions and preparing for the Presidential transition and inaugural activities.

I would also note that this temporary funding bill includes $231 million for the Secret Service's immediate protection operations following the two recent assassination attempts on the life of former President Trump. All of us are aware that there also is a plot by the Iranian Government to assassinate President Trump. So we need to make sure we are providing robust protection.

While the first attempt on President Trump's life, the Secret Service has conceded, was due to poor communication and other failures, the Secret Service has also asked for this additional funding. It is absolutely essential as they deal with the increased threat environment and ensure that our current President and Vice President and Presidential candidates are all fully protected.

As I mentioned, the Secret Service has acknowledged that the security failure on July 13 was not a result of a

lack of resources. The additional funding in this bill will help to surge support to meet emergent personnel, equipment, and logistical needs. It will also allow for the Department of Defense to be reimbursed for the activities that it provides and will now resume for former President Trump.

The continuing resolution also allows the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, immediate access to more than $20 billion for its Disaster Relief Fund to sustain disaster assistance during the period covered by this CR.

This funding resolution is the product of bipartisan, bicameral negotiations. It is essential that it be adopted in order to prevent a government shutdown, and I urge its adoption.

Madam President, I do think it is important to point out that the House passed this bill by an overwhelming bipartisan vote.

Madam President, I rise today to introduce two bills: the Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregiver Act and the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act. These bills, which I am introducing today with my colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner, would enable family caregivers to better save for retirement.

Family caregivers play an essential role in American society: caring for this Nation's children and elderly. While providing many vital services for their loved ones, these caregivers often suffer economically. According to a new study from the Edward Jones Grassroots Taskforce, 64 percent of women say their caregiving duties have negatively impacted their ability to save toward their long-term financial goals. In fact, an average 26-year-old female making $60,000 a year leaving the workforce for 5 years to raise her children will lose close to $1 million over her lifetime due to lost retirement assets and wage growth. Those taking care of an aging parent often face similar experiences. While it is difficult to put a dollar amount to the value of the devotion, time, and services that these caregivers provide, the Alzheimer's Association has estimated that in 2023, family caregivers provided $350 billion in uncompensated long-term care.

For this reason, the American retirement system needs to change to benefit family caregivers. Our legislation would enable family caregivers to contribute to their retirement funds without significant income. Currently, contributions are capped to Roth IRAs at $7,000 or yearly income, whichever is less; therefore a family caregiver earning less than $7,000 annually is severely limited in their ability to contribute to a retirement account. The Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregiver Act, would eliminate the income cap for family caregivers, enabling them to contribute to a Roth IRA through other savings accounts up to$7,000 annually.

In addition, our current retirement system allows those over the age of 50 to contribute more money to their retirement than the statutory limit, the idea being that those in their fifties have more discretionary income than they did when they were younger to put towards retirement. Using the same logic, the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act would give family caregivers extra years of maximum catch-up contributions for every year they were sidelined from the workforce to be a family caregiver. These complementary bills would allow family caregivers to invest more in their retirement funds now and later.

These complementary bills would allow family caregivers to invest more in their retirement funds now and later. They have earned to support of important stakeholder organizations that represent family caregivers, including the Alzheimer's Association and the Alzheimer's Impact Movement. In letters that support these bills, they write, ``Nearly half of all caregivers who provide help to older adults do so for someone living with Alzheimer's or another dementia. Alzheimer's takes a devastating toll on caregivers.'' I am grateful for the support of these groups who know how important these retirement reforms will be to the financial security of caregivers who sacrifice for their loved ones. I urge my colleagues to support our legislation.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be printed in the Record:

Madam President, I rise today to introduce two bills: the Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregiver Act and the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act. These bills, which I am introducing today with my colleague from Virginia, Senator Warner, would enable family caregivers to better save for retirement.

Family caregivers play an essential role in American society: caring for this Nation's children and elderly. While providing many vital services for their loved ones, these caregivers often suffer economically. According to a new study from the Edward Jones Grassroots Taskforce, 64 percent of women say their caregiving duties have negatively impacted their ability to save toward their long-term financial goals. In fact, an average 26-year-old female making $60,000 a year leaving the workforce for 5 years to raise her children will lose close to $1 million over her lifetime due to lost retirement assets and wage growth. Those taking care of an aging parent often face similar experiences. While it is difficult to put a dollar amount to the value of the devotion, time, and services that these caregivers provide, the Alzheimer's Association has estimated that in 2023, family caregivers provided $350 billion in uncompensated long-term care.

For this reason, the American retirement system needs to change to benefit family caregivers. Our legislation would enable family caregivers to contribute to their retirement funds without significant income. Currently, contributions are capped to Roth IRAs at $7,000 or yearly income, whichever is less; therefore a family caregiver earning less than $7,000 annually is severely limited in their ability to contribute to a retirement account. The Improving Retirement Security for Family Caregiver Act, would eliminate the income cap for family caregivers, enabling them to contribute to a Roth IRA through other savings accounts up to$7,000 annually.

In addition, our current retirement system allows those over the age of 50 to contribute more money to their retirement than the statutory limit, the idea being that those in their fifties have more discretionary income than they did when they were younger to put towards retirement. Using the same logic, the Catching Up Family Caregivers Act would give family caregivers extra years of maximum catch-up contributions for every year they were sidelined from the workforce to be a family caregiver. These complementary bills would allow family caregivers to invest more in their retirement funds now and later.

These complementary bills would allow family caregivers to invest more in their retirement funds now and later. They have earned to support of important stakeholder organizations that represent family caregivers, including the Alzheimer's Association and the Alzheimer's Impact Movement. In letters that support these bills, they write, ``Nearly half of all caregivers who provide help to older adults do so for someone living with Alzheimer's or another dementia. Alzheimer's takes a devastating toll on caregivers.'' I am grateful for the support of these groups who know how important these retirement reforms will be to the financial security of caregivers who sacrifice for their loved ones. I urge my colleagues to support our legislation.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be printed in the Record:

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

Mr. President, I rise today to point out that we are only 12 days from the end of the fiscal year and to call upon the majority leader to bring the appropriations bills to the Senate floor. We have wasted the last 2 weeks. We have spent time voting on issues that were not nearly as time-sensitive.

By the end of July, the Senate Appropriations Committee had held hearings on, thoroughly considered at full committee markups, and reported for consideration by the full Senate 11 of the 12 appropriations bills, roughly 96 percent of the discretionary funding permitted by the caps. All of the bills--all of them--received strong bipartisan support. We advanced six of the bills unanimously. Unanimous support for any bill in today's Senate is no small feat and a testament to the hard work and seriousness of our committee members on both sides of the aisle, led by our chair, the senior Senator from Washington.

But what has happened after the committee reported its bills? Nothing. They have languished on the Senate calendar. Instead of taking up the Senate committee-passed bills--including bills that passed unanimously--that we passed earlier in the summer, the Senate has spent this month processing nominations and taking show votes aimed at scoring political points.

Show votes: We had another of those yesterday. We voted for the second time on the exact same bill on IVF. What was that? That is not what the Senate should be doing at this critical time. That was simply an attempt by the majority leader to score political points, and I think that is highly unfortunate. We need to get back to legislating, and surely funding our government is an imperative. The Founders envisioned the Senate as a deliberative institution.

As I indicated, by July, the Senate Appropriations Committee had advanced the fiscal year 2025 Defense appropriations bill by a vote of 28 to 0. It was unanimous. The bill would provide our military with the resources it needs to confront the global threats facing the United States, which combatant commanders have described to me as being the worst and most dangerous in 50 years.

Our bill rejects the administration's budget that would have led to the smallest Air Force in history and would have yielded the seas to the growing Chinese navy. The committee, instead, called for a 3.3 percent increase in defense funding levels compared to last year.

Our bill strengthens our military across all domains: air, land, sea, space, and cyberspace.

Our bill would also provide our brave men and women in uniform the pay and benefits that they deserve. It would fund a 4.5-percent pay increase for most of our service men and women and a 5.5-percent pay increase for the most junior enlisted personnel.

These are just some of the highlights of the bill.

Our bill includes $37 million for Navy shipbuilding, the largest shipbuilding budget ever. It begins to reverse the dangerous decline in the number of Navy ships.

For the Air Force, the bill provides additional funding to make nearly 500 more aircraft available than the President's budget request would allow.

The bill addresses the changing face of warfare with $1 billion for counterdrone capabilities to address this evolving threat. The growing use of drones by Iran and its proxies as well as Russia in its attacks in Ukraine have demonstrated that warfare has changed and so must our strategies and budgets.

These are just some of the highlights of this critically important appropriations bill that we should have been debating, amending, and passing on the Senate floor.

Mr. President, don't take just my word for it. I would ask unanimous

consent to submit for the Record letters on why we need a full-year defense appropriations bill and describing the harm of long continuing resolutions.

One of the letters is from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. One is from the Secretary of Defense. One is from the Chief of Naval Operations. One is from the Commandant of the Marine Corps. One is from the Secretary of the Navy. One is a letter from The Military Coalition, representing more than 5.5 million current and former servicemembers, their families, and caregivers. One is from the Aerospace Industries Association. I could go on and on.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that those letters be printed at the end of my remarks.

Mr. President, here is my point. It does not have to be this way. If the Senate majority leader had prioritized bringing appropriations bills to the floor, we could be in conference now with our Senate colleagues on some of the most important funding bills and send them to the President's desk prior to the October 1 start of the fiscal year.

The Senate is not doing its job. We should be considering these bills, not engaging in show votes.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I just want to thank the distinguished ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee for his extraordinary leadership. He has charted a future for defense spending that recognizes the extraordinary threats that we face, and it has been a real honor to work with him.

I yield to the Senator from Alabama, Mrs. Britt.

Mr. President, I just want to thank the Senator from Alabama for her eloquent words, her passion, and her leadership. She is absolutely correct that there is no reason for us to be in the situation that we find ourselves in just 12 days before the start of the new fiscal year.

There is no reason why the Defense appropriations bill, the military construction VA bill, the Labor HHS bill, the CJS bill--I could go on and on. There is no reason why the Senate appropriations approved bills could not have been brought to the Senate floor.

They are important. Funding the government is critical. And as the distinguished Senator from Alabama points out, when we go on to continuing resolutions, we cause enormous harm, which is why I entered into the record all of those letters from the Department of Defense and to other organizations.

And here is the other point: As the Senator from Alabama has pointed out, we end up spending more money. It costs us more money because contracts are put on hold, new starts are delayed, and programs that should be trimmed back or eliminated continue to be funded.

This just is not how the Senate should operate. And I implored the majority leader more than once to bring the appropriations bills to the Senate floor, and it is harmful to our Nation and particularly to our national defense that these bills were not brought to the floor.

I yield the floor.

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

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act.

This legislation is in response to the October 25, 2023, tragedy in Lewiston, ME. On that day, 18 Mainers were killed and 13 injured during the worst mass shooting in Maine's history. For 2 days, Lewiston and the surrounding communities were locked down and people were frightened as law enforcement searched for the shooter. It was a horrific event that Mainers will never forgot, nor should we.

The phrase ``Lewiston strong'' continues to echo across our State as we remember those whom we lost nearly a year ago. The victims were enjoying time with their family and friends at a local bowling alley and a restaurant. They included four members of Maine's deaf community who had gathered at the restaurant that evening to play cornhole. They also included a 14-year-old high school honors student, an Army veteran who served tours in Iraq, and a volunteer coach for a youth bowling league. They were parents, husbands and wives, neighbors, coworkers, and friends. Lives were forever changed on that day as families continue to mourn the loss of their loved ones.

The shooter was a sergeant first class in the Army Reserve. In the aftermath of the shootings, I led the Maine delegation in requesting an independent review by the inspector general of the Army to help us better understand what happened and what could have been done differently to help prevent this tragedy.

I said then that I wanted to use the results of that review--as well as the findings of a separate investigation by the Army Reserve and the independent commission established by the Governor of Maine--to inform potential Federal legislation that could help prevent future shootings.

The Army Reserve and the Army inspector general released their reports in July, and the independent commission appointed by the Governor released its report just last month. I commend the commission for its thorough report, and I thank the chairman of the commission, former chief justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court Daniel Wathen for his leadership.

All of these investigations revealed that there were numerous missed opportunities to potentially intervene and prevent this horrific tragedy. In many instances, there was a clear lack of effective communication and coordination. For example, the independent commission concluded that the local sheriff's office was ``justified in pointing out that the Army Reserve did not share all relevant information it had about [the shooter's] behavior.'' In its report, the commission went on to explain that had Army Reserve personnel ``presented a full and complete accounting of the facts, the [sheriff's office] might have acted more assertively.''

The findings of these investigations into the Lewiston shootings also serve as a stark reminder that members of our Armed Forces are not immune from mental illness.

So, today, I am introducing legislation that is designed to help address these significant issues. If enacted, my bill will move us closer to achieving our goals of making our communities safer and ensuring that servicemembers in crisis get the assistance they need to prevent injury to themselves and to others.

This bill is premised on my belief, which is supported by the findings of the investigations, that State crisis intervention programs should be fully utilized by our military when appropriate and with adequate due process protections. This can only happen, however, if relevant information is shared in a timely and effective manner.

The Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act would facilitate that kind of communication and coordination between the Armed Forces and the relevant State, county, and local authorities that was lacking during the months leading up to the mass shootings in Lewiston.

Specifically, this bill would direct the Armed Forces to fully utilize State crisis intervention programs in certain circumstances where the risk of harm is the greatest--namely, when a servicemember is determined to be unfit to possess military firearms due to that member making serious, credible threats of violence against themselves or against others or when a servicemember has been involuntarily committed to a hospital that specializes in caring for people with mental illness. ``Fully utilize'' is defined in the bill to mean taking action available to third parties under a State crisis intervention program and providing relevant material facts to appropriate law enforcement or judicial personnel.

In the case of the Lewiston shooter, Robert Card, the Army Reserve determined that he should not have access to military weapons and facilitated his treatment at a mental hospital, but regrettably, it did not provide civilian law enforcement in Maine, where he resided, or in New York, where he was training, with all of the relevant information that it had. This bill would direct that such information be provided to the appropriate authorities through an established process so that the authorities can make fully informed decisions about whether to take additional steps pursuant to a State crisis intervention program.

The bill also facilitates information sharing by directing the branches of our Armed Forces to fully participate in judicial proceedings authorized as part of a State crisis intervention program. This means that the branches of our Armed Forces would be required to produce upon request evidence as part of those proceedings.

This provision is especially meaningful. If this bill had been law prior to the shootings and Maine law enforcement had initiated proceedings under the State of Maine's yellow flag law, the Army would have been directed to produce evidence that could have resulted in the shooter losing possession of his personal weapons--the weapons that he used to murder 18 people--and at the same time, he could have received additional treatment for his severe mental illness.

I have worked for months to carefully craft this legislation, which also reflects the findings and recommendations of the three separate investigations I previously described. While drafting this bill, I solicited input from the relevant stakeholders--including the Army, veterans service organizations, and sportsman's groups, including the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine.

Responsible gun ownership is part of the heritage of many Maine families. The Sportsman's Alliance of Maine has long been an effective voice in our State for preserving this heritage and protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans, while recognizing that there are extreme circumstances in which action must be taken to intervene in order to prevent gun-related violence. I thank them for their thoughtful input and advice.

The product of this collaborative and consultative process is a bill that is

carefully constructed. It is a bill that is designed to save lives.

It is important to note once again that this proposal protects the due process and Second Amendment rights of servicemembers. It would not create a Federal crisis intervention program or impose new requirements on States or alter existing State programs or direct States to adopt such crisis intervention programs. The bill preserves the ability of States to craft their own crisis intervention programs. The Armed Forces would simply operate within each State's framework, provided that the State programs adhere to the due process and Second Amendment protections already specified by Congress in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.

Moreover, if a current or former servicemember seeks to regain possession of his or her firearms through a judicial proceeding, he or she would be entitled to evidence from the military that could be helpful to his or her case.

This legislation also does not affect the military's existing authority to disarm servicemembers of their issued weapons in a broad range of situations that are unrelated to a serious, credible threat of violence or involuntary commitment to a mental hospital.

We often search for something good to come from a terrible tragedy. After shoppers were killed in Buffalo, NY, and schoolchildren and teachers were murdered in Uvalde, TX, we came together in this Chamber to pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. I was honored to be part of that effort, which I believe has saved lives. Indeed, in June, the Department of Justice announced that it had charged more than 500 defendants under the provisions of that law that target unlawful trafficking and straw purchasing of firearms. I coauthored those provisions to help take dangerous criminals off the streets, and that is exactly what is happening.

Nothing that we can do can take away the pain, the shock, and the understandable anger felt by the families who lost loved ones last October, but we can and we should take legislative and administrative actions in response to the Lewiston tragedy. By taking such actions, we have a chance to help servicemembers in crisis. We have a chance to help protect our neighbors, our families, our communities. We have a chance to save lives.

Let me end by thanking my colleague from Maine Senator King for cosponsoring this legislation. I urge the rest of our colleagues to join us in this important effort.

Madam President, I rise today to introduce the Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act.

This legislation is in response to the October 25, 2023, tragedy in Lewiston, ME. On that day, 18 Mainers were killed and 13 injured during the worst mass shooting in Maine's history. For 2 days, Lewiston and the surrounding communities were locked down and people were frightened as law enforcement searched for the shooter. It was a horrific event that Mainers will never forgot, nor should we.

The phrase ``Lewiston strong'' continues to echo across our State as we remember those whom we lost nearly a year ago. The victims were enjoying time with their family and friends at a local bowling alley and a restaurant. They included four members of Maine's deaf community who had gathered at the restaurant that evening to play cornhole. They also included a 14-year-old high school honors student, an Army veteran who served tours in Iraq, and a volunteer coach for a youth bowling league. They were parents, husbands and wives, neighbors, coworkers, and friends. Lives were forever changed on that day as families continue to mourn the loss of their loved ones.

The shooter was a sergeant first class in the Army Reserve. In the aftermath of the shootings, I led the Maine delegation in requesting an independent review by the inspector general of the Army to help us better understand what happened and what could have been done differently to help prevent this tragedy.

I said then that I wanted to use the results of that review--as well as the findings of a separate investigation by the Army Reserve and the independent commission established by the Governor of Maine--to inform potential Federal legislation that could help prevent future shootings.

The Army Reserve and the Army inspector general released their reports in July, and the independent commission appointed by the Governor released its report just last month. I commend the commission for its thorough report, and I thank the chairman of the commission, former chief justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court Daniel Wathen for his leadership.

All of these investigations revealed that there were numerous missed opportunities to potentially intervene and prevent this horrific tragedy. In many instances, there was a clear lack of effective communication and coordination. For example, the independent commission concluded that the local sheriff's office was ``justified in pointing out that the Army Reserve did not share all relevant information it had about [the shooter's] behavior.'' In its report, the commission went on to explain that had Army Reserve personnel ``presented a full and complete accounting of the facts, the [sheriff's office] might have acted more assertively.''

The findings of these investigations into the Lewiston shootings also serve as a stark reminder that members of our Armed Forces are not immune from mental illness.

So, today, I am introducing legislation that is designed to help address these significant issues. If enacted, my bill will move us closer to achieving our goals of making our communities safer and ensuring that servicemembers in crisis get the assistance they need to prevent injury to themselves and to others.

This bill is premised on my belief, which is supported by the findings of the investigations, that State crisis intervention programs should be fully utilized by our military when appropriate and with adequate due process protections. This can only happen, however, if relevant information is shared in a timely and effective manner.

The Armed Forces Crisis Intervention Notification Act would facilitate that kind of communication and coordination between the Armed Forces and the relevant State, county, and local authorities that was lacking during the months leading up to the mass shootings in Lewiston.

Specifically, this bill would direct the Armed Forces to fully utilize State crisis intervention programs in certain circumstances where the risk of harm is the greatest--namely, when a servicemember is determined to be unfit to possess military firearms due to that member making serious, credible threats of violence against themselves or against others or when a servicemember has been involuntarily committed to a hospital that specializes in caring for people with mental illness. ``Fully utilize'' is defined in the bill to mean taking action available to third parties under a State crisis intervention program and providing relevant material facts to appropriate law enforcement or judicial personnel.

In the case of the Lewiston shooter, Robert Card, the Army Reserve determined that he should not have access to military weapons and facilitated his treatment at a mental hospital, but regrettably, it did not provide civilian law enforcement in Maine, where he resided, or in New York, where he was training, with all of the relevant information that it had. This bill would direct that such information be provided to the appropriate authorities through an established process so that the authorities can make fully informed decisions about whether to take additional steps pursuant to a State crisis intervention program.

The bill also facilitates information sharing by directing the branches of our Armed Forces to fully participate in judicial proceedings authorized as part of a State crisis intervention program. This means that the branches of our Armed Forces would be required to produce upon request evidence as part of those proceedings.

This provision is especially meaningful. If this bill had been law prior to the shootings and Maine law enforcement had initiated proceedings under the State of Maine's yellow flag law, the Army would have been directed to produce evidence that could have resulted in the shooter losing possession of his personal weapons--the weapons that he used to murder 18 people--and at the same time, he could have received additional treatment for his severe mental illness.

I have worked for months to carefully craft this legislation, which also reflects the findings and recommendations of the three separate investigations I previously described. While drafting this bill, I solicited input from the relevant stakeholders--including the Army, veterans service organizations, and sportsman's groups, including the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine.

Responsible gun ownership is part of the heritage of many Maine families. The Sportsman's Alliance of Maine has long been an effective voice in our State for preserving this heritage and protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans, while recognizing that there are extreme circumstances in which action must be taken to intervene in order to prevent gun-related violence. I thank them for their thoughtful input and advice.

The product of this collaborative and consultative process is a bill that is

carefully constructed. It is a bill that is designed to save lives.

It is important to note once again that this proposal protects the due process and Second Amendment rights of servicemembers. It would not create a Federal crisis intervention program or impose new requirements on States or alter existing State programs or direct States to adopt such crisis intervention programs. The bill preserves the ability of States to craft their own crisis intervention programs. The Armed Forces would simply operate within each State's framework, provided that the State programs adhere to the due process and Second Amendment protections already specified by Congress in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.

Moreover, if a current or former servicemember seeks to regain possession of his or her firearms through a judicial proceeding, he or she would be entitled to evidence from the military that could be helpful to his or her case.

This legislation also does not affect the military's existing authority to disarm servicemembers of their issued weapons in a broad range of situations that are unrelated to a serious, credible threat of violence or involuntary commitment to a mental hospital.

We often search for something good to come from a terrible tragedy. After shoppers were killed in Buffalo, NY, and schoolchildren and teachers were murdered in Uvalde, TX, we came together in this Chamber to pass the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. I was honored to be part of that effort, which I believe has saved lives. Indeed, in June, the Department of Justice announced that it had charged more than 500 defendants under the provisions of that law that target unlawful trafficking and straw purchasing of firearms. I coauthored those provisions to help take dangerous criminals off the streets, and that is exactly what is happening.

Nothing that we can do can take away the pain, the shock, and the understandable anger felt by the families who lost loved ones last October, but we can and we should take legislative and administrative actions in response to the Lewiston tragedy. By taking such actions, we have a chance to help servicemembers in crisis. We have a chance to help protect our neighbors, our families, our communities. We have a chance to save lives.

Let me end by thanking my colleague from Maine Senator King for cosponsoring this legislation. I urge the rest of our colleagues to join us in this important effort.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, on September 5, 1924, a new hospital opened its doors in my hometown of Caribou, ME, and admitted its very first patient. Today, I join people throughout the region in celebrating a century of expert, compassionate care at Cary Medical Center.

It is fitting that this 100th anniversary coincides with Cary being named as one of the Nation's Top 100 Great Community Hospitals by Becker's Hospital Review. This latest addition to the long and impressive list of national awards and recognitions underscores what CEO Kris Doody said when that announcement was made this summer: ``Working at Cary Medical Center is not just a job. It's a calling.''

From the start, Cary has been a community hospital with the emphasis on ``community.'' It was built on the foundation laid by Dr. Jefferson Cary, a physician as devoted to the people of northern Maine as he was to the practice of medicine. He came to Caribou in 1877, a time when house calls, even in the frigid winter, were made by horse and buggy, medical supplies were scarce, and payment for services was often made with farm products and firewood rather than cash. His skill as a physician was matched, as a friend put it, by his ``untiring devotion to the cause of humanity.''

When Dr. Cary died in 1912, he left the bulk of his estate to Caribou. His

bequest enabled the construction of the original hospital and created a legacy of generosity and support that the people of Caribou and the neighboring communities continue today.

The new Cary Medical Center, built in 1978, offered greatly expanded facilities and new technology, but the focus on patient-centered care remained unchanged.

Cary Medical Center is a nationally recognized leader in providing quality healthcare to rural veterans. Maine has one of the highest percentage of veterans in the country, and we Mainers are proud of our State's commitment to protecting our Nation. We also are proud of our State's care for the brave men and women who have served in uniform, and Cary has led the way.

One of the most significant milestones in Cary's storied history came in 1987, when our Nation's first community based outpatient clinic for veterans was established in Caribou. That pioneering work has been of great benefit to America's 3.5 million rural veterans who now receive care close to home at nearly 730 CBOCs throughout the country. The commitment by Cary Medical Center, the Veterans Administration, local veterans, and the entire community transformed healthcare for the men and women who defend our freedom.

Based on that success, Cary was selected in 2011 as one of just five sites nationwide for the Access Received Closer to Home pilot program. Maine's successful ARCH program paved the way for the Veterans Community Care Program that enables rural veterans to access the care they need in their communities. Veterans throughout American are grateful for Cary's leadership.

From professional education to diabetes care, oncology, and women and children's health, Cary Medical Center offers an ever-expanding array of services. These expansions are made possible by generous community support, led by the active and dedicated professionals and volunteers. The Cary team of physicians, nurses, technicians, staff, and volunteers are joined by grateful and supportive people throughout Aroostook County.

Through its partnership with Tufts Medical School's Maine Track Program and Cary's partnership with Pines Health Services, Cary Medical Center is a leader in strengthening rural healthcare. The selection of Cary as a pilot site for the Maine Medical Center and Dartmouth Institute Healthcare Improvement Project further demonstrates Cary's commitment to excellence.

My family, like so many others in Aroostook County, has close ties to Cary. My father served as chairman of the board of directors and actually signed the mortgage when the new hospital was built. Decades later, my brother Gregg chaired the board, and today, my niece Clara is a board member. For many years, my uncle Doug Collins, an internist, practiced medicine in Caribou and at Cary. The wonderfully compassionate and skilled healthcare providers at Cary cared for both of my parents during the final days of their lives. I am personally grateful for the leadership of all who have served in this outstanding community hospital.

More than a century has passed since Dr. Jefferson Cary practiced medicine, and he could not have foreseen the dramatic advances in healthcare since that time. But he had a vision that his generous gift to the community would benefit future generations. Thanks to the efforts of so many, that vision is a reality.

My congratulations to Cary Medical Center for 100 years of going above and beyond, and my best wishes for the years to come.

Mr. President, on Saturday, September 7, I was pleased to

join the people of New Gloucester, ME, in celebration of the town's 250th anniversary. It is an honor to recognize this milestone for a town with such a storied and compelling history.

Nestled in the northern part of Cumberland County, New Gloucester was first settled in 1739 under a Massachusetts Bay Colony grant by 60 inhabitants from Gloucester, MA. These early settlers built a small establishment above North Yarmouth where they enjoyed bountiful fishing from the Westcustogo River, today known as the Royal River, which originates at Sabbathday Lake in New Gloucester. Named in honor of their hometown, the early settlers hoped New Gloucester would be to them what Gloucester had been to their parents: a place of opportunity and prosperity.

Conditions on the early northeastern frontier were not always easy, and the settlement had to be abandoned for nearly a decade amid the tumult of the French and Indian War. Ultimately, however, the resilience and determination of those who would make New Gloucester their home won out. Settlers returned in 1754 and erected a blockhouse within a large palisade which protected and housed 12 families until it became safe to build individual homes, with the town rapidly growing into the friendly, tight-knit community locals know today.

New Gloucester boasts abundant natural beauty with its idyllic countryside and rolling hills, which have been tilled by hard-working farmers for generations. Today, it is home to Pineland Farms, one of Maine's largest food producers and best-known brands, as well as many family-owned farms who continue the work of their families going back generations.

The town is also unique for its rich cultural and religious heritage. The Sabbathday Lake Shaker Village, which sits at the western end of the town, is home to the last active Shaker community in the world. The village contains a barn, library, and museum which share knowledge of the Shaker's way of life and contain artifacts and heirlooms telling the group's story. It remains an important center for the community, hosting events year-round that include tributes to the history of the native Wabanaki population, harvest festivals, and much more.

I joined hundreds of townspeople and many more from across the State for a parade and fair held in commemoration of the town's anniversary. The fair featured over 60 community groups, crafters, and vendors, multiple historic displays, and live music. I so enjoy celebrating Maine's rich history, and Saturday's events were a wonderful example of what unifies the wonderful communities across our State.

New Gloucester's 250th anniversary is a time to honor the great people who have made the town such a beautiful and welcoming place to call home. It is my pleasure to offer congratulations and best wishes to them for this very special milestone.

Mr. President, I rise today in support of the nomination of Stacey Neumann to serve as a U.S. district court judge for the District of Maine.

I had the opportunity to meet with Ms. Neumann before her Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in May.

The committee has reported her nomination favorably with bipartisan support, and the Senate will be voting on her confirmation shortly.

I have decided to support this nominee based on her extensive legal experience--including as a Federal prosecutor--her in-depth interview with me, and her hearing testimony and background check. I have concluded that she possesses the integrity, intellect, and impartiality to serve in this critical position.

Ms. Neumann has served as a litigator at the law firm Murray Plumb & Murray in Portland, ME. She has been there since 2013 and handles criminal defense and civil litigation matters in State and Federal courts and agencies. Prior to this role, Ms. Neumann served in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Maine as an assistant U.S. attorney, where she represented the Federal Government in a variety of criminal proceedings.

Notably, a group of former Federal prosecutors from the District of Maine signed a letter stating that, in their view, Ms. Neumann has ``distinguished herself by virtue of a keen legal mind, tireless work ethic, and balanced and measured professional demeanor.''

Earlier in her career, Ms. Neumann served as the law clerk to a justice of the Vermont Supreme Court as well as for a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. She graduated magna cum laude from both James Madison University and Cornell Law School.

The American Bar Association has given Ms. Neumann its highest rating of unanimously ``well qualified.''

If confirmed by the Senate, she would be assigned to the U.S. district court seat in Bangor.

Based on her experience and character, I believe that Stacey Neumann will faithfully uphold our Nation's laws and that she will serve the State of Maine and our Nation well. I urge the Senate to confirm this nominee.

Mr. President, I rise today to support passage of two bipartisan bills aimed at continuing the significant progress we are making in treating and, one day, preventing and curing Alzheimer's disease.

These bills--S. 133, the National Alzheimer Project Act, or NAPA, as it is referred to, Reauthorization Act, and S. 134, the Alzheimer Accountability and Investment Act would help coordinate the tools of the Federal Government toward reaching these important goals.

And I would note, on the floor is the cochair of the Alzheimer's task force in the Senate, Senator Markey, along with the other two cosponsors we are fortunate to have, Senators Warner and Capito.

When I first joined the Senate in 1997, there really wasn't much of a focus on Alzheimer's in Washington. It was often called senility and was thought of not as a disease but just as part of growing old.

To increase public awareness of Alzheimer's disease, to advance research, and to bring the disease to the forefront of the Congressional agenda, I founded the Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer's in 1999 here in the Senate.

A true milestone in focusing our efforts was the passage of the Bipartisan National Alzheimer's Project Act that I coauthored with then-Senator Evan Bayh in 2011.

Before we passed that legislation, which became known as NAPA, there was no coordinated strategic plan to focus our efforts to defeat this devastating disease and ensure that our resources were maximized and leveraged.

NAPA tackled this problem by convening a panel of experts to create a coordinated strategic plan to prevent and effectively treat Alzheimer's disease by the year 2025, an ambitious goal, to be sure.

The expert council updates its plan annually. While the 2025 goal regrettably will not be met, it was still important to set an ambitious objective in order to spur research and to instill hope.

And, indeed, since then, researchers have made great strides in understanding this complex disease. To put our progress in context, 20 years ago we knew of only four genes that were associated with Alzheimer's disease. Now, researchers have identified more than 70 associated genetic areas, opening multiple new avenues for potential prevention and treatment.

There is another point that helps put this into perspective. In the early 2000s, the only sure way to know whether a person had Alzheimer's was through an autopsy.

Since then, the National Institutes of Health Research has led to the development of imaging techniques, biomarker tests, and data-driven approaches to enable more precise and earlier diagnoses.

And, most recently, decades of NIH research have paved the way for disease-modifying therapies targeting amyloid plaques' role in certain dementias.

After directing this decade of progress, the National Alzheimer's Project Act law is scheduled to expire soon. We must reauthorize the law to ensure that research investments remain coordinated to maximize their impact.

Toward that end, I introduced the NAPA Reauthorization Act with Senator Warner, which would extend NAPA through 2035 and modernize the legislation to reflect the strides that have been made to better understand the disease, such as including a new focus on promoting healthy aging, reducing risk factors, and supporting family caregivers.

The NAPA Reauthorization Act will allow the important work of the expert panel to continue through 2035. Among its provisions, the bill would reauthorize and expand the Advisory Council that assists annually in the development and evaluation of the National Plan. It will also ensure that underserved populations, including individuals with Down syndrome who are at greatly increased risk for Alzheimer's as they age, are included in this important work.

I have also introduced the Alzheimer's Accountability and Investment Act with my colleague from Massachusetts who has been such a leader in this area. It would continue through the year 2035 a requirement that the NIH submit an annual budget directly to Congress, estimating the funding necessary to fully implement NAPA's research goals.

Only two other areas of biomedical research--cancer and HIV/AIDS-- have been the subject of special budget development aimed at speeding discovery. This ``bypass budget'' helps us understand what additional funding is required to find better treatments, a means of prevention, and ultimately a cure.

As cochair along with Senators Warner, Capito, and Markey of the Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer's, I am committed to this effort both on a personal level as well as professionally as a Senator concerned about the impact on our families and our healthcare budgets.

On a personal level, I know just how devastating this disease is. I just recently lost my brother-in-law to the disease. My father, grandfather, and two of my uncles also succumbed to Alzheimer's. It is truly a heartbreaking disease. It is heartbreaking when you talk to a loved one and receive only a confused look in reply.

Alzheimer's disease is also one of the greatest health challenges of our time. It is currently ranked as the seventh leading cause of death in the United States, and nearly 7 million Americans are living with the disease. It is also one of the most expensive diseases for society, costing an estimated $360 billion last year alone.

Reauthorization of NAPA and the Alzheimer's Accountability and Investment Act would ensure our country is maintaining momentum in our fight against Alzheimer's, just as our investments in research are beginning to translate into promising new treatments.

Both laws have no mandatory spending effects, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Both bills are cosponsored by nearly half the Members of this Senate. Both bills have wide-ranging support from national stakeholders, including the Alzheimer's Association, Us Against Alzheimer's, the National Down Syndrome Society, and the National Down Syndrome Congress. And both bills were reported out of the Senate HELP Committee with broad bipartisan support last summer.

In order to change the trajectory of this disease that otherwise is projected to claim the minds of 13.8 million seniors and nearly surpass $1 trillion in annual costs by 2050, Congress has a responsibility to pursue effective public policy.

Ultimately, I think we are going to discover that this is a multifactorial disease, and that is why all of the research that is going on is so critical to finding effective treatments, a means of prevention, and, one day, a cure. And that is the purpose of these two bills.