Sherrod Brown

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask for an additional 5 minutes.

Mr. BROWN. This issue today we are about to vote on is about Eric Murphy. It is about confirming a very young, very inexperienced lawyer in Cleveland whose claim to fame is that he argued against marriage equality in the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges case. It is why Jim Obergefell has spoken out against his nomination. Here is what he said. He actually argued that marriage equality would be disruptive--disruptive--to our Nation. Telling people who love each other that they can marry is disruptive to our Nation? Who does that harm? Why would it matter? A couple in Atlanta or Decatur or a couple in Sioux Falls or Topeka or Omaha or Lincoln or Manchester or Laconia or Cleveland or Mansfield--why would it matter? Why would it be disruptive? This gentleman whom we are about to--I know every Republican, except maybe one courageous one, will vote for him because that is how we do it nowadays. You can't win through the democratic process; you win through the back door of the judiciary. That is what they are going to do. They are going to vote for a man who said it is disruptive to allow people who love each other to marry. He will make decisions on the rights of LGBTQ couples. Some in this body like to claim they support people regardless of their orientation. He has moved to restrict access to contraceptives for women. We are going to have women Republicans vote for somebody like that? He has defended Big Tobacco, as if there is any defense for addicting our children to tobacco. We have had huge public health victories, but let's go back. Let's go back on voting rights. Let's go back on supporting public health. Let's go back on equal rights for people. Let's go back on civil rights. Is that what we are going to do today? But maybe most despicable, on this day today 54 years ago, in Mr. Figures' State of Alabama--my wife has visited this bridge five times, crossed it since then--54 years ago, John Lewis, our colleague down the hall--you know, just on the other side of the special interest majority leader's office down the hall--John Lewis--I think he was 25 years old at that point--got his head beat in by Alabama State troopers. Do you know why? Because he wanted people to register to vote. He wanted people to have their full rights. That happened 54 years ago today--the day we are going to vote on Mr. Murphy. Mr. Murphy defended Ohio's voter purge, taking registered voters off the rolls. He led the efforts to take away Golden Week in Ohio, passed by a Republican legislature on a bipartisan basis. He defended restrictive voter ID and provisional ballot rules. This weekend, Connie and I walked across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. We saw foot soldiers who had been beaten up 54 years ago as they were trying to cross this bridge. We listened to their stories. These men and women were beaten. Many of them were 15, 16, 18, 20 years old. They did that so that in the future, they and their children would have the right to vote. But judges around this country, judges supported by this majority-- none of whom think for themselves when it comes to voting on these nominations--all the way up to the Supreme Court, they are dismantling these rights. I can't imagine my Republican colleagues who came here from Georgia and Kansas and Nebraska and Montana--and I think he is going to vote right--I just can't imagine they came here thinking: I am going to take the oath of office--right in that corner--and do you know one of the things I am going to do? I am going to vote to restrict voting rights. I am going to vote to tell gay people they can't marry. I am going to vote to take away workers' rights. I am going to vote for judges who put their thumbs on the scales of justice and choose corporations that outsource jobs over workers. I am going to choose Wall Street over consumers. I am going to choose big health insurance companies, with their multimillion-dollar salaries for executives, and hurt sick people. I can't believe that is why any of you came. So please vote no on Murphy. Please. As the 54th anniversary of Selma happens right about this time of day--I think they tried to cross the bridge around noon--I ask my colleagues to vote no. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 30 seconds.

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I appreciate Senator Isakson's work as the leader of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, his bipartisan work to advance the causes of veterans in our country. I was in Columbia, SC, last week, and a veteran who had attempted suicide seven times told us that veterans are more than paintings on the wall, and Senator Isakson embodies that as somebody who advocates for those veterans. I thank him for that.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, judges are making decisions around the country right now on voting rights, on civil rights, on women's rights, on LGBTQ rights, decisions that could limit those rights not just for a year or for a decade but for a generation. They make decisions on healthcare; they make decisions on sentencing; and they make decisions on corporate power. We have seen judge after judge, especially on the Supreme Court, put their thumbs on the scales of justice by favoring corporations over workers, by favoring Wall Street over consumers, and by favoring health insurance companies over patients. That is, fundamentally, why we in Ohio cannot afford to have Chad Readler on the bench. Look at an op-ed he took upon himself to write as a private citizen, which reads we should allow the execution of 16-year-olds--kids, children who are 16 years old. This is at a time when we are taking important, bipartisan steps forward on sentencing reform, and this Senate doesn't come together very often. This Senate, under Senator McConnell's leadership, actually came together in a bipartisan way. After all of the mostly unworkable pieces of legislation he has written that always help the rich, the President of the United States signed a bill, in this case, in which we did the right thing by taking bipartisan steps forward on sentencing reform. How do you turn around and put someone on the bench for life who supports executing children? That is what a 16-year-old is--still a teenager, still a child under the law. Yet he thinks it is something we should do--execute children who are found guilty. During his nomination hearing, it was pretty unbelievable that Readler stood by his op-ed and refused to disavow his support for using the death penalty on high schoolers and, possibly, on even younger children. I guess I give him credit for consistency. His record on voting rights is equally despicable. He worked on behalf of a far-right group and argued for the elimination of Golden Week, something passed by Republicans that had been in effect for more than a decade, which means he was limiting the amount of time people can vote early, and he defended restrictive voter ID and provisional ballot laws. We know exactly whom those laws target--people of color, the elderly, young voters. They are the same people, in many cases, who face literacy tests and poll taxes. They are the people John Lewis and the foot soldiers of Selma were marching for 54 years ago tomorrow across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. It is shameful that, half a century later, we are fighting that same fight. Chad Readler again is on the wrong side. We can't afford another judge on the bench who works to undo Selma's legacy. We can't afford another judge who has made it his mission to take away Americans' healthcare. Chad Readler's work threatens the healthcare coverage of 20 million Americans who have preexisting conditions. Last summer, Readler did what three career attorneys with the Department of Justice refused to do. He filed a brief that challenged the law that protects Americans with preexisting conditions. He filed a brief nobody else was willing to file. They all recused themselves. They all refused to do it. They thought it was something improper and unconstitutional. One of them, I believe, resigned. Do you know what happened then? The next day, he was nominated for this very judgeship. So the message is loud and clear from the administration: If you go after preexisting conditions under consumer protections, if you attack workers' rights, if you attack voters' rights within any job you hold-- and there is a real incentive to do this from this administration--you may get a good, lifetime Federal judgeship. The arguments he made in his brief were unprecedented. As I said, three attorneys withdrew from the case. One resigned altogether in his objections to the Department of Justice's unprecedented actions. One of our Republican colleagues, Senator Alexander, who works with Senator Murray to run the HELP Committee, called Readler's argument as farfetched--Senator Alexander's words, who is a conservative Republican from Tennessee--as he had ever seen. Yet, in December, a partisan Texas judge decided to go along with Readler's opinion, and he handed down the decision that undermines preexisting condition protections for all Americans. Right now, judges are deciding the future of Americans' healthcare every day. We can't afford to put another extremist--and he is way out of the mainstream--in my increasingly conservative, Republican State. He is way out of the mainstream among lawyers, way out of the mainstream among judges, and way out of the mainstream as a citizen. We can't afford to put another extreme judge on the court who will not defend Americans' right to healthcare. We know there have been a number of times this body has refused to take away the consumer protections for preexisting conditions. We remember the vote late at night when we defeated the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. We know that all kinds of Republican candidates who were victorious went on television and said they were going to defend the consumer protections for preexisting conditions. We heard that over and over. Why did we hear that? Even though that was not their position a few months earlier, in the cases of a lot of them, we heard it because they knew how popular it was and how much the public cared about the consumer protections for preexisting conditions. In a moment, I am going to share some letters from Ohioans who make the point that even though, this year, Republican candidates thought it was all OK to say we are going to preserve preexisting conditions, a vote for Judge Readler is exactly the opposite. Don't go home and say you support consumer protections for preexisting conditions and then vote for a judge who has a history of wanting to take that right away and who will now have a lifetime appointment and get another chance to likely take away the protections for preexisting conditions. Let me share a few letters from people. A man from Sandusky wrote to me about how the marketplaces that were created by the Affordable Care Act helped him to start his own business because he had a way to purchase insurance. He was later diagnosed with lung cancer. He wrote: ``I am watching the dismantling of the only program available to me with a pre-existing condition that I can afford. I am devastated.'' I don't know what Mr. Readler thinks when he reads something like that, but let me give another example. A woman from Cleveland writes: Protect real health care coverage for all people with pre- existing conditions. Real people's lives depend on it. My husband's life depends on it. Chad Readler wants to be a judge. Chad Readler did the President's bidding and the insurance industry's bidding at the Department of Justice. I don't know if he knows these people exist, like the woman from Cleveland or the man from Sandusky. I hope Chad Readler would have gone out and, as President Lincoln said, gotten his public opinion badge by actually listening to how the decisions he makes affect real people. A woman from Chagrin Falls, which is a fairly wealthy suburb of Cleveland, wrote: I've been a cancer patient since 2011. If pre-existing conditions are no longer covered, I--along with countless others--will probably be screwed. A mother from Waynesville, OH, wrote: My family has lived every day worrying about the ACA being dismantled. We have a son who was born with a neurological condition before the ACA. We lived in constant fear of medical caps and pre-existing conditions. Just putting Chad Readler on the bench increases people's anxiety. Is Congress going to take away the Affordable Care Act? Is Congress going to wipe away those protections for preexisting conditions? If Congress isn't, are judges going to do that? No wonder people are so anxious about that. A woman from Fairborn writes: I previously lost health insurance from a possible preexisting condition and now, being a 2-time cancer survivor, I'm scared of losing coverage again. The security of having insurance since the ACA allowed me to sleep at night and focus on my health. My editorial comment on her comments is to focus on her health, not on whether she loses her coverage. It is unimaginable that politicians want to deny so many Americans access to health insurance and quality of life. Senator Murray and I sat and watched a bunch of mostly men on the other side of the aisle cast their votes--all who had good health insurance--to take away insurance for millions of Americans and for hundreds of thousands in my State and to take away their consumer protections for preexisting conditions. A mother from New Albany writes: My daughter had two autoimmune diseases by the age of 6-- SIX. That means her entire life she will be a ``preexisting condition.'' But she isn't just a label. She is a person. Please protect my baby. She already deals with enough. I mean, hear the passion in that letter, the strong feelings in that letter, the cries for help in that letter. Yet this body may be about to put on the Sixth Circuit, in a lifetime appointment, someone who clearly doesn't care about people like them. Another woman from Hillsboro writes: We are a family of pre-existing conditions and survive because we have insurance that we can afford. My husband works long, hard hours and has to work 60 hours a week for us to make it. I'm a teacher. I work about 18 out of 24 hours a day but make $40,000 a year. We can't work any more than we already do. Again, these are people who are working hard and who are doing everything right. They didn't ask to be sick. They didn't ask for their healthcare costs to go up. Are we going to put somebody on the court who wants to take away the consumer protections for people like this lady from Hillsboro? These Americans work hard. They pay their premiums. Many of them deal with all that comes with caring for a child or a family member who has a chronic condition. How can Members of Congress and how can this President--all who have good insurance paid for by the taxpayers--stand by and allow activist, partisan judges to dismantle these protections that Americans rely on? It is bad enough that so many Members of Congress want to take away these consumer protections. Now it is unelected judges the American public really doesn't know, and this body is about to put one more of them on the court, even more extreme and younger than so many other of these judges. We can't afford another judge on the courts who will vote to take away Americans' healthcare, who will vote to take away Americans' voting rights, who will vote to take away Americans' civil rights. I ask my colleagues to vote no on Chad Readler for the Sixth Circuit.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to speak on the judicial nomination coming up and the cloture vote on the other nominee. With both nominees, I offered the White House cooperation to choose two more moderate nominees for Ohio, both of whom had been vetted by a bipartisan commission Senator Portman and I had, and the White House said they would rather pick these two extremist judges--these two young, far-right judges who have attacked America's healthcare and have attacked the consumer protection on preexisting condition. Judges are making decisions right now--in this body, fortunately, as Members of the Senate, we all have good coverage and health insurance-- that try to take insurance away from millions of Americans and several thousands in my State, even as they have tried to eliminate the consumer protections for those people who have preexisting conditions. There are millions of Americans who are anxious about holding onto their insurance because they get sick a lot and it is expensive to take care of them. They are afraid of having their insurance canceled, and they can't get insurance because of a preexisting condition, and this Congress tried to repeal that law and it failed. Now, Senator McConnell has turned to the Federal Judiciary, and the President of the United States seems to think the only way to eliminate the consumer protection for those with preexisting conditions is through the Judiciary. Judges are making decisions right now on voting rights, on civil rights, on women's rights, LGBT rights, on healthcare, on sentencing, and on corporate power--decisions that could limit those rights for a generation. We know that the Federal Judiciary already puts its thumb on the scales of justice to support corporations over workers, to support Wall Street over consumers, and to support insurance companies over patients. We know that the Federal Judiciary and the Supreme Court have done that dozens of times. We know that the Federal Judiciary, increasingly, is looking like a group of far-right, young, detached people who never go out and get their public opinion pass, as Lincoln said. They never consider what the public wants in this country. Chad Readler, the nominee whom we will vote on in a moment, took it upon himself as a Jones Day lawyer--one of the greatest law firms in the country, headquartered in Cleveland--to write an op-ed as a private citizen saying we should allow the execution of 16-year-olds. He actually wasn't that specific. He implied it could be even younger than that. He said we would allow the execution of teenagers. At a time when this body--something we should be proud of--took important bipartisan steps forward on sentencing reform that was supported by the White House, supported by a lot of Republicans, and supported by virtually all Democrats, how do we turn around and put someone on the bench for life who supports executing children? How does that compute? How we can do that? He argued on behalf of the far-right think tank for the elimination of ``Golden Week'' in Ohio, a period where people can vote early. They can register and vote early. It was passed by a Republican legislature. It has bipartisan support, but not by this rightwing nominee who thinks it is OK to eliminate people's right to vote and restrict it. He defended restrictive voter ID. He defended the squeezing of provisional ballot laws. On the eve of the 54th anniversary tomorrow of Bloody Sunday in Selma, AL, it is shameful to put on the bench another judge who will rubberstamp modern-day literacy tests and poll taxes. Fundamentally, it is the same purpose. You find ways to suppress the vote. You find ways to take people's voting rights away. You find ways to disqualify people who want to vote. Chad Readler's record on healthcare is clear. He has been a ringleader in the Republican effort to take away the protections on preexisting conditions for all Americans. He wrote the White House's brief. We all know that now. He wrote a brief that nobody else above him at the Justice Department was willing to do. Three people refused to write it. One actually resigned. The next day, he was rewarded by this lifetime appointment as a Sixth Circuit Federal judge. Remember that. The White House rewarded him after suggesting that we block the consumer protections for preexisting conditions for millions of Americans and for hundreds of thousands in Virginia, Arkansas, and in Ohio. Millions of Americans would lose their consumer protections under his views, and the next day the White House decided to reward him with a judgeship. As I said, three career attorneys withdrew from the case. One resigned altogether in objection to doing this. Senator Alexander, our friend from Tennessee, who sits near where Senator Kaine is sitting, said this was just amazingly awful language that Chad Readler had suggested.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for an additional 2 minutes.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, judges are deciding the future of America's healthcare right now, the right to vote right now, civil rights right now, LGBTQ rights right now, women's rights right now. Judges around the country are deciding that. We can't afford to put another out-of- the-mainstream judge on the court--and he is clearly out of the mainstream among Ohio lawyers, among Ohio judges, among Ohio citizens-- who will not defend America's right to healthcare. I ask my colleagues to think about the families you promised to vote for. If any of you in your campaigns, if any of you in discussions you have had with your constituents, if any of you in your public statements, and if any of you running for office committed that you would support consumer protections for preexisting conditions, the only way you can prove you actually believe that is by voting no on Chad Readler in about 1 minute from now. If you really believe in preserving preexisting condition consumer protections so you don't see in your State--in Tennessee, Virginia, Arkansas, and Ohio--millions of Americans lose their insurance, then your only way to support what you promise is to vote no on Chad Readler. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I thank my friend from Cincinnati for his work on both the issues he spoke about--both, on sex trafficking, which is a terrible affliction in our country and especially in Ohio, and on the issue of opioid deaths. We lose almost 100 people a week in Ohio to overdoses, and more than 11 a day on opioid overdoses. So I thank my colleague from Cincinnati for that.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, this week, General Motors is set to lay off thousands of workers in Lordstown, OH, and around the country. Tomorrow is the day that most of the first shift lose their jobs. Several months ago, the second shift lost their jobs. A couple years ago, the third shift lost their jobs. That totals about 4,500 human beings with families. What is the President's response? He boasts nonsense and rubs salt in these workers' wounds. Last week, as if he didn't know about Lordstown and other places, he said: We have car companies opening up in Michigan and Ohio and Pennsylvania and so many other places. I don't know where those mystery factories are in Ohio that the President brags about. They aren't in Lordstown, where people are about to lose those jobs. President Trump's remarks, his uncaring feelings, and his ignorance of even knowing what has happened in Ohio--the State he seems to boast about and credit for his victory--are a slap in the face to the workers, and there is the fact that he has done nothing to help. Think about the workers who are out of a job at the end of the week. Think about their families. Think about the other families in Lordstown who are about to lose customers. Senator Portman and I spent a lot of time working with General Motors, visiting a restaurant near the plant and talking to the workers there who know their jobs are affected as fewer Lordstown workers come to that restaurant. Multiply that with hardware stores, police and fire jobs and teacher jobs and all that afflicts the Mahoning Valley when GM does what it does. Remember what Donald Trump promised people in communities like Youngstown. He said that he would fight for them, that he would fight for their jobs. Last year, he told the people of Mahoning Valley-- Mahoning Valley is Youngstown, Warren, Lordstown, and that area: ``Don't move.'' These are the President's words: Don't move, don't sell your house. We're going to fill up those factories or rip them down and build new ones. He said: We never again will sacrifice Ohio jobs and those in other states to enrich other countries. Think about that. The President of the United States comes in, in the midst of these GM layoffs, and says: Don't sell your house. Don't move. We are going to fill those factories up. If we don't fill them up, we are going to rip them down and build new ones. He went on to say: Workers will come back. Jobs will come back from these countries. Then, even when I called and talked to him about the second-shift layoff, he didn't even know about it. I am not sure what his staff is telling him. Maybe FOX doesn't cover these stories, but the mainstream media does. These are real stories. These aren't political opinions. Some 4,500 people lost their jobs, and the President doesn't seem to know or care. Those weren't the only promises he made. Over and over, Candidate Trump and then-President Trump promised American autoworkers that he would fight for their jobs. In Warren, just a few miles from Lordstown, in 2016, he said: ``If I'm elected, you won't lose one plant, I promise you that.'' ``If I'm elected, you won't lose one plant, I promise you that.'' In Michigan in the fall of 2016--another State with a lot of auto jobs--he said: ``We will bring back your auto manufacturing business like you have never seen it before.'' In February 2017, he promised again: ``A lot of jobs are going to be coming back into Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania and all the places that have been hurt so badly.'' In March 2017, he said: ``The assault on the American auto industry, believe me, is over.'' Last year, after GM announced the layoffs, he said: ``Ohio is going to replace those jobs like in two minutes.'' ``Ohio is going to replace those jobs like in two minutes.'' First of all, why would he say this stuff? Second, does he not ever follow the news? Does his staff not tell him what has happened in the seventh largest State in the country and the State that he in part credits for his election? He lost the popular vote by 3 million votes. He won the electoral college because of Ohio and because of two or three other States. But wouldn't he know that a valley of 450,000 people, just during the time since the election, has lost 4,500 jobs just in that plant alone, and another 5,000 manufacturing jobs that make the components that go into the Chevy Cruze, and another 5,000 to 6,000 to 8,000 to 10,000 jobs? Nobody knows for sure how many they will lose in restaurants, hardware stores, and car dealerships and cuts in public dollars because the local governments have lost tax revenue so there are fewer police and fire and street cleaners and people who work in the cities, the counties, and the school districts. The workers who are going to be out of a job by this week are still waiting. These people trusted him. President Trump did really well in the election in this valley of 450,000 people. He did really well. He did really well. He did better than Republicans ever do, but what did he do for them after he made those promises? I am going to make a statement that is provably true but almost doesn't even make sense that it could be true. His tax bill says: If you do your production in Lordstown, OH, you pay a 21-percent tax rate, but if you move your production to Mexico, you pay a 10.5-percent tax rate. In other words, because of Trump's tax law that, frankly, was written down the hall in Senator McConnell's office but with the President's signature on it, these companies get a 50-percent-off coupon for moving overseas. Think about that. If these companies move overseas, they get a 50-percent-off coupon on their taxes. I talked to the President about that. I asked him to reconsider that law, and he said: ``Where did that law come from?'' I said: ``Well, Mr. President, it was in your tax bill, and you signed it.'' Then I talked to him about the American Cars, American Jobs Act and how he can fix this. Here is what the bill does. Customers who buy cars made in the United States get a $3,500 discount at the dealership. If the American car is electric or a plug-in hybrid, they get an even bigger discount. These are the cars GM said it was going to start making instead of the Cruze. There is no reason they can't make them in Lordstown instead of Mexico. Second, companies that cut the number of American jobs they had on the day the GOP tax bill passed, if they move those jobs overseas, they lose their tax breaks. Under my bill, the American Cars, American Jobs Act, they lose their tax breaks, they lose that 50-percent-off coupon, and then that money they have to pay because they lose their tax break goes to car consumers at the dealerships, meaning they will buy more American cars. So what will happen is it will actually do what Candidate Trump said he wanted to do and promised that he would do, and that is to bring American jobs back. This President who says: ``I am the workers' best friend, and I fight for these jobs,'' that is phony populism. Do you know something? Populism is never racist. Populism is never anti-Semitic. Populism doesn't divide people. Populism doesn't push people down to lift people up. Populism doesn't give tax cuts to rich people and then turn around and cut Medicare and Head Start. Populism fights for people and fights to lift up all workers. That is what we are not seeing here now. I am calling on the President, again, to try keeping his promises and actually fight for autoworkers, fight for these communities like Lordstown, and help us pass the Americans Cars, American Jobs Act, end the tax cut for corporations to shut down American plants and move jobs overseas, and take this 50-percent-off coupon away that some of the richest people and biggest corporations in this country enjoy when they send jobs overseas because if you love your country, you fight for the people who make it work.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, the last vote we took today was about Americans' healthcare. It was about consumer protections for preexisting conditions that are at risk because of partisan judges. The Presiding Officer was running for the Senate at the time and wasn't in this body, but I assume she knows, and all of us remember the day when the repeal of the Affordable Care Act failed. The people on that side of the aisle, the Republicans, were all voting to take away consumer protections for preexisting conditions. That was part of the vote for the repeal. Among other things, it was to cut people off Medicaid, many of whom were getting treatment for opioid addiction, and it was to take away the consumer protections for preexisting conditions. That is when people can't get insurance because they are sick or they get their insurance canceled because they are too expensive. They are sick, their insurance is too expensive, and the insurance companies come down on them. So the stage was set. The Republican Members who said they wanted to preserve preexisting conditions, many of them ran their campaigns on-- because they knew the voters were very upset with Republicans for trying to take away the consumer protections on preexisting conditions, they ran their campaigns on that issue. So the Republicans quickly flipped and said: Well, we are going to protect you too. Well, tomorrow is the day we have a chance to really protect the consumers with preexisting conditions and to keep the protections for consumers with preexisting conditions. The problem is, they can't do it in Congress. They can't take it away because voters don't like it if they take away the protections so they do it through the Federal judiciary. That is how they work around here. These partisan judges who are voted out of here--maybe the worst one yet is from Columbus, OH, named Chad Readler. Last summer, Readler did what three career attorneys with the Department of Justice refused to do--he filed a brief challenging the law protecting Americans with preexisting conditions. He was the person in the Trump administration who was the point person for taking away the consumer protections protecting Americans against losing their insurance because of a preexisting condition. Do you know what? After he filed that brief, the very next day the lights went on. The very next day, Chad Readler was nominated for a lifetime appointment to the Sixth Circuit Court--the next day. He did his work for the insurance companies. He did his work for the Trump White House. He did his work for the Republican majority who is going to take away any consumer protections. What is his reward? I guess you can't say ``payoff'' because there were no dollars actually exchanged, but the reward that this party--the Senate majority leader down the hall and the President of the United States--gave the guy who wants to take those protections away and do the bidding of the insurance company is a lifetime--I don't know, $180,000, $200,000-a- year, whatever it is--Federal judgeship. It is for life. Mr. Readler is in his forties, so lifetime could be a very long time. The arguments he made were unprecedented. Three career attorneys withdrew from the case after Readler made that decision. One went so far as to resign in objection to the Department of Justice's unprecedented actions. Our Republican colleague Senator Alexander from Tennessee called Readler's arguments as farfetched as he had ever seen. This is a Republican saying that the Trump White House's Department of Justice Chad Readler's, Acting Assistant Attorney General, logic was as farfetched as he had ever seen. We saw what happened with the Texas decision in December, going along with Readler's arguments and threatening the healthcare coverage of 20 million Americans; that is, 20 million people because of a decision he made. Judges are deciding the fate of Americans' healthcare right now. Judges are. It is not their elected body. It is judges who are taking away healthcare. The elected officials failed to take it away. They tried. They tried, and they tried. They did it 50 times in the House. They tried in the Senate. We defeated it by one vote. The Vice President was here on behalf of the President just in case he had to break the tie. He didn't have to because we defeated it by one vote. He didn't get to break the tie. Now it is judges. Judges decide right now. We can't afford to put one of the White House's ringleaders in the fight to dismantle healthcare protections on the bench for life. It is not just healthcare. It is LGBTQ rights. It is women's rights. It is voting rights. Judges make decisions right now that eliminate and limit Americans' rights for a generation. On these issues, the President's nominees for the Sixth Circuit, Chad Readler and the other one, Eric Murphy, have a proven record of fighting to strip Americans of their rights. Get this. Chad Readler not only supported the death penalty for minors, for 16-year-olds, as a private citizen, he took it upon himself to pen an op-ed saying he wanted to allow the execution of 16-year- olds--the execution of 16-year-olds. Think about that. Apparently, he thinks it is OK for a mistake someone makes as a child to not only get them locked up for life but to actually take away their life altogether. What kind of person writes an editorial calling for the execution of 16-year-olds, and we are going to put him on the Federal court for life? At a time when we are taking important bipartisan steps forward on sentencing reform, how do you turn around and put someone on the bench for life who supports executing children? A 16-year-old is still a teenager, a child, in our State, in our country, and in our society. During his nomination hearing, Readler stood by his op-ed. He refused to disavow his support for using the death penalty on high schoolers. As for Eric Murphy, he argued against marriage equality in the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges case. That is why Jim Obergefell has spoken out against his nomination. He worked to restrict access to contraceptives for women, and my favorite, he defended Big Tobacco because those companies were doing such useful things for our country. As a lawyer, he defended Big Tobacco. He also defended Ohio's voter purge. Think about the anniversary we will mark this week. This Thursday will mark 54 years, to the day, since Bloody Sunday. Last weekend, my wife Connie and I were in Selma and walked across the Selma bridge. For me, it was the fifth time. I took my teenage daughters once. I took my mother, who was born in a small town in the South and taught me about civil rights. My wife and I went. We went back again this year to walk across the Edmund Pettus Bridge. I listened to their stories. Women and men were beaten, their blood was spilled, and their homes were broken into. Why? Because people of color couldn't vote in many places in this country, and Alabama was one of those places. They were willing to suffer and, in some cases, die so they could have a right to vote. That was only a half century ago. That happened only 54 years ago. Judges around this country, all the way to the Supreme Court, are systematically dismantling those rights. Without question, they are taking away people's right to vote by voter suppression. We can't let the sacrifices of the foot soldiers in Selma be in vain. It is pretty despicable that a bunch of Members of Congress who have health insurance are willing to take it away for millions of people. That is pretty despicable. It is also despicable that Members of this body are going to mark this anniversary by putting another judge on the bench for life who will work to undo that legacy, who will likely be another judge ruling to send us back to those days, and who will rubberstamp modern-day poll taxes and literacy tests. They will not exactly do poll taxes and literacy tests, but they will find plenty of ways to take voters off the rolls. We know the Governor's race in Georgia was essentially stolen from the African-American woman who was the nominee because of the sitting Secretary of State--oh, yes, who happened to be running for Governor. We know that. We know the election in Georgia was stolen. We know voters were purged prior to that election by the Secretary of State, who happened to be running for Governor. I ask my colleagues, if you will not listen to me, listen to those foot soldiers in Selma, listen to the civil rights leaders who ask you to reject these judges. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, think about what we just heard, first from Senator Markey talking about a fossil fuel lobbyist in the year 2019 being chosen to head the EPA--a fossil fuel lobbyist--when there has not been a bill on this floor or any motion coming from Senator McConnell to deal with climate change, to deal with one of the greatest if not the greatest moral issue of our times--nothing on this floor. You heard what Senator Markey said. This administration has done nothing to address this issue, and President Trump selects a fossil fuel lobbyist to be head of the EPA. It is the same thing over and over again. We have to take aggressive action to protect our planet and protect our future now. That means accelerating our transition to carbon-free power. It means investing in technologies that make our manufacturers the most energy efficient in the world. It means creating jobs in clean energy all around the country. I have always, as a House Member living in Lorain, OH, and as a Member of the Senate--for years, I have always refused to accept the idea that you have to choose between good environmental policy and good-paying jobs. We have proved that is simply not true. We have proved it in my State, where we have lots of wind turbines, made usually with American-made steel. We have proved it in Toledo, where we have one of the biggest solar energy manufacturers in the country. We proved it in the auto industry, where the auto industry has generally had a pretty good decade making more fuel-efficient cars. We put Americans to work, and we can change course on climate change before it is too late. Mitch McConnell and President Trump seem to think climate change-- that is notwithstanding what Senator Whitehouse said--is a joke. I have news for them. Climate change is not something to play political games with; it is a crisis we need to confront and set an example around the world. It is a crisis we need to confront and to set an example for our partners around the world. It would be shameful enough to have no ideas and no plan to confront our biggest threats. But not only do President Trump and Leader McConnell have no plan, not only are they denying the problem, and not only are they standing in the way of solutions, but they are actually working to make climate change worse. It is just despicable. They are spreading lies and stacking the administration with shills for the fossil fuel industry. They stacked the administration with Wall Street cronies to do bank regulation. They stacked the administration with fossil fuel cronies and shills to do energy and climate and environmental regulation. We got news this week that the White House is going to use your taxpayer dollars to set up a panel to promote junk science and spread the debunked conspiracy theory that climate change is a hoax. This week we will vote on the President's nominee to head the EPA, a lobbyist who would be overseeing the same special interests who have paid his salary. Andrew Wheeler is just the latest in a long line of cronies from the fossil fuel industry who President Trump has put in charge at the EPA and the Department of the Interior. Climate change is not a future problem. It does damage to this country right now. It is threatening thousands of Ohio workers who rely on Lake Erie for their livelihood, whether it is tourism or other industries that rely on clean water. Climate change makes algal blooms worse. Off the shores of Toledo, it contaminates our lake, threatens our drinking water, and hurts small business. Nobody on that side of the aisle seems to give a darn. I have talked to farmers who have been farming in the Western Lake Erie Basin for decades. They tell me they are experiencing heavier rain events more often and with greater intensity compared to even 15 years ago. Hotter summers and shorter winters will only make this problem worse. It is time for the President of the United States to stop sabotaging the country he is supposed to lead. It is past time to rejoin the Paris Agreement, to restart the Clean Power Plan, and to implement aggressive fuel economy standards for cars and trucks. It is time to create new jobs in clean energy and energy-efficient manufacturing. It is time for the United States to be the leader the world looks to. It is time to take this threat seriously to preserve our country for our children, and their children, and their children's children before it is too late.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, I say thank you to Senator Manchin. We are joined by Senator Capito, Senator Warren, and I know, in spirit, a number of others. I think Senator Casey will be here in a few minutes. I join them to remind this body--it is a constant reminder--that more than 86,000 miners--86,000 miners--are on the verge of facing massive cuts to the pensions and healthcare they earned. This body doesn't always remember what collective bargaining is all about. Collective bargaining is when union members sit down and give up wages today to have something for the future, to have healthcare and to have retirement in the future. Of those 86,000 miners, 1,200 miners and their families could lose their healthcare this month because of the Westmoreland and Mission Coal bankruptcies. The bankruptcy courts could allow these corporations to ``shed their liabilities,'' which is a fancy way of saying walk away from paying miners the pensions and the healthcare benefits they absolutely earned. Senator Manchin is working to fix this. I thank him for his efforts, and I thank others in this body. We know the mine workers aren't alone. The retirement security of hundreds of thousands of teamsters, ironworkers, carpenters, bakery workers, and so many other retirees is at risk. We know this affects, in my State alone, 250 businesses, mostly small construction and transportation companies, 60,000 workers in my State alone, and the health of communities. Mine worker communities are especially hurt by this because so many of them live in the same community--local stores and local businesses. As we know, Congress pretty much tried to ignore these workers and these retirees. Senator Manchin and I saw that day after day and week after week, but they fought back. We saw workers rally. They rallied in very hot weather on the Capitol lawn, and they rallied in very cold weather on the Capitol lawn. They rallied. They called. They wrote letters. We have seen those camo UMWA T-shirts around the Capitol. Many of them are veterans. They fought for their country. We owe it to them to fight for them. We made progress on the bipartisan Pensions Committee that Senator Manchin and I sat on. Thanks to Senator Portman, also from my State, and members of both parties who put in months of good work in good faith on this. I am committed to these miners and workers. We will not give up. That is why I brought Rita Lewis as my guest to the State of the Union Address down the hall last week. Rita Lewis is the widow of Butch Lewis, the teamster who died from a heart attack a couple of years ago, in large part, we think--she thinks, his family thinks brought on by the pressure of fighting for his union, his Teamsters 100--1 million members around the country. It is about the dignity of work. When work has dignity, we honor the retirement security people have earned. As I said, people in this town don't always understand the collective bargaining process. People give up money today to earn those pensions. If you love your country, you fight for people who make it work, people like these mineworkers.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN. Madam President, last week America lost Frank Robinson, a baseball legend and a pioneer for civil rights. Frank Robinson spent much of his career in Ohio. He starred first for the Cincinnati Reds All-Star World Series championship team. They built a team around him in Cincinnati with Vada Pinson and others. Near the end of his career, he went to Cleveland, and he managed for the Cleveland Indians. He was a pioneer for change in baseball. Larry Doby, whom we honored last year with a Congressional Medal, was the first African-American player in the American League. He played for Cleveland. He came up only several weeks after Jackie Robinson broke the color line. Then in 1974, Frank Robinson became the Major League's first African- American manager. I was at the game when he--that first game he managed. He hit a home run his first time at bat. He was the DH for the Indians. He was what is called a player-manager. In the days since his passing, we have heard people say that Frank Robinson was one of the most underappreciated legends of the game, but the same could also be said of his importance to our country. There are few players in baseball who have accomplished anything close--on the field or off the field--to what Frank Robinson did. He is the only person to have won a league MVP in both the American and National Leagues--with the National League for the Reds and with the American League for the Orioles. He was Rookie of the Year with the Reds. He won two World Series championships. He was the World Series' most valuable player. He won the Triple Crown with the Orioles. He was a Gold Glove winner. He was a 14-time all-star. He hit 600 career home runs. The championships, the awards, and the records alone don't define who Frank Robinson was or what his success meant to so many people. The Reds signed him right out of high school. He still strove for more. He took courses at Cincinnati's Xavier University at the beginning of his rookie season. He knew that the courses wouldn't count toward any degree; yet he persevered. He was traded to the Orioles in 1966. He witnessed redlining and segregation that prevented him and his wife from finding housing. Here was one of the best players in the Major Leagues, and he couldn't find housing in Baltimore in the 1960s. Here was the city's star baseball player, but because of our country's racist housing policies, realtors wouldn't sell him a home. Parenthetically, I would also point out that today some of those racist housing policies continue and that we have an administration and housing regulators who simply seem too busy to want to enforce fair housing laws. My wife and I live in ZIP Code 44105 in Cleveland, OH. Our ZIP Code had more foreclosures in the first half of 2007 than any other ZIP Code in the United States. And don't think that some of these housing problems and segregated housing in this country aren't because of some of the actions of this administration and prior to that. Frank Robinson didn't stay silent. He joined the NAACP and became a voice for the civil rights movement. As I said, he was traded to the Cleveland Indians in 1974. The Indians made him manager. As I said, he was the first African-American manager in the history of Major League Baseball. It took exactly 27 years after Jackie Robinson broke the color line for the owners of Major League Baseball to actually hire a Black manager--27 years. That accomplishment meant so much to so many. He proved what never should have been in question--that African Americans belong not just on the field but that they are leaders, just like any other American. That accomplishment resonated not only among baseball fans but, in fact, in schools and offices around the country. He was a symbol to so many young Americans that these roles of authority and leadership aren't just roles that only certain kids whose skin was a certain color could dream of; these dreams are for everyone. It was a powerful message that paved the way for so many great leaders on and off the baseball field. The Cleveland Indians unveiled a statue of Frank Robinson 2 years ago in my hometown of Cleveland at Progressive Field. Mr. Robinson spoke at the unveiling. He talked about how far we have come, and then he said: There are people out there in the minor leagues and at the big-league level as coaches, and they have earned their way up. But they just don't seem to be able to break that barrier as often. All I can tell them--don't give up. Do not give up. We still don't see nearly as many African-American managers as there should be. As we celebrate Black History Month, we as a nation need to heed Frank Robinson's words. We cannot give up on his dream of breaking down the institutional barriers that are set up for people of color in baseball and throughout our society. We don't just honor Black trailblazers; we need to continue our country's unfinished work. Hard work isn't paying off for far too many people in this country. Hard work doesn't pay off for far too many workers, and women and people of color have even greater challenges. It is even harder to get ahead no matter how hard they work. We know that this country doesn't respect work, it doesn't respect the dignity of work, and it doesn't honor work. As I said, we know that as much as this country doesn't compensate people for the work they do, it is, again, even harder for women and people of color. Let's honor Frank Robinson's memory. Let's honor the legacy of Black Americans not just with words but with actions to change that. Parkland High School Shooting Madam President, this Thursday will mark 1 year since 17 Americans were tragically and brutally murdered at Parkland High School. Seventeen families lost daughters, sons, brothers, and sisters, 17 more were wounded, and hundreds of students and teachers joined the ranks of survivors of mass shootings. Those injured and those families will never be the same. One of the country's greatest strengths is that out of the greatest tragedies, Americans channel their outreach in grief into action. The young people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School launched an incredible movement for change in this country. These were high school students, many not even old enough to vote, dealing with pain that most of us can't imagine. They were able to do what so many, shall I say, grown politicians have been unable or unwilling to do--something that so many Members in this body are afraid or unwilling to do. These kids stood up to the gun lobby--if only we saw that kind of courage among politicians who take money from the gun lobby year after year after year. These kids stood up to the gun lobby. They organized and forced their government to listen. A month after that awful day, more than a million Americans joined the March for Our Lives and marches for our lives across the country. They had a pretty simple demand: The people who represent them should protect them from gun violence. This body, again, did virtually nothing. They demand that we stop ignoring the millions of Americans who want reasonable gun safety measures. They demand that we stop doing the bidding of special interest gun lobbyists. We can't say we are doing what it takes to keep our country safe until we are finally willing to pass commonsense laws to protect all Americans from gun violence. Many of us have tried. I supported the original Federal assault weapons ban in 1994. I joined many of my colleagues to try to renew it after the Sandy Hook grade school massacre. Weapons of war don't belong on our streets. They certainly don't belong in our classrooms. We tried to pass legislation to close loopholes in our background check system. After the tragedy at the Pulse nightclub in Florida, we tried to pass legislation to prevent people on the terrorist watch list from buying guns. Imagine this, if you are on the terrorist watch list and you go up to the John Glenn Airport in Columbus, OH, you can't get on a plane, but you can buy an assault weapon. You can't get on a plane if you are on a terrorist watch list. That is Federal law. But because of the power of the gun lobby in this body and in this room, you can buy an assault weapon. That is why the gun lobby, again, stood in the way. It is why the movement that these students launched matters. They showed the country that the gun lobby may have the money, but we have energy on our side, and we have voters on our side. Look what happened last fall. So many new voters--many of them young, many of them women--were elected to this Congress promising, finally-- finally--to stand up to the gun lobby and finally to say no to the National Rifle Association. Creating change is never easy. It often requires going up against powerful special interests, but from the Women's March to the airport rallies, to the activism to protect people's rights under the Affordable Care Act, Americans prove over and over the power of activism. The students at Parkland clearly aren't quitting. The millions of Americans inspired by them give me hope for the future. I hope my colleagues in this body finally stand up to the gun lobby and demand change. Remembering Bill Brewer Madam President, on Friday, Ohio laid to rest a dedicated public servant, Detective Bill Brewer. Detective Brewer devoted two decades of his life to the police force and made the ultimate sacrifice to keep his fellow Ohioans safe. He laid down his life while doing his job responding to a desperate 911 call with fellow Clermont County officers in southwest Cincinnati, working to protect the people he served in Pierce Township. In the days since Detective Brewer's passing, we have heard stories of his unselfish service to his community and his family. Last Sunday, officers from all over southwest Ohio joined the procession escorting Detective Brewer home to Clermont County. In his home of Amelia, OH, his community lined the route, paying tribute to their fallen hero. Hundreds attended a memorial service on Friday, while hundreds more watched on video. It is a fitting recognition of the sacrifice this man made to keep the people of his community safe. Detective Brewer was a proud son of Williamsburg, OH, and a star high school athlete and a family man. Our hearts break for his wife of 13 years, Jamie, and his 5-year-old son, Braxton. As they mourn this incredible loss, we hope they take comfort in the outpouring of support and honor for the husband and father. To his fellow officers, he was a devoted friend. He was a mentor. One of them told the press that Detective Brewer was always fair and kindhearted, that he would give the shirt off his back for anyone in need. Detective Brewer's legacy will live on through the many lives he touched. In times of tragedy, Ohioans rise to the occasion, as do citizens in Clermont County. We witnessed an outpouring of community support in the days since he was taken from us. No gesture, of course, ever repays him or his loved ones. Today we honor this hero's memory. We lift up the entire Clermont County community. Tax Reform Madam President, what we have seen in the last few days is that more and more Americans are filing their tax returns and getting their tax refunds, and they realize that the President's tax law was a bit of a sham. They haven't seen the raises that the President promised. I heard the President in the Cabinet Room say to a group of us: People will get a $4,000 raise, on average. Some will get as much as a $9,000 raise with the tax bill. Call it an empty promise or call it a lie. Either way, the President's words were empty and meaningless. Then they expected a huge tax cut because the President told them it was hundreds and thousands of dollars. They are not seeing that either. Then, to top it all off, there is a provision in this new tax law that says if a company shuts down in Orange Town, OH, as GM did, and then moves to Mexico, as GM is building again in Mexico, they actually get 50 percent off. They get a 50-percent-off coupon on their taxes. What does that mean? That means that they are paying a 21-percent tax rate in Ohio--Federal tax rate--but then they go to Mexico, and they pay 10.5 percent. Believe it or not, under the President's tax law, they get a 50-percent-off coupon if they move overseas--exactly the opposite. The President went to Youngstown, and he said: We are going to bring more jobs back. We are going to have more jobs. Don't sell your homes if it looks like there are layoffs coming because we are going to bring more jobs back. We are going to build new factories. None of that happened. The opposite happened. Again, they shut down production in Lordstown, OH. GM did. They are laying off 5,000 people. They are moving to Mexico, and they get a 50-percent-off coupon, thanks to President Trump, thanks to the Members of this body and all Republicans who voted for this disastrous tax bill. Now, here is what we need to do. We need to throw out the Trump tax law--just throw out the Trump tax law--and we should rewrite the Tax Code, amazingly, to put people first. Here is what we should do. We should first pass the Patriot Corporation Act. The Patriot Corporation Act is really simple. It simply says that if you pay decent wages, if you provide decent benefits--health benefits, healthcare, and pensions or 401(k)--and if you do your production in the United States of America, you get a lower tax rate. In other words, if you are a patriotic corporation, if you are good citizen, then, you have earned a lower tax rate. But the other side of that is that if you are a big company where the executives are making millions--sometimes tens of millions of dollars-- and you pay your employees--if you have hundreds of employees or thousands--$10 or $12 an hour, then you are in a different category. Here is how that works. If you are making $10 or $12 an hour and you are working for one of these big companies, you are eligible for food stamps often, you are eligible for Medicaid often, you are eligible for section 8 housing tax credits often, and you are eligible for the earned income tax credit. In other words, these employees that are making $10 or $12 an hour get all of these Federal benefits, even though they are working full time. So what our bill does is what is called the ``corporate freeloader fee.'' As for these companies that pay their executives millions and pay their workers $8 and $10 and $12 an hour and those workers end up getting subsidies from taxpayers, they pay a corporate freeloader fee. They pay the government. They reimburse taxpayers for the subsidies that they give their employees. I mean, why should all the people in the Gallery here, why should the staff working here, who are paying Federal taxes, why should their taxes go to an employer where the company is making millions and they are paying their workers such low wages that they are eligible for food stamps or section 8 housing vouchers or Medicaid or the earned income tax credit? The last two bills that we should pass, as we throw out the President's tax law, is the earned income tax credit. If we double the credit, we make millions more people eligible. It would mean thousands of dollars in the pockets of tens of millions of Americans. It would make a difference in their lives. Instead of giving tax breaks to rich people, which is what Senate Republicans and President Trump always want to do--the White House looks like a retreat for Wall Street executives--and instead of giving millions in tax breaks--actually, billions to the wealthiest people in this country--why don't we make the tax system fair and put money in the pockets of people making $20,000, $30,000, $40,000, or $50,000 a year. That is what our earned income tax credit expansion would do, and at the same time, we should expand the child tax credit. Experts have said that plan would cut child poverty in half. That gives kids who grow up in my ZIP code, 44105, who are struggling, who live in homes with high levels of toxic lead in the walls--kids who don't have the breaks in their lives that my kids have--a fighting chance. It would lift half of these kids out of child poverty. Taken together, the Patriot Corporation Act, the corporate freeloader fee, the earned income tax credit, and the child tax credit would create a Tax Code that puts money in the pockets of working people, would create opportunity for people to aspire to and join the middle class, would raise wages, and, equally importantly, would keep jobs in the United States of America. Why should this Congress keep passing legislation, as the President asked, that would encourage the shutdown of plants here and moves overseas? Why don't we reward companies that do the right thing? Why don't we give kids opportunities and families opportunities so they can get ahead? Why don't we put money in the pockets of working people, raise wages, and keep jobs in the United States of America? I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BROWN

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

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, yesterday I left my home in Cleveland and kissed my wife good-bye and headed to the airport early in the morning. I went to gates A, B, and C in the Cleveland Airport and talked to the TSA agents who are all working and working without pay. Then, when I got to Washington--I flew into National Airport--I went straight to a building in Arlington where I talked to cafeteria workers. They are Federal contract workers who serve food at our Smithsonian museums and other Federal facilities. They don't work for the Federal Government. Their paychecks don't come from the Federal Government. They are contracted through a company and then paid by these companies. They have lost their jobs during the Trump shutdown. These workers, making $12, $13, $14--some with some seniority make $15. They are union. They make 2 or 3 dollars more than the nonunion comparable workers. But they are not getting paid. Unlike the 800,000 Federal workers, some working without pay, some furloughed--unlike them, if history is a judge, they will not get paid those lost wages. So these are people making $12, $13, $14 an hour who have already lost 2 weeks of work because of the Trump shutdown, and unless Congress acts, they have no prospect to get that back pay. Again, their wages are at that level. Then, last night, to sort of cap the day, in my apartment here I watched the President of the United States talk about his wall and dig in a little more. You know, I wish President Trump would talk to the workers he is hurting with this shutdown. I wish that he would go out and, as President Lincoln used to say, get his ``public opinion bath'' and listen to these workers; that he would leave the White House or Mar-a- Lago, where he spends most of his time, and talk to these workers I talked to yesterday--the TSA workers in Cleveland who are working without pay. The anxiety levels are going up and up and up for these workers because this coming Saturday they will miss their first paycheck--and then beyond that too. This also affects the food service workers. Last week, President Trump said--imagine this, a billionaire President--his shutdown, the Trump shutdown, which he proudly, as Commander in Chief, said: ``I am proud of this shutdown.'' Last week, he said: ``This shutdown has a higher purpose than next week's pay.'' Imagine that, a billionaire President, living in this beautiful house paid for by taxpayers and having his estate in Mar-a-Lago, and he would say: ``This shutdown,'' this Trump shutdown, ``has a higher purpose than next week's pay.'' I wonder if he would tell that to TSA workers, the ones I met in Cleveland, including Aaron Bankston, who told me: If you're the only breadwinner in your family, and to have your kids looking up at you, it's hard to tell them, we don't have anything to put food on the table, that's the hard part. We just have to get us back working. We're working diligently over here, trying to make sure we're securing America. Mr. President, tell the cafeteria workers I talked with there is a higher purpose than their week's pay because, remember, it is not just Federal employees feeling the pain. There are also these contractors. There are 800,000 Federal employees. We think--we can't get the number from the government yet--I am not sure the administration wants to tell us these numbers. There are thousands and thousands and thousands of contract workers making $10, $12, $15 an hour--making a little more if they are lucky enough to have a union, but some making as little as $8 or $9 or $10 an hour. A lot of Americans don't realize that thousands of janitors and cafeteria workers and security guards are out of work because of the President. You know, it is all kinds of Federal employees. It is people who process tax returns at the IRS. It is people who are helping farmers adjust to the new farm bill we passed proudly--Senators Roberts and Stabenow and a bunch of others. It is about people wanting to get a mortgage, and they can't get it approved at FHA because of this shutdown. It is also people making $8 and $10 and $12 an hour. Unless we do something, these workers will not get the backpay they should get because they are employed by private contractors. They have no way, at $12 and $15 an hour--without pay, they have no way of making up their lost hours and lost wages. I am working with a relatively new Minnesota Senator, Ms. Smith, on legislation to try to come up with a solution to get these workers backpay, the way that workers who are actual Federal employees get backpay. Fundamentally, it comes down to respecting the dignity of work. That means respecting the dignity of work and that these workers make a decent wage with decent benefits. Missing one paycheck may not seem like a lot to the billionaire President and the multimillionaire Cabinet with their massive investment portfolio. I will say that again. Missing one 2-week paycheck or two 2-week paychecks or even, if the President gets his way, three 2-week paychecks may not seem like a lot to a billionaire President and a multimillionaire Cabinet with their massive investment portfolios, but it means a whole lot to these people. Missing a paycheck is a big, big deal that the President of the United States clearly either doesn't understand or doesn't care about. The President doesn't understand that working people can't just send a letter to creditors saying: Excuse me from paying rent this month or paying my mortgage or paying for my medications. You can't put groceries or gas in the car with an IOU. One of those cafeteria workers told me in Arlington: I have to pay rent. I have other bills. I have a college student in community college. He needs help with his books. He said: President Trump, I am asking would you please open the government. Everyone is going through hardship. We really don't want this wall you want. I am guessing the President of the United States, the billionaire President, jetting back and forth between the White House and Mar-a- Lago in Florida, will never talk to not just these workers I talked to in Virginia or those TSA employees in Cleveland--I am sure he will not talk to them, but I hope he will talk to some people like them. He spends his time in his resort, but he doesn't see them. To him, they are invisible, but Mitch McConnell can see them. Mitch McConnell's office is down the hall on the right about 100 feet. I have shared on this floor before how lobbyists, during the tax bill, when President Trump and the majority in the Senate and the majority in the House gave a $1.5 trillion tax cut--and 70 percent of that tax cut went to the richest 1 percent, people like themselves, the President, the Cabinet, many Members of the Senate, many Members of the House. I documented it to show--as I looked out this door and opened these doors, I showed this is the place where the lobbyists go in and out of the majority leader's office, talking to him about their special interest legislation. So I ask--right now, Senator McConnell could come out of his office, and he could walk down this hall. I would be happy to open the door for him, if that is not contrary to Senate rules. I would be happy to open the door for him and welcome him. He could right now vote to reopen the government and get this process moving and tell the President of the United States. He also could go to Virginia. He also could go to the airport in Louisville or Cincinnati, and he could listen to their stories, but he doesn't seem to be listening either because I am guessing if he did, he might be a little more inclined to let us vote to get these workers back on the job. I am calling on Senator McConnell to come out of that office, to walk down this hall, and to come here and begin the process of opening the government. Let's talk for a minute about what the President said last night. The President continued his record of telling lie after lie after lie after lie, misleading the people he is supposed to serve. Facts matter. So when you hear the President say we need a wall, remember that it is a fact that illegal border crossings are at historic lows. It is not fake news. My wife says if it is fake, it is not news, and if it is news, it is not fake. It is a fact that border crossings are at historic lows. Another fact, border crossings are down about 80 percent since 2000. Another fact, the President's wall would do nothing to stop opioids coming into our communities. First, most illegal opioids are seized at legal points of entry, not tracked over some remote area of Texas. Fact, the shutdown makes it harder for Customs and Border Protection to do their jobs intercepting those opioids. Another fact, last year we passed the INTERDICT Act. I worked with my colleague from Ohio, Senator Portman, and Senator Markey from Massachusetts on a bipartisan bill to get Customs and Border Protection the screening devices they need to test for opioids. Why would we focus on the President's vanity project, building this wall? A promise he made--remember his promise? ``I will build the wall, and the Mexicans will pay for it.'' Well, he is now asking American taxpayers, over time, to pay $25 or $30 billion. Why would we focus on the President's vanity project instead of getting the agents and technology they need? We can do this with agents, technology, helicopters, and all the things we need to do to protect the border because that is what we want to do. We don't want this vanity project. We want to protect the border. Another fact, most undocumented immigrants aren't committing crimes. In fact, there are 56 percent fewer criminal convictions of undocumented immigrants than of native-born Texans. So a native-born Texan is more likely, percentagewise, to commit a crime than an undocumented person living in Texas. Keep in mind the facts of what this shutdown is costing the American people; 800,000 Federal workers are going without a paycheck; 420,000 of them are on the job without pay; thousands of contract workers, custodians, cafeteria workers, janitors not only are not getting a paycheck, but they probably never will for this lost work. Here is another fact. The President and Senator McConnell could end the shutdown right now. The Senate passed a bill unanimously to fund the government in December. That is a fact. We passed it. It is a fact. It was unanimous. It is a fact. The House passed bills to fund the government last week. It is a fact. Senator McConnell right now could come out of that office, walk down this hall, and Senator McConnell could put those House bills on the floor right now, and we could vote to end this shutdown. We could send them to the President's desk, and if the President is going to continue his vanity project and continue this Trump shutdown and he vetoes it, we have the ability to override it. The President doesn't tell us what to do. He seems to be telling the Republican majority what to do day after day. I applaud those who stood up to him recently and said they want to open the government, but it is also a fact that this President said: ``I am proud to shut down the government.'' The Commander in Chief of the United States of America--the Commander in Chief--the top person in this country's government said: ``I am proud to shut down the government.'' Facts matter. The fact is, President Trump, once again, as he betrayed the General Motors workers in Lordstown, as he betrayed the General Motors suppliers--all the companies that supply the building of the Chevy Cruz--he has betrayed these Federal workers; he has betrayed these contract workers who are making $10, $12, and $15 an hour; and he has betrayed the American worker. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I noticed today news reports from Bloomberg that the year 2017 is shaping up to be or likely was the most profitable year in Wall Street history. So what is Congress's reaction to that? What happens in the majority leader's office? More special interest legislation, more breaks for Wall Street, more tax cuts. So this Congress--this Congress has decided that Wall Street never quite has enough; that the richest people in this country are never rich enough; that the most powerful people in this country are not powerful enough. So what happens down the hall in the majority leader's office? What happens way down the hall in the Speaker's office, although voters this year decided this year to eject him and his staff and his cohorts and his fellow travelers--if I can use a phrase like that--from that office and elect a whole different group of people. What they have done is meet behind closed doors to help the oil companies, the drug companies, the gun lobby, and help especially Wall Street. In fact, not only are there all kinds of Wall Street lobbyists day in and day out--tobacco lobbyists, gun lobbyists, and others, but the White House itself looks like a retreat for Wall Street executives. We know that. That is why, I guess, Wall Street had such a great year in 2017.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I want to honor the career of Patricia Rogala, who has been with my office our entire 12 years in the Senate and my 14 years in the House before that. Pat is the model of a dedicated public servant. After more than 25 years serving the people of Ohio, Pat is retiring at the end of the year. Her first day on the job in Cleveland, Congress was in the middle of a fight--sounds familiar--over healthcare. Some local activists sent an Elvis impersonator to the office singing a healthcare song to the tune of ``It's Now or Never.'' Pat said at the time, ``What am I getting myself into?'' Fortunately, she stayed. As our Ohio scheduler, she has sent me all over my State. She has helped me put more road miles on our made-in- Toledo Jeep Cherokee than any travel agent ever could. She has made sure I am able to serve Ohioans through meetings and roundtables and plant visits. She juggles a Senate schedule that changes--as we see tonight--always at the last minute. She ensures that this office serves every corner of Ohio. She works directly in concert and coordination with Diana Baron in our Washington office. It is a tough job, but Pat makes it look easy. One of our colleagues in our office wrote this week that Pat has been a true friend and wonderful coworker. What a loss we will feel come Monday when she is not sitting in her office hard at work. It is a loss to all of us. We will miss you, Pat. You have had an incredible impact on your colleagues. You made such a difference serving Ohio for the people of Ohio, but after a quarter of a century, you have earned a long and happy retirement. Your family needs you, and your family loves you so. Thank you, Pat. (Mr. RUBIO assumed the Chair.)

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, 10 years ago this summer, we lost a longtime friend of mine and colleague, a remarkable public servant, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones. When Marcia Fudge, then the mayor of Warrensville Heights, a Cleveland suburb, won the special election to Stephanie's seat to represent the 11th Congressional District, including Cleveland and the home where Connie and I live, she had big shoes to fill, but Marcia rose to the occasion. For the past decade, she has been a fighter for my hometown of Cleveland and the east side suburbs into Akron and all the Ohioans she serves. On the Education and Workforce Committee, she has become a senior leader who knows how to get things done. She stands up for Ohio's teachers, students, and families. Marcia also joined the Agriculture Committee, perhaps not initially seen as a natural fit for someone with an urban district like hers, but she understands that farm bills are not just about crops. They are food bills, economic development bills, conservation bills, research bills, and nutrition bills. She and I--and I am the first Senator in half a century to be on the Ag Committee for some of the same reasons Congressman Fudge is on this committee. We have worked together to write two farm bills. This year, we both served on the bill's conference committee, and we fought House Republican efforts to erect more bureaucracy to gut nutrition programs in Ohio that families rely on. These are programs for people making $8, $10, $12 an hour who don't have quite enough income to feed their families. We won that fight. Tomorrow the President is scheduled to sign the bipartisan farm bill we passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in both Houses. Congresswoman Fudge and I worked to right a century-old wrong and get Central State University the 1890 land grant status they deserve. That designation isn't just a rhetorical honor; it means more opportunities for funding and research in partnerships with industry--the sort of results that Marcia delivers for her district. She is a leader among her colleagues. As head of the Congressional Black Caucus, she led the fight on so many issues, including working to ensure that all Americans have a voice in their government. A few years ago, we held a field hearing on barriers too many Ohioans face exercising their most fundamental right--the right to vote. Marcia was a star in that hearing. It came in the wake of a despicable Ohio law and, frankly, years of attempts at voter suppression by Ohio Republicans--a despicable Ohio law that cut the number of early voting days in half. We know exactly whom these laws are aimed at. Marcia testified about how these suppression tactics hurt communities of color. Unfortunately, it has gotten worse--limiting absentee balloting, restricting provisional balloting--and the Supreme Court, a Court that puts its thumb on the scale of justice in support of corporations over workers, a Court that puts its thumb on the scale of justice to support Wall Street over consumers, and a Court that rubberstamps all these restrictions on voting. I look forward to continuing our fight alongside Marcia against these tactics straight out of the Jim Crow era. I know Marcia will continue to be a leader. There is no doubt, even before her election to Congress, that Marcia was a force to be reckoned with: a former mayor, a former congressional chief of staff, and former national president-- as important as anything she has done, I think in her mind--of Delta Sigma Theta. She still helps lead efforts to bring Deltas from around the country to the Hill each year for Delta Days. Hundreds of driven, ambitious, smart, committed, empathetic talented Black women come to our Nation's Capitol to meet with Members of Congress and make their voices heard. They have an incredible role model in Marcia Fudge. I am grateful, Congresswoman Fudge, to have you as my Congresswoman. I am proud to call you a colleague and a friend.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to honor the career of an indispensable member of my staff, Elizabeth Thames. Beth has been with my office for over 20 years--all 12 years in the Senate and about a decade in the House before that. Now, after serving the people of Ohio for these 20-plus years, Beth retires at the end of the year. She joined our office after working as an editor at the Elyria Chronicle-Telegram. Far from being the enemy of the people, Beth knew what journalism was, knew how important it is, and knew to tell stories to help people, to afflict the comfortable, and to comfort the afflicted. Beth brought that same spirit to our office. She helped our office to connect with the community in Northeast Ohio and around the State. She writes down the name of every single Ohioan we meet together so we can better serve them. Her work has had an amazing impact on the people of Ohio. At meetings, at roundtables, and at community events, she listens and she learns about problems. She understands what Lincoln was talking about when he said: Go out and get your public opinion. She listens to people who don't often get listened to, and she is a voice for people whose voices are often not heard. In 2012 and 2013, she began hearing more and more about infant mortality--a huge problem in our State, particularly for African- American babies. Frankly, State government didn't seem to give a damn. Constituents would bring up this issue over and over, but no one was doing anything about it. She started calling around. She met with anyone who would talk to her about what the State and Federal Government could do. She called Arthur James, a doctor on the faculty at Ohio State and at the Nationwide Children's Hospital. He was sounding that alarm. He met with Beth and told her how bad things were. A crisis at the time, Ohio--a generally wealthy State, which could do so much better were it not for corrupt State government--had the third highest infant mortality rate in the country, and ranked last for African-American babies. Beth started this conversation before many people were paying attention. She pushed every level of government to take this seriously. She talked with public health departments, with home visiting programs, with hospitals, with nurses, with doctors. She started conversations with legislators and legislative staff about what we could do on the Federal level, the State level, and the local level. It is because of her that we passed and President Obama signed the bipartisan Sudden Unexpected Death Data Enhancement and Awareness Act. It is because of Beth that we wrote to the Consumer Product Safety Commission and got them to add warnings to crib bumpers to promote safe sleep. It is because of Beth's hard work that then-Secretary of HHS Sylvia Mathews Burwell visited my hometown of Mansfield, OH, to see the great work that the Doctors Redding--husband and wife, two doctors in Mansfield, OH, my hometown--were doing and to see the great work they and community health workers were doing to help moms have healthy pregnancies and deliver healthy babies. The change was dramatic in the number of healthy babies who were born as a result of the work of all of them. We have more to do, but all of Beth's efforts have given our State important tools to pay attention to monitor this problem and to figure out how to solve it. For Beth, of course, it wasn't just infant mortality. Any time she heard about an issue in a meeting or roundtable, any time she heard about how our office could look and search for and find problems and find ways to be helpful, she was. She called agencies and offices. She talked with legislative staff. She always tried to find a solution. She heard from veterans about the challenges using GI education benefits. This year she spearheaded our first student veterans conference. We spread around the State to help student veterans, soldiers, sailors, air men and women, and marines who come back after serving to integrate into classrooms in a difficult situation, where they are around college students who are usually younger than they and didn't have their life experience. She connects those student veterans with resources that allow them to the get the most out of the benefits. For all of her efforts, Beth never sought recognition. She is generally quiet as a person. I can imagine her right now telling me to stop. She doesn't need all this fuss. This fall, the Elyria NAACP gave her an award--something she probably hoped I wasn't going to talk about--called the ``Unsung Hero Award.'' That is Beth. By the end of a long career that touched so many lives, I can't let her go without giving her the recognition she reserves. Beth Thames, thank you for what you have done for our State. Thank you for what you have done for our country. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to honor the career of Margaret Molnar, a dedicated public servant who has made a difference in the lives of thousands of Ohioans and who is retiring soon after 12 years with my office. She joined my Ohio staff the very first year I came to the Senate after a long career at Legal Aid. Her entire life has been dedicated to helping those people in need. In the past 12 years, Margaret has worked on more than 10,000 cases. Those are 10,000 Ohioans whose lives she has touched. Many of these were seniors trying to navigate bureaucracy and get the Social Security and Medicare benefits they have earned. Margaret went above and beyond the call of duty for them. She worked on one case for 5 years. It was a complicated one, helping an Ohioan who was taken as a baby from Lithuania, brought to a displaced persons camp in Germany after World War II, and then finally brought to America. They were having trouble finding the documents he needed to prove his eligibility for Social Security and Medicare, two Federal programs for which he had paid in. The case at times seemed hopeless, but Margaret never gave up. This year she was finally able to track down the documents this Ohioan needed to secure the benefits he earned. That was par for the course. She worked on another case for a constituent who had been trying to get someone to intervene regarding her mother's Medicare coverage. The woman's daughter wrote that Margaret's ``caring, expertise, and knowledge of the medical system and Federal programs cut through all the gobbledygook I was facing, and pointed us in the direction of help when not one other agency or politician would.'' Our office has received so many letters of praise and thanks like that for Margaret. One Ohioan wrote to Margaret: You and Senator Brown have accomplished what I was beginning to believe was impossible--the Social Security backpay was indeed transferred to my account yesterday. I cannot thank your office enough. I cannot even begin to explain what a Christmas gift this is. I truly was beginning to wonder and worry about how I was going to make ends meet for the next several months. Again, it is par for the course for Margaret Molnar. Another woman wrote after her brother passed away, who Margaret helped in the last years of his life: I will never forget how much you have helped enrich Robert's life while he was with us. Forever, we will be grateful. You immediately responded to my email and got the ball rolling and never gave up on Robert. You are like family. Another woman wrote: I did not know how to fight this type of issue, it seemed bigger than life to me. You truly have done a wonderful job. I appreciate you stepping in for me . . . your office truly cares about people. In a last note, another couple wrote: ``I hope Senator Brown knows how fortunate he is to have you on his staff.'' I know that, and Ohio knows that.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, these are not Mick Mulvaney's decisions to make--or whatever job Mick Mulvaney happens to be in this week. These are not Alex Azar's decisions to make. Congress needs to do its job. On behalf of the minority leader, I object.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. I thank Senator Tester, Senator Isakson, Senator Gillibrand, and Senator Blumenthal. This is the cost of war. This is simple. If you were exposed to poison while serving our country, you deserve the benefits you have earned--no exception. My office holds roundtables with veterans all over the State. We have held more than a dozen over the past several months. We hear Ohio veteran after Ohio veteran raise this issue time and again. Joe Benedict from Cleveland talked about how important these benefits are to veterans like him. Last week, I met with Mike Kvintus, another blue water Navy veteran from Cambridge, OH. He is 71 years old, and he drove 4 hours from his home in Eastern Ohio to get here. He talked to Members of Congress about what a burden the senseless policy is for so many veterans he knows who have already sacrificed for this country. He urged us to put politics aside. That is what Senator Tester and Senator Gillibrand and Senator Isakson have asked us to do. Last year, we introduced the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act, which would guarantee that all Vietnam veterans exposed to toxic Agent Orange chemicals have equal access to the care and benefits they have earned. A number of us, myself included, raised the issue with VA Secretary Wilkie, both in private meetings in our office and in the Veterans' Affairs Committee, pressing him to expand benefits to all veterans. Mr. Kvintus and Mr. Benedict and all of the veterans in our States-- Georgia, Connecticut, Montana, New York, and Ohio--we all hear this. We all know that these veterans put themselves in harm's way. It is the cost of war. We need to show the American people we can work together. We should start by putting partisanship aside, passing this bill tonight, and finally getting the care for veterans that they deserve. I yield the floor.

Mr. BROWN

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, our job in this body, in public service, is to fight for the people we serve. If you are taking a government salary, your job is to fight for the people who make this country work. Wall Street, the big banks, and corporate special interests have their own army of lobbyists that go in and out of the majority leader's office. They are at their beck and call. Our job is to fight for everyday Americans. That is why we created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Bureau's job is to crack down on Wall Street predators and people who cheat the system and shady lenders who prey on hard-working families. The people in this town may have collective amnesia about what happened a decade ago. They may have forgotten the financial crisis. They may have forgotten the housing crisis, but families who lost their homes, lost their retirement savings, lost their jobs, and lost their college funds haven't forgotten. My wife and I live in Cleveland, OH, in ZIP Code 44105. My ZIP Code, a decade ago, in the first half of that year, had more foreclosures than any ZIP Code in the United States of America. I see every day the blight and the damage that the foreclosure crisis brought to us, mostly by Wall Street. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is supposed to look out for danger before it crashes down on these hard-working families and robs them of their homes, jobs, and savings. The first 6 years on the job, that is what public servants at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau did. They returned $12 billion to 29 million Americans who had been scammed, cheated, and ripped off. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau follows in this country's proud tradition of progressive achievements: workers safety laws, overtime protections, collective bargaining rights, Social Security, Medicare, safe drinking water laws--all of those things that helped our country grow, that helped build a middle class, that helped to enhance people's quality of life. Over the last year, Mick Mulvaney turned an agency meant to stand on the side of the American people into yet another outlet for the financial industry to push its agenda. The same people who line up outside the majority leader's office down the hall and the same lobbyists line up at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and push that same Wall Street agenda. Mick Mulvaney said to the workers and servicemembers who are served by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to students and seniors who are served by the Bureau: You are on your own now. Don't expect any protection from us. It is not just an attack on consumers. It is the Americans who work hard, whether they swipe a badge or punch a clock, whether they work for salary, whether they work for tips, whether they are raising children or taking care of an aging parent. Americans work hard to earn a paycheck, buy a home, send their kids to college, and save for retirement. Every day they find themselves under attack from scam debt collectors and predatory payday lenders, or they see their pensions being raided by hedge fund billionaires. When we let financial predators strip away at the people in ZIP Code 44105--strip away Americans' hard-earned dollars through fees and scams--we undermine that dignity of work, undermine the dignity people should have when they retire, and undermine the dignity of work that makes this country great. How do you look Americans in the eye who are working that second or third shift or starting a small business if their government is going to stand by and line up with criminals who fleece people, line up with Wall Street, line up with shady lenders? It comes down to whose side you are on. We know that Mick Mulvaney, who has been running the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau--sort of moonlighting because he has another Federal job--has been on the side of Wall Street. Now we have to ask ourselves about the nominee for this job, Kathy Kraninger: Whose side has she been on? We tried to get answers from Ms. Kraninger. In her job at the Office and Management Budget, she oversaw the agencies that ripped children from their parents at the border. She was involved in that. We asked Ms. Kraninger to show us what her role was in that policy. She didn't defend it. She just refused to respond. She came in front of the committee. She wanted this nomination. She wanted to be confirmed. She wanted this promotion, and she would not even answer questions. She wouldn't respond to letters about her involvement. We asked Ms. Kraninger whose side she was on after a devastating hurricane left millions of American citizens--American citizens, don't forget--in Puerto Rico without power, without water, without hospital, without shelter. We asked her to show us who she was fighting for when the government failed to find relief. She didn't deny anything. She refused to answer. She wants a promotion. She wants this job. She refused to answer questions that we asked, that Senator Whitehouse or I or others asked on behalf of the American people. Then we asked whose side she would be on if she were head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Would she be on the side of all the lobbyists that lined up outside Majority Leader McConnell's office or on the side of those who have been harmed? Would she be on Mick Mulvaney's side or fight for workers and servicemembers and students and seniors? It is one of the questions she did answer. She said: ``I cannot identify any actions that Acting Director Mulvaney has taken with which I disagree.'' We know exactly whose side Ms. Kraninger will be on. She is with Mick Mulvaney, which means she is with Wall Street, with the payday lenders, with the shady special interests. She is not on the side of millions of Americans--the 29 million Americans who have saved $12 billion because the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau existed. She is not on their side. She is not on the side of her neighbors and my neighbors--her neighbors in her home State and in my home State of Ohio who lost their homes, their jobs, and their retirement savings to Wall Street greed. She is not on the side of people who work for a living. She is on the side of big corporations like GM, which is shutting down its operations in Lordstown, presumably, costing 5,000 people their jobs, and moving some of those jobs overseas. She is on their side. She has no experience in banking, finance, or consumer protection. Her one and only qualification is that she will be a rubberstamp for special interests. I call on everybody in this body--I call on the President: Let's find somebody who will take this job seriously, who will fight for the people who make this country work. I suggest the absence of a quorum.