the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. mr. barrasso: thank you, mr. president. mr. president, i come to the floor today to talk about

combied -- biden administration's war on american energy. over the last two years joe biden's energy policy seems to have been based on two principles. one is restricting american energy production and the second, regrettably, is a policy that benefits china. time and again joe biden's energy policies have hurt america and have helped china. when joe biden's first day in office, he shut down the keystone xl pipeline, and i think he did it for spite. it would have brought 800,000 barrels of oil to this country every single day. joe biden then stopped all new energy leases on federal land, and in wyoming we have a lot of federal land. he did it in a way that was blatantly illegal. a federal judge actually ordered joe biden to follow the law, to sell energy leases. follow the law, mr. president.

as of today, joe biden has leased fewer acres of federal land for energy than any president in modern times. and he raised the royalty rate for oil and gas development on federal lands. now this is the fee that the government collects for energy that's produced on federal lands. he raised it by half, exe -- and he did it overnight. higher fees will get passed on to consumers, and, by the way, people are noticing the price at the pump is going up again. joe biden also raised taxes on natural gas by billions of dollars. raised taxes on colby $1 billion as well. as a nation today, we're still producing about two million barrels of oil less than was projected we would be producing every day a number of years ago, before the pandemic.

with lower production and higher taxes, it is no wonder that energy prices have been painful for the american people, punishing for the american people who are just trying to make ends meet. working families have lost nearly $3,000 specifically because of joe biden's radical left-wing energy policies. paying a lot more for that for additional causes of inflation, but on energy alone, about $3,000 more than they should have spent under a normal situation. and who have been the big winners under all of this? regrettably it's been china. we're less, less independent, less competitive, and more dependent on china. this is compared to the day that joe biden took office. i'm going to give you a couple of examples, mr. president. first, joe biden ended america's role in helping developing countries, other

developing countries explore for energy. many countries very poor, but they do have massive energy resources. they just need some help in getting to use them. so millions of people could have benefited and lifted out of poverty if we had helped them use the energy that they already have. joe biden stubbornly refuses. as a result, now these countries who need money to develop their energy resources, what are they doing? go talk to a high school class. joe biden ought to try that. they'll tell them what's happening. those countries are turning to china. more and more countries of course then will owe money to china. we know china uses debt and loans as a weapon. more debt to china means more control by china. over all these additional countries. joe biden won't let us in the

united states help these countries or help the world bank or help other lending institutions go to those, lend to those countries, and we see it all over africa, because joe biden is too pure and he doesn't like their energy. so he just turns them right over to china for predatory lending. joe biden's obsession with electric vehicles also is turning over american power and money to china. the batteries in electric vehicles require a specific set of critical minerals, a specific set of critical minerals that go into the batteries of electric vehicles. well, we can mine it in this country. oh, no, we can't. joe biden says no, don't mine it in america. he's actually shutting down mining in this country and has been doing it since the day he took office. we're not going to let you use the minerals that are critical for the electric vehicles that he wants us to use come from the united states.

so where are we going to go? let's send more money to china. supply and demand, our demand goes up, china has it to supply, prices go up as well. just in the past few weeks, mr. president, joe biden has shut down proposed copper mines in minnesota and in alaska. where are we going to get the minerals for the electric vehicles that joe biden and the democrats want us to buy? china and countries under the influence of china. china produced three-quarters of all the lithium ion batteries. china, also 70% of the world's production capacity for the key parts of the ev batteries. china has a majority of the world's lithium, majority of the world's cobalt, majority of the world's graphite processing

and refinement capacity. all of these are necessary for the interest vehicles that the democrats and joe biden say we must buy. where are these going to come from? there's only one place, and they won't let us have it from america. they won't let us use what we have here. china now dominates copper and cobalt mining in places like the congo, the conditions at many of these mines, and this has been widely reported, are inhumane. child labor, brutal conditions. these are not like the mines that we have here in the united states, the mines like we have in wyoming. our mines in wyoming and the united states are technically sophisticated and professional. many of the mines and the miners in the congo are not professional at all. we're talking about young mothers working for a few dollars a day, controlled by

china, and that's joe biden's answer to electric vehicles, and every democrat's answer to electric vehicles. these young mothers often bring their babies with them to the mines. not in the united states. no, we're too pure here in the united states to be able to mine for the chemicals that are needed for the electric vehicles, so joe biden wants mothers to take babies into the mines in congo for the minerals for the electric vehicle that he is mandating that we drive here in the future. so what happened to these mothers and these babies? they inhale toxic cobalt ail day long. according to a united nations report, 40,000 children are scavenging for cobalt in the congo for the electric vehicles so china can sell us the chemicals that joe biden and the democrats will not let us get out of the ground here in the

united states. most people would call this criminal. women and children in africa are inhaling toxic minerals so that climate elites in san francisco can drive their electric vehicles. i guess that's the american dream. that's the democrat dream for america. worse -- to force these people into this kind of labor so they can drive the electric vehicles of their dreams. china also sells less expensive e.v.'s, and they're for sale all over europe. they may be on the road in san francisco and in manhattan in just a few years. and then there is the bloodshed and brutality that china uses to make solar panels. joe biden loves solar panels as much as he loves wind turbines. well, there's a shortage of

solar panels in this country right now. why? because of the law we passed two years ago to stop buying chinese products made by forced labor. solar panels require slg called po -- something called poly silicon. nearly half of the world's poly silicon is made now by forced labor in china. democrats have to choose between their green energy fairy tales and upholding basic human rights, and it seems like the church that they worship, the church of wind and solar and wishful thinking, is what they've chosen over human rights. i hope democrats agree with me that we should not make a green transition on the backs of forced labor. democrats seem to feel more guilt about burning oil than about solar panels made by slave

labor. hard to imagine. this is just another in a long line of democrat dilutions -- delusions. as if this all wasn't enough, joe biden is even giving our tax dollars to china. two weeks ago today, the department of energy announced that joe biden was sending another $1.6 million to a green energy company with ties to china. the company is called lanza tech. it's a carbon capture company. joe biden had already given them $10 million. he gave them the money right after they signed a partnership with china's official energy company cinepac. well, this company has disclosed that, quote, the chinese government may intervene or influence our operations at any time.

so let's get this straight. joe biden is giving money to a company that says the chinese government may intervene or influence our operations at any time. what do we know about this company? well, we know that it has some ties to democrat party's top donors. the top donors, people that contribute to the democratic senatorial campaign committee. members of this body who go and ask them for more money. who is on the board? former president obama's campaign manager is a member of the board. is this just a coincidence? that joe biden were to move money, u.s. taxpayer dollars, to that company? maybe it's not. the department of energy has announced a $200 million grant to a battery manufacturer with close ties to the communist chinese government. the company's financial filings

with the securities and exchange commission admit, and i have these filings at the energy committee just last week to show these to the secretary in the department of energy, the filings say this. remember, this is a company to which the democrat department of energy announced a $200 million grant. the fes -- fec filing says china experts -- exerts substantial influential over the manner in which we conduct our business activists and may intervene at any time with no notice. in other words, the company admits that it is controlled by the communist chinese party, the chinese communist party controlling the company, u.s. department of energy $200

million grant. so i wrote to the department of energy about the department's review process for this grant. how can you do this? it says it in the filings. finally last thursday i got a response. it says that now, now, this year, even though they did the grant last year, $200 million, now this year, just now they are going to do a due diligence review of the grant. that's from their letter. my question is why don't we do a due diligence review in this country before we announce we're going to give $200 million to a company so completely tied and controlled by the chinese communist party? why doesn't the department of energy do their homework?

so last week the deputy secretary of energy testified before the energy committee. he said money hasn't yet gone out the door. i hope -- i hope he's right. i hope money hasn't gone out the door. we need to stop it now before it goes out the door. we don't need to send anymore money, our tax dollars, to china. we want carbon capture, i say come to wyoming. you don't have to put money in these companies. we do it in wyoming. we have a school of energy resources. we have a wonderful location. it can be done the right way. they had an x prize, a granted prize through the university of wyoming for energy resources. it seems like the administration when it comes to energy would much rather go to china than the united states. that's joe biden's view of the world right now.

wyoming is ready to do carbon capture better than anybody in the world. i'm not sure why the administration turns to china rather than to america. just like i don't know why they go to iran, saudi arabia, venezuela, russia in the past for energy rather than in america. joe biden's policies continue to rob the american people and pay off china. joe biden even sold one million barrels of oil from our emergency petroleum reserve to china. then he said he was doing all of us a favor because it was going to bring down prices. this is a president who has been wrong and wrong and wrong. i've introduced legislation to ensure we never sell any of our emergency stockpile to china ever again. the house of representatives have already passed legislation

to do that. the legislation was actually bipartisan. i think 100 democrats voted for it. why doesn't chuck schumer bring it to the floor of the senate today? why not? why isn't he here? 100 democrats joined republicans to say, we shouldn't do this. people in this body get it. the white house clearly done. the department of energy clearly doesn't, the administration doesn't. joe biden is held hostage by the far left of his party. our strategic petroleum reserve is for us, not for our enemies. america's energy policy is supposed to be for us, not for our enemies. it's not what we've -- that's not what we've gotten from this president. next week i will introduce legislation to ban officials to go to work for china.

for two years joe biden has strangled energy production, at the same time he has made us more dependent on china for critical minerals and for so much of what this nation needs. it is time for joe biden and the democrats in this body to remember who we work for and that is the american people. thank you, mr. president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

and talking about police report what did you and what is the push by democrats and others on capitol hill? is a bipartisan proposal? a bipartisan proposal comes pretty quickly. the next couple weeks is going to be really important just like the unfortunate horrific shooting and then the senate mobilized quickly to get something done. they sent it over to the house and we got legislation passed. we need to see that same sense of urgency right now. first of all the state of the

union was very good, i give the president and a because it was uplifting, inspiring, celebratory in terms of what we have gotten done the past couple of years like the infrastructure bill, inflation reduction act and many others and you spoke to the pocketbook and kitchen table issues of the american people around price gouging and the wealthy contribute their fair share and etc. but what i also heard something i'd never heard before. he spoke with a level of empathy and compassion toward the victims of violence, it's not just about tyre nichols and rice's mom was also here state of the union. we finally heard of president say something right. i don't understand this issue, i haven't had to have the talk with my children in the same way

families have a talk with their children. it brought america into hopefully have more empathy toward victims, a complex issue. we get it but what we are saying as black people in the country, when police commit a crime there should be accountability. stop killing us when we are not harming you or don't have weapons or anything like that so the first time i heard that and it was good to hear. >> you have been critical instead the president missing opportunity to be a president who comes to the social issues, what you mean? >> that's exactly what i meant. we need to be historic leader in this moment in the vein of roosevelt or lincoln, here's what i mean. years of donald trump were traumatizing for the american people. america is a beautiful mosaic of

cultures and ethnicities and people. donald trump used to attack, demonize and marginalize millions of people in our country. that creates trauma and stress in addition we had a global pandemic, the person 100 years which adds a layer of trauma and stress and we had an insurrection. first attack on the u.s. capitol since the war of 1812. on top of that we continue to have children go hungry, issues of poverty, lack of affordable housing. we need a president is going to provide a vision for our country and we can finally come together across our differences to build a nation that works for everyone. we need to be that and that speech was a great step in the right direction. >> talk about education and we

will talk about legislation and reintroduce. >> education for 20 years starting my career as an elementary school, teacher in the south bronx and did that about five or six years before student and guidance counselor for three years and the education has more to offer for our kids and it's unlocking the unlimited potential. i wrote a proposal to new york city for me to start my own public middle school in the northeast. the proposal was supported they say yes and 2009 open up my own middle school and ran for ten and a half years would our

school system and teachers to great work but there's so much more we implement the program. iran for congress because when you're in education, qc all the social issues and family, they are at your doorstep every day. hard for kids to learn when they are hungry and criminal justice involved and struggling with housing or poverty not teaching about emotional intelligence, hard for kids to learn. the year before iran for office, 34 kids died in a k-12 system in 17 died via suicide so i knew, i saw and lived mental health crisis before covid even came. we had fun with our kids and

pushed me into run for office been fortunate enough to win i hope to elevate these issues of mental health and education and project -based learning and right we introduce this act. >> african history is american history the same way every other group in this country that makes up the beauty of our country, their history matters and should be taught in our schools and what i experienced as a young student and what i saw in public education curriculum as an educator was lack of african-american history being taught. maybe during black history month to learn a bit about the civil rights movement, mostly about doctor king and my learn about trade in the transatlantic slave trade.

i people had nations in africa, democracies in africa, infrastructure and built the pyramids in africa. affiant ancestral history. it's important to know that because i need the self-esteem and self worth that i need to do well in school and in life so african-american history month seeks to appropriate $10 million which is not a lot of money here in washington, 10 million for the smithsonian museum to create curriculum that is accurate and school districts can use free to implement in their schools so it is important and in response the governor to santos and others who claim this value in african american history versus other history.

misunderstanding in public safety because of lack of knowledge of our history selective history and our country. >> go ahead, you're on with congressman. >> i want to say, i'm leading the democratic party because of him and. cory booker and aoc. >> what are the ideas you are rejecting? >> the whole defend the police movement. i am most definitely for police accountability. police need to be held accountable. what they are doing is destroying cities. look how anybody is leaving new

york, california because they hate the police, they don't want the police and look, nobody wants to do the job and because of that, police departments are struggling to get people and because they are struggling so bad, they are hiring rejects. >> okay, i will have the congress and respond. >> first of all, the police department in new york city has not been defunded. police department across the country are not being defunded so it's not happening number one. number two when we talk about public safety, we talk about it from the perspective of public health. police respond at best after a crime has been committed and they do the job of arresting and making sure the person is held accountable. what we are saying or what i am saying is we need proactive

preventative approach. we know the majority of people incarcerated suffered or struggled with mental health disorder and substance abuse disorder or some form of trauma or learning disability or some form of poverty, housing and the like. any preventatives so they don't commit crimes. to get out for return back to their communities and no resources with them and that's why they continue to escalate and do other crimes so take a step back and have a fresh look at public safety through the lens of public health. that's what we are pushing and that's the conversation we are going to have. >> democrat louisiana, your next. >> i would like to comment, add

to a misinterpretation of black history, the whole united states misinterpretation of black history. american legion magazine has a beautiful story. the groups in the military and this is just stuff we were raised to see more than stuff. we know it happened.

>> essentially history absolutely there so many black americans that persevere through the toughest of times and did remarkable things. we talk about our impact during world war ii, but history there was a movie made about that history so many americans learn about. when you talk about hidden figures, i didn't realize it black woman was essential to our space travel program stuff that in our history books so the black girl or black girl could grow up learning they've contributed to this great nation and that black boys will be less likely to commit a crime when they become a young man. >> oklahoma city, dependent color, good morning. >> i get nervous when i get on here. >> take your time.

>> a couple of things here, what's our problem? our problem is greed. that's all. greed causes poor people. poor people aren't most of the country but they act like we are. i'd like to see 1 trillion, i'd like to go with them to a bank and let them see if they can get a trillion out of the bank. there's no trillion dollars anywhere. you can't get a billing out of the bank but much less a trillion and they want us to get online and read don't have to have money, we are not going to deal with money. it's a huge problem. we better talk about this, this can't go on. i don't see very many people. >> the congressman is shaking

his head. >> preach, preach. thank you so much. you're absolutely right. we have a political system that allows wealthy individuals to not only contribute their fair share and: businesses not only o not contribute their fair share but they -- esiding officer: witt objection. mr. durbin: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor will say aye. opposed no. the ayes appear to have it' the ayes have it. -- i move to consider calendar number 7. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor will say aye. opposed will say nay. the ayes appear to have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, lindsey c. jenkins of illinois to be united states district judge for the northern district of illinois. mr. durbin: i send a cloture motion to the desk.

the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 7, lindsey c. jenkins of illinois to be united states district judge for the northern district of illinois signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. durbin: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. opposed nay. the ayes appear to have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. durbin: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 12. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye opposed will say nay. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, matthew l. garcia of new mexico to be united states district judge for the district

of new mexico. mr. durbin: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of give calendar number 12, matthew l. garcia of new mexico to be united states district judge for the district of new mexico signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. durbin: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: i move to proceed to legislative session. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed nay. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. mr. durbin: i move to proceed to executive session to consider calendar number 15. the presiding officer: the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. opposed nay. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. the clerk will report the nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, adrienne c. nelson of

oregon to be united states district judge for the district of oregon. mr. durbin: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the cloture motion. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in corns corns -- in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 15, adrienne c. nelson of oregon to be united states district judge for the district of oregon signed by 17 senators as follows. mr. durbin: i ask consent the reading of the names be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: i move to proceed to legislative session. i withdraw that motion. the presiding officer: the motion is withdrawn. mr. durbin: finally, i ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorums for the cloture motion filed today, february 9 be waived. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from georgia. mr. warnock: i ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote occur immediately. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of executive calendar number 5, cindy k. chung of pennsylvania to be united states circuit judge for the third circuit signed by 18 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination cindy k. chung of pennsylvania to be united states circuit judge for the third circuit shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.

the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

will

vote:

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 52, the nays are 46, and the motion is agreed to. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. reed: mr. reed: i have 12 committees requested to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority leader and minority leaders. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reed: i rise with my colleague senator whitehouse to pay tribute to vince he -- vincent. from a young state trooper, to a top organized crime

investigator, to chief of police. vin passed away -- away at the age of 34. we wanted to honor this great hero. he is so beloved and respected by all. who practiced and taught art of community policing and truly made a positive difference in the lives of countless rhode islanders. vin is a dear friend and i will always remember the time we spent together, especially when he came down to washington with his fellow chiefs of police. i deeply admire the chief as not just a police officer, but as a person with a wisdom like no other. in 2012, the chief who served was honored as the first

inductee into the hall of fame. he was looking into organized crime and corruption and served 30 years as the chief of the south kingstown police department. he continued in that role for another four years. vin's courage and integrity made him quite deservedly one of the most respected and revered members of the state's, not only law enforcement community, of the state overall. as steven perry, the former commissioner of public safety for the city of providence put it, he was as relentless and honest and as long as you could be as a police officer. he described him as a no-nonsense chief who is comfortable talking with anyone on the force. he commanded respect because he gave respect, perry said. and that's an apt description an

high praise indeed but well deserved. vincent vespia grew up on federal hill and the east side of providence. he served in the army for two years and worked at the factory in east greenwich before finding his true calling in law enforcement. beginning in 1959, he served in the elite rhode island state police for two decades before becoming chief of police of south kingstown. during his 31 years with the rhode island state police intelligence community, he focused on combating organized crime. throughout the 1906's and 1970's, he coordinated state and local efforts to trap, disrupt and dismantle organizationized crime. mike stanton krong called --

wrote about some of those stories. stanton told a story as how when he was a young trooper, he rescued a playmate, recognizing his childhood friend, the perpetrator asked, how can you arrest me? we played kick the can together. vespia replied, you went one way, i went the other. he took the high road. in one of his most notable cases, he worked for years to gain the trust of a known hitman in order to collect evidence leading to the arrest and prosecution of notorious organized crime leader, the head of organized crime in new england. in addition to being an outstanding police officer, vin vespia was an incredible mentor.

he taught police officers the fine points of police work and leadership. towards the end of his career, a local television station asked him about his legacy. he replied, forget about what i've done, what my rank was and the cases i made, forget about all of that, if somebody would remember me as a guy who tried to be a good cop, then i'm happy. mr. president, vin vespia was not only a guy who tried to be a good cop, he was a great cop. when he finely retired, they cheered, hail to the chief, vin vespia retired after 35 years as the town's top cop. along with senator whitehouse, i want to express our gratitude to

his chief vespia's wife and family. they have made a sacrifice so vin could serve. i want to recognize his children, including renee and her husband. vin was a doating -- a doating grandfather and i yield to someone who worked closely with chief vespia in a variety of capacities as the attorney general of the state of rhode island, as the federal attorney for the district of rhode island, as one of the most successful, effective attorneys and federal officers as well as state officers in the history of our state, my colleague, senator whitehouse.

and with that, i yield to senator whitehouse. mr. whitehouse: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, i'm delighted to join my senior senator to honor our common friend vincent vespia, who was the chief of the south kingstown rhode island police department. he passed away on january 26, 2023, rounded by his wife judith ann and their cherished daughters robin and renee. he grew up in providence and served two years in the army before returning home to rhode island and a career of service in the rhode island state police. chief vespia was a legend in our outstanding rhode island law enforcement community. famously fearless in his pursuit

of justice. during his 22-year career in the state police, chief vespia was at the center of the state's ongoing fight against organized crime. back in that day when the mob was a force in rhode island and the rhode island state police was its counter force. his courageous police work led to the downfall of some of the most violent mobsters, including crime boss. along with his grit and toughness, chief vespia had style. in the book that jack referenced, the prince of providence, mike stanton wrote, that one night vespia came crashing through the second-floor window of willie mafaro's apartment, waving a machine gun at two dozen stunned

dice players. not everybody does that. after his successful career with the state police, he went on to take the helm of the south kingstown police department where he spent the next two decades. he was the longest serving leader of that department and will be fondly remembered for his pursuit of justice, for his unimpeachable sense of right and wrong, for his persistent good humor and of course for the love and respect for that community he leaves behind. hearing viny vespia tell stories of his law enforcement career with a twinkle in his eye is an indelible memory for me. and he was a mentor to me as well as the young officers who he brought up in law enforcement. when chief vespia retired in

2016, it was widely accepted that he was one of the greatest to ever have worn our uniform. i thank him and his family for supporting him in his devoted service. i, like many, will miss him dearly. rhode island was lucky to have this man. and we are safer because of him and many officers he mentored and trained who carry on the vincent vespi a legacy to this day. i yield the floor.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. ms. murkowski: mr. president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. ms. murkowski: mr. president, i was in barrow, alaska, the northern most community in the united states. i was there for what some describe as a messenger feast, the nuclear inupiak word is kiv. it was a ree union, a glorious family reunion where all eight

communities and actually neighbors from canada gather together during the winter to celebrate family, to celebrate community. it's an extraordinary sharing. it is very similar to the sharing that they have during the summer months when the communities come together to celebrate the whale harvest, the luckatuck. an extraordinary family reunion. in a region that is built on a culture of sharing, sharing of subsistence foods, sharing of resources. and that's what i want to focus my comments on today are the resources within the north slope region. as i was preparing to leave on sunday morning to go back to

anchorage, i was at the hotel and visiting with people who were gathered there for coffee. and one gentleman was leaving, he said lisa, he said, i think there's just two things that we need you to do. we need you to make sure that you protect our whale quota so we can continue to provide for the sustenance of the people in this region and we need for you to ensure that willow is opened up for oil production so we can continue our lifestyle. some of might suggest that there's some inconsistency between this culture of traditional subsistence lifestyle and a harvest of a whale to feed entire communities and production of oil in the

arctic region. and i would suggest that it is not only absolutely not inconsistent but absolutely compatible because it is with the sharing of these resources that the people of the north are able to have much of what we enjoy in other parts of america today. the opportunity to see our kids educated, the opportunity for health care, the opportunity to be safe in our communities, the opportunity to have economies. so i am here today, mr. president, to speak in strongest possible terms of the willow master development project within the national petroleum reserve, alaska. we refer to it as the npr a. and what i hope to do along with

my colleague senator sullivan is to further educate members of the senate and really people around the country about this project by explaining how it will help to benefit the nearly 11,000 alaska native people and residents who call the north slope home, how it will support good-paying union jobs, how it will reduce our energy imports from quite honestly some of the worst regimes in the world and why its approval is both necessary and prudent. and i want to start with a little bit of background just to put willow in context. our npra is a federal petroleum reserve. it's a federal petroleum reserve. its lands were explicitly designated back in 1923 so a hundred years ago designated under the harding administration. it's an area that encompasses

23.4 million acres. it's roughly the size of indiana up in the northwest corner of alaska. it's home to the alaska native communities of wainwright, utkiagvik and more. these people have been living in this region since time in memorial. they still practice a traditional lifestyle, but they live in this region and they care what happens in their region. i mentioned that the npra is a hundred years old this year and yet it's only seen just a few projects and those have been in the very recent years and in part, ironically, that's because the obama-biden administration pushed for the oil companies to turn their focus there. they explicitly encouraged.

they said go develop in the npra, explicitly designated for oil and resource development. they said, don't go in the offshore, don't go? the non-- go in the nonwilderness part of anwr. go over to npra. that's exactly what conophillips did. it was during the clinton administration. they started developing shortly thereafter but they really accelerated that work during the obama-biden administration and then moved into federal permitting in 2018. so they've been seeking federal approval for five years now. and then last monday the department of interior published its final supplemental environmental impact statement. this is their scis for the willow project to address --

they wanted to address two issues that had been identified by the federal court. so now where we are is roughly 30 days from now in this time period, the department of interior will be able to issue a final record of decision announcing its decision on whether and how this critical project should be allowed to proceed. so you've got this final scis. this is a document that has been worked with career blm officials. these are scientists. these are engineers. they've got decades of experience evaluating environmental -- and they together with this analysis over this five-year project selected a new preferred alternative for the willow project. they call it alternative e. but keep in mind that these

scientists, these engineers, these career agencies officials, they took years of analysis and very rigorous review. they had significant, significant input and support, support from the alaska native communities within the npra and the north slope borrow. in other words, the people who live up there, the people whose home region it is, gave that input. there was back and forth. there was give and take. they listened to the native people and they worked to develop this alternative e. keep in mind the willow project was already quite small when it was first advanced in line with all modern development on the north slope, but what blm's preferred alternative, this alternative e does is it reduces its footprint even further. so from what conoco originally

wanted to do to this alternative e, they have gone from five drill pads with three with a fourth deferred permitting t. will have 19% fewer road miles, cover 11% fewer acres, avoid further -- avoid ecological areas. these were all considerations that were taken into place. and placed into this alternative e. so at this point the total project will cover just over 400 acres so i've already shared with you the size of the npra. would we're talking about here with the willow project is .002% of the npra will be impacted. it will be in full compliance with all of the restrictions that are included in the land management plan that the obama-biden administration issued back in 2013. so under that plan, they

effectively took 50%, 50% of the npra's surface area, some 11.8 million acres. they took that off the table to resource development. so that's already off. we're not talking about that. we're talking about the area that is available now for development. the willow project is just .002% of the npra. willow -- the project itself is not going to cover all of its leased lands. not by a long shot. there are areas that will have no development, no development will take place. there will be areas where development is only allowed with a waiver. that would be required. and areas where additional considerations will apply before any development takes place. so again think about this. you've got -- you've got 11.8 million acres of the npra that's

been taken off the table. this project is 429 acres. what we're trying to develop here, the project we're talking about developing is literally 27,000 -- 24,500 times, times smaller than what's already been taken off the table. i press this upon folks because i think it's important to recognize this is an extraordinarily significant project for the state of alaska, for the resources that it will bring to my state, the economic development that is will spur, it is significant to the people of the north slope who call this home and rely on the revenue and resources, but as significant as it is, the footprint for willow is minuscule. it has been meticulously planned

to coexist with the wildlife, with the tundra, with the subsistence lifestyle on the north slope. think about it. you would not have the two whaling captains that were wandering the halls here just this week, two whaling captains from the north slope who are advocating for development of willow if they felt this was going to be harmful to their subsistence activity or to the subsistence caribou hunter who was also being interviewed by reporters and meeting members of the senate here just tuesday to talk about why he believes that this coexistence, that the development can proceed and is compatible with their life and their lifestyle. conocophillips in moving forward with this will have to abide by

hundreds of lease stipulations and best practices and best practices, keep in mind when you are exploring and developing in the state of alaska in the north slope, it's thought like louisiana. it's not like new mexico. it is -- we're operating in an arctic environment which means you have to work within the contours of the area around you. so best practices mean that exploration is effectively limited to about 90 days. 90 days out of 365. if you're in new mexico, you've got a lot more time to be looking around. you've got a lot more time that you can be building. we have to use ice roads to help facilitate the exploration rigs that might go out. you cannot be -- you cannot be on the tundra when the tundra is

not sufficiently frozen. but that also means you've got to get off the tundra as soon as the spring comes. so these conditions, this scenario is the so different that anywhere else we produce in the united states of america. and even with these lease stipulations, even with all that has to go on, conoco believes that they can make this extraordinary environmental commitment. they believe that this project, this alternative, is viable for them to proceed. if you're following the news about willow, you will -- you would probably get the sense that -- you'd probably get the sense that the support from most alaskans is not there because there are a few voices who we

see an objection. i get that. but i will tell you that one of the reasons, probably the biggest reason that has helped the willow project garner support throughout the state is because -- is because the people of the north slope who live there have come forward and have said, we believe that this will be helpful to us. and it's not just those who are living on the north slope. the broader alaska federation of natives have come forward in support, bipartisan, nonpartisan entities from around the state. one of the leaders in the region, the north slope borough

mayor -- i had sinner with he and his -- i had dinner with he and his wife on saturday night. the mayor is not only the mayor, pretty extraordinary man, but he's also a whaling captain himself and strongly, strongly in support of the willow project. he wrote in a letter to secretary holland that, quote, responsible oil and gas development is essential to the economic survival of the burrow and its residents. oil and gas activities are the primary economic generator for our region and by far the most significant force of funding for the burrough's infrastructure. to put that into context, when he says significant source of funding, over 95% of the burrough's revenues come from oil in the region. so when we think about our communities and our counties and where they may gain sources of

revenue, pretty extraordinary to find any area where 95% of your revenues come from one single source. and what do these revenues provide? they enable the burrough to provide for basic, basic services, basic infrastructure like clean drinking water, like education, like health care, emergency services. the burrough does it all. the burrough is funding their own government. and their own government to include search and rescue -- i just mentioned emergency services. so when you are in an area -- i mentioned that the npra is the size of indiana in. but the north slope burrough,

communities spread out over hundreds and hundreds of miles, no roads. in the wintertime, the way that you move appeared is by snow machine -- move around, the way you move around is by snow machine. in the summer it might be by boat. the reality is that weather is very, very harsh. and so machiners get lost. people are trying to travel from one village to the next. who is there to be on a search and rescue? it is the local, it is the local community, funded by the north slope burrough. these are activities that i think most, most don't think that a burrough would be providing. but they're able to do so. they're able to care for their people because of the revenues that they receive from oil. as one former mayor put it, he said, oil and gas activities are responsible for 200 years of development on the north slope in the span of 30 years.

i was in the energy and natural resources committee when he made that statement on the record. it's extraordinary how the quality of life has advanced since the days of revenue coming from our oil. a recent study really kind of brings it home. it's not just about infrastructure that brings clean water or heat to your home, but it's what happens to the health and well-being. when you have improved infrastructure, when you have sanitation systems, when you have medical care that these revenues have helped to facilitate, people are healthier, people live longer. the increased life expectancy among alaska natives who live on the north slope -- get this -- if you were born in 1985, if you

were born in 1985, your life expectancy was about age 65. pretty young. for those born in 2014, average expectancy -- average life expectancy, 77 years. thinks about that. think about the dramatic leap in life expectancy, and the only thing that has changed is there's still living a subsistence lifestyle. they're still lying in a really harass -- they're still living in a really harsh environment. the only thing that's changed is they have access to resources that allow them to be better-cared for, a how them to have a quality of life that we would just accept as basic. i think clean, running water is basic. i think a flushed toilet is basic. i can't tell you how many communities in my state i go to

where they are waiting for the day, waiting for for the day that they will get running water and a flushed toilet. pretty basic. and, mr. president, i think it's important -- i've been talking a lot about the benefits to the people of the north slope region. but when i mentioned that the -- the kiviak, the nalukatuk, these are ways of living. it's not just in the subsistence lifestyle that our native people share. it's in the structure of how it really came to be such an amazing benefit to alaska native people, the ancsa.

section 7-i requires -- and this was agreed to by the native -- the 12 regional native corporations. 70% of all revenues received by each regional corporation from timber or subsurface estates a, they're divided annually, according to the number of natives that are enrolled in that region. so what i'm sharing with you is that the resource wealth that comes from the north slope, the arctic slope regional corporation, is not the only native corporation and beneficiaries to that. all -- all native shareholders throughout the state, through the 12 regional corporations, are entitled to that sharing of those benefits. think about what that means then if you are from a region where you have -- you don't have the

resources. think about what that means to then have sharing coming to you from the north. when adjusted for inflation, between 1982 and 2015, a total of 3.1 billion was shared between the regional corporations for the benefit of their shareholders. 56% of that or $1.749 billion came from oil and gas operations. so when people ask, you know, what's the benefit that you receive from the oil sector in alaska, it's certainly jobs, absolutely. it's -- it certainly benefits our state, absolutely. in terms of our revenue. you've heard heard of our permanent fund dix but the immediate benefit, the real, tangible benefit that is shared with alaska native people is an extraordinary -- it's an extraordinary model, something that i think most of us here in the lower 48 where corporations

are all sharp elbows, you know, wanting to get as much as they possibly can for themselves, that's not who the alaska native people are. the values -- the values that they bring is truly one of sharing. the north slope is an amazing place, and whether it's summer, whether it is the heart of winter, as it was just this weekend, 30 below -- i know the sun was up for a brief moment in time there for a period of time. everyone was really excited that the sun is coming back. but, it is, it's dark, it's cold. but for those who would suggest that responsible resource development and a subsistence way of life are incompatible, i -- i invite you, go up to

utqiagvik, go to these communities, and hear for yourself, see for yourself how that is just simply wrong. because you'll be able to see the benefits of responsible resource extraction and what it can mean to the lives of people in their communities. i was in utqiagvik, again -- yes, this past weekend did but i was there in the first week in january for a memorial service for a friend of mine and a great, great native leader, oliver leavitt. oliver was not only the head of asrc as an extraordinary corporate leader, he helped really with the formation of the north slope borough, but he was a whaling captain and he spent a lot of time here in washington, d.c., trying to educate people, and he would always get grumpy with me when i'd say, only very,

i'm so happy you're back. he would say, i should be at camp, the whales are coming through. but i listened. i went to the school of oliver leavitt. i heard his stories about how hard it was for him as a young boy, as a a young man. his job was to go out before school and collect driftwood so that their family home could have some form of fuel. keep in mind, there's no trees on the north slope. it's hard -- it's hard. he said, i went to school not because i wanted to learn but because there was heat in the school. he saw a transformation of what it meant for the people when they were finally able to get natural gas into his community

and how -- how now an elder can turn on the heat by just turning on the thermostat. what a concept. but for us? we kind of expect that. but it is -- it's just a reminder, again, that the benefits that come to those who live there, who have lived there for generations and thousands of years, how it is compatible with alaska's future here. the willow project will allow development, health outcomes, life expectancy, all to improve, all to improve on the north slope. you know, when you think about -- when you think about the resources that the people need and what will happen if they no longer have access to those resources, what will happen? they're telling me, lisa, we

can't go back in time. we don't want to be left out in the cold. we will not be left out in the cold. this is not social justice. and so i ask -- i ask us, as we're looking at this particular project, keep in mind -- keep in your heart the people for whom it will most benefit. don't forget, the rest of alaska, the country as a whole, they're also going to benefit. it's projected to create an estimated 2500 construction jobs, 75% will be filled by union labor. so union's pretty supportive of this. once complete, will support 300 permanent jobs, which then in turn spins off thousands more across the state, across the countries. so i mention the unions.

if you support unions, you should be supporting willow. alaska afl-cio, the alaska district council of labors, the north american building trade union, the international union of operating engineers, the plumbers pipe fitters, they're all onboard, all on board and strongly supportive, and so are countless others who recognize the importance of creating good jobs in alaska and around the country to help reverse our gdp decline. we're in a tough place in alaska right now. i think we're number 47, if i'm not mistaken, out of 50 states. we're seeing a net migration out of alaska that is greatly concerning, greatly concerning. we have a higher than average unemployment rate. we're looking at this and saying alaska, alaska needs this

project. now, i know there's criticism out there. you have folks saying nope, can't move willow forward. we all have to address climate. we have to address the issue of climate change. let's talk about that for a second, because you know, mr. president, you've heard me talk about it, you've heard me stand up and say we need to be actively working to reduce emissions, increase our use of clean energy. i've been pushing policies to do just that. i think we also recognize you just can't flip a switch. you just can't get there from here overnight. there's a transition. and so, i think what we need to focus on, the true choice we have to face, is how painful, how chaotic do we want the transition to be for the people that we serve? so, on tuesday night, when the president spokes at the state of the union, he acknowledged, he said we're going to need oil for at least another decade and beyond that -- i would argue,

mr. president, it's going to be longer than a decade regardless of what we do at the policy level. the question is, what are we going to do to take care of our own needs, with our own resources, or are we going to empower opec at our own expense, and are we willingly going to return to the days of being highly dependent on foreign oil, with all of the economic, all of the environmental, all of the geostrategic cons consequenct that entails? we have to seen, mr. president, what happens if we make poor choices and we don't plan for what a rational energy transition is going to look like. europe is certainly one example there. i would suggest, let's bring it closer to home, california is another example. alaska's oil production has declined. we sent a lot of our stuff to california. so as our oil production has declined, what's happened in california?

their imports have risen, and risen dramatically. they've turned where? they've turned to countries like saudi arabia and russia for their supply. so now that russian supply is outlawed, we saw a recent "new york times" article that noted, quote, one in every nine tanks of gas, diesel, or jet fuel pumped in california comes from the amazon. so really, are we okay with this? are we really okay with this? i don't think calfans will be happy knowing -- californians will be happy knowing their gas came from russia. now that we're not taking it from russia, it's coming from the amazon, rather than from a petroleum reserve in alaska? the choice here is not whether we need to continue to develop our oil resources. we do. we clearly do. the choice is where the source is going to come from. we're going to need it for decades to come. i will tell you, i'm going do

choose alaska anytime over foreign sources. i'll choose alaska because we have a better environmental track record, because development there it benefits our people there, and it ultimately makes it a little easier to address climate. so you can oppose production on the north slope, you can impoverish alaska natives and blame them for changes in the climate that they did not cause, but can you really feel good about that, given the autocrats you're going to empower around the world and the harm and devastation that comes? we've got a better answer, and the better answer here is willow. it's going to provide up to 180,000 barrels per day at peak production. this is going to help us refill our transatlantic pipeline, it's going -- trans-alaska pipeline and keep the lower 48 from importing from the worst regimes in the world. instead of importing from place was no environmental standards to speak of, we should be

confident the energy we need is coming from a project with a tiny footprint, that is safely operated with as little impact as humanly possible, and we can ensure that the benefits of production go to the alaska natives of the north slope and the communities around the state and around the country, rather than petrocrats like vladimir putin. all we need, all we need is the approval of the willow project, which allows us to continue to tackle climate change while maintaining our energy security. it's not going to be a violation of the president's pledges, which were, i'll remind you, to allow responsible development on existing leases to occur. well, willow, valid, existing leases, was approved when he came into office, its reapproval next month would simply signal, to alaska natives, to alaskans, americans and the world, that we're serious not only about our

climate policies, but also our energy policies. i urge the biden administration, in the strongest possible terms, to listen to all who support this important project. and i urge them to reject the false and misguided claims about impacts coming from some. i would urge them to issue a record of decision early next month, selecting alternative e without new limits or extraneous conditions. we need to get to work, mr. president. and with that, i yield the floor.

mr. wicker: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. mr. wicker: thank you, mr. president. seven centuries ago, a chinese novelist wrote, the empire long divided must unite, long united must divide. thus it has ever been. these are the opening words from the chinese classic novel "romance of the three kingdoms." mao tse-tung, dung xe ping and xi jinping have quoted passance from this -- passages from this classic, because the chinese imagination can be traced back for centuries. they describe the long rhythm of

chinese history, a period of civil war and chaos, followed by a period of stability. and now, after a century of perceived humiliation, the chinese communist party believes it is destined to be whole and powerful again. that's what makes chinese current ambition to unify, as they put it, even more troubling. just as vladimir putin seeks to use violence to reconstitute what he considers the old soviet empire, the chinese communist party has made it its mission to reunite all those it considers chinese, including those who gained freedom and liberty, like the people of taiwan. the taiwanese people want no part of beijing's communist vision, and they fully reject the idea that beijing should

impose its will on its neighbors. some may think beijing has been hiding and biding its time, but in fact it has for decades been active and aggressive in expanding its claims of sovereignty and territory. in the last 60 years, chinese almost risked a nuclear conflict with the soviet union, fought a war with vietnam, and engaged in multiple, bloody skirmishes with india as recently as last month to assert their territorial claim. today, it continues to make egregious territorial claims in the south and east china sea, all in the name of expanding the reach of the chinese communist party. americans saw firsthand president xi's disregard for our own sovereignty over the past week, as a chinese spy balloon violated u.s. air space uncontested for several days. just the latest in beijing's

string of provocative actions. to see his plans for taiwan, look no further than xi jinping's brutal repression of the people of hong kong. he continues to trample the freedoms they long enjoyed, and indeed were promised by the chinese communist party. we should have known that the idea of one country, two systems was always incompatible with the rule of the chinese communist party. taiwan is the missing piece in president xi's puzzle. without taiwan, xi jinping, who wants to be remembered as one of the great emperors of chinese history, will have failed, and make no mistake, mr. president, he cannot accept a free taiwan, because taiwan, situated 90 miles off the chinese coast, is living proof that freedom and democracy can thrive in a chinese-speaking nation. taiwan is a powerful

advertisement for liberty to the 1.4 billion people who suffer under the communist police state. for this reason more than any other, xi jinping wants what he views as the taiwan problem resolved on his terms. he and his comrades have spent the last several decades pursuing the fastest military buildup in history, achieving the world's largest navy by sheer number of vessels and, by far, the largest fleet of advanced ballistic missiles. the chinese air force now flies fifth-generation aircraft, armed with air-to-air missiles that outrange our own. the entire people's liberation army conducts advanced and realistic training, and our own top cyber officer, general paul nakasone says the improvement is chinese capabilities is unlike anything he has ever seen. all of the pla's capabilities

are aimed across the taiwan strait. just last week, someone leaked a private memo from general mike menna han, our air mobility chief, in which he urged troops to be ready for war in 2025. this is 2023. he urged then to be ready for war in 2025. despite the handing wringing this is rust the latest example of senior civilian and mirm officials increasingly -- and military officials increasingly worried about chinese aggression over the next four years, during xi jinping's third term. secretary of state blinken last year said beijing remains determined to pursue unification on a faster timeline than previously suspected. there should be no doubt the potential for chinese invasion of taiwan is higher today than it has ever been. this raises the fair question whether protecting taiwan is feasible. can the small island nation of

23 million souls really stand a chance against a nation of 1.4 billion? the answer is that taiwan not only can stand a chance, it must be able to defend itself successfully. because what is at stake in taiwan is not just its own freedom and sovereignty, but the stability of the region, the stability of the world economy, and our own american economy and national security. standing tall against a powerful aggressor is no small task. we have seen this in ukraine. over the past year, we have seen the sacrifices of courageous ukrainians who have taken the fight directly to the russians and continually won, despite many dismissing that possibility, including our own intelligence community. that very same heroic kind of existence, and the very same

help from friends and allies will be required for taiwan to preserve its freedom and democracy. the conflict in ukraine is closely related to what will happen in taiwan. indeed, china openly supports the brutal russian invasion. this reflects xi jinping's own ambition to launch a similar assault on taiwan. he knows full well that if putin can outlast the free world and get away with it, with murder and war crimes in ukraine, his own chances of success against taiwan will be stronger. u.s. support for a win in ukraine enhances our abilities to deter beijing in taiwan. congress led the biden administration to help ukraine in its fight against russia. now congress should lead once again to help taiwan defend itself against communist china. in fact for decades congress led the effort to preserve a free

and democratic taiwan. but to do this work on the timeline and scale required, we need first to understand the extraordinary ways in which taiwan contributes to american interests. mr. president, i recently stood here and made the case for why americans should care about supporting ukraine. today i will pose a similar question, why should americans care about taiwan? well, they should. we should. first, failure to defend taiwan would forever damage our position in the indo-pacific, calling into question our credibility and capability to defend other allies and partners such as australia, japan, philippines, south korea, thailand. since the end of world war ii, our allies have relied on the united states of america underpinning more than seven decades of peace and prosperity in the indo-pacific.

america has also benefited greatly from this peace and prosperity. today japan is our fifth largest trading partner and south korea is our sixth largest trading partner. a failure to defend taiwan would upend that stability, and our allies and partners could abandon america if that happens. simply put, peace in the pacific means jobs for americans. war in the pacific, on the other hand, would put american economic freedom at risk. in addition, what happens in taiwan will have consequences for whether our allies decide to pursue new capabilities they have thus far forsaken. with open access to the pacific ocean, beijing would almost certainly push tokyo, seoul, and others to seek to acquire nuclear weapons. or perhaps even to rebalance from the united states to china.

what this development would mean for the u.s. alliance network and stability in the indo-pacific is unthinkable. our allies and partners also play a pivotal role in providing key military basing in the western pacific. with u.s. bases in japan, south korea, and now the philippines, our national defense in the pacific is strong. without those, our national defense would start on the shores of guam or hawaii, rendering america much harder to defend, rendering our homeland much harder to defend. these allies want us in their countries. we're there because they have allowed us and asked us to be in their countries, and they have each spent billions of their own dollars to build military facilities for our forces. america's web of alliances and

partnerships is critical to our success in competing with china in the long run. with 60% of the world's population, the indo-pacific is projected to be the largest contributor to global economic growth over the next 30 years. if we lose these critical partners, we would also cede a critical advantage in our effort to compete economically with china, a nation with five times our population and an economy nearly our size. so that's the first reason. the second reason, taiwan is a linchpin of the global economy. a war over taiwan launched by china would immediately send the global economy into a recession, into a depression, the likes of which we have not seen in a century. americans would lose access to key semiconductors that are in our latops, phones, cars, and countless electronic products that have become the backbone of daily life. as our colleague, senator dan

sullivan of alaska, said in a strong december speech on taiwan, the semiconductor shortage in 2021 already cost americans $240 billion and nearly eight million cars. eight million cars that we don't have because of this shortage. taiwan also exports a significant amount of advanced machine tools that underpin manufacturing jobs here in america. chinese aggression against taiwan would send shock waves through the economy and upend daily life here in america. it would dwarf the economic effects of russia's war in ukraine, and we need to do what we can to prevent this aggression. thirdly, the aggression of taiwan's surkt industry would -- semiconductor industry would leave america vulnerable to the influence of the chinese communist part.

beijing wants to seize that industry in order to gain a clear upper hand in the world economy. this could cause massive economic pain for the united states. if beijing gains control of taiwan's semiconductor industry, it could rewrite the rules of the global economy. beijing wants to dictate the terms of any negotiations with the united states, costing americans tens of millions of jobs and stalling our economic growth. to sum this all up, protecting taiwan as a free and prosperous democratic nation is absolutely vital to the prosperity and security of our children and grandchildren. taiwan should matter to every american. now how do we ensure that a war over taiwan never occurs, because that should be our goal. given what we know about beijing's intentions and capabilities. we should be vigilant about

applying the lessons we've learned in ukraine. that requires recognizing the differences between ukraine and taiwan. the u.s. military began training ukraine eight years ago following the russian invasion of crimea and eastern ukraine in 2014. but we've done comparatively little to train the taiwanese. with taiwan, we're playing catch-up. we earn ukraine by wartime quickly arming taiwan by air and sea would prove extremely challenging. also the people's liberation army in china is not the russian military. they are much more focused and serious. so there's simply no time to waste, mr. president. we need to get high-quality weapons into taiwanese hands now before the conflict breaks out. as senator phil gramm and i

wrote last year in the "wall street journal," we need to turn taiwan into a porcupine so that xi jinping wakes up every day and concludes that an invasion is not worth of cost. why do you say a porcupine? any wolf has the ability to kill a gentle porcupine, and yet such an attack rarely occurs in nature. the defense of the porcupine's quills, which be rip through the predator's mouth and throat is the deterrent that froacts from attack by the -- froacts from attack by the wolves. last year to begin work on this issue, congress passed the taiwan enhanced resilience act. congress provided the biden administration with the ability to send $1 billion worth of u.s. weapons stocks to taiwan. we also authorized up to $10

billion in foreign military financing with matching contribution by taiwan. this brought to fruition years of work by our colleagues, senator menendez and senator risch. we authored the -- authorizes the creation of a joint stockpile, expanded u.s. military training and established the first ever comprehensive oversight regime on u.s. national security work with taiwan. lest we forget our friends, the taiwanese, are accelerating their own defense. for the sixth straight year with a 14% increase in 2022. their weapons purchases increasingly aligned with how our military experts envision a correct defense of the ielt, including harpoon antiship cruise missiles, stingers, antiaircraft missiles and secure

communication systems. we should encourage this change in taiwan's focus. as general james mattis once said, we need a willing partner in the combiemed to move -- in the biden administration to move at the speed of relevance. last september the armed services committee asked the administration some very basic questions. which weapons are most important in the pacific? what training does taiwan need? what weapons is taiwan ready to buy? the biden administration has yet to respond to these questions, mr. president, even though we know the state department and defense department have completed the analysis. in this case, silence will only make the situation worse. we need answers. i reiterate, congress needs this information to perform our duties, our constitutional duties effectively. so i'm calling on the biden

administration today, mr. president, to work with us to accelerate the transfer of financing, sale of a key set of military capabilities to taiwan. the president needs to use the authority that congress provided to transfer $1 billion in weapons to accelerate the expansion of our training programs in taiwan. make no mistake, the president's actions will have a direct, will have direct consequences for taiwan's ability to defend itself and for our ability to prevent a war in the pacific. without these tools, china will continue to gain the upper hand in the taiwan strait. we need to offset and deter the chinese military from taking actions in the first place. an influx of american weapons will go a long way toward assuring that we stand with them against chinese aggression and encourage other nations to join

us. as ronald reagan said, peace does not exist on its own will. it will depend on us, on our courage to build it and guard it and pass it on to future generations. end of quote from ronald reagan. one of the great advocates of peace through strength. that's how we will help taiwan preserve its freedom and democracy and how we can avoid war in the pacific. at the same time the armed services committee will intensify its focus on our own work, ensuring our military has every tool it needs to deter and, if necessary, defeat the people's liberation army. we must fix our munitions production problem and focus on the high-end weapons that our troops need. we need to modernize and expand the air force and the navy while honing the army and marine corps for their missions in the western pacific. we also have to explore new

ideas for nuclear modernization to respond to the unprecedented chinese nuclear build-up given that our commanders now tell us the chinese have more ground-based launchers for nuclear weapons than we do. and we must continue our work to improve the quality of life for all of our servicemembers and their families so they can focus on the task at hand. in conclusion, mr. president, congress has prioritized financial and material support for ukraine to help turn the tide in that war. the security of taiwan is no less important than the security of ukraine. the threat to global and economic security from communist china has the potential to jeopardize the prosperity and safety of americans here in the united states. it is time for our actions to reflect the significance of that

threat. thank you, and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. sullivan: thank you, mr. president. i want to thank my good friend from the great state of mississippi who's been a fantastic leader on the armed services committee, fantastic leader on so many of these important national security topics. and he and i share a very strong similar, identical view on the importance of taiwan, and we all need to be doing that. i want to thank my good friend, senator wicker from mississippi, for his leadership on this and so many other issues. i also want to thank my good friend from alaska, senator murkowski, who was just on the floor of the u.s. senate talking about the importance of the willow project, not just to alaska but to america. she and i are going to be down

here on the floor a lot in the next several weeks. i was here last week talking about this project. now for those of you who haven't watched, a quick recap of the willow project, a very large-scale oil and gas project in the national petroleum preserve of alaska. so not a controversial area at all. it's not like anwr or some of the other areas in our state. npra, as we call in alaska, was set aside by the federal government decades ago for oil and gas development. because we need oil and gas. we need it. some people out there don't think we do, but we do. and if we need it, we should do it in america. mr. president, just a quick little summary on some of the key aspects of this. 2,500 jobs to build this, ready to build tomorrow if we got permission. completely shovel ready. 75% of those jobs will be union

jobs, building trades jobs. it's one of the top priorities of the unions, i'm going to talk about that. peak productio, highest environmental standards in the world by far. lowest greenhouse gas emissions of a major energy project in the world by far. billions in revenues from the federal government, for state government, for local governments in alaska. and broad-based support from every group in alaska you can imagine, mr. president. so that's the willow project. we got the final eis last week and the biden administration is still kind of saying maybe we're going to narrow this so much that we're going to kill it. i'm going to talk about that. that would be unbelievable. i've tried to work with this administration. certainly senator murkowski has. we have made this the number one

issue from the alaska delegation ever since joe biden stepped into office on day one. i've personally raised this with the president, every cabinet official. willow is number one. you want cooperation from the alaska delegation, you've got to work with us. we're there. we're almost there. but i want to talk about some of what happened last week, mr. president. because our good friends in the media who love to write about this story willow because they hate the project, they're bias in the project. so when the eis came out last week, if you read the national media, which there was a lot of, guess who they quote, mr. president. guess who they quote? think they quote the alaskans who want it, the native people, the indulgous he -- indigenous people in my state who really want it? the unions? no. no, no, no. our national media friends, the national media, they never quote them. they quote greenpeace, center

for biological diversity. who are the other radical groups? justice. all the far-left radical groups, none of whom live in alaska, by the way. they get fully quoted, climate, all this crazy stuff that's not scientific based at all. but they don't quote people in my view who really, really matter. who really, really matter. particularly the native people. you want to talk about racial justice? you want to talk about environmental justice? you want to talk about racial equity, buzzwords the biden administration uses all the time. the media does, too. but somehow they always leave out the indigenous people in my state. it's wrong, mr. president. it is wrong. the media is wrong. the biden administration is wrong. i'm going to go into this in a big way, but i just want to make one final point. when people talk about the

science, oas, the democrats, we're the party of science. what happened last week was the final eis came out. that was the career staff at the federal agencies who came out with this final environmental impact statement. okay. it wasn't great. it limited this project from five pads which is where the trump administration, their record of decision, concluded based on science that you could do this environmentally -- in an environmentally sensitive way. the biden administration came out and said no, we're going to move it to three pads. okay, that's the career staff. we can live with that. the private sector company conocophillips can live with that. native people can live with that. we have 30 days. if you're an american who cares about energy security, national security, weigh in with blm.gov, the department of interior, mr.

president, if this gets limited beyond that, it is pure politics. pure politics. the democrats, party of science, okay, prove it. if this gets limited more, it's going to kill the project. we know every far-left environmental group in the country -- just read the paper -- last week they said we are out to kill this thing. if this gets killed, it will be pure politics by joe biden, john podesta, the whole group in the white house. so, the native people are very upset in my state because overwhelmingly they support this. every major native alaskan group in the country supports this. and, mr. president, they can't get one quote in the newspaper. "the washington post," forget it. they won't quote a native alaskan who supports it. they find the one who's against it and quote her.

but the vast majority support it. this is the voice of the arctic innuclear power ak -- inupiaq. they put this out. outside activist groups, the ones that always get quoted in the newspaper. you know the ones. the center for biological diversity, green peace, there is justice. by the way, center for american progress, interesting about them. they're really against it. now, why is that so interesting? i was startled by john podesta. recently he was the leader of it. they put statements out against willow all the time. now he's in charge of the decision whether willow should go forward. is that fair? boy, i hope he's being objective. imagine if the shoe was on the other foot. i won't even describe would that would look like. all these group, they're always against it. but here's the native people who want it. i'll explain for a minute why they want it. so they said outside activist groups opposing willow have

drowned out, certainly in the media, our local perspectives and are actively working to supersede the views of the alaskan native people. true. by the way, the media -- sorry, guys, but you're helping them in a great way to cancel the voices of the native people. this is not environmental justice or any other kind of justice. certainly not racial equity. it's racial cancellation. i'm continuing. and it is a direct attack on alaska native self-determination. okay. so that's going on right now and it's very fruts traiting. it's -- frustrating. it's very frustrating, mr. president, because the voices of some amazing people in my state, the indigenous people of alaska, are being canceled and drowned out and our national national ms

no problem quoting in every story the far-left radical envier rows who want to -- enviros who want for shut down every project in america and they won't quote these people. why do they care about this project so much? well, it's jobs. it's energy. it's revenues. but you know what? it's even bigger than that. here's why they care. mr. president, i break out this chart a lot. i'm going to explain it here. this is the -- this is a chart from the american medical association. and what it does, it looks at the changes and life expectancy in america from 1980 to 2014, a 25-year period. now, look, we're all americans. we want progress.

where you see anywhere kind of yellow, then green, then blue, then dark blue and purple, that's good in our country. that means people's life expectancy is increasing. we all want that. we all want that. now, unfortunately, you see like orange and red. a couple of spots in america, orange, red, that's actually american life expectancies in the last 25 years decreasing. nobody wants that. this is another topic, mr. president, but that's primarily parts of the country that were hit really hard by the opioid epidemic. we've got to work together to improve it. we don't want to see any orange or red here. nobody wants an american's life expectancy to decrease. that's bad. okay. but here's my broader point, mr. president. what part of america had the biggest life expectancy increase

from 1980 to 2014? increase. my state. great state of alaska. you look at this map, life expectancy particularly in the rural areas, the native areas, native villages, lucian island chain, parts of the southeast, life expectancy went up five, six, seven. mr. president, up to 13 years. 13 years. highest in the country. that's great. that's great. as i've said, the many folks, when we've been debating these issues here on the senate floor, give me one indicator of policy success more important thannen your citizens living longer -- than your citizens living longer. i've never heard somebody come back to me and say here's something more important, dan. i don't think there is. from 1980 to 2014, there are big

swaths of alaska where the life expectancy went like this. that's great. we should all celebrate that. why did that happen, mr. president? why did that happen? i'll tell you why it happened. you had major resource development here. you had prudhoe bay, the development of prudhoe bay, the biggest oil and gas field in north america. other oil and gas fields. you had the development of the alucia island -- alutia island chain. huge legislative change. so you had mining. you had resource development which was jobs and revenues and all of a sudden these communities were able to get things like clinics and flushed toilets and running water and gymnasiums, things that in the lower 48 and new jersey and

other places you take for granted. we didn't have them there. because we had resources and development and the economy, you started having that and people living longer. so, mr. president, i think you're hopefully seeing the point. this willow project is a matter of life and death for my constituents and that's why almost everybody, the alaska federation of natives, every native group, every group in alaska, they're all for it. and that's why we get really mad and frustrated. you saw senator murkowski down here a couple of minutes ago. she was frustrated. when the big "washington post," "the new york times" they write their left-leaning antiwillow and they have no idea what they're writing about. this is a matter of life and death. and they're canceling the voices of the people i represent, particularly the native people.

mr. president, that's got to change. that's got to change. you know who else supports this i had the great honor giving my annual speech to the alaska legislature two days ago in juneau, alaska, something senator murkowski and i do every year. it's a huge honor. i made the pitch on willow to all the state senators, state representatives, and i'm pretty sure, mr. president, we're going to get a unanimous joint resolution from the house and senate, alaska state legislature, saying how important this project is and how everybody in elected office in my state supports it. that's very unusual. any state you'd have outliers. pretty sure we're going to get something unanimous. why are we doing that? showing the biden administration that this issue unifies alaskans and we should be respected for this. we should be respected.

so the native people of alaska are very strongly supportive. they get canceled. even have a real clueless congressmen on the other side of the congress last week coming out and saying alaskans don't want the willow project. the native people don't. these guys are clueless. i forget their names. some guy from arizona. but they're wrong. but, mr. president, i'm going to make another point which is maybe even more frustrating. the media doesn't want to hear from the native voices but you know who else doesn't want to hear? the biden administration themselves. the biden administration themselves. i can't tell you how many times i've heard the president, cabinet officials, the vice president talk about racial equity, racial justice, environmental justice all the

time. last night i was with a remarkable gathering of alaska native people. this was a trilateral gathering from the people on the north slope where this willow project is going to take place, right here. i call it a trilateral gathering, mr. president, because it was the leaders, dozens of them, flew 5,000 miles from here ute, top of the world, flew 5,000 miles to washington, d.c. we all met last night. it is the trilateral group because it's the tribe, what we call the inupiaq community of the arctic slope. this is a regionally federally recognized tribe. of inupiaq people. their leadership. so that was one part of this friday lateral group. the -- trilateral group. the second part was the region

ol burrough, like a county. i think it's bigger than montana. that's the size we're talking about. these are elected officials, a city council, a mayor. they're all inupiat indigenous people. that's the second part. then the third part was the alaska native regional corporation called arc ticket slope regional corporation. remember, created by congress. economic engine, it has tribal and heritage components. so it was the leaders of all these three organizations -- the tribe, the borough, and the regional alaska native corporation, all their leadership. mr. president, i've known these people for a long time. they are amazing, incredible americans. you would love them. you would love them. a couple dozen of them then flew

right here to utqiagvik borough, to washington, d.c. they wanted a meeting with the secretary of interior, deb hall land. they wanted a meeting with her. they didn't get the meeting. you would think, geez, pretty important. you want to hear the voice of the native people, you want to talk about racial equity, racial justice, environmental justice in these people just flew 5,000 miles to washington, d.c. the secretary doesn't have time to meet with them? well, that's not very respectful. they're all supportive -- by the way, the tribe, they're all supportive of the willow project. but here's the thing, mr. president. it wasn't just this week. this group of alaska natives, the trilateral group, some of the most important people in my state have tried at least five different times to meet with the secretary of interior. they've flown 5,000 miles to

washington, d.c., to get one damn meeting with the secretary of interior. and you know what? her office has said no every single time. environmental justice, racial equity, respect for the native people. come on, bunch of baloney. five times at least. the only time deb hallland has only given these people an audience is when she was up there for about 20 minutes. shocking. canceling the voices of the native people of alaska who want this project. 5,000 miles, trilateral group. the tribe, the borough, the anc, nope, the secretary is too busy. nope, secretary is too busy last time and last time and last time. at least five different times

they tried to meet with her. she won't listen. that's what i call cancellation. media, you're welcome to write that a you won't, of course. i think guarantee you in that time she's probably met with representatives from some of these far-left radical groups probably dozens of times. but she won't do it. now, you want to hear some real irony, mr. president? as i mentioned, last week the scientists came out in the federal agencies and said, here's the final environmental impact statement. it was very long, very detailed, very data, scientific study. remember, the normal course of business in in the federal government,, once you do an eis, you have 30 days for the final record decision. that almost always gets stamped approvedment. rarely do you have the record or decision 30 days later changing the eis. what's happening right now in america is all these radical lower-48 environmental groups are trying like crazy to

pressure john podesta and the president of the united states to change it. that would be pure politics. democrats say they're a party of science. this wouldn't be science at all. this would be pure, raw, political power to appease the center for biological diversity and completely screw the people i represent on the north slope. okay? that would happen. but here's the real irony. last week blm puts about out this eis, pretty good statement, narrowed it more, and then the department of interior put out a statement -- they didn't attribute it to anybody. deb haaland certainly didn't say it was her statement. it was just a statement from the department of interior saying the department has substantial concerns about the willow project. wait a minute,, blm is part of the project. and blm just came out with a any statements related to this

matter be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if read saying that the project is good. that's weird. and the preferred alternative in the eis, which blm just putout. shows that's really strange. then they said one of our concerns is direct and indirect gas emissions. indirect, i don't know what that means. deb haaland doesn't worry about it in new mexico. where is that story, washington "washington post"? they also said they're concerned about the impacts to wildlife and alaska native subsistence, unquote. so, hmmm ... they might change it based on that. but, mr. president, who are the people who understand impacts to wildlife and alaska native subsistence on the north slope? who are they? who are they? they're the people i was with last night, the people deb haaland refusings to meet with.

so if the department of interior was concerned about, quote, impacts to wildlife and alaska native subsistence, she had people to tell her about it. these are the whaling captains, the hunters, people that know this issue more than anybody. you know what this is, mr. president? it's just a reduce, right? -- it's just a rues ruse, right? don't you think that deb haaland would have taken at least one meeting with these great leaders, who are the leaders on alaska native subsistence and wildlife? north slope borough project is one of the best wildlife experts anywhere in the world. the borough was here yesterday. same with icast, the native tribe. they were here. so it's a little fishy you mr. president. it's a little fishy that the

secretary of interior won't meet with these great alaska natives. they -- i just think it's because they're going to say, madam secretary, respectfully, we really want this project. so is let me conclude with one other voice that's being ignored, canceled, whatever you want to talk about, on the willow project. now, mr. president, i like this picture. i love this picture, actually. it's a very icon tyke photo -- it's a very iconic photo of men. it's the great americans who built this country, right? this is taking a lunch break on their building the empire state

building. i think they built that in 18 months, 12 months, something incredible like that. the reason i like this picture is because there's become a theme, unfortunately -- some of my democratic colleagues don't like it when i say this, but there's become a theme that i've seen over the years, certainly alaska, maybe not in the rest of the country, but i think it's pretty much the rest of the country. and it's this -- my friends in the democratic party, they used to say, we're the party of the workingmen and women. men and women build stuff like the empire state building and build projects like willow or the trans-alaska pipeline. but here's the thing, mr. president. whenever the national democrats, joe biden, you name it, whenever they have a choice, a choice, between the radical far-left environmental elites who want to stop stuff and these men and women who build things?

every time, every single time they go with the radical elites and sell out the workingmen and women of america. every time. now, some of my democratic colleagues don't like this when i say that -- don't like it when i say that. well, i'm so, but i think it's truthful. but i will say on i said on the floor the other day, i have a lot of senate colleagues, republican and in particular democrats -- and i am so thankful -- who have called and reached out to the white house and said, look, you guys, come on. this willow project makes so much sense. it's been in permitting for decades. every environmental review, it's passed with flying colors. the president is really going to saudi arabia to get on bended knee to beg for oil? he's really going to venezuela so he can get oil from them and we're not letting alaskans produce it? that's crazy. so a lot of my democratic

colleagues -- i'm not are going to name them because they probably don't want to be named -- i appreciate you calling the white house saying, come on. you got to approve this willow project. but here's the thing, mr. president. last year i had what's called a congressional review act. it was on a permitting issue. a permitting issue. the white house, believe it or not, after the infrastructure bill, which i supported, we had good permitting reform in it. the white house put hot a rule that -- the white house put out a rule that would make infrastructure projects much harder to permit, particularly energy projects. so i brought what's called a congressional review act to rescind the biden administration rule, so we could build things more quickly, and i'm proud to say, mr. president, a bipartisan group of senators supported it. president biden said he was going to veto the sullivan bill

if it comes to his desk. all right, mr. president. that's a bad idea. but the reason i'm mentioning it now, that was a test because i had every building trade in america supporting my congressional review act resolution to rescind the biden administration's arcane rule that would make permitting infrastructure projects harder and the workingmen and women said, no, we're supporting the sullivan congressional review act. and guess what? it passed. now, the usual suspects, the center for biological diversity, all the far-left green groups, they were against it. so that was a test. i gave a speech here. who you with? the workingmen and women of america? or the far-left radical environmental groups that want to shut down? the senate passed the test. it was bipartisan, not by much, but it was still bipartisan, thank you joe manchin. but here's the thing,

mr. president. willow is another test. now, it is not a test for my colleagues here, because like i said, if we had a vote on willow right now, i'd bet it would pass well over 60-65 senators. so i ha appreciate my democrat colleagues helping me here. all my republican colleagues know it's good for america, good for alaska. but here's the thing. all the big building trades, all of them, are coming out in huge support for the willow project. they're making it the laborers, the building trades, they're making it one of their biggest prioritied, if not their biggest, for these people. why? because as i mentioned, 2,500 construction jobs, that's the estimate to build this. 75% of which will be labor building trades union jobs. so here's just a few of the statements from some of these

great americans, and they are great americans. i've gotten to know these labor leaders, the heart and soul of the country. here's terry o'sullivan. energy infrastructure, oil and natural gas in particular you is the largest privately funded job-creating sector for liuna construction workers. the oil and natural gas industry has provided tens of thousands of jobs, resulting in millions of work hours for our members. these are quality union jobs with family-supporting wages and benefits. the same is true for the willow project -- liuna, terry o'sullivan, labor, pro-willow. where's that story, "the washington post," "the new york times," you won't write it. you never write it. you cancel these guys.

these are great americans. how about mark mcmanu us? general president, journeyman, apprenticeship of the plumbing and pipe fitting union. let's see whataburger he said about willow. it is long past time we created good-paying union jobs and indiana vest in north slope alaska communities that will benefit directly from this project in the npra, as we call it. nfra, set aside 70 years ago for oil and gas development. the wilhelmina which will -- the willow project will help deliver reliable energy to consumers and provide billions of dollars in economic investments in these communities. there you go, pipe fitters. come on, national media. write that story. don't keep quoting the far-left environmental groups. quote working men and women who built this nation. who else? james callahan, president of

the operating engineers. willow will also put operating engineers to work. those are his union members. he's in charge of. he's another great american along with others in the skill trades. these jobs offer family-sustaining wages and offer strong health and pension benefits. furthermore, construction of the willow project will provide much-needed revenue to alaska and the native communities. another union leader in america. now look, the president likes to call himself blue collar joe and working joe and all that. prove it, mr. president. prove it. this is another example of a choice. the only groups in this country right now who want to shut down the willow project are far-left radical environmental groups who don't want to build anything, who don't give a darned about

working men and women in america, and who certainly don't give a darn about the native community on the north slope. i really wish our media friends would write this story. the unions support it -- quote them. the native people support it -- quote them. don't cancel them. and this administration needs to wake up. the american people are getting tired of this. this is a test. the eis came out last week. if it has changed, it will be because of raw political party by far-left environmental groups who forced the twhows kill this project. i'm just going to end with this, mr. president. this is just an example. these are union members, these are a broad base group of alaska native organizations, these are just economic groups in our

state and nationally. it's not a hard call. this project has the highest environmental standards in the world. and if we need oil and gas, which we do, why wouldn't we get it from american workers like the people i just quoted, to help alaska native communities like the people i just quoted? why is the federal government and joe biden going to saudi arabia to beg for oil? by the way, he got rejected. why did we lift sanctions on venezuela, a terrorist regime, to get more oil, whose production processes are 18 times more polluting than an american oil and gas project. why? none of this makes sense. so, mr. president, again, i want to thank my democratic senate colleagues in particular. we've got 30 days. and if you're an american and

you care about energy security and good jobs, you're a union member, pick up the phone, send an e-mail, blm.gov, and tell them stop the madness. finalize the willow project for the benefit of the native people in alaska, for the benefit of working americans, for the benefit of our national security, for the benefit of our environment. that's what we need to do. i'm hoping that the biden administration makes the right call. i yield the floor.

mr. peters: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time on the chung nomination be considered expired, that at 5:30 p.m. on monday, february 13, the senate vote on confirmation of the chung nomination, that if confirmed the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. finally, that the cloture motion with respect to the menendez-miro nomination ripen following the disposition of the chung nomination. the presiding officer: without objection,so ordered. mr. peters: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. peters: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the appointments at the desk appear separately in the record as if made by the chair. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered.

mr. peters: mr. president, i understand that there is a bill at the desk that is due for second reading. the presiding officer: the senator is correct. the clerk will read the title of the bill for the second time. the clerk: s. 299, a bill to amend title 31 united states code to provide for automatic continuing resolutions. mr. peters: in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i would object to further proceeding. the presiding officer: the objection is heard and the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. peters: i understand that there is a bill at the desk, and i'm asking for its first reading. the presiding officer: the clerk will read the title of the bill for the first time. the clerk: h.r. 185, an act to terminate the requirement imposed by the director of the centers for disease control and prevention for proof of covid-19 vaccination for foreign travelers and for other purposes. mr. peters: i now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule 14, i object to my own request.

the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent --. the presiding officer: the bill will receive second reading on the next legislative. mr. peters: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today it stand adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on monday, february 13, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed. further, that following the conclusion of morning business, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the mendez-mirror nomination. --. the presiding officer: without objection,so ordered. mr. peters: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the senate stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m.