today lawmakers will continue working on an amendment to the infrastructure for which includes more than $1 trillion in funding. it it provides money over several years for roads, bridges, public transit, rails, water projects, airports, broadband internet, and electric vehicle charging stations. live coverage of the senate here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal god, in these challenging days our hearts are steadfast towards you. empower our lawmakers to grasp

your firm hand, depending on you to lead them through the darkness to the light. lord, lead them safely to the fortress of your choosing, for you desire to give them a future and a hope. provide our senators with the power to do your will as they more fully realize that they are servants of heaven and stewards of your gifts. may they make integrity the litmus test by which they evaluate each action as you keep them from deviating from your chosen path.

we pray in your great name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c, august 4, 2021. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable ben ray lujan, a senator from the state of new mexico to perform the duties of the chair. signed: patrick j. leahy, president pro tempore.

the presiding officer: under the previous order, leadership time is reserved. morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of h.r. 3684, which the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 3684, calendar number 100, an act to authorize funds for federal aid, highways, highway safety programs and transit programs, and for other purposes.

mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent -- okay. i ask unanimous consent that

following senator kelly's maiden speech, that senators johnson, peters, and carper be permitted to speak for up to five minutes each prior to the start of the vote. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. schumer: for the information of senators, the vote scheduled for 12. a 15 will likely begin closer to 12:30 p.m. now, mr. president, for my remarks. as you have seen, as america has seen, the senate is moving full steam ahead on the bipartisan infrastructure bill. since the legislative text of the bill was finalized, the senate has considered eight amendments. five amendments were led by senators from the republican minority. seven amendments have received roll call votes. one amendment offered by the uncommon pairing of senators warnock and cruz was adopted yesterday by voice vote. miracles happen, even here in the senate, mr. president. so the senate is making great progress on amendments, and we're going to make further progress very soon.

while a specific number of additional amendments has yet to be agreed to, i believe we can consider another substantial tranche on the floor today. senators should expect multiple roll call votes this afternoon. on evictions. yesterday afternoon, millions of american families were able to breathe a sigh of relief that the biden administration announced an extension of the eviction moratorium that expired last month. according to the c.d.c., the new ban on evictions will apply for 60 days across regions of the country that are experiencing high levels of covid infections. in total, roughly 90% of american renters, 90% will be protected by this order. that is what the head of the c.d.c. told me yesterday. there are so many individuals who helped make this happen. first, i applaud the president, president biden, and the c.d.c.

for taking action to protect american families. i want to commend speaker pelosi. she and i worked closely together to get this done from our first conversations with the president and the white house on thursday on through the weekend and the beginning of this week. but i also want to recognize the amazing courage of my colleagues, including representatives ocasio-cortez, jones, and gomez, and above all, representative cori bush. congresswoman bush knows what it's like to be evicted. she knows the pain and fear and indignity of being told to get your things and get out. when you lose your home, you lose everything. hard to get to a job if you have it. what do the kids do about school? what if there is a local clinic taking care of somebody with a health care problem? you lose your home, and that's it. the roof literally and figuratively falls in. well, congresswoman bush has known this through her own experience, and she took her

passion and converted it into effective action. a salute to her. it's a moment of history that shows when you persist you can get things done. for four nights, she slept on the steps of the capitol, drawing attention to this issue in a way we rarely see from a member of congress. she made yesterday's announcement possible. so amazing credit lies with congresswoman bush and the americans who joined her in her righteous cause. and, of course, i want to give real credit as well to senator brown, our chairman of the banking committee, who worked hard on this issue along with senator warren and many others in the senate. now, while yesterday's announcement by the c.d.c. was very welcome, it's only the first step. in the weeks ahead, the administration must continue working with state governments to better distribute emergency rental assistance that congress has appropriated at the end of the last year.

the money is there. we in congress provided it. i want to call out my state of new york which has done a poor job at distributing this money. two weeks ago, along with housing advocates, i called on the state to move things more quickly. a week before that, new york state along with south carolina were the only two states that had sent out no dollars, no dollars. some of our localities that didn't cede the money to the state have done a better job like monroe county where rochester is, but too much of the money is just sitting up there in albany. so we need mike hine who is head of the relevant department in the state and all the states to get that money out fast. an evictions ban is a good thing. it prevents people from being kicked out of their homes. but once the eviction ban ends, if there is not rental assistance, we're back in the same boat. so we need the states to get that money out.

state governments, my state of new york, must do a better job of getting that support out the door into the hands of americans who need help. and one other thing. the -- there is not treasury bureaucracy in the way. states like texas, like monroe county, have been able to get out a lot of the money. the fault lies in the state governments that are not doing this, and they have got to move. now, on another matter, aumf. today the senate foreign relations committee will vote on the repeal of the authorization for the use of military force in iraq. this authorization was initially passed by congress in 2002, 19 years ago. it's far outlived its usefulness. the iraq war has been over for nearly a decade. an authorization passed in 2002 is no longer necessary in 2021. it has been nearly ten years since this particular authorization has been cited as a primary justification for a military operation, and there is

a real danger to letting these legal authorities persist indefinitely. allowing an authorization for military force to just lie around forever is an invitation to a future administration to use it for any military adventurism in the region. americans, frankly, are sick of endless wars in the middle east. congress simply has to exert more authority over matters of war and peace as we all know the constitution prescribes. this morning i reiterate my strong support for the repeal of the 2002 authorization for military force in iraq. i urge the senate foreign relations committee, under the able leadership of chairman menendez to advance the matter to the floor. i thank senator menendez and senator kaine for bringing this to the floor.

i intend to bring up a repeal for a vote on the senate floor later this year. members should be on notice. we're going to vote on this. now, finally, judicial nominations. one of our most important jobs near the senate is to confirm president biden's judicial appointments. the democratic majority in the senate is committed to swiftly and consistently filling judicial vacancies with highly qualified, ideologically mainstreamed jurists. later this week, the senate will have the opportunity to confirm another judge who meets all of the -- all three of these criteria. last night i filed cloture on the nomination of ewe if -- ewe, it was my honor to have recommended ms. lee to the white

house for an appointment. she will be the fourth circuit judge confirmed in the first seven months of the biden administration. she is not only an excellent lawyer with sound judgment and a jurist temperament, but she brings the kind of legal experience that is all too rare on the federal bench. she went her entire career in public service representing criminal defendants who could not afford counsel. once confirmed, she'll be the only former federal defender among the active judges on the federal circuit. when i met her, i saw what a caring, compassionate, thoughtful woman she was. and i was so glad -- so glad to recommend her to the white house who quickly agreed and has sent her name forward. perhaps the highest compliment paid to her came from a group of over 70 former federal prosecutors from new york. these are the folks who most often found themselves on the

opposite side of her in a courtroom. they called her a brilliant, accomplished advocate who is supremely well qualified to serve on the bench. she's a model. she's a model in diversity. you know, we don't have very many people of color on our second circuit court of appeals. i'm trying to increase that with the nomination of ms. li, ms. perez as well. not only is she from a diverse background demographically, but she is diverse professionally. to have someone who has been a federal defender up there on the second circuit will expand the breadth and width and depth of knowledge that bench has. so i'm proud of recommended her and i look forward to confirming this nominee later this week. with that, mr. president. i yield the floor.

and note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. mcconnell: mr. president. the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: i ask con send that further proceed -- consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: this morning the appropriations committee considered a first partial batch of government funding bills for next year. i want the senate to secure bipartisan appropriations through the regular process.

i want us to fund the government in an orderly fashion just like the successful appropriations committee work we saw throughout republicans recent years in the majority. we accomplished that because we built a truly bipartisan process, importantly can began at the beginning. early in the calendar year we convened bipartisan talks so appropriators would have actual targets. that led good-faith bipartisan conversations happen at the subcommittee and committee levels throughout the spring and summer. and we got results on a bipartisan basis. unfortunately this year our democratic colleagues haven't done anything like that. either our colleagues don't have any big picture plan or they are

privately working off the president's partisan budget request. there's been no big picture bipartisan conversation. democrats didn't even let the committee vote on top line allocations, which normally happens at the start of a markup. our colleagues' fixation on far-left shiny objects is distracting them from basic governs. they are -- nofer unanimous. they are more focused on a taxing and spending spree than avoiding a stalemate over government funding. now, look i understand and i appreciate that senators on both sides have worked hard to develop appropriations titles with a lot of good content. the problem is bigger picture. when it comes to floor consideration, we cannot and will not start planning individual trees before we have

bipartisan consensus on the shape of the forest. here's what it will take to get a senate appropriations process back on track. two -- two simple things. number one, democrats will need to honor the long-standing bipartisan truce that provides parity for defense and nondefense spending growth -- parity for defense and nondefense spending growth. and at a responsible overall number that we can all settlement. our men and women in uniform and the nation they defend deserve better than cuts our national defense after inflation and allows adversaries to get an edge. and, number two weeks must have agreement that we're going to keep longstanding bipartisan policy riders in and new poison pill riders out. we need to keep foundational main stays like the hyde

amendment right where they are and neither side should throw new wrenches into the process. parity for national and border security and a bipartisan deal on policy riders. this is not rocket science. it's a road map. we all know it very, very well. that's what it will take to move bipartisan appropriation bills across this floor. but the majority leader is -- but the majority is behind on the homework. now, mr. president, on a totally different matter. in april when president biden announced his intention to pull u.s. forces out of afghanistan, he said it was, quote, time to end the forever wars. time to end the forever wars, said president biden. but at every stage of the rushed

retreat that has followed, the biden administration's wishful thinking hasn't come within a country mile of reality. by any account the situation in afghanistan has become worse, as we have headed to the exits, and we will live with the security, humanitarian and moral consequences for years to come. and this whole debacle was not only foreseeable, it was, in fact, foreseen. remember what top national security experts were saying around the time the president announced his decision. quote, the taliban is likely to make gains on the battlefield and the afghan government will struggle to hold the taliban at bay if the coalition withdraws support. officials shrugged it off, they downplayed the chances that afghanistan's pro-american government would fall to the

pro-terrorist taliban, but now that outcome appears all but inevitable. the administration literally glossed over the risk of an al qaeda resurgence, but now secretary austin is acknowledge being, al qaeda could reestablished -- re-establish a safe haven in less than two years, and even that could be optimistic. they insisted that over the horizon operations would be enough to keep terrorists in check, but now, just as the c.i.a. director warned from the start, intelligence gathering is already suffering. the administration claimed that resources tied up in the fight against terrorists were more urgently needed to counter chinese aggression, but now the manpower demands of this over the horizon approach, has required forces in the -- from

the middle east and pulled away from china's backyard so it can have costlier, less efficient long-range missions over afghanistan from the gulf. much of the rhetoric from the president's team has sounded almost laughingly -- laughingly naive. the secretary of state suggested he thinks he can bribe the taliban into a responsible, peaceful regime with diplomatic carrots. so that's where we are. in six months this administration has taken us from helping local partners fight the taliban to abandoning our partners and pretending that a future taliban government will care about foreign assistance and being accepted by the so-called international community. the taliban have already begun paving their way to kabul with innocent blood. al qaeda is already revealing

capabilities to strike at our homeland. so, mr. president, what on earth are we doing here? what are we doing? surely the administration would not consider the fall of kabul a success. surely it will not look at the fate awaiting afghan women and girls and say mission accomplished. surely a terrorist resurgence or the assassination of our afghan partners cannot look to president biden's team like a, quote, deliberate or responsible exit from afghanistan. but these are the predictable results of these terrible decisions. the consequences of making enormous changes with no real plan to mitigate the risks, the failure to learn from similar mistakes like the disastrous withdrawal from iraq back in 2011, here in the senate it is curious to see that some of our

colleagues who are the most exorcised, the most exorcised about trying to undue authorizations for the use of military force are somehow also among the quietest, the quietest when it comes to the unfolding disaster in afghanistan and oversight of ongoing conflicts. make no mistake, whether america is on the ground or over the horizon, the war in afghanistan will continue. and americans will not be safer with the taliban ruling from kabul. we will not be safer when al qaeda regains a safe haven and inspires a new generation of global jihadists. and we won't be safer when coalition partners doubt they can trust our word. a strategic disaster is what we're witnessing from top to

bottom. and the growing risk that this war will end in a victory, a victory for the taliban and al qaeda and become a greater threat to the united states. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: mr. president, is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. thune: i would ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. thune: mr. president, around here it's members of congress who typically get the spotlight. when we talk about a bill getting passed, for example, you usually hear about the members who introduced and pushed for the bill.

you don't usually hear about the staffers, but, mr. president, none of us in congress works alone. we are supported by dedicated staffers who spend long days and oftentimes nights and weekends working to serve our constituents and our country. today i want to talk about one of those staffers, my whip office chief of staff who is leaving the hill after 26 years of government service. nick rossi has been with me since 2013 when i became the ranking member of the commerce committee. he came on as deputy staff director and took over as staff director two years later. there isn't one thing that we did in my years as commerce ranking member and chair that wasn't at least partially owing to nick rossi. the 2018 f.a.a. reauthorization, the fast act, coast guard legislation, s.e.c.

bills, broadband legislation, spectrum legislation, section 230 reform legislation known as sester, legislation toreduce robocalls. other consumer legislation like the f.t.c. fairness review act, legislation to advance 5g, and, mr. president, the list goes on. nick came to my staff after an already illustrious career on the hill. he had served as chief counsel at the senate judiciary committee. as chief counsel and chief investigator on the commerce committee, and as staff director on the homeland security and governmental affairs committee. but his career in government started much earlier. he actually started his government service in the f.b.i., applying on a whim when he couldn't join the u.s. attorney's office because of a hiring freeze. as is typical for nick, he graduated first in his class at the f.b.i. academy and then went

on to spend 11 years in the f.b.i. as a special agent, a supervisory special agent, unit chief, associate legal counsel, and media spokesperson. that sounds like a lot for 11 years, but not so much when you know nick. i mentioned that he graduated first in his class at the f.b.i. academy. he also graduated with honors from notre dame and from harvard law school, where he was in the drama society with our colleague ted cruz. i don't think i've ever asked nick about any issue and gotten anything less than a thoroughly informed answer, whether the subject was technically in his area of expertise or not. i'll never forget when he accompanied me and former senator bill nelson to the sanford underground research facility in leeds, south dakota. this is a lab where scientists

are conducting research in particle physics and the expansion of the universe, so it's pretty complicated stuff. well apparently not to nick. he was in the car with us, and he was throwing out technical formulas and the finer points of physics and cosmology with the ease he might use when discussing the lunch menu in the dirksen cafeteria. when asked how he knew all this stuff, he definitely didn't major in physics and space wasn't his issue area, he just said it was a hobby. trust nick to be flirting with particle physics as a hobby. but, mr. president, while nick may often be the smartest person in the room, he's also the most humble. he's often the last to speak. he listens. he asks questions. sometimes maybe when he doesn't really need to. and he gives thoughtful, wise

counsel. it's been clear over the last few days that staffers across the senate learned that nick was leaving just how respected his voice is in the senate. i've had more than one committee staff director talk to me about how he or she learned to run a committee from nick. i know a lot of senior staffers inside my office but outside of it as well who will tell you that when they're facing a challenge, the first person that they go to to provide a sounding board is nick. and nick always makes himself available. he is uniformly generous with his time and knowledge, and he treats everyone the same, whether the individual in question is a staff assistant or a chief of staff. he's brought out the best in every team i've seen him work with whether at the commerce committee or in the whip office. mr. president, nick has been chief of staff in my whip office for two years, two very

eventful years. through it all nick has been a steady presence in the whip office and in the senate. no matter the crisis, nick is calm and collected, and he inspires that calm in others. although i do hear that it's a different story when he's watching notre dame football. the word is that there's a lot of ranting, pacing and yelling at the tv, but i've not observed that, mr. president. above all, nick is a character guy, which matters a lot to me. he's a man of honor, integrity, and principle. i never have to worry that nick is going to cut corners or bend the rules. he's always going to do things the right way. and there's nothing more important than that. mr. president, i can't talk about nick without also mentioning his commitment to his family. his pride and his kids always shines through. and just as he's never too busy

to talk to a staffer who's having a problem, he's always ready to take a break from his work to help his daughter with her math homework, another subject nick didn't major in but is really good at, or to build bows and arrows with his son johnny. i'm very grateful to his wife katherine and to elaina and johnny for sharing nick with us for all these years. and i'm very happy that there are fewer late nights in his future so that he can get in some more time with his family. mr. president, i realize that nick may be starting to sound a little siewrm human here -- super human here so let me say while he is a man of many talents who has not only successfully repaired the family's microwave but is known for shaping a balloon in an arch for his kids' school, i am reliably informed that he is not a good cook, and i am pretty

sure that not was bold and underlined. seriously, mr. president, nick is one in a million. and it's been my privilege to have him lead the team in the whip office. his absence will be sorely felt by me, by my staff, and throughout capitol hill. and i hope he won't mind the occasional phone call to pick his brain on some of the issues that are facing the senate. nick, thank you for your service, and god bless you in all your future undertakings wherever you land next, they will be lucky to have you. mr. president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: mr. president, i ask consent to suspend the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lee: mr. president, infrastructure is the physical backbone of our country. and it's an example of positive,

constructive american achievement and accomplishment. unfortunately, this particular bill in its process, content, price tag, and long-term effects simply will not serve the country, americans, and particularly utahans well. it will ultimately be detrimental to our economy, to the daily lives of the american people, and even in some cases to infrastructure itself. now, i'm not saying that i don't appreciate the hard work, goodwill, and excellent intentions of my colleagues who have put many long hours, weeks, and months into crafting it, nor am i suggesting that there aren't good things in the bill, good things that would benefit deserving people in this country. as i have said before, the question is not whether or not

infrastructure is a good and a necessary thing, nor is the question whether the bill contains some good things. the question is rather how much should the federal government be involved in infrastructure, and if it should, where it should, how much should it be spending on it. the truth is the particulars of this bill take the scope far beyond what should be under the realm of the federal government, under the domain of the federal government specifically, at a price far beyond what we can afford, at a time when we're already far into feeling the sting of inflation. now, there is a reason that our founding fathers reserved numerous and indefinite powers for the state while providing few and defined powers to the federal government. article 1, section 8 of the constitution literally lists the particular powers given to congress. it tells us what they are. and you will notice that

infrastructure generally is not one of them. now, in some cases, it does make sense that the federal government is involved in some infrastructure. the interstate highway system is a good example of that. postal roads, also specifically accounted for in article 1, section 8, are another example of that. this bill, however, includes things like bike paths and beautification projects, mass transit systems, surface roads, roads that start and stop in one state or are not part of the interstate highway system. things that while good and lovely and useful are a far cry from what the federal government can and should reasonably and can successfully oversee. what's more, it does so at an enormous price tag, one that will dig us even deeper and deeper into debt at the expense of the american people, both now and further down the road. now, proponents of the bill insist and will continue to insist as we debate this that the bill is paid for, but in

fact despite this staggeringly large amount of money that it spends, estimated to be $1.2 trillion in total, the largest amount for a package of this kind in history by far, it still does not have a score from the congressional budget office. normally we don't vote on, much less pass, something like this without a c.b.o. score. we don't have one. and i regret to say that many of the so-called pay-fors amount to flimsy budget gimmicks that in reality do no such thing as pay for the bill. so what are these so-called pay-fors? well, let's take the new reporting requirements on cryptocurrency, for example, which would allegedly bring in $28 billion. everything about this pay-for is half-baked and unclear. how exactly will additional revenue reporting generate new tax revenue and how can you

possibly apply stock exchange-style reporting requirements to something so different and so decentralized as bit coin, doge coin and other block chain cryptocurrencies. at best this will fail. at worst, it will hamper financial innovation for decades to come. or the mandated sales of oil from the strategic petroleum reserve. which the bill's sponsors claim will produce $6 billion in revenue, starting seven years from now. but do we realistically know what the demand for oil might be at that time? or what could happen in the meantime when we might need to use oil in the strategic petroleum reserve? or what happens when we get five years down the road and congress determines that we should hold onto the oil a bit longer until we might be able to generate more revenue from the sale? or what if even more of these

sales are congressionally mandated in these years, essentially flooding the market and causing the price of that same oil to crash? or take the pension-smoothing component of the bill which would only cause us to lose more money in the long term and simultaneously threaten the solvency of retirement benefits, the retirement benefits of millions and millions of american workers. or the rebate rule delay which so far has never and may never go into effect. delaying something that has no set time for implementation cannot realistically be predicted to produce $49 billion in savings. or the $20 billion in future spectrum auctions. while spectrum auctions can certainly produce a great deal of revenue, this possible future auction may end up never

happening. it could have significant restrictions on it due to the dynamics of adjacent bands, or it could simply produce far less than we are being asked to assume today. finally, take the claim of $205 billion in unused covid funds. upon further investigation, it includes only roughly $50.2 billion of unused covid funds as a real pay-for. the other $150 billion is simply spending that didn't happen because the country began to emerge from the pandemic. many states ended the enhanced unemployment benefits that were keeping more people out of work. in other states, local communities, businesses, and families didn't require as much federal spending, thanks to their own successes and their own resiliency. in other words, this other $150 billion is not a pay-for. it's fake. it's simply spending or lost

revenue that was never realized. and whether this bill passes or not, this $150 billion will never be realized. no, mr. president, the numbers for these pay-fors do not add up. the math for this bill is faulty, to say the least. what's more, much of the massive amount that it will be spending will not even be efficient or effective spending on infrastructure. even if this were the role of the federal government, then we ought to make sure that it spends those funds efficiently and effectively. but unfortunately, the fact of the matter is that along with federal dollars come a whole host of byzantine laws and regulations that prevent precisely that, including restrictions imposed by everything from nepa to the davis-bacon act. the davis-bacon act artificially

inflates labor prices by requiring that all federally funded construction projects worth more than $2,000 pay workers at least the prevailing wage rate on nonfederal projects in the same locality, and it has substantially driven up the cost of federal projects, hindered economic growth, wasted taxpayer dollars, and hurt unskilled laborers each year. in fact, it's estimated that repealing it would save taxpayers $7.10 billion over ten years. nepa has imposed similar burdens and costs. signed into law in 1970, it was intended to account for the environmental consequences of proposed federal actions through projects, but over the last 50 years, it has substantially deviated from its original purpose, morphing into a complex bureaucratic labyrinth, stalling projects through frivolous lawsuits and bureaucratic delays and dramatically increasing the costs and timeline of their

completion. sometimes, mr. president, this law stretches projects that should take a couple years to complete into decades. at the very least, we ought to reform these costly, ineffective regulations and do so drastically so that federal infrastructure can be completed better and faster, which is exactly what i proposed in the amendment i put before this body yesterday. but this bill in its current form is ultimately not good for utahans, and it's not good for the american people. dragging more federal money into infrastructure unfortunately means we'll pay more to build less. we will be paying more to build less. it means less money going to steel and concrete in the ground and a whole lot more going for lawyers, accountants, lobbyists, compliance specialists and bureaucratic delays. it means longer and more expensive projects. this varies state by state, but in utah it's estimated that

adding federal dollars to a project increases the overall cost by 20%, sometimes as much as 40%. not only will it mean more expensive projects but more expensive projects, too. another provision in this bill would impose new fees on dozens of chemicals used in countless products and consumer goods in our day-to-day lives, chemicals found in concrete, wood, plastics, rubber, dyes, detergents, drugs, pesticides and foods, just to name a few. so every time you buy one of those products or almost any product, for that matter, you will be paying a little bit for this. only it's not a tax, it's a fee, and it's hidden from your view. so the consumer, the poor and middle-class taxpayer doesn't see a tax increase. they just see they are paying even more for everything that they buy. and another provision would extend fannie mae and freddie mac's g fees for an entire decade. these fees could add thousands of dollars to the mortgages of

home buyers at a time when that first home is already increasingly out of reach for many. utahans can't afford this. congress is supposed to be addressing problems like these, not making them worse with sneaky new fees. mr. president, this comes at a time when americans are already feeling the sharp sting of snowballing inflation. now this graph highlights some of the problems. it highlights what the american people have felt over the last 12 to 18 months. you will notice a curve sloping sharply upward. today inflation is at 5.4%, which means on average the goods you buy today are 5.4% more expensive and the savings you have responsibly accrued are actually worth less. don't forget the president's

reckless spending has exacerbated the trend. look at the red here in this chart. these are deficits. look at how it's grown. the red portion of the graph is deficit spending. while we surely needed to spend additional money during the covid pandemic, did we really need to spend this much more to the point where we were borrowing a lot more than we were taking in. you know, mr. president, we borrowed close to $4 trillion last year. and even if you think that we did need to spend this much more, wouldn't we try to get our country back on track and to discontinue this unfunded spending spree that contributes to runaway inflation? from gas to groceries, from homes to health care, every day it's getting harder for

hardworking americans to afford the basic necessities of day-to-day life. take a quick look at everyday items. these are not luxury items that we associate with the elite. these are ordinary things that people purchase every day. compared to the period of time before the pandemic, not so very long ago, just 16 months ago, eggs are now 13% more expensive, milk is 11.3% more expensive, chicken is 11.3% more expensive, bread is 9.4% more expensive and gas is 27.5% more expensive. the fact is, mr. president, that packages like this one are not without their effects on the people we've taken and oath to represent. at the end of the day, it is the american people whose tax dollars we take to pay for packages like this, at the end of the day it the american people who will bear the brunt

of what we are forcing them, and -- at the end of the day it is the people who will feel this, and they should get a say in it. they shouldn't have to sign on to something that was made known to the american people at 10:00 p.m. on sunday night. those who drafted this legislation had four months to review it, four months to get to know it. the american people shouldn't be asked to pass this in four days. thank you, mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. carper: i ask unanimous consent, mr. president, that the following amendments be called up to substitute and be reported by number. wicker number 2146, kennedy number 2210.

further, that upon disposition of the johnson amendment the senate vote in relation to the amendments in the order listed, with no amendments in order with a vote prior in relation to the amendments with 60 affirmative votes required for the adoption of the kennedy amendment, with five minutes for debate for senator wicker and two minutes debate for the opponents for the wicker vote and four minutes equally divided before the kennedy vote. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. the clerk will report the amendments by number. the clerk: the senator from delaware, mr. carper, for mr. mr. wicker, proposes amendment 2146 to amendment 2137, the senator from delaware, mr. carper, for mr. kennedy, proposes an amendment numbered

2210 to amendment numbered 2137. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i come to the floor today, i note the democrats being so eager to move to their reckless tax and spending spree. it is something, mr. president, i have to tell you i absolutely oppose. if we pass a bill of that magnitude, the american people will pay more in taxes, we'll pay more in the cost of living, it will continue to impact the american people in a very negative way. right now the senate is debating a separate bill, an infrastructure bill and, in fact, the bills are not completely separate. it would be nice if they were, but they are not. and the reason they are not separate, mr. president, is because nancy pelosi, the speaker of the house has made it abundantly clear that any bipartisan infrastructure bill that is passed here in this

senate won't see the light of day in the house of representatives unless and until, as she has said, the senate also sends her a multitrillion-dollar reckless tax-and-spending bill. according to one nonpartisan group, that bill could cost up to $5.5 trillion over the next ten years. nancy pelosi has said time and time again there will not be one penny for roads, not one penny for bridges, not one penny for airports or ports until she gets the reckless tax-and-spending bill that she is demanding. it wasn't a negotiation, it was a hijacking. and nancy pelosi isn't just a hijacker, she is also an arsonist. what she is proposing is going to pour jet fuel on the fire of the inflation that is raging the country. the flame was lit months ago

after democrats borrowed $2 trillion under the name of covid relief. look at the economic projections before the bill became law. some people failed to predict the inflation. the federal reserve failed to predict it. the white house budget office said no, we won't get inflation. the congressional budget office said, no. economists warned that it would happen and republicans pointed out clearly it was going to happen and that is what has happened now. democrats refused to listen. they borrowed and spent two trillion additional dollars and i flakes has gone up every month since. core inflation is the fastest and highest it has been in 40 years. who are the victims of this? well, there are victims on fixed incomes, there are seniors, there are working families trying to get by. it now costs $25 more every time you fill up your vehicle with

gasoline. fill up a truck in wyoming, it could be even more than that compared to the fillups of inauguration day. go to the grocery store now, about $25 more for the weekly trip to the grocery store. $25 a week in gas, $25 extra a week for groceries, it is $2,500 extra because of what joe biden and the democrats have brought upon us. and of course this kind of inflation slows our economic recovery. i found out last week that economic growth is significantly below what economists predicted it should be at this point. it does seem the democrats haven't learned basic economics. now they want to make the same mistake all over again, even at a higher level. they want to borrow and spend trillions more. last week we found out that the previous democrat bill gave $800 million to prisoners behind

bars. now, tom cotton and i came to this floor, we tried to stop the democrats from giving our taxpayer dollars to prisoners currently behind bars. specifically warned it would happen as stimulus checks were sent out around the country. we tried to stop this as part of the democrats' spending yield. but all 50 democrats, every one supported direct checks to prisoners behind bars. the senior senator from illinois came to the floor and gave a speech defending it. he implied it would be racist not to give free money to people behind bars. every one of the 50 democrats put $800 million taxpayer dollars on the credit card and sent checks to prisoners behind bars. this means more debt, more inflation for law-abiding citizens in exchange for money for criminals. it tells the american people that all we need to know about the priorities in the democrat party. now democrats want another round

of payoffs. this payoff is even more expensive and than the last one. democrats are promising payoffs to all their favorite groups, climate activists, left-wing activists, trial lawyers, union bosses. this bill, this reckless tax-and-spending bill includes one liberal priority after another. and even as we face the worst border crisis in the last two decades, democrats are now promising amnesty, citizenship and voting rights for millions of illegal immigrants. once they get amnesty, then they can get all the other democrat payoffs as well. this is going to lead to an additional tidal wave of illegal immigration and all of this has a price tag and someone has to pay. democrats do -- tell nice stories, republicans do the math. this bill is so expensive that democrats will have to go after every working family in america

in order to pay for it. one way or another, every working american will end up paying for this. it's not some rich person who is going to be able to pay for all of this. there aren't enough rich people on earth to pay for this level of spending. democrats are going to go after the majority of the people in this country and, of course, that is the middle class. that's exactly what they intend to do with this bill. because this billis going to raise taxes on family farms and ranches. according to the a -- accounting firm ernst and young, this spending bill that nancy pelosi is demanding go from the senate to the house before any infrastructure bill is passed, that it would eliminate 80,000 jobs over ten years. the bill would raise taxes on small businesses, which are already struggling to stay open because of the democrat policies. anyone who sells their home will pay thousands and thousands more

in taxes. now, this is also going to include a carbon import tax which will drive up prices even higher. the bill would be socialist takeover of our economy, more taxes, more spending, more debt, more government, eating into people's paychecks, eating into their savings. there's not a single republican in the house or the -- or in the senate who is going to support this reckless tax and spending spree. we need to stop this freight train to socialism. we don't have a taxing problem in this country, mr. president, we have a spending problem. inflation is already high enough. we know what the cause is. we know it's the cause of the excessive democrat spending and this is going to make it worse. families across this country are struggling light now to make ends meet. family businesses are struggling to stay open and it is time to stop this reckless tax and

spending spree. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. kelly: mr. president, it's an honor to rise today to deliver my maiden speech. nine months ago the people of arizona entrusted me with a great responsibility, to represent them in the united states senate. to do so during a pandemic that has challenged every one of us, taken loved ones too soon and battered our economy. and to fill the remaining years of senator john mccain's sixth term. each day since then i've gone to work for the people of arizona striving to fulfill that responsibility. undeterred by the challenges we have in front of us because that's what arizonians have done over the last year and a half, protecting their families from this virus, keeping themselves and their businesses afloat, looking out for their neighbors.

arizonians have faced down this virus and the economic fallout that came with it with determination. and i came here to have their backs and to work towards a brighter future for our growing state because we can't just rebuild our economy the way it was before, we have to reinvent it and create the jobs of the future, good paying jobs that you can actually raise a family on. it's a long to-do list but, hey, i'm used to those. the checklist for flying the space shuttle stands about six feet tall. the senate, though, is not nasa and doesn't move as fast. and it's not the united states navy either where everyone works together towards a common goal. but my wife gabby taught me a thing or two about how to listen and how to find common ground. now, she loved representing arizona in congress, and no one

works harder than she does. neither of us expected that it would be me serving here in the united states senate. i might have been the astronaut, but it turned out that she is the one who would nearly lose her life serving our country. i'm so proud of her, of her relentless positivity that she brings to her continued rehabilitation. it inspires me each and every day. and i could not do this without her support or the support of my daughters, claudia and clare, my fitter grandchild sage -- my first grandchild sage who was born in may. i'm not so sure about her support, she's only two months old. in my first days here i spoke to republicans and democrats to work on emergency covid relief. for so many arizonans, the relief we got passed was a lifeline, the difference

between bankruptcy and keeping the lights on, between losing their small business and paying their employees. i've heard that countless of times as i've traveled across the state. in march, on my 100th day in the senate, i spoke with a group of arizonans to understand how covid-19 was impacting them and their families. one of those conversations really struck with me -- stuck with me, and i want to take a second to tell you about susanna androtty. prior to the pandemic, susan worked in a school cafeteria. when the pandemic struck in arizona her husband's work slowed down and school closed but susanna and coworkers kept going to work.

she told me they were initially offering breakfast and lunch, but then they added dinner and a snack because the demand was so high. susanna and her coworkers knew how hard the pandemic had hit the community, how many folks were out of work. there were students who wouldn't eat if they weren't there to make them meals. so she kept going to work, making and packing meals for students and their families, and then in february she and her entire family got sick with covid. she couldn't go to work for weeks, and she and her family struggled to pay their bills that month while they tried to recover. susanna's story has stuck with me over the last year. here is a hardworking arizona family doing everything right that just got knocked off their feet. at the same time susanna embodies the best of what we saw

during this awful pandemic, neighbors and parents making tremendous sacrifices to help one another get through this. i spoke to susanna h recently. she told me that days after we spoke in march, she and her family received their stimulus checks, and it made such a big difference in their lives. but she is still now living paycheck to paycheck, working two jobs trying to provide for her family to just get ahead. and i understand that. growing up, my mother worked both as a secretary and a waitress at the same time. when my brother and i were in middle school, she decided to become a police officer like my dad, but she had to pass this physical fitness test which was designed for men. but my mother was not discouraged. she wasn't discouraged by that or by the fact that if she would pass, she would become one of the first female police officers in our hometown. in fact, i think she liked

that. that was my mom for you. but i knew that she believed that the increased and steady salary would help our family. my mother wanted to give my brother and me every opportunity to succeed. she showed us what we could achieve by having a goal and a plan and working hard at it. and i'm here because of a good public education and because of the opportunity that my parents created for me to serve our country and pursue my dreams. but for so many families, it's becoming harder to get ahead. and the pandemic only made this more difficult. businesses shuttered, savings drained, debt and bills piled up. what every parent wants, what my mom wanted is to be able to work hard and give their children a future filled with opportunity. that's why the most important responsibility we have here is not just to rebuild our

economy, but to reit invent it for the future -- but to reinvent it for the future, and doing that starts with infrastructure -- roads, bridges, water, the power grid, high-speed internet. and it's not just in big cities, but in rural and small towns, small-town arizona and tribal communities. that's the item on our checklist now. arizona is facing a severe drought that requires us to improve our water infrastructure and increase our resiliency. school buses on the navajo nation costs three times as much to maintain because so many of the roads are unpaved. i-10, which runs through the center of our state, through tucson and phoenix, has not been expanded in years. a single accident can cause delays for hours. that happens almost every day. it's clear that arizona will benefit from upgrading and

modernizing our infrastructure. that's why for the past few months i've been working with a group of republicans and democrats to come to an agreement on an historic investment in our infrastructure. i advocated for arizona's priorities, and we worked together to find common ground and work out our differences. and now we're on the verge of passing it. this is going to fix roads and bridges, improve tribal water and transportation infrastructure, expand affordable high-speed internet access, and make arizona more resilient to drought and wildfires. i've been determined to deliver these infrastructure investments that arizona needs to continue to grow. we want to grow and we want to attract new and innovative companies to our state because arizona's prosperity depends on continuing to create new, high-paying jobs, including growing our tech sector.

now one of the biggest success stories of our growing tech sector is an industry that actually produces something physically small -- microchips. microchips go in everything, from our phones and appliances and cars, to computers, but also the most sophisticated fighter jets and missile systems. there's currently a global shortage of microchips, and the truth is today that just 12% of them are manufactured here in the united states. it used to be 40%. many foreign competitors, including china, are investing heavily to try to dominate this industry. now arizona does manufacture a lot of microchips. it already employs about 30,000 people in good-paying jobs in this industry, and it's poised to grow. we recently announced investment plans from intel and the taiwan semiconductor manufacturing

company. arizona can lead the way as we restore more mike crip manufacturing -- microchip manufacturing to american soil. that's the goal of this plan that i spent months working on with senators cornyn and warner to create new manufacturing facilities and fabs in places like arizona. i made it my mission to get this passed through the senate because it's important. it's important to our economy, and it's important to our national security, ensuring that our supply chain for something so critical does not depend on adversaries like china. transformational investments such as this will create thousands of high-paying jobs, and we got it passed through the senate, republicans and democrats working together. now we must continue working on this checklist, getting arizonans the skills they need for these new jobs. now for some, that will mean

getting a college degree in science or engineering. arizona is home to three world-class universities that are leaders in research and innovation. we must continue to educate the best scientists and engineers in the world. that's the only way we are going to stay ahead. at the same time we know that about a third of students who graduate from high school will not pursue a four-year degree. that doesn't mean that they can't be set up for success in the 21st century economy. we need to make sure that they are. advanced manufacturing facilities like microchip fabs that i mentioned earlier, for those, we need well-trained semiconductor processers and we need electricians and we need hvac technicians. these are good-paying careers for those who get the skills and training that they need. and right now a lot of young arizonans are getting those skills through our community

college system. at pema community colleges, downtown campus in tucson, they've got a new automotive technology innovation center that i visited last month, and their students are learning how to operate the software that automatically controls drills and milling machines and 3-d printers and other tools. they can be trained not just in traditional automotive technology but in electric vehicles as well. arizona is becoming a center for innovative electric vehicle manufacturers, so why shouldn't we being getting these students the skills they need for this technology right now. pima community college, chancellor lambert calls this much needed approach moving at the speed of business. what he means is our education system must meet the demands of today's workforce, and that has to be the case not just in major

metro areas but in rural arizona as well and in rural america. at yavi pike college in northern arizona, they opened a new skill trade center in clark dale where they will train a new generation of construction workers and plumbers and electricians and hvac technicians, and i could not be more impressed with arizona's community college system. yavi college is taking advantage of companies with partnerships to set students up with opportunities to prepare them to immediately enter the workforce in industries like mining, moving at the speed of business, that's how we're going to prepare hardworking young students to get these good-paying jobs. it's also how we're going to outcompete and out-innovate other countries like china. having a talented workforce that can fill the jobs of the future and develop cutting-edge technologies that are critical

not just to our economy but to our national security as well. these are issues that i know republicans and democrats agree on. and even on tough issues, i believe that we can also find common ground we've had crisis after crisis at our border, each a result of decades of failure in washington to adequately address border security and fix our broken immigration system. senator portman and i have introduced bipartisan legislation that would require the department of homeland security to finally develop a plan to handle increases at the border. to take the politics out of this, no matter which party controls congress or the white house, and to provide dedicated funding to carry out that plan and ensure a secure, humane process at the border. finding common ground on issues like this is hard, but it's important.

i, like many of you, like many of my colleagues, i spent years admiring the way the late senator john mccain represented arizona in the united states senate. but my first impressions of john mccain were not of him as a senator but of his service in the navy. he was a hero of young naval aviators like me, an example of how to serve your country honorably and bravely, including in the impossible circumstance of being shot down and captured. his legacy means so much to the state of arizona, and it lives on through his children and his wife cindy, who i'm so grateful to have here today in the gallery. thank you.

mr. kelly: his legacy, it's something that cannot be matched, but it's what inspires me serving in the senate seat. and it's his example of bipartisanship, of independence, that continues to demand more of us. so i'm going to continue focusing on delivering results, on beating this virus, and reinventing our economy for the future so that hardworking arizonans have every opportunity to succeed. arizonans sent me here to have their backs, and that's what i intend to do. thank you, and i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. carper: could i have order, please. the presiding officer: the senate will be in order, please. mr. carper: a lot of folks are gathered around our new senator from arizona, congratulating him, from his speech. i said to him in the navy when somebody does an especially good job, we say bravo zulu.

that was an exceptional job. i'm delighted we can be joined by cindy mccain. before i yield to the senator from wisconsin for his amendment, the theme that we just heard from our new senator from arizona really focuses on preparing, doing the groundwork, plowing the field in anticipation of creating jobs. we do that in a lot of ways. he has mentioned a bunch of them in terms of technology jobs and so forth. one of the other ways is what we are doing with the legislation before us today. that is investing in our infrastructure. not just roads, highways, bridges, not just waterways, not just broadband, not just surface transportation. all of the above. all of the above. it's a great way to start our day today. with that, i yield the floor and i think the gentleman from wisconsin has some comments he may want to make, unless the leader wishes to go next. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin.

mr. johnson: i rise to speak to my amendment that is completely germane to the discussion of infrastructure. i can't think of more important infrastructure that would actually secure our homeland from a variety of threats. but as i have always said coming from a manufacturing background, the first step in solving a problem is admitting you have one, and right now, this administration is in a complete state of denial regarding the crisis that is on the border. this crisis has been growing. it's not a seasonal surge. this is a growing problem. the presiding officer: order, please. mr. johnson: it has been a growing problem, and i have my chart here that demonstrates that. here's january. this is when president obama -- or president biden came into office. you can see the enormous surge of the crisis he created. vice president harris went down to central america looking for the root cause of this crisis.

she only would have had to walk into the oval office and look at president biden because president biden is the root cause of this crisis. it's his policies, the dismantling of successful policies from the previous administration that had stemmed the flow, that largely secured our border until this president took office and reversed all that progress. it's a real shame. let me just give you the numbers. because you have to describe the problem. this has been growing for the last four or five months. in particular, we have been averaging first almost 6,000 and now over 6,000 apprehensions per day. 6,000. in june, it was 6,249. in july, it will probably be over 6500. there have been weeks we believe it is 7,000 people per day coming in and being apprehended at the border. that adopt even count the 750 to

1,000 known gotaways. it is estimated that will result in 269,000 people coming into this country that we know they came in, we just couldn't catch them. this also doesn't even describe or enumerate how many unknown gotaways. again, the fact of the matter is from january to july, approximately 1.3 million people have been apprehended coming into this country without documentation. about 173,000 of those individuals have been released in the interior, either with a notice to appear or even worse a notice to report. if you multiply that times two, that's 346,000 people dispersed through all points of america.

d.h.s., the administration is not notifying the states, not notifying the cities that these individuals, apparently claiming asylum, are coming into communities near you. you add that to the 269,000 estimated known gotaways, that's over 600,000 people just this year. that's larger than the population of the state of wyoming. it's approaching the population of the state of vermont. and again, this is why we have the title 42 restrictions in place. probably about 900,000 people in the first seven months have been returned under title 42. if the administration ends that program, imagine the surge. now, there once was a time when securing the border was a nonpartisan issue. senator mccain led the charge. in 2006, this body passed on a vote of 80-19 the secure fence

act which was going to build about 700 miles of fence. in the end, only 36 miles was double-layer fencing. the rest was pretty ineffective as we have seen. but voting for that bill was president biden, president obama, senator carper, secretary of state clinton, senator feinstein, senator schumer, senator wyden, senator stabenow. this is a bipartisan effort to secure our border. but somewhere between 2006 and 2021, this has become a partisan issue. now, what's absurd is in the last administration, again, pretty well solved the problem. had allocated about $10 billion to build the fence. it's all been contracted. it's all been paid for. we build about 453 miles of the 738 miles that was contracted for.

285 miles remain unbuilt. in a report by senator lankford shows we spent about $2 billion getting out of those contracts. $2 billion to not build the wall. it's costing us $3 million a day just to guard the steel fencing that's laying there not being used. so my amendment is very simple. it's very common sense. it says please, let's recognize fences work. certainly, congress recognized it when we put a double layer around the people's house for a number of months. spent hundreds of millions of dollars on that security effort. so let's not waste the taxpayers' money. let's recognize walls work. we need to complete the $285 million -- or 285 miles of wall to help secure our border, that will help secure our homeland, that will help keep

americans safe. it's a very simple amendment. let's hope it's not a partisan result. with that, mr. president, i will yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: mr. president, i have six requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. peters: mr. president, i rise to oppose the johnson amendment. this measure would force continued payment of government contractors to build an ill-conceived border wall. most of these funds were never intended for this purpose. more than $10 billion were redirected from the department of defense, and these funds were intended for military installations and functions such

as schools for military children and national guard equipment. the biden administration is conducting a comprehensive review of these contracts led by the department of defense and homeland security. d.h.s. has repeatedly announced that they will continue work on certain commonsense projects on the southern border to address life, safety, environmental, and operational considerations. these decisions will be guided by what is best for our national security, not well-connected government contractors profiting off of hard-earned taxpayer dollars. we need to move forward with smart bipartisan investments that secure both our southern and our northern borders. we must not look backwards at the former administration's boondoggle. i urge my colleagues to vote no

on the johnson amendment. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. mr. johnson: in quick response, the prior administration is what the good senator claimed a boondoggle worked. during this comprehensive review by this administration, again, this administration is the root cause of this problem. they caused this. the problem is growing worse. it's not getting better. congress, by supporting a double-layer fence around this capitol for months, spent hundreds of millions of dollars keeping us safe and secure, recognizes that fencing and walls work. again, this fencing has been paid for. this wall has been paid for. $2 billion will be wasted, $3 million a day will be wasted. this is just common sense, and it will improve the security of

this nation. and again, in 2006, this was a bipartisan type of effort. building 700 miles of fence was bipartisan. 80-19. it should be bipartisan today. i'm urging my colleagues, let's finish building this wall. let's not waste billions of dollars of taxpayer money. i yield the floor. mrs. capito: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mrs. capito: i ask unanimous consent to address the senate for several minutes on this amendment. i rise in support of this amendment. i am the ranking member of the subcommittee on appropriations for homeland security. the president's budget request included a rescission of $2 billion that we as members of this body put -- enacted it, as the gentleman from wisconsin has clearly illuminated. at the same time, we are having a tremendous problem at our

southern border. we all know this. we don't have the july numbers yet. we know the apprehensions will be in excess of over 200,000 in one month. the july numbers also indicate that the number of unaccompanied children is the largest ever encountered in one month. there are currently now over 160,000 miles of walls that we legally funded. when you go to the border, you see thousands of dollars worth of steel slats lying on the ground that were to be constructed until president biden canceled it. you know who will else see that's? human traffickers, drug smugglers, we have all been to the border several times.customs and border patrol has told us this is necessary to stop the illegal drugs. this is infrastructure to keep america safe, it's infrastructure to keep drugs out of this country and it's

infrastructure to control illegal immigration. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the johnson amendment to prohibit the cancellation of contracts to build the border wall. the presiding officer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: mr. president, over the years i've made any number of trips to our nation's southern border, with many colleagues, democrats and republican. one of the people who has been to that part of the world more than me is a guy who used to serve here in the senate is our president, joe biden. there's a verse in scripture, when i was hungry, did you feed me, when i was a stranger in your land, did you welcome me. to the extent that we looked out for these, we have a brighter future.

anyway, i reason i raise this, we have a peril to look out to the least of these and that includes those looking for a safe haven. the reason why so many people continue to come to our borders from central america, especially honduras, guatemala, and el salvador is they live lives in fear, deprived of economic opportunity and hope, corruption, crime, you know, if any of us lived there with our families, we would want to get out of there too and find a place to go to for a brighter future. border security, as chairman of the department of homeland security, we need secure borders and -- including barriers, i have supported them and so has the gentleman who is the former chairman of the committee. we traveled in that part of the

world together. one of the things we agreed on is what i said. we could spend the next, you know, year, five years, ten years, securing our border. that's important. if we don't address those root causes of why people are coming here, ten, 20 years, they will still be coming. we have to be smarter than that. i -- this is a shared responsibility. it's not all on the united states. i -- i like to use the example, some of my colleagues from west virginia, i use to use the example of home depot, which senator johnson heard me use more than a few times. home depot, their ad line is, you can do, we can help. the immigration flow we're getting, they can do it, we can help. the lines for prosperity, a number of years ago, with democrat and republican support, i think with the support of certainly then-vice president biden and senator mccain, the

late john mccain, among the things we need to focus on and doing under the alliance for prosperity is, one, addressing crime and violence and two, addressing corruption, three, economic hope and opportunity. those are the three buckets. if we put money in those buckets, put even more money in those buckets matching $2, $3, $4, $5 for every country that helps. there's private businesses, there's an expectation for them to help, nonprofits, there's an expectation from all of us. we have a responsibility. as a place where illegal drugs are coming from, moving the drugs through these three countries, we have a moral responsibility to do something to help the situation down there, not just at the border. with that in mind, i'm not going to support this amendment, but i would just note, i always look for common ground. the author of the amendment

knows full well about the need to go at root causes and we've -- for as long as we've been working on this issue, all of these years we need to work on root causes and we still do today. thank you very much. mr. johnson: mr. president, i need to respond quickly. the presiding officer: there are now two minutes evenly divided. mr. johnson: if you want -- the presiding officer: before a vote on the johnson amendment. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. mr. johnson: mr. president, i need to respond quickly. senator carper was talking about root causes. the root cause of the instability, you know, primary cause of the violence in central america is -- is americans insatiable demand for drugs. if you can solve that problem, you can solve the root cause of the problem, you won't have the

violence. but the root cause of this current crisis, because it was already solved, the root cause of this current crisis is president biden's policies. president biden is the root cause. so if you want to fix this, we can fix it. secure the border. go back to the policies that work. we won't be able to fix central america until we end our instaishable -- insatiable demand for drugs. mr. carper: in 48 hours, a third of the airplane will be -- heading for gillette and remember mike enzi. i remember when mike enzi was talking about the 80-20 rule, senator kennedy and mike enzi, democrat, republican, how they were able to find a common cause

and get stuff done. i asked him, what is the 80-20 rule. 80% ted and i agree on, 20% we don't. there is common ground here. i think the gentleman from wisconsin knows what it is. in addition to talking about our differences, let's talk about where we agree and do good work there. thank you. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. mr. johnson: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 48, the nays are 49. under the previous order requiring 50 votes for the adoption of this amendment, the amendment is not agreed to.

the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: thank you, mr. president. it may take a moment, but i would suggest that the senate be in order now. i thank the members for their consideration. mr. president, i offer today what should be considered a friendly amendment to the broadband section of this infrastructure bill. why is it a friendly amendment? because using the administrative procedures at which my amendment would provide, it would save billions of dollars in broadband build-out funds. it would provide for consumer input, stakeholder input, local and state government input into ntia, the agency that will be in charge of this broadband build-out. and also because it will not delay the broadband build-out in

any way. now, as written today, the broadband section waives the administrative procedures -- the presiding officer: the senate will be in order. mr. wicker: thank you, mr. president. the wicker amendment would strikingly strike that waiver and make the administrative procedure act apply to the broadband section as it applies to so many big programs that are enacted. if we pass this amendment, here will be the timeline. let's assume the president doesn't get around to signing this bill until october 1. i would expect the president would sign it earlier than that. but let's assume that he does that. there will be 30 days of notice, 30 days of public comment after the notice is published, a review of those comments, which could take 30 to 40 days, at

that point the regulations are published and after 30 days, they go into effect. so by my calculations, assuming the president is very, very late in signing the bill, the -- the act -- and the regulations under the administrative procedures act would be done by february 7. now what we all know, what everyone in this chamber knows is that we have to wait on the f.c.c. maps and they will not be ready until the earliest -- until the earliest by spring of next year and that is -- that's very, very optimistic. so we have time to do it right, to get public input, to have people who already experienced this come to the agency and say, you might want to do it this way or you might want to avoid doing it that way because here's our

experience. we did this one time before. and it was only $4.7 billion. this is $42 billion. that was the b-top program which was enacted in 2009. we skipped this, we gave it to an agency which is going to have it this time, the ntia, a staff of only 157 people to monitor $4.7 billion, this time it is $42 billion. here is what we learned about the b top program which is a lot like this. when congress asked ntia to administer this, the results were deeply troubling. let me quote the inspector general and let me cope the economic policy institute and the inspector general, they found that there were significant challenges in managing the size and complexity of the program.

it's a program a tenth the size of what we're talking about today. the stanford institute said ntia's mechanism for selecting projects was incoherent. had they adopted more reasonable framework, many more households could have been connected with the same money or the same number of connections could have been realized for a fraction of the cost. because they didn't do what i'm advocating today, mr. president. the phoenix center, an independent think tank, said they found no positive effect on home broadband adoption from the b-top program. mr. president, and my fellow colleagues, years from now when someone realizes we wasted billions of dollars on this build-out, i want -- i would be want, and i think my colleagues

would want to say, well, i voted yes on the wicker amendment to take the extra 130, 140 days to hear what went right and what went wrong in the past and to make sure we get it right. no senator has worked harder than i have on broadband build-out. i want this program to succeed. this is a way to make sure we spend the money correctly, to make sure we do it right. i ask unanimous consent, at this point, mr. president to put into the record an article dated august 3, yesterday, into the congressional budget office, how broadband could fall short. i ask that it be entered in the record at this point. the presiding officer: without

objection. mr. wicker: mr. president, i don't want this program to fall short. i want it to succeed. this amendment gives us a chance to get the money right, to take the extra time we're going to have to take anyway to get the maps right. it's a good government amendment, a friendly amendment, and i urge bipartisan adoption of it. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. mr. king: mr. president, with all due respect to my friend from mississippi, i don't consider this a friendly amendment. i consider this a major departure from the agreed upon structure of this broadband section of the bill that we're talking about. this, as we all know, was a heavily negotiated bill. there are provisions in it that i don't like, there are provisions that are there because of the negotiation.

this reinserts the administration act into the process would bureaucratickize the process. here are some points i think need to be made. first, i consider the broadband section one of the crown jewels of the bill. the fact that it is structured in such a way that the grant will go to the states and the states will decide how best to administer those programs because of their knowledge of their needs in their states. yes, they are going to use maps -- updated maps, i should say, from the f.c.c., but this is really a driven process. this is a regulatory process. we're not talking about a regulatory process. we're not talking about the issuance of a lot of long and detailed regulations, we're talking about a grant program to

states and so the -- the burdensome administrative requirements of the a.p.a. are really not necessary in this case because it's not a regulatory process. in is already significant oversight built into the stach ute. -- statute. there's 68 pages that have all kiebdz of requirements for public -- kinds of requirements for public notice, filing online, public disclosure, comment and involvement of communities of other providers, of all of those interested parties in this process. so it's not like it's some kind of closed process. there's no doubt that this will slow down the process. there's no doubt that this would restrict the ability of the ntia to tailor programs to fit individual states. as i said, that's one of the beauties of this whole provision

is that it has the flexibility to meet the needs of states as they define them. it would hamper that state flexibility and it would make it more difficult for the states to follow through in a timely basis to make this tremendously important. where the senator and i agree, and i know how hard he's worked on this, as have i, this is, i think, one of the most important things we can do in this bill to get americans connected. i don't neat to make that argument. everyone in the chamber knows that. the other piece, unfortunately, that this amendment would be -- would do is enable and in fact invite lawsuits. there would be challenges to the regulation and if indeed the f.a.a. said we are going to do it this way, the bill provides for the kind of protections the senator is talking about.

i think this is an unnecessary amendment. i certainly as one of those who worked on the negotiation of the bill don't consider it a friendly amendment and i believe it is a major change in the agreement that would not have been agreed to in the negotiation and i hope my colleagues across the aisle who have supported this -- this agreement will oppose this amendment because it is not something that was in the negotiation and it would not have been accepted by those who were negotiating it on this side of the aisle. so with that, mr. president, i strongly oppose this amendment. it is a bureaucratic -- it makes this a bureaucratic process that is unnecessary, will only slow and impede the distribution of these desperately needed funds to connect the people of america. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on amendment

numbered 2146. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: the yeas are 43. the nays are 55. this amendment is not agreed to. under the previous order, there will now be four minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote related to the kennedy amendment number 2210. mr. kennedy: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. kennedy: madam president, with respect to my amendment, i offer it on behalf of myself and

senator cassidy. the last 18 months have been challenging for louisiana. first, there was hurricane laura. then there was hurricane delta. then there was hurricane z zada. the hurricanes alone did about $25 billion of damage. madam president, then we had the historic freezes. then we had historic flooding. the total amount of damage was $47.1 billion. my people are tough but they are tired. this amendment would appropriate $1.1 billion in community development, block grants to help my people recover. i bring you a problem but also a solution. thanks to the efforts of senator cantwell and senator schatz and myself, three years ago we convinced the f.c.c. not to give away the spectrum auction which belongs to the american people

and instead to auction it off, and there's now $80 billion sitting in treasury. the money for these block grants would come from that $80 billion in cash. thank you, madam president. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: madam president, we all agree responding to natural disasters is a federal core responsibility. this unprecedented amendment would take funds from the federal communication commission spectrum auction revenues to pay for disaster relief. the spectrum auction revenues my colleague seeks to reallocate are intended to help expand high-speed internet in the united states. all americans no matter where they live should have access to 21st century economy. we can't pick winners and losers when it comes to natural disasters.

the process should be set in law which is something my colleague from hawaii, senator schatz has been working on for years. i support disaster relief, but this is not the way to do it. my heart goes out to all americans impacted by natural disasters, not just those affected by hurricanes but also devastating wildfires and flooding caused by climate change. i'm committing to ensuring they receive the assistance they need but we need a comprehensive solution and i'd like to yield time to my colleague from maine. ms. collins: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: madam president, first let me offer to work with both senators from louisiana to secure the funding that their states so desperately need. in my capacity as ranking member of the transportation hud appropriations subcommittee. louisiana has been particularly hard hit experiencing three

hurricanes almost back to back and certainly the need for disaster assistance is clear. but we also have other states that have been affected. alabama, california, florida, iowa, michigan, oregon, puerto rico, a territory, not a state obviously. those need help too. and what i would propose is that we work together on an emergency disaster supplemental that will take care of all these needs, including the needs of the people in hard hit louisiana. and i pledge my personal help and support to both of my colleagues and friends from louisiana to bring this about. finally, let me just say i'm surprised that the administration has not submitted a request for supplemental

disaster assistance. and i hope -- the presiding officer: your time has expired. ms. collins: thank you. mr. kennedy: madam president, i ask for the yeas and nays of my amendment. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

vote: