Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise to join my colleague, the senior Senator from Vermont, in introducing the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act of 2022. This bill would update and reauthorize the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs, which have provided lifesaving services and housing for America's homeless youth for nearly half a century.

Homelessness is affecting youth in truly staggering numbers. According to the National Network for Youth, an estimated 4.2 million young people experience homelessness at some point each year. Some of these youth may be away from home for a few nights, while others have been living on the streets for years. No area of this country is immune from the scourge of homelessness, as it impacts rural and urban communities alike.

Tragically, runaway and homeless youth are at high risk of victimization, abuse, criminal activity, and even death. This population is at greater risk of suicide, unintended pregnancy, and substance abuse. Many are unable to continue with school and are more likely to enter our juvenile criminal justice system. The reality is that available data likely underestimate the scale and consequences of this problem.

I have met with teachers, social workers, and others from Maine who work directly with young people experiencing homelessness. We talked about the pressure that student homelessness places on teachers, school administrators, and their already strapped resources, and--most important--the homeless students themselves. I have also visited New Beginnings in Lewiston, where I saw firsthand how Runaway and Homeless Youth Act resources are providing essential safety nets for young people in need. The staff at New Beginnings helps young people with case management, provides referrals to State and local agencies, assists with housing needs and access to shelter, and connects individuals to local educational and employment programs.

Several years ago, as the chair of the Senate Transportation and Housing Appropriations Subcommittee, I held a hearing that featured testimony from Brittany Dixon, a former homeless youth from Auburn, ME, who gave powerful testimony on her personal experience with homelessness. After becoming homeless, Brittany was connected with New Beginnings. In her testimony, she said, ``New Beginnings provided many resources I could use to succeed, including assistance with college applications and financial aid. . . . New Beginnings has helped me to develop critical life skills and to become self-sufficient.'' ``Programs that support homeless youth are important to

so many young people like me,'' she added. ``It gives young people the chance to have a safe place to stay while they get their footing and figure out what they want to do in their lives.''

Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs helped make Brittany's success story possible. Sadly, however, there are still many homeless youth who do not have the support they need. We must build on our past efforts because homeless youth should have the same opportunities to succeed as their peers.

The three existing Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs--the Basic Center Program, the Street Outreach Program, and the Transitional Living Program--help community-based organizations reach young people when they need support the most. These programs help runaway and homeless youth avoid the juvenile justice system, and early intervention can help them escape victimization and trafficking.

The Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act would reauthorize and strengthen these programs that help homeless youth meet their immediate needs, and it would help secure long-term residential services for those who cannot be safely reunited with their families. Our legislation would also create a new program--the Prevention Services Program--designed to help prevent youth from running away and becoming homeless in the first place. Moreover, our bill supports wraparound services for victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation.

Mr. President, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act will support those young people who run away, are forced out of their homes, or are disconnected from their families. A caring and safe place to sleep, eat, grow, study, and develop is critical for all young people. The programs reauthorized and modernized through this legislation help extend those basic services to the most vulnerable youth in our communities.

I thank Senator Leahy for his leadership on this bill and urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. President, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the motion be dispensed with.

Mr. President, the underlying bill provides billions of dollars to the IRS to hire 87,000 additional auditors, yet more than 50 percent of the current IRS employees have yet to return to their offices or work sites.

Here are the consequences: Four out of five phone calls from taxpayers go unanswered; 21 million returns have not been processed; refunds are taking 6 months or more.

My motion would simply prohibit the IRS from using these billions of dollars to add 87,000 new employees prior to bringing 90 percent of their workforce back to the office.

I would note that that 87,000 number is more than the combined employees at the Pentagon, the State Department, the FBI, and the Border Patrol agents combined.

Mr. President, I request the yeas and nays.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be permitted to speak prior to the scheduled votes: Senator Collins for up to 10 minutes, Senator Graham for up to 5 minutes, Senator Blunt for up to 5 minutes, Senator Romney for up to 5 minutes, Senator Risch for up to 5 minutes, Senator Paul for up to 10 minutes, Senator Sullivan for up to 1 minute, and Senator Menendez for up to 10 minutes.

Madam President, I rise in strong support of the accession of Finland and Sweden into the NATO alliance.

In May, I visited Helsinki and Stockholm as part of a Senate delegation to encourage the Finnish and Swedish efforts to join the alliance. Our trip, however, started in Ukraine. There, after a long, secret journey under cover of darkness, our contingent of four Senators met with President Zelenskyy for 2 hours. We discussed the military, humanitarian, economic, and security consequences of Russia's unprovoked, brutal war against Ukraine. I asked President Zelenskyy whether he thought Vladimir Putin's attack on his country had had the opposite effect of what he had intended. For example, the Russian- speaking sections of eastern Ukraine are now embracing their Ukrainian identity, and NATO is more united than ever. President Zelenskyy told me that Putin's war of aggression not only had been the opposite of the easy conquest that Putin had expected but also had strengthened the NATO alliance and the European Union.

(Mr. HICKENLOOPER assumed the Chair.)

Mr. President, one cannot understand how Russia's invasion of Ukraine has upended decades and, in the case of Sweden, centuries of security policy for these countries. For 200 years, Sweden has maintained a policy of neutrality, but, as Swedish Prime Minister Andersson put it to me, ``February 24 changed everything.'' That was the date of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Finland, which shares an 830-mile border with Russia, likewise concluded that Russia's aggression required a dramatic rethinking of its security. To demonstrate the reality on the ground, the Finnish President took us outside of his home and pointed to his right, where Tallinn, Estonia, is only 50 miles away across the Baltic Sea. He then pointed to his left and told us that St. Petersburg, Russia, is only 200 miles away.

Our visits to these leaders came just as the Parliaments of Finland and Sweden were voting to formally request admission into NATO. We assured their leaders that there was strong, bipartisan support in the Senate for their accession and that adding their capabilities to the alliance would improve, would strengthen our collective defense and security.

This is, indeed, an important point. Sweden and Finland will both bring enormous geographic advantages and military capabilities to NATO. Finland is expected to exceed NATO's 2 percent defense spending target this year, and Sweden has committed to meeting that target as soon as possible. Finland has the largest reserve military force in Europe and has recently decided to upgrade its current fleet of American F-18 fighter jets with the fifth-generation F-35. For the past several years, Sweden has been increasing its arms spending, and the country has advanced defense industrial capabilities.

The addition of both of these nations to NATO will bolster deterrence against Russia in the Arctic, Nordic, and Baltic regions.

For decades, Finland and Sweden have had a strong history of support for NATO. Their advanced militaries are, for example, interoperable with member nations. Both countries also have supported NATO-led operations over the decades, including in Afghanistan, Kosovo, and Iraq. They frequently participate in alliance-led exercises and capacity-building operations in Africa and elsewhere.

During the current crisis in Ukraine, Finland and Sweden have been invaluable partners to the Ukrainians. They have been sending vital military aid to Ukraine, as well as humanitarian assistance, since February, including anti-ship missiles, rifles, body armor, and anti- tank weapons.

There are a few critics who contend that this NATO expansion, which will more than double NATO's direct border with Russia, is somehow provocative to Vladimir Putin. This assertion ignores a clear pattern of Russian aggression extending back years.

In 2008, Russia invaded its neighbor, Georgia. In 2014, Russia invaded Ukraine for the first time, occupying and seizing Crimea and areas of eastern Ukraine. Then, earlier this year, of course, Russia launched the largest and most devastating land war in Europe since World War II without any justification or provocation when it invaded the free and democratic nation of Ukraine.

This expansion of NATO is warranted precisely because of Russian provocations across the region.

As always, NATO and the United States have no desire to see a war with Russia, but we will defend the territory and sovereignty of each of its members.

Russia's brutal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has permanently changed the European security environment. Enlarging NATO to include two of our most capable and supportive European allies, Finland and Sweden, is a necessary and deliberative response.

I urge all of my colleagues, in a strong vote, to join me in the swift ratification of Finland and Sweden's accession into NATO.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Heidi Zisselman, a fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges through August 4, 2022.

Mr. President, I rise today to join in the introduction of the Reproductive Freedom for All Act, a bipartisan bill that would ensure the right of women to make certain reproductive choices without undue government interference.

I support a woman's right to have an abortion, and I believe that the threshold question of whether or not abortion is legal needs to be consistent at the national level. States can account for regional differences with regulations like parental notification requirements, but the basic right needs to be the same regardless of the State in which a woman happens to reside.

In its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the U.S. Supreme Court abandoned a nearly 50-year precedent that had been reaffirmed and on which women had relied for decades. The Dobbs ruling was, as the Chief Justice described it, a ``jolt'' to our legal system. This action has further divided the country at a moment when now, more than ever in modern times, we need the Court to demonstrate consistency, predictability, and restraint.

Prior to the Court's decision in Dobbs, I introduced, with Senator Murkowski, the Reproductive Choice Act to enact in to Federal law the abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade and affirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In the wake of the Dobbs decision, I have worked with my colleagues Senator Kaine, Senator Murkowski, and Senator Sinema in drafting a more comprehensive, bipartisan bill that would codify the abortion rights articulated by the Supreme Court in Roe, Casey and Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, as well as the contraception rights first articulated in Griswold v. Connecticut and later clarified in Eisenstadt v. Baird and Carey v. Population Services International.

Our legislation would enshrine important abortion and contraception rights into Federal law without undercutting basic conscience protections that have been in place for decade and that are relied upon by healthcare practitioners who have religious objections.

Our goal with this legislation is to do what the Court should have done--provide consistency in our laws that Americans have relied upon for five decades regarding the ability to make certain reproductive choices.

Mr. President, this bill maintains the pre-Dobbs status quo. In other words, it would ensure that the legal framework in place before Dobbs remains the law of the land. Our bill accomplishes this goal by tracking the Supreme Court's language in the seminal cases I mentioned.

Specifically consistent with decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence, the Reproductive Freedom for All Act provides that a State may not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to ternate a pregnancy before fetal viability.

During this time Sates may enact reasonable regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, unless such regulations impose an undue burden.

After fetal viability, a State may regulate or even proscribe the ability of a woman to terminate her pregnancy but not when such a termination is necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman.

Moreover, by codifying Griswold, Eisenstadt, and Carey, the bill makes clear that a State cannot prohibit an individual from obtaining or using contraceptives.

Finally the legislation specifically protects conscience protections that have been relied upon by healthcare providers who have religious objections.

Mr. President, the best path forward for our country is to maintain the same legal framework that was in place just weeks ago before the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs. Our bill would enshrine into law the important protections articulated in the Supreme Court cases that I mentioned without undercutting statutes that also have been in place for decades.

I urge all of my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today to join in the introduction of the Reproductive Freedom for All Act, a bipartisan bill that would ensure the right of women to make certain reproductive choices without undue government interference.

I support a woman's right to have an abortion, and I believe that the threshold question of whether or not abortion is legal needs to be consistent at the national level. States can account for regional differences with regulations like parental notification requirements, but the basic right needs to be the same regardless of the State in which a woman happens to reside.

In its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the U.S. Supreme Court abandoned a nearly 50-year precedent that had been reaffirmed and on which women had relied for decades. The Dobbs ruling was, as the Chief Justice described it, a ``jolt'' to our legal system. This action has further divided the country at a moment when now, more than ever in modern times, we need the Court to demonstrate consistency, predictability, and restraint.

Prior to the Court's decision in Dobbs, I introduced, with Senator Murkowski, the Reproductive Choice Act to enact in to Federal law the abortion rights established by Roe v. Wade and affirmed by Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

In the wake of the Dobbs decision, I have worked with my colleagues Senator Kaine, Senator Murkowski, and Senator Sinema in drafting a more comprehensive, bipartisan bill that would codify the abortion rights articulated by the Supreme Court in Roe, Casey and Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, as well as the contraception rights first articulated in Griswold v. Connecticut and later clarified in Eisenstadt v. Baird and Carey v. Population Services International.

Our legislation would enshrine important abortion and contraception rights into Federal law without undercutting basic conscience protections that have been in place for decade and that are relied upon by healthcare practitioners who have religious objections.

Our goal with this legislation is to do what the Court should have done--provide consistency in our laws that Americans have relied upon for five decades regarding the ability to make certain reproductive choices.

Mr. President, this bill maintains the pre-Dobbs status quo. In other words, it would ensure that the legal framework in place before Dobbs remains the law of the land. Our bill accomplishes this goal by tracking the Supreme Court's language in the seminal cases I mentioned.

Specifically consistent with decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence, the Reproductive Freedom for All Act provides that a State may not impose an undue burden on the ability of a woman to choose whether or not to ternate a pregnancy before fetal viability.

During this time Sates may enact reasonable regulations to further the health or safety of a woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, unless such regulations impose an undue burden.

After fetal viability, a State may regulate or even proscribe the ability of a woman to terminate her pregnancy but not when such a termination is necessary to preserve the life or health of the woman.

Moreover, by codifying Griswold, Eisenstadt, and Carey, the bill makes clear that a State cannot prohibit an individual from obtaining or using contraceptives.

Finally the legislation specifically protects conscience protections that have been relied upon by healthcare providers who have religious objections.

Mr. President, the best path forward for our country is to maintain the same legal framework that was in place just weeks ago before the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs. Our bill would enshrine into law the important protections articulated in the Supreme Court cases that I mentioned without undercutting statutes that also have been in place for decades.

I urge all of my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, the opioid epidemic continues to claim the lives of far too many people, with record numbers of both Mainers and Americans lost in 2021. While many perceive the face of opioid addiction as young, the epidemic harms older adults as well. In Maine, more than 10 percent of drug overdose deaths last year were among residents 60 and older.

Each and every opioid death is preventable, but we must ensure the unique needs of seniors struggling with addiction are not forgotten. That is why I rise today with my colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, to introduce legislation to improve seniors' awareness of, and access to, opioid use disorder, OUD, treatment covered by the Medicare Program. Our bill, the Supporting Seniors with Opioid Use Disorder Act of 2022, is in response to recent findings from the inspector general that confirm the urgent need to increase the number of Medicare beneficiaries receiving treatment for opioid use disorder.

The challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, combined with the increased prevalence of fentanyl, have aggravated this national crisis. Even before COVID-19, however, the number of people age 55 or older treated in emergency rooms for nonfatal opioid overdoses was increasing, with a shocking 32 percent jump in E.R. visits from 2016 to 2017. In 2018, as chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, I chaired a hearing on this very topic in attempt to shed light on this often-overlooked population. One expert witness told the Aging Committee, ``Medicare beneficiaries are the fastest growing population of diagnosed opioid use disorders.''

Compounding these disturbing statistics is a December 2021 Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, OIG, report exploring whether Medicare beneficiaries with opioid use disorder receive medication and behavioral therapy. It found more than 1 million Medicare beneficiaries were diagnosed with OUD in 2020, yet fewer than 16 percent of those patients received medication to treat their OUD. The report also concluded older beneficiaries were three times less likely to receive medication to treat their OUD than younger beneficiaries. Even fewer beneficiaries received both medication and behavioral therapy. The conclusion is clear: Medicare beneficiaries are not receiving the OUD treatment they need.

Our bill, the Supporting Seniors with Opioid Use Disorder Act of 2022, would codify the recommendations made by the HHS OIG regarding how to improve beneficiaries' awareness of Medicare coverage for OUD treatment and how to identify current gaps and opportunities to better meet the needs of this unique population. Specifically, our legislation would require CMS to conduct additional outreach to beneficiaries to increase awareness about Medicare coverage for the treatment of OUD, such as by revising outreach and enrollment materials, making State and national contact information for healthcare providers publicly available in an easily accessible manner, and developing or improving continuing education programs on opioid medications

and substance use disorder treatment programs. Our bill would also improve data sharing within Agencies at HHS with the goal of obtaining a better understanding of current treatment gaps.

Lastly, the bill would require HHS to convene a stakeholder meeting to share best practices on the use of behavioral therapy among beneficiaries receiving medication to treat opioid use disorder. Emerging research points to evidence that patients receiving medication to treat opioid use disorder may also benefit from behavioral therapy, so this opportunity for collaboration on strategies to support better treatment engagement and continuity could be beneficial to both patients and healthcare professionals.

The overdose crisis continues to ravage the country, and it is critical that people who are suffering from opioid use disorder have access to the treatment they need to survive and thrive--including our seniors. Challenges in treatment and recovery undoubtedly persist, but the actions taken in this legislation can help guide our continued response. I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of this important legislation that will support seniors' access to opioid use disorder services and our understanding of potential disparities in treatment.

Mr. President, the opioid epidemic continues to claim the lives of far too many people, with record numbers of both Mainers and Americans lost in 2021. While many perceive the face of opioid addiction as young, the epidemic harms older adults as well. In Maine, more than 10 percent of drug overdose deaths last year were among residents 60 and older.

Each and every opioid death is preventable, but we must ensure the unique needs of seniors struggling with addiction are not forgotten. That is why I rise today with my colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, to introduce legislation to improve seniors' awareness of, and access to, opioid use disorder, OUD, treatment covered by the Medicare Program. Our bill, the Supporting Seniors with Opioid Use Disorder Act of 2022, is in response to recent findings from the inspector general that confirm the urgent need to increase the number of Medicare beneficiaries receiving treatment for opioid use disorder.

The challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, combined with the increased prevalence of fentanyl, have aggravated this national crisis. Even before COVID-19, however, the number of people age 55 or older treated in emergency rooms for nonfatal opioid overdoses was increasing, with a shocking 32 percent jump in E.R. visits from 2016 to 2017. In 2018, as chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, I chaired a hearing on this very topic in attempt to shed light on this often-overlooked population. One expert witness told the Aging Committee, ``Medicare beneficiaries are the fastest growing population of diagnosed opioid use disorders.''

Compounding these disturbing statistics is a December 2021 Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General, OIG, report exploring whether Medicare beneficiaries with opioid use disorder receive medication and behavioral therapy. It found more than 1 million Medicare beneficiaries were diagnosed with OUD in 2020, yet fewer than 16 percent of those patients received medication to treat their OUD. The report also concluded older beneficiaries were three times less likely to receive medication to treat their OUD than younger beneficiaries. Even fewer beneficiaries received both medication and behavioral therapy. The conclusion is clear: Medicare beneficiaries are not receiving the OUD treatment they need.

Our bill, the Supporting Seniors with Opioid Use Disorder Act of 2022, would codify the recommendations made by the HHS OIG regarding how to improve beneficiaries' awareness of Medicare coverage for OUD treatment and how to identify current gaps and opportunities to better meet the needs of this unique population. Specifically, our legislation would require CMS to conduct additional outreach to beneficiaries to increase awareness about Medicare coverage for the treatment of OUD, such as by revising outreach and enrollment materials, making State and national contact information for healthcare providers publicly available in an easily accessible manner, and developing or improving continuing education programs on opioid medications

and substance use disorder treatment programs. Our bill would also improve data sharing within Agencies at HHS with the goal of obtaining a better understanding of current treatment gaps.

Lastly, the bill would require HHS to convene a stakeholder meeting to share best practices on the use of behavioral therapy among beneficiaries receiving medication to treat opioid use disorder. Emerging research points to evidence that patients receiving medication to treat opioid use disorder may also benefit from behavioral therapy, so this opportunity for collaboration on strategies to support better treatment engagement and continuity could be beneficial to both patients and healthcare professionals.

The overdose crisis continues to ravage the country, and it is critical that people who are suffering from opioid use disorder have access to the treatment they need to survive and thrive--including our seniors. Challenges in treatment and recovery undoubtedly persist, but the actions taken in this legislation can help guide our continued response. I urge my colleagues to support the adoption of this important legislation that will support seniors' access to opioid use disorder services and our understanding of potential disparities in treatment.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join my close friend and dear colleague Senator Manchin in introducing bipartisan legislation to reform the archaic and ambiguous Electoral Count Act of 1887, the important law that governs how Congress tallies each State's electoral votes for President and Vice President.

On January 6 of 2017, I was amused to learn that I had received one electoral vote for Vice President of the United States, an office for which I obviously was not a candidate. But on January 6, 2021, I realized that my unearned vote from 4 years earlier was really not funny at all. Rather, it was an indication of deep structural problems with our system of certifying and counting the electoral votes for President and Vice President. These unfortunate flaws are codified in the 1887 Electoral Count Act.

In four of the past six Presidential elections, this process has been abused, with Members of both parties raising frivolous objections to electoral votes. But it took the violent breach of the Capitol on January 6 of 2021 to really shine a spotlight on the urgent need for reform.

Over the past several months, Senator Manchin and I have worked with a terrific, bipartisan group of Senators who are united in our determination to prevent the flaws in this 135-year-old law from being used to undermine future Presidential elections.

I want to express my gratitude to my friend Senator Manchin and to all the members of our bipartisan group for their hard work, their constructive work, to craft this legislation. Specifically, I want to thank Senators Portman, Sinema, Romney, Shaheen, Murkowski, Warner, Tillis, Murphy, Capito, Cardin, Young, Coons, and Sasse for their work over several months. I also want to thank Senators Klobuchar and Blunt, who head the Rules Committee, for their advice and counsel throughout this process, and Senator Lindsey Graham for his insights and for joining as a cosponsor.

The legislation that we are introducing--the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act--will help ensure that electoral votes totaled by Congress accurately reflect each State's popular vote for President and Vice President.

Our bill includes a number of important reforms, but I want to highlight just a few.

First, it reasserts that the constitutional role of the Vice President in counting electoral votes is strictly and solely ministerial. The idea that any Vice President would have the power to unilaterally accept or reject or change or halt the electoral votes is antithetical to our Constitution and basic democratic principles.

Second, our bill raises the threshold to lodge an objection to electors to at least one-fifth of the duly chosen and sworn members of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Currently, only a single Member in both houses is required to object to an elector or a slate of electors.

Third, our legislation will ensure that Congress can identify a single, conclusive slate of electors by clearly identifying a single State official who is responsible for certifying a State's electors; requiring Congress to defer to the slates of electors submitted by a State pursuant to the judgment of State or Federal courts; and providing aggrieved Presidential candidates with an expedited judicial review of Federal claims related to a State's certificate of electors. Let me be clear that this does not create a new cause of action. Instead, it will ensure prompt and efficient adjudication of disputes.

To help promote the orderly transfer of power, our bill also includes clear guidelines for when eligible Presidential candidates may receive Federal resources to support their transition into office. And I want to particularly thank Senators Portman, Coons, and Sasse for their hard work on those provisions.

We are also introducing a second bill--the Enhanced Election Security and Protection Act--to address other issues pertaining to the administration of elections. In the interest of time, let me just quickly note the major provisions of this bill. It would reauthorize the Election Assistance Commission and require it to conduct additional cyber security testing of voting systems, a concept put forth by Senator Warren. It would improve the Postal Service's handling of election mail. It would enhance current penalties for violent threats against election workers; and increase the maximum penalties for tampering with voting records, including certain electronic records, that was the work of several members, including Senators Romney, Shaheen, and Sinema, among others.

We have before us an historic opportunity to modernize and strengthen our system of certifying and counting the electoral votes for President and Vice President. January 6 reminded us that nothing is more essential to the survival of a democracy than the orderly transfer of power.

And there is nothing more essential to the orderly transfer of power than clear rules for effecting it. I very much hope that Congress will seize this opportunity to enact these sensible and much-needed reforms before the end of this Congress.

Mr. President, I, too, want to salute all of the members of our group who worked so hard over many months. As is always the case when you delve into a complicated issue, it turns out that there are far

more nuances and complexities than you would think when you first look at the issue. But everyone continued to work for the common good to strengthen the procedures, to update this archaic and ambiguous law that was written in the language of another era. And we have accomplished that. And I really hope our colleagues will all join together and that in the end we can have an overwhelming vote.

Finally, I, too, want to thank our staff members for their extraordinary work. They worked literally night and day to work through the many thorny issues and to help bring us together. So my thanks not only to the Members but to their staffs as well.

Mr. President, I am pleased to join my close friend and dear colleague Senator Manchin in introducing bipartisan legislation to reform the archaic and ambiguous Electoral Count Act of 1887, the important law that governs how Congress tallies each State's electoral votes for President and Vice President.

On January 6 of 2017, I was amused to learn that I had received one electoral vote for Vice President of the United States, an office for which I obviously was not a candidate. But on January 6, 2021, I realized that my unearned vote from 4 years earlier was really not funny at all. Rather, it was an indication of deep structural problems with our system of certifying and counting the electoral votes for President and Vice President. These unfortunate flaws are codified in the 1887 Electoral Count Act.

In four of the past six Presidential elections, this process has been abused, with Members of both parties raising frivolous objections to electoral votes. But it took the violent breach of the Capitol on January 6 of 2021 to really shine a spotlight on the urgent need for reform.

Over the past several months, Senator Manchin and I have worked with a terrific, bipartisan group of Senators who are united in our determination to prevent the flaws in this 135-year-old law from being used to undermine future Presidential elections.

I want to express my gratitude to my friend Senator Manchin and to all the members of our bipartisan group for their hard work, their constructive work, to craft this legislation. Specifically, I want to thank Senators Portman, Sinema, Romney, Shaheen, Murkowski, Warner, Tillis, Murphy, Capito, Cardin, Young, Coons, and Sasse for their work over several months. I also want to thank Senators Klobuchar and Blunt, who head the Rules Committee, for their advice and counsel throughout this process, and Senator Lindsey Graham for his insights and for joining as a cosponsor.

The legislation that we are introducing--the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act--will help ensure that electoral votes totaled by Congress accurately reflect each State's popular vote for President and Vice President.

Our bill includes a number of important reforms, but I want to highlight just a few.

First, it reasserts that the constitutional role of the Vice President in counting electoral votes is strictly and solely ministerial. The idea that any Vice President would have the power to unilaterally accept or reject or change or halt the electoral votes is antithetical to our Constitution and basic democratic principles.

Second, our bill raises the threshold to lodge an objection to electors to at least one-fifth of the duly chosen and sworn members of the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Currently, only a single Member in both houses is required to object to an elector or a slate of electors.

Third, our legislation will ensure that Congress can identify a single, conclusive slate of electors by clearly identifying a single State official who is responsible for certifying a State's electors; requiring Congress to defer to the slates of electors submitted by a State pursuant to the judgment of State or Federal courts; and providing aggrieved Presidential candidates with an expedited judicial review of Federal claims related to a State's certificate of electors. Let me be clear that this does not create a new cause of action. Instead, it will ensure prompt and efficient adjudication of disputes.

To help promote the orderly transfer of power, our bill also includes clear guidelines for when eligible Presidential candidates may receive Federal resources to support their transition into office. And I want to particularly thank Senators Portman, Coons, and Sasse for their hard work on those provisions.

We are also introducing a second bill--the Enhanced Election Security and Protection Act--to address other issues pertaining to the administration of elections. In the interest of time, let me just quickly note the major provisions of this bill. It would reauthorize the Election Assistance Commission and require it to conduct additional cyber security testing of voting systems, a concept put forth by Senator Warren. It would improve the Postal Service's handling of election mail. It would enhance current penalties for violent threats against election workers; and increase the maximum penalties for tampering with voting records, including certain electronic records, that was the work of several members, including Senators Romney, Shaheen, and Sinema, among others.

We have before us an historic opportunity to modernize and strengthen our system of certifying and counting the electoral votes for President and Vice President. January 6 reminded us that nothing is more essential to the survival of a democracy than the orderly transfer of power.

And there is nothing more essential to the orderly transfer of power than clear rules for effecting it. I very much hope that Congress will seize this opportunity to enact these sensible and much-needed reforms before the end of this Congress.

Mr. President, I, too, want to salute all of the members of our group who worked so hard over many months. As is always the case when you delve into a complicated issue, it turns out that there are far

more nuances and complexities than you would think when you first look at the issue. But everyone continued to work for the common good to strengthen the procedures, to update this archaic and ambiguous law that was written in the language of another era. And we have accomplished that. And I really hope our colleagues will all join together and that in the end we can have an overwhelming vote.

Finally, I, too, want to thank our staff members for their extraordinary work. They worked literally night and day to work through the many thorny issues and to help bring us together. So my thanks not only to the Members but to their staffs as well.

Madam President, I rise today to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the town of Buxton, ME. It is a great pleasure to celebrate the generations of industrious and caring people who have made Buxton a wonderful place to live, work, and raise families.

Named for the famous spa town in England, Buxton has a rich history. For thousands of years, the Saco River Valley was home to the Abenaki. In 1728, the Massachusetts General Court granted land to establish a settlement that was called Narragansett Number One. As the population grew, the town of Buxton was incorporated on July 14, 1772.

The early settlers turned the dense forests and fertile soil into a thriving lumber industry and productive farms. With the Saco River providing power, sawmills and gristmills were built, followed by woolen mills, tanneries, churches, libraries, and flourishing retail stores.

Education has been central to Buxton from the start. The first schoolmaster arrived in 1761, more than a decade before incorporation. Soon, 17 homes in town hosted one-room schools so that every youngster was within walking distance.

Buxton's early prosperity as an industrial center produced many fine examples of New England architecture. Today, several homes, businesses, and the First Congregational Church are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

Also on the Register is the Buxton Powder House, built by the townspeople at a cost of $59 to store ammunition and arms during the War of 1812. Since then, the people of Buxton have joined together to erect monuments and memorials in tribute to the patriots who have defended freedom throughout our Nation's history.

The spirit that built Buxton is evident today in many ways. Countless volunteers have come together to make the town's sestercentennial a memorable celebration. For nearly 30 years, townspeople have generously supported the Buxton Toy Box that helps bring holiday cheer to children. Buxton's active involvement on the Saco River Corridor Commission shows a commitment to protect the natural resources that are vital to the quality of life.

Nothing better demonstrates the Buxton spirit than a special moment at this year's annual town meeting on June 18, when the townspeople honored Deputy Chief Gene Harmon of the Buxton Fire-Rescue Department for 60 years of dedicated service to his community and his neighbors.

Buxton's 250th anniversary is a time to celebrate the people who pulled together, cared for one another, and built a great community. Thanks to those who came before, Buxton, ME, has a wonderful history. Thanks to those there today, it has a bright future.

Mr. President, St. Joseph Healthcare of Bangor, ME, was founded in 1947 by the Felician Sisters with a mission to support the wellness and healing of a patient's mind, body, and spirit. On this 75th anniversary, I congratulate this outstanding institution for carrying out that mission with expertise and compassion.

St. Joseph is a 112-bed acute care community hospital that brings together primary care providers and specialists focused on delivering personalized medicine in more than 30 departments. It is a member of Covenant Health, an innovative, Catholic regional health delivery network that is a leader in values-based, not-for-profit health and elder care.

The St. Joseph story began in 1855 in Warsaw, Poland, when Blessed Angela founded the Congregation of the Sisters of St. Felix, an order dedicated to serving the poor, the sick, and the disabled. The Felician Sisters were founded with a particular focus on serving the Polish countryside. St. Joseph Healthcare continues that tradition by its efforts to ensure healthcare services for rural Maine.

St. Joseph's contributions as a healthcare provider are enormous but only part of its mission. The hospital's facilities have been applied to such needs as providing laundry and food services to the area's homeless shelters. A food pantry, an elementary school backpack program, and a community vegetable exchange stand help alleviate food insecurity. St. Joseph's Closet provides patients who are being discharged with needed clothing. The Blessing Bag program provides food, winter clothing, and basic personal hygiene items to homeless emergency room patients.

Countless other acts of kindness complement the St. Joseph mission of meeting the spiritual and religious needs of patients regardless of their beliefs and traditions or spirituality. The 16th century Capuchin friar canonized St. Felix was known in his time as ``the saint of the streets of Rome'' for his daily journeys through the city dispensing food, medicine, and comfort to the poor, the sick, and the troubled. The dedicated staff and leadership of St. Joseph Healthcare continue that legacy through the streets of Bangor and the country roads of Maine, and I thank them for their blessed service.

Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.

Once again, our Nation has been horrified by mass shootings, this time of shoppers killed in Buffalo, NY, and of schoolchildren and teachers murdered in Texas.

Twelve of us have come together to develop the bipartisan proposal before us to help address the gun violence that is plaguing our country. We were led by Senators Chris Murphy, John Cornyn, Kyrsten Sinema, and Thom Tillis. I want to thank and recognize each of them for their efforts.

Our commonsense plan increases needed mental health resources, improves school safety and support for students, and helps ensure that dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as suffering from mental illness cannot purchase firearms. If enacted, our bill will save lives. At the same time, it steadfastly protects the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners. It is not hyperbole to say that this legislation represents the most significant gun safety legislation in decades.

I would like to highlight two specific provisions of this bill that I worked on and that will have a significant impact in Maine and across the country.

First, our bill will fund crisis intervention programs, like Maine's yellow flag law, which our State supreme court just upheld as constitutional this very week.

Maine's law, which has robust due-process protections, allows the court--following an assessment by a medical professional--to determine if individuals should temporarily lose possession of firearms because they pose a serious threat to themselves or to others. Maine's law was developed in consultation with the Sportsman Alliance of Maine, and it has likely saved lives.

This Federal legislation will provide Maine with more resources to fully implement this important program. It will help connect law enforcement, medical professionals, and people in crisis through telehealth services, as well as provide additional financial help to ensure that the law can be efficiently and effectively utilized when necessary.

Second, our bill will also help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals. The bipartisan package includes the Stop Illegal Trafficking and

Firearms Act that I coauthored with Senator Patrick Leahy. It cracks down on straw purchasing and firearms trafficking.

I would like, particularly, to thank Senator Heinrich, with whom I worked to further refine this proposal so that it could be included in this bipartisan package. Senator Heinrich was a wonderful partner as we worked through all of the details of this provision.

The trafficking of firearms to violent criminals, gangs, and drug trafficking groups presents a serious threat to public safety in communities across America. Straw purchasers--individuals who purchase guns for other people who are prohibited by law from receiving such weapons--are the linchpin of most firearms trafficking operations, which are responsible for funneling firearms into our cities and across our southern border.

Currently, there is no criminal statute specifically prohibiting straw purchasing or firearms trafficking in the way that we need it to do. Instead, prosecutors rely primarily on paperwork violations that prohibit making false statements in connection with the purchase of a firearm.

Our bill establishes new, specific criminal offenses with significant penalties for straw purchasers and firearms traffickers, along with enhanced penalties when straw-purchased firearms are used in connection with serious criminal activity like terrorism or drug trafficking.

The danger presented by straw purchasers and firearms trafficking is not abstract. It is not theoretical. It is very real--a real and present danger.

Maine's U.S. attorney, Darcie McElwee, recently described how gun and drug trafficking in our State and elsewhere are often intertwined. ``Individuals would come to Maine for guns and leave us their drugs and go back,'' she explained. She added that in recent years, guns acquired in Maine represented ``7% of Massachusetts gun recoveries at crime scenes,'' while Massachusetts guns ``were responsible for 20% of ours. So, that means that both their guns and their drugs are coming into our state.'' I am quoting our new U.S. attorney.

In a recent example of gun and drug trafficking along the I-95 pipeline, a Massachusetts man was sentenced to 7 years in prison after receiving two pistols from a straw purchaser in Androscoggin County, while facilitating fentanyl sales in Bangor. What we have seen are gang members from Connecticut coming to Maine with heroin and swapping heroin for guns.

Gun trafficking is also a border security issue. Law enforcement has long been concerned about the flow of firearms from the United States into Mexico.

According to a recent report, more than 70 percent of all crime guns recovered and traced to Mexico between 2009 and 2014--and that represents more than 73,000 firearms--were traced back to the United States. And the Mexican Government has estimated that 200,000 firearms are smuggled from the United States into Mexico each year.

Our bill provides additional tools to law enforcement and prosecutors to prevent and prosecute these crimes. This is meaningful legislation that reflects input from gun safety advocates, gun rights groups, the U.S. Department of Justice, law enforcement officers, and others. Thus, in addition to helping keep our schools safe and our communities safer, this bill will help to address the gun violence and drug problems that are plaguing our communities, more generally.

Mr. President, I come from a State with a strong heritage of responsible gun ownership. This package reflects conversations that I have had with the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and other responsible groups. It is worth my emphasizing one more time that we are able to make these significant improvements without infringing on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.

Finally, it is important to note that this package demonstrates that Members of the Senate can come together and work in a constructive way to get important goals achieved on behalf of the American people. I urge my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.