very moment and document it as a historical rarity in time because it really put such a bright light on housing. >> we are leaving this to keep our more than 40 year commitment to live coverage of congress. the senate isna about to gavel back in following a recess for the weekly party caucus lunches. this is live coverage here on c-span2. a senator: just starting out is finding a safe, affordable place to live. mr. reed: the simple fact is that we don't have the supply of housing to meet demand. indeed we have a shortfall of seven million affordable housing units, according to the national low income housing coalition. certainly the covid-19 pandemic reduced housing production and created kinks in the supply chain for important raw materials like lumber, but the truth is that we were lagging

when it came to building and maintaining affordable housing long before covid-19. back in 2020, a rhode island family earning the state's median income couldn't afford to buy a home at the median price anywhere in the state. it has only gotten worse since then. across the country, home prices have risen 13.4% from last year, with the national median price now at $416,000. in my state, the rhode island association of realtors reports that the median price of homes sold in june 2022, reached an all-time high of $430,000. that's 11.7% higher than a year earlier. a large reason that homeownership is out of reach for many americans is that the inventory levels are so low. in recent months, sales have

dropped as interest rates have increased, but nowhere near a balanced market. in a healthy housing market, there is usually 6,000 homes for sale at any given time. right now our country hags less than a three-month supply of homes and rhode island has less than a two-month supply. as potential home buyers are priced out of the housing market, they remain in the rental market, adding additional pressure to rental prices. according to apartment list the renting has grown since last summer, in providence, rhode island, rents jumped 23.8% from last year. when supply is tight and rents go up, it's harder for our vulnerable community members to afford housing, that's seniors, people with disabilities and

people who have been a fabric of our community for decades are no longer able to afford to stay. it is a problem facing too many americans. this didn't happen overnight. according to the affordable housing low income mission, the decline started between 1991 and 2015 and now we have a major housing supply crunch that has led to soaring rents and home prices. developers have more incentives to build $6 million mcmansions and luxury apartments, that doesn't help those who need a safe, affordable community and it doesn't help young families that too need 1,800 square feet, four walls and a roof. we have a housing market where firefighters, teachers, and

nurses cannot afford to live in the communities they serve. simply put, our current housing stock does not have homes to match what families want and what families need. also contributing to the problem are housing -- our housing market has been flooded with speculators and large institutional investors who are looking for big profits. this is why chairman brown, senator warren and i have called on hud to stem the flow of family homes to institutional investors and help level the playing field. in this kind of market, it's hard fosh everyone, especially first-time buyers. over the last two years the federal government has made substantial investments in affordable housing, helping people experience homelessness and keeping people staibly housed -- staibly housed, without the measures we adopted,

the housing situation for millions of americans would be worse. i was part of the bipartisan working group which was part of the cares act which was keeping people safe, protecting public health and preventing affordable prices from becoming an evicn kroises, but -- crisis wasn't enough. now we have an influx of more than $46 billion in emergency rental assistance to help renters who struggle to pay their rent and utilities during the pandemic. those funds have also been used to help with housing stability, particularly for unhoused individuals. in total, emergency rental sentence has helped over 34,000 families in rhode island alone. and i also worked with colleagues to deliver nearly

$10 billion under the homeowner assistance fund to help homeowners who experienced covid-19 hardships keep up with house payments and stay in their homes, over $50 million in this fund is helping homeowners in my state. rhode island and her states are also committing their american rescue plan dollars towards building new affordable housing. it is hard to overstate the impact that this cushion of support has had for families in our state and across the country. putting a historic emphasis on housing support helped eliminate a major potential economic hardship that could have been catastrophic for millions of americans. without the worry of how to make rent or mortgage payments, families didn't need to scramble to find shelt and uproot themselves from their support systems, kids in safe homes could stay in the same schools, it helps seniors stay connected

and parents keep their jobs and kept all of us healthier and safer. we need more of this kind of support for families, not less. measures like emergency rental assistance and the home owner assistance fund were temporary and those programs will be wrapping up in the next few months. as we look ahead to the future, it's time for us to think, what have relearned? what are the acute needs of housing today? there is no question we need to build more affordable housing. we need to invest in rehabilitating old homes and building new homes, specifically for low-income families. we need to fortify the federal problems that incentivize affordable house, like a capital manage net fund and low housing tax credits. that includes extending available low-income housing tax credits by rein-stating the

12-point -- rein-stating the 12.5% boost. it means passing the bipartisan act with senators leahy, collins, wyden, and myself, among with others, so we can recover funds from the american rescue plan when states put the funds towards building and maintaining affordable housing. we need apprenticeship and training to attract more diverse workersle we need more innovation with -- workers. we need innovation and high-tech materials. this is not a pipe dream. rhode island has shown the world how to get innovative in the housing state with one neighborhood building row homes.

these are innovative construction projects, small homes with many energy-saving aspects and they are the future and we have to invest in that future. and as i said, we have to build to focus on a green future that includes the effects of climate change. that means we need to pass the green retro fits act, which i introduced with senator collins. this would boost energy efficiency in thousands of homes nationwide by bolstering private-public partnerships to create a new program to distribute energy efficiency grants and loans. we need to increase our assistance and our commitment to the homeless assistance grants, that includes funding for the continuum of care program which served over 750,000 people experiencing homelessness each year and for emergency solution grants which support over

350,000 who are in emergency shelter each year. we need to fully fund housing choice vouchers, make them easier to use in communities and incentivize landlords to take these vouchers, which is being done presently in rhode island. investing in housing will not fuel the fire of inflation, it will tackle one of the key contributors to rising costs and help stabilize family budgets. on many of these fronts, state and local action is also need it had to move the ball forward. state and local governments must address the issue of seclusion ordinary -- exclusionary funding, there are barriers to building multifamily homes, making it very challenging to build affordably. it should be easier for people to converse their garage into living space for a family member

such as an in-law suite above a detached garage. some of these challenges can be traced back to not in my backyard attitude which we must all do our part to overcome. every family should have a decent, affordable place to live and we need to commit ourselves to making investments an -- and policies to make that possible. investment in housing will lower costs to family, which will be an effective way to help overall, not immediately, but overall to lower inflationary pressures on working families. and, with that, meap, i -- and with that, madam president, i would thank you and i would yield the floor. mr. kennedy: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. kennedy: thank you, madam president. joining me today on the floor, madam president, are mr. james

shay, mr. woody dagle, and bernadette breslin. three very able members mf my staff. -- of my staff. madam president, i want to talk today about electricity and more specifically about how to pay for it. my people are really struggling right now. folks in my home state of louisiana, and i know this is true in your state, madam president, and across the country, are facing some of the largest energy bills, electricity bills in the history of ever. in the past month, i've learned about a -- a woman in shreveport in my state, whose electricity bill went from $180 to $243, another person whose bill went

up to $363. a citizen of mine in minority leaders who went f -- your electricity bill should not be one-third of your paycheck. i realize that to some americans who are fortunate enough to be wealthier, these increases may seem insignificant, but many of my people in louisiana, madam president, live from paycheck to paycheck. and put very simply, many of the people in my state and many of their fellow americans simply cannot afford this. now, look, i understand it's hot. i understand it's hot in louisiana. here's a news flash. in the summer it's always hot in louisiana. some days i think that --

that -- that god gave louisiana a choice between good food and good weather, and we chose good food. i get that, but heat is not the main reason that these electricity bills are soaring. it's not. the main reason that electricity bills are soaring is because of president biden's profoundly foolish energy policies. which have depleted america's natural gas inventories. because of this, natural gas prices have increased 75% from 2022. not -- from 2020. not 9.1% that you read in the newspaper or attributed to inflation in general, it's 20% and they continue to climb.

energy, madam president, is one of the largest electricity providers in my state. particularly in south louisiana. actually all over my state, and there was a -- energy sent a letter to my customers. this is what energy told its rate payers and my people. the cost of natural gas which we used to separate numerous power generation facilities continues to rise. natural gas prices in april of 2022 were more than double those of april of 2021, and three times higher than april of 2020. as a result, these hig higher-than-normal costs will be seen on customer bills. and that's why my people are so

scared. that's why the american people are so scared. louisianians are not alone on this. a recent survey -- there's a very representable research firm called help adviser. it just found that 24%, a quarter of all americans have reduced or gone without paying basic expenses so they can pay their energy bill, pay their electricity bill. what country are we living in? now, the current energy crisis -- and that's what this is -- is a sucking chest wound for louisianians and for americans but yet president biden refuses to budge from his war on affordable energy that got us here. i will say this. president biden has been true to

his word. day one in his campaign he said he would destroy america's energy independence, and by god he has done it. he said that. my goddess' been successful -- by god he's been successful. he killed the keystone pipeline. he's canceled our country's mineral leases. he stalled our country's pipelines, and he's told his banking regulators to dry up capital and loans for energy production. he's put the full force and weight of the united states government behind this effort to destroy oil and gas. and in doing so, he has intentionally forfeited america's energy independence. and that's why electricity bills are so high. i'll give you one example.

i'm not going to beat this to death. but just last month -- earlier this month, i guess, just before july 4th, president biden's department of the interior released its five-year federal leasing plan. that plan contained a maximum -- doesn't even mean they'll do this amount -- a maximum of 11 lease sales for oil and gas producers. you know what the last plan proposed under the biden add -- under the prior administration? 47. it's clear. i mean, i get it. president biden does not want the united states of america to produce its own fossil fuels. he just doesn't. his new plan is we're going to forfeit our energy independence. we have to have oil and gas to run the greatest economy in all of human history. so where are we going to get it if we forfeit our energy

independence? well, we're going to buy natural gas and oil from countries, foreign countries that hate us so those foreign countries will have more money to buy weapons to try to kill us. that's what we're doing. now, what's the answer? how do we fix this? well, the answer, duh, is to have the american people produce their own oil and gas, and we can do it. we've done it before. we were energy independent. my people in louisiana know how to produce clean, affordable energy and so do other people in other states. and this is what else my people would tell president biden if they could speak to him directly. they'd say mr. president, with all due respect, we can produce natural gas. we can produce oil. and they would go further. they'd say mr. president, we

want you to understand that we don't hate wind. we don't hate solar. we, the people of louisiana, we want to explore all alternative forms of energy. wind, solar, nuclear, clean hide generally. hydroelectric. but they would go further and say mr. president, we want a balanced energy policy. and ours is the greatest economy in all of human history. and it uses a lot of energy. and 80% of our energy comes from fossil fuels. do we work every day to make those fossil fuels cleaner? yes. but we can't do without them. and when we try, this is what happens in terms of electricity bills. there are ways that people can keep -- can get help. they're struggling right now in my state, madam president. for example, for customers in new orleans, energy has created

a program called energy smart program, entergy, the electric power company, will send someone out to your residence for free and make suggestions on how you can lower your bills. there are other entities trying to help. there's a group called share the light. another group called smile. these are local nonprofits in lafayette that will try to help people in their area who are having trouble paying their electricity bill. slim co is also offering a terrific utility assistance program that would provide a one-time $300 grant payment for people who can't pay their electricity bill. and of course there are also programs under my state's louisiana housing corps. such as la heap and weatherization assistance

program that can help folks reduce their electricity bills. madam president, let me close this way. two years ago i was on the same floor in this very same spot right here. i was able to talk about how our economy was soaring. two years ago i was able to proudly say we in america are energy independent, that unemployment is at record lows, and that americans have more money in their pockets. and we can have that gone -- we can have that again, madam president. the american people deserve it and we can have it again, but not if president biden continues to double down on what in my judgment is his bone-deep, down to the marrow foolish energy policy which when you scrub away all the rhetoric amounts to

this. wind, solar, and wishful thinking. you can't produce electricity with wishful thinking. and my people's bills are way too high and they don't have to be that high if president biden would just listen. madam president, thank you. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: will the senator withhold his request. mr. kennedy: i beg your barton. the presiding officer: will the senator withhold his request. mr. kennedy: i would. how about if i yield to senator marshall. i yield. a senator: a senator: thank you so much.

madam president. the pr, this week afterwaiting a statue will replace kansas native and former united states senator john engles in the statuary hall collection. mr. marshall: it will join dwight eisenhower, our nation's 34th president as one of kansas' two tribute statues in the capitol building. president eisenhower's likeness was placed in the capitol rotunda in 2003 but amelia's journey to our nation's capitol has taken much longer. kansans and especially the people of atchenson persevered just as amelia did in her flight to coordinate a bronze statue if limestone base and appropriate nod to our state's signature natural stone. it was 85 years ago this month amelia earhart vanished over the

vast pacific ocean. she'd already completed more than three-fourths of her trip which would have made her the first pilot ever to circle the earth at its equator. amelia already had made history before this flight. she was the first person to fly solo from hawaii to the united states mainland, the first woman to fly solo across the atlantic and the first woman to fly nonstop across the united states. defying odds and expectations with each new accomplishment, she became a global superstar and one of the most accomplished pilots in history. while amelia was a pioneer of aviators everywhere, she is still today a role model for every person but especially for women and young girls who strive to break barriers and achieve their dreams despite the odds being against them. in my home state of kansas, amelia's legacy lives on and continues to know no limits. kansas is home to the air capital of the world for good

reason. our state has been home to many aviation manufacturers over the course of a century. on any given summer's day with eyes to the sky, you can see crop dusters flying low, dodging trees and power lines, diving upon acres and acres of crop land. and looking further upward you might see hobby pilot itself or executive jets and often you will hear screeching fighter bombers and giant jet refuelers but to see them you have to strain your eyes forward of the booming sound. indeed our spacious land is well fitted for spacious runways and our faraway horizons have provided endless visibility that goes on miles upon miles. kansas remains the leader in aerospace and drone development. i want to go back for a moment to a young amelia being brought up in the heartland. yes, kansas is where 9-year-old amelia first took to flight.

listen to this story. inspired by the exhibit she saw at the 1904 world's fair, she built by herself a makeshift roller coaster and recall again she's 9 years of age in this story. she launched her coaster off the roof of her house. after tipping over the edge of the roof line, she said it felt like i was flying. 16 years later she purchased her own plane and flew to new heights. today i also want to honor the people of atchenson who have taken to great lengths to tell her story for all americans to hear. my wife and i not too long ago enjoyed a great day visiting her perfectly preserved birth home but the star of the show for our visit, a must go see for everybody, especially american history buffs, is the new amelia earhart museum which honors her legacy and inspires all generations in the pursuit of flight. the centerpiece is muriel, the

world's last remaining electric tenna, an aircraft identical to the plane amelia flew on her final flight. muriel is named for amelia's younger sister, grace muriel earhart morrissey. what i'm really excited about is the immersive stem exhibits which takes visitors through amelia's life from kansas to the hielt of her worldwide fame as the first woman to fly solo across the atlantic ocean. every school within busing distance has to plan a field trip in the coming year and parents should be fighting for that chance to chaperone. i want to salute the annual festival in honor of amelia which i attended weeks ago celebrating her life and achievements with history lessons. concert, downtown arts and crafts, a world class fireworks extravaganza and a luncheon honoring amelia earhart

pioneering achievement award recipient. it's the first time i connected with the legend and why the hometown folks nearly 130 years after her birth fight to preserve her legacy and especially how much she means to the ladies in the community. amelia flew to new heights and traveled longer distance than ever before. and today americans everywhere are joining atchensonians and kansans as we all honor amelia this week out of a scared at r add -- shared admiration for her pioneering spirit. ha coin model for our state meas to the stars through difficulties. amelia earhart personified that model pushing social boundaries set for women and breaking new records in flight not just for a woman but for all aviators. for generations to come her spirit and likeness in will

inspire all kansans and visitors from around the world. thank you, madam president. i yield back.

mr. moran: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. moran: i don't know whether the senate is in a quorum call, but if it is, i ask it be lifted. the presiding officer: it is not. mr. moran: this week, the united states capitol will welcome a bronze statue of a determined young woman, with short cut hair, a curious smile, and a

bomber hat in hand. for almost everyone around the country, this young woman is easily recognizable as the adventurer and aviator, amelia earhart. amelia earhart, the most famous woman in aviation, soared into the history books, setting flight records and breaking barriers, but before she became known worldwide as the queen of the air, she was the daughter of a small town in kansas, atchison. amelia was born in 1897 in atchison, kansas, a rural community with a population then of about 500 people. as a young girl, amelia kept busy with her sister muriel, the girls were cob assistantsly exploring their own neighborhood, climbing trees, and playing with animals. during high school, amelia excelled in chemistry, which inspired her to go to medical school, a goal unthinkable for women at her time. her independence and ambition were evident from a very young

age. amelia's go-getter attitude propelled her to become an innovative nerp -- nerpt, working as a sten -- earth, working as a stenographer, and fashion designer. when asked how she maintained such a fervent work ethic, she stated the most effective way to do it is to do it. this can-do spirit was the catalyst for earhart's daring and fast-paced career as a aviator. she fell in love with flight when she took a plane ride at a california air show in 1920. it wasn't long after that experience before amelia started her first pilot lessons. she completed her courses in 1921, making her the 16th woman in the world with a license to fly. earhart quickly purchased her own plane, wasting no time in becoming one of the world's most notable aviators. following charles lindbergh's

flight across the atlantic, interest grew to see a woman fly across the same. in 1928, she took off but only as a passenger. after lange in wales, she -- after landing in wales, she said she qelt, quote, like baggage, a sack of p potatoes. adding someday she'd tried it alone. after that, she said she'd try the same path, but on her own, solo. when asked what prompted her, she stated that, quote, there's no more to life -- let me say that differently, quote, there's more to life than just being a passenger. in 1932, earhart became the first woman to complete a solo transatlantic flight in a record time of 14 hours and 56 minutes, despite being faced with a number of chal, during the trip -- challenges during the trip. earhart continued to break records by completing the first ever solo flight from hawaii to

california, from los angeles to mexico city, and reaching the highest altitude a female ever reached at the time. this led her to attempt the greatest feat, a flight arounde world, taking the ek was torial -- equatorial route, west to east. this was an astonishing 29,000-mile without with the last 7,000 over the pacific ocean. she left with her navigator, fred noonan, making stops in south america, africa, india, seeth asia, every stop she came closer and closer and closer to achieving her goal. on july 2, 1937, the day of the longest leg of her journey, her quest ended too soon in radio silence, somewhere over the pacific. intensive searches continue to this day, most recently by the

renowned oceanographer and kansan bob ballard that left the world continuing to wonder what ever happened to amelia. she captivated the hearts and minds of many, inspiring the next generation of pilots to love the sky in the same way she did. under deniably, the state of kansas has a long history steeped in the aviation industry, but without pioneers like amelia earhart, our state would not be the epicenter of aviation it is today. now, in celebration of her accomplishments and legacy, amelia earhart will join president dwight d. eisenhower as bronze beacons representing kansas in our nation''s capitol. tomorrow, this wednesday, we unveil amelia's statue to the world. just three days after what would have been her 125th birthday. this week would not have been possible without efforts of

jackie pragoy, karen seaberg, reed burger and the amelia earhart foundation. thank you for your extensive and determined efforts. this partnership is making so much progress, as made so much progress to get us to the day we now arrive at. i look forward to the dedication ceremony on wednesday, and seeing kansans fill statuary hall to honor and preserve amelia earhart's legacy. madam president, i yield the floor.

>> now, mr. president, this morning, this morning the senate will draw a clear line in the america's chip prices and america's dwindling commitment to science and innovation will not continue under our watch. within the next hour the senate will vote, finally, finally to move towards final passage of our ships and science bill. that's what we're calling it, the chips and science bill. that will put us in a position to finish the work on this bill before the end of the week. it's a major step for our economic security, our national security, our supply chains and,

in fact, for america's future, for america's future. i want to be clear. the proposal we're passing this week contains the majority of key site and innovation measures the senate passed last summer. it will make a store investments to scientific research. it will take direct aim at our nation's chip crisis, alongside infrastructure law and a recent gun safety bill among others. it is one of the most consequential bipartisan achievements of this congress. i thank all of my senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle who are helping to make this happen. i am confident that future generations will look back on the passage of this chips and science bill as as a turningt for american leadership in the 21st century. but it didn't come together overnight. legislation has been several years in the making. in 2019 i approached my my colleagues, a republican colleague todd young with a proposal to work together on

legislation to provide america's committed to science and innovation. together we drafted the first iteration many policies we're passing this week, the endless frontier act. later i join with my colleague senator cornyn and senator warner to push for the authorization of federal chips initiative as part of the ndaa to address our nation's growing chip shortage. .. the american people to unleash the next wave of discovery and scientific achievement. we knew that if we didn't get there first if, our rivals -- can chief among them, the chinese communist party -- would likely beat us to the punch and rehappy the world in their authoritarian -- reshape the world in their authoritarian the image. in february of 2021, less than a month after i became majority

leader, i directed the chairs and members of our relevant committees to start drafting a legislative package to outcompete china and create new american jobs with the endless frontier act serving as the core of this effort. i also instructed them to draft legislation to rebuild the capacity of the united states' semiconductor industry. pandemic made clear with unforgiving clarity how america's chip shortage was creating a crisis in our economic and national security. so, members, on both sides of the aisle -- this has been a bipartisan effort from the get go -- got to work. we made a commitment last february to work together. we bring a bill to the floor in the vote in the spring, and that's what we did. we passed the u.s. innovation and competition act with overwhelming bipartisan support in june of 2021. a year later the legislation we're passing week has many of

the same -- [audio difficulty] contained in the bill we worked on this summer. for example, last year 's bill secured historic investments for science and innovation. this bill does too. last year 's bill offered tens of billions to encourage american chip manufacturing and r&d. this bill does that too and even more with the investment tax credit provisions. last year's bill provided funding to help build wireless communication supply chains to counter huawei. bill does too. last year's bill created the national science foundation tech direct rate and -- directorate and to provided funding to to help compete with foreign rivals in key technologies like a.i. and quantum computing. bill does too. last year -- this bill does too. last year's bill made investments in manufacturing extension partnership to strengthen domestic supply chains. this bill does too. and last year's bill created the

first ever program to cultivate the tech hubs of tomorrow in regions around the united states that have enormous potential but have largely been overlooked. not the big mig lop lises -- big megalopolises which have a lot of tech, but smaller regions that have great talent but have been overlooked. they might be in upstate missouri, hay might be in indiana and -- in upstate new york, indiana, in many other participants of the country, and this bill is making sure that happens. now let me be clear, while this bill constrain towns the two major components of the science and chips bill, there are other major proposals from both sides hard still being worked on in the conference committee. make no mistake that there are many democrats and republicans who have provisions that will be contained in the conference report under chair cantwell's leadership. and it is my intention to put the conference committee bill on the floor of the senate. as i said a moment ago, i firmly

believe that passing this bill will be a turning point for american leadership i don't know how many years in a row i've been doing this but this week in july i always come to the senate floor to honor whistleblowers. i expect this week that the senate will unanimously pass my resolution designating this saturday, july 30, as national whistleblower appreciation day. this year the resolution has 21 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, which is more than this resolution has ever had the number of cosponsors ever before. now, that should serve as a very important reminder that protecting and celebrating whistleblowers is not a partisan

issue. it's just as simple as it being good government. this congress i've been working on several pieces of whistleblower legislation that also have bipartisan support. one of those bills which i introduced last december along with senators warren and warnock relate to money laundering. in 2020, congress established the first ever anti-money laundering whistleblower program. under this reward-based program, whistleblowers who provide actionable information to the government that exposes money laundering may receive a percentage of the funds recovered as a result of their disclosure. while that's an important step forward, the current problem -- the current program has its

issues. first, there is no minimum award amount, so the government isn't obligated to pay a whistleblower anything at all, even if the information that the whistleblower provides leads to a successful enforcement action. second, the program doesn't provide the treasury department with a mechanism to pay whistleblowers and instead relies on yearly congressional appropriations. my bill addresses these issues. it raises the cap on whistleblower rewards from 25% to 30%, and it sets a 10% base minimum on rewards to ensure that if the government collects as a result of the whistleblower's disclosure, the whistleblower isn't left holding the short end of the stick.

it also establishes a funding mechanism to ensure that the treasury department has funds readily available to pay whistleblowers independent of congressional appropriations. these improvements will ensure that whistleblowers have the confidence to come forward and assist law enforcement in cracking down on money laundering. the bill also expands the whistleblower disclosures that are eligible for the award. current whistleblower laws don't offer anything to whistleblowers who report violations of sanctions against individuals. that would include sanctions placed on russian oligarchs following putin's unprovoked invasion of ukraine. that's a missed opportunity.

i have it on good authority that there are some whistleblowers who might have come forward to report sanction violations associated with the russians if only the reward system were in place to cover their disclosure. my bill fills the gap by expanding the list of covered disclosures to include sanctions violations. another bill which i am introducing this week strengthens the f.b.i. whistleblower protections. for years, the f.b.i. has argued that the f.b.i. and the justice department should retain tight control over f.b.i. whistleblower retaliation cases. the f.b.i. has its own separate whistleblower law that leaves authority for settling f.b.i. whistleblower retaliation complaints to the f.b.i. and to the department of justice.

the bill that i introduce will allow f.b.i. employees to appeal their whistleblower retaliation cases to the merit sanctions systems protection board. this bill gives them outside review by a neutral third party. the bill also includes a kick-out provision. that will mean that if the f.b.i. doesn't act in a timely manner, the whistleblower can take their cases straight to the merit system protection board. this bipartisan bill is cosponsored by senators durbin, hawley, whitehouse, and blackburn. i want to thank each of those cosponsors for their support. those are just two of several legislative initiatives before congress that will ensure whistleblowers remain protected. i urge congress to consider and pass this legislation before the

end of the year. support for whistleblowers is something that we can all get behind. it can and should unite every member of the congress who believes government needs to remain transparent and accountable to people. this week i encourage my fellow senators to remember that important fact. let's renew our shared commitment to strengthening the nation's whistleblower laws by taking up and passing this important whistleblower legislation. now, on another subject -- and it is a subject that's before the senate right now, i assume will be brought up for final action yet this week -- is the vote on a stripped-down china competition package. now, gone is language combating

china's unfair trade practices. gone from our provisions -- gone are provisions preventing fentanyl and narcotics from entering the country. gone is my proposal to stop subsidizing china through the low-cost world bank loans. gone are provisions that i championed preventing the flood of counterfeit chinese merchandise. and gone are condemnations of the chinese communist party for the ongoing genocide of the uighur minority. last year i supported an earlier version of this bill in large part because it included these very tough-on-china policies that i just mentioned that are missing from this piece of legislation that the senate will

soon be voting on. but now these policies are out, and more spending is in. it includes more than $76 billion of subsidies earmarked for a single industry, the semiconductor manufacturers. semiconductors, or chips, are important, but that doesn't mean that we should write these companies a blank check. if incentives to encourage more semiconductor investment in the united states are necessary, they should be targeted. i understand the national security concerns, but simply mention the words national security isn't the understand of the discussion -- isn't the end of the discussion. proponents must show how she is subsidies will accomplish their

objectives. these subsidies are not targeted at the production of advanced chips produced absolutely exclusively by our allies in asia. furthermore, these subsidies fail to include adequate safeguards to prevent companies receiving subsidies from turning around and, you know what, possibly investing in china. a lot has changed since congress began talking about these subsidies more than a year ago and the senate passed this bill a long, long time ago. according to a recent "wall street journal" editorial, the semiconductor industry has already announced $80 billion of u.s. investment by 2025. moreover, there is growing evidence that a chip glut is down the road coming along. yet, instead of looking to trim

back or better target the subjects, this bill actually doubles down on corporate welfare. this bill now includes an expensive tax credit that will subsidize semiconductor manufacturers to the tune of about $24 billion. in total, american taxpayers will pay up to 40% of the cost of a semiconductor facility. that means individual companies are in line to receive billions in taxpayers funds. for example, intel has announced plans for a $20 billion facility. taxpayers will write a check from a low of $4 billion to possibly a high of eight billion checks for this one facility. i'm dumbfounded that my democrat colleagues can justify this.

and i say that because president biden and his allies in congress rant and rave about profitable corporations paying little or no tax. and, yet, under this bill some of the largest and most profitable companies in the world are poised to pay zero tax. in fact, unlike typical tax credits that reduce a company's tax bill, this one will allow a company to receive the credit as a cash payment exceeding any taxes that that company might pay. outside of senators -- senator sanders, senate democrats seem very unconcerned with making these large, profitable corporations, quote-unquote, as you hear them say all the time, pay their fair share. i hope that they keep this in mind when liberal groups inevitably point to more

profitable multinationals not paying taxes. don't try then and blame republicans or the 2017 tax bill, which has resulted in record revenues coming into the federal treasury. in fact, the 2017 tax bill should be modeled to how we should be competing with china instead of targeting specific industries for lavish subsidies. we reform our -- we reformed our tax code to eliminate special interest loopholes while helping all industries compete on a global scale, including against china. a competitive tax code, pro-growth policies and rule of law allows americans to do what americans do best, and that is innovate. that is how we will outcompete

china. in congress un -- chinese industrial policies will weaken our dynamic economy, which is a great advantage. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

>> -- of the american people concerned about inflation. 4 # % say they are struggling -- 42% say they are struggling just to stand still financially. 63% say that gas prices, inflation, bills or the economy are their biggest concerns. that, mr. president, is because 100% of the american people living in our country are experience appearance -- experiencing the worst inflation in more than 40 years. and 100 percent of the american people live in a country where things do not have to be this bad. but for democrats' deliberate policy choices. don't take it from me, listen to larry summers, treasury secretary of president clinton and nec director for president

obama. finish -- here's what larry summers had to say: it wouldn't have been nearly the same kinds of supply chain problems if we weren't giving people who were laid off unemployment insurance that was far more than the salaries they had been earning, if we weren't mailing checks willy-nilly. it would have been less spending, until have meant less boltmembers. bottlenecks. he continued: printing money and distributing it well ahead of supply of goods is a prescription for inflation. and that's what we dead -- we did. we injected enough money into the economy to make total spending grow at 11.6% rate last year. when you have 11.6% growth rate in spending, hen on any reasonable theory of how much capacity there is, you're going to have a lot of inflation, and that's what we did.

that's a top democrat talking. but he is intellectually honest. he tried to advise washington democrats not to dump nearly $2 trillion onto the economy. but, of course, they didn't listen. and is now working families are stuck with skyrocketing costs and bills as a consequence. you'd think the worst inflation in 40 years would be enough to convince democrats to stop running these painful experiments on more than families. but if you can believe it, almost every house and senate democrat would like to follow this up, this historic inflation, with massive new tax hikes. the same people who spent us into inflation want to tax us all the way into recession. so let's hope this small handful of democrats who see the insanity of this approach continue to stand strong for our country.

on an entirely different matter, this past saturday brought yet another escalation of russia's brute wall -- brutal war many ukraine. the ink had a barely i dried on a deal when russian missiles hit the port city of odesa. ukraine produces one-fifths of the -- one-fifth of the world's high grain wheat. description are of ukraine's crops have left vulnerable regions of the world literal low on the verge of -- literally on verge of crisis. vladimir putin only managed to resist the urge to the to commit senseless violence for about 24 hours. now fact that putin was even compelled to negotiate was thanks to the introduction of anti-ship missiles into ukraine's arsenal. if ukraine had had weapons like these earlier, the the blockade of odesa could have been

prevented in the paris place. in the first place. the biden administration says its decision making throughout process has been think about and nuanced. history will likely judge otherwise. the months before putin's escalation clearly called for boldness and resolve to say nothing of the months since. but too often the administration's first instincts have been to plod along slowly and vacillate. the ukrainians have fought bravely to stop russia's advance despite being undermanned and outgunned. just think what they could have accomplished if the west had a acted boldly to support ukraine as storm clouds were first gathering or right away when the storm broke. but now no one should need reminder of the far-reaching impacts of war in ukraine. our eastern flank allies certainly don't. they've been preparing to defend themselves literally for generations, and from the

beginning of russia's latest offensive, they've reached deep into their own inventories to help equip ukraine. elsewhere in europe treaty allies have finally taken an important lesson about investing in deterrence and self-defense to heart. countries like germany have made historic commitments to increase military spending. the germans, swedes and others have also broken historic precedent to share their stockpile with ukraine. and, of course, russia's war has led other major european states to announce their intention to join the ranks of the strongest alliance in world history. last week our colleagues on the foreign relations committee advanced the necessary protocols to ratify sweden and finland's ascension tomato. to nato. there's nothing preventing passage by full senate many. the the legislations of other nato allies like canna, norway,

poland and germany have already ratifieded them -- canada. the united states would be with fortunate to have two new treaty allies as impressive and capable of finland and sweden. both countries will improve the alliance's interoperability and instantly improve the state of burden-sharing the day they come in. american leadership in the world is made -- has made possible the peace and security our countrien enjoys today. -- country enjoys today. that leadership is helping encourage our allies to make sufficient investments in their own capabilities based on these shared threats. but american leadership is only as strong as our willingness to make robust investments in our own capabilities. president biden has submitted a defense budget request that fails to keep pace with the growing threats and fails to keep pace with democrats' own inflation. and senate democrats are giving

short shrift to the need for a strong bipartisan defense authorization bill. russian aggression isn't the only threat to america today. rogue states like iran and north korea continue to march toward devastating weapons. china's provocative behavior in the indo-pacific continues to raise the stakes for long-term competition. so les no time -- there's no time, no time to waste on either of these measures. sweden and finland protocols, nor a strong bipartisan ndaa -- [inaudible] as soon as possible. with we need to do all three as soon as possible. >> for months our country has experienced a severe computer chip shortage, one that has impacted nearly every american industry and increased costs for nearly every american. from cell phones to cars to it'ses, even our refrigerators

and -- televisions, even our refrigerators and washing machines, product we use every day need computer chips to function. they're also used in critically important technology like the medical equipment in our hospitals and the technology used by our military. this is why the computer chip shortage we're facing is a critical economic and national security issue. it has caused prices to rise, contributed to supply chain issues and limited the availability of many products, something that anyone who has tried to buy or rent a car over the past couple of years knows all too well. this shortage, well, it's it's directly impacting hard working families and the businesses that support jobs across our nation. and if there's companies that employ people in my state of nevada which use computer chips to manufacture cancer-fighting

and other critical medical technologies. this shortage, this shortage is impacting lives and hively hoods. livelihoods. there are for decades america was a global leader this in manufacturing and innovation. but over the years, we outsourced the production of computer chips to countries like china. millions of potential american jobs and increasing our relies license -- reliance on foreign nations for technology that is critical, critical for our national security and for our safety. and all of it has been exacerbated by a global pandemic and the war in ukraine. mr. president, we can't afford to wait any longer to bring manufacturing of computer chips back to the united states. the senate will be voting on bipartisan legislation to bring computer chip manufacturing back

to the u.s. and help existing manufacturers compete, creating thousands of new american jobs and enhancing both our economic and our national security. we'll also improve our supply chain which will help businesses, and it will minimize the supply chain disruptions which will, ultimately, help lower prices for consumers. and this bill, well, this bill will do so much more to spur innovation and invest in our american economy. as the paris and only former computer programmer to serve in the united states senate, i'm so excited about what this legislation will do for the future of american technology and innovation. it will establish a of its kind -- first of its kind effort to accelerate critical technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing

and advance manufacturing. we'll invest heavily in s.t.e.m. education and in our cybersecurity work force. and it will help build regional technology hubs all across this country to spark innovation. i'm also so proud that this bill includes bipartisan provisions that i worked on in committee that wrote the bulk of legislation which includes these: my bipartisan s.t.e.m. act to increase access to quality s.t.e.m. education for rural schools sost accessible to all of our students -- so it's accessible to all of our students no matter where they live. it also includes provisions with senator blackburn to support advanced manufacturing, work force development. and a bipartisan amendment i introduced with senator lumbar mocks to -- lumbar ox.

this historic bipartisan legislation, it's just common sense. so let's build up our communities, let's strengthen america's competitiveness. let's invest in american innovation. let's lower prices for hard working families, and let's bolster our domestic supply chain. let's pass this critical piece of legislation now. thank you. >> now, mr. president,ed today we took another giant step on something that has been a lot harder than it should have been and could have been -- actually, i start last june when i rose before this body, june of 2021, to speak about the critical need to pass united states intervention -- innovation and competition act. as it was known back there.

in order to the to shore up u.s. investment in research, development and manufacturing of critical technologies. this bill, changes later and, unfortunately, more than a year later, i rise again before this body to express my strong support for this revised chips plus legislation. we just clear an important hurdle over the last hour. and urge my colleagues to pass this bill as quickly as possible so we can get it over to the house and get it to the president's desk. we cannot afford to any more time. because this funding sends the message that the united states is putting a strong down payment on maintaining our edge in the global technology race. and preventing global supply chains from being weaponized against the united states or, for that matter, against our allies. over past few years, i china has

continued to increase investments in its domestic industries. and particularly in areas that have long-term strategic influence. this includes the semiconductor industry which i've been particularly focused on over the past few years. now, let me be clear, when i talk about china, i want to be clear, my beef is with the the communist party of china, xi jinping and their approach. it's not with the chinese people. matter of fact, when people don't make that distinction, hay play exactly into the ccp's agenda that now somehow these are all simply anti-chinese activities. these are not. these are activities against the government of china and particularly the communist party of china. bring back the semiconductors. semiconductors, often i called chips, are backbone of our modern lives. he can be found with literally anything with an on and off switch from cars and trucks to washers and dryers, smartphones

and laptops. chips are an is essential component in so many of the devices we use today. and the growth in chips is going to be exponential. many have thought and talked about whole notion of the internet of things. the internet of things require devices that are connected to the internet, obviously. autonomous driving would be one example. for every connection there needs to be most of those requiring the semiconductor chip. and unfortunately, looking backwards for many years american semiconductor companies led the world in both design and manufacturing of this kit call technology. but i the truth is our leadership has a languished. in recent years we continue to lose ground marley -- particularly in east asian a markets. in 1990 we produced literally 37% of all the chips in the world.

today in the whole field of micro-electronics we're town to about 12% on the other hand, china has ramped up its investment many chips, providing an estimated $2 the 00 billion in financial support between just 2015 and going forward projections up to 20 the 25. chinese orders for semiconductor manufacturing equipment rose 58% in 021 in the midst of the covid crisis -- in 2021. and china has a lowell concern -- has a goal to produce at least 70% -- [inaudible] many some countries by 2030. the truth is it's not just china. this is global competition. japan recently passed the $6.8 billion investment package that will fund innovative chip manufacturing as well as research and development. south korea, which has been also one of the great leaders in this movement, has a similar type investment. and, unfortunately, one of the

challenges we face, country or the entity, country that has evolved some of the fastest has been taiwan where, unfortunately, we now rely on many of the most cutting-edge, leading-edge chips coming out of taiwan. and as we've seen with president xi's aggressive at least indications about trying to subjugate title ix, the notion that that could take place beyond what it would do the to the democracy that exists in taiwan, what it would do the in terms of that critical semiconductor production would cause not a are recession, but a depression around the world. korea, squaw pan, taiwan, india that has recently passed legislation investing $30 billion in their domestic electronics, manufacturing industries. 10 million billion of that dedicated to chips manufacturing and display manufacturing. the truth is, and this is one of the things that i think was a

great irony, when i spoke about this bill 13 months ago and obviously in the senate with the leadership of the presiding officers and others, we actually passed this bill back in july of last year. and our passing of that bill and, i think, raising the expectation that america r america was really going to let in the -- going to to yet in the game, set off alarm bells in asia and europe with. and the truth is european democrats marley coming out of brussels are not normally viewed as moving with a gate deal of speed. but because we have taken now 12 months to actually get our act together to get this will to concern this bill to this stage of passage, we've seen european countries -- germany, for example, has already selected 3 32 semikicker projectses and put

$12 -- semiconductor projects. and even our friends many france recently announced a major u.s. global-founded investment in france. this has been proven up. the lack of investment by the u.s. has had a huge impact. from 2010-2020 only 17 major semiconductor plants, manufacturing fabs, were built in the united states. over that same time, we've seen 122 go elsewhere around presidei thought that the republicans wanted to cut taxes, but when it comes to american families' health insurance, they want to raise taxes. now why? well, there's one simple explanation -- barack obama. you see, it was barack obama who came up with the ac averages the affordable care act, where millions of americans have access to health insurance, affordable health insurance.

35 million. one out of five -- pardon me, one out of ten americans. but in the efforts of the republicans end to the affordable care act, they are basically trying everything. there was a time when there was this historic tension-filled moment on the floor when three republican senators saved the affordable care act -- senators murkowski, collins, and john mccain. i'll still remember that image as long as i'm alive, walked on the floor and saved the affordable care act. but ever since then, the republicans have been trying to do away with it every way they can think of. there are americans who are better insurance because of the affordable care act. they cannot be denied coverage because of a preexisting condition, they don't have annual or lifetime limits on coverage, they have free preventive health care, and young adults can stay on their parents' plan until they reach of age of 26, all positive things wildly popular. still, the republicans resist the idea that this is going to

be the law of the land if they have anything to say about it. there's no disputes that aca is one of the greatest public policy accomplishments of a life time. but, as i mentioned, this lifesaving policy is once again you understand threat by the republicans. why? last year congress passed and president biden signed into law the american rescue plan which, among other things, made aca health plans more wildly available and more affordable formols of americans. -- for millions of americans. that package increased the size of aca's tax credit, which eliminated or reduced out-of-pocket premiums for millions of people. it also expanded eligibility so that more lower- and middle-income americans are now eligible for tax credits. as a result, a record 14.5 million people signed up for aca plans during the to 22 open enrollment -- during the 2020

open enrollment period. and understand -- oh, thank you very much. understand nearly one-third of these enrollees found a plan that cost $10 a month or less. millions of enrollees selected a plan that didn't cost anything. in the midst of this once-in-a-century pandemic, the american rescue plan provided families across the nation with peace of mind that they'd have continued being a seas to health insurance. here's the problem -- if congress doesn't do something and soon, these enhancements lowering the cost of premiums for american families will end. that causes millions of people to lose their health insurance or have to pay more. if you're in a time of inflation where the cost of living is is going up, wouldn't you want to be on the train that says lower

health insurance premiums? the democrats are. the republicans aren't. millions of people will either lose their insurance or pay more if we don't do something. not one single republican senator will join in our efforts. those families in every state are going to be benefited by this. let's not forget how hard republican senators have fought to qom down on the side of -- to come down on the side of insurance companies and take health insurance away from americans. it's been their top priority for a decade. so it falls on democrats once again to fix this problem and fix it we must. it's my understanding that all 50 democratic senators are on board with providing a multiyear extension of these aca tax credits. i know that house democrats are with us. let us get it done soon, by august when insurers start notifying people of their premiums. people have a lot on their plate -- from rising costs to fierce

of gun violence to increasing covid cases. let us not add to the burdens of taxpaying families by hiking their health insurance premiums next year. the democrats want to fix it. we invite the republicans, who give many speeches on the cost of living for families, to join us. madam president, i yield the

>> on another subject, and and it's a subject that's before the senate right now, i assume will be brought up for final action yet this week, is vote on a stripped-down china competition package. now, gone is language combating china's unfair trade practices. gone from -- are provisions preventing fentanyl and narcotics from if entering the country. gone is my proposal to stop

subsidizing china through the low-cost world bank loans. gone are provisions that i championed preventing the flood of counterfeit chinese merchandise. and gone are condemnations of the chinese communist party for the ongoing genocide of the uighur minority. last year i supported an earlier version of this bill in large part because it included these very tough-on-china policies that i just mentioned are missing from this piece of legislation -- over 6 million people died worldwide from covid. over a million americans died from covid. last year we passed unanimously an amendment i had to ban any u.s. tax dollars from going to wuhan, china, to the lab. there is a great deal of

evidence that this pandemic arose out of the lab. gain-of-funs research enhances the severity of transmissibility of existing viruses viruses thay infect humans. the dangers are so acute that from 2014 to 2017, the national institutes of health suspended funding for all gain-of-function projects. the emergence of covid serves a as reminder that this research conducted in a secretive and totalitarian country is simply too risky to fund. i therefore ask my colleagues to restore this crucial provision that would prohibit the funding of gain-of-function research in china. i ask unanimous consent that it be in order to call up my amendment number 5159. i further ask that there be 30 minutes of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. upon the use or yielding back of that time the senate vote on adoption of my amendment with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: be is there objection?

a senator: madam president, reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. ms. cantwell: madam president, no one could be more disappointed than myself in the fact that we don't have a conference report before us at this point in time. with so many different committees in four corners working to resolve so many issues, i would hoped we would get over the goal line and be here with that conference report. unfortunately events overtook us and objectives of the calendar and a variety of issues that narrowed the discussion we have before us today to two focus points. one, the science committee's wrork with the commerce committee in the senate and language that basically would incent the semiconductor industry. and our colleagues voted to

proceed on those two measures, and there was a lot of discussion on what the definition of a skinny bill was. i'm not sure exactly how -- i mean i know a lot of the events that got us to that discussion, but i will say to my colleague that he's correct. when usica left the united states senate, it included this language, and this language was very much debated in conference. and it was part of the jurisdiction of several committees, but primarily the help committee, whose content is now not part of the legislation we're considering. so i am hopeful that we will get those committees who have jurisdiction over this language to rectify their differences between the house and the senate, but that's what four corners is, it's rectifying conditions between the house and the senate. i hope my colleague will work

with me on a conference that will continue after this point. i hope that we get this legislation done. and then i hope that we literally return to finish up the rest of the conference work, because there are so many important issues like this that we should include in the legislation. so i hope my colleague will continue to work with us, knowing that this is not all of the issues that had been discussed but a more narrow issue. so, therefore, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio.

mr. portman: mr. president, i'm coming to the floor today to offer a very straightforward, commonsense amendment that is noncontroversial, that has met all the requirements set out by the democratic leadership, by the majority leader, by the chair of the conference, by the ranking member of the conference to be accepted. this is language that must accompany the research dollars that are part of the chips-plus legislation that we are considering right now. when you add it all up, when you add up chips and the chips-plus language which includes research dollars to nsf, nih, department of energy and so on we're talking over $200 billion of taxpayer money. as part of this process, when we passed the underlying bill, usica here in the united states senate, we passed language that said we ought to protect that language, we ought to protect that research. it's like we're buying a really

expensive new car and if we don't protect it, it means we're not buying the insurance that goes with it, and the insurance is needed for a very simple reason. we know that for the past two decades that u.s. taxpayer-paid research, just like the research that we are about to both appropriate and authorize in this legislation, has been subject to being taken by our adversaries, particularly china. so that's why we need to protect it. and we worked painstakingly over the past four years on a bipartisan basis to come up with this legislation. again, it's been fully vetted. there was discussion a moment ago about the four corners. what does that mean? that means that the chair and ranking members of the committees of jurisdiction, the four corners, are asked to approve anything that goes into this legislation.

everything i'm going to talk about today is approved by the four corners. by the way, everything that's in the underlying legislation, some of the plus in the chips-plus act does not come through the four corners process. this has. and to my colleagues who say, well, if we put this amendment in, how about these other amendments? i've got five or six things in the usica bill i would love to have be part of this final agreement. i've got wonderful trade legislation that should be part of this. it's not. that's with senator brown, by the way. i've got wonderful legislation that deals with worker retraining that is absolutely related to competitiveness. that's with senator kaine that should absolutely be part of this final agreement. it's not. i get that because there are a lot of things that had to be left out when the conference did not succeed even though i, like others, worked very hard to get that conference to come to agreement. not just in my aries -- i'm the ranking member -- in my rears,

i'm the ranking member on the homeland security committee. but i said from the start we have to have this research security language in place if we're going to put out billions of dollars of taxpayer dollars in terms of research. otherwise it is irresponsible. so the amendment i'm offering today is a skinnied-down version of what passed in usica already. it's a skinnied-down version of what i was proposing because some people thought there were some concerns in the house actually among republicans, interestingly, about some of these aspects. we have just taken those out. we've made this totally noncontroversial, four corners, fits like a glove what we've been talking about, which is the new research dollars. that's what this is all about. it should not be surprising that there's a lot of bipartisan support for this. there has been from the start. why? everybody knows this is a grave threat to our national security

if we do not protect american research. the director of the fbi, christopher wray, warned the greatest long-term threat to our nation's information and intellectual property is to counterintelligence and economic espionage threat from china. it is a threat to our national security by extension. he countered china is the largest threat to our ideas, innovation and economic security. he noted the fbi has over 2,000 cases focused on china with a new case being opened approximately every 12 hours. this is reality. this is what's happening right now. after our bipartisan investigation, we had a hearing. the fbi showed up, and we saipped you know what -- we said you know what? we have learned in our investigation the shocking news that for two decades china has been systematically targeting the best american research and the best american research to be able to take that research,

leapfrog us, and it's help to create in china the rise of their military and their economic progress. by taking our research, taxpayer-paid. and the fbi testifying said you know what? you're right. we've kind of been asleep at the switch, and we're going to change that. and they have. and that's why you're seeing many, many arrests being made. but they said to us we need some legislation. we need a cause of action that actually fits what's going on here because there is not one now. we have to come up with other ways like mail fraud, tax evasion or other ways to bring people to justice. that's what this legislation does. we also heard from the state department, and this was career people at the state department, including now in the biden state department. they desperately want new authority to be able to avoid people coming into our country to steal our technology. they desperately want it. and that's part of this legislation today.

we found out that china uses these so-called talent recruitment programs. the most prominent one is the thousand talents plan to target science and technology sectors, just like the ones we are funding. just like the ones we are funding. they target academics, scientists, entrepreneurs, finance experts. the plans provide monetary benefits to lure experts into providing proprietary information in research to china in violation of laws and conflict of interest rules. the cases go on and on. china in turn exploits american research, intellectual property and open collaboration for their own benefit. again, often u.s.-taxpayer funded. in one of many cases a chemist was sentenced by a federal judge in tennessee after being convicted of conspiracy to commit trade secret theft, possession of stolen trade secrets, economic espionage and wire fraud. the chemist received china

government grants including a plan award to steal american innovation to fund the rise of china's economy. this is just one of the researchers we've been able to stop. think of how many slipped through the cracks since we have not yet implemented the grant and visa funds. the department of health and human services i.g. released a report that found more than two thirds of the national institutes of health grant requirements failed to meet requirements regarding national interests, including researchers failing to disclose ties to the chinese government. that's nih. we're funding nih through this. some of this money is going to go to nih and we're not providing the protection to keep this from happening. the skinnied-down version of the amendment today goes to the root of the problem. it's the minimum we have to do. first it makes it punishable by

law -- researchers should not be able to lie to grant making agencies about the money they receive. second, it allows the state department to deny visas to foreign workers coming to the united states to exploit the openness of our research enterprise. currently the state department can deny a visa to a foreign researcher they know who's coming here to steal export control technology, but what if that technology someone succombing to steal is not export controlled? how about artificial intelligence? how about quantum computing? if you can believe it, in that case the state department's hands are tied. this amendment gives the biden state department the authority they have sought from congress to deny visas to those seeking to come to the united states to expressly steal our emerging technology. sometimes they are members of the chinese communist party, sometimes they are members of the chinese military, and yet they cannot stop them. as we know, there are more provisions in the full safeguarding american innovation act.

again, after talking to my colleagues, i agreed to scale back the amendment. doing so will insure our research is protected and guarantees passage in the house. these provisions reached four corners greavment in conference, and include additional changes beyond that made at the request of everybody who had any objection, including the congressional asian pacific american caucus. we solved their issues. the skinny version of the securing american innovation act is a significant concession and i urge my colleagues to respect the fact that we spent years going through this and more recentlily hours to deal with everybody's issues to meet them more than halfway. i will remind many of my colleagues in this chamber, voted to begin consideration of the chips package last week because they believed that this language was in the bipartisan proposal. i know that because democrats and republicans alike have come up to me and said that.

i thought your language was in there, they say. why wouldn't we want to protect this research, they say. one reason they think it's in there is because all republican offices at least were told that it was in there. in fact, the e-mail sent right after the vote late on tuesday afternoon reiterated that these provisions were included, so the whip we sent out, the whip information what was in this legislation included safeguarding american innovation act. that's how we got the necessary republican votes. i support the underlying bill. and i have restrained myself and shown respect for the process by helping to get us to the point we are today. but my understanding was that people would work with me to ensure that we were able, if it was four corners, to be sure that, again, this insurance on this new car that we're buying would be there. it fits like a glove.

this is where the legislation must be included. if not, we find ourselves irresponsibly spending taxpayer dollars that are not protected. so we're going to invest about $250 billion of hardworking american taxpayer dollars in research and innovation. again, i support the underlying bill, but we've got to protect that intellectual property, that taxpayer-funded research being stolen by our competitors and used against us. without these protections i believe this legislative package with significant levels of federal funding is a giveaway to some of our adversaries, including beijing. not like there's any secret. china has made no secret of its goal to supplant the united states as the global economic leader and to do it by getting the best research and the best researchers. today we released a report on how china has also targeted the u.s. federal reserve in addition to our science and innovation.

economic policies are in china's crosshairs and this body cannot stand by idly allow it to continue. we must act and that includes at a minimum this skinny version of the safe guarding innovation act provisions. failure to do so will harm our national security and our economic strength in the face of an ascending china. so to my colleagues, please do not block this very simple request. we've done everything right. we've gone through the process. bipartisan investigation, bipartisan hearing, bipartisan legislation. four corners agreement. working with everybody to address their concerns. this is where this legislation must be. again, i have four or five other very important bills in usica that i'm not asking for today because they don't fit perfectly with this new research money. but this does. and it has to be there.

so i ask unanimous consent. that's all i need. with unanimous consent, the senate can do anything. to include what everybody says they want. everybody says is important. i ask unanimous consent that it be in order to call up my amend number 5158. i ask further that there be 30 minutes of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees. upon the use or yielding back of that time, the senate vote on adoption of my amendment with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? the senator from washington. ms. cantwell: reserving the right to object. i say to my colleague from ohio, i know how hard he and senator peters from the homeland security committee have worked on this language. i know because i consulted many times over the last month and a half wondering about its progress, wondering about various issues involving people on both sides of the aisle to

resolve what they were concerned about in definitions. and i, too, felt like the senator's hard work and language had gotten to a point where it could be included in a package of legislation. we were very, very hopeful that these various committees, the finance committee, the foreign affairs committee, the help committee, the health, education, labor committee, the intel's committee work and the work that we just discussed from the homeland committee could all be included in a conference report. so the words pins down did not come from my side of the aisle. the words pins down did not happen. for me i've been doing nothing but diligently working with all

my colleagues most of the time when they don't agree trying to get them to agree. and i very much appreciate the subject at the heart of what senator portman's work is. he is trying to say to us that we have to understand the reality of the word that we live in now and make sure that we are protecting all of our research dollars as we move forward. so again it wasn't my decision to decide the narrowness of this bill. it wasn't my decision to say these are the two subject areas that people are going to include. i know because i thanked the senator for his help in getting the science committee legislation included in this package, but you could see even that was a very tough lift that there were a lot of people around here who didn't want to do that. and so i say to my colleague

from ohio, i'm going to work with him in whatever capacity to get this language accepted. now, he's saying that he's streamlined this language from probably what four corners had agreed to. and i do know that the senator worked very hard trying to get a four-corner agreement from the science committee which we didn't have to include this language. and why? because there had been a big fight in the house between the science committee and their homeland committee about what this language said. and then you had the judiciary committee weighing in in both the house and the senate and what this language said. so since all those people had been part of that discussion, that part of the four corners did not happen. and so but my colleague is earnest and his work is real and the reports he is referring to in the homeland security

committee are real. and we should honor them and honor that work. so i'm committed to getting that legislation passed and will confer with the senator from ohio about where that goes, if it goes in the conference report, because i'm committed to finishing the conference report. because as i said, the finance committee, the foreign affairs committee, the help committee, the judiciary committee, and your homeland security committee, five committees, would still all like to have language as part of this conference report. so while we aren't able to cover every aspect of this jurisdiction, i'm very hopeful that our colleagues will take the impetus of this legislation passing and double down on getting the rest of the conference report done and signed and on to the president's desk. and then we will have a robust policy not just the incentives,

not just the r&d, but a variety of issues addressed as it relates to our competitiveness. and so i will continue to work with my colleague from ohio on this important language and all my colleagues on those various committees that have asserted tear interest -- asserted their interest on this subject, but at this time i object. the presiding officer: the objection is heard. a senator: mr. president.

in the next hour, the senate will vote finally, finally to move toward final passage of

chips and science bill. that's what we are calling it, chips and science bill that would put us in a position to finish the work on this bill before the end of the week, a major step for economic security, national security, supply chains and america's future. i want to be clear, the proposal we are passing this week contains majority of key science and innovation measures the senate passed last summer. it will make historic investments to scientific research and take direct aim at nations to prices alongside instructional law and gun safety bill among others, one of the most consequential bipartisan achievements of this congress. i think all of my senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle helping make this happen. i am confident future generations will look back on the passage of this chips and

science bill is a turn for american leadership 21st century but did come together overnight, legislation has been several years in the making. 2019 i approached my colleague, republican colleague todd young with a proposal to work together on legislation to revive america's commitment to science innovation. together we drafted the first of many policies we are passing this week, and this frontier act. i drink with my colleague, senator cornyn and warner to push for authorization of new chips initiative part of the nda to address our nation's growing chip shortage. we all knew but america faced a choice. we could keep underfunding science and innovation and continue to let america fall behind global competitors or wake up to the challenges of the century and empower the american people to unleash the next wave of discovery and scientific

achievement. we knew if we didn't get there first, rivals, the chinese communist party would likely beat us to the punch and reshape the world and their authoritarian image. in february of 2021 less than a month after i became majority leader, i directed the chairs and members of relevant committees to start drafting legislative package to outcompete china and create new american jobs with and this frontier act serving as the core of this effort. i also instructed them to draft legislation to rebuild a capacity of the united states semiconductor industry. the pandemic made clear with unforgiving clarity how america's chip shortage was creating a crisis in economic national security so on both sides of the aisle, it's a bipartisan effort from the

get-go. he made a commitment last february if both sides work together we bring a bill to the floor for a vote in the spring and that's what we did and we passed the u.s. innovation competition act with overwhelming bipartisan support in june of 2021. a year later legislation we are passing this week has many of the same important measures contained in the bill we worked on this summer. for example last year's bill secured historic investments for science and innovation. this bill does, too. last year's bill offer tens of billions to encourage chip manufacturing and r&d. this bill does that and even more with the investment tax credit. last year's bill provided funding to help build wireless communication supply chains to counter while way, this bill, does to pre-flashes bill created national science foundation directory and provided funding to the department of energy national labs to help competing

with technologies like a.i. and quantum computing. this bill does, too. flashes bill made major new investment in manufacturing usa and extension partnership to strengthen domestic supply chains. this bill does, too. last year's bill created the first-ever program to cultivate tech hubs of tomorrow in regions around the united states have enormous potential largely overlooked. not the big ones that have a lot of text like new york city and san francisco but smaller regions with great talent but overlooked. they might be upstate new york, indiana and many other parts of the country and this bill is making sure that happens. let me be clear while this bill contains the major components of

the science and chips bill, there are other major proposals from both sides still being worked on in the conference committee. make no mistake there many democrats and republicans who have provisions that will be contained in the conference report under chair cantwell's leadership and it's my intention to put the conference committee bill on the floor. as i said a moment ago i firmly believe passing this bill will be a turn for american leadership in the century. the benefits of this legislation will reverberate across the country for years and decades to come. for much of the 20th century, america was without. in our commitment to scientific research to innovation, manufacturing new cutting edge manufacturing and said to tens of millions of good paying jobs and made the u.s. unquestioned economic leader of the world. today the story is different. nations around the world are spending tens of billions of dollars to secure this century much like america secured last one. sadly the federal government's

commitment to science has waned in recent decades. as a percentage of gdp, we spent less than half as much as the chinese communist party, less than half which is even more devastating given china spent decades dealing with america's intellectual property. this bill, that is finally going to change. we will not only create good paying jobs of tomorrow, not only fix our supply chains and bring costs down for american families with this new, we will reawaken the spirit of discovery, innovation, invention and optimism that made america the envy of the world. we don't mean to let the days of american leadership and on our watch. we don't mean to see america become a middling nation in this century. we mean for america to lead this century. i urge my colleagues to give a resounding vote yes enclosure 11:00 p.m. today -- 11:00 a.m.

today. on the pack act. last night i felt closer to prepare the senate to once again pass the pack act, largest most important expansion of federal and healthcare benefits and decades and bipartisan issue to the core, another bipartisan issue. my colleagues already know because of a technical error house of representatives unable to take up our version of the bill we passed in the spring, the house has no fixed their error and return the pack act back to the senate. we want to finish our work on the pack act before the end of the week. our nation's veterans waited long enough to get the benefits they need to treat complications from toxic exposure in the line of duty. we have every reason in the world to get the bill done quickly with same bipartisan support since the first time around. the need for the pack act is

beyond question. burn pits have affected up to three and a half million veterans since 9/11. if the va rejected nearly 80% of all disability claims connected to burn pits. it's unacceptable and must change. i hope numbers work together to fast-track the bill as soon as possible because there's no reason to delay a measure the vast majority of senators in both parties agree is necessary in our veterans, their families and veterans service organizations have been urging us to finish work on this bill, let's keep our promise to valiant service members and send the act quickly to the president's desk. >> 3% of the american people are concerned about inflation. 42% say they are struggling financially. 63% say gas prices, inflation, bills or the economy are their biggest concerns. that is because one 100% of the

american people living in our country experience the worst inflation in more than 40 years. one 100% of the american people live in our country did not have to be this bad before democrats, deliberate policy choices. don't take it from me, listen to larry summers president clinton and nac director of president obama. this is what he said. it wouldn't have been nearly the same kind of supply chain problems if we weren't giving people who are laid off on employment insurance far more than the salaries they been earning if we weren't mailing checks willy-nilly, it would have been less spending, it

would mean less bottlenecks. he continued. disturbing money well ahead of the prescription for inflation, that's what we did. we ejected enough money into the economy to make spending grow 11.6% last year. when you have 11.6% growth rate in bending, on any reasonable theory of how much capacity there is, you are going to have a lot of inflation and that's what we did. he's intellectually honest to try to advise washington democrats not to dump nearly $2 trillion onto his economy but of course they didn't listen and not working for them is skyrocketing cost.

the worst inflation in 40 years you would think would be enough to convince them to stop running these experiments on american families but if you can believe it almost every house like to follow-up with historic inflation, massive new tax hikes. the same people in inflation all the way into recession. let's hold to see the insanity of this approach and continue to stand strong for our country. on a different matter disparately escalation russia's brutal law in ukraine, he could barely drive, secure and safe passage for ukrainian experts russian missiles hit the port city of odesa. ukraine produces one fifth of the world week, russia's blockade and destruction of

ukraine's crops left regions of the world literally on the verge of crisis vladimir putin managed to resist the urge to commit senseless violence for the past 24 hours. the fact that putin was even compelled to negotiate with the introduction of rockets and harpoon antiship missiles into ukraine's personnel. ukraine earlier the blockade could have been prevented in the first place. the biden administration says decision-making throughout the process has been deliberate and nuanced. history will likely judge otherwise. the month before his escalation clearly calls resolve to say nothing too often the administration's first instinct have been to apply the law

slowly. ukrainians fought bravely to stop russians advances despite being under manned and outdone. think what they could have accomplished if the west acted boldly to support ukraine as storm clouds were first gathering or when the storm broke but now no one should need a reminder of the impacts of the war in ukraine. our allies certainly don't, they been preparing to defend themselves literally for generations from the beginning of russia's defense, they've reached deep into their own inventory to help with them. elsewhere in europe allies have finally taken lesson about investing in insurance self-defense to heart. germany made historic commitments to increase military spending. the germans, swedes and others

have broken to share stockpile with ukraine and russia's war that other major european states to announce their strongest alliance in world history last week our colleagues on the foreign relations committee advanced necessary protocols to ratify sweden and finland to nato. nothing preventing democratic leader from calling measures up or immediate consideration and passed by the full senate legislation of other nato allies like canada, norway, poland, germany haveca already ratified. in -- a budget point of order and a motion is made to waive, at 4:55 p.m. today, the senate vote son a motion to waive the budget point of order. further, that if senator sanders raises a budget point of order and a motion to waive is made, that at 11:30 tomorrow,

wednesday, july 27, all postcloture time expire and any remaining amendments except sa5135 be withdrawn and the senate vote on the motion to waive the sanders' point of order and the motion to concur with respect to h.r. 4346 with an amendment. further, that the following the vote, the senate resume consideration of the message to accompany s. 3373, at pact act, notwithstanding rule 22 at 4:30 p.m., the senate vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur, all without further intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. scott: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. scott: mr. president, florida families hear a lot of talk up here in washington about inflation. right now inflation is raging over 9% across america. i was warned about the coming inflation crisis back in february of last year.

by now basically everyone in the senate, republicans and democrats alike, have joined immediate in talking about just how horrific this is for families in each of our states. in florida, inflation is costing families nearly $800 more every month. imagine being a family on a fixed income, having to pay double rent each month or adding a luxury car payment to monthly expenses. that's what families are dealing with since joe biden took office. it is a tax created by the sheer incompetence of joe biden. it hurts poor families like mine growing up the very most. we know what causes this inflation. it's reckless government spending. on this side of the political aisle we're not afraid to tell this truth but our democratic colleagues with the exception of one or two won't do it. you probably imagine in a 50-50 senate we'd still be able to hold the line and stop reckless

spending in its tracks. no, not in broken washington. here in washington, the only thing we seem to get bipartisan consensus on is digging america deeper and deeper into debt. it happens again and again. and with each dollar of debt and each new round of reckless spending, we del gasoline on the raging fire burning across america. it's about to happen again. this week the senate will very likely pass the so-called china bill, that spends $280 billion we don't have. we are not burning our savings here. we are borrowing $280 billion to do this. this is why the american people hate congress. they see politicians stand up in their neighborhoods and pledge to fight the waste in washington, then watch as those same politicians become the very problem they vow to fix. it's disgusting, it's happening

up here all the time. so let's talk about this bill we are set to vote on this week. democrats and some republicans will suggest it will help combat the threats we face from sabin. there is just -- from beijing. this bill doesn't help us fight communist china. as of last week this bill was 73 pages long. two days later senator schumer turned it into a $250 billion version. now it's more than 1,000 pages, $280 billion monster chock-full of reckless spending and bad policy that gives joe biden a wide open door. the bill ballooned in size and price because chuck is schumer inserted massive slush funds for the national science foundation, the same agency that wastes billions of dollars.

this bill doubles the national science foundation's budget over the next five years and gives millions to universities that already have a problem with spies from communist china stealing intellectual property and data. does the bill increase protections to stop this or better protect tax dollars? no. no wonder the debt is surging over $30 trillion and inflation is over 9%. washington is broken. it just can't stop wasting your money. so what else does this bill do? a huge part of it is is a massive giveaway to chip makers like intel. you know intel, the world's largest semiconductor maker that saw $20 billion from profit last year and paid its ceo $180 million. they're not exactly struggling these days, but politicians in washington want to give them billions of your money with no strings attached. there is no requirement to see a return on investment. there are no provisions to call back dollars if they don't do

what they're supposed to do. there's nothing for accountability. what's worse, these large chip makers lobbied hard to weaken the bill so they can keep doing business in communist china. and guess what? washington caved and they got exactly what they wanted. massive, multibillion-dollar corporations like intel will get americans' hard-earned tax dollars to build manufacturing plants, get tax write-offs for those plants, and get a tax credit. these chip makers are getting paid three ways with your tax money, and they will still be allowed to work in expanding communist china. there is nothing stopping them from moving funds around to increase their business in communist china or any other market, for that matter. there is no requirement for them to build a certain number of plants here in the united states. there are no quotas they need to hit so americans can be sure we never have to rely on risky supply chains. and even if communist china invades taiwan, which supplies nearly two-thirds of the world's semiconductors, the companies who get your tax dollars in this

bill will still be allowed to operate in communist china while receiving your money. this bill isn't anti-china. it's pro-china. it's going to cause more inflation, more debt, and create more deficits. there is absolutely no accountability. it doesn't make any sense. there's a heck. we can do -- there's a lot we can do to ensure chinese spies don't steal our technology. all things this bill purports to do but doesn't. for more than a year i've been fighting this bloated bill while at the same time introducing other legislation with my colleagues to economically decouple from communist china. strengthen our defense networks, and stand up to xi jinping's abuses. we want to solve problems, i want to solve problems. i'm open to good investments but they have to be done with accountability to the american people. that's why i introduced an amendment to this bill to ensure that no tax dollars in it go to benefit communist china. my amendment would do four things. first, my amendment will

eliminate all the exceptions or exemptions in the bill that allow semiconductor companies who take u.s. taxpayer dollars to expand and continue operations in china. money is fungible and we should make clear that these american tax dollars should only be benefiting americans. some have called this a national security investment. if that's true, we should make sure it builds up american security, not communist china's. second, my amendment will require the secretary of commerce to certify to congress that the department has completed a return on investment analysis of a proposed grant. that analysis must show the grant will be a net positive for taxpayers and prevent distribution of that grant until the secretary certifies the analysis and makes it public. in business and government, i've made countless deals, i never want to make an investing deal when i'm unsure whether i'm getting a return on my money. americans understand this. if we're going to be investing taxpayer dollars, we need to make smart investments that will get a real return. third, my amendment will

require companies receiving funds to disburse from the chips act to enter into a three part agreement with the commerce agreement specifying they will not engage in any transaction expanding chip manufactures in company. commit to immediately cease an all-operations in communist china if it invades taiwan. as i mentioned before, the bill in its current form does nothing to stop chip makers from expanding operations in communist china, expensingically allowing companies to keep working there. that is insane. we should not am low it. if people were to call this an anti-china bill, let's make it an anti-china bill and stop doing business in communist china. fourth, my amendment will ensure all u.s. tax dollars are called back if any company breaks that three-part agreement with the commerce secretary. and it requires the commerce secretary to ensure the company will repay the money if they

break the agreement. if you break a contract there are consequences. everyone knows this and it's crazy this bill doesn't already have those provisions in it. if we don't change this bill, a vote for this bill is a vote for higher inflation. it's a vote to help communist china and it's a vote to add already to our $30 trillion to the debt. my amendment isn't controversial. this is commonsense stuff. it will improve the bill and add the kinds of safeguards americans should expect from legislators handling their tax dollars. we are a phi fiduciary for the american taxpayer. the american public has come to expect dysfunction under democratic leadership. the democrats love to pretend they are fighting against corporate special interests. the families of each of our states deserve and expect better than what this delivers. our nation is in the midst of an

historic inflation crisis. it is destroying the dreams and hard-earned savings of families across our country. our answer is that this crisis cannot be to throw gasoline on the fire and walk away. we can do and must do more to combat threats posed by communist china. members of this body on both sides of the aisle have great ideas to do that but this bill isn't one of them. i urge mile colleagues to oppose this bill or join me in demanding my amendment be adopted. i also urge my colleagues not to turn a blind eye to the new debt this bill creates. as i said earlier, this bill borrows $280 billion we don't have. we have to stop this. that's why i'm raising a budget point of order. when we keep borrowing and spending money we don't have, it's terrible for our country and our families. a vote to waive my point of order is a vote to approve more debt which means more inflation. mr. president, the pending measure, senate amendment 5135 viets section 404a of section 13

of the 111th congress as amended by senate budget resolution 11 of the 114th congress because it will increase the short-term debt by more than $10 billion in one or more of the fiscal years that comprise the budget window. i raise a point of order against this measure pursuant to section 4o4a that fiscal year 2010 of the current resolution on the budget. ms. cantwell: mr. president, pursuant to section 404-b of the fiscal year 2010 budget resolution s. con res. of the 111th congress as amended by s. con res. 11 of the 114th congress i move to waive section 404 of s. con res. 13 for purposes of the pending measure and ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the yeas and nays are ordered.

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote: the presiding officer: on this vote the yeas are 63. the nays are 32. three-fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn have voted in the affirmative. the motion is agreed to. and the point of order fails.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. a senator: mr. president, i rise today to recognize the service, accomplishments and retirement of michigan native general joseph m. martin. mr. peters: joe will pass on the mantle of leadership after 36 years of service and completes his highly decorated career as the vice chief of staff of the united states army. joe is a proud son of michigan, born and raised in royal oak and dearborn, his family is deeply rooted in the area with strong ties to the ford motor company. joe's grandfather, leonard martin, worked there for 43 years. joe's father, leonard martin jr. worked there for 42 years.

it was from his father and grandfather that general martin learned the michigan values of honesty, hard work, and service to his community. and it is these values that general martin has carried with him throughout his 36 years in the united states army. as a child, joe attended henry ford elementary and w woodworth junior high. the family moved to the west side of dearborn where joe attended junior high and dearborn high before college. although joe's family has a tradition steeped in naval aviation, joe took a different path and chose to attend west point and join the army. general martin graduated from the united states military academy in 1986 and was commissioned as an armor officer. throughout the next 30 years,

general martin would serve and sup -- in support of america's most significant large-scale operations and fight in some of the army's most storied divisions. he'd deployed in support of operation desert storm, twice for operation iraqi freedom, and as the combined joint force land component commander for operation inherent resolve. among other assignments, joe served with the first armor division, the fourth infantry division, u.s. army tactical test command, and served as the commanding general of the national training center and the commander of the first infantry division. following his command of the big red one, general martin was appointed as the director of army staff and later confirmed as the vice chief of staff of the army. joe credits his success to his wife lee anne and the martins have two children, joey and

kylie. to general martin and to his family on behalf of al grateful nation, thank you for your incredible service and sacrifice over the last three and a half decades. we are glad to welcome you back to your home state of michigan as you begin your next chapter. a senator: mr. chair. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota. a senator: mr. chair, i rise today to address my colleagues on the topic of competition policy just as i did last week and i will continue to do until we take action. ms. klobuchar: now, i want to start out speaking briefly about one part of competition policy that's very important, and that has to do with prescription drugs. as we all know, brand name

prescription drugs in the u.s. are more than 250% of those in industrialized countries. in many cases americans pay the highest prices in the world for these drugs. yet it is our country, our taxpayers that's put in the money for the research. the high price of prescription drugs has put treatments out of reach for many americans, even those with insurance and driven up the tab for taxpayers. examples. one of my constituents, ramie was diagnosed in 2018 with an ircurable blood cancer, multiple myeloma. she relies on a drug called revelemen that costs about $15,000. she depleted her lifesaving, cashed out her 401(k) and couldn't afford her house in order to have these drugs.

the good news and this gets to competition, years and years ago, as you know, mr. president, the pharmaceutical industry installed in law a provision that said medicare was banned from negotiating less expensive prices for drugs. banned from negotiating. yet we know from the v.a. which is allowed to negotiate on behalf of our nation's patriotic veterans, that we can get much less expensive but as high quality drugs for our veterans. our 46 million seniors deserve the same kind of deal. that is what we are coming into in this next week. finally. and i have led the bill that has over 30 cosponsors in the senate to allow for negotiation of prescription drugs for a long, long time. finally, we're going to get this done. it's not growing to cover all the drugs, as i would, but it's

a big beginning. we have enough votes in the senate to pass a bill to fix that, democratic votes, all democratic votes. but it is a fight worth fighting. you see the pharma ads running against this bill. they've got every incentive to stop this. why? well, it's going to save taxpayers $288 billion over ten years. taxpayers that are going to be able to get that money instead of the prescription drug companies. that is why this is so important. it's going to allow medicare to finally negotiate price rs under medicare part d. in addition to take it will stop companies from price gouging drugs that are already on the market, stop price hikes, and make sure the price of your drugs doesn't increase more than the rate of inflation. mr. president, as i said, we have the votes in the senate, all democratic votes to make life easier for so many people. we stand with aarp.

we stand with the seniors of this country to finally allow medicare to negotiate less expensive drugs for our seniors. that's one part of competition policy. that means allowing negotiation. that's part of what competition is. but there's something else that we need to do. and last week i talked about what's happening with the tech companies. i talked about the fact that for years and years from the beginning of this nation's inception, our country has always believed in capitalism and in a free market, and we've always understood that you've got to have antitrust laws in place which i explained the history last week, antitrust laws at the time it got that name because it was about breaking up trust. trust, steel trusts, copper trust, trust that control the economy, brought up price, made it hard for individual, small

businesses to compete. and over time this senate, this chamber right here, the senators, they finally stopped just doing everything these trusts want. they stopped just giving in to the big money, and they actually did something to protect capitalism. that's when they passed the sherman act. senator sherman was a republican from ohio. they passed the clayton act. through history rose to the occasion. we are at another moment in history right now. and that is a moment focused on too much consolidation in our economy. what's at stake is the very idea that drives our economy forward. competitive markets. today too many areas of our economy are highly concentrated and controlled by a few corporations. these are the corporations of old. these are the trusts of old but we have our modern day ones as

well. so when this happens, you've got a lot of problems. and one of them is corporations stop competitors from moving ahead and from innovating and finding better ways to serve customers because they've got all the customers. so they don't have the incentive. we've seen consolidation in everything from cat food to caskets. our digital markets are now controlled by a few big tech titans that have grown into the largest corporations the world has ever known. it is well past time to put some rules of the road in place to make sure these dominant digital platforms work for consumers and air -- allow american small businesses to innovate and compete. that's why i've been working across the aisle with senator grassley and a bipartisan group of senators that samantha b once called an ocean's 11 of sponsors. including richard blumenthal, john kennedy, sint why lummis,

mark warner, josh mawly, steve daines, and sheldon whitehouse are all cosponsors of this bill but there are many other senators that are going to support it as well. it is why as chair of the subcommittee on competition, policy, antitrust and consumer rights i have held a series of hearings with senator lee about online markets and abuses of power by the largest digital platforms. senator lee and i have a number of other bills together on this subject. we have heard about how the small number of extraordinarily large digital platforms based on the 18 months of house hearings, 18 months of house hearings, still we have passed nothing in this congress, not one bill since the dawn of the internet involving internet competition and competition policy. what question have learned -- what we have learned is they act as gatekeepers that control how smaller companies reach their customers. as a result online marketplaces like the hallmarks of

competition, game-changing new products and customers switching back and forth among products. instead we have what started as exciting when everyone started accessing amazon, google, but the market is becoming increasingly calls identified. one -- calls identified. the gatekeepers have no fear of competitor threat. they feel no pressure where they put themselves at the top of the search results regardless of quality or price. that's what we've got right now. no rules in place. so when you look at amazon, you see all these amazon products at the top. you look at google when this all started out, they didn't have their own products. well now they do. google products at the top. apple products at the top. they can extract monopoly profits from consumers and the small businesses rely on them because there's really no other way to access their own market. if we don't act now, we will entrench those companies further making it even more difficult for innovators to bring new

products to market and for small and medium size companies across america to grow online. let me be clear. we have monopoly problems that go far beyond digital giants like facebook and google. and there is more that we need to do to restore competition to markets throughout the economy. we have a big task in front of us to rein in unchecked power and bring the benefits of consumer competition to all. last tuesday i talked about the cost of inaction, how other countries are attacking this way before us how the european parliament has just passed a major bill that's much more aggressive than anything we're looking at here. great britain, what they're doing. australia, what they've just done. many examples throughout history, of course, where congress stepped in, didn't bow to the bloated monopolies but actually did something to further competition and rejuvenate the competitive

market. when i talk about the dominant digital platforms, i'm talking about some of the most powerful companies in the world with armies of lobbyists and lawyers. thousands of lawyers and lobbyists. they're everywhere, in every corner of this town at every cocktail party. i tell my colleagues they don't even know when someone is trying to influence them. once they start talking about antitrust and big tech, i tell them they should at least ask the person if they're being paid by the tech company or if they're on one of the boards of one of the groups that support the tech companies because time appeared time again, they've been surprised to hear the answer is yes. the tech companies aren't just lobbying my colleagues, they're also lobbying the american people with astroturf campaigning and dishonest p.r. tactics. at the same time that i've been working with my colleagues in good faith, on common sense

solutions to our online competition problems, these companies have been telling anyone who will listen that acting to protect competition in our digital markets will somehow cede our national security or outlaw amazon prime, something senator grassley and i came to the floor of the senate because it was such a lie. together we noted that their own lobbyists had said that it wasn't true, that their own lobbyists for google had said, yeah, this bill wouldn't really get rid of amazon prime but that's what they're running ads for. then of course there is the money. i think this is actually the best evidence of just how big and dominant and grueling these companies are, running ads in states where people are in tough races. that's what they're doing. how obvious can it be? message received. we're out here. we can hurt you. we may not be putting your name in these ads right now, but we

can do it because we've got the money to do it because we are the dominant monopolies. and, by the way, they wouldn't be spending millions and millions and millions of dollars to stop us if we didn't have some momentum. and let me give you some numbers. in 2021, big tech companies spent more than $70 million combined lobbying congress. in the first quarter of this year, facebook, now known as meta, amazon,ful bet, which is google, and apple spent more than $16 million in congress. in just one week in may, one industry group, the computer and communications industry association, spent $22 million in one week on tv ads against this bill. that's $22 million against one bill in one week. and the numbers keep getting worse. since i last took to the floor to discuss this issue, it was reported that amazon reached an all-time high in lobbying spending in the last quarter and

that's only when the company spent directly. it doesn't include what big tech directed others to spend, using contributions to spread misinformation about the bill. so that's what we're up against. and there's me and there's this poster. there's our lawyer, one lawyer, kagan, we have another lawyer, avery. we have a third person. that's us. that's our team. and of course senator grassley and the other senators involved in this have great attorneys. we have the endorsement of the justice department. that's a we will lot of lawyers. we have support from secretary raimondo over in commerce and their team in doing it this bill because they get that this is about competition moving forward. i'd like to share two examples of the misinformation campaign against this bill. just a few months ago, you may have read a letter from people outside of the senate

criticizing the bipartisan bill that senator grassley and i have worked on. it was signed on by a little-known group -- actually not that little-known if you watch tv because it is in the disclaimers on the ads -- called american edge. here's what "the washington post" wrote about them, backed by meta, american edge has launched a full-throated campaign to combat antitrust legislation in washington shall placing op-eds in regional papers throughout the country, commissioning studies and collaborating with the surprising array of partners, including minority businesses associations, conservative think tanks and former national security officials. this is "the washington post" talking. it is a political playbook more common to other industries, including pharmaceuticals and tobacco. this is the playbook we have seen time and time again. distort the truth, distract people from the key issues by raising sideline potential concerns that aren't even in had the bill's scope. look over here. not at the real problems we face

with real solutions to address them. amazon tried something similar, but they didn't get away with it because small business owners are too savvy to fall for shrill tricks. as cnbc wrote in an article last month, amazon is so worried that congress will finally do something not to get rid of amazon, not to stop amazon prime, but to simply say, when you do your searches on amazon, at least you should have a fair shake attest going whatever -- at getting whatever are the most affordable or best products at the top and not just what amazon wants you to see because that's what they own. they placed a senior executive in charge we now know to recruit third-party sellers to oppose the bill, the small businesses. the amazon executive posted to a forum used by sellers and directed them to a website that includes a form to contact their senators with their pre-written e-mail opposing the legislation.

but, get this -- they weren't fooled. these sellers knew the power that amazon has to affect their businesses. they're monopolies, right? according to the cnbc report, hundreds of sellers replied to the post and actually expressed their support for the legislation. i'm not sure this would have happened ten years ago, honestly. but now they realize what the game is, what the rig is, what's really happening. here are some examples of what the small businesses posted. any inform -- this is after a request from the amazon executive to the write letters to people like me and the presiding officer opposing the bill. here's what someone wrote. any informed seller is going to support massive action taken against amazon in the antitrust arena. i am personally sick of the condid he sending posts directed to us. we are not morons and know how to read and think for hour he -- for ourselves s yes, i am going to oppose thattate ma does on

will be prohibited from undercutting manipulative buybacks and instituting restrictions on certain listings that unfairly bar me from he will something an item. yep, writing to my senator right now. we'll call this a sarcastic post. others got straight to the point. thanks for the reminder. i've asked my senators to support the bill. another wrote, if amazon is against the bill it must be good. and my favorite -- i'm highly allergic to corporate propaganda and fearmongering. therefore, for the sake of my health, i will be encouraging my senators to fully support this legislation. i think these are pretty good examples of how resilient and clever our american small businesses actually are. since i'm a. senator and not a tech-based industry group, i don't get to spread my message with a multimillion-dollar ad campaign. but big-tech lobbyists can't stop me from telling it you the

truth. people who are watching at home, there are actually no other senators out here right now except the presiding officer, we cannot let these companies use their monopoly profits to scare the congress from doing its job. some have said that this is the biggest political fight that big tech has ever fought and the truth is that they are not fighting on terms that anyone would think are fair. they are not fighting with truthful representations or factually grounded arguments. they are spending millions and millions of dollars on ads that distort the truth because they're scared. they're scared what's going to happen if we honest, robust, american-style competition. it is better to buy than compete. it's better to buy than compete. you know who said those words? that's what mark zuckerberg wrote in a 2008 e-mail around the time of the instagram and whatsapp acquisitions. facing competition, facebook decided to take them out, to stop them from innovating in

ways that might win over users. who knows what facebook might have developed with their bells and whistles if they had been able to fairly compete? when the ftc sued facebook -- and by the way, that was under the trump administration and it now continued on through the biden administration -- it wrote on page one of its antitrust complaint, facebook has maintained its monopoly position by buying up companies that present competitive threats and by imposing restrictive policies that unjustifiably hinder actual or potential rivals that facebook does not or cannot acquire. as another facebook employee wrote, quoted in the ftc's complaint, we're scared that we can't compete on our own merits. and last week we have new evidence showing the same from other companies, from documents that were obtained by chairman david cicilline and ranking member ken buck over in the house during their bipartisan

investigation into big tech. one of the documents quotes an amazon executive discussing the potential threat from ring, a video doorbell company it later bought for a billion dollars. the executive said, i am a supportive of ring. i don't know how we can get big fast without acquiring someone. and in the amendment is e-mail chain from another amazon executive, there's a lot of overlap with what we do. and very little that we don't want to do. in black and white, they wanted to enter the market but they couldn't innovate fast enough so they just bought up the competition. that's what they've been doing. the dominant platforms will stop at nothing to protect their profits, even if it means stifling the innovation and ingenuity that has made our nation's economy second to none. we see the campaign to try to torpedo this bill for what it is. an obvious effort to protect power and monopoly profits. adam smith, godfather of

capitalism, the guy who talked about the invisible hand, he loved capitalism but he always said this -- always watch out for the standing army of monopoly lifts. that is why -- monopolists. that is why over time we have developed law that allows you to ensure that the big guys don't always control the marketplace so you can have new forms of competition develop. i want to be clear on this point. these are highly successful companies that have given us incredible innovation. i don't want these companies and the beneficial products and services they offer to go away. they won't go away with this bill. but what we will do is make sure they are creating the conditions in their dominant platforms -- because that's what we're dealing with, four different ones -- for the next new thing to be developed and thrive. that is why we have antitrust laws. as senator sherman famous licited, if we will not endure king as a political power, we should not endure a king over

the production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life. let me speak specifically about antitrust and innovation. there is a persistent myth out there that antitrust law is about prices and nothing else. that's not true. although prices are an extraordinarily important component of competition policy and analysis. and you're seeing more and more small businesses so concerned about what's going on, and big businesses, because these platforms are charging them more and more and more just for the pleasure of being on the platform or getting their name up at the top. but it isn't all about pricing. it's also about innovation. through competition and innovation, there are new products, services, apps, ideas that are hard to fathom that will be developed by small business and clever americans and thoughtful marketsment innovation generates new opportunities and hopes for

businesses. breakthroughs in science and technology have given us the vaccines that are getting us through this pandemic and driving the development of clean energy solutions. emerging technologies like artificial intelligence are driving innovation across our country. appeared look at the the presiding officer from the great state of michigan, knows a little bit about innovation there with what we've seen, when everyone was writing off the american car companies, they innovate and moved ahead. some of our largest companies began as start-ups. some of these companies are starting to see, wait a minute, these four big tech companies can buy anything they want. they can put their stuff at the top and this is where customers go and buy things. we just need an even playing field in the marketplace. innovation that is vital to our american economy cannot thrive without open, competitive markets. it's competition that pressures

manufacturers to invest in research and development, to constantly innovate to improve their products and introduce new products. it is competition that provides opportunities for entrepreneurs to develop new ideas and start new businesses. this topic is so important that i held a hearing with senator lee last december on innovation. in his opening remarks, senator lee shared his thoughts about this important topic, noting that when competition suffers, so does innovation. one might say that competition is itself the mother of innovation. competition really can't occur without a lot of innovation. as one of our witnesses at the hearing, dr. diana moss, president of the american antitrust institute, testified, dominant firms face fewer economic incentives to innovate. it is one thing to create new products that can win other customers from a rival. it is another to create new products that might undermine your existing business. when you've got all the

businesses, all apple phones, one kind of app, all other phones, another kind of app, google. that's right a duopoly. there you go. they can do what they want. that's why they're charging 30% to spotify just for the pleasure of competing against apple music. that's what's happening. the path to future innovations through the crucible of competition. what makes companies innovate is not just the desire to please their customers, but also the healthy fear others might please them instead. and win customers in the competitive landscape. if the largest digital gatekeepers do not face any meaningful competition, they will continue to extract monopoly profits from customers and the small businesses that depend on them to reach their customers. if the largest digital gate keep evers have the -- gatekeepers have the power to avoid competition, we should expect they will not innovate at the

same pace as with stiff competition. to my colleagues, i say, yes, you can love the products, you can love the ceo's if you want, you can love the companies, but you also have to love competition and understand the unique place of the united states senate to take on what has happened time and time again in history, the bloated monopolies that sometimes come up. you don't get rid of steel or copper. of course we didn't. we created a more competitive marketplace. that former chairman of at&t said himself after the breakup of at&t, when he saw long distance rates go down through democratic and republican leadership, when he saw the cell phone industry, which had been nothing, cell phones were the weight of bricks, this big in your briefcase, we saw all of that change, and he actually said we are a stronger company because of what happened. here are our facts today. here is our new bloated situations. google, pretend that's now

google, has a 90% market share in search engines. in australia, web the australian government was taking them on, saying you got to charge a fair rate for media links, google and facebook, by the way, said we're going to leave your country. we're going to leave an industrialized nation. there was so much pressure on the world, they backed down a negotiated rate. 90% market share. that's what you get to do. great product, okay. if we're going to tolerate that, i guess the justice department will look at it. our bill doesn't break them up. it says when we've got a90% gate have rules of the road. together, apple and google have a duopoly on app distributions on all smartphones. three out of every four social media users, there are four billion of them, are active facebook users. amazon is expected to seize half of the entire e-commerce

realtime market this year. what do they do with that power? well, as "the new york times" reported a few years ago, back in 2018, if you open up the app store on an isk phone in may of -- on iphone in may 2018, type in podcast, the first result is apple. the next is apple's compass app, then their find my friends app. amazon does the same thing. as propublica reported, we looked at 2 250 frequently purchased products over several weeks to see which were the most prominent on amazon's virtual shelf, the is buy box that pops up first. what pops up first? about three-quarters of the time, amazon placed its own products and those of companies that pay for its services in that position, even when there

were substantially cheaper offers available from others. this obviously put small businesses in a bind. the need for action is clear. all they have to do is treat people fairly, have a reason to put people up at the first, it treats the people advertising on their sites fairly. the way our bill works, they do that, they stay out of trouble. they don't do it, justice department, ftc, state a.g. can look at doing something about it. they're not going to bring a wig case over -- a big case over one mistake. we're talking about a consistent effort here, which is exactly what they've been doing to make more money by putting their stuff at the top. since the founding of this country people across the country and across the political spectrum have recognized and taken on the issue of monopoly power. that's why we have worked across the aisle, senator grassily and myself, to -- senator grassley and myself, to build bipartisan support for this bill. the bipartisan solution to the problem of anticompetitive

self-preferencing by dominant digital gatekeepers. that's how we found the common ground and ken buck, a conservative republican out of colorado, found common ground with representative cicilline, a liberal, progressive congressman from rhode island. our bill creates a rules-of-the-road for these platforms so they can't abuse their gatekeeper power by favoring their own products or services and disadvantaging rivals in ways that harm competition. in other words, examples, amazon won't be able to misuse small-business data to copir their products. best example, "wall street journal" reporting, four-person luggage company out of brooklyn, new york, giving them the data to advertise, bam, few months later, amazon has the identical product in amazon basics. apple won't be able to stifle competition by blocking other companies' services by interoperating with their platforms.

goog won't be able to bias -- google won't be able to bias platforms without merit. these platforms will no longer be able to but the their products and services automatically first. that's what we're talking about, amazon should rank products based on price and quality, not their own profit margins. those new house judiciary documents, there's one from a google executive that illustrates this point. it's an e-mail about amazon, saying amazon has a built-in incentive to partner with alexia, since they will pull you from their store if you don't support it. again, amazingly honest statement of the situation where random self-preferencing is allowed. a product might be great for consumers, if it doesn't partner with alexia, forget it. they'll pull it from the store to solidify their emerging power in voice assistance. the world's largest and most powerful platform shunned be allowed to copy small -- shouldn't be allowed to copy

small businesses' data to create knockoff products. third, while platforms shouldn't require companies, especially small companies, to buy a bunch of stuff from the monopolies, like ads or distribution services, in order to be listed at the top. these can offer those services, they can sell those services, but the only way you get to the top, when our pages here looking on the best deal for a fan, this they don't have air-conditioning, it was really hat in washington, d.c. -- really hot in washington, d.c., the well, the best products or least expensive should come up, not just something that amazon basics can make money off of. that's what the bill does. it's not a breakup bill. it's not a ban on mergers. but it will put commonsense rules of the road in place. if we can get these reforms in place, we will ensure a fairer, more competitive marketplace for small and medium businesses.

this bill gives them more options. more flexibility, and more access to the markets. just today, the national nationl federation of independent businesses wrote to senator grassley and me to say that 84% of their members support congress taking action. that's the kind of numbers i like to see around here, 84%. to control unfair and anticompetitive practices of large tech companies. that is why they are formally endorsing the bill, writing, most small businesses have no choice but to rely in some capacity on these large technology companies for a variety of business needs, ranging from driving business traffic through search to online advertising to accessing key digital marketplaces. for small business sellers using marketplace platforms, competition between the operators' own products and third-party sellers create conflicts of interest that has been shown to lead to unfair business practices.

by the way, it's not just small business. a whole bunch of business businesses support it too, only because they are not going to compete against the big titans. a lot of them don't want to say it out loud because they don't want to be punished of though call us to tell us. that's what you deal with with monopolies. you don't out people who don't want it out there, but there are a bunch of businesses that support this bill, in addition to a bunch of working people, in addition to my colleagues from all sides of the political spectrum. what did the justice department say? they say vesting the power to pick winners and losers in a small number of corporations contravenes the foundations of our capitalist system and given the importance of these markets the power of such platforms is likely to continue to grow, which is what we're seeing with the small business rebellion. this puts at risk the nation's economic prosperity, ultimately

threatening the economics that undermine our democracy. justice department, consumer federation of america, we need to incentivize more competition and more innovation. group of legal scholars, it is an appropriate thing for congress to inma tain the -- to maintain the vibrancy of the online economy. monopoly power, consumer choice, reduced innovation don't come up for the first time when we marked up and passed the bill. we got it out of committee 16-6. first time since the advent of the internet in a highly polarized at times senate judiciary committee, for anyone that watched the supreme court hearings. we got that bill out 16- . first bill to advance to the -- 16-6. first bill to advance to the floor, competition bill, since the advent of the internet. we cannot do nothing while they gobble up more businesses,

bigger slices of the economy. i guess we can turn into this situation. but even these senators way back, theys were all in here what i see right now, but they were all here, and they actually got something done. this is our moment right now. i urge my colleagues to bring this bill to the floor. i've gotten a commitment to get a vote on this bill. we've got to get this bill on a vote. i appreciate senator grassley's patience and bipartisan support, but we know that we are up against a lot. if they think i'll get scared by that, think again. i'm ready to roll. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania.

mr. toomey: thank you, mr. president. i rise because i want to express concerns that i have about a particular provision in the pact act, and it is my understanding the senate is considering this later this week. we could be voting on cloture as early as tomorrow afternoon. my concerns with the provision of the bill as drafted are, well, i and many of my colleagues share this concern, we want to ensure that the pact act is not used as a vehicle to dramatically increase spending outside of the objective of the bill, which is to cover specific health care and benefits for veterans. as it is written, as we are currently considering it, the pact act includes a budget gimmick designed to do exactly that. this gimmick was not in the house bill, but some senators

found it necessary to add this. this gimmick is not necessarily to achieve the underlying purpose of the legislation. the purpose of the legislation is to expand v.a. health care benefits and certain other benefits for veterans. i have a very simple proposed fix for this problem that will not reduce veteran benefits by a single dollar. it would allow the bill to fully achieve its original intent. to explain this a little bit, mr. president, i've got to explain a little about how the federal government spends money around here. as you know, mr. president, we have two big categories of federal spending. we have what we call discretionary spending, and that is the spending that is appropriated annually by congress. that spending is limited every year. there's a cap on how much can be spent in that category. that's the first category. the second category of federal

spending we call mandatory spending. this is different from discretionary spending in the sense it's kind of automatic spending. it occurs not by appropriation. it's driven by eligibility for various programs. people are eligible, so they get the payment, and it does not depend on a congressional appropriation. those are the two big categories. spending. now, the pact act, as i said, it addresses veterans health care. as we all know, current law already obligates the v.a. to spend a great deal of money on veterans health care and benefits, as it should. in particular, there's about $400 billion over the next ten years that the v.a. will spend on veterans toxic exposure care and benefits, about $400 billion. that's existing law. that's going to happen no matter what we do with this bill. that $400 billion has always

been categorized in the discretionary spending category of federal spending. therefore, it's subject to caps, limits. what the pact act does is it expands its obligation on the part of the v.a. and expands it a lot by about $280 billion over the next ten years. it takes all of that that new spending, the $280 billion the v.a. will spend under the pact act and puts it under the mandatory spending category. we can argue whether or not that was a good idea but that's not my issue on the floor this evening, mr. president. i have no quarrels with the $280 billion being in the mandatory category. that's not the issue at hand. here's the problem with this bill. here's the budgetary gimmick. this is what is outrageous.

the bill takes the $400 billion that i mentioned earlier, the $400 billion that is obligated to be spent by the veterans administration by legislation passed many years ago, money that's going to be spent, it enables that spending to be shifted from the discretionary category to the mandatory category of spending. you could say, well, so what? the government is still going to spend the money either way. that's true. it's going to go for the same purpose, to the same people who need it. that's all true. so why does it matter? why did the senate authors of this bill, unlike the house, why did they decide it's necessary to take this big category of spending that's already in existing law and move it from the discretionary spending category to the mandatory category? here's the reason.

as i said earlier, there are caps on how much discretionary spending can occur in any given year. by moving this big category of spending, this $400 billion out of the discretionary category and putting it into mandatory, you create this big hole under the cap. that's what's going on here. when you create that big hole, guess what happens with that big hole? it gets filled with spending on who knows what. that's what's going on here. this is unbelievable. again, i want to stress, my quarrel here is not with the underlying purpose of the bill or the substance. and sure, we could talk about ways it could be approved but that's not what this is about. it's about a budget gimmick that's designed to allow hundreds of billions of dollars in additional unrelated

spending, having nothing to do with veterans -- could be anything -- it's this big, gaping whole that some folks around here created by design in our discretionary spending category. you know what it really comes down to? it's about congress hiding behind an important veterans care bill, a massive, unrelated spending binge. that's what this amounts to. that would be objectionable at any time under any circumstances, as far as i'm concerned. but it's unbelievable that this provision is snuck into this bill at a time like this. what i'm referring to is the obvious fact that our entire economy, american families, virtually all of them are being racked by out-of-control inflation. inflation is at a 40-year high. 40 years. roughly half of all americans

have never been alive with inflation this high. and there's no avoiding it. it's at the gas pump, it's at the grocery store, it's at the rent. it's everywhere. had you do this inflation -- how did this inflation come about? a big part of it comes from too much government spending and lax, easy monetary policies. that's always a dangerous combination and it gave us this out-of-control inflation. well, this gimmick is going to make it worse. it's going to add $400 billion over ten years in totally unrelated, unnecessary spending. again, we're not talking about veterans health care. that is not what i'm here to talk about. we're talking about the other $400 billion. we haven't seen exactly what that's going to consist of. who knows? but you can be sure that a big hole under the spending caps is not going to be left as a big

hole. this is terrible policy. i've got a suggestion, here's all we need to do. we leave the $280 billion, the new spending for veterans health care that the bill contemplates, leave that in mandatory spending. that's fine. but we simply would modify the bill to keep the $400 billion that we're going to spend anyway in the category where it's always been -- the discretionary spending category. this doesn't cut a dime in veteran spending, but it would avoid creating this huge hole for all kinds of new and unrelated spending. again, i stress one more time for the people who might choose to listen. this doesn't reduce spending on veterans health care or benefits of any kind by a single penny, and the change that i'm looking for would not in any way impede the ability of veterans to get the health care that they're going to get under this bill as a result of toxic exposure.

it's not about any of that. it's only about preventing this excessive, unrelated spending, and we don't even know yet what categories, which was inserted in this bill. so, mr. president, i think this is a simple fix. unfortunately it appears we're still not in the business of contemplating amendments in this chamber. we were promised there would be amendments at the beginning of this process. amendments have always historically been a fundamental way that we litigate our differences and iterate our way to solutions, but we're not allowed to do this. i've not been allowed to offer an amendment. nobody has. so i intend to vote against cloture, which as you know, mr. president, is the procedural vote that ends debate and ends the amendments and allows the body to get on to final passage. i'm not going to vote for cloture because we haven't had this debate yet. we haven't had this vote on this

outrageous budget gimmick that has nothing to do with the underlying purpose of the bill. so i'm going to urge my colleagues to join me in voting against cloture. and what will happen if we deny cloture? what if we succeed and the chamber, the body is unable to achieve cloture? well, then i think i know what will happen. our democratic colleagues would work with us to fix the gimmick. that's what would happen. and then the bill would move forward with all the same benefits for veterans that it has, that it's always had as a bill, and we would do this without introducing this massive, unrelated spending binge. why am i confident that that's what the outcome would be? because i think our democratic colleagues are very unlikely to forego passing a really important veterans health bill for the sake of their unrelated spending blitz. i think, as much as they want to go on that spending bill, they would take a pass on that if that's what they have to do to get this veterans bill done. so that's how this would end,

and that is why, mr. president, once again i urge my colleagues, join me in a simple fix for a terrible budget gimmick and let's do this quickly. and if we're not allowed to do this any other way, then let's deny cloture tomorrow on the cloture vote and then we'll be able to fix it promptly thereafter. i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. as the presiding officer knows, the united states of america has long been at the vanguard of

global scientific and technological innovation, and that leadership has helped power our economy and strengthen our leadership position in the world. that competitive edge is now at risk. it's at risk because we failed to renew our national commitment to one of the key tools that has brought us that success in the past -- making robust federal investments in scientific research and development. the bill before the senate called the chips and science act of 2022, aims to stop this downward drift and propel us forward again in the area of discovery, in areas of innovation and manufacturing. it honors a long, long tradition of american excellence in research and invention. if you look back over our history, america has always been on the leading edge of

science, of technology, of engineering, and mathematics. that spirit has been with us since our founding, but it truly flourished in the decades following the second world war. with new inventions springing from american minds every year and moving us forward at an accelerating pace. american astronauts took humanity to the moon for the first time. american computer scientists invented the internet and changed the world. in fact, it was during this explosion of discovery that an american engineer created the first integrated circuit in 1958. and that invention would pave the way for the microchips we use today and which are a big part of the legislation before us. in the 20th century, the united states was the innovation capital of the world. in 1960, america generated 69%

of all research and development on the entire planet. this golden age flowed from the ingenuity of american visionaries and it was fueled by our system of free enterprise and private investment. but, mr. president, we cannot ignore another key ingredient in the success of that period, and that is the very large investment in cutting-edge research and development made by the federal government on behalf of the american people. federal funds accounted for two-thirds of all american research and development investment in 1968. two-thirds from the federal government. in fact, all three of the american-made inventions and innovations i just mentioned, from building the rocket and the systems to land a man on the moon and return him safely to

earth, to inventing the internet, to creating that first microchip, those were fueled in large part by federal government investment. taxpayer investment to strengthen the entire country. for example, if you look at the history of the microchip, you'll see that between 1987 and 1997, that decade, the r&d arm of the department of defense, what we call darpa, dispensed $870 million in federal funding to 14 chip manufacturers across the country, which in turn made the american chip industry more competitive than ever. mr. president, that was then. today we see a changing story. we are still a leader in innovation, but we are at risk of falling behind and falling behind quickly. and in doing so, we are seeding

ground to our global competitors and adversaries. this is a time where standing still means going backwards and going backwards fast. the united states' share of global research and development has dropped by half, by a full 50% in the last six decades, and the most recent figures available reveal that the federal investment in r&d as a share of our gross national product has dropped by one-third over the last 40 years. while we have been slipping, other countries are dramatically boosting their investments in these critical areas, fueling huge resources toward innovation. china's most recent five-year plan calls for ramping up investments in research and development by more than 7% every year. china has made no secret of its desire to corner the market, in

a.i., in quantum computing, in clean energy tech, and much more. and the chinese communist party is putting resources where their plan is, mobilizing investments needed to try to achieve that goal. and, mr. president, this is not only an issue of falling behind in the areas of innovation and discovery. because even if americans are inventing new technologies, the benefit to the american worker of leading in the invention of new technologies is much diminished if the manufacturing of essential products that use those technologies simply goes offshore. we spend a lot of time inventing new technologies here, but over the last many decades we've seep the offshoring of those technologies and the manufacturing of products with those technologies to other parts of the world at the expense of the american worker. we've seen that dramatic offshoring of jobs for decades,

including in many areas that are critical to the success of our entire economy and to the needs of our national security. an american may have invented the microchip, but today we produce only 12% of the world's microchips. and that's at a time when these chips are absolutely essential to almost every aspect of modern life, from running our washing machines to powering our military. at the same time competitors like china are pairing their rising r&d investments with major funding in manufacturing, putting the money in for invention and putting the money in to make sure those inventions stay and are manufactured in china. china has put $150 billion toward manufacturing microchips over the last eight years, and

today 19 of the world's of the fastest growing microchip firms are in china. you can see this is a challenge for america's competitiveness, our economic strength and for national security. the technology we need today for our cars, homes, our businesses and our military is in large part produced overseas. we've already fallen way behind in the manufacturing of strategically important technologies and now we're also at risk of losing our edge in developing the critical technologies of the future. this has got to change. in the face of these challenges, we have to ask ourselves two fundamental questions. one, how can we ensure that we continue to invent the key technologies of the future? and, second, how can we make and manufacture key products using

those technologies right here in america? that's why it's time for us to take a page out of our own history and reignite a golden age in american research, development, and manufacturing through robust federal investments. and the bill before the senate begins to take us down that road. first and foremost, it includes $53 billion to supercharge microchip manufacturing in america. that will bolster our economic security and our national security. for american families, more american-made microchips means we'll be able to ease some of the strain on our supply chains that are leading to increased wait times for everything from cars to smartphones to dishwashers, and in the long term boosting our domestic production of chips will help

spur homegrown manufacturing jobs and lower the prices of a wide range of goods and services. more american-made chips also mean we'll be less reliant on foreign manufacturers to meet our military needs. today, 90% of the high-end microchips, the most sophisticated microchips, are made in taiwan. these are advanced chips on the market that power everything from consumer electronics to sophisticated military software and hardware. these microchips are in our jets, they're in our radar systems, and much more. so, mr. president, with this additional funding, america will have increased capacity to produce these high-end microchips right here at home so we are not relying on foreign countries to power the things our communities and our country relies on every day. but while supporting the

manufacturing of chips here at home is important, it is not enough to keep us competitive on other key fronts. as i said earlier, we need america to get back on the leading edge of research and development in a whole range of areas on technology's frontier. now is the time for us to boost innovation and to sharpen our edges across every technological front, from quantum computing, to article official intelligence to so much more, and that's why this legislation calls for significant new investments in major scientific institutions. it would authorize $36 billion to the signs foundation. and an increase of $12.9 billion for the department of energies science office.

these increases represent roughly a doubling of federal resources dedicated to these important agencies and $11 billion to the department of commerce to develop regional technology hubs around the country so every part of the united states and communities in every corner of country can benefit from these investments. these are major increases. these are authorized increases, these parts with respect to future technologies as opposed to the chips portion of bill. so, mr. president, number one, we need to make sure these funds are actually appropriated. second, we need to ensure that these funds are deployed in the most strategic and effective way. that's why our bill includes a bipartisan provision that i authored with senate blunt, of missouri, to ensure the united states has the tools it needs to monitor and address new

frontiers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. this portion of the bill includes two elements. first, it directs the national academies of sciences to identify the critical emerging technologies before us. and, second, it directs the national academies to assess how well the united states is meeting those science and technology challenges through our global leadership and through the investments we're making here at home. i think we all recognize that we can't determine the path that we should chart as a country without getting a good look at the terrain and the horizon and even try to peer over the horizon. and charting that course is only helpful if we monitor our progress along the way to see if we're meeting our goals. that's about developing a national early warning system for technologies in which our

country's best minds are focused on the technologies of the future so that we don't get caught flat-footed in the face of emerging opportunities. mr. president, we've seen in the case of 5g technology what can happen when we're not tracking the possibilities and we get blind sided -- blindsided. the reality is china beat us in the transition from 4g to 5g, it is not because we lacked the skills, resources or drive to win the 5g race of we failed to build a comprehensive system for 5g deployment fast enough because we did not have a national strategy. we had blind spots, the market didn't fill them. it requires a national plan of action. that provision in the legislation will address that shortcoming. and as we revitalize innovation

here at home, we've got to get all of our talent on the field. we need to deploy all of our brain power in order to fuel this renaissance in american technological leadership. this bill will provide major investments in 21st century workforce to create jobs and inspire the next generation of innovators. i'm pleased that a bipartisan provision was included in here offered by our colleague senator warnock which will direct additional federal funds to emerging research institutions of higher education, including our nation's historically black colleges and universities and our minority-serving institutions. on top of that provision, i'm pleased this bill includes a bipartisan measure that i wrote with senator tillis, of north carolina. our provision would help advance the research classification of

hbcu's around the country that already have strong research programs and make them competitive among the highest caliber of research universities for more federal funding. to take them from r-2's to r-1's. this will open the doors for opportunity for more students, faculty, and staff across the country. in my state of maryland, we have two hcbu's that would directly benefit from this provision, morgan state university and the university of maryland eastern shore. mr. president, this is an investment in our future. this is just -- these are just some of the elements in this bill that will help foster a sustained american leadership and emerging technologies into the future. but even when this bill is passed, and i urge all of my colleagues to vote for it, our work is not over.

the senate and the house have spent the last two years working on a package to sharpen america's competitive edge on the world stage. the bill before us does not include many of the other important measures that also enjoy bipartisan support and are still part of the conference committee. so we need to get to the remainder of those provisions and get them over the finish line. for example, mr. president, one of the pieces of that larger bill that's not included in the measure before us would be -- would help protect american intellectual property and protect our technology secrets against theft by foreign companies or other countries. we know that in today's high-speed, fast-paced economy where things and -- where information zips around the world at the speed of light, it's easier than ever to steal

someone else's technology for your own purposes. at a summit in london earlier this month, f.b.i. director chris wray warned companies from across europe that beijing is developing more advanced strategies to, quote, ransack western companies, pillaging intellectual property and stealing inventions from americans and others around the world in the high-tech sector. we've got to do everything we can to protect ourselves against that malign conduct. for example, if you're an american company and a foreign company in china steals your intellectual property, the only resource you currently have at your disposal is to file a lawsuit -- file a lawsuit and go to court. it's like taking a pea-shooter

to a knife fight, especially when you are dealing with a foreign government like the government of china. that's why i joined with a bipartisan bill with senator sasse to impose tough sanctions on companies that systematically plunder u.s. technology -- plunder u.s. technology secrets and intellectual property. that measure, as i said, is part of the larger package, and we need to the get that done by the end of the year. for now, i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the bill that is before us this week. it is a key step forward to ensure that america remains the world's leader -- leading developer of key technologies and will help bring that important high-tech microchip manufacturing back here to the united states. madam president, we have the brain power, we have the institutions, we have a system that can fuel tech

entrepreneurs. we need to match those very important assets with a willpower for national success and progress. history tells us that a key ingredient in america's innovation success story has been federal investment in r&d. much of the r&d that companies will not invest in because it's sometimes too risky. it is an investment that we make on behalf of the american people to ensure our national success and our global leadership. we are today witnessing the efforts of our competitors, and in many cases our adversaries, to overtake us in these key areas and we should not and we must not surrender our leadership in those places that shape our economy and shape our world. madam president, we must harness the full power of american innovation as we've done in the

past to meet the challenges of our time, and this bill is an important part of that effort and i urge my colleagues to support it. madam president, i yield the floor.

peters madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the notice of proposed rulemaking from the office of congressional workplace rights be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar item number 3418, senate -- number 418, senate resolution 394. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 418, s. res. 394, recognizing the 25th anniversary of radio free asia and its mission to provide an independent source of news to closed societies in asia. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will

proceed. mr. peters: i further ask that the committee reported substitute amendment to the resolution be agreed to. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. peters: i know of no further debate on the resolution as amended. the presiding officer: is there further debate? if not, the question is on the resolution as amended. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the resolution as amended is agreed to. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent that the committee reported substitute amendment to the preamble be agreed to, the preamble as amended be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions introduced earlier today -- senate resolution 720, senate

resolution 721, senate resolution 722, and senate resolution 723. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed en bloc. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it adjourns until 10:00 a.m. on wednesday, july 27, and that following the prayer and pledge the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of the proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate resume consideration of the house message to accompany h.r.

4346. further, that following disposition of the house message to accompany h.r. 4346, the senate will resume consideration of the house message to accompany s. 33373. the presiding officer: without objection -- s. 337 . the presiding officer: without objection. mr. peters: there will be two roll call votes in relation to chips and science legislation at approximately 11:30 a.m. and a cloture vote at approximately 4:30 p.m. in relation to pact act. if no further business to come before the senate, ski that it stand adjourned -- i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the >> u.s. senate has gambled out for the day, bring the session lawmakers voted the bill to provide grants to the u.s. computer shipping industry in order to benefit this with china and also this weekend, members

are considering legislation that expand access the va healthcare and disability benefits for the veterans exposed to toxins during their military service and as always, you can follow live coverage of the senate, when it returns, here on "c-spa. >> now available to the c-span shop, the 2022, congressional directory, go there today to photocopy of the congressional directory, compact spiral-bound the book is your guide to the federal government, with contact information for every member of congress including bios and committee assignments and also contact information for state governors and the biden administration cabinet and order your copy today is c-span shop .org or skinny cut of your smart phone, every c-span shop purchase help support cspan's nonprofit operations. wednesday morning good manufacturing executives testified how they are the products and respond to gun

violence in this country this is oversight committee begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern live coverage on c-span three and you can also watch on c-span now are free mobile video app online at cspan.org. >> there a lot of places to get political information but only at cspan, do you get it for free from the source in a matter where you are from, or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, and it happens here, or here, or here or anywhere that matters, america has watching on c-span. powered by cable. >> we are joined next i retired lt. score he's currently the heritage foundation and the director of the center from national defense and this