Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Harley- Davidson's 120th anniversary. I am honored to recognize this iconic Wisconsin company and to commemorate this momentous milestone.

Though the style and swagger of Harley-Davidson motorcycles are now known across the entire world, the origin story of these bikes humbly began in a machine shop on Milwaukee's North Side in 1903. This was where two young best friends, William S. Harley and Arthur Davidson, first experimented with different prototypes for a motorized bicycle. While their first model struggled to scale the hills of Milwaukee's streets, Harley and Davidson understood the promise that their invention held. Less than a year later, an updated prototype placed fourth in a motorcycle race at State Fair Park.

As Harley-Davidson's business and production rapidly grew in the following years, so did its place in American history. In 1907, the company began selling its motorcycles to police departments, a tradition that remains to this day. In 1917, the U.S. military adopted Harley-Davidson motorcycles for military issue during the First World War, purchasing over 20,000 units for the war effort. Bolstered by the strong sense of resolve and innovation that we all associate with our legacy American manufacturers, the company was able to survive the Great Depression, leading to a historic partnership with the U.S. Army during the Second World War.

Today, Harley-Davidson remains one of the largest motorcycle manufacturers in the world and is famous for a loyal following that spans the far reaches of the globe. While Harley-Davidson holds onto its roots, it also looks to the future. The new Harley-Davidson LiveWire electric motorcycle released in 2019 continues the company's commitment to style, craftsmanship, and an unparalleled riding experience.

Though everyone knows the look and sound of a Harley-Davidson bike when they see one, the company has expanded their business with merchandise that people from all backgrounds are desperate to get their hands on. There are now Harley-Davidson dealerships in nearly 100 countries, but the company has kept true to its roots with its headquarters located in Milwaukee. In 2008, the Harley-Davidson Museum opened to the public, allowing fans to experience more than 100 years of history up close. The museum remains a top tourist destination for Milwaukee, reinforcing the shared identity between a great American city and manufacturer.

What began as a motorcycle prototype stored in a Milwaukee family backyard has become an unparalleled vehicle for adventure across the open roads of the Earth. Yet beyond the roar of an engine or the classic look of a motorcycle, Harley-Davidson has come to symbolize the freedom we all know as Americans. On the 120th anniversary of this American icon, I am proud to recognize the Harley-Davidson Motor Company and look forward to many more years of success.

Madam President, earlier this afternoon, my colleague Senator Markey asked unanimous consent to advance the Right to Contraception Act. There was an objection heard, but I wanted to come to the floor to voice my strong support as a cosponsor of the Right to Contraception Act.

Across the country, women are frightened. They are frightened that after decades of progress in advancing their rights and freedoms, they are watching an activist Supreme Court ignore precedent and strip away their rights and freedoms.

For nearly six decades, American women have come to rely on their right to control when and if they are going to have a family, including through the use of contraception. In fact, about 90 percent of women in the United States have used contraception.

In 1965, the Supreme Court correctly decided Griswold v. Connecticut, reaffirming that our Constitution guarantees the right to privacy. This particular case was over a Connecticut law that banned the use of contraception and imposed penalties, including up to 1 year in prison for doing so. The Supreme Court correctly overruled the law as an invasion of the right to privacy and determined that Americans could use contraception should they choose without government interference.

At the time, the majority opinion reasoned that there were many implied rights that Americans have within the Constitution. On a basic level, this is obvious. Not every single right we are due could be written into our Constitution. So this concept of ``implied rights'' is the foundation for various rights that Americans have come to rely on and, frankly, never think twice about, like the right to learn a foreign language or to travel across State lines or to live with your own family.

Famously, 8 years after Griswold was decided, the Supreme Court used a similar legal foundation--the constitutional right to privacy--to rightly decide in Roe v. Wade that women in the United States have the right to abortion care.

But, despite Roe being the law of the land for nearly 50 years and ``settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis,'' according to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, it was thrown out the window.

This Saturday will mark the 1-year anniversary since this activist Supreme Court--crafted, of course, by anti-choice Republican politicians--stripped 22 million women and counting of their freedom to control their bodies, families, and futures; 1 year since women lost the right to an abortion nationwide; 1 year since women in my home State of Wisconsin were sent back to 1849--and I didn't misstate that, 1849--living under an archaic law that effectively criminalizes all abortion procedures; 1 year since women in America became second-class citizens.

Sadly, that fateful decision that overturned Roe v. Wade put more of Americans' rights on the chopping block.

In Justice Clarence Thomas's concurring opinion, he explicitly said that the rationale used to overturn Roe should be used to overturn cases establishing

the right to contraception, the right to same-sex consensual relations, and same-sex marriage. Justice Thomas wrote that the Court ``should reconsider'' all three of these decisions, saying the Supreme Court had a duty to correct the error in these decisions.

He was essentially providing an open invitation to litigators across the country to bring their cases to the Court, inevitably instilling fear among millions of Americans.

Let that sink in.

With the right to abortion care already ripped away from tens of millions of Americans, a Supreme Court Justice essentially asked for someone to bring him a case so he could rip away one of the only tools many women have left to control if and when to have a family--that being having access to contraception.

Americans have spoken loudly and clearly that they do not believe that a woman's right to control her own body is an error or that the freedom for someone to love whom they love is an error. We cannot rely on an activist Supreme Court to protect our rights and freedoms. Congress must act.

So I stand here, with the backing of 9 in 10 Americans who support access to all forms of birth control, to call for the Senate to listen to our constituents and pass the Right to Contraception Act. Our legislation is simple and common sense. It would guarantee the legal right for individuals to get and use contraception, and it would stop politicians or the government from trying to get in the way, and that is it.

Americans want the right and freedom to control their own reproductive healthcare without interference from judges or politicians. In my home State of Wisconsin, where women are already living under an 1849 criminal abortion ban, access to contraception is absolutely essential. Every person should have the right to control their own bodies, families, and futures no matter where they live. Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who advocated for the right to privacy, called it ``the right to be left alone.''

So I stand here to reiterate this sentiment and to tell Washington to pass our legislation and give women the right to be left alone.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, today I rise to recognize Kikkoman Foods, Inc., on its 50th anniversary. I am proud to honor this organization and the ongoing international exchange of food culture from Japan to Walworth, WI.

What began in 1973 as the first U.S.-based plant for the manufacturing of soy sauce has now become a strong part of the Walworth community. The Mogi family soy sauce recipe dates back over 300 years and was first introduced in the United States at a Navy Pier global business showcase. Crowds present in Chicago tried Kikkoman soy sauce for the first time. It was such a big hit that Kikkoman created a committee to investigate production in the United States. The committee settled on Walworth, WI, because they saw great potential in the proud tradition of Wisconsin agriculture and a midwestern work ethic. In addition, the Midwest region provided an optimal climate for the production of soy beans and wheat, essential components of soy sauce.

Soon, Kikkoman's plant in Walworth aided the fusion of American and Japanese cuisine. In Walworth, soy sauce became a kitchen staple. Kikkoman continues to advance their mission of expanding the use of soy sauce as a ``versatile flavor enhancer.'' I appreciate the continued fusion of these two cultures and the partnerships of Kikkoman in the Wisconsin community. Together, Japanese technology and American agriculture blend to create a successful overseas expansion for Kikkoman.

Today, the plant in Walworth is Kikkoman's North American production headquarters and produces an estimated 34 million gallons of soy sauce annually, more brewed soy sauce than any other facility around the world. Since its introduction to Wisconsin, Kikkoman has been an essential contributor to the Wisconsin economy and shares the same commitment to the development of Wisconsin businesses, suppliers, service providers, and contractors. Ultimately, the Walworth Kikkoman production facility serves as an important example of the coprosperity and success of American and Japanese partnerships.

We in Wisconsin are grateful to Kikkoman for sharing the vibrant tradition and well-respected values of soy sauce brewing and the Japanese culinary tradition. I am honored to recognize the 50th anniversary of Kikkoman Foods, Inc., and look forward to their continued success in Wisconsin for years to come.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the exceptional life of Lawrence Eckstein, on the occasion of his 99th birthday.

Mr. Eckstein was born on June 30, 1924, in Wisconsin. He attended Winneconne High School before heading into the workforce at age 14. At age 20, Mr. Eckstein entered the U.S. Army and served as a private in both the 85th Infantry Division and 10th Mt. Division from 1944 through 1947. During his time in the U.S Army, he was stationed throughout Italy and Austria. He was a recipient of the Bronze Star Medal and received a Quilt of Valor in 2022.

In 1952, Mr. Eckstein married his wife Darlene. Together, they raised six children and celebrated 61 years of marriage before her passing in 2013. After the military, Mr. Eckstein worked within the Kimberly-Clark Corporation for 26 years. Retirement didn't stop Mr. Eckstein from keeping busy. He drove semi-trucks up until the age of 86 and often could be seen riding his bike on the Wiouwash trail in Winneconne up until the age of 95.

Mr. Eckstein is also incredibly active with the Winneconne Legion, marching in local parades up until the age of 91. He also had the opportunity to go on the Old Glory Honor Flight back in 2012.

I am privileged to acknowledge the life and work of Lawrence Eckstein, and on the occasion of his 99th birthday, I wish him a happy birthday and thank him for his lifetime of service to our country.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor the sacrifice of S2C David Joseph Riley who lost his life, along with 428 of his fellow crewmen, on December 7, 1941, while serving on the USS Oklahoma during the attack on Pearl Harbor. After over 80 years, S2C Riley's remains will finally come to Juda in Green County, WI, on May 27, 2023.

Seaman Second Class Riley was born on February 18, 1916, and at the age of 11 years old became the foster son of Elmer and Della (Matzke) Asmus of Juda, WI. He attended the Juda elementary and high schools and was known for his cheerful and likable manner. In 1939, he joined the Wisconsin National Guard, and in May 1940, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy. After training, he was assigned to the battleship USS Oklahoma.

On December 7, 1941, Seaman Second Class Riley was onboard the USS Oklahoma, docked at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor, when it was attacked by Japanese forces. This ship was hit by multiple torpedoes, causing it to quickly flip and capsize.

On December 21, 1941, Mr. and Mrs. Asmus received a telegram from the Navy, stating that Seaman Second Class Riley was missing. On February 17, 1942, 1 day before what would have been his 26th birthday, they received another telegram declaring that Seaman Second Class Riley had lost his life in service of his country. Unfortunately, his remains could not be identified at this time. Eventually, the remains of the men lost aboard the Oklahoma were recovered and buried at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific--NMCP--and listed as ``Unknowns.''

The loss of Seaman Second Class Riley was devastating to the tight- knit community of Green County, and over 80 years later, his legacy is still known and honored. The American Legion Post 84 in Monroe is the Zilmer-Riley post, named in part for Seaman Second Class Riley. A plaque in Juda High School commemorates the sacrifice made by Seaman Second Class Riley and two other men from Juda during World War II.

In 2015, the Department of Defense authorized the exhumation of the USS Oklahoma ``Unknowns,'' interred at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, NMCP. Seaman Second Class Riley's remains were exhumed and identified through the painstaking efforts of the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency--DPAA--the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory--AFDIL--and the Navy Casualty POW-MIA Branch.

Deborah Krauss Smith, great-grandniece of Seaman Second Class Riley's foster parents, worked diligently to gain approval from the Navy Casualty POW/MIA branch to return Seaman Second Class Riley's remains to Juda, where they will be interred with those of his foster parents, fittingly over Memorial Day weekend 2023.

It is our duty to honor Seaman Second Class Riley and his fellow servicemembers who lost their lives on that fateful day. I ask that we all take a moment to remember S2C David Joseph Riley and to pay tribute to his service and sacrifice.

Madam President, today I rise to honor Matt Rothschild, executive director of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, on his retirement. Over the span of Matt's 43-year career, he has been a tireless advocate for democracy, social and economic justice, and civil rights and liberties.

After graduating magna cum laude from Harvard in 1980, Matt went to work as an editor for the Multinational Monitor, working for Ralph Nader in Washington, DC. In 1983, he moved to Wisconsin to take a job as staff writer with The Progressive Magazine. In 1994, he advanced to senior editor and chairman of the board of directors for the magazine. While with The Progressive, Matt was also the director of The Progressive Media Project and published the book, ``You Have No Rights: Stories of America in an Age of Repression.'' While at The Progressive, Matt wrote hundreds of stories on issues ranging from threats to civil liberties, to social justice, to peace, to environmental concerns. He interviewed notable figures in the arts, politics, and economics including Wendell Berry, Naomi Klein, Bill McKibben, Robert Redford, Alice Walker, Allen Ginsberg, and Joseph Stiglitz.

In 2015, Matt joined the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign where he focused the efforts of the organization on banning gerrymandering, protecting and expanding the freedom to vote, getting rid of dark money in politics, and opposing anti-democracy efforts. Matt has the distinguishing quality of being everywhere, all at once, and has taken his vital messages about protecting democracy to hundreds of radio and television broadcasts, newspaper articles, opinion columns, social media and, in person, doing talks to good government groups in nearly every community in Wisconsin, letting citizens know what is at stake and how to get involved to redirect Wisconsin's future. While at the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, he also wrote ``Twelve Ways to Save Democracy in Wisconsin,'' which tells the story of what a once- progressive State lost after Act 10 was enacted in 2010 and the Republicans, through the creation of unfair maps, held a lock on government.

Matt has been a leading voice in Wisconsin for over 40 years. He has advocated tirelessly, doing so with kindness and good humor, always willing to engage with those who disagreed with him as much as those who did. Today, as Matt moves into retirement, he will step aside to leave space for others to fill because that is what Matt is about: paving the way for the next generation to continue the good fight. I feel honored to call Matt my friend and will be forever grateful for all he has done for the citizens in our State and for the voice he has given to democracy in these perilous times.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor the career of Darnell DeMasters, who will retire from her position as vice president of Federal Government Affairs at WEC Energy Group on April 4.

Over the past 25 years, Darnell has worked on behalf of customers in Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, and Minnesota, advocating for their energy needs before Congress and ensuring lawmakers understand the impact of legislation on their constituents. Prior to her time with WEC Energy Group, Darnell spent many years on Capitol Hill and later transitioned to positions in government affairs for the Duquesne Light Company and General Public Utilities.

Darnell was also instrumental in re-establishing and leading the Wisconsin Group, a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy organization to discuss public policy matters and government actions affecting Wisconsin's business, educational, public sector, and political communities.

Outside of her working hours, Darnell is an active member of the executive board of The Woman's Club of Fairfax, GFWC, a unified group of women dedicated to enhancing the lives of families and strengthening their community through charitable work, donations, and volunteer service.

I am fortunate to have worked with Darnell in her capacity at WEC Energy Group for many years. Her efforts to re-establish the Wisconsin Group as a forum to connect Wisconsinites and Wisconsin organizations in Washington, DC, have proven to be valuable, and my staff and I have regularly enjoyed the connection and community they have fostered.

I know Darnell's colleagues will miss her thoughtful and expert guidance, good humor, and deep knowledge. I am grateful for all of the work Darnell has done for the people of Wisconsin, and I wish her all the best as she begins a new chapter in her retirement.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the exceptional career and life of Rev. Joseph Ellwanger. Reverend Ellwanger is a pillar of the Milwaukee community and has left an indelible mark on the lives of so many. From his early career as a pastor in Alabama standing with civil rights leaders, to his ongoing work to reintegrate formerly incarcerated people into their home communities, Rev. Joseph Ellwanger has put into action his faith to affirm all people.

Reverend Ellwanger was born in St Louis, MO, but grew up in Selma, AL. He left his childhood home when St. Paul Lutheran Church, an African-American congregation in Birmingham, requested a pastoral candidate. During his time with St. Paul's he joined the Southern Christian Leadership Conference's fight for civil rights. Reverend Ellwanger attended civil rights meetings and eventually received an invitation to meet with the SCLC's steering committee, where he met Dr. Martin Luther King. Reverend Ellwanger was the lone White pastor to join the movement, and he stood undeterred by challenges from his conservative denomination. He recruited both students and clergy to join with him in the civil rights movement. On March 6, 1965, the day before Bloody Sunday, Ellwanger led a group of 72 White Alabamians to Selma to participate in the Concerned White Citizens march supporting voting rights for African-Americans.

Reverend Ellwanger joined the National Council of Christian Churches and met with President Lyndon Johnson after Bloody Sunday. This meeting brought together a group of clergymen from a broad spectrum of denominations to communicate to President Johnson that the religious community supported the Voting Rights Act.

Reverend Ellwanger's work for equal justice has been ongoing. From Alabama, he moved to Milwaukee, WI, where he was a Lutheran pastor for decades. He continues to work for voting rights and is a founding member of Project RETURN to help individuals who have experienced incarceration make a positive, permanent return to community, family, and friends.

As Reverend Ellwanger celebrates his 90th birthday, I am pleased to join others in recognizing the contributions he has made to the people of Milwaukee, our State, and our Nation.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the long career of Scott Leonard, of Milwaukee, as he retires from Amtrak after 19 years of dedicated service. Born in Milwaukee on April 2, 1961, he graduated from the University of Wisconsin in 1984. His first job was with the blood services division of the American Red Cross, first in Wisconsin, then in Washington, DC.

Scott always loved trains, especially passenger trains. As a child, he would ride some of the storied trains that travelled through the Badger State. His interest and passion for the railroad led him to a position with the National Association of Railroad Passengers--NARP--an advocacy group supporting the growth of rail passenger services in the United States. There, he worked with the membership of the association to advance ideas to Amtrak for improved service and to communicate back to NARP what they could do to support Amtrak. Scott was an ever-present figure on Capitol Hill providing information and support to the Members and their staffs as they worked on the important rail bills of the late 1980s and 90s.

In 2004, Scott joined Amtrak's government affairs office and was responsible for handling congressional correspondence, managing special projects, and assisting with VIP travel. He is well regarded for his thorough and prompt replies to queries and ability to provide personal and professional service to inquiries or complaints. Members of Congress, foreign dignitaries and other important passengers came to know Scott on a first-name basis as he met or escorted them to the station or their train. Leaving the office and headed to the station, suit and tie, clipboard in hand, his friends in government affairs would say: ``Somebody is about to get the Scott Leonard Treatment.'' For many, he was Amtrak, a recognized face in the crowd, a measure of consistency in a harried world.

Scott also holds the unique distinction of travelling every mile of Amtrak's 21,400-route system, one of only two people known to have that achievement. As in every large endeavor such as this, one needs a playbook or guide so others may follow on a clear and consistent path of requirements. In a system as large as Amtrak's, there are many anomalies. Scott organized the ``playbook'' right to down the last switch, siding, and alternative route options. There are others chasing this goal, and maybe someday there will be created the ``Leonard Prize'' for those who do indeed cover that last mile. In addition to his knowledge of Amtrak's system, he can recite the beginning and end of the U.S. highway system and possesses excellent mapmaking skills and a deep knowledge of American geography.

Some might say that Scott was lucky to get a job that allowed him to pursue his passions and interest. However, the truth is that Amtrak was lucky to have Scott. He lives the values of the company every day, and he is a beloved colleague to those around him. His former boss in government affairs once said that ``if there were ever a human cloning opportunity, Scott would be No. 1 on the list.''

Soon, Scott will retire from service at Amtrak and return to Wisconsin with his husband, Kevin. They will settle in a historic property in Racine, not far from the Hiawatha line where friends and family alike can keep an ear out for the whistles and sounds of trains racing by.

Scott, thank you for your dedication and long service to Amtrak-- America's Railroad. May you and Kevin have a long, happy, and healthy retirement.

Madam President, across the country, people are experiencing the ramifications and women are feeling the pain of Roe v. Wade being overturned and having lost fundamental rights and freedoms overnight.

In my home State of Wisconsin, women are living with dire, real-life consequences. Two constituents, Erica and Scott, have been trying to get pregnant for years--something many Americans can relate to--and, finally, they were successful.

But 13 weeks into her pregnancy, Erica learned the heartbreaking news that the fetus had a rare condition that caused the skull not to fully develop and the fetus could not survive--an absolute nightmare for expecting parents.

Instead of being able to get immediate care and mourn their loss, Erica and Scott had to figure out the logistics of how to get the healthcare they needed--an abortion--out of State. Let me say that again. Expecting parents learned that they lost the baby they had tried years to conceive, and instead of being able to mourn their loss, they had to navigate a complicated legal and medical landscape and play travel agent.

They had a challenge even to get somebody on the phone and struggled to find an appointment sooner than 2 to 3 weeks out. In the end, Erica was forced to stay pregnant for a week with a fetus that she knew could not survive.

She said:

Every day I was still pregnant was just an ongoing reminder

of our loss.

Sadly, Erica is not alone. One Wisconsin woman bled for more than 10 days from an incomplete miscarriage after emergency room staff said they would not treat her. Another, whose water broke at 17 weeks, was sent home without the abortion care she needed, only to return 2 days later with a life-threatening infection.

All of this is because Wisconsinites have really been sent back to the year 1849. What do I mean by that? In 1849, Wisconsin's 1-year-old legislature banned abortion, making it a felony to provide abortion care in almost all circumstances. At the time of the vote, exactly zero women were present to debate that misguided law, let alone vote for or against it. In fact, it would be 70 years before women even had the right to vote.

Yet, 174 years later, an activist Supreme Court ripped away the constitutional rights of millions of Americans, and, last year, this abortion ban in Wisconsin that predates the Civil War went back into effect, denying hundreds of thousands of Wisconsinites the right and freedom to control their bodies.

This archaic law has doctors and medical professionals afraid to administer the lifesaving care they are trained to provide for fear that they might be prosecuted. In fact, lawyers are now deciding what care can and cannot be provided. This law is leaving women with no good options and wondering how, in 2023, they could have found themselves in a position with fewer rights than their mothers and their grandmothers.

Women who have the means and the ability can seek care out of State, sometimes traveling hundreds of miles and often being forced to take off time from work. Some others are being forced to self-administer medication abortions without medical supervision. Those who cannot afford the cost of travel and lodging, childcare, or time off work--a reality for so many Americans, especially women of color and those in rural areas--are being forced to carry pregnancies that they did not choose.

Wisconsinites are not alone, unfortunately. Across the country, 14 other States have already implemented near total bans on abortion, leaving one in three American women without access to a safe and legal abortion.

And anti-choice extremists in States across the country are continuing their crusade. They are continuing to try to take away bodily autonomy by pushing bills that include medically unnecessary restrictions that limit access to abortion care. This all flies in the face of an overwhelming majority of Americans who support women having control over their own bodies and their futures and their families.

That is why I, alongside a record number of my colleagues, am proud to be leading the introduction of the Women's Health Protection Act. This legislation would protect the right to perform and access abortion care, free from arbitrary waiting periods, biased and scientifically inaccurate counseling requirements, mandatory ultrasounds, and absolute bans on abortion earlier in pregnancy.

Our legislation makes sure that the life and health of the mother are paramount, just as it was prior to Roe being struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court and as the American people overwhelmingly support.

The Women's Health Protection Act would return the life-altering decision to have a baby to women and their doctors, without interference from politicians.

For Wisconsinites like Erica, whose rights and freedoms have been stripped away, this bill is not just a political exercise; it is a necessary response to a very real crisis.

Having the freedom to control your healthcare, your body, and your future, free from government interference, is a fundamental right, but in Wisconsin, it is no longer a reality. It is time to pass the Women's Health Protection Act.

I yield the floor.

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

Mr. President, I rise today in support of Dr. Laura Taylor-Kale, the President's nominee to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy.

As a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, I know that growing and sustaining our industrial base is a critical aspect of the resilience of our national security, and it is critical also to maintaining our competitive advantage with China and other near-peer competitors. A resilient defense industrial base is also vital to the support the United States is providing to Ukraine.

Dr. Taylor-Kale is well suited for this role, having served in the Obama-Biden administration as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Manufacturing in the International Trade Administration and as the senior adviser for policy and operations at the U.S. Development Finance Corporation. She has significant professional experience at the intersection of business and government and has a thorough understanding of industry challenges and their impact on supply chains most crucial to our national security. Her experience across government, the private sector, multilateral organizations, and academia leave her well suited to help ensure the Department of Defense continues to deliver secure and resilient capabilities to our forces.

Filling this position is important. It is vital to addressing critical vulnerabilities in industrial supply chains, to reducing reliance on foreign adversaries, and securing domestic industrial capacity--all actions that are key to U.S. economic and national security.

If we are serious about the role of the United States as a global competitor, we need a fully staffed and capable team managing the current and future needs of our military forces. Dr. Taylor-Kale will help complete that team.

I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined by the majority leader, in consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 1152, Laura Taylor-Kale, of California, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense. (New Position); that there be 10 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form on the nomination; that upon the use or yielding back of the time, the Senate vote without intervening action or debate on the nomination; and that the Senate resume legislative session.

Mr. President, I listened carefully to my colleague from Alaska as he objected, and I just want to add a couple of comments in response.

I had a chance to share with him that there was a Wisconsin conflict between the Department of Defense and the Department of Interior, something that when I was a Member of the House of Representatives I worked on for 14 years and could not get it shaken loose--finger pointing, finger pointing. And then I had the honor of being elected to the U.S. Senate, where we have the power to place holds on nominees. And I had the opportunity, and took advantage of that opportunity, to place a hold on a nominee who was absolutely in the position to resolve the issue. And it is a powerful tool.

In this case, the person who is being held could be doing so much to advance and grow our defense industrial base and help to improve our national security and resiliency. And this particular person is not in a position to, if confirmed, resolve the issue that I heard my colleague describe. So I am disappointed that we cannot move ahead with this confirmation at this time.

I understand the power of the hold, but it is much more powerful when the person being held is also in a position to resolve the issue.

And with that, I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Senator Lankford's amendment would eliminate the only practical recourse for same-sex and interracial couples to protect their marriages under the Respect for Marriage Act. It would create an exemption far beyond current law for partnerships between government and faith-based organizations, the latter of which continue to enjoy robust religious liberty and conscience protections that remain intact under the Respect for Marriage Act.

This amendment would upend a carefully negotiated, bipartisan compromise that protects the interests of religious organizations and individuals while affording the dignity of marriage recognition to same-sex and interracial couples. I urge my colleagues to vote no.

I yield back.

Vote on Amendment No. 6496

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the debate be extended an additional minute so that I might recognize the leader after my remarks.

Mr. President, I want to express, as did my colleague Senator Collins, that there are many thanks to go around. I thank the leader. I want to thank the original bill sponsors in the House and Senate--Congressman Nadler and Senator Feinstein--and the team of Senators Collins, Portman, Sinema, and Tillis for your unrelenting commitment that has brought us to this final vote to pass the Respect for Marriage Act.

I want to thank the advocates who have been fighting for marriage equality for decades, and I want to recognize the millions of same-sex and interracial couples who have truly made this moment possible by living their true selves and changing the hearts and minds of people around this country.

Many of these same-sex and interracial couples are fearful. They are worried that the rights, responsibilities, and freedoms they enjoy through civil marriage could be stripped away. Right now, the Senate has the opportunity to put those fears to rest and give millions of people in same-sex and interracial marriages the certainty, dignity, and respect they need and deserve. By passing this bill, we are showing that the American Government and people see them and respect them.

I encourage all my colleagues to vote yes on the Respect for Marriage Act and move our country forward.

I yield to our leader.

Mr. President, I want to begin by thanking and recognizing the House Judiciary chairman, Jerry Nadler, and the entire House Equality Caucus for introducing the House bill and starting up this effort.

This legislation passed the House of Representatives with a strong bipartisan vote of 267 to 157, with all Democrats and 47 Republicans supporting the bill.

I also want to extend my heartfelt appreciation for my Senate colleagues who have worked tirelessly to get us up to this point. I want to thank the lead sponsor of the bill, Senator Feinstein, and also thank and recognize the hard work and effort of Senator Collins, Senator Portman, Senator Sinema, and Senator Tillis for their steadfast commitment. We couldn't be where we are right now without their efforts.

I also want to thank the staff of all of these offices for the long hours and hard work that went into this legislation, including my own counsel, Becca Branum, and my chief of staff, Ken Reidy.

Lastly, I want to thank all of the advocates who have fought for marriage equality for decades.

We are on the cusp of a historic vote in the Senate because of everybody's efforts.

I decided, in thinking about what I wanted to share today, that I wanted to put a face on this debate; actually, more accurately, three faces.

Let me introduce you to my dear friends Margaret, Denise, and their daughter Maria, and just tell you a little bit about them and then how this underlying issue impacts them.

The marriage and long partnership that my dear friends Denise and Margaret share began in Oklahoma in 1981. They were there as organizers, working to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in that State. They were organizing support for the ERA so that we might add a few simple words to the U.S. Constitution, specifically, ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.''

That they met one another during a struggle for social justice surprised no one who knew either Denise or Margaret, for, really, the pursuit of equality and equity and justice has defined each of them as individuals as well as life partners.

Their professional and personal lives and the movements for women's rights, LGBTQ rights, educational equity, affordable housing, economic justice--they are all inextricably linked.

Their first date occurred in December of 1981 over coffee in Oklahoma City. And as that ERA campaign came to an unsuccessful close in 1982, they chose to move together to Madison, WI. I vividly recall meeting them shortly thereafter in the autumn of 1984.

Denise hailed from Milwaukee, WI--this is Denise--Margaret, from Webster City, IA. They were incredibly and are incredibly committed to one another, but they also determined, as they got a little older, that something was missing. Actually, I want to say someone was missing. Denise's and Margaret's journey to find that someone was arduous. Yet they never gave up.

In 2003, after working with an adoption agency for many years, Denise received a video of their daughter, this lovely, brown-eyed Maria. And the family you now see here--this is, actually,

several years old. Maria is now a sophomore at the University of Wisconsin, Madison campus, so a little bit dated. But I wanted to put a face or a series of faces on this because it is such an all-American family and an all-American story.

But as everyone knows about the debate we are about to enter, marriage was not an option for Margaret and Denise until after the Obergefell decision. The things that most married people take for granted are things that couples like Margaret and Denise had to think about and had to figure out how do they protect one another, how do they protect their family.

We often think, when we think about marriage, of the wedding and the ceremony and the celebration, but we don't often think about the hundreds upon hundreds of rights and responsibilities that civil marriage confers upon couples.

Margaret and Denise were telling me about their recollection of when the city of Madison passed a domestic partnership ordinance allowing them to register. And when that happened, for the first time, they could be on one another's health insurance. That is something that married couples kind of take for granted--that they could have one another on their health insurance. They had to think a lot about what they would do in an emergent situation where one might be in the hospital because without marriage, you are technically legal strangers. And, literally, if Margaret were in the hospital after an accident, for example, Denise, without having the appropriate papers--a healthcare power of attorney--would be viewed as a legal stranger and potentially denied access.

Adoption is something that has made many a family in the United States. Yet prior to marriage rights, Denise and Margaret had to make a choice of only one who would have the official adoption, but then they had to go through a whole bunch of legal rigamarole, if you will, so that Margaret, if need be had to go to a parent-teacher conference or to pick Maria up at school, had some documentation at the school that she, too, was a parent.

Estate planning, you have to think about that. You had to think about that intently prior to marriage rights being conferred.

I wanted you to get a quick chance to meet Margaret and Denise and Maria because they reflect the experiences of literally tens of millions of people in the United States. It is why the Obergefell decision was so key.

I want to switch to focus on why it is so critical that we adopt the Respect for Marriage Act--because Obergefell right now is the law of the land, but there is great concern that that legal precedent could be in jeopardy.

Some of my colleagues have questioned the urgency and maybe even the necessity of passing the Respect for Marriage Act. Some have asserted that there is no threat to these rights in America. Some have said that there is no case currently making its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court challenging these rights so there is nothing really to worry about. Others have suggested that proponents of the Respect for Marriage Act are raising the issue just to drive further divisions among Americans.

I believe that there is an urgency to pass the Respect for Marriage Act in order to heal such divisions and provide certainty to married interracial and same-sex couples that the protections, rights, and responsibilities that flow from their marriages will endure.

Right now, millions of Americans--our family members, our neighbors, our congressional staff members, and, certainly, our constituents--are scared; scared that the rights they rely upon to protect their families could be taken away. And they are scared for good reason.

Let's face it. Regardless of your position on the issue of abortion, the highest Court of the land has just overturned a precedent of nearly 50 years. There is no questioning that. And the same legal arguments that the Supreme Court rested upon to reverse Roe v. Wade could just as easily be applied to reverse numerous other cases related to families, related to intimate relations, to contraception, and marriage.

In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, in the Dobbs case access to abortion care or denial of such care has been left in the hands of the States. By the way, in Wisconsin, we are subject to a criminal abortion law that was passed in 1849, 1 year after Wisconsin became a State and before women had the right to vote and certainly before women served in the legislature that serves to rule upon their rights.

There are landmark cases related to marriage that could be threatened should the Supreme Court consider cases challenging those earlier decisions. One such case is Loving v. Virginia, which was decided in 1967. The Supreme Court ruled in Loving that State laws prohibiting interracial marriage were unconstitutional based upon the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment and its liberty provisions. At the time of the Loving decision, 16 States had laws banning interracial marriage. And you might be surprised to learn that it took until the year 2000 for the last State to repeal the law on its books banning interracial marriage.

Another landmark case relates to same-sex marriage. In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court decided in 2015 that the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment prohibit States from outlawing and refusing to recognize same-sex marriages.

Some 35 States across the country prohibit same-sex marriage in their laws, constitutions, or both. And the so-called Defense of Marriage Act that bars Federal recognition of same-sex marriages and was ruled unconstitutional by a narrow 5-4 Supreme Court--that law is still on the books.

Given this landscape, it is not unreasonable for same-sex and interracial couples to be fearful that the protections of their marriages are in real jeopardy. The fact that the constitutional principles of liberty, privacy, self-determination, and equal treatment under the law, upon which Roe v. Wade was originally decided, are the same constitutional principles on which the Loving and Obergefell cases were decided makes the Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade all the more shocking and frightening to those in interracial and same-sex marriages.

Several of my colleagues have maintained that, even if the Court may someday revisit these cases, there is no urgency right now since there is no case challenging interracial or same-sex marriage that is currently making its way up to the Supreme Court. But think about today's world. Given the Supreme Court's use of procedural mechanisms like cert before judgment or use of a shadow docket, cases often reach the Supreme Court faster than ever before.

And when it comes to the merits, one needs to pay attention to the concurring opinion of Justice Clarence Thomas in the Dobbs decision. In his opinion, Justice Thomas explicitly said that the rationale used to overturn Roe v. Wade should be used to overturn cases establishing rights to contraception, same-sex consensual relations, and same-sex marriage. He was essentially providing an open invitation to litigators across the country to bring their cases to the Court, inevitably instilling fear among millions of Americans.

The Supreme Court should not be in a position to undermine the stability of families with the stroke of a pen. So now Congress must act, and Congress is acting with a full-throated endorsement from the American people. More than 70 percent of Americans support marriage equality, including a majority of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.

This legislation unites Americans. With the Respect for Marriage Act, we can ease the fear that millions of same-sex and interracial couples have that their freedoms and their rights could be stripped away. By passing this bill, we are guaranteeing same-sex and interracial couples, regardless of where they live, that their marriage is legal and that they will continue to enjoy the rights and responsibilities that all other marriages are afforded. And this will give millions of loving couples the certainty, the dignity, and the respect that they need and that they deserve.

For my dear friends Margaret and Denise and their daughter Maria, passing this legislation will remove the weight of the world from their backs. While they worry just like the rest of us about the cost of living and staying

healthy and saving for retirement, passing this bill will take away a worry that someday their marriage might be on the chopping block at no fault of their own.

By the way, I think I failed to mention it, but I was so honored back in December of 2018 to be a copresider at their wedding. The wedding took place 37 years after they first met and became a couple, and it happened on Maria's Sweet Sixteen birthday.

But for the millions of other Americans in same-sex and interracial marriages, this shows that the American Government and people see them and respect them.

With that, I encourage all of my colleagues to vote yes on the motion to proceed to the Respect for Marriage Act and to help come together to move our country forward.

I yield the floor.

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

I ask unanimous consent that the vote previously scheduled for 3:15 p.m. be called immediately.

Cloture Motion

I ask for the yeas and nays.