Floor Statements

Mr. President. The United States Agency for International Development's (USAID) New Partnerships Initiative (NPI) was formed to help small and local nonprofit organizations partner with the agency on humanitarian work, and was inspired in part by requests from Congress for USAID to cooperate more closely with these organizations. The program was founded on the principle that greater diversity and competition among the USAID partner base would lead to better and more effective development

work. Since its creation, NPI has helped USAID expand its collaboration with local nonprofits to undertake critical work overseas, but this vital program needs a clearly defined foundation in statute and long- term authorization of funding to sustain its progress well beyond 2021.

Today, I am pleased to introduce the New Partnerships Initiative Authorization Act with Senator Rubio. This legislation would cement USAID's commitment to diversifying its nonprofit partner base by authorizing the program and necessary funding through Fiscal Year 2026. Additionally, the New Partnerships Initiative Authorization Act would improve outcomes at the NPI program by outlining in statute core elements of the program, and requiring the USAID Administrator to adhere to certain criteria regarding program management and nonprofit recruitment.

This bipartisan legislation is an opportunity to ensure that the New Partnerships Initiative continues to be an effective tool for diversifying USAID's partner base through the inclusion of locally based and underutilized partners. I look forward to working with USAID leadership and my colleagues on the Foreign Relations Committee to swiftly consider and implement the New Partnerships Initiative Authorization Act.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President. The United States Agency for International Development's (USAID) New Partnerships Initiative (NPI) was formed to help small and local nonprofit organizations partner with the agency on humanitarian work, and was inspired in part by requests from Congress for USAID to cooperate more closely with these organizations. The program was founded on the principle that greater diversity and competition among the USAID partner base would lead to better and more effective development

work. Since its creation, NPI has helped USAID expand its collaboration with local nonprofits to undertake critical work overseas, but this vital program needs a clearly defined foundation in statute and long- term authorization of funding to sustain its progress well beyond 2021.

Today, I am pleased to introduce the New Partnerships Initiative Authorization Act with Senator Rubio. This legislation would cement USAID's commitment to diversifying its nonprofit partner base by authorizing the program and necessary funding through Fiscal Year 2026. Additionally, the New Partnerships Initiative Authorization Act would improve outcomes at the NPI program by outlining in statute core elements of the program, and requiring the USAID Administrator to adhere to certain criteria regarding program management and nonprofit recruitment.

This bipartisan legislation is an opportunity to ensure that the New Partnerships Initiative continues to be an effective tool for diversifying USAID's partner base through the inclusion of locally based and underutilized partners. I look forward to working with USAID leadership and my colleagues on the Foreign Relations Committee to swiftly consider and implement the New Partnerships Initiative Authorization Act.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President. With a growing number of older adults and people with disabilities in the U.S., our Nation is becoming increasingly reliant on the direct care workforce and family caregivers who support older adults and people with disabilities. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this need.

The direct care workforce, such as direct support workers, home care workers, personal care workers or other paid workers who support older adults and people with disabilities in their homes and communities, has long experienced staffing shortages in part because of low wages and high turnover. Currently, 4.5 million workers--including nearly 2.3 million home care workers--make up the direct care workforce, and this industry is expected to grow by more than a million jobs by 2028, not including the jobs that will need to be filled as existing workers leave the field or exit the labor force. The shortage of direct care workers often puts pressure on family caregivers. The number of American caregivers providing unpaid caregiving has increased over the past 5 years, and 23 percent of caregivers say that caregiving has made their health worse.

Today, I am pleased to introduce the Supporting Our Direct Care Workforce and Family Caregivers Act along with my colleagues Senators Bob Casey, Maggie Hassan, Tammy Duckworth, Jack Reed, Ron Wyden, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Jacky Rosen. Our legislation would direct the Department of Health and Human Services, through the Administration on Community Living (ACL), to award grants to states or other eligible entities for initiatives to build, retain, train and educate, and promote the direct care workforce, including self-directed workers and direct care supervisors or managers, and to provide education and training support for family caregivers to help ease stresses associated with caregiving. Grants could be used for preapprenticeship and on-the- job training opportunities, apprenticeship programs, career ladders or pathways, specializations or certification or other activities to recruit and retain direct care professionals in the field. Additionally, the bill creates a technical assistance center at ACL to bolster coordination across Federal agencies, provide consultation to States, and make policy recommendations to support the direct care workforce and family caregivers.

The bill aligns with President Biden's American Jobs Plan, which calls for substantial investments to meet the demand for home and community-based services and invests in our country's care infrastructure. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to see the Supporting Our Direct Care Workforce and Family Caregivers Act as an opportunity to invest in the direct care workforce and family caregivers--both critical pieces of the care team who provide support for millions of Americans every day, ensuring they can live their lives independently and with dignity.

Mr. President. With a growing number of older adults and people with disabilities in the U.S., our Nation is becoming increasingly reliant on the direct care workforce and family caregivers who support older adults and people with disabilities. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this need.

The direct care workforce, such as direct support workers, home care workers, personal care workers or other paid workers who support older adults and people with disabilities in their homes and communities, has long experienced staffing shortages in part because of low wages and high turnover. Currently, 4.5 million workers--including nearly 2.3 million home care workers--make up the direct care workforce, and this industry is expected to grow by more than a million jobs by 2028, not including the jobs that will need to be filled as existing workers leave the field or exit the labor force. The shortage of direct care workers often puts pressure on family caregivers. The number of American caregivers providing unpaid caregiving has increased over the past 5 years, and 23 percent of caregivers say that caregiving has made their health worse.

Today, I am pleased to introduce the Supporting Our Direct Care Workforce and Family Caregivers Act along with my colleagues Senators Bob Casey, Maggie Hassan, Tammy Duckworth, Jack Reed, Ron Wyden, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Jacky Rosen. Our legislation would direct the Department of Health and Human Services, through the Administration on Community Living (ACL), to award grants to states or other eligible entities for initiatives to build, retain, train and educate, and promote the direct care workforce, including self-directed workers and direct care supervisors or managers, and to provide education and training support for family caregivers to help ease stresses associated with caregiving. Grants could be used for preapprenticeship and on-the- job training opportunities, apprenticeship programs, career ladders or pathways, specializations or certification or other activities to recruit and retain direct care professionals in the field. Additionally, the bill creates a technical assistance center at ACL to bolster coordination across Federal agencies, provide consultation to States, and make policy recommendations to support the direct care workforce and family caregivers.

The bill aligns with President Biden's American Jobs Plan, which calls for substantial investments to meet the demand for home and community-based services and invests in our country's care infrastructure. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to see the Supporting Our Direct Care Workforce and Family Caregivers Act as an opportunity to invest in the direct care workforce and family caregivers--both critical pieces of the care team who provide support for millions of Americans every day, ensuring they can live their lives independently and with dignity.

Mr. President, as career opportunities and the requisite skills

for success adapt to the demands of the 2lst century, so too must the instruction and preparation educators receive. Educators are tasked with designing educational experiences that rise to the rigorous State academic standards and reflect the needs and interests of our Nation's diverse student population. This past school year with the pandemic was even more demanding our Nation's educators as they were faced with new teaching challenges and adapting to virtual or hybrid learning environments. Prior to the pandemic, school districts were faced with widespread teacher shortages, with nearly every State reporting shortages of teachers in high-need subjects like math, science, ahd special education. Data from the U.S. Department of Education shows COVID-19 has only exacerbated those needs with 43 States reporting shortages in math teachers, 42 in science teachers, and 44 in special education for the 2020-21 school year.

We must find ways to strengthen the educator talent pipeline to ensure our students have access to high-quality educators and school leaders. We also must address the fact that schools in high-need communities are often staffed by a revolving door of underprepared and inexperienced teachers who unable to meet students' needs. According to the U.S. Department of Education's Civil Rights Data Collection, in 2016, schools with high enrollments of students of color were four times as likely to hire uncertified teachers as were schools with low enrollments of students of color. This in part due to State teacher shortages.

This is why I am pleased to introduce today with my colleague, Senator Collins, the Preparing and Retaining Education Professionals Act, or PREP Act. As schools across our Nation continue to face growing class sizes, many are struggling with a shortage of qualified teachers. Rural communities in particular are experiencing a dearth of teachers equipped to meet their growing needs. The PREP Act aims to create high- quality teacher residency programs to develop a diverse workforce that is well prepared to provide the educational opportunities students need to be successful in the 21st century.

More specifically, this legislation would expand the definition of ``high need'' districts under the Every Student Succeeds Act, ESSA, to include those experiencing teacher shortages in rural communities and in areas such as special education, English language, science, technology, engineering, math, and CTE, to allow for access to additional support and improvement. It would also encourage school districts to establish partnerships with local community colleges and universities to ensure their education programs are developing future teachers in content areas where there is currently a shortage of educators. It would increase access to teacher and school leader residency programs and preparation training while requiring States to identify areas of teacher or leader shortages by subject across public schools and use that data to target their efforts. Additionally, the PREP Act bolsters support for teacher preparation programs at minority serving institutions, MSIs, or historically Black colleges and universities, HBCUs, to invest in a diverse and well-prepared educator workforce.

Improving our Nation's educational system is contingent on our ability to prepare, support, and retain quality educators. Research shows that better prepared teachers stay longer in the profession and are more likely to remain in their roles and positively impact young people and their communities. As we continue to focus on recovering from the pandemic, I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle see the PREP Act as a commonsense opportunity to help ensure that students in every ZIP Code across the country have the well-prepared teachers and school leaders they deserve.

Mr. President. Senator Baldwin and I are pleased to introduce a resolution that acknowledges and apologizes for the mistreatment of and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LBGT) individuals who have served our nation as civil servants or members of the Armed Forces and Foreign Service. This systemic mistreatment and discrimination of members of the LGBT community began as early as the 1940s and continued well into the 1990s and is often termed as the Lavender Scare by historians. During this time, it is estimated that 100,000 service members were forced out of the Armed Forces between World War II and 2011. In addition, more than 1,000 State Department employees were dismissed due to their alleged sexual orientation, and many more were prevented from serving due to discriminatory hiring practices.

Policies such as the 1949 decree by the Department of Defense mandating that ``homosexual personnel, irrespective of sex, should not be permitted to serve in any branch of the Armed Forces'' led to the mass discharge and systemic screening of gay, lesbian, and bisexual military service members. Similar policies within the State Department followed led to mass dismissals and terminations of Foreign Service and civil service employees. Subsequently, policies were enacted across the Federal government targeting members of the LGBT community. To this day, historians do not know the exact number of people impacted. However, despite these harmful and discriminatory policies, LGBT people continued to faithfully serve and make significant contributions to the United States, many of whom became clerks and lawyers, surgeons and nurses, Purple Heart recipients and Navy Seals, translators and air traffic controllers, engineers and astronomers, teachers and diplomats, and rangers and postal workers.

It is time to acknowledge the harm caused to these Americans, their families, and our country by depriving LGBT people of the right to serve as federal civil servants, diplomats, or in the Armed Services. This Senate resolution takes a stand on the side of respect for LBGT Americans who have served our nation and reaffirms our commitment to treat all public servants with fairness and equality, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. I'm proud to introduce this Senate resolution during Pride Month to reaffirm our nation's commitment to treat everyone, including LGBT Americans, with equal respect and fairness. I will continue working toward advancing equality for all LGBT people in Virginia and across our nation.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Well, thank you.

Mr. President, I want to thank my best friend in politics, Senator Mark Warner. And I just realized something. John Warner defeated in an election my best friend in politics, and John Warner also defeated in an election my political hero, my father-in-law, Linwood Holton, who was Governor of Virginia from 1970 to 1974.

So I want to talk a little bit about John's effect on me personally and then also his great partnership when I was mayor of Richmond and Governor and into the Senate, and then I will hand it back to our senior Senator for his comments.

When John Warner came out of the Pacific at the end of World War II, he went back to complete his studies at Washington and Lee. He was a surface ship guy in the Pacific Navy and went back to Washington and Lee in Lexington. My father-in-law, Linwood Holton, was a submariner in the Pacific during World War II and also came back to complete his studies at Washington and Lee. John Warner and Linwood Holton, my father-in-law, met in 1946 at W&L, and they were part of the same fraternity, and John Warner used to always say that my father-in-law broke a paddle across his backside in a fraternity hazing ritual.

But those friends began a friendship that went to 75 years--75 years of friendship. My father-in-law is still alive. He will be 98 in September, and it was an amazing friendship. They worked on projects together.

As Senator Warner mentioned, they had to build the Republican Party in Virginia. We were a one-party State, dominated by the Byrd machine Dixiecrats, and they had to build the Republican Party with just a handful of others.

My father-in-law became the first Republican-elected Governor of Virginia, elected in 1969, at the time that John was Secretary of the Navy.

One day, a Navy ship, moored on the Elizabeth River, broke free and ran into and destroyed a bridge.

And my father-in-law called: Mr. Secretary.

Yes, Governor.

One of your ships has broken one of my bridges.

They had so much fun together as friends.

In 1978, they ran against each other to be in this body--a four-way Republican nominating convention. Neither of them won. Dick Obenshain won that convention. John Warner was second, my father-in-law was third, and someone else was fourth.

Dick Obenshain was killed in a plane crash, and it was unclear how it would sort out and who would be the nominee. My father-in-law threw his support behind John Warner. John Warner got the nomination. John Warner ran and then became the longest serving Senator in Virginia history, with 30 years.

When I married Anne in 1984, I was adopted into the John Warner friendship society because of being part of the Holton family. We were friends, and I enjoyed him. I admired him, and I saw his work here.

I came into public life as a city councilman and mayor in Richmond, and John Warner: I have to produce for the mayor of my capital city.

I was a young whippersnapper. I was mayor when I was--I think I was-- 39, and by now John Warner was in his mid-seventies, but he would produce for the capital city.

And then, as Mark knows, because he had the same relationship when he was Governor--I was Governor, and I was about 45 or 46, and by now John Warner was nearly 80--John Warner had an old-fashioned sense: You do what the Governor says. There are two Senators, but there is only one Governor.

I treated him like he was the senior partner, but he kind of treated you, when you were Governor, as, sort of, ``Well, we have to produce for the Governor.''

We were working on the Metro Silver Line project, the rail to Dulles, and the project during the George W. Bush administration was about to be unplugged from life support, after decades of work, and John Warner helped us get in and save that project.

A tremendous friend, a tremendous supporter, but I will say this and then hand maybe to Senator Reed, who might want to say a word, and then back to Senator Warner, because I think Senator Warner might want to be our closer here.

I got to know a new side of John Warner when I came to the Senate. I mean, I felt like we were like best friends and family friends, and he helped me when I was mayor and Governor. I came to the Senate in 2013, and he had been gone for 4 years. But I started to meet people whom I didn't know--John McCain and Carl Levin and Jack Reed and so many others whom I did not know before I was here--and then I really learned about John Warner.

I learned about his service as the chair and ranking of the Armed Services Committee. I learned about the fact that he was always in the middle of whatever gang was trying to do something good. I learned about his love for this institution. I learned about his love for his fellow Senators.

I was on a ticket with one of those fellow Senators, Senator Hillary Clinton, and stood with John Warner when he came out to endorse us, and he talked with such depth about working together with Senator Clinton on the Armed Services Committee.

I asked John Warner to come to lunch with me one day in the Senate Dining Room, and it was like I had brought the Pope in. I mean, we sat down and everyone--all the staff, everybody working in the Senate Dining Room, all the Senators and their families--were coming over to talk to John Warner because they loved him so much. And one of the reasons they loved him is they knew how much he loved the institution.

There is so much more I could say, but I just want to tell one more thing. John and I, at some point during my first term, were talking about the Senate, and we were both regretting that the Senate of today was not the Senate that John Warner served in--that the relationship- based Senate was turning into a more partisan Senate. And we were just being candid about that.

But when we finished, John said to me: Old friend--old friend is what he would call you--old friend, that is the way it is. But it is not in the water supply, and it is not sick building syndrome. It is just in the character and priorities of the people who walk in the doors every day. So if you don't like the way it is right now, guess what. You will walk in the Capitol tomorrow, and it can be different tomorrow if you try to make it better.

That was just John's attitude about this country and about this institution, and it leaves a big hole in my life. I am just grappling with the big hole in my life now not to have John Warner to go to and seek his advice.

With that, I yield to the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, the Senator from Rhode Island

Mr. President, amid high unemployment rates across the Country exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, businesses continue to face challenges in hiring the skilled workers they need to grow and thrive. Simultaneously, individuals looking for work may not have the skills and support that they need to enter or renter--and remain--in the workforce. Unfortunately the pandemic has slowed the number of students attending some form of postsecondary education, but even prior to the pandemic the supply of middle-skilled workers, whose work requires more than a high school diploma but not a four-year degree, fell short of industry demand. It's important that States make strategic investments now to set students up for success in the constantly-evolving labor market, and the best training for high-wage, high-skill, or in-demand jobs is often offered by community colleges.

For many people seeking a job, attending a community college is the most affordable and accessible pathway to higher paying employment opportunities. In Virginia, we have 23 community colleges that serve an estimated 400,000 people across the state, providing them opportunities to earn an associate's degree, certifications or licensures in some of the most cutting-edge and in-demand fields in our workforce. The impact of community colleges nationwide is even greater, and our rapidly changing economy demands increased investment in the pathways these institutions provide to keep up with changing skill demands. The rapidly changing U.S. economy demands agile education and workforce development systems that can keep up with changing skill demands.

Today, I am proud to reintroduce the Assisting Community Colleges in Educating Skilled Students (ACCESS) to Careers Act with Senator Young. This bill builds on lessons learned from the Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training grant program (TAACCCT), and provides grants to community colleges to partner with private and public sector entities to create innovative career pathways directly between two-year institutions and employers. The ACCESS to Careers Act also provides grants to states and community colleges to scale evidence-based strategies that will help prepare our students with the skills necessary to succeed in our in-demand industry sectors and occupations. These grants can be used to expand dual enrollment, work-based learning opportunities, apprenticeships, and other pathways to best meet the skill needs of students and employers in our evolving workforce. The bill also emphasizes the importance of student services to ensure that students have the support they need to complete their programs.

As our Country begins to recover from the widespread job losses we've seen over the last year, the success of our economy will depend on our ability to provide people with the resources they need to quickly enter or reenter the workforce. This legislation makes strategic investments in students to ensure they have access to programs that properly prepare them for good-paying, in-demand jobs as we continue to build back better. The ACCESS to Careers Act represents a necessary step to take the evidence-based innovations we've seen on the local level to scale in order to fill jobs in high-needs industries. I strongly encourage my colleagues in the Senate to consider this commonsense, bipartisan legislation.

Mr. President, I am thrilled to rise and join my colleagues in pressing the case for DC statehood. I won't be long because I was on the floor about 3 weeks ago talking about this same matter. I really talked about Virginia then. I talked about Patrick Henry.

The phrase ``no taxation without representation'' is a phrase that we learn coming up in elementary school. The root of it isn't really at the beginning of, say, the Declaration of Independence or during the Revolutionary War; that phrase really came about as colonists rallied to oppose the Stamp Act.

The Stamp Act was an act of Parliament in 1765 that put a tax on paper goods, including newspapers and pamphlets and periodicals. The English Crown was getting very, very worried about the restive nature of Americans pressing their case for being treated equally as royal colonists and subjects of the Crown, but they were not happy with the way they were being treated.

The Stamp Act was an attempt not just to levy a tax, but it was also an attempt to shut down their rights to have political discussions.

Patrick Henry led an effort in the Virginia General Assembly in 1765 that came to be known as the four resolves. He put five resolves on the table, one of which was set aside, but four resolves were passed, and the core of the four resolves was to protest taxation without representation.

One of my great regrets was wanting to hear the great orators of history and never to have had a chance to hear Patrick Henry, although I have heard good Patrick Henry impersonations at St. John's Church in Richmond. What a powerful speaker--the ``Give me liberty or give me death'' speech on the very kind of verge of the United States declaring independence; his court advocacy as a relatively untrained lawyer in Virginia on behalf of religious freedoms so that people who were not part of the established Church of England could still practice their faith as they chose. But many believe that Henry's advocacy against the Stamp Act was his most powerful oratory.

I read excerpts from the resolves when I was here 3 weeks ago, but now I want to jump from Patrick Henry to somebody else who is very much in the spirit of Patrick Henry, and that is Frederick Douglass.

If DC becomes a State, it will become a State named in honor of the abolitionist Frederick Douglass.

Frederick Douglass certainly was an inheritor of the Patrick Henry tradition. He was enslaved for the first 20 years of his life, and then following the Civil War, he moved to the Nation's Capital to become so many things--diplomat, civil rights leader, confidant of President Lincoln, President Grant, and others.

In his autobiography, ``The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass,'' he wrote:

The District of Columbia is the one spot where there is no

government for the people, of the people, and by the people.

Its citizens submit to rulers whom they have had no choice in

selecting. They obey laws which they had no voice in making.

They have a

[sic] plenty of taxation, but no representation. In the great

questions of politics in the country, they can march with

neither army [neither party], but are relegated to the

position of neuters.

Those are the words of the great Frederick Douglass echoing the Patrick Henry speech a century earlier against the Stamp Act. Those words are as true today as they were when he wrote them, and they were as true when he wrote them as when Patrick Henry delivered them in 1765.

In the history of States coming into the Union, most States have some pretty interesting background and history, but there are some common themes. The two commonalities--but then there has been one quirk that I want to mention as I conclude--the two commonalities are States come into the Union when they achieve sufficient population and when they have a demonstrated desire that is not just temporary, effervescent, but is essentially fixed and permanent

In the mid-1800s, Congress would set a population deadline. Say, for example, in the Northwest Territory, Michigan was told: As soon as you get to 60,000 residents, then we will entertain you if you want to be a State, but you have to do a referendum first.

There is no minimum number established by Congress in terms of population now to become a State, but we would all agree that DC would pass any minimum because DC is larger than States that currently are part of the Union. So whatever criteria we might set--well, you need to be of sufficient size to be a State--DC has met that.

DC has met the second criteria as well, which is demonstrated desire, most recently in a referendum in 2016 where the overwhelming sentiment of DC, as you would expect, was a patriotic sentiment: We want to be a State of the greatest Nation on Earth.

So those two criteria have usually been sufficient for States having demonstrated that or territories or populations having demonstrated that to become part of the Union and to have their star added to the flag of this country.

There have been controversies, though, bluntly, when States have sizable minority populations.

The quest of Hawaii for statehood took longer than it otherwise would have because many Members of this body stood on the floor and expressed concerns about whether Hawaii would be a cultural match for the United States because of the predominant API and indigenous population. I am sad to say that some of those who took the floor and raised those questions and objections were from Virginia.

The State of New Mexico had a particularly rocky path to becoming a State because Members of this body, including from Virginia, took the floor and raised a question about the size, the population, the percentage of New Mexico's indigenous and Latino population.

About 46 percent of the population of DC is African American, folks who--many march in the footsteps and quest for the same equality that Frederick Douglass was questing for in the 1800s.

I hope we can show that the failures of the past that led statehood for New Mexico and Hawaii to take perhaps longer than should have been the case--I hope we will have learned something from that and can move finally to grant these 700,000-plus residents of this wonderful city in our Nation's Capital the ability to be a State.

The last thing I will say is this. I did say this when I was on the floor 3 months ago. We haven't added a State, we haven't added a star to our flag for I guess 70 years now, about 70 years. I don't think a fixed number of stars on the flag sends a message of a growing, thriving nation. I think it might send the message of a nation that is kind of fixed. When you are fixed and set and not willing to change, I believe that can almost send a little bit of a message of decline.

Throughout our Nation's history, the addition of stars to the flag has sent the message of an America that--we are not done growing. We are not done expanding. We are on the move. History isn't done with us yet.

The fact that we haven't added a State--this has been the longest period of time in the history of the United States where we haven't added a star to the flag. I think doing so would suggest very powerfully that the best days of our Nation aren't behind us; they are still ahead of us.

For these reasons and those articulated by my colleagues, I strongly support the effort for DC statehood.

I yield the floor.

Mr. president. There are significant racial and ethnic inequities in maternal and infant mortality rates in the U.S. American Indian/Alaska Native women are more than twice as likely as nonHispanic white women to die as a result of pregnancy or its complications, and the infant mortality rate among babies born to American Indian/Alaska Native women is 2.1 times higher than that of non-Hispanic white women. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the maternal mortality rate for non-Hispanic Black women in 2018 is more than 2.5 times higher than the maternal mortality rate of non-Hispanic white women, and the infant mortality rate of non-Hispanic Black women is more than 2.3 times higher than the infant mortality rate of non- Hispanic white women. Any pregnant woman choosing to have a child should be able to do so safely without regard to income, race, ethnicity, employment status, or any other socio-economic factor.

This is why Senator Murkowski and I are reintroducing the Mothers and Newborns Success Act, which aims to reduce maternal and infant mortality, ensure that all infants can grow up healthy and safe, and protect women's health before, during, and after pregnancy. Our legislation supports innovation in maternal health delivery and improves data collection on maternal mortality and maternal deaths, including implementing quality assurance processes to improve the validity of pregnancy checkbox data from death certificates so that we can better understand the causes of maternal deaths. The bill will help ensure that women are matched with birthing facilities that are risk- appropriate for their particular needs to improve maternal and neonatal care and health outcomes. The legislation strengthens support for women during the critical postpartum period, the year after birth.

The bill also establishes a public and provider awareness campaign through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to promote awareness of maternal health warnings signs and the importance of vaccinations for pregnant women and children, ensuring pregnant women get the vaccinations they need. The bill promotes maternal health research, providing technical assistance to states to ensure representation of communities of color in key datasets. The bill establishes a National Maternal Health Research Network at the National Institute of Health to support innovative research to reduce maternal mortality and promote maternal health. The bill supports the Rural Maternity and Obstetric Management Strategies (RMOMS) Program at the Health Resources and Services Administration to improve access to, and continuity of, obstetrics care in rural communities, including thorough use of telehealth.

No woman should fear for her or her child's health because of socio- economic factors, such as race or geographic location. We need to ensure more women of color and their children, particularly Black women and children given the significant disparities they experience, receive equitable care and a fair chance for a healthy pregnancy and safe delivery. COVID-19 and its impact on pregnant women has only underscored the need for urgent action. The Mothers and Newborns Success Act is a significant step toward reducing racial, ethnic, and geographic inequities in maternal and infant health. I'm calling on my Senate colleagues to cosponsor this bill and support its passage so we can enact positive systemic changes to make sure more women and newborns thrive and have the maximum chance for success.

Mr. President, today I am introducing the Jobs and Childcare for Military Families Act, with my colleagues Senators Boozman and Tillis. By incentivizing private businesses to hire military spouses and allowing military families to use pre-tax dollars to pay for childcare, we can alleviate some of the unique hardships military families face and put them on firmer financial footing. This effort has only become more critical as the nation recovers from the coronavirus pandemic that has increased the number of unemployed and emphasized some longstanding issues in securing childcare for young families.

The families of America's servicemembers make sacrifices that are not as recognized in the public eye. Military spouses face routine moves every few years that require packing up a stable home in order to move to a new area and start over. This is compounded by the complex system of state licensing and certification requirements, which can limit these spouses from taking jobs that utilize their expertise and experience. Because of this, military spouses have unemployment rates substantially higher than the national average, and are often underemployed when they do have jobs. Adding to the financial struggle that frequent periods of unemployment and underemployment cause, the rising cost of childcare puts a substantial burden on many military families.

The Jobs and Childcare for Military Families Act would help these families in two ways. First, the bill makes military spouses an eligible population for the Work Opportunity Tax Credit. This tax credit has been proven effective in improving the employment prospects for other groups, and extending it to military spouses would help them find employment easier after moving a new area. Second, the bill instructs the administration to implement dependent care flexible spending accounts for all servicemembers. These accounts which are widely available in the private sector would allow military families to contribute pre-tax dollars to accounts

that they can then use to pay for childcare services, helping ease the financial burden of childcare.

I hope my colleagues will support this bill to help families who have made an incredible sacrifice for our nation.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. President. A vibrant and independent media and public access to accurate information are critical to the functioning of any democracy. A free press is so important that our Founding Fathers explicitly guaranteed that right in the First Amendment of our Constitution, and the United Nations defined press freedom as a fundamental human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But today--as democracies worldwide are facing growing challenges from authoritarian leaders, censorship, and disinformation campaigns-- foreign journalists are facing unprecedented dangers that put their profession, and their lives, at risk.

The nature of threats against journalists is shifting. While the number of journalists killed in war zones continues to drop, the number of journalists killed or targeted in countries at peace continues at historically high levels. Fifty journalists were killed because of their work in 2020, and 68% of these deaths occurred outside of conflict zones. Most of those who perpetrate attacks are never held accountable. Worldwide, there was complete impunity in 86% of cases of murdered journalists occurring between September 2019 and August 2020. In addition, the number of journalists imprisoned remains at historically high levels, with nearly 400 behind bars as of December 2020. And authoritarian governments are using the COVID-19 pandemic as a pretext for censorship, restricting reporters' freedom of movement, and harassing them.

The legislation I am introducing today with Senator Graham marks World Press Freedom Day by honoring journalists not only with words but with action. It builds on the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act, signed into law in 2009, to take concrete steps to ensure the wellbeing of journalism as a profession, and of individual journalists themselves. This legislation creates a new fund for programs to help keep foreign journalists safe, whether they are operating in dangerous environments or need to be re-located for their safety, and authorizes $30 million for this purpose. It uses existing funding to help nations prevent, investigate, and prosecute crimes against journalists overseas. It creates a new non-immigrant visa category to allow journalists in danger to come to the United States. And it creates a Coordinator for International Press Freedom at the State Department to serve as a focal point for advancing the right to freedom of the press and freedom of expression abroad.

I am proud to join Senator Graham in this effort to ensure that the free press that we value so highly in the United States is protected and promoted around the world, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that this legislation is swiftly considered by the Senate.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President. As we work to support American families, stimulate the economy, bolster small

businesses, protect health care workers, and sustain our industries, investing in child welfare is imperative to supporting these efforts. The coronavirus pandemic has further highlighted that the development of a robust, well-trained, and stable child welfare workforce is central to improving outcomes for children and families across the United States. The existence of such a workforce is essential to a child welfare agency's ability to carry out the responsibilities with which they have been entrusted. Child welfare work has been shown to be physically and emotionally challenging, as demonstrated by recent studies into the impact of secondary traumatic stress (STS) on child welfare professionals. The multitude of challenges inherent in child welfare work, combined with relatively low compensation and work benefits, make these careers difficult to sustain, resulting in high rates of turnover and professionals who are more susceptible to burnout and compassion fatigue.

For the past 15 years, child welfare turnover rates have been estimated between 20 percent and 40 percent. In 2017, Virginia reported a turnover rate of 30%, while Washington State reported a turnover rate of 20% and Georgia reported a turnover rate of 32%. These high rates of turnover detract from the quality of services delivered to children and families and result in an estimated cost of $54,000 per worker leaving an agency.

More needs to be done to ensure that individuals pursuing careers in child welfare receive appropriate training and support to improve the sustainability of their important, yet demanding work. Maintaining a high-performing, engaged, and committed workforce is vital to providing families with the quality supports they need to stabilize, reunify, and thrive. Research suggests that positive child welfare outcomes depend largely on the capacity and competence of the child welfare workforce.

This is why I am pleased to introduce today the Child Welfare Workforce Support Act with my colleague Senator Baldwin. This bill directs the Secretary to conduct a five-year demonstration program for child welfare service providers to implement targeted interventions to recruit, select, and retain child welfare workers. This demonstration program will focus on building an evidence base of best practices for reducing barriers to the recruitment, development, and retention of individuals providing direct services to children and families. Funds will also be used to provide ongoing professional development to assist child welfare workers in meeting the diverse needs of families with infants and children with the goal of improving both the quality of services provided and the sustainability of such careers. Investing resources in determining what practices have the greatest impact on the successful recruitment and retention of child welfare workers will assist in developing an evidence-base for future federal investment in this space.

I hope that as the Senate considers reauthorizing the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act that we consider the Child Welfare Workforce Support Act and recognize the vital role that child welfare workers play to improve outcomes and protect our most vulnerable infants and children.

Mr. President. According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) youth are at an increased risk for experiencing maltreatment compared to non-LGBTQ youth. Because of limited exposure to mandated reporters as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the unfortunate truth is that the maltreatment that some youth experience have experienced has gone unrecognized and underreported. Research prior to the pandemic demonstrated that LGBTQ youth were more likely to experience physical abuse by a parent or guardian when compared to their heterosexual peers. Risk for harm of vulnerable youth also extends far beyond physical safety. LGBTQ youth are at a disproportionately high risk for depression, suicidal ideation and suicide, and self-harming behaviors, with rates of attempted suicide of around 2 to 10 times those of peers.

These risks for maltreatment often times result in LGBTQ youth entering the child welfare system. Studies have found that, ``LGBT young people are overrepresented in child welfare systems, despite the fact that they are likely to be underreported because they risk harassment and abuse if their LGBT identity is disclosed.'' This overrepresentation of LGBTQ youth in the foster care system raises concerns about issues in the child abuse and prevention space. Additional research is needed to understand the risk of abuse among LGBTQ youth, particularly those identifying as transgender. This information will yield invaluable information to be used in developing targeted prevention strategies to reduce the rates of adverse childhood experiences of LGBTQ individuals.

This is why I am pleased to introduce the Protecting LGBTQ Youth Act with my colleague Senator Baldwin. Our bill amends the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act and calls for HHS and other federal agencies to carry out an interdisciplinary research program to protect LGBTQ youth from child abuse and neglect and improve the well-being of victims of child abuse or neglect. This legislation also expands current practices around demographic information collection and reporting on incidences and prevalence of child maltreatment to include sexual orientation and gender identity.

Additionally, the bill opens existing grant funding opportunities to invest in the training of personnel in best practices to meet the unique needs of LGBTQ youth and calls for the inclusion of individuals experienced in working with LGBTQ youth and families in state task forces. Improving data collection and disaggregation will provide greater insight into the circumstances LGBTQ youth face in the home that, when left unaddressed, lead to entry into the child welfare system. This improved data-driven understanding can then be used to develop appropriate and effective primary prevention practices to decrease the risks faced by LGTBQ youth, and will be pivotal in our understanding of abuse and neglect following the pandemic.

I hope that as the Senate moves to reauthorize the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act we consider the Protecting LGBTQ Youth Act to better inform our collective understanding of the risks faced by LGBTQ youth and the best ways to protect them.

Mr. President. While cancer is the leading cause of death by disease among children past infancy, childhood cancer and other rare pediatric diseases remain poorly understood. According to the National Cancer Institute, an estimated 15,590 children and adolescents under the age of 19 will be diagnosed with cancer, and 1,780 will die of the disease in the United States in 2021.

This is why I am pleased to be introducing the Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act 2.0 with Senators Jerry Moran, Mark R. Warner, and Bill Cassidy. The legislation provides a new source of funding for the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Gabriella Miller Kids First Pediatric Research Program (Kids First) by redirecting penalties collected from pharmaceutical, cosmetic, supplement, and medical device companies that break the law to pediatric and childhood cancer research. The bill is named in honor of Gabriella Miller, a Leesburg, Virginia resident who died from a rare form of brain cancer at the age of 10. Gabriella was an activist and worked to raise support for research into childhood diseases like cancer until her death in October of 2013.

The Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Program has supported critical research into pediatric cancer and structural birth defects and has focused on building a pediatric data resource combining genetic sequencing data with clinical data from multiple pediatric cohorts. The Gabriella Miller Kids First Data Resource Center is helping to advance scientific understanding and discoveries around pediatric cancer and structural birth defects and has sequenced nearly 20,000 samples thus far. While Congress has appropriated $12.6 million for the Kids First program annually since Fiscal Year (FY) 2015, this legislation would make additional funding streams available to appropriators to further support pediatric and childhood cancer research.

Gabriella Miller was a passionate activist and fighter. In 2014, I was a strong champion of the Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act, which established the Ten-Year Pediatric Research Initiative at the NIH and authorized $12.6 million per fiscal year through FY23. We honor Gabriella's memory by continuing her work in making sure pediatric disease research is a priority. This bipartisan legislation would provide a critical source of funding to improve research in pediatric cancer and diseases, and I urge my colleagues to support it.'

Mr. President. A vibrant and independent media and public access to accurate information are critical to the functioning of any democracy. A free press is so important that our Founding Fathers explicitly guaranteed that right in the First Amendment of our Constitution, and the United Nations defined press freedom as a fundamental human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But today--as democracies worldwide are facing growing challenges from authoritarian leaders, censorship, and disinformation campaigns-- foreign journalists are facing unprecedented dangers that put their profession, and their lives, at risk.

The nature of threats against journalists is shifting. While the number of journalists killed in war zones continues to drop, the number of journalists killed or targeted in countries at peace continues at historically high levels. Fifty journalists were killed because of their work in 2020, and 68% of these deaths occurred outside of conflict zones. Most of those who perpetrate attacks are never held accountable. Worldwide, there was complete impunity in 86% of cases of murdered journalists occurring between September 2019 and August 2020. In addition, the number of journalists imprisoned remains at historically high levels, with nearly 400 behind bars as of December 2020. And authoritarian governments are using the COVID-19 pandemic as a pretext for censorship, restricting reporters' freedom of movement, and harassing them.

The legislation I am introducing today with Senator Graham marks World Press Freedom Day by honoring journalists not only with words but with action. It builds on the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act, signed into law in 2009, to take concrete steps to ensure the wellbeing of journalism as a profession, and of individual journalists themselves. This legislation creates a new fund for programs to help keep foreign journalists safe, whether they are operating in dangerous environments or need to be re-located for their safety, and authorizes $30 million for this purpose. It uses existing funding to help nations prevent, investigate, and prosecute crimes against journalists overseas. It creates a new non-immigrant visa category to allow journalists in danger to come to the United States. And it creates a Coordinator for International Press Freedom at the State Department to serve as a focal point for advancing the right to freedom of the press and freedom of expression abroad.

I am proud to join Senator Graham in this effort to ensure that the free press that we value so highly in the United States is protected and promoted around the world, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that this legislation is swiftly considered by the Senate.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. President. As we work to support American families, stimulate the economy, bolster small

businesses, protect health care workers, and sustain our industries, investing in child welfare is imperative to supporting these efforts. The coronavirus pandemic has further highlighted that the development of a robust, well-trained, and stable child welfare workforce is central to improving outcomes for children and families across the United States. The existence of such a workforce is essential to a child welfare agency's ability to carry out the responsibilities with which they have been entrusted. Child welfare work has been shown to be physically and emotionally challenging, as demonstrated by recent studies into the impact of secondary traumatic stress (STS) on child welfare professionals. The multitude of challenges inherent in child welfare work, combined with relatively low compensation and work benefits, make these careers difficult to sustain, resulting in high rates of turnover and professionals who are more susceptible to burnout and compassion fatigue.

For the past 15 years, child welfare turnover rates have been estimated between 20 percent and 40 percent. In 2017, Virginia reported a turnover rate of 30%, while Washington State reported a turnover rate of 20% and Georgia reported a turnover rate of 32%. These high rates of turnover detract from the quality of services delivered to children and families and result in an estimated cost of $54,000 per worker leaving an agency.

More needs to be done to ensure that individuals pursuing careers in child welfare receive appropriate training and support to improve the sustainability of their important, yet demanding work. Maintaining a high-performing, engaged, and committed workforce is vital to providing families with the quality supports they need to stabilize, reunify, and thrive. Research suggests that positive child welfare outcomes depend largely on the capacity and competence of the child welfare workforce.

This is why I am pleased to introduce today the Child Welfare Workforce Support Act with my colleague Senator Baldwin. This bill directs the Secretary to conduct a five-year demonstration program for child welfare service providers to implement targeted interventions to recruit, select, and retain child welfare workers. This demonstration program will focus on building an evidence base of best practices for reducing barriers to the recruitment, development, and retention of individuals providing direct services to children and families. Funds will also be used to provide ongoing professional development to assist child welfare workers in meeting the diverse needs of families with infants and children with the goal of improving both the quality of services provided and the sustainability of such careers. Investing resources in determining what practices have the greatest impact on the successful recruitment and retention of child welfare workers will assist in developing an evidence-base for future federal investment in this space.

I hope that as the Senate considers reauthorizing the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act that we consider the Child Welfare Workforce Support Act and recognize the vital role that child welfare workers play to improve outcomes and protect our most vulnerable infants and children.