low-carbon in disadvantaged communities, $300 billion for a safety and affordable transportation program, $3 billion for environmental and climate justice block grants. further, the bill includes new taxes on natural gas and increased fees and royalty rates for oil and gas produced on federal land which will only result in higher costs for american families at the pump, at the gas station a or their utility bills and higher prices for goods across the board because all of those goods have to be transported to the grocery story. you don't just see it at the pump, you see it at the grocery store. you'll see it on manufactured goods as well. low-income people are going to be paying those higher prices. more inflation. that means the tax hits them. gas prices are already $2.25

higher a gallon than when president biden took office. diesel prices are even higher, nearly $2.81 per gallon more than in january of 2021. in short, look, we need to unleash our domestic energy production, not ask for help from opec. or venezuela. we need to unleash our oil and gas resources in states like my home state or the presiding officer's home state. we can produce a lot more oil and gas in this country and we have the best environmental ?andz. that's how you bring the price down at the pump. more supply, not higher taxes. more supply, not taxes that will drive prices up and reduce supply. we still have increased demand. that's why we have inflation in the first place. the biden administration's policies are creating the inflation and now the stagflation, and this

legislation will make it worse. it's going down the same path. we need to unleash our domestic energy production. we need to get our debt and deficit under control. we need to work on behalf of farmers, ranchers, the ag supply chain to continue to produce the highest-quality, lowest-cost food supply in the world. we need to unleash our energy resources. those are the things that will increase supply, reduce inflation, get our economy going so we don't have recession or stagnation. those are the things that benefit all american consumers, all american workers, regardless of their income level. this bill does none of those things. this bill makes the problem worse. and it should be rejected. with that, mr. president, i yield to my colleagues. mr. brown: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: i have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders.

the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, the men and women at the company delphi technologies helped make general motors the world's largest automaker, yet those workers lost the retirement they earned through no fault of their own, when their company went bankrupt during the great recession. that was a time, some of us were here then when -- senator crapo and i were both here then -- when washington bailed out wall street, the people who caused the crisis, but left two many americans like the delphi retirees who did nothing wrong on their own. after years of efforts, it's past time for the united states senate to do its job to restore full retirement benefits for the thousands of ohioans and tens of thousands nationally of delphi salaried retirees across the country. i've been fighting for them and earning the pension benefit

guaranty corporation to do the right thing since 2009. i thought we had this problem solved years ago when i blocked president obama's nominee to head the pggc. we hoped that would signal to the president that we were serious. pbgc needed to do the right thing for delphi workers. unfortunately delphi employees know what happened. he got the job anyway, they didn't get the help they needed. the next president, president obama didn't do. the next president, president trump, promised, went to youngstown and dayton, promised he would take care of these workers. they voted for him. ohioans thought president trump would be different. once again workers were left on their own. we kept working, these retirees never gave up. this year we reintroduced legislation with a congressman from ohio, a republican from

ohio, to save these pensions. we named the bill in honor of susan muffly, a delphi worker who passed away. we have senator young on board in the senate along with 39 republicans that joined congressman turner from dayton. the white house supports it as well. the white house said by ensuring that those who put in a career of hard work will receive the pension benefits they earned, this legislation supports a secure retirement for affected workers. that's what the white house said. so we have senator portman and senator young here. we have 39 house republicans on board, a number of democrats are on board. the president of the united states is on board. promises from president obama and president trump, now is the time. these ohioans and workers across the midwest earned these pensions.

it's past time to restore them. the senate has that opportunity today. i hope my colleagues of both parties will join senator portman and me. and i yield the floor to my friend from ohio. mr. portman: i thank my colleague from ohio, senator brown. and i thank him for working with us on this bipartisan legislation that impacts thousands of retirees in our home state of ohio. in the summer of 2009, as the federal government took general motors into bankruptcy, the obama administration terminated the pension plans covering thousands of delphi workers. while union employees were protected, these 20,000 salaried retirees ranging from shop floor supervisors, sales people, engineers, office managers were left out. they spent many years working at delphi, a major employer and economic engine in youngstown and sandusky. these people followed the rules. they earned their pensions the american way, through hard

work, dedication and contribution. instead of honoring the promises that had been made to these salaried, middle-incomed employees, the administration terminated their pensions. people who worked hard their entire lives and played by the rules saw benefits cut by as much as 70%. it's just not fair, no fault of their own. and it's devastated some of them, particularly those who have health care issues in their later years who have been not been able to live the standard of living they assumed they would based on the pensions they had. it's about fairness and it's very simple. it ensures these delphi retirees receive the retirement benefits they were promised. it would reinstate their pension plan and restore their benefits that were unnecessarily reduced and unfairly reduced. some of my colleagues may characterize as a bailout but i must correct the record. the delphi pension was over 80% funded when the federal government terminated the pensions in twine and took over these assets. by the way, it would have been fully funded by the next year

based on all the data we now have showing what happened with market conditions. it was 80% funded when the government stepped in and said that it was massively underfunded, and a year later it would have been fully funded. despite this, the government again treated the pensions as though they were underfunded and slashed the benefits. it's simply about keeping our promises to these workers. there were 20,000 participants. it's not a lot of people. well, to them, it's really important and it's really important to ohio, and about a quarter of those 20,000 live in our home state of ohio. that's why i'm proud to stand with them, my colleague from ohio, with others here in this body and over in the house to ensure that fairness is what they get at the end of the day. this should not be controversial legislation, in my view. i'm pleased to say that it has bipartisan support. we just saw 36 republicans support this on the house side. i encourage my colleagues in the senate to also support these workers to make them whole with

this legislation so that we can make good on the federal government's promise to them. i yield back my time to my colleague from ohio. mr. brown: i thank my friend senator portman. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of h.r. 6929 which was received from the house and is at the desk, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? a senator: mr. president. reserving the right to object. the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. mr. crapo: reserving the right to object. i appreciate my colleagues' commitment to this issue and to your constituents. as you know, this legislation has been before us for some time now, and there is controversy over it. this bill would retroactively reinstate pension benefits for a

small subset of participants whose pensions have already been transferred to the pension benefit guaranty corporation, or pbgc. that would create a precedent other plans would follow. the pbgc exists specifically to cover pension benefits if a plan is terminated, so we should let the system work. this system does not require taxpayer dollars for a bailout or for whatever one would like to call it. that's part of the reason for the objection. we also have an obligation to be delivered in how we spend taxpayer. before we inject more money into the system, we should explore the implications of this bill, which brings me to my final point. the finance committee has not held a hearing, not a single hearing, let alone a markup, on this bill. the finance committee exists to examine proposals such as this and to provide all senators an

opportunity to weigh in. i'm willing to work with my chairman, senator wyden, on this and with senator brown and with senator portman and others senators who are interested in the issue so we can see if there is a need and a way that we can address this issue specifically without creating a precedent that would deal with the rest of the entire system that has been put together to address terminated plans. because of the need for us to have regular order, deliberation and consideration of this legislation, i must today object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. brown: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio. mr. brown: i thank senator crapo. senator crapo and i have worked together on a number of things. he was chair of the banking committee the last four years. i was his ranking member and worked with him and greg and his staff on a number of things. i take him at his word. i know that senator portman and senator crapo and i sit also on the finance committee. i'm serious about this.

i just had a private conversation with senator crapo. he seems serious. i know senator portman is. we've waited too long. there are far too many people. it's not a huge number, as rob, as senator portman said. not a huge number of people, but it's awfully important to them. i know what it means to a community that's struggling like the mahoning valley and miami valley. those two communities have hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of these retirees. when their pension shah h rinks like this -- shrinks like this, it affects their buying power, standard of living and prosperity of the community. we will be back together working on it. i thank senator crapo. i'm disappointed but i thank him. mr. president, i ask that the following remarks be in the record at a different place. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. brown: thank you, mr. president. i rise today on a cheerful duty, if you will, to recognize bill knell who retired this month after a long career of service not working in the

senate, but sort of working around the senate. bill was deputy director of the congressional program at the aspen institute, something not particularly known to the public. it's a nonprofit working to bring together diverse perspectives to solve challenges facing the united states and the world. bill was the second hire when the aspen institute's congressional program began. it's one of the institute's longest serving employees, 35 years the a aspen. almost every week for as long as i can remember that the senate and house were in session bill brought together democrats and republicans across the ideological spectrum for breakfast and conversation with leading policy scholars, typically on a thursday morning at 8:00, you'd come and there would be 10 or 15 or 20 house and senate members fairly evenly divided depending on the topic plaps between the parties, and a scholar or an activist or someone that bill generally recruited came in and talked to

us. it helped, it helped educate us for sure. it brought us together in ways that the public doesn't necessarily see, but helped us discuss issues with each other, and we learned, we learned in so many ways about each other and about these public issues. we learned from experts, we learned from each other. bill helped host 636 breakfasts. we counted. someone counted them at aspen, over his career of service. during the hustle and bustle of the workweek, these aspen breakfasts were a welcome respite where members of congress could come to listen and discuss and learn from experts, with little partisanship involved. bill brought in these experts. we learned from them, we learned from one another. i wish everyone could sit in on those breakfasts and see the thoughtfulness of so many members of both parties in congress. it really taught me a lot about partisanship that most of my colleagues -- i would not say everyone, but most of my colleagues here are here for the

right reasons and want to do a good job, and the thoughtfulness exhibited in those meetings was so important. bill was diligent about bringing a balanced presentation of topics and experts. these breakfasts helped us consider other perspectives and think about things we might not have thought about otherwise. sometimes we found common ground or opinion our experts share. it's how we got things down. -- things done. it brings to mind one of my colleagues who is about to retire, roy blunt from missouri. he served with me in the house. i knew him actually even before that. he one time said -- he's a conservative republican and i'm decidedly not, and he said i've known sherrod brown for 30 years, and we've agreed exactly five times. and then he laughed and then he said but all five of those are federal law. and that's what really matters. senator crapo and i look at the world very differently. senator portman and i look at the world very differently, but

senator portman and i put together the strongest language ever in federal law on buy america. we've done a number of issues like that. when you may look at things different lip but you find things you can agree on, you can to town and make it happen. back to -- back to bill. he's described as one of the hardest-working people that we know. bill was able to make his job, which was anything but this, appear effortless. his long-time colleague, former secretary congressman dan glickman recognized bill as, quote, the soul of aspen. his current boss, until his retirement last week, charlie dent, glickman's a democrat, dent's a republican, called bill an anti-procrastinator, it is a title rare in a town where

procrastination seems to be everyone's middle name. he was kind, he made people feel comfortable, he made people heard. i have no idea what his ideology or party what, we didn't talk about that. he served and helped us understand. he seemed to have no enemies in doing his job. in retirement, bill is spending time back in his beloved montana just outside of yellowstone, one of my favorite places in the country where years ago i took my daughters on train to see yellowstone for a week. he's spending time in montana with his beloved wife cindy. the aspen breakfast will continue. bill will be missed by all of us. blessed by his kindness, curiosity and capability. he made the place work better. he reminded us of the importance of self-government, of democracy. it is up to us to uphold that legacy and keep working towards

each other for a better future and for the people we serve. thank you so much bill knell. we wish you the best in retirement. thank you, mr. president.

a senator: mr. president . the presiding officer: the senator from florida. mr. rubio: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. rubio: as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on health, education, labor and pensions be discharged from further consideration of s. 4394 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, further, that the bill be considered read add third time and passed and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there an objection? mrs. murray: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: thank you, mr. president. reserving the right to object. i'm concerned this bill would overrule fda experts and would do so without going through regular order. we should be setting a high bar for doing anything like this, i do appreciate my colleague's concern for growers in his state. this is an environmental issue, but skipping regular order to

meddle with the long-standing process for food standards does not get to the root of the problem, so i object. the presiding officer: the certainty from florida. mr. rubio: and i regret that that is the case. i understand the argument and if i could explain a little further. the -- florida's identified with the citrus industry. people have long understood it as such. it's a big part of our state and here's the best way to describe this to people. about 60 years ago the fda created a standard for what they consider pasteruized orange juice and for it to be marked as that, no less than 5% of the weight of the juice has to be accounted for by naturally occurring sugar. this is an arbitrary number. the 10.5% of the weight has

nothing to do with the nutrition or the safety or anything to do with the quality. they had to come up with a number to define the difference between orange juice and something that is not orange juice and that that is the number they came up with. for decades the citrus industry in florida followed that specifification and then florida was impacted by citrus greening pests that came from asia and it has ravaged the trees. to the point where one of the impacts it has is now the sugar content -- you wouldn't notice it if you drink it or eat one but the sugar content of the fruit that's now on those trees because of the greening often falls under the 10.5. again, no one would know it. it's not any less safe, not any less nutritious. it just -- it falls under that number. and then obviously the hurricane we had in 2016 made those problems worse when they

suffered the loss a bunch of trees. to meet this arbitrary 10.5% threshold, the juice processors in florida have to now blend in oranges and orange juice that have higher sugar content and these you have to import it from a foreign source. again, there's no health benefit to doing it. in fact you could probably argue that less sugar is probably better. you wouldn't taste the difference. you wouldn't know it but two glasses of orange juice in front of you, one with the number they're asking for which is 10% and the other 10.5, you wouldn't notice the difference. they're asking the fda for change the standards so they don't have to import oranges from brazil and mix it to hit the sugar content. if they can't do it, then the only thing that changes is that the final product can't be marketed as florida orange juice. that's really the challenge that we're facing. we would love for this to go to normal process. the problem is the -- by the time the fda makes a decision on it, there may not be any growers left. let me explain why that is a

problem. these citrus growers sit on valuable land. every developer in the state is trying to get their hands on that land. they'd love to develop it into a mall, into an industrial park. we're facing those problems everywhere. once you turn farmland into commercial use, industrial use, housing development, you never get it back. i've seen farms turned into commercial development. i've never seen a commercial development be turned back to a farm. once we lose this land, we lose it forever. we lose it forever. so not only is it important to have it from a food security stpped, but from an environment -- stpped, but from an -- stand point, but from an environmental stand point. having something remain in agriculture where people care about the land and the water usage because it's key to its existence, it's better use of the land. eventually these agriculture owners have to do something. some have been in business for generations but at some point they cannot grow enough fruit to justify the continuing in business. they've got people offering

millions and millions of dollars to buy their land from them. and so this simple bill that i filed would provide certainty to the orange growers that by lowering the solids, the 10.5 content to 10.0, that's all it does, from 10.5 to 10.0, they will have some level of certainty they'll be able to continue in business. so i regret there's an objection here today. i understand the desire to follow the fda process, but i just want to be clear. like no one is arguing that knows about this that going from 10.5 to 10.0 has any safety issue or anything of that nature. it's literally an undefectable -- undetectable difference but would make a big difference for citrus growers in florida. if we're not going to be able to do it this way, i happy we can get a hearing and get this passed. i'm not sure if a couple of years from now we're going to have a citrus industry. if we lose them, we'll lose take land and we'll never get it back. i yield the floor.

the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: mr. president, across this country americans are facing aggressive attacks on their reproductive freedom. an extremist supreme court and radical right-wing politicians have made it clear they see women as second class citizens and that government, government, not the person who is pregnant but government should be making decisions about whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term. in this extraordinary moment, we must do everything we can to

ensure that patients get the health care and reproductive services that they need, and that includes protecting patients from the deceptive practices of some so-called crisis pregnancy centers or cpc's. nationwide there are over 2500 known cpc's, although some claim that the number is closer to about 4,000. now, before roe was overturned, over 16 million women of reproductive age lived closer to a crisis pregnancy center than to an abortion clinic. now some estimate as many as 34 million women do. and today in massachusetts, cpc's outnumber true abortion clinics by about 3-1. cpc's often lure women seeking legitimate reproductive care, including abortions, into their facilities by advertising

themselves as comprehensive reproductive health care providers, but this is flatly untrue. many of these cpc's are not health care.ers, and they often -- health care providers and they often operate specifically to deceive pregnant women with the goal of preventing them having abortions. cpc websites often feature images of people in white lab coats and promises of services like ultrasounds or std tests. yet cpc's rarely employ licensed physicians or offer a full range of reproductive health services. according to one study, 84% of cpc's had no physician, and 75% had no registered nurse, even affiliated with the staff. in fact, of the staff that did have some medical training, most

work part time or at volunteers. as for the services they provide, the same study found that only one out of 607 crisis pregnancy centers provided contraceptive care and 95% of cpc's offered no prenatal care, none, zero. most have no doctors, no nurses, and offer no medical care, but they sure have a lot of medical opinions. nearly two-thirds promoted medically unsound claims, such as offering information about unproven and unscientific abortion pill reversal treatments. deception is at the heart of the operation for many cpc's. the director of a crisis pregnancy center in texas explained to "the washington post" how she revamped

operations so her center could pull in more people who were seeking an abortion. the director paid thousands of dollars to ensure that searches for phrases like need an abortion would lead people to her center, and she filled the website with phrases like i want an abortion and promised confidential abortion consultation, no cost to you. the website is so deceptive that the director said she even receives angry calls from antiabortion advocates who want to know why her center even talks about abortion to which she replies, how else do you get an abortion-minded girl to know that you're there. deception is wrong. no one should be deceived directly or indirectly about the

services they can access or the risks of receiving care. that is particularly true for someone under great stress and time constraints who is coping with an unplanned pregnancy. and that is why i am glad to introduce the stop antiabortion disinformation act with senator menendez, and why i am joining him today in calling up this legislation for a vote. our bill directs the federal trade commission to prohibit deceptive or misleading advertising related to the provision of abortion services. it also empowers the commission to enforce these rules and collect penalties from organizations that violate the law. this is far from a radical proposal. for more than a hundred years, the ftc has been authorized to prosecute entities that use deceptive practices.

and let me be clear. any crisis pregnancy center that operates fairly, disseminates factual information, and is clear about what services it does and does not provide would be free to continue its work. this bill is not about preventing parents from receiving diapers or other supplies if they've chosen to continue a pregnancy. this is about organizations that deliberately deceive women and girls who are seeking help to terminate a pregnancy. and unfortunately deception is at the heart of the typical cpc's business model. as the director of a cpc explained, the deception begins when women search for an abortion provider. the deception then continues once women walk through the doors of a crisis pregnancy center. i just want to tell you a bit about the experience of a young

woman living in massachusetts who visited a crisis pregnancy center earlier this year. now, after finding the facility which promised a, quote, free abortion consultation, this woman was asked to fill out forms to disclose personal information. she was repeatedly lied to about how far along she was in her pregnancy. she was told falsely that terminating her pregnancy would increase her risk of breast cancer and depression and that an abortion could mean that she could never become pregnant in the future. and sadly, her experience is not unique. here's the kicker. women and girls visiting cpc's like this young woman often fill out forms and answer questionnaires requesting both personal identification and personal health information which women provide because they

believe they are in a medical facility that will protect their privacy. but because cpc's are not health care providers, these women have no legal protection, and these centers have no legal obligation to protect those data. these unlicensed facilities are not subject to federal privacy laws, like the health insurance portability and accountability act or hippa. this means that crisis pregnancy centers can pass along private information about who was seeking an abortion, where that person lives and so on, information that in the wake of the dobbs decision is particularly dangerous. the evidence of abuse is overwhelming. it is time to crack down on deceptive and misleading practices that many crisis pregnancy centers employ.

because the last thing that women seeking reproductive care should have to worry about is whether she's being tricked, lied to, or deceived about the medical care that she seeks. thank you, mr. president. i yield. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: mr. president, i want to thank my colleague, senator warren, for beginning this debate, and we will move to a consent shortly. and i want to thank her for working together with me on this most important issue. mr. president, at this moment there are millions of women who face an uncertain future after the repeal of roe v. wade. millions of women who no longer have the right to make their own decisions about their own bodies. it's a heart-wrenching choice. no doubt one of the hardest decisions anyone will ever have

to make. but in the midst of this, in this post-roe landscape we find ourselves in, there are organizations, as has been discussed here, known as crisis pregnancy centers, who are preying on the fears of women. exacerbating the fierce caused by the dobbs decision. crisis pregnancy decisions cloak themselves in benign language about, quote, providing answers and, quote, offering advice. but they have an agenda; namely, to steer women away from abortion through a combination of guilty, harassment, and downright lies. crisis pregnancy centers pretend that they are there to educate, support, and empower women facing unplanned pregnancies and yet at the bottom of their websites in very small print

you'll find the disclaimer that lays it all bear -- crisis pregnancy centers do not offer or refer for pregnancy terminations or birth control. information should not be relied on as a substitute for professional and/or medical advice. that's the disclaimer. you can hardly read it, but it's there. this is pulled straight from the web page of one center in my state. i'll repeat that ending again. information should not be relied on as a substitute for professional and/or medical advice. ironically, this is the only objective and accurate piece of information you'll find on the site and others like it. as senator warren mentioned, crisis pregnancy centers are not required to have a physician or a registered nurse on staff. very few of them do. they are not required to provide contraceptive care or even stick to medically sound claims. and because they claim to only provide so-called education

services, they can promote blatant lies about how abortion increases risk for breast cancer. mr. president, women in america do not deserve to be lied to. they shouldn't be preyed upon during moments of vulflexibility or@at any other -- of vulnerability or at any other time. they shouldn't have to shift to what's real or what's not and they shouldn't have to parse through the carefully constructed language of crisis pregnancy centers that promote an antichoice agenda. our bill, it would empower the federal trade commission to issue rules prohibiting false advertisement of abortion services. it would allow the ftc to penalize those who are found in violation, and it would provide greater oversight over crisis

pregnancy centers who profit from the pain of unplanned pregnancies, sometimes while double dipping on the taxpayers' dime. senator warren and i are leading this bill to end the practice of disreceiving women and girls through false advertisement. we are leading this bill to promote truth in advertisement, to end misinformation and disinformation and to protect women from harassment. yes, harassment. as senator warren said, crisis pregnancy centers have no duty to uphold hipaa price of protections, the most significant information that you can give about your health and the status of your health and your condition. you do that thinking that you're in a medical center, and now you've given all this information that has enormous consequences to it if it's

misused to these deceptive entities. and after divulging personal information, then they can freely sell it to scammers who would want to take advantage of them. so i does my colleagues, let's end the assault on bodily autonomy and the right to access reproductive care. let's end the barrage of attacks on their health care. let's end deception in any delivery of any service. let's end the fraud in any delivery of any, quote-unquote, service. let's end the barrage of tac on their health care. join us in passing our bill so that in the hardest moment of their lives, women all across our country can rest assured in knowing that when they are get something the truth, not some biased agenda pretending for medical advice, not some one-

sided talking point that steers them towards one agenda. the truth, truth. pregnant women in america deserve the truth, and that's what this bill does. to oppose our unanimous consent request is to promote deception, is to promote fraud. i don't think anybody really wants to do that. with that, i yield the floor to the senator to make the consent request. ms. warren: [inaudible] mr. menendez: okay. as if in legislative session, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the commerce committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 469 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. further, that the women be considered read a third time and pass and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. marshall: reserving the right to object -- the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. s. mr. marshall: mr. president, i rise in objection to this bill as it is an outrageous tac on life-affirming pregnancy resource centers. as a pro-life obstetrician, i have had the pleasure and honor of delivering over 5,000 babies, and i can attest to the lifesaving critical and comprehensive care and resources these centers provide moms in need. these pro-life charities not only help women in poverty choose life instead of abortion, but they also help women after babies are born. they help provide clothing and diapers and housing assistance and nutrition. and sometimes just putting an arm around their shoulders and help helping get to their next appointment. this legislation essentially to shut them down all across the country on the grounds that they purportedly spread disinformation. under this bill, charities could

be find $500,000 or 50% of the revenues earned by the entity of the charity for violating the act's provision on disinformation related to abortion. now, i ask you -- who would determine what counts as prohibited disinformation? there's no doubt it would be bureaucrats with a pro-abortion agenda. is this not an infringement on our first amendment rights? this bill would turn the ftc into a national abortion disinformation board with an agenda of suppressing speech and spreading pro-abortion propaganda. nationally pro-life pregnant resource centers are a good thing. in some states by as many as 11-1. no knowing that many women choose abortion because they feel pressure that they have no other option. the pro-life movement has placed tremendous resources into these centers which exist to offer

alternatives to abortion, usually at no cost. but right now in america, pregnancy resource centers are the ones that need our protection, as zealous pro-abortion terrorists have spent the past two months firebombing and vandalizing pro-life pregnancy centers all across the nation. these criminals, these terrorists do he so not in the name of abortion access but in retribution for daring to stay on the side of good in the spiritual battle. there have been more than 60 pregnancy resource centers and offices of pro-life groups that attacked and vandalized since the draft supreme court opinion was leaked in may. pro-abortion domestic terrorists have claimed responsibility for these crimes. congress should be taking up the legislation instead to affirm, grow, and protect pregnancy resource centers and praise its citizens for their great work for volunteering to help and serve their community.

and attorney general merrick garland should abide by his oath of office and prosecute the law. therefore, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. menendez: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: i would like to propound a question to my colleague through the chair. does the first amendment allow you to promote fraud? does the first amendment allow you to promote deception? is it great work to lie to someone about what you are providing them? is it great work to allow someone to get your vital health information, briefing that you are a health provider and then being able to use that private information? mr. marshall: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from kansas.

mrs. murray: to answer my colleague, the fraud and the deception is occurring in the abortion clinics. i can tell you story after story of patients crying in my office who went to planned parenthood for a pregnancy test and were scheduled for an ass bortion, coming to -- for an abortion coming to my office wondering, do i have to do this abortion? these women aren't being told about the potential complications of these abortion procedures. they're not being told that these abortion pills are going to cause pain and cramping and bleeding, that they could end up in the emergency room as well. they're not told about the complications from the abortion procedures. that's where the fraud and deception is present. you're afraid to say the word abortion in these clinics. that's the fraud and deception. this isn't reproductive services. these are abortions, this is taking the life of the unborn. thank you, mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: i am a little confused by what's just happened here. i presume deception is wrong, whoever does it. so if we just said, no deception around pregnancy services, would you be willing to support this? mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: yes. the presiding officer: questions fleed knob asked through the chair. ms. warren: i am scug that question, mr. president. mr. marshall: we could never support any part of this legislation. i think the deception and fraud is occurring on the part of abortion clinics. this is a threat to our first amendment rights, and i think, like i said in my opening remarks, this is just simply unacceptable. that's why we continue to object. thank you. mr. menendez: mr. president, if i may ask my colleague through the chair, is it right, no matter who gets the

information by fraud, to give your most private health -- surely as a doctor, the senator would say that no one should give up their health information to an entity that does not preserve it under hipaa laws. so could the senator not join us if we limit limited to fraud that actually has that fraud create the insecurity of hipaa information? mr. marshall: mr. president, i think this is not the place to try to rewrite legislation. of course i'm against all fraud. i think all fraud is bad. i think that i'm all for the truth, all for protecting patients' personal information. but i'm also here proud to say what great work that these clinics do. i'm not sure what you are you a even accusing them is even true. i have a not witnessed that a the pregnant clinics that i have seen do great work for these

folks. they sit down and talk with them, they give them a hand up, do so many great things. i don't noted where this fraud and deception is coming about except that they're talking to women and saying, do you realize that your baby has a heartbeat? do you realize that your baby can feel pain at 14 weeks? do you realize that your baby recognizes the voice of your husband right now? do you recognize -- so i think those are great things to share with patients, how wonderful life is, that we're all wonderfully, beautifully made in the womb, that life begins at conception. i think that's all the truth that should be shared were them. -- with them. so, no, i don't think there's anything you could do with this legislation that could change it that i could support. and i continue to object. thank you, and i yield. ms. warren: mr. president, then could i ask through you another question and that is, if we're not talking about the fraud part, can we at least talk about collecting health information, that any so-called

crisis pregnancy center -- i'm sorry, is the senator leaving, the one who said that it's important to protect private health care information? that at least we could agree that private health care information -- i guess the senator is just going to walk off the floor. so the question would have been, how about agreeing that anyone that collects information about a pregnancy and collects medical and personal information has to be bound by hipaa so that that information is fully protected? that would be my question, mr. president. but since there's no one here to answer it on the republican side, i guess we will have to leave it for today. thank you. mr. menendez: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: i would like to answer the senator's question. that makes eminent sense that we

would protect hipaa information regardless of who is in a position to maybe have access to collecting it. and there have been, in the first instance, you shouldn't collect it if you're not a medical entity, but if you do you should be ultimately bound by the same guarantees that anyone else would be guaranteed. you know, it would baffle me that particularly a medical professional, doctor, would suggest that hipaa information is something that we shouldn't protect. i think that at a minimum we should all be able to agree to that. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. ms. warren: this is a reminder again why i am so honored to fight alongside senator menendez. i don't think anyone should be deceived, and particularly a woman who is seeking information about termination of a pregnancy, and i don't believe anyone's private medical

information should be shared. the idea that these crisis pregnancy centers gather information from women who believe they are giving it to a medical provider, and that that information will be protected, and that that is not the case, is truly despicable. thank you again, senator menendez. thank you, mr. president.

the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: gas prices are 64% higher in my home state of kentucky than they were in january of 2021. this means kentuckians are paying $1.43 more for gas than they were at the beginning of last year. for average americans already struggling to put food on the table, sky-high gas prices had a daily punishment. every additional dollar an american spends on a gallon of gas is a dollar not going towards their mortgage, their retirement, or their children's college fund. rising prices are robbing

americans of the chance to plan for the future as they struggle to make ends meet in the present. in an attempt to address rising gas prices, president biden announced on april 12 that he would allow the sale of e-15 gasoline this summer. then white house press secretary jen psaki had this to say about this decision -- this waiver that president biden passed to allow e-15 is a critical step to address the fuel supply crisis and build real u.s. energy independence, support american agriculture and manufacturing, and save americans money at the pump. at current prices, e-15 can save a family 10 cents her gallon of gas, on average, and many stores sell e-15 at even greater discount. today's waiver will allow families to pay that lower price for months to come. so this a policy supported by president biden, and it is

currently the law, since he's waiving the regulation. e-15 is a gasoline blend containing up to 15% ethanol. it's a renewable fuel, typically made from corn. a 2008 study published in "atmospheric environment" found that ethanol-based fuels like e-15 emit up to 16% less carbon dioxide than traditional gasoline. a more recent study, published by the u.s. department of energy, argonne national laboratory, found these fuels emit up to 23% less carbon dioxide and provide a cheaper alternative to typical gasoline. the clean air act currently prohibits the sale of e-15 during the summer. we sell it for nine months of the year, we forbid it three months of the year, but companies can't get used to either selling it or making it or distributing it because of the disruption during the summer. under the current law, gas with up to 10% ethanol, commonly

known as e-10, can be sold during the summer. inexplicably, the law treats e-15 dimple, even though the higher -- differently, even though the higher ethanol blends is better for the environment. american drivers ought to be able to access e-15 year-round. prohibiting sale in the summer months artificially restwricts supply -- restricts supply, especially when americans are paying higher prices for gasoline. what we're asking today through this legislation is not to subsidize ethanol, not to force people to use ethanol, but to allow people to use ethanol at an e-15 basis, a little higher than we're allowed to use already. republican and democrat presidents have both waived this rule. this is essentially what the law of the land is, other than we're having to suspend the law to get what we have. the last president and this president have both waived the rule that we're trying to repeal today.

both presidents trump and biden approved the removal of barriers to the sale of e-15 during summer months, but in congress we have it in our power to permanently allow the sale of e-15. if we only do it by presidential waiver, there's never enough certainty for people in the marketplace to decide to sell it year-round because they're worried at any moment a president will flip a switch and we'll go back to banning it again. the e's act, which we're asking to pass today, is a bill that will allow the sale of e-15 year-round and will provide relief for americans on the road. not only this year, but every year. this change is long overdue. i've advocated this policy for seven years. is i first introduced this legislation in 2015. passing the e-'s act would again fit consumers, farmers, and the environment by increasing access. so as if in legislative session

i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s-4774, which is at the desks, further i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. heinrich: reserving the right to object. what my colleague from kentucky is attempting to do leer is really short-circuit the bedrock public health protections in the clean air act. make no mistake, this a major policy change, not a minor change. it would have far-reaching impacts. for example, this policy would clearly make food even more expensive. it would make air quality worse. and it's not even imminently clear that the impact on gas prices would necessarily be negative. so fundamentally, this is the kind of sweeping policy that should actually go through the committee of jurisdiction, and in this case the environment and

public works committee. so mr. president, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard.

the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island.

mr. reed: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to urge my colleagues to support the swift passage of the inflation reduction act. in the wake of covid, global supply chains have been strained. there's been shipping disruptions, and putin's illegal invasion of ukraine has added to this. as a result of these many factors, inflation is up in virtually every single country across the globe. the united states is among the world's wealthiest, most productive and diverse economies, but no major economy on earth is immune to the forces of inflation, particularly when they come from so many different directions. let's remember also, 2021 was a huge year for u.s. economic growth. in fact, last year the u.s. economy grew at its fastest pace since 1984. our unemployment rate is back down to 50-year lows, wages

have risen for many, and there is a job literally for any american that wants to work and is looking for it. nobody thought that type of growth was sustainable, especially with the global economic headwind we're facing and we will continue to face. the fact is that americans are forced to pay inflated gas prices at the pump because of the immoral and illegal invasion of ukraine by vladimir putin, because of the cartel, opec, that controls prices, as well as our failure so far to invest in new sources of clean energy. and this has made our economy fragile. so the question before us is how do we help our economy gain firmer footing and lower prices for consumers? how do we make our country more energy independent? and how do we strike a blow for

fairness and financial responsibility? and make things better for families, businesses and communities. the inflation reduction act accomplishes all of those goals. it makes forward-looking policy adjustments and investments to shore up the country. it takes long overdue steps to help lower out-of-pocket costs for things like energy, prescription drugs, and health care. it will strengthen america's energy independence and enhance our national security by moving production lines and jobs from china and other places back to the united states. and don't just take my word for it. a wide array of economic experts have confirmed in bill will ease inflation in three ways -- by lowering energy costs for families and small businesses, cutting health care costs for millions of americans, and ensuring wealthy americans and large corporations pay their fair share.

republican and democratic treasury secretaries have said this, as have over 120 of our nation's leading economists, including seven nobel prize winners. the inflation reduction act will also reduce the deficit by more than $100 billion, according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office. and budget experts agree it will save another $200 billion by empowering and equipping the irs to crack down on tax cheats and enforce tax law already on the books. so independent arbiters are clear, this bill is good for the family budget and for the national budget. it's good for the health of our communities and our planet. and here are some of the highlights. let's start with the cost of prescription drugs. according to the families usa, nearly three in ten american adults -- that's about 80

million people -- have not taken required medicine due to its high cost. for decades the drug companies have taken advantage of every avenue to keep prices high. they argue that the cost is justified in order to fund research and development, but that's not really what's happening. the bottom line is drug companies are not playing fair. in fact, they're charging inflated prices even on old medications, insulin being the classic example. developed more than 100 years ago, the developers basically made their product available to etch. they didn't insist upon patent protections, et cetera, and the price of insulin, a 100-year-old drug, has gone up dramatically. the inflation reduction act will put the brakes on that type of profiteering. under this bill, the government will finally be allowed to directly negotiate lower drug prices for medicare. and i'm fighting to include, as

i mentioned before about insulin, a $35 cap on insulin cost for millions and millions of american in this bill and i must support senator war nook for leadership -- warnock in this effort. the department of affairs already does it and saves veterans and taxpayers billions of dollars a year. the inflation reduction act would also limit drug prices, increases to the rate of inflation. it also caps out-of-pocket costs for $2,000 annually for older adults buying prescriptions for pharmacies. it will also provide free vaccinations for seniors, and it helps keep health insurance affordable for millions of americans. let's not forget cutting health care costs for millions of americans is a direct attack on inflation, so the benefits here are both health related and economic. now let's talk about how the bill will reduce energy costs

and address climate change. the american people recognize that climate change is a serious threat. it fuels extreme weather, environmental degradation, and natural disasters. and we're witnessing at this moment all across the country these phenomena. frankly, i haven't seen the kind of rapidity and severity of storms like this in sheer number in my time. this is a result of our neglect of the climate crisis, and i must also applaud my colleague, senator whitehouse, because he has been a voice since his first day here in this senate about the dangers of climate change, the cost to families, and of course to our environment. of course, all of these climate effects lead to food and water insecurity, economic disruption, and indeed human conflict. one of the areas which is of

most concern to our defense department officials is the follow-on effects of famine and disruption of economies. it usually creates a whole generation of young people without any gainful employment but with access to weapons, which means instability and violence, and that threatens the whole world and eventually threatens us. just this week we had a hearing in the banking committee on the economic cost of climate change. one witness cited a particularly eye-popping statistic from omb that a lack of action on climate change cost the federal government up to $2 trillion per year. that's $2 trillion with a t. so the cost of our efforts to reduce this will be more than exceeded, according to this number, by the benefits.

and good economic analysis suggests when you have a proposal which benefits far outweigh costs, that's something good to pursue. the inflation reduction act stops kicking the can down the road and takes urgent, overdue action to confront climate change and economic challenges head on. i don't have to remind anyone here we've been talking about climate change for years and years and years. now we have a real opportunity to take positive steps. and if we don't, what we see now is upsetting, to say the least, but it's accelerating. you can sense that with the economic crises and the environmental crisis we see all about us. now this legislation will invest $369 billion in affordable clean energy, energy security and initiatives to keep and help combat climate change and make america more energy independent.

we have a very good example up in rhode island. we have the first offshore wind field in the united states off an island. it has been built so they provided up to 300 workers, union workers mostly with good jobs. it will continue to help employ people as it's maintained. it's provided us, the whole region with example of where to go. and now you have significant wind fields, wind farms that are being proposed in federal waters off massachusetts and off long island. it will bring energy without pollution, and that's something that will benefit all americans, both in their pocketbook and in their well-being. this is really an historic investment we're talking about, and the savings will pay off for families and the planet month

after month, year after year. it's something that we owe the next generation because right now we're prepared to hand off to the sons and daughters and grandsons and granddaughters a world that is environmentally challenged, to say the least, and they'll look back at us and say you had an opportunity and you failed. we cannot fail. now a report by a nonprofit group, rewiring america, found that the tax incentives included as part of the $369 billion dedicated climate initiatives in the bill would save the average household $1,800 per year on energy costs. these will incentivize the use of heat pumps, use of solar panels, much more practical and cost-saving energy tools than what they have available today. the inflation reduction act sets

up america also to outinnovate and outcompete other countries and strengthens domestic clean energy manufacturing and reinforces our supply chains, making america more energy independent and self-reliant. i want to make the important point that under the budget act, this bill must be paid for. and rather than cut medicare and social security or some other issue that my colleagues on the other side, many of them like to suggest, this bill strikes a blow for fairness when it comes to our tax code. it sends a signal to the middle class that those who wish to avoid taxes will be no longer be able to easily evade taxes because we are enforcing the audit and the enforcement mechanisms to the irs so that the law will be followed more scrupulously, and that will result in benefits to us.

it sends a signal to working families that the 150 most profitable companies will pay a minimum of tax of 15% rather than zero, as is sometimes the case. and it's not fair for a multibillion-dollar company to use the tax system to avoid any payments while a truck driver, a custodian is paying 20% of their income perhaps, or even more. it sends a signal that private equity and hedge fund managers who claim their income is carried interest will have to step up and pay more. indeed, as the president stressed, this is focused so that no one making under $400,000 as a family will see their taxes go up. that's what the president promised, and that's what this legislation will deliver. so no one should be out making a claim that this hurts the middle

class and the tax cuts are going to be paid by them. in fact, it increases the tax fairness of our system, and any examination of our present system, it is grossly unfair. aisle end with the words -- i'll end with the words of five former treasury secretaries including one appointed by president george w. bush who all agree the inflation act will, in their words, help increase american competitiveness, address our climate crisis, lower costs for families and fight inflation, and should be passed immediately by congress. let me also quote over 120 leading economists who shared a similar message writing, i quote, this historic legislation makes crucial investments in energy, health care, and shoring up the nation's tax system. these investments will fight inflation and lower costs for american families while setting the stage for strong, stable, and broadly shared long-term

economic growth. this isn't a partisan issue for economists, and it shouldn't be a partisan issue in congress. but the bottom line, mr. president, is congress has an opportunity to help lower prices for consumers, and invest in scalable new energy technologies and solutions that will strengthen our economy and make the u.s. and the planet more secure, more prosperous, and more resilient. we must seize the moment. the time to act is now. generations from now, they will look back at this moment and ask the question, did we stand up for them, for this country, for the planet, for the future or did we fail. i urge us all to stand up and succeed. and with that, mr. president, i yield. i would also note, mr.

president, the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from kansas. mr. marshall: thank you, mr. president. before the covid-19 pandemic, few people other than scientists and national security experts were familiar with gain of function research. i ask to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. the senator from kansas. mr. marshall: thank you, mr. president. before the covid-19 pandemic, few people other than scientists and national security experts were familiar with gain of function research. now as we continue to search for the origin of this pandemic and begin to learn more about the dangerous research that's been largely kept from the public eye, it's becoming a household phrase. before we get started on the current state of play, i would like to give a brief history of research and how the government has poorly, perhaps negligently

approached its oversight in funding. in late 2011, over a decade ago, the nsabb which is n.i.h.'s advisory board stopped two scientists if publishing an abeian inpliew entoday gain of -- influenza gain of function study because they were afraid this study would educate bioterrorists. that's right. in 2011, a decade ago, scientists had figured out how to make h5n1 more contagious. which would have been catastrophic for american agriculture. dr. fauci personally called both scientists and convinced them to volunteer to pause their experiments. in early 2012, dr. fauci encouraged all inpliew went today scientists to voluntary pause research and told them, and i quote, it is essential we respect the concern of the public doamically or globally and not ask them to take the word of inpliew entoday

scientists, dr. fauci almost prophetically stated that he worried about, and i quote again, unregulated laboratories, perhaps outside of the united states, doing work soppily and leading to an inadvertent pandemic, accidental release is what the world is really worried about. and i end the quote from dr. fauci. in 2014, after several biosecurity accidents in the united states research labs, the obama white house implemented the gain of function moratorium on influenza as well as mers and sars research because of gain of function danger. these two moratoriums clearly demonstrates that the united states government and n.i.h. are primary public health agency understood the risk associated with this research and understood the threats it posed. despite this pause, though,

certain viral gain of function research projects continued at the university of north carolina. research that was later shared with a chinese virologist, the bat lady. she was famous for copious amounts of research conduct on coronavirus that live in bats. outside of the north carolina studies, dr. fauci failed to heed his own call to pause studies and offshored the paused research to china, not just once and not just recently but practically continuously for over a decade. it's disturbing that one of our top public health agencies directed this risky research to be offshored while -- in the united states. in 2012 dr. fauci gave a new grant to the ecohealth alliance, a company that america will soon know the name of all across america. he gave a new grant to the ecohealth alliance for avian

research in china which was truly gain of function research. in 2014 dr. fauci gave another new grant, another gain of function grant to dr. dasik for research in china. through these grants peter dasic partnered with the wuhan institute of virology. a lift on the gain of function pause was made without senate confirmed, state department or national security leadership. significantly, there was no director of the office of science and technology policy in place with only an acting hhs secretary at the helm. n.i.h. essentially lifted the moratorium on their own by slipping it in between administrations and self-policing. today we can't see the research record from dr. fauci's offshore projects because the chinese cop i.n.s. party has possession or at least supposedly has possession of ecohealth's records and n.i.h. resists

sharing theirs. by all accounts dr. fauci and ecohealth research in china led to the covid-19 pandemic and dr. fauci's worst fears that a lab accident in a foreign lab became reality. at a very important hearing yesterday at the capitol hosted by senator paul, dr. richard ebright, a renowned microbiologist declared it is possible that this research did lead to the outbreak of covid-19. dr. qai and other expert witnesses on the panel agreed that viral gain of function offers no civilian use or benefit -- let me say that again. both these doctors agreed that gain of function offers no civilian use or benefit but is so risky, it can cause a pandemic that will have a worse impact than a nuclear attack is indeed a weapon of mass destruction.

despite warnings in past lab accidents, our public health agencies like n.i.h. continue to fund this weapon of mass destruction research. often in china nonetheless. in fact at one point n.i.h. paid for more viral gain of function experiments than the department of defense. according to hearing testimony given by dr. fauci on this topic in 2012. shockingly, congress has minimal insight into the amount of research that n.i.h. performs. there's no transparency into the risk process and no proper oversight. recently -- this is news -- our office just learned that usaid is currently paying $125 million to the washington state university school for global health to collect potential pandemic pathogens in high-risk areas for outbreak. once collected these samples are being used in dangerous gain of function experiments through their deep vision grant. this project initially partnered

with five countries in africa, asia, latin america but could expand to others. the university researchers are experimenting on these pathogens in foreign laboratories in each country. even worse, these hazardous research techniques are being taught to foreign research while experimenting with potentially deadly pathogens in laboratories where the u.s. has no regulatory control authority. no process exists to screen u.s. researchers or foreign researchers by intelligence analysts for the potential threat actors. the u.s. has no ability to control who the technology or the deadly pathogens are shared with in these foreign labs and cannot enforce proper storage techniques. usaid is putting everyone at risk right now. our u.s. public health agencies like n.i.h. and cdc cannot be entrusted to oversee risky research with the current guardrails that are self-selecting and

self-policing. certainly our united states agency for international development cannot be entrusted yet federal agencies continue to spend some funds for gain of function research. dr. fauci recently became before congress and publicly declared that he had no intention to stop using u.s. taxpayer dollars to fund chinese communist party research projects. folks, this is a national security issue. since january of 2020, i've been trying to sound the alarm on this virus, on this issue, on this weapon of mass destruction but it's largely falling on deaf ears in congress and with the current administration. yesterday's hearing was the first time congress examined the subject since the outbreak of covid-19 and unfortunately none of my colleagues across the aisle bothered to show up for this hearing, clearly declaring that this was not a priority for them. additionally, mainstream media

has not covered the lab leak. we must pause this research until national security experts can help create appropriate risk processes for this research. it's important to note that this is estimated to only compromise less than 0.1% of all biomedical research and less than 1% of biorology research. this small part of the biomedical research is highly consequential and requires effective oversight. and certainly that current oversight is not effective. mr. president, this is a bipartisan national security issue, and anyone who studies this issue in depth will conclude that biogain of function. anyone will conclude that covid

is shrike a nuclear hand grenade in its pin pulled out. it's already killed a million people and can kill millions more. every witness will conclude, like we did yesterday, that the potential is much worse than any type of benefit from this research. this covid virus is likely a product of u.s.-funded gain of function research. the research has produced no benefit in ten years and seemingly no benefit on the horizon. this is why i brought my legislation to the floor today to place a moratorium on all federal research grants and risky research on potential pandemic pathogens. this is an urgent matter that must be acted on today. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on health, education, lakers and pensions be discharged from further consideration of senate 3012 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration, further, that the bill be

considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mrs. murray: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from washington. mrs. murray: reserving the right to object, earlier this year when we passed the prevent pandemics act out of our help committee in an overwhelming bipartisan vote, we were able to include amendments from my colleague from kansas and others to bolster oversight of the federally funded research involving pathogens of pandemic potential and make sure that we do have appropriate guardrails in place. i appreciate the leadership my colleague from kansas has shown on this issue. i know it's important to him. however, i'm concerned this new bill brought forward today is far less targeted than the provisions the senator from kansas and i worked on and would have significant consequences for u.s. biomedical research.

i would remainfully ask my colleague from kansas to keep working with me and ranking member busch to get his relate -- burr to get his related provisions and the rest of our prevent pandemics act across the finish line. i thank the senator from kansas for his work, his focus on this issue, and i think we can continue to make bipartisan progress in the next few weeks in getting the prevent pandemics act and the senator's provision into a good place and final lay getting that much-needed package signed into law. for those reasons, i object to it. the presiding officer: objection is is heard. mr. marshall: mr. president, i want to thank my colleague for her kind comments. the chairwoman has now commitment to continue towork with her on the pandemics prevention act as well. but if my colleagues do not agree with placing a full -- i ask to stop federal funds from being used to conduct risky research with countries that threaten our democracy and

public health. we recently heard that udaid has been paying for this in china. but don't yet know all the other countries where they fund this risky research. what we do know is that despite their relationship with the state department, this funding is being dispensed by usaid without state department security consultations oblivious to the proliferation potential. federal agencies that oversee national intelligence maintain lists of countries that may pose a risk or threat to national security. the department of state, for example, maptains a list that includes burma, the people's republic of china, iran, north korea, pakistan, russia, saudi arabia, and others. this legislation is common sense. we shouldn't be collaborating on dangerous research with our adversaries. i think it is p.o. obvious that all members of our committee agree with us, that they support

this bill and this legislation. on march 14 the committee held a markup where this amendment, the same text in this bill, was unanimously apartisan dod in the bipartisan prevent pandemics act. i appreciate chairwoman murray working so hard, collaborating with ourselves and during the markup she supported this. specifically that it protected biomedical research enterprise that it threads the needle -- excuse me, you stated that it threaded the needled in terms of protecting biomedical research enterprise while taking steps to prevent some of the concerns. given the unwillingness to -- needed step to placing a complete moratorium on gain of function research, we must pass this narrow approach today. as if in legislative soldiers, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 4778 which is at the desk.

further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that at the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mrs. murray: mr. president? the presiding officer: officer the senator from washington. mrs. murray: reserving the right to object, i appreciate the senator from kansas' focus and leadership. i am glad we were able to work together to include a provision similar to this bill in our prevent pandemics act that we did pass out of the help committee by an overwhelming vote earlier in year. along with ranking member burr being we are very focused on getting the prevent pandemics act into law. the senator's provisions within that package as well as many others are really key to making sure that our country is prepared for future pandemics. i do hope we can continue to work on this bill in a bipartisan way and get it passed and put into the law shortly. so while i look forward to continuing to work with the

senator from kansas on this issue within the prevent pandemics act package, if if he's asking today for unanimous consent to pass it, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard.

to deliver supplies and to those affected by ongoing flooding. heat and humidity are rising to dangerous levels in areas that still power. my team is helping coordinate relief efforts in any way they can and with the senate still in session we joined the kentucky national guard yesterday as they distributed food and water to displaced residents. the roads in eastern kentucky are still impassable so the kentucky national guard is flying dozens of helicopter

missions daily to drop water, mre's and vital supplies to kentuckians in remote areas of our state. our state rector was on board as they flew over flooded roadways and homes to visit the community centers operating in areas isolated by rising water. the landings are difficult. sometimes nearly impossible but the heroes of the kentucky national guard will do whatever it takes to reach those stranded by the floods. that's just one part of the flurry of that pivot he. emergency responders have deployed boats and trucks across the affected regions in buckhorn. residents are even loading up to

take supplies to areas where the roads are literally washed out. it's truly heroic work. this emergency is far from over but when our neighbors are in need kentuckians will always help other kentuckians. i'll do to the region myself to survey the damage and help with relief efforts. while here in washington i remain in close contact with those who are out on the ground. i'm grateful to everyone taking on the colossal task of providing for kentucky amid this disaster. on another sad note yesterday congress were shaken by the news that a tragic automobile accident held killed congressman jackie walorski and three others including emma thompson and zachary pots. our former colleague at the capitol and back home and fellow

hoosiers and indiana's second district circumstances familiar to each of us long days on the road with trusted aides with people we represent. by all accounts congressman walorski had two stellar young people by her side. at 27 zachary was a seven-year veteran of her team having served as campaign manager and her. emma her 28-year-old communications director was a capitol hill veteran with the intelligence and drive one former boss described is second to none. in elastase outpourings agree the net ration demonstrate just how great the whole jackie walorski is leaving behind and her friends at the capitol. they marveled at her tremendous personal kindness interferes

efficacy for the families she represented. i had the personal pleasure of breaking bread with congresswoman walorski several years ago and looked forward to every time our paths would actually cross. according to those who knew jackie best or infectious passion and boundless energy to service were routed in the face that guided her entire life. it led her and her 11th husband dean took on the charity and to spend years living in serving needy people in romania. today we trust this faith has reunited our college with her eternal father and we for her family and friends and those who mourn the >> and emma on these, days.

later today the senate will vote on a resolution to kill back a significant layer of regulatory red tape that has been causing headaches all across our country. thanks to the leadership of the jr. senator from alaska this resolution would overturn a biden administration act that aims to give the federal government even more authority to slow install critical and. structure projects. for years our republican government made headway in rolling back some of the countless road or a -- where blogs liberal support in the paths of new highways, bridges and pipelines. we took a bite out of the

process and just last year republicans ensured that bipartisan infrastructure legislation included clear limits designed to speed up federal permitting reviews. alas earlier this year the president fired off an executive action that directly contradicted some of the bipartisan headway catering to radical environmentalists the new biden rule restrains sweeping jurisdictions are for federal bureaucrats to slow down all sorts of critical infrastructure. the democratic action is taking a process that's known for years long waiting in a multi-hundred page federal reports. mr. markey: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, 12 years ago the united states congress was on the precipice of passing historic climate legislation, legislation that may not have

been perfect but it would have cut carbon pollution by 80% by the year 2050. and it would have set us on a path to a healthier, cleaner, safer world. unfortunately, despite that bill passing through the house of representatives, a bill which congressman henry waxman and i were able to craft and to move through the house of representatives, that legislation, even though the senate and the senate democrats had a supermajority, that legislation was ultimately defeated by the same legislative body, the united states senate, that i serve in today. in 2009, the united states senate chose to do nothing

rather than something substantial that would give us a fighting chance against this generational crisis, which is why we have spent the last 12 years in the climate wilderness, with full-blown republican obstructionism and no meaningful congressional action on climate justice all the while that wilderness literally burns to the ground because of climate change. in the intervening decade, we have suffered the consequences of climate inaction. whether that used to be extreme is now the new normal, and that normal is deadly. our addiction to fuels has put communities at risk, worsening asthma, cancers, and disease

in general, and has exposed working people to criminal price gouging from big oil and big gas. throughout this summer, the united states has experienced devastating heat waves, putting 100 million americans under heat warnings across the country. people are dying in kentucky. children are dying in kentucky as a result of the extreme rain and floods, rain that still hasn't stopped. those are so-called 100-years floods, well now they're happening on a weekly basis in kentucky, over and over again communities throughout the united states are facing deadly wildfires, storms and droughts, all of which have become more frequent and more severe over the last 12 years. but instead of giving up after

that missed opportunity more than a decade ago, we reengaged, we rebuilt and reenergized a stronger, smarter climate movement, one that expanded carbon calculators to include climate justice, one that swept complicated carbon trading systems for direct funding for environmental justice communities in our country, and one that exchanged an environmental above-all strategy for our 21st century contract with communities with the promise of climate justice, well-paid union jobs, and cuts to climate pollution so all of our children and grandchildren can thrive on a livable planet. so let me be clear, the inflation reduction act of 2022 is not the green new deal that america wants and needs.

i wish it were. but i've learned the hard truth throughout my years in congress. perfect ideas can only live on through imperfect legislation. as the author of both the green new deal and the waxman-markey climate bill, i know we cannot wait another 12 years for billions of dollars in investment to fight the climate crisis. this is not the bill we wanted. it's not the bill i would have drafted. but we need a package now to fight for and resources to fight with. this bill will not correct every economic injustice in our society or rectify the economic disparities between big oil billionaires and working families, but it starts a process that we absolutely need to level the playing field.

the inflation reduction act makes sure that every billion-dollar corporation finally pays a higher tax rate than a preschoolteacher. last year a preschool teacher in massachusetts paid 8% of their average $39,000 salary in federal taxes. exxonmobil paid only 2.8% of their $9.3 billion u.s. earnings in federal taxes. chevron paid a mere 1.8% of their $9.5 billion in u.s. earnings in federal taxes in 2021. a kindergarten teacher in massachusetts paid 8% on $39,000 of income.

who did more for america last year? all of our kindergarten teachers or the executives at exxonmobil and chevron? who contributed more to our society? that is our challenge right now, to pass this legislation, because the status quo is immoral. it's outrageous. unless we pass this bill, that disparity is perfectly legal. they can evade their responsibility to contribute to solving the problem which they created, the climate crisis. right now, they're letting pre-schoolteachers -- preschoolteachers contribute more than they are to a problem families across our country are suffering from. by passing the inflation reduction act, we can make sure big oil finally pays more in

taxes than preschool teachers. can take that revenue and reinvest it in clean thearnlg cd communities. this will not give the climate movement the trillions needed to confront the crises of systematic racism, economic inequality, a broken health system and climate injustice, but thanks to our relentless fighting this bill contains an historic $60 billion in environmental justice investments. let me say that again. $60 billion will be in this bill to begin the process of rectifying the problems black, brown, and indigenous communities across our country, who have always been the victims of climate change, of environmental injustice. this has never happened before, in any bill in u.s. history. it's in this bill, finally. now, that's the message of the

green new deal. that was something that was driving fox news and the oil companies crazy, when we said we have to rectify environmental injustice as part of the green new deal. it's in this bill. it's in this bill. $60 billion. that will begin to start righting the wrongs brought by polluters in our most vulnerable communities. this could be a down payment on clean air and safer communities everywhere, not just the suburbs, which have always breathed cleaner air than inner city communities, because they don't plant these oil, gas, and other facilities in the suburbs. they put them right next to who they believe are the least powerful communities in our country. we know this bill will not get us to the critical mark of it 50% emissions reductions, 2005 levels by 2030, which is the

baseline of what we need to meet our 2050 targets. however, this package gets us to 40% reductions. economy-wide, more importantly, it puts our economy on an emissions reductions trajectory that positions us to enact more clean energy and climate justice provisions in the future to meet the 50% goal. securing these emissions reductions now is the start which we need, and we need it now. this legislation reflects the largest single investment in climate justice and environmental protection in our nation's history, and it means the climate test. first, it reduces emissions, creates good-paying union jobs, and provides funding so that we can begin the long process of preparing historic harms in our

environmental justice communities with that $60 billion investment. second, the bill lowers energy costs for consumers. price gouging and tax dodging big oil companies are charging americans more than $4 a gallon for gasoline, shaking money out of their pockets at the pumps all across our country. and what we're going to do is just point to the electric vehicle owners, who pay an equivalent of 75 cents a gallon right now in our country in order to go the same distance, and we're going to open up this opportunity to tens of millions of additional americans once we pass it. the inflation reduction act provides tax credits to low and middle-income americans so they can buy a new or used e.v., break their addiction to big oil and save money on their daily

commutes. and finally, the inflation reduction act will make sure we make things in america again. the domestic manufacturing tax credits in this bill, for the first time, ensure that we will build electric vehicles, solar panels, wind turbines here in our own backyard, in the united states, american-made infrastructure means good-paying american union jobs. a new study released today shows this bill will create -- get ready -- nine million new jobs in our country. that is what we're talking about. that is what will be debated on the floor of the united states senate over the next several days. i'm especially proud of a provision i authored with

senator chris van hollen and congresswoman debbie dingell that would fund a national climate bank to ensure vulnerable american communities will have access to capital to invest in local, clean energy projects and fuel a new generation of entrepreneurs from disadvantaged backgrounds. how big is this program? $27 billion in a climate bank that communities across the country can apply to, to have the lowest possible interest rates for their greening of their housing units, the greening of any other part of their community. what mckenzie has estimated is that for every dollar that's in the bank, $27 billion, it will unleash $7 to $10 of private sector investment. meaning we're looking at $200 billion to $300 billion that are going to get unleashed just in this section, in that one pro

gap. critical defense production act funding will ensure that we have robust domestic supply chains to install heat pumps in american buildings and responsibly source critical mince rals for clean energy technologies made in -- minerals for clean energy technologies made in america. we have to break this whole addiction we have to foreign oil coming into our country, but also being dependent upon other countries for the clean energy technologies. we're going to do it here. that's what this bill says. we're going to tell people we don't need your oil any more than we need your sand. we're going to do it right here. we're going to build the technologies right here in our country. my time in congress has taught me this, we cannot let the perfect be the enemy of the good. ending up with nothing might be a viable political option, but it is not a viable planetary

option. this is a good bill, with broad-based appeal that lowers costs for yurns, fights inflation with deficit reduction, protects our environment with critical justice investments, and provides affordable health care access to all americans. in 2009, zero was an option, which this senate took. zero is not an option we can take. we must pass this legislation, and we will begin a pathway for generations to come that says we understood your anger, we understood why you as a younger generation believe that the system had failed you and that it had not provided the solutions which you deserve. so let's pass this bill and keep fighting in cities and states and in the white house and in congress so that we can finish the job in the years ahead, meet

our climate targets, and finally pass the green new deal that our country deserves. this is our moment, and the beauty of it is that there's a poetic justice in it, and it is that chevron only paying 2.8% on their profits last year, exxonmobil only paying 3% on their profits last year. they're the ones who are going to pay for the solutions to the problems which they created. they're going to be the source of the funding, because we're going to force them to finally pay their taxes, to pay their fair share of the dues to live in this great country. that moment of justice is arriving, and it is justice. they are the ones who should be paying for this. they are the ones who have a moral, political, and economic responsibility to pay for this

bill, and they right now are screaming, they are absolutely angry that we are going to take that action. but i will tell you this, we're going to be forced to do it with no republican support, because the gop now stands for gas and oil party. it now stands for gang of polluters. that's the gop of today. they're going to say, oh, my goodness, look at all the socialism that's going into this package. for wind, solar, all-electric vehicles and batteries. you know what this young generation's response is? what do you call tax breaks for oil, gas, and coal for 100 years? if that's not socialism, what is? all we're looking for is fair treatment for the renewable energy revolution, because once we give them the same kinds of incentives, get out of the way, because we're going to have that

revolution that young people in our country have wanted for so long. so, it's all on us, the democrats. it's our moment to deliver for the american people and guarantee the resources we need to keep fighting for the future we deserve. by the way, after we've created those nine million new jobs, that's forever going to be a new political constituent in our country. they're going to be saying to senators who vote no today, what are you doing? you're voting against my new job that has been created. this is just the beginning, and we're going too telescope the time frame ultimately in order to finish the job. yes, we're now in a sprint to solve the problems, because every night on every tv station the lead stories are floods and fires, and every other imaginable consequence of climate change, and it is time, the moment has arrived, and the united states senate with only

democratic support is ready to take the action that the younger generation in our country has been waiting for. i thank you, mr. president, for giving me the opportunity of being here, and i yield the floor. thank you.

mr. bennet: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from colorado. mr. bennet: thank you, mr. president. is the senate in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not in a quorum call.mr. bennet. president. i wanted to come down tonight to talk a little bit about the bill we have in front of us this weekend, the inflation reduction act. i've been in the senate for 13 years, and i think this is one of the most important pieces of

legislation that we've ever considered. let me just say also, presiding officer and i have been here for a long time, and there have been weeks and weeks and weeks, months, years that have gone by here when it felt like we weren't getting anything done. what an amazing moment to be here, when we've got a bipartisan infrastructure bill that we passed, the biggest investment in our infrastructure since eisenhower was president. we passed the first bipartisan bill to overcome the n.r.a. just a few weeks ago. last week we were able to pass the chips act to bring back semiconductors to the united states of america and the pact act, the veterans bill last night, and today we're here to talk about the inflation reduction act. it's quite an amazing moment in our democracy and i think in the country's history and it's not the subject of my speech

tonight, but i wanted to say to the presiding officer on the floor that i think we are at a moment in our country's history when we are ready, finely, to turn the -- finally, to turn the trickle-down economics that has been a hardship for so many families and create in the united states an economy when it grows, it's for everybody, not just those at the top. the bill on the infrastructure fits into that. the bill on semiconductors fits into that as well. and if you look at the agenda washington has pursued for the last 40 years or so, it's pretty simple. let the big corporations do whatever they want and call it freedom. cut investments in working families and in our future, and instead of grappling with the income equality that we have and

instead of grappling with the economic mobility -- mobility that we have, cut taxes for the largest corporations, hoping that those tax cuts will somehow magically trickle down to everyone else and pay for themselves. that has never happened. here's what happened instead. 40 years of an economy that's worked really well for the wealthiest people and corporations but hasn't worked very well for anybody else, an economy with income inequality higher than at any time since the 1920's where, mr. president, the top .1% of americans, a mere 160,000 families hold basically the same amount of wealth as the bottom 90% of americans, nearly 145 million families.

160,000 families, the top .1% holding as much wealth as the bottom 90% the nine out of ten americans, nearly 145 million families. where kids, i'm sad to say this in front of the pages here tonight, have a 50-50 shot of earning as much as their parents when that number used to be 90%. it charges families more for their health care than any other industrialized country in the world, that forces seniors in this country, and only in this country, to cut their pills in half or skip prescriptions or decide whether they're going to be able to eat or take their medicine. shackled to a global fossil fuel markets dictated by tyrants like vladimir putin, despite our abundant resources at home and

despite the urgent threat from climate change, that is the legacy of the past 40 years of trickle-down economics. and as i've said many, many times on this floor, we can't survive another 40 years like the last 40 years and expect to hold on to this democracy. i don't think we can survive another ten years like this and expect to hold on to this democracy with this failed agenda. working families can't sustain it and our democracy can't withstand it. when people feel like they've lost a sense of opportunity for themselves and their families no matter how hard they work, that's when, you know, throughout human history somebody shows up, some self-interested politician shows up and says, i alone can fix it. you don't need a democracy, you don't need the rule of law. you should expect your public

sector and your private sector to be hopelessly corrupt and you're a sucker if you don't believe that because people are going to take advantage of you. we need a new agenda for america, mr. president. and i'm pleased to say we're closer, i think tonight, this weekend than we have been in a long time to pursuing one. it started with the american rescue plan, it continued, as i said earlier with the bipartisan infrastructure law we passed year, to rebuild our country and the bipartisan innovation bill that we passed last week to help us compete with china and bring thousands of good-paying jobs back home and now i hope we're close to passing the next part, the inflation reduction act. this bill will lower costs for millions of families at the pharmacy, at the pump, and on their monthly energy bills and insurance premiums. it will do more -- it will do

more to achieve energy independence and fight climate change than anything that we have ever done, than anything that we have ever done as a nation. and unlike the trump tax cuts for the wealthiest americans, which added $1.9 trillion to the debt, notwithstanding the arguments that we've heard going back to ronald reagan, the false arguments that we heard going back to ronald reagan, that these tax cuts will pay for themselves, once again, of course they didn't pay for themselves. and unlike that, $1.9 trillion hole blasted into our deficit when unemployment was only at 3.5%, every cent of that money borrowed just for the privilege of giving tax cuts to the wealthiest americans, 52% of that bill went to the top 5% of

americans, we borrowed every single cent to do that. that was no different than when the presiding officer was the mayor of richmond, virginia, and he said to the people of richmond, i've got a really good idea for how we could spend a lot of money, but we're going to have to borrow money to do it, and they said, well, that sounds like a lot of money that you're borrowing. tell us what you're spending it on? are you using it for our roads and bridges? no. are you using it for the parks? no. are you tiewfg for education, for -- using it for education, mental health? no are you using it for cleaner energy? no. what are you using it for, mr. mayor, they would say. and the answer is, i'm going to borrow this massive amount of money and give it to the two

richest neighborhoods in richmond and hope it trickles down to everybody he's. that is -- i'm not making it up. that is the theory. that is the policy, and that was the theory and policy when ronald reagan was president, that was the theory and policy when donald trump was president, and unlike those bills, every single cent in this bill is paid for. more than that. it cuts the deficit by over $300 billion. if you listened to my republican colleagues, at least some of them and the way they complain about this bill, you would think it was some sort of take over of the -- takeover of the united states of america. it's ridiculous, i think sometimes they don't want the public to know what's in this bill because what's in this bill is so popular with the american people. let's start with health care.

for the first time ever this bill requires medicare to negotiate drug prices on behalf of the american people. the presiding officer and i wrote a bill called medicare x. we introduced it in 2017 to create a public option so everybody in america could have a benefit of choosing between their private insurance and public insurance, that's not in this bill, but in that bill, we said that medicare ought to negotiate drug prices for seniors and this would allow medicare to use its market power to drive down the costs of prescription drugs. that's going to save families thousands of dollars and it's going to save our country billions of dollars. the only reason we have not passed that is because special interests have succeeded at tying medicare's hands so that pharmaceutical companies can keep charging american prices

that no other developed nation in the world would tolerate. americans like julia from denver. her dad has a heart condition. he pays $6,000 a month for medication, that's $72,000 a year for something he needs to take for the rest of his life. that is outrageous. but i hear stories like that every day all over colorado. inflation reduction act also would cap out-of-pocket costs for seniors to $2,000 a year, so they're not spending down their retirement to buy medication. i know seniors in colorado spending their retirement money to get the medication they need. the choices they have to make unlike any choice that seniors have to make in any other country in the world. i was with seniors in pueblo,

one said i have three inhalers, i can't afford three, so i can only take one at a time and i'm getting sicker and sicker as a result of that. another person in the room had worked her entire life at the local newspaper and she was telling me she was having to cut her medications in order to make it through economically. and on top of that -- on top of that, this bill would have -- has a three-year extension for tax credit to help millions of americans pay for their health insurance. including over 150,000 coloradans who are now going to be table to afford their health insurance in ways that it couldn't. the second part of this bill closes tax loopholes for about 200 of the biggest corporations in america, those with over $1 billion in profit.

this comes directly from a bill i wrote with senator warren and with senator king. today these corporations use armies of lawyers and accountants that no middle-class family has, no working family has to pay almost nothing in taxes. last year chevron paid an effective rate of 1.8%. bank of america paid 3.5%. 3.5%. that's after the trump tax cut cut the corporate rate and took it down to i think it was 20%, which, by the way, there was no consensus to do. the consensus was at 25%. here you have companies paying 1.8%, 3.5% in the case of bank of america, amazon paid 6.1%. they might want to fire their c.f.o. because they're paying a little more than the 1.8%, the

3.5%, at&t paid negative 1.3%, that means they got money from the treasury in tax credit. in colorado, a typical firefighter, teacher or police officer has an effective tax rate of somewhere around 16% to 22%. so on the one hand, you've got working americans paying 20% of their income, an economy that's barely lifted their incomes in 40 years while billion-dollar corporations are paying virtually nothing. i had a conversation the other day with the teacher of the year in colorado, she's from glenwood springs. she wasn't complaining, but making an observation, she said 70% to 80% of her colleagues where she teaches and in the high school have to work two and three jobs just to afford to

live in glenwood springs. do we think it is right for her to pay 22% in taxes and the biggest corporations in america that are making more than $1 billion in taxes and income don't have to pay at least 15% much less the 20% gift that donald trump gave them when the number that everybody had basically agreed to was 25%? it is no wonder that americans think this tax code is rigged against them. we start to fix that problem with this bill. it's not everything that i would have wanted. i think we have a lot more to do to make this tax code fairer, not the least of which is to make permanent the expanded child tax credit that i worked on with sherrod brown and cory booker, kamala harris to give

working people the biggest tax cut they had in generations, that's one of the things not in this bill that i feel really terrible about. this bill is also -- the carried interest loophole. most americans have no idea what that is because 99.99999% of americans aren't hedge fund managers. they don't benefit from this loophole to lower their tax rate and pay less than their assistance or their secretaries -- their assistants or their secretaries. that hasn't stopped my republican colleagues from telling the american public that this bill would tax working people. that's what they're saying. and i guess that's true if by working people they mean hedge fund managers. over half of whom base their business in the cayman islands

or billion dollar corporations. we are increasing their taxes. that's true. but there is nothing in this bill that's raising taxes on american families, nothing, nothing. it's amazing to me people that i meet, that simultaneously support the trump tax cuts for the wealthiest people on the theory of trickledown economics and are opposed to this bill on the theory that somehow the taxes that will we're raising on literally the wealthiest humans in our country and the wealthiest corporations are somehow going to trickle down to people in the workplace. that's never going to happen. it never has happened. the last part of this bill contains energy. and first i think it's important for us to have some context. it's been nearly 50 years since

the 1973 oil crisis spurred america to seek energy independence. it's been more than 30 years since nasa scientists james hanson urged congress to fight climate change i think at a hearing held by my predecessor. until now we haven't had a plan. we have had no plan to accomplish either. we haven't just stalled. in some cases we've actually gone backward, mr. president. at home right now our use of coal has increased during the biden administration. abroad, germany has been forced to reactivate coal plants after putin's attack on ukraine while other e.u. nations plan on rationing natural gas. or turning on their coal plants. instead of leading the world with a coherent approach on these issues, washington has been deadlocked in the same old

tired politics around climate and energy and as usual, the american people have paid the price. they've paid it at the pump with incomes that have barely budged in this economy. in colorado we've paid for it in homes incinerated by record wildfires. mountain passes washed out by mud slides. fields wittering in extreme -- withering in extreme drought that no one has seen for 800 years. the colorado river in crisis. and people fear the american west will somehow be unrecognizable to our grandchildren. mr. president, when this deal fell apart ten days ago or so, whatever it was, my heart was broken as a result of that. because i thought about what colorado has been going through, and i thought -- i had to call and explain to my 22-year-old

and 21-year-old, 17-year-old daughters that once again we had failed. and their sense of disbelief, of incredulity which i think is shared by every single member of their generation in this country, whether they're democrats or whether they're republicans or independents or if they don't even know what political party they're in, how can you not deal with this? how can you place this burden on us? and if we pass this bill, we're going to be look the next generation straight in the eye and say we're actually living up to our responsibility to you, at least with respect to climate. and that fills me with joy. and that's the reason to support this bill and feel good about

it. we can't afford another ten years of dysfunction on these issues. this transition should have started 25 years ago, mr. president. 25 years ago. in my opinion, we urgently needed a plan, an energy policy that secures the energy our economy needs and relentlessly lowers climate pollution. in other words, we need to plan for clean energy independence. we can start by being honest about where we are. i think that's really important. today 60% of our power generation comes from fossil fuels. only 20% comes from renewables. over 90%, 90% of our transportation relies on fossil fuels. and less than 3% uses electricity across the economy. 80% of primary energy consumption still comes from fossil fuels. renewables are just 12%. we've made some progress, but to

hit our emissions targets, renewables have to scale from 12% today to at least 60% by 2050. that's why even under the most ambitious projections, some fossil fuels will likely remain in our energy mix for decades, even through 2050. don't take my word for it. that's not me saying it. these projections are from the national academy of sciences, the international energy agency. princeton. and that's the reality that they confront us with. when i hear politicians and others whip up twitter with promises to reject every permit for new infrastructure, they ignore this reality. and i worry that we see the scientific high ground to critics of climate action who then claim climate advocates as disconnected or delooted or even

daing -- deluted or even dangerous to the economy. and the only thing that wins are fossil fuels. the only thing that wins is coal. i worry sometimes these claims also repel the very americans we need to support our energy transition. if our position in the short term is to oppose every new piece of infrastructure, we're essentially forcing america to choose between scarcity and higher prices. to choose between either less energy or higher prices. i was in belgium with our colleague chris coons, met with the deputy prime minister there who said -- we're on our way to scotland for the climate conference. and he said, we have to meet these climate targets. we have to meet these climate

targets in 5050. -- in 2050 but he said i don't know how we're going to met them and not have -- break out over europe. we're seeing that now. we're seeing that in a world where putin has cut off russian oil and russian gas because of his invasion of ukraine, the challenges that creates in democratic societies when it comes to energy. there is no country in the world better positioned on this question, better positioned to lead this transition to clean energy than the united states of america. there's not a country in europe. there's not a country in the middle east. china is not better positioned on this than we are. we are the best positioned country in the world to lead on -- lead this transition. in fact, i think we're the only country in the world that can lead this transition. which, by the way, is why it was such a tragedy when it looked ten days ago this bill wasn't

going anywhere. because then the rest of the world looks at us and says, why should we do anything if the country that is most capable of being able to do this can't do it. and what i want to assure you is that these outcomes of scarcity or higher prices, neither of those outcomes are going to support the broad and durable support that we need to be able to not just pass climate policy but keep it the law of the land and make sure that it lasts until the next generation of americans can pick it up from us and say thank you for putting us in a decent position. we're going to finish the job. and then if we can't pass this bill and we can't make progress

on climate change, then what we have instead is our current policy which is the status quo which drives up prices, is bad for our national security, and is terrible at reducing emissions. that's where we are today. that's why coal is up, as i said, during the biden administration. for a successful transition, we've got to smooth the path with domestic energy production now to stabilize prices and bridge our way to a clean energy economy tomorrow. and to do that we need every tool on the table. this means deploying renewables like wind and solar which my state has led. we need to do it at record rates. we need to invest in next-generation technologies from carbon capture to hydrogen to advanced nuclear. it means we need to recognize the role that national gas -- natural gas has played in our transition. over the last 15 years, replacing coal with natural gas

has accounted for 60% of our national carbon reductions. and that's really good. but we need to do a lot better because the time is ticking. and now we have the opportunity because this bill, the secure america's position as the global standard for production, modeled on our example in colorado where we passed the first law to capture methane when senator hickenlooper was our governor, by driving down meth pollution and strengthening cleanup and monitoring across the supply chain, the last thing we should accept is the leaking pipes that the status quo will have when we have the available tools to do better. we can't accept the painful price shocks that the american people have to beat because of our lack of a coherent energy policy. fortunately, this bill lays the

foundation for a responsible energy policy for the country. and it has the largest investment to fight climate change in the nation's history. and it's full of proposals. i've worked on for years, proposals to rapidly deploy clean energy and to provide industry the long long-term cery it needs. to boost american manufacturing for wind and solar and batteries to power electric vehicles and our energy grid. to invest $14 billion to help rural communities transition from fossil fuels along with over $25 billion for environmentally friendly farm and conservation and forest health. we also have the opportunity in this bill to address the drought that's ravages the american west and to do it in a way that measurably improves the situation of the colorado river basin, reflects the interests of the people of my state, and other states in the upper basin, and actually deals, finally,

with the long-term causes of the crisis that we face. when you add it all up, this bill would put us on track to reduce carbon pollution 40% by the end of the decade. that is light years ahead of where we would be without it. but even if you don't care about climate change, you should still like this bill because it lowers costs for families. how does it do that? by increasing the supply of american energy with a responsible approach while reducing demand for oil and gas by putting more renewables and electric vehicles on the market. according to a recent study, this bill would reduce the average family's electricity bill by hundreds of dollars a year. from my perspective, as i said, this transition should have started 25 years ago. and we can't wait any longer. now is the moment to act. russia's invasion of ukraine should finally rid america and our allies of the delusion that

we can continue to rely on foreign dictators for our energy needs. it should remind us how foolish we have been to surrender the lifeblood of our economy to the whims of tyrants. so nearly 50 years after the 1973 oil crisis, let's make this the year that we finally pass a coherent plan for america's energy independence. let's finally organize our thinking, mr. president, and advance a plan that liberates us from foreign energy and tackles the threat of climate change head-on and while we're at it, let's reforge the engine of american manufacturing to produce the clean energy we need and to create thousands of good-paying jobs along the way. let's support our european allies by exporting cleaner american energy so they don't have to rely on coal or russian gas to heat their homes through the winter. there is no country in the world better prepared than the united

states to lead this effort. and this bill will do more than anything we've ever done to strengthen our hand in this regard. in another era, a proposal like this would have received 70 votes on the senate floor. every provision in here is a victory for common sense. and a victory for the american people over special interests and the status quo. frankly, i don't know how many people could request home and say -- could go home and say they voted against a balanced approach to achieve energy independence, fight climate change, and lower costs for families at this moment in our history. i don't know how you'd go home and say they voted to preserve tax loopholes for hedge fund managers and billion-dollar corporations that no american family can even imagine, as they're paying the rates of tax aches they're paying. or -- taxation they're paying. or how they voted to allow pharmaceutical companies to continue to gouge the american

people, instead of letting medicare negotiate on their behalf. how they voted against reducing our deficit by $300 billion. but that's the choice we have in front of us. to me, it's a choice that's obvious. we've got to pass this bill. we need to seize the moment to lower costs for american people, to makes our tax code a little fairer, to secure our energy independence and spark a new era of clean energy manufacturing and innovation, to support our allies and lead the world in a fight against climate change, and hopefully, hopefully, hopefully, mr. president, leave something a little bit better for the next generation of americans. with that, mr. president, i thank my colleague from new jersey for his patience, and i yield the floor. mr. menendez: the presiding officer: the

senator from new jersey. mr. menendez: i was happy to listen to my colleague from colorado and his erudite observations and what it means for the american people. i very much appreciate it. mr. president, i come to the floor for a very important reason. i rise not to introduce a bill, nor to ask my colleagues for unanimous consent. no. i am here for one simple reason, and i want to make sure that the c-span cameras are capturing this moment for posterity. i come to the floor today to honor keith roachford, a member of my staff who faithfully served the state of new jersey, the united states senate and the united states of america for more than 35 years. now, mr. president, as you can see from keith's face, it's clear that he had no idea this was happening. we told him he was coming for another reason, and i don't think we would have gotten him otherwise. but nonetheless, i rise today

because after 35 years and 18 congresses, keith is retiring from the senate. as a result, i wanted to come to the floor to send him off with a tribute befitting his legendary career. a native son of willingborough, new jersey, keith served not one, not two, but four united states senators for the garden state. he is the very definition of institutional knowledge. in countless fellow staff members can attest to his experience, which has saved the day on more than one occasion. keith has sometimes said he's been here so long he came with the furniture. it's a classic keith line, a glimpse not evenly into his sense of humor but also his view of how staff work behind the scenes gets stuff done. that may be the case, you tooth, i rise to shine a spotlight on your illustrious career. to start, i'd like to share some of the stories his colleagues have sent me. keith has not only been a mentor

to me, they say, he's also been a friend to anyone lucky enough to come into contact with him. when i think of keith the words that come to mind are helpful, generous, thoughtful, patient, and understanding team players. another one said he's so kind to everyone, from interns to the chief of staff, and is always, always willing to share his knowledge with others. mr. president, it brings me immense joy to speak these words into the "congressional record" so that, like keith's legacy, this he may stand the test of time. beyond his track record and sterling reputation, keith at heart is a humble man. i know it isn't easy for him to sit here, listen to me shower praise on him, to that, i say, well, you're still on the payroll, so you have to bear with it. above all, keith's a family man. a devoted husband to his wife, sandy, and incredible father to his beloved children rick, danielle and lauren. he's a man that every day for

the last 36 years has braved the brutal beltway traffic to come into work in the hart senate office building. he's a man that every weekend made a similar trip with his family to attend services at st. george's episcopal church in d.c. keith credits his faith for guiding him throughout his life. he will be the first to tell you it's been a moral compass for him, season after political season. as the book of james asks, what good is someone who says they have faith but does not have works? fret not. in addition to his duties as senior warden of the vestry at st. george's, keith gives back to the community. he's a member of the brotherhood the st. an crew, serves as -- st. andrew, he's a boy scout leader. at every opportunity, he goes out of his way to give back. it's a trait he learned growing up. as the son and grandson of public servants, keith was

taught from an early age service to others is the highest calling. his grandfather was a transit operator for the city of new york, his father a veteran in the national guard worked for the sanitation department for 37 years. no surprise keith has followed in their footsteps. he's a throwback to a previous era, one where individuals spent years, if not decades, working for the same organization. i know keith never intended to spend 36 years working in the senate. he used to joke with colleagues that he came to washington fresh out of college just to try it out. but in the process he's gone from working as a constituent liaison to mail director, to deputy chief of staff and so much more. today keith is an indispensable resource, a go-to person for appropriations, defense, veterans issues, homeland security and the budget. he's had a hand in passing countless initiates for our office, from supporting community development financial

institutions to shoring up supply chains and expanding senior housing to inserting pro vigs in pact act, that's how we got him here, telling him that's what we'd talk about, that addresses the needs of veterans suffering from gulf war illness. keith has had a hand in far too many wins to count. is yourifies to say, the ledge -- suffice to say his legend led to what we call the roachford rule, which is simple -- with every appropriations letter i sign on to, every bill i cosponsor, to pass the rule it needs a tangible benefit for new jersey families. much like the man it's named after, the roachford rule is about connecting what we do here in d.c. to the people whose lives it affects back home. long after keith has left the senate, his rule will live on as testament to his relentless pursuit of good government. a trademark for a public servant devoted to the common good, a namesake all of us in this chamber would do well to

emulate. i'll end with this, last march i came to this floor to rebuke the words that a colleague used in reference to the january 6 attack. i won't use the time to rehash what i said. instead, i'll once again lift up the bravery and courage of the man who compelled me to act. late one night keith e-mailed me outlining the pain and outrage he felt after reading our colleague's comments. in personal terms, he relayed how his entire life he had to endure, in overt and covert ways, the harmful legacy of racism and stain of white supremacy. knowing keith, it could not have been easy to keep that message to his boss, a sitting united states senator. but as i said in that speech, there comes a time when you either ruffle some feathers and speak the truth or fail to do justice to the values you hold dear.

mr. president, the united states senate is a better institution, and i am certainly a better senator, for having keith roachford work in these halls. he's a man of principle, a man of god, a man who has put every ounce of his being into the work that new jerseyans have sent us here to do. he's the first person to tell you that he's not perfect, the first to say he's certainly seen it all over 36 long years of service, but by god, i cannot help but feel so thankful and grateful we have been blessed with his presence. he is a calm and steady haened that helped guide our -- steady hand that helped guide our office since 2006, the quiet one, who keeps his powder guy drie and plays the long time, who never loses sight of the ultimate goal to improve the lives of hard working american families. john madison once said, if men were angels, no government would be needed.

i've never met an angel, but i've worked alongside keith roachford for 16 of those 36 years. he's served with me longer than any other of the u.s. senators he's worked with, and it's why i can truthfully say without pause that keith is truly doing god's work here on earth. when keith first mentioned that he was thinking of leaving, he said the most incredible thing. he said you know, senator, it's just that with the pandemic and work from home, i've just gotten to spend more time with sandy and the kids. we don't want to wait any longer to get started. we make breakfast and take walks. i just don't want to wait any longer to do that. that, mr. president, is keith in a nutshell. that's who he is. so i want to congratulate keith on an incredible 36 years of senate service. we're going to miss you, certainly so. but to you, to sandy, to your three children, we wish you all

the best on a well-deserved retirement. thank you, keith. thank you, mr. president. i yield back. and observe the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: .

quorum call: quorum call:

quorum call:

including putting medicare from the chopping block by making it i want to talk about the good things that democrats have done. some on a bipartisan basis. in some which it looks like we're going to have to do a loan for the american people. mr. president, just in the last few weeks this united states senate has made historic progress, tackling a number of very real and very urgent challenges that our country faces. we passed the first major gun reform bill in 30 years. we passed historic legislation to boost american manufacturing of essential semi conductor chips. important to our economy and our national security. we passed the packed acts of veterans exposed to toxins will get the care they deserve it. i just yesterday, we voted to admit finland and sweden as new

members of nato pride therefore expanding and strengthening the atlantic alliance in the face of putin's brutal war against ukraine. these are major accomplishments. now is not the time to rest on our laurels. now's not the time to coaster. that's everything we can to fight back against rising prices, against inflation. it's been driven in recent months for the 3p's, putin's poor, its impact on food prices. the change disruption has caused. price gouging reaping record profits. this a bit big drivers of inflation. i've listened to republican senate colleagues here on the floor week after week trying to exploit inflation as a campaign issue. as if it were all caused by the policies of president biden.

the american people know much better. also know they are talking up inflation talking down the economy, we the democratic majority have a plan to do something about rising costs. it is called the inflation reduction act. mr. president, in the coming days were going to be voting on that. i hope a republican colleagues will have a change of heart, at least some of them. because here's the bottom line. the inflation reduction act will drive down prices over time will produce the deficit and it will do that without raising taxes on anyone making under $400,000 a year. not by one dime. that does all of that while addressing four major issues facing our country. they need to lower healthcare costs. the need to address the climate

crisis. the need to fix part of a broken tax system, this is start on that. reduce the deficit. mr. president first on healthcare. listless chamber have known the cost of prescription drugs in the united states are way too high out of control. trini prescription drug as people in other advanced economies around the world. it's not just squeezing people's pocketbooks, that of course hurts. it's also jeopardizing their health. if you look at the study by the kaiser family foundation they found nearly one and three adults reported they had not taken their medication as prescribed. due to cost, there to spencer they could not afford them.

zero nine and ten older dark adults take prescription medication. sixty-five and older struggle to further medicine. here's what adds insult to injury. american taxpayers spent over $40 billion every year to support happening at the national institutes of health in my state of maryland. that is a great investment for our country. it helps discover, it helps develop and produce many of the life-changing medications that are available to american families today. when two people around the world. but it is just not right for american taxpayers to invest $40 billion a year on developing and drugs that are then sold by american pharmaceutical companies here in the united states for two, three, four

times as much as they were sold overseas. benefit from the great research done at nih. they pay lower costs on the medicines developed from the research that american to help fund the research in the united states. that is just not right. so mr. president, that is why the inflation reduction act finally empowers the medicare program to negotiate crisis with the pharmaceutical industry. private insurance companies negotiate volume discounts every day. all the time to try to get better deal for their members. why should we tie the hands of the medicare program? i said finally mr. president, you and i and many others in this chamber have worked offs just for one or two years but for decades to try to achieve this. i written the pharmaceutical

blocking it because if you take away the power of the medicare that means they get to write the bill themselves. so, this is important. it's also accompanied by a cap on out of spending to $2000 a year. and last but not least this extends the important work we achieve the american rescue plan who get their insurance through the affordable care exchanges. in my state, marylanders are saving because of that provision from the american plan which this bill will extend for three more years. we are joined in this effort by a vast coalition including aarp

and 38 million members who support this bill. meanwhile's way of seeing billion dollar pharmaceutical companies pouring their profits in negative as to try to defeat this bill. just last night i saw two or three of them in the space of about an hour. i think the country is pretty clear on what is at stake here. on the one hand you have tens and tens of millions of americans who will benefit prescription drugs. that big pharma trying to maintain this privilege position redo not have to negotiate them in order to reduce the profits. mr. president, let's be clear what were going to do. that will lower the cost for seniors, we are capping out-of-pocket spending from

seniors nor make it more affordable to get health insurance through the affordable care act marketplaces. and yet right now as of today, with every one of our republicans voting no. would i go around maryland this is not a partisan issue. want us to take this action. on the same is true as climate change. most americans regardless of party recognize a very real harm caused by climate change. they just have to look around them or turn on the news. apparently when you enter the senate republican cloak room you go into a science free in fact free zone. many of our colleagues filled out the fact of human caused climate change. that is out of touch with the american people who see the harm every day and also see the promise of developing a clean energy industry.

that is why our legislation make this big investment in more rapidly deploying clean energy technology. we are projected to cut u.s. emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by 40% by 2030. we should move even faster but at least this gets us in the game to hitting the targets that we have too. and we will do that while supercharging the development, the manufacturing of the deployment of wind, solar, battery power. mr. president, want to talk about a couple provisions in this field. there are many first is called the greenhouse gas reduction fund. $27 billion psalm could support a national climate bank which is initiative i've been working on this by time and the representatives with my

colleague ed markey national climate bank would be a magnet for private investment in new sustainable technology channeling more capitol into the clean energy space and lowering the risk to investors. for every 1 dollar of public financing through climate bank, we project it will draw in sevee investment turbocharge and clean energy. in addition, it targets a large share of investments to low income and disadvantaged communities that often lack access to financing for clean energy and energy efficiency projects. also includes another called hope for home. i've worked on it with a

bipartisan group of colleagues in the house and the senate. that includes congressman peter welch from here in the senate, senator coons and shaheen. the hope for homes legislation has been incorporated in this bill will provide americans with sizable rebates with cash credits to retrofit their homes with clean energy energy efficiency technology. it will not only help us meet our climate goals going to save consumers up to seven and $50 every on their heating and cooling bills. and to give people a rebate to make their homes more energy-efficient. they will save money as a result. and it also invest in clean energy jobs training so we have the people power to help folks

in every neighborhood around the country access the help and the workers they need. estimate to help generate 80000 jobs over the next couple of years in this important area. mr. president inflation reduction act is also includes major to develop clean energy manufacturing base. introduce our finance unclean import products for include 30 billion in tax credits designed to accelerate manufacturing solar panels, wind turbine, batteries and critical minerals right here in the united states. anna has made it one of their goals and they've been open about to dominate the clean energy technology space for years to come. right here in the united states. i want to give a great example for my state of maryland which

is the vanguard of a budding offshore. nations en bloc, 967, 994, 1094, 10 the 5, 1104, 1126, 1127, 1128, 891, 892, 893, 114, 123, and 1069 through 1077. that the senate -- 1123. i may not have said it clearly enough. 1114. should i do it again? a lot of numbers, you know. that the senate vote on the nominations en bloc, without intervening action or debate, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the presiding officer: without objection. the question occurs on the nominations en bloc.

all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. the presiding officer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate consider the following nominations en bloc, 984, 1052, 1061, 1062, 1064, 1111, 1115, 1116, 1117, 1118, that the senate vote on the nominations en bloc, without intervening action or debate, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's actions, and the senate resume legislative session. the presiding officer: without objection. the question occurs on the nominations en bloc. all those in favor say aye.

all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nominations are confirmed en bloc. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitsed to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following senate resolutions introduced earlier today, senate res. 744, senate res. 745, senate res. 746. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed en bloc. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the senate veterans affair committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 3606, and the senate proceed to

its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 3606, a bill to amend title 38, united states code, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged. the senate will proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: if there's no further debate, the question is on passage of the bill. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill is passed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate's vet veterans' affairs committee be discharged from further consideration of s. 4558 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 4458, a bill to

attend title 38, united states coat, so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: if there's no further debate, the question is on passage of the bill. all those in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill is passed. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: mr. president, finally, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today ite adjourn until 12 noon on saturday, august 6, and that following the prayer and pledge the morning your be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, time for the two leaders be reserved for use later in the day and morning business be closed. that upon the conclusion of morning business, the senate resume consideration of the

motion to discharge the omen nomination. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: for information of the senators, the members should expect roll call votes starting at 12:30 p.m. saturday. if no further business to come before the senate, i ask it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the update on the the inflation reduction act. majority leader schumer announced lawmakers will begin work on it saturday with a vote to officially begin debate. if that is approve sunday is expected to be full of votes on limited amendments with final passage potentially lined up for early monday morning. all votes including final passage will only require a simple majority. the congressional budget office analysis of the democrats a plan

at c-span.org and follow the senate live on c-span2 or with c-span now our free video app. >> he spent as your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more including comcast. >> you think this just a committee center? >> know it's way more than that. comcast's parting with 1000 committee center circuit wi-fi enabled the list students from low income families get the tools they need to be ready for anything. comcast support c-span as a public service. these other giving a front row seat to democracy. >> like to welcome aaron for joining us tonight. it's about 30 minutes fromm kickoff of super bowl lvi in