Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Better Energy

Storage Technology Act. I am pleased to be partnering with Senator Heinrich on this initiative. I would also like to thank Senator Gardner, Senator Smith, Senator Coons, Senator McSally, and Senator King who have joined us as original cosponsors of the BEST Act.

Our bipartisan bill supports narrowly tailored energy storage research to develop the next generation of technologies at the Department of Energy. Advancing next generation energy storage technology will allow us to integrate more renewables into the power grid, such as wind energy or solar energy which, in turn, will help to reduce emissions and slow climate change.

Energy storage systems provide a wide range of benefits. First, these technologies increase the reliability and the resilience of the electric grid by limiting potential disruptions. Energy storage helps us to better manage supply and demand on the grid and allows for the expanded use of renewable energy. The reliability of our grid and grid- scale storage systems go hand-in-hand.

Second, this type of technology can decrease energy costs, a goal that we all share. In Maine, the price of electricity rises steeply during the coldest days of the year. For example, in late 2017 and early 2018, very cold temperatures in New England led to higher energy costs--more than a billion dollars in the wholesale energy market--in just 15 days.

The next generation of energy storage technologies could help to transform our grid, meaning that we would no longer need to generate more expensive power to meet demands during the hottest and coldest days of the year. Instead, we could use more affordable energy sources that have been stored for later use.

Third, energy storage systems can allow for more intermittent renewable sources, such as wind and solar power, to be placed on the grid and used precisely when they are needed. The Aqua Ventus, a floating, deepwater offshore wind project being developed by the University of Maine and a consortium of groups, could benefit from energy storage innovation. Off the coast of Maine, there are very strong and consistent winds where offshore wind turbines can produce electricity almost 50 percent of the time. This next generation storage technology will ensure that we can use this wind power closer to 100 percent of the time by storing electricity to use when the wind isn't blowing.

One of the biggest hurdles to commercializing energy storage is cost. To overcome this obstacle, our bill specifically directs the Department of Energy to work to decrease the cost of this exciting technology. This is similar to the Department's SunShot initiative that decreased the price of solar power by approximately 75 percent in less than a decade.

Furthermore, energy storage systems are technology neutral. This bill will foster innovation and enhance deployment of these innovative technologies without picking winners or losers.

Specifically, our bill would do the following: It would focus energy storage research on highly flexible, longer duration, and seasonal storage systems. It would support five energy storage demonstration projects. The bill would create a strategic plan and allow the Department of Energy to develop cost targets. It would coordinate research and support the coordination of research. Finally, the bill would authorize $60 million annually for each of the next 5 years.

I am pleased to report that our bipartisan bill has earned very broad support, including the endorsements of the Bipartisan Policy Center, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, ClearPath, Edison Electric Institute, Energy Storage Association, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, the National Audubon Society, the Natural Resources Council of Maine, the National Hydropower Association, Solar Energy Industries Association, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Frankly, it has been a long time since I have seen a bill be able to attract that much support from groups that have different ideological goals, and I am very proud that we were able to line up the support of all of those groups.

The BEST Act will help advance energy storage technologies to improve the efficiency of our Nation's electrical grid while helping to promote the wider use of clean, renewable energy. The goals of this bill are those which I would hope every Member of this body could embrace. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Better Energy

Storage Technology Act. I am pleased to be partnering with Senator Heinrich on this initiative. I would also like to thank Senator Gardner, Senator Smith, Senator Coons, Senator McSally, and Senator King who have joined us as original cosponsors of the BEST Act.

Our bipartisan bill supports narrowly tailored energy storage research to develop the next generation of technologies at the Department of Energy. Advancing next generation energy storage technology will allow us to integrate more renewables into the power grid, such as wind energy or solar energy which, in turn, will help to reduce emissions and slow climate change.

Energy storage systems provide a wide range of benefits. First, these technologies increase the reliability and the resilience of the electric grid by limiting potential disruptions. Energy storage helps us to better manage supply and demand on the grid and allows for the expanded use of renewable energy. The reliability of our grid and grid- scale storage systems go hand-in-hand.

Second, this type of technology can decrease energy costs, a goal that we all share. In Maine, the price of electricity rises steeply during the coldest days of the year. For example, in late 2017 and early 2018, very cold temperatures in New England led to higher energy costs--more than a billion dollars in the wholesale energy market--in just 15 days.

The next generation of energy storage technologies could help to transform our grid, meaning that we would no longer need to generate more expensive power to meet demands during the hottest and coldest days of the year. Instead, we could use more affordable energy sources that have been stored for later use.

Third, energy storage systems can allow for more intermittent renewable sources, such as wind and solar power, to be placed on the grid and used precisely when they are needed. The Aqua Ventus, a floating, deepwater offshore wind project being developed by the University of Maine and a consortium of groups, could benefit from energy storage innovation. Off the coast of Maine, there are very strong and consistent winds where offshore wind turbines can produce electricity almost 50 percent of the time. This next generation storage technology will ensure that we can use this wind power closer to 100 percent of the time by storing electricity to use when the wind isn't blowing.

One of the biggest hurdles to commercializing energy storage is cost. To overcome this obstacle, our bill specifically directs the Department of Energy to work to decrease the cost of this exciting technology. This is similar to the Department's SunShot initiative that decreased the price of solar power by approximately 75 percent in less than a decade.

Furthermore, energy storage systems are technology neutral. This bill will foster innovation and enhance deployment of these innovative technologies without picking winners or losers.

Specifically, our bill would do the following: It would focus energy storage research on highly flexible, longer duration, and seasonal storage systems. It would support five energy storage demonstration projects. The bill would create a strategic plan and allow the Department of Energy to develop cost targets. It would coordinate research and support the coordination of research. Finally, the bill would authorize $60 million annually for each of the next 5 years.

I am pleased to report that our bipartisan bill has earned very broad support, including the endorsements of the Bipartisan Policy Center, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, ClearPath, Edison Electric Institute, Energy Storage Association, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, the National Audubon Society, the Natural Resources Council of Maine, the National Hydropower Association, Solar Energy Industries Association, the Union of Concerned Scientists, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Frankly, it has been a long time since I have seen a bill be able to attract that much support from groups that have different ideological goals, and I am very proud that we were able to line up the support of all of those groups.

The BEST Act will help advance energy storage technologies to improve the efficiency of our Nation's electrical grid while helping to promote the wider use of clean, renewable energy. The goals of this bill are those which I would hope every Member of this body could embrace. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President, I wish to honor our former colleague Senator Richard Lugar, who passed away recently and whose memorial service was this week. As the longest serving Senator from his beloved Indiana, Richard Lugar dedicated 36 years of service to his State, the Senate, and our Nation. He was a dear friend and mentor who already had 22 years of Senate service when I joined the Senate.

What I remember most fondly about Senator Lugar is that he combined an extraordinary intellect with good humor. He knew so much about foreign policy and was also so approachable that new Senators like myself never hesitated to seek his guidance.

Senator Lugar's commitment to bipartisanship guided his engagement on issues from international affairs to agriculture. He sought compromises to achieve results, regardless of the political calculus. He eschewed polarization and cautioned colleagues that, ``whatever is won today through division is usually lost tomorrow.'' Instead he sought to foster good will to bring together opposing sides. He continued this effort after his service in the Senate with the Lugar Center, a nonprofit public policy institution that seeks to improve the quality of debate and bridge ideological divides on important issues.

It is this approach that led to great success in international affairs from South Africa to the Philippines.

Senator Lugar viewed support for democracy and development as a stabilizing force to counter international threats. Around the world, partners trusted his foreign policy expertise and judgment. Perhaps his greatest achievement was his bipartisan work with Senator Sam Nunn in developing the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program to dismantle weapons of mass destruction in the former states of the Soviet Union, eliminating nuclear arms in Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. His work to limit weapons of mass destruction led to the deactivation and destruction of thousands of nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles. Due to Senator Lugar' s vision, leadership, and bipartisan approach, we live in a safer world.

Through his contributions to international security, Senator Lugar serves as a reminder of what we can achieve if we work together to face the challenges that pose dangers to world peace and stability and, of course, to the interests of the United States and our international partners. As we reflect on his life and his lessons, I hope my colleagues will honor his legacy by building bipartisan bridges to resolve the pressing problems of today.

Mr. President, I wish to introduce the Volunteer Responder Incentive Protection Act with my friend and colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, which will benefit the brave women and men who volunteer at our local firehouses.

Across our Nation, volunteer firefighters play a critical role in helping to ensure the safety of our communities and the well-being of our neighbors. The State of Maine, for example, has approximately 9,785 firefighters who serve the State's 1.3 million citizens. Maine is largely a rural State, and more than 90 percent of firefighters are volunteers. Without these public-spirited citizens, many smaller communities would be unable to provide firefighting and other emergency services at all.

Often, communities seek to recruit and retain volunteers by offering modest benefits. The legislation we are introducing today would support these efforts by helping to ensure that these nominal benefits to volunteers are not treated as regular employee compensation.

The Volunteer Responder Incentive Protection Act would allow communities to provide volunteer firefighters and Emergency Medical Service, or EMS workers, with up to $600 per year of property tax reductions or other incentives, without those benefits being subject to Federal income tax and withholding. This would ease the administrative burden that local departments sometimes face when they reward their volunteers.

We should take care to protect our volunteer firefighters who serve this country with such bravery. Our legislation would help us achieve that goal, and I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this bill.

Mr. President, today I wish to reaffirm my partnership on the Lifespan Respite Care Reauthorization Act of 2019 with my good friend, Senator Tammy Baldwin, who I would like the record to reflect is an original lead cosponsor of S. 995. As the longstanding coauthors of this legislation, Senator Baldwin and I have been working together to provide the necessary resources to State respite agencies to ensure that caregivers have access to the respite services they need. Following the introduction of the legislation earlier this week, we heard testimony in the Senate Special Committee on Aging that reaffirmed the importance of respite care for the millions of caregivers who are caring for loved ones with Alzheimer's and other dementias. I look forward to continuing to work with Senator Baldwin to advance S. 995.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with my colleague from Wisconsin, Senator Baldwin, to reauthorize the Lifespan Respite Care Program. Respite care provides full-time caregivers with the much-needed opportunity to take a temporary break from their responsibilities caring for aging or disabled loved ones.

Every day, an estimated 43 million family caregivers attend to loved ones who are experiencing chronic, disabling health conditions. While many of these individuals care for an older adult, almost one-third of caregivers attend to persons under the age of 50. Caregivers help their loved ones remain at home, often delaying the need for nursing home or foster care placements. The value of their efforts is tremendous, amounting to more than $470 billion in uncompensated care.

This compassionate task, however, can take a toll. Caregivers experience higher mortality rates and are more likely to acquire acute and chronic health conditions. Respite care, which provides temporary relief to caregivers from their ongoing responsibilities, helps to reduce mental stress and physical health issues they may experience, keeping caregivers healthy and families intact. Yet, almost 80 percent of America's caregivers have never received any respite services.

As a senator representing the State with the oldest median age in our Nation and as Chairman of the Senate Aging Committee, the well-being of our seniors and their caregivers is among my top priorities. Since the Lifespan Respite Care Act was enacted in 2006, 37 States and the District of Columbia have received grants to increase the availability and quality of respite services. Still, the need for respite care continues to increase and outpace available resources.

When I ask family caregivers about their greatest needs, the number one that I hear is respite. The Maine Department of Health and Human Services recognized this urgent need in a report released in December 2018 on children's behavioral health services. The report recommended expanding access to respite care services for families. One Maine mother shared, ``Respite has helped our family because we have been able to take other children to doctors appointments without everyone having to go. My husband and I have been able to have a little time away. I have been able to attend to my own mental health needs.'' From families caring for children with disabilities to those caring for older adults, the need for respite care today continues to grow.

Our legislation will help to close the resource gap experienced by our nation's caregivers. Specifically, the Lifespan Respite Care Act will authorize robust funding for this program over the five years, through 2024, to assist states in establishing or enhancing statewide Lifespan Respite systems. It would authorize $20 million for fiscal year 2020, with funding increasing by $10 million annually, in order to reach $60 million for fiscal year 2024. This bill is widely supported by leading caregiver and respite organizations, including the ARCH National Respite Network and Resource Center, the American Psychological Association, the Arc, and the Elizabeth Dole Foundation. Mr. President, I ask to include letters from these supporting organizations in the Record.

Mr. President, there is a large gap between caregivers who need respite services and those who receive it. Our legislation would provide the necessary resources to state respite agencies to ensure that more caregivers have access to the respite services they need. I urge all of my colleagues to join in support of this important bipartisan legislation, the Lifespan Respite Care Reauthorization Act of 2019.

April 1, 2019.

Hon. Susan Collins,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. Tammy Baldwin,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. Jim Langevin,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Collins, Senator Baldwin, Representative

Langevin and Representative McMorris Rodgers: We, the

undersigned national organizations representing all ages and

disabilities, are writing to offer our fervent support for

and endorsement of the Lifespan Respite Care Reauthorization

Act to reauthorize the Lifespan Respite Care Program at $200

million over five years. We also want to thank you for your

leadership in supporting the nation's family caregivers.

Every day, millions of American families are faced with

unexpected illness, disease, or disability. A soldier is

injured in war, a spouse develops multiple sclerosis or

Alzheimer's disease, or a child is diagnosed with a

developmental or physical disability or chronic illness.

These are but a few examples of events that can forever

change an individual's and family's trajectory.

While each situation is unique, the one thing that they

often have in common is the incredible value of family

caregivers. Forty-three million family caregivers provide a

vast majority of our nation's long-term care, permitting

individuals of all ages to remain in their communities and

avoid or delay nursing home or foster care placements. AARP

has estimated that in 2013, family caregivers provided $470

billion in uncompensated care to adults, a staggering

statistic that exceeds federal and state spending on Medicaid

health services and long-term services and supports that same

year.

While the benefits of family caregiving are plentiful,

caregiving can take its toll--with older spousal family

caregivers experiencing higher mortality rates, rates of

acute and chronic conditions, and depression than

noncaregivers. Respite--short-term care that offers

individuals or family members temporary relief from the daily

routine and stress of providing care--is a critical component

to bolstering family stability and maintaining family

caregiver health and well-being. Respite is a frequently

requested support service among family caregivers, but 85% of

family caregivers of adults receive no respite and the

percentage is similar for parents caring for their children

with special needs. Not surprisingly, high burden family

caregivers (defined as those who assist their loved one with

personal care such as getting dressed or bathing) cite lack

of respite as one of their top three concerns.

To help provide family caregivers the support they need,

the Lifespan Respite Care Program was enacted in 2006 with

strong bipartisan support. The program provides competitive

grants to states to establish or enhance statewide Lifespan

Respite systems that maximize existing resources and help

ensure that quality respite is available and accessible to

all family caregivers. With more than half of care recipients

under age 75 and more than one-third under age 50, Lifespan

Respite rightly recognizes caregiving as a lifespan issue and

serves families regardless of age or disability.

Though the program has been drastically underfunded since

its inception, thirty-seven states and the District of

Columbia have received grants and are engaged in impressive

work such as identifying and coordinating respite services

available through various state agencies, including veterans

caregiver services; helping unserved families pay for respite

through participant-directed voucher programs or mini-grants

to community and faith-based agencies; building respite

capacity by recruiting and training respite workers and

volunteers; and raising awareness about respite through

public education campaigns. Originally authorized through

Fiscal Year 2011, enactment of the Lifespan Respite Care

Reauthorization Act is necessary to continue this excellent

momentum, better coordinate and supply respite care to our

nation's 43 million family caregivers through statewide

Lifespan Respite programs and ensure that states are able to

sustain the great work they have begun and still allow new

states to receive a grant.

We thank you for your commitment to individuals living with

disabilities, older individuals in need of assistance and

support, and the loved ones who care for them and we look

forward to continuing to work with you as the bill moves

forward. If you would like more information, please contact

Jill Kagan.

Sincerely,

AARP; Alzheimer's Association; Alzheimer's Foundation of

America; Alzheimer's Impact Movement; American Association of

Caregiving Youth; American Association on Intellectual and

Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD); American Dance Therapy

Association; American Music Therapy Association; The Arc of

the United States; Association of University Centers on

Disabilities (AUCD); Autism Society of America; Brain Injury

Association of America; Caregiver Action Network; Caring

Across Generations; Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation;

Easterseals.

Elizabeth Dole Foundation; Epilepsy Foundation; Family

Caregiver Alliance, National Center on Caregiving; Family

Voices; Generations United; The Jewish Federations of North

America; Justice in Aging; LeadingAge; Lupus Foundation of

America; The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's

Research; National Alliance for Caregiving; National Alliance

of Children's Trusts and Prevention Funds; National

Association for Home Care and Hospice; National Association

of Area Agencies on Aging (n4a); National Association of

Councils on Developmental Disabilities; National Association

of Social Workers (NASW).

National Association of State Directors of Developmental

Disabilities Services; National Association of State Head

Injury Administrators; National Association of States United

for Aging and Disabilities; National Down Syndrome Congress;

National Down Syndrome Society; National Hospice and

Palliative Care Organization; National Military Family

Association; National Multiple Sclerosis Society; National

Respite Coalition; Paralyzed Veterans of America; Program to

Improve Eldercare, Altarum; Rosalynn Carter Institute for

Caregiving; Sibling Leadership Network; TASH; United Spinal

Association; Well Spouse Association.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with my colleague from Wisconsin, Senator Baldwin, to reauthorize the Lifespan Respite Care Program. Respite care provides full-time caregivers with the much-needed opportunity to take a temporary break from their responsibilities caring for aging or disabled loved ones.

Every day, an estimated 43 million family caregivers attend to loved ones who are experiencing chronic, disabling health conditions. While many of these individuals care for an older adult, almost one-third of caregivers attend to persons under the age of 50. Caregivers help their loved ones remain at home, often delaying the need for nursing home or foster care placements. The value of their efforts is tremendous, amounting to more than $470 billion in uncompensated care.

This compassionate task, however, can take a toll. Caregivers experience higher mortality rates and are more likely to acquire acute and chronic health conditions. Respite care, which provides temporary relief to caregivers from their ongoing responsibilities, helps to reduce mental stress and physical health issues they may experience, keeping caregivers healthy and families intact. Yet, almost 80 percent of America's caregivers have never received any respite services.

As a senator representing the State with the oldest median age in our Nation and as Chairman of the Senate Aging Committee, the well-being of our seniors and their caregivers is among my top priorities. Since the Lifespan Respite Care Act was enacted in 2006, 37 States and the District of Columbia have received grants to increase the availability and quality of respite services. Still, the need for respite care continues to increase and outpace available resources.

When I ask family caregivers about their greatest needs, the number one that I hear is respite. The Maine Department of Health and Human Services recognized this urgent need in a report released in December 2018 on children's behavioral health services. The report recommended expanding access to respite care services for families. One Maine mother shared, ``Respite has helped our family because we have been able to take other children to doctors appointments without everyone having to go. My husband and I have been able to have a little time away. I have been able to attend to my own mental health needs.'' From families caring for children with disabilities to those caring for older adults, the need for respite care today continues to grow.

Our legislation will help to close the resource gap experienced by our nation's caregivers. Specifically, the Lifespan Respite Care Act will authorize robust funding for this program over the five years, through 2024, to assist states in establishing or enhancing statewide Lifespan Respite systems. It would authorize $20 million for fiscal year 2020, with funding increasing by $10 million annually, in order to reach $60 million for fiscal year 2024. This bill is widely supported by leading caregiver and respite organizations, including the ARCH National Respite Network and Resource Center, the American Psychological Association, the Arc, and the Elizabeth Dole Foundation. Mr. President, I ask to include letters from these supporting organizations in the Record.

Mr. President, there is a large gap between caregivers who need respite services and those who receive it. Our legislation would provide the necessary resources to state respite agencies to ensure that more caregivers have access to the respite services they need. I urge all of my colleagues to join in support of this important bipartisan legislation, the Lifespan Respite Care Reauthorization Act of 2019.

April 1, 2019.

Hon. Susan Collins,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. Tammy Baldwin,

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Hon. Jim Langevin,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Collins, Senator Baldwin, Representative

Langevin and Representative McMorris Rodgers: We, the

undersigned national organizations representing all ages and

disabilities, are writing to offer our fervent support for

and endorsement of the Lifespan Respite Care Reauthorization

Act to reauthorize the Lifespan Respite Care Program at $200

million over five years. We also want to thank you for your

leadership in supporting the nation's family caregivers.

Every day, millions of American families are faced with

unexpected illness, disease, or disability. A soldier is

injured in war, a spouse develops multiple sclerosis or

Alzheimer's disease, or a child is diagnosed with a

developmental or physical disability or chronic illness.

These are but a few examples of events that can forever

change an individual's and family's trajectory.

While each situation is unique, the one thing that they

often have in common is the incredible value of family

caregivers. Forty-three million family caregivers provide a

vast majority of our nation's long-term care, permitting

individuals of all ages to remain in their communities and

avoid or delay nursing home or foster care placements. AARP

has estimated that in 2013, family caregivers provided $470

billion in uncompensated care to adults, a staggering

statistic that exceeds federal and state spending on Medicaid

health services and long-term services and supports that same

year.

While the benefits of family caregiving are plentiful,

caregiving can take its toll--with older spousal family

caregivers experiencing higher mortality rates, rates of

acute and chronic conditions, and depression than

noncaregivers. Respite--short-term care that offers

individuals or family members temporary relief from the daily

routine and stress of providing care--is a critical component

to bolstering family stability and maintaining family

caregiver health and well-being. Respite is a frequently

requested support service among family caregivers, but 85% of

family caregivers of adults receive no respite and the

percentage is similar for parents caring for their children

with special needs. Not surprisingly, high burden family

caregivers (defined as those who assist their loved one with

personal care such as getting dressed or bathing) cite lack

of respite as one of their top three concerns.

To help provide family caregivers the support they need,

the Lifespan Respite Care Program was enacted in 2006 with

strong bipartisan support. The program provides competitive

grants to states to establish or enhance statewide Lifespan

Respite systems that maximize existing resources and help

ensure that quality respite is available and accessible to

all family caregivers. With more than half of care recipients

under age 75 and more than one-third under age 50, Lifespan

Respite rightly recognizes caregiving as a lifespan issue and

serves families regardless of age or disability.

Though the program has been drastically underfunded since

its inception, thirty-seven states and the District of

Columbia have received grants and are engaged in impressive

work such as identifying and coordinating respite services

available through various state agencies, including veterans

caregiver services; helping unserved families pay for respite

through participant-directed voucher programs or mini-grants

to community and faith-based agencies; building respite

capacity by recruiting and training respite workers and

volunteers; and raising awareness about respite through

public education campaigns. Originally authorized through

Fiscal Year 2011, enactment of the Lifespan Respite Care

Reauthorization Act is necessary to continue this excellent

momentum, better coordinate and supply respite care to our

nation's 43 million family caregivers through statewide

Lifespan Respite programs and ensure that states are able to

sustain the great work they have begun and still allow new

states to receive a grant.

We thank you for your commitment to individuals living with

disabilities, older individuals in need of assistance and

support, and the loved ones who care for them and we look

forward to continuing to work with you as the bill moves

forward. If you would like more information, please contact

Jill Kagan.

Sincerely,

AARP; Alzheimer's Association; Alzheimer's Foundation of

America; Alzheimer's Impact Movement; American Association of

Caregiving Youth; American Association on Intellectual and

Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD); American Dance Therapy

Association; American Music Therapy Association; The Arc of

the United States; Association of University Centers on

Disabilities (AUCD); Autism Society of America; Brain Injury

Association of America; Caregiver Action Network; Caring

Across Generations; Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation;

Easterseals.

Elizabeth Dole Foundation; Epilepsy Foundation; Family

Caregiver Alliance, National Center on Caregiving; Family

Voices; Generations United; The Jewish Federations of North

America; Justice in Aging; LeadingAge; Lupus Foundation of

America; The Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's

Research; National Alliance for Caregiving; National Alliance

of Children's Trusts and Prevention Funds; National

Association for Home Care and Hospice; National Association

of Area Agencies on Aging (n4a); National Association of

Councils on Developmental Disabilities; National Association

of Social Workers (NASW).

National Association of State Directors of Developmental

Disabilities Services; National Association of State Head

Injury Administrators; National Association of States United

for Aging and Disabilities; National Down Syndrome Congress;

National Down Syndrome Society; National Hospice and

Palliative Care Organization; National Military Family

Association; National Multiple Sclerosis Society; National

Respite Coalition; Paralyzed Veterans of America; Program to

Improve Eldercare, Altarum; Rosalynn Carter Institute for

Caregiving; Sibling Leadership Network; TASH; United Spinal

Association; Well Spouse Association.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce, along with the senior Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act. This bill would establish an American women's history museum in our Nation's Capital.

American women have made invaluable contributions to our country in every field, such as government, business, medicine, law, literature, sports, entertainment, the arts, and the military. Telling the history of American women matters, and a museum recognizing these achievements and experiences is long overdue.

In 1999, a Presidential commission on commemorating women in American history concluded that an ``appropriate celebration of women's history in the next millennium should include the designation of a focal point for women's history in our Nation's capital.'' In 2014, Congress took an important step toward realizing this goal when it passed legislation creating an independent, bipartisan commission to study the potential for establishing such a museum in Washington, DC. Following 18 months of study, the bipartisan commission unanimously concluded, ``America needs and deserves a physical national museum dedicated to showcasing the historical experiences and impact of women in the country.'' I could not agree more.

The bill we are introducing takes the next step toward creating this national museum. Incorporating the recommendations of the bipartisan Commission, the bill would establish a national museum to collect, study, and create programs incorporating and exhibiting a wide spectrum of American women's experiences, contributions, and history. The Smithsonian Institution would be the governing body, ensuring that this museum is free and open to all who visit Washington, DC. Following the Commission's recommendation, the Smithsonian has begun an American Women's History Initiative to increase its research and programming related to American women, past and present.

Mr. President, this year we commemorate the 100th anniversary of American women's suffrage and the decades-long fight for women's equality at the ballot box. The story, leaders, and lessons of women's suffrage are among the most powerful in our nation's history. Amid celebrations of that historic moment, I can think of few better ways to honor those women and that momentous achievement than by passing this legislation. A museum dedicated to women's history would help ensure that future generations understand what we owe to those American women who have helped build, sustain, and advance our society.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce, along with the senior Senator from California, Mrs. Feinstein, the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum Act. This bill would establish an American women's history museum in our Nation's Capital.

American women have made invaluable contributions to our country in every field, such as government, business, medicine, law, literature, sports, entertainment, the arts, and the military. Telling the history of American women matters, and a museum recognizing these achievements and experiences is long overdue.

In 1999, a Presidential commission on commemorating women in American history concluded that an ``appropriate celebration of women's history in the next millennium should include the designation of a focal point for women's history in our Nation's capital.'' In 2014, Congress took an important step toward realizing this goal when it passed legislation creating an independent, bipartisan commission to study the potential for establishing such a museum in Washington, DC. Following 18 months of study, the bipartisan commission unanimously concluded, ``America needs and deserves a physical national museum dedicated to showcasing the historical experiences and impact of women in the country.'' I could not agree more.

The bill we are introducing takes the next step toward creating this national museum. Incorporating the recommendations of the bipartisan Commission, the bill would establish a national museum to collect, study, and create programs incorporating and exhibiting a wide spectrum of American women's experiences, contributions, and history. The Smithsonian Institution would be the governing body, ensuring that this museum is free and open to all who visit Washington, DC. Following the Commission's recommendation, the Smithsonian has begun an American Women's History Initiative to increase its research and programming related to American women, past and present.

Mr. President, this year we commemorate the 100th anniversary of American women's suffrage and the decades-long fight for women's equality at the ballot box. The story, leaders, and lessons of women's suffrage are among the most powerful in our nation's history. Amid celebrations of that historic moment, I can think of few better ways to honor those women and that momentous achievement than by passing this legislation. A museum dedicated to women's history would help ensure that future generations understand what we owe to those American women who have helped build, sustain, and advance our society.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Thank you.

Mr. President, later today, the Senate will make a significant decision with implications for our constitutional system of government.

We will vote on a resolution to reverse the President's ill-advised national emergency declaration that funds the construction of a border wall using money that Congress has appropriated and the President has signed into law for other purposes, such as military construction.

I want to thank Senator Udall, the Senator from New Mexico, for working together with me. We introduced a companion resolution to overturn the President's declaration, and I commend Senator Udall for his leadership.

By declaring a national emergency, the President's action comes into direct conflict with Congress's authority to determine the appropriation of funds, a power vested in Congress by the Framers of our Constitution in article I, section 9. That is why this issue is not about strengthening our border security, a goal that I support and have voted to advance. Rather, it is a solemn occasion involving whether this body will stand up for its institutional prerogatives and will support the separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution.

Throughout our history the courts have consistently held that ``only Congress is empowered by the Constitution to adopt laws directing monies to be spent from the U.S. treasury.''

For the past 65 years, the courts have determined the boundary of Presidential authority vis-a-vis Congress under the doctrine of Youngstown Sheet & Tube, the 1952 Supreme Court case that reversed President Truman's seizure of U.S. steel companies during the Korean war.

As Justice Robert Jackson explained in his profoundly influential concurrence in that case, the question of whether a President's actions are constitutionally valid should be determined by examining the source of the President's authority. In this concurrence, the Justice goes through three scenarios in which he assesses the President's power.

According to Justice Jackson, when acts taken by the President are against the express or implied will of Congress, the President's power is at its lowest ebb. President Trump's declaration clearly falls in that category.

The President rests his declaration on the National Emergencies Act, and that act fails to define precisely what constitutes an emergency. There is a commonsense rule we can apply. It is a five-part test that was used by the Office of Management and Budget under

former President George Herbert Walker Bush to determine whether requested funding merited an emergency designation under our budget rules. Under that test, a spending request was designated as an emergency only if the need for spending met a five-part test. It had to be necessary, sudden, urgent, unforeseen, and not permanent.

Whether one agrees with President Trump that more should be done to secure our southern border--and I do agree with him on that goal--his decision to fund a border wall through a national emergency declaration would never pass all of this five-part test.

Another concern I have with the President's declaration is, it shifts funding away from critical military construction projects. We don't know which ones. We have not been able to get a list, but this could have very real national security implications. Again, I would note that the Military Construction appropriations bill incorporated projects recommended by the President and his Department of Defense, was passed by both bodies, and signed into law by the President.

Let me emphasize, once again, that the question presented by this resolution is not whether you are for a border wall or against a border wall; it is not whether you believe that border security should be strengthened or whether it is sufficient; it is not whether we support or oppose President Trump; rather, the question is a far more fundamental and significant one. The question is this: Do we want the executive branch, now or in the future, to hold the power of the purse, a power the Framers deliberately entrusted to Congress?

We must stand up and defend Congress's institutional powers as the Framers intended we would, even when doing so is inconvenient or goes against the outcome we might prefer.

I urge my colleagues to support the rulings of disapproval and our Constitution.

Thank you.

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

Mr. President, I rise today to discuss Senate bill, S. 659, the Biologic Patent Transparency Act. This bill would help encourage competition in the prescription drug marketplace and begin to put an end to the harmful patent strategies that block new drugs from coming to market. I am pleased to be sponsoring this legislation with my friend and colleague

from Virginia, Senator Tim Kaine, as well as with Senators Portman, Shaheen, Braun, and Stabenow, all of whom have joined us as original cosponsors.

Prescription drugs are vital to the health and well-being of Americans, especially our Nation's seniors, 90 percent of whom take at least one prescription drug in any given month. Developing these medicines is a lengthy, expensive, and uncertain process. It often takes more than a decade and can cost billions of dollars to bring a new drug from the laboratory to the patient. Most drugs fail during the clinical trials. If we want new medicines to reach consumers who need them, the companies that invest in this research and development and take the risks necessary must see a fair return on their investment.

To encourage such investments, Congress grants inventors limited periods of patent protection during which their products are legally shielded from competition. Rewarding these investments has proven to be beneficial to many Americans. The past century could be termed the ``Age of Miracle Drugs,'' with discoveries such as insulin and penicillin, and treatments for cancer, heart disease, HIV, and other serious medical conditions. Today, however, we might well define a ``miracle drug'' as one that has not doubled in price since the last refill.

Although our country leads the world in prescription drug innovation, we also lead the world in drug spending. According to one estimate, U.S. spending on prescription drugs will reach between $580 billion and $610 billion by the year 2021. In 2017, Americans spent more than $330 billion on retail prescription drugs, and nearly one-quarter of individuals surveyed reported difficulties paying for the cost of their prescription medications.

How well I remember standing in the pharmacy line several months ago behind a couple who were informed by the pharmacist that their copay would be $111. The husband turned to his wife and said: ``Honey, we just can't afford that.'' They then turned around, left their prescription on the counter, and left the pharmacy. I asked the pharmacist how often that happens, and he told me, ``Every day.'' That is the kind of onerous burden too many Americans are facing, and it's causing them to forgo fulfilling a prescription, to stretch out doses, or simply to choose to buy the medicine and short themselves on food or be late in paying their rent or mortgage.

Among the most expensive drugs on the market today are biologics. These are incredibly promising drugs for the health and well-being of many Americans. They have revolutionized treatment for many serious and life-threatening conditions, from diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis to cancer and multiple sclerosis.

Today, fewer than 2 percent of Americans use biologics, yet biologics account for nearly 40 percent of total spending on prescription drugs. Last year, the Senate Aging Committee, which I chair and which the Presiding Officer is a member of, held a hearing to examine the price increases for one of these groundbreaking treatments. HUMIRA, the world's best-selling prescription drug, is a biologic that was first approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis by the Food and Drug Administration, the FDA, in 2002. In 2017, U.S. sales of this product generated an astonishing $12.3 billion in revenue for the drug's manufacturer.

Now, HUMIRA is truly a miracle drug for many patients. It is used to treat a variety of conditions, ranging from rheumatoid arthritis to Crohn's disease to ulcerative colitis and plaque psoriasis. So a wide range of diseases and conditions are responsive to HUMIRA. According to various reports, more than 200 patent applications have been filed for HUMIRA, with nearly 90 percent of those filed after HUMIRA was first approved by the FDA in 2002.

According to the manufacturer's CEO, more than 130 patents are included in HUMIRA's patent portfolio today. Protections provided by these patents can block competition and extend the drug's market monopoly until the year 2034. Keep in mind that this is for a drug that was first approved in 2002. We're talking about extending the patents until 2034.

HUMIRA has increased in price yet again this year, and although biosimilars have been approved by the FDA, patent litigation is blamed for keeping these lower cost alternatives from reaching the market. And HUMIRA is not the only biologic to be protected by such an extensive portfolio of patents--what we call a ``patent thicket.''

Enabling the creation, approval, and marketing of competitive biological products must be among our top priorities when we consider ways to reduce the healthcare costs of Americans.

The Biologic Patent Transparency Act is an important step Congress can take to shine light on the patent thickets that protect these biologics and to stop some of the gaming that has prevented consumers from accessing lower cost, FDA-approved products.

So what will our bill do? It has three major components. First, our bill would require manufacturers to disclose to the FDA the web of patents that protect their approved biologics from competition by biosimilar manufacturers--a process that we already know works. It has worked remarkably well for the small molecule drugs that are governed by the Hatch-Waxman Act of 1984. Although generics accounted for only 13 percent of U.S. prescriptions immediately before the Hatch-Waxman Act was passed, today they make up 90 percent. These generics often cost 70 to 90 percent less than the branded product. They have significantly reduced costs and expanded access to necessary treatments for Americans. According to one estimate, generics have saved consumers more than $1.6 trillion in drug costs over the last decade.

Second, our bill would tackle the patent strategies that are intentionally designed to block competition by limiting the enforceability of late-filed patents against biosimilar manufacturers that have already filed applications with the FDA.

According to one estimate, over 70 of the patents covering HUMIRA were applied for and granted within three years prior to the expiration of the initial patents.

So here's what is happening. A manufacturer of a wildly successful drug sees that its patents are about to expire and that a competitor--a biosimilar manufacturer--is on the way to getting approval by the FDA for its product. So what that original brand manufacturer does is make small alterations, frequently, in the product. It doesn't change the product in a dramatic way. It doesn't come up with a brand new medicine, but it changes it ever so slightly or decides to patent an aspect of it that was not previously patented. The whole purpose is to prevent that biosimilar manufacturer from bringing to market a more affordable product that consumers could access. That is just wrong. That is not what patents are intended for. And as I made clear earlier in my statement, I support a limited period of exclusivity for the innovator manufacturer. I think we should reward that investment in research and development and clinical trials, which is often very expensive. But it is not right for the patent system to be gamed this way, for it to be exploited and for last-minute patents to be filed for the sole purpose of precluding a competitor from coming to market with a less expensive, equivalent drug.

Restricting the enforcement of these late-filed patents that are filed after the application by the biosimilar manufacturer has been filed with the FDA will still protect the important investments made by the manufacturers, while encouraging the biosimilar manufacturers to bring important innovations to consumers sooner and at a lower cost.

Finally, the third part of our bill would require the FDA to regularly publish specific information related to approved biologic products, making it easier for prospective competitors to evaluate and plan for the development and introduction of biosimilars.

In addition to the name and patent information for all approved biological products, our bill would require the FDA to publish information including the drug's marketing status, applicable reference products, periods of exclusivity, biosimilar or interchangeable products, and approved indications for usage. The FDA will be required to regularly update this information as well, so that it is readily available and up-to-date. So what this will do is allow

the biosimilar manufacturer to go to what is known as the ``Purple Book'' at the FDA, take a look at the drug it wishes to compete with, and learn what existing patents are there, how long they are going to be in effect, and plan accordingly.

America's system of protecting innovation has provided our citizens with tremendous benefits, especially in the area of pharmaceuticals. Of that there can be no doubt. We must provide pharmaceutical manufacturers with the ability to recoup their investments, but at the same time, we cannot be blind to the costs of these drugs, nor to cases where patent laws are manipulated to preserve monopolies and prevent lower cost, equivalent drugs from coming to market. Passing the Biologic Patent Transparency Act is a major step we can take to put a stop to the patent-gaming that blocks consumers from accessing lower cost drugs. I encourage my colleagues to support this crucial legislation.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Seeing no one seeking recognition, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I rise to announce my opposition to the nomination of Chad Readler to be a Judge on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

As the Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department's Civil Division, Mr. Readler was both a lead attorney and policy adviser in the Department's decision not to defend the Affordable Care Act, including its provisions protecting individuals with preexisting conditions.

Rather than defend the law and its protections for individuals with preexisting conditions, such as asthma, arthritis, cancer, diabetes, and heart disease, Mr. Readler's brief in Texas v. United States argued that they should be invalidated.

I strongly objected to DOJ's position to not defend the law, and it is telling that this position also concerned some other career attorneys in the Department. In fact, three career attorneys withdrew from the case rather than support this position, and one of those attorneys eventually resigned.

In my view, the Justice Department's severability argument is wrong and implausible. On June 27, 2018, I wrote to Attorney General Sessions and urged the Justice Department to reverse course and to defend the law's critical protections for individuals with preexisting conditions. Even the Justice Department acknowledged that it was ``rare'' for the government to refuse to defend the laws of the United States against constitutional challenges.

I have continuously stressed the importance of protecting Americans who suffer from preexisting conditions, including 45 percent of Maine's population: 590,000 Mainers. In July 2017, I voted to block several proposals to repeal the ACA, which I feared would reduce protections for individuals with preexisting conditions. In October 2018, I voted to overturn a Trump administration rule that expands the duration of short-term health insurance plans, which could deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.