Sherrod Brown

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Object.

Mr. BROWN. Object.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the career and service of a proud Ohioan, Dan Sewell, who will retire at the end of June, bringing an end to his 44-year career in journalism. Dan spent 39 of those years with the Associated Press, serving Americans, both by bringing them the news and by telling their stories--in Buffalo, Miami, San Juan, Atlanta, and Chicago, where he has worked as a writer, editor, assistant bureau chief, and most recently in our home State, in Cincinnati, OH. A native of Middletown, OH, Dan graduated from Edgewood High School. He got his start in journalism as a student journalist at Ohio University's student newspaper, The Post. That is where Dan and I first met, when he interviewed me as the youngest member of the Ohio State Legislature. Journalists like Dan play a vital role in our democracy--they ask tough questions, they challenge special interests and uncover corruption, and they connect Americans with their communities and with the world. Whether it was the Grenada Invasion in 1983, Hurricane Andrew in 1992, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, or the mass shooting in Dayton's Oregon District in 2019, Dan has done vital work on the frontlines, covering stories that matter to people. Not only has he made a difference through his writing, Dan also teaches as a part-time instructor of journalism at Miami University in Oxford, OH, helping mentor the next generation of journalists. Dan is a devoted husband to Vickii, father of five, and grandfather of nine, and plans to spend time with them during retirement. And he will have more time to partake in his favorite hobby--attending Cincinnati Reds' games. On behalf of grateful readers in Ohio and around the country, I thank Dan Sewell for nearly four decades of service in journalism, doing work that is important to the fabric of our communities and our country.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, one week from today, on July 1st, Trade Adjustment Assistance will expire. This is our only tool to support workers who lose their jobs because of countries like China that cheat the rules. And in one week, it goes away. This is an economic problem and a China problem. All of us, of both parties, recognize the threat that countries like China pose to our economy. It's why just two weeks ago, we came together and passed the Endless Frontiers Act on a broad, bipartisan basis: To secure and expand our domestic supply chains, to support R&D to ensure the next generation of manufacturing is developed in America and made in America, and to finally--finally--ensure that Americans' tax dollars are used to buy American products that support American jobs. This should not be controversial. We are working to undo decades of bad trade policy with China, and decades of neglect for our domestic supply chains. That's going to take years. We know corporations won't stop outsourcing jobs on July 1st. We know China isn't going to stop cheating and undermining American industries on July 1st. And we know our manufacturers will still have to compete against governments that prop up their competitors on July 1st. We owe it to workers, who we know are going to have their lives upended through no fault of their own to unfair trade, to do everything we can to ease the transition. Today, I'm not asking for a complete renewal of the program. I'm not even asking for an extra year of the program. I, on behalf of my Democratic colleagues and American workers, asked for unanimous consent from this body for a straight 3-month extension of TAA, so that we can keep having the conversations about how best to structure the program going forward. It appears that my friends on the other side would prefer a 1-month extension. I would like more, but in the spirit of compromise--this beats the alternative--letting TAA expire and leaving workers in the lurch. And while that dialogue continues, workers get the help they need. We know workers are losing jobs to China all over the country. Sadly, that happens every week, every day. By extending this program, service workers and people whose jobs get shipped overseas to countries without trade agreements will get help. Training funds, will continue being provided, at a time when we need to train people for the new jobs that we want industry to create. We all want the US economy to be more resilient in the face of economic shocks. We all want to see fewer communities devastated by unfair trade. We all want American workers' hard work to pay off TAA is part of that. We came together to extend it in 2011. We came together to extend it in 2015. We must do the same today. If you love this country you fight for the people who make it work. That's what we do with Trade Adjustment Assistance.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Carolina Young, of my staff, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 117th Congress.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, last week, America lost a baseball legend, a pioneer in civil rights, Jim ``Mudcat'' Grant. He joined the Cleveland Indians in 1958. He spent 14 years in the Major Leagues. I remember watching him play when I was a kid growing up in Cleveland in the 1960s. Cleveland has been, more than any other franchise, perhaps, a pioneer for change in baseball. Cleveland had the first Black player in the American League, Larry Doby, Hall of Famer. He came into the league only about 2 months after Jackie Robinson integrated the National League. Cleveland had the first Black manager, Hall of Famer Frank Robinson. Cleveland also had ``Mudcat'' Grant, who refused to be silent in the face of segregated hotels and racist slurs and discrimination from management. Grant was an accomplished singer with a beautiful voice. He organized the singing group ``Mudcat and the Kittens'' to make up the income he was denied that other players had, that White players had, in advertising and endorsements. Companies wouldn't hire a Black player. They toured the country during the off-season, performing with Johnny Carson and in places a little less known. I remember Grant in later years serving as an announcer for Cleveland Indian games with a southern drawl that was unmistakable. He didn't just use that voice, though, for entertainment or commentating on plays; he used it to speak out for civil rights. During the national anthem at one game, predating Colin Kaepernick, Mudcat Grant--in the 1960s, before civil rights and voting rights had passed this Congress, he said this during the national anthem. He said: This land is not free. I can't even go to Mississippi and sit down at a lunch counter. A Major League Baseball player. In 1958, he and his White teammate Gary Bell roomed together for away games, becoming the first time--players, in those days, when they were paid less than management, charged less, whatever, players roomed together. Two players would room together. Gary Bell and Mudcat Grant were the first Black and White roommates in the major leagues in 1958. While running for President, Senator John F. Kennedy invited Mudcat Grant to breakfast. Grant didn't hold back. He talked openly with Senator Kennedy, with the future President, about the poverty he grew up in, the racism he endured every day--this was 1960--as a Major League Baseball player. Of course, it wasn't only his activism we remember Mudcat Grant for. We know his talent on the field. He was Minor League's Rookie of the Year in 1954, only 7 years after baseball was integrated. In 1965, he was the first Black player to win 20 games in the American League. He should have been the first, but listen to this: For years, major league managers conspired to prevent Black pitchers from becoming 20-game winners. That almost doesn't make sense. Well, Grant said some catchers would tell the hitters, the opposing hitters, while they were catching, what was coming because they didn't want you to do well as a pitcher. Other managers, when a player was reaching--a pitcher was getting close to 20 games, other managers sat the player down so he couldn't win 20 games as a Black man. After Black players pass away, we often hear about how they were among the underappreciated talents of the game. That is not a coincidence. In addition to being a singer, Grant was also a writer. He published a book in 2007 called ``The Black Aces.'' It is about the great African-American pitchers. Part of his project is to tell more stories about Black players and to teach more people about the history of baseball integration. It is the kind of stories we need to tell more often. Our country is richer, as the Presiding Officer representing Arizona knows--the country is richer when we tell people's stories. Let's honor James Timothy Grant, Jr., by telling his story, by heeding his words. In his great poem ``Life,'' James Timothy Grant Jr. wrote: Life is like a game of baseball, you play it every day. It isn't just the breaks you get, but the kind of game you play. James ``Mudcat'' Grant, rest in peace. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN. The Presiding Officer and I and another 20 or so Senators listened yesterday in the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee to the CEOs of the Nation's six largest banks testify to our committee. Those six CEOs are among--or maybe the six most--powerful business people in America. I look to what has happened to my hometown of Mansfield, OH, and to Zanesville, OH, and Lima and Chillicothe and Portsmouth and Springfield--medium-size industrial cities that 40 years ago were prosperous industrial communities that created and which were the homes of thousands--tens of thousands, really, of good-paying union jobs, allowing people out of high school to go into the plant and make a decent middle-class living, allowing them to send their kids to North Central State or Mansfield OSU or Denison or schools all over Ohio. But in the last 30 or 40 years, we have seen what Wall Street has done. Wall Street has done just fine for themselves. We have seen profits go up dramatically. We have seen executive compensation stratospheric--tens of millions of dollars for most of these CEOs and their earnings every year and their compensation. But we see middle-class wages in places like Toledo and Akron simply flat. And we heard a lot at that hearing yesterday, from these CEOs, about how much they value their employees. Yet not one of these CEOs agreed to remain neutral if their workers want to unionize. And I know from my State, whether it is Dayton or whether it is Trotwood or whether it is Zanesville--I know from my State--that when workers are lucky enough to carry a union card, they are much more likely to prosper. These CEOs said: Yeah, we want our employees' voices to be heard. But that is not what remaining neutral means--not using their vast power to intimidate their employees. The Presiding Officer has seen it in Georgia, we saw it recently in Alabama, and I have seen it many times in Ohio, where an employer uses the vast resources of the corporation to browbeat--or however they do it--to stop people from voting for the union that would make their lives better. I heard these CEOs say they are focused on lending to small businesses and growing the economy, but I don't see that in Newark. I don't see that in Canton. I don't see it in Warren or Youngstown. These small businesses want help. The community bankers did it. For community bankers, their lending went up during the pandemic, but these large six banks restricted their lending in the pandemic. But they had enough money left to do major stock buybacks. One of these companies planned to do $25 billion. It was announced just recently that one of these six banks was going to do a $25 billion stock buyback. Do you know who that enriches? It certainly doesn't enrich the community. It doesn't enrich Columbus or Cincinnati or Blue Ash or Bellaire or Steubenville. What it does is enrich the executives. These six CEOs said that, yes, climate change is a threat to the entire economy, but they drag their feet when it comes to investing in new technology and jobs for the future. I am glad they raised wages, a number of them--and I know the Presiding Officer from Georgia saw this. Right before the hearing, one of the companies agreed to raise the minimum wage of its employees significantly. A couple others of them bragged about their diversity in their workplace. They had just put the first Black woman on their board. But we also know that one of those CEOs--this is not even quite believable, but I can prove it with the math, as we did during the hearing. One of these CEOs makes 900 times what the lowest, what some of their new employees make--900 times. I don't think they claim to work 900 times harder. But how do you figure this out? How does this come about, that a CEO will make 900 times what some of its workers make? I am glad they raised wages. I am glad they made some investments in minority depository institutions. And I was even welcome to hear them brag about their investments in Howard and Fisk and one of the great institutions in the Presiding Officer's home State, in Atlanta, with Morehouse. I am glad they are doing that. I am glad they are increasing diversity in their senior leadership. I hope they continue it, and we will be watching. It is not close to enough, though, when these are the most powerful actors in this country. The signals that these companies send to influence workers and companies all over the country--it is not just the thousands of employees. It is important to remember, when financial services makes about 25 percent of the profits of all corporations in the country--financial services accounts for about 25 percent of it, but they are only 4 percent of all the employees. Four percent of all the employees in the country work for financial services, but they account for 25 percent of the profit. That tells a story too. It tells the story that these large banks have built an economy that is good for them. They built an economy that is good for financial services. They built an economy that is good for the largest banks--not the community banks in Savannah or Lagrange or Griffin, GA, or Mansfield or Shelby or Crestline, OH, but they have built an economy that is good for the big guys. Let me give you a couple examples. Before the pandemic, Bank of America downgraded Chipotle's stock because an analyst decided the company pays its workers too much. They downgraded the stock because an analyst said it pays the workers too much. As a result, the company's share price declined. When American Airlines announced pay raises for its pilots and flight attendants, Wall Street punished the company, dropping its stock price by 5 percent. So when American Airlines does the right thing--they decide to invest more money in their workers--Wall Street slaps them and says: Don't do that. That doesn't help the economy. A Citibank analyst actually wrote--believe this: This is frustrating. Labor is being paid first again. Shareholders get leftovers. Leftovers? Shareholders get leftovers? We might have thought that after the pandemic things might start to change a little bit. No one could deny how much essential workers contribute--the bus driver in Cleveland, the drugstore worker in Lima, the nurse in Bellaire. Those are the people who really were the heroes in this economy. Our economy is supposed to reward people whose talents are in high demand. That is what we are taught. That is what corporate leaders tell us, right But this year, after Amazon defeated Alabama's workers' union organization effort, the company stock climbed. Just a few weeks ago, Wall Street sent Uber and Lyft and DoorDash stocks down when Labor Secretary Walsh said gig workers should be classified as employees. So when the government decides we need to do something, we need to make sure these workers are treated better, Wall Street essentially attacks those companies' stocks. Think about that. It sends a pretty clear message. The more you pay your employees, the worse you are going to do on Wall Street. The less power you give workers, the better you will do. That view that American workers are costs to cut instead of a valuable asset to invest in, that is what is wrong with this system. So-called analysts at Wall Street, often at the banks--these six largest banks--make decisions for people in Ohio, Georgia and Pennsylvania and across the country. They make decisions about whether workers they have never met, in towns they have never been to--whether those workers are a good investment. I hope these banks make progress not only within their own institutions but thinking about the role these banks play in leading this system and leading our economy and leading this country. I suggest the absence of a quorum. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Megan Malara, a legislative fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 117th Congress.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, we know that some of our biggest competitors around the world spend billions in propping up state-owned enterprises and investing in research and development. They have also gotten pretty good at taking our ideas, monetizing them, and using them to compete--and sometimes cheat--against American businesses while paying their workers less and giving those workers fewer protections and rights. China is often the worst offender. Ohio workers know all too well what happens to their jobs and their communities when they are forced to compete with Chinese companies that break the rules, pay poverty wages, and are propped up by the government. We are working to change that this week I want the technologies that will drive the next generation of U.S. economic growth and manufacturing--from semiconductors to hydrogen buses to the next-generation jet engine--to be developed in America and to put people to work in good-paying jobs in our country. This is something we should all agree on. It is what we are working to do with this comprehensive, bipartisan bill. This package is packed with investment in research and development, technology, and high-tech domestic manufacturing that will again set us up to lead the world. It supports American manufacturing and innovation. It gives businesses the tools to compete. It supports American workers--the engine behind our success. It includes my Build America, Buy America Act to strengthen our ``Buy American'' rules and ensure that American tax dollars go towards American-made products that create American jobs. This provision is the result of bipartisan partnership. I would like to thank my colleague from my State, Senator Portman, and also Senators Peters and Stabenow from Michigan, Senator Baldwin from Wisconsin, and Senator Braun from Indiana for their work. Our legislation would apply ``Buy American'' rules to all taxpayer- funded infrastructure and public works projects. When we ensure our tax dollars are spent on American products, these tax dollars go further in the economy. We employ more workers who spend on local businesses and lift up everyone. When we say ``Buy American,'' we mean ``Buy American''--not import a steel slab from China, make it into a pipe, and stamp on it ``Made in America.'' We need to make sure these rules are thorough, tough, and effective. That is exactly what this provision does. This bill also gives our country tough new tools to crack down on China's cheating. Banking and Housing Committee Ranking Member Toomey and I worked together on an amendment to take on Chinese espionage against our economy. The amendment is the product of months of bipartisan negotiation. I thank Senator Toomey and his bipartisan staff. The Presiding Officer, Senator Ossoff, is a new member of that committee and has contributed greatly on this and other projects we have done. Our plan directly confronts action by the Chinese Government and Chinese firms that hurt American workers and companies by stealing their valuable intellectual property. These measures were developed by Senator Van Hollen. They require mandatory imposition of powerful new sanctions on Chinese actors who steal U.S. trade secrets. The United States remains a global center for research, development, and innovation, and for years, people have been stealing our ideas. China is the worst offender; we know that. The Chinese Government and the companies it props up engage in systematic and growing espionage against our businesses and our workers. The theft of trade secrets costs the United States as much as $540 billion every year. Our plan would give the President new tools to go after Chinese actors who target our country with cyber attacks. Americans have all seen over the past few weeks how serious cyber attacks are, how they can disrupt our entire economy. We need strong tools to punish these attackers and the countries that finance and support them. Sanctions are just one new tool this package includes to increase American competitiveness. We will build on the success of our bipartisan Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act to create more manufacturing innovation hubs around the country. Back in 2014, I worked with Republican Senator Roy Blunt and the Obama administration to pass the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act. This landmark bill created a national network of advanced manufacturing hubs. It was one of the biggest steps we had taken as a country in a long time to make our manufacturing more competitive. America Makes in Youngstown--the first of its kind, the first in this program--started as a pilot program back 9 years ago. It became the first hub in that network. I thank my colleagues for their work on this. I thank especially two members of my staff who are on the floor today, Abigail Duggan and Megan Malara, for the work they have done. I thank my colleagues for moving forward on this very important act. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, the vote we are about to take on this Van Hollen resolution, S.J. Res. 15, is a bipartisan opportunity for us to show people whom we serve that we are on their side. States all over the country--red and blue States, States in the South and Midwest, on both coasts--have all recognized that people need protections from predatory lenders. That is why nearly every State and the District of Columbia have passed laws to limit, to cap the interest--the amount of interest--that can be charged on payday and other loans. In the late 1990s, payday lenders were desperate to find a way to evade State laws that limited them from charging exorbitant interest rates that trap people in a cycle of debt they can't get out of, no matter how hard they work. They came up with what the Comptroller of the Currency called ``rent-a-charter''--what we now know as a ``rent-a- bank'' scheme. Because banks are generally not subject to these State laws, payday lenders funneled their loans through a small number of willing banks. It looked like the banks were making the loans, when it was really the payday lenders. Federal regulators in both parties--Republicans and Democrats--saw through this very obvious ruse that hurt low-income people who were forced to get credit any way they could. Federal regulators cracked down. Under both President Bush and President Obama, the Office of Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation--OCC and FDIC--shut down a series of these schemes by payday lenders and banks. States from across the country also stepped in to protect their residents. Georgia, West Virginia, my State of Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Montana, South Dakota, Colorado, Illinois, Virginia, and Nebraska all passed new laws and regulations either to stop these schemes or to cap interest rates on payday loans at 36 percent--still a very, very high number that most of us never pay, but that people who can only get credit that way end up paying, unfortunately. It is still a high number that, obviously, will make any company making these loans plenty of money. Several other States, including California and Ohio, also passed laws to limit the interest that can be charged on consumer loans. These new laws passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. Now, get this: More than 75 percent of voters in Nebraska and South Dakota supported the ballot initiatives to cap interest rates on payday loans. So three-fourths of the voters going to the polls in a popular vote wanted to cap interest rates on payday loans in those two States. In recent years, new financial technology companies emerged that partner with banks to offer responsible small-dollar loans at more affordable rates. But we also have a separate group of online payday lenders resurrecting the same old rent-a-bank scheme to offer abusive, high- interest loans. They are not even attempting to hide it. One online lender told its investors it would get around California's new law by making loans--these were their words, this lender's--through ``bank sponsors . . . not subject to the same proposed state level rate limitations.'' So he or she is even acknowledging that States--voters or State legislatures or both--are saying: We want to cap those interest rates so people don't take out a small loan and end up paying 200, 300 percent after these payday lenders put that on them. Another lender said: ``There is no reason why we wouldn't be able to replace our California business with a bank program.'' So they know what they have to do. They know they are going against the intent of the legislature and the intent of the voters. Given the broad bipartisan support for these laws, we had hoped that the Trump OCC would take action and crack down on these schemes, the same way that Bush and Obama had done--schemes that have been rejected by voters and legislatures over and over, in State after State after State. But last year, the OCC issued what is known as the true lender rule, overruling voters of both parties, giving essentially a free pass to these abusive rent-a-bank schemes. Now, to fight back on behalf of low-income people and on behalf of fair play, a broad bipartisan coalition is asking Congress to overturn the OCC's harmful true lender rule. That support includes credit unions, State bank regulators-- Republicans and Democrats alike--and State attorneys general of both parties. One of the most outspoken has been the Republican attorney general of Nebraska, because his State passed--his State's voters passed--a limit, 75 percent of them, to keep interest rates down. There is support from small business groups, support from the Military Officers Association of America. We know that payday lenders especially prey on young members of the military. One of them may be off in a foreign country while the spouse stays back at the base or stays back in a community and is struggling with just having the resources to get by. They are preyed upon so often. Other groups are the National Association of Evangelicals, the Southern Baptist Convention, and other members of the Faith in Just Lending Coalition. That coalition wrote to Congress: Predatory payday and auto title lenders are notorious for exploiting loopholes in order to offer debt-trap loans to families struggling to make ends meet. The OCC's ``True Lender'' rule creates a loophole big enough to drive a truck through. That came from this coalition--the coalition of attorneys general, the Military Officers Association, the National Association of Evangelicals, and the Southern Baptist Convention. They are saying the OCC's true lender rule creates a loophole big enough to drive a truck through. We know why these commonsense laws that our States passed are popular. We know why they enjoy bipartisan support in States across the country. People don't want abusive lenders to prey on them, their loved ones or their neighbors. Some issues that come before the Senate are complicated. They divide people. There are thorny nuances to consider. This isn't one of them. It is simple. Let's protect the people whom we serve. They have clearly cried out for us to do this. We should protect those people. I urge my colleagues to support S.J. Res. 15 to overturn this rule. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. I thank my colleagues for their vote on this resolution, which was so important to protect people from being abused by payday lenders. S.J. Res. 15 will be a big deal, saving a lot of money for a lot of low-income people who have been fleeced far too many times. I thank the leader. I thank, in my office, Laura Swanson and Jan Singelmann for their terrific work in making sure that everybody was here and everybody was learned on this issue so well and how important that was for our State and for our country. I thank them. National Police Week Mr. President, each year during Police Week, we honor the law enforcement officers who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to their communities. This year, we add the names of four Ohioans to the National Law Enforcement Memorial who laid down their lives last year: Corporal Adam McMillan of Hamilton County Sheriff's Office, Detective James Michael Skernivitz of Cleveland, Patrolman Anthony Hussein Dia of Toledo, and Officer Kaia Grant of Springdale. Sadly, we already know of two names who will be added to the memorial next year: Officer Brandon Stalker of the Toledo Police Department and Jason Lagore, who worked for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Each one of these losses is a tragedy for a family, for a community, and for their fellow officers. Ms. Grant's mother, I know, and I talked to her about how tragic this is for her, for her family, and for the families of all of these officers who gave their lives in service to others. Over the past year, we have had many reminders of the work that must be done to reform and reimagine public safety and to rebuild trust between law enforcement and communities. These Ohioans' lives are a reminder of the ideals we should strive for--officers who are true public servants in the best sense of the word, people who gave themselves to their communities. And these Ohioans gave so much. Officer Anthony Dia was the father of two young sons. He married his high school sweetheart. In a letter he wrote to his family during Ramadan, the devout Muslim wrote: Every day I put on the uniform, it is with the intention to protect the innocent and the weak in my community. The imam who spoke at his memorial service said: When you think of Islam, think of this man who gave his life on the Fourth of July to defend the values of the United States. Detective James Skernivitz served my city of Cleveland. He served in neighborhood policing districts, and in 2013, he joined the Gang Impact Unit, working to reduce violence in Cleveland. He was a devoted father and played softball for many years, traveling to tournaments with the Steel City Enforcers. Corporal Adam McMillan spent 19 years serving the public at the sheriff's office in Hamilton County, Cincinnati. So many in his community spoke about his kindness. His pastor said at the memorial service that ``he was the kind of guy who asked the person in the drive-thru window how their day was going.'' His generous spirit will live on. Corporal McMillan was an organ donor, and his loss is giving new life to someone else. Kaia Grant was in the Reserve Officer Training Corps in college. After graduating and working with at-risk kids in Cincinnati, she joined the Springdale Police Department. Her coworker said: Instead of going into the military and then going into politics, like many do, she wanted to serve the community. Another colleague related a story about how she saved a woman's life. The department got a call about a person considering taking her own life, and they searched and searched but found no one. They were close to giving up, but Officer Grant didn't. She found the woman in a parking garage in time to save her life. As part of her dedication to our country, Officer Grant interned for a U.S. Senator while she was in college. That Senator's name was Joe Biden. Earlier this year, on his first trip to Ohio as President, Joe Biden met with Officer Grant's mother, Gina Mobley, to thank her for her daughter's service to him, to our country, and to her community. We can't begin to repay the debt we owe Ms. Mobley and all these families. We can work to reform our systems to protect more officers and the communities they swear an oath to protect. This week, I am introducing legislation, the Law Enforcement Training for Mental Health Crisis Response Act, with Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma. We have seen too many Americans, both officers and those they serve, hurt or killed when law enforcement responds to people in their communities suffering a mental health crisis. This bill would invest in training to help families resolve those situations safely for themselves and for their communities. They help officers resolve these situations safely for themselves and for the communities they serve. Law enforcement officers, reformers, and advocates all agree we pushed too many problems onto the criminal justice system, expecting officers to be social workers and crisis responders and family mediators without the proper training to fill those roles. We need to actually invest in mental health and education and other social support. We need to give officers the training and resources they need to help when they are called on to respond to these situations. This Police Week, let's offer--many of us come to the floor to do this--more than empty words. Let's honor the memory of these women and men who have laid down their lives in service of their community by getting their fellow officers the tools and the training they need to do their jobs and to build trust with the communities they have sworn to protect.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 206, submitted earlier today.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, if I could say, this is kind of like the old days, with you up there. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 205, submitted earlier today.

Mr. BROWN. I know of no further debate on the measure.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Wednesday, May 12; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be 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 upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the motion to discharge the nomination of Chiquita Brooks-LaSure to be Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services from the Finance Committee; that at 12 noon all time be considered expired and the Senate vote on the motion to discharge the Brooks-LaSure nomination; that the cloture motions filed during yesterday's session of the Senate ripen following disposition of the motion to discharge; further, that if cloture is invoked on Executive Calendar No. 108, Ronald Stroman, all postcloture time be considered expired at 3:30 p.m.; finally, that if any nominations are confirmed, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order, following the remarks of Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, reserving the right to object, no serious economists across the ideological spectrum are concerned about inflation right now. No one is hiding information at the White House. I am in meetings all the time with White House officials talking about this package. No one believes--first of all, no one is hiding information. No one believes what the Senator, the junior Senator from Florida, is saying about this. Perhaps some millionaire Senators want to make this into an issue, and I hear that over and over and over, but I talk to people like Jay Powell, Chair of the Federal Reserve, nominated by President Trump for that position. He, of course, keeps his eye on these kinds of things, but he has expressed no strong concern about inflation. And we even know that when some experts have been concerned, they have been wrong. We saw what happened in 2008 after too many elites worried about inflation. What we really needed was to increase wages and get people back to work. The result from 2008 was a recovery that was too slow for most people, while so many of these big costs continued to rise. Our economy looks a whole lot better today than it did last year, but we can't compare where we are today with where we were last year. We were on the brink of a once-in-a-generation health and economic crisis at this time last year. Millions of people, mostly low-wage workers, lost their jobs. Our economy ground to a halt as we tried to stop the spread of the virus. This year, we have made good progress with the American Rescue Plan, as the Presiding Officer from Wisconsin knows, getting shots in arms and money in pockets and kids back in school, people back to work. But our recovery is far from over. Just moments ago Fed Chair Powell said that we are seeing some temporary upticks because things were so dire last year, but we still have a long way to go. The bigger risk to the economy is not doing enough to raise workers' wages and to invest in the infrastructure that allows our economy to grow. We know corporate leaders, we know millionaire Senators, we know people at the top have done very--in many cases, have done very, very well through this, but we know millions of workers, many of them hourly workers, have lost jobs. We know millions of workers, so-called essential workers--one essential worker said to me, works in a grocery store: I don't feel essential. Frankly, I feel expendable because they don't pay me much; they don't protect me at work. Those are the people we should be looking after. I want to raise wages. I want to bring down costs. That is exactly what the jobs plan and the family plan will do--bring down healthcare costs, make childcare more affordable, create more housing people can afford, bring down energy bills, make work--getting to work cheaper and easier with better transit. These are the costs that have been rising and eating away at family budgets for decades. If my colleague from Florida is so concerned about the cost of living and raising a family, I hope he will join me to allow Medicare to negotiate directly with drug companies to bring down prices for seniors. I hope he will join us in investing in childcare to bring down the cost of childcare. I hope he will join us as we work to create more housing, bringing down housing costs. I hope he will join us to raise the minimum wage. My first speech on this floor 14 years ago--14 years ago, my first speech on this floor was to raise the minimum wage, and we did, and it hasn't been raised since. That is what the Senator from Florida and the Senator from Indiana can help us with. But we know most of the conservative elites in this country--most won't say out loud what this inflation alarmism is really about. They don't want to invest in the American people. They don't want to do anything to make Americans' hard work pay off. They would rather try to scare people: Can't spend this money because there might be inflation. They don't want us to do what too many have failed to do: put money in people's pockets and raise wages and rebuild infrastructure. I would ask my colleagues to listen to the words of a worker from West Virginia, Pamela Garrison. She testified at our first-ever work listening session, our ``Dignity of Work'' session in the Banking and Housing Committee yesterday. She said: We're seeing corporations make billions every quarter in profit, but then when we ask for a minimum wage raise, we're told that ``no that will raise the cost of stuff, oh that'll cost jobs.'' Funny, corporate executives never seem to say they will have to raise prices when they give themselves bonuses. It is just we will have to raise prices if we increase the minimum wage. This same Ms. Garrison also said: You know, they call me part of the working poor. The words ``working'' and ``poor'' shouldn't be in the same sentence, and she is right about that. Real expenses for most families have gone up for decades, along with corporate profits and the stock market. Executive compensation has exploded upward, and workers' wages haven't kept up. Executive compensation--productivity is up. Executive compensation is up. Profits are up. Workers' wages are flat. That is the problem. That is what we should be working on. I object