Tammy Baldwin

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 178, submitted earlier today.

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

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 179, introduced earlier today.

Ms. BALDWIN. I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3 p.m., Monday, April 26; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Miller nomination; finally, that the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. on Monday.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 177, submitted earlier today.

Mr. BALDWIN

Mr. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I have 11 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at 10: 15 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Veterans' Affairs The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 22, 2021, at to be determined, to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 30, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Mr. Joseph Martin Rose, Sr., Moka'ang Giizis or ``Rising Sun'' in the Ojibwe language, a beloved elder and member of the Eagle Clan of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Ojibwe. As a member of the Three Fires Midewiwin Grand Medicine Lodge, Joe was a teacher, culture keeper, pipe carrier, and treasure to his community. His life was one of far too many claimed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Joe was born on April 24, 1935, to Carl Rose, Sr., and Mary ``Dolly'' (Jackson) Rose in Oklahoma. When his father volunteered to repair naval ships in Alaska during World War II, his mother brought the family back home to Odanah to live with her parents on the Bad River Native American Reservation. Joe often told stories about growing up in Odanah, calling it a ``time of kerosene lamps, outhouses, and wood heat.'' He credited his grandfather, Dan Jackson, with instilling in him a strong connection to the natural world by teaching him about traditional plants, ceremonies, and medicines. He spent his youth netting fish in the spring, wild ricing in late summer, duck hunting in the fall, then ice skating and enjoying bonfires in the winter. He attended DePadua High School in Ashland, where he played nose tackle on the football team, wrestled, and sang in the school choir. His athleticism earned him a scholarship to Northland College, where he majored in biology and secondary education, earning a certification to teach high school science and math. After graduation, he spent the next 10 years teaching in South Dakota and Wyoming, while coaching youth sports. With the help of his parents, he raised two children, taught full time, and earned a master's degree in guidance counseling before returning to Bad River in 1970. Back in Wisconsin, he became the homeschool coordinator and guidance counselor at Ashland High School. As an advocate for Bad River children, he taught them Native American arts and crafts and offered courses about culture. In 1974, he was asked to develop the newly formed Native American Studies Program at Northland College, one of the first such programs in America. As its director, he created a culture- based curriculum that emphasized environmental stewardship and the connection Ojibwe people have with Lake Superior. Joe's experiential learning courses were memorable for the visits to his home on Waverly Beach, birch bark canoes, ceremonial lodges, and a round house built by his students. He helped create the Traditional Ways Gathering, an annual event celebrating Ojibwe crafts such as beading, basket making, and flintknapping. He formed a relationship with the recently dedicated David R. Obey Northern Great Lakes Visitor Center in Ashland and curated its exhibits on Lake Superior tribal history and culture. As a staunch defender of Native American treaty rights, Joe and his son, Joe Dan, were among Lake Superior Ojibwe who exercised their rights to spearfish lakes in the ceded territory. They did so in the face of sometimes violent demonstrations in opposition to those rights. He later served on the Voigt Intertribal Task Force, which facilitates the cooperative management of shared natural resources in ceded territory. Joe retired as an associate professor in 2007, although he continued to teach and serve in leadership roles until the end of his life. Even after retirement, Joe continued his activism against environmental threats facing Lake Superior, including nuclear waste, oil exploration, garbageincineration, factory farming, and taconite mining in the Penokee Hills. His most recent fight was against the Enbridge Line 5 oil pipeline that crosses the Bad River reservation, one of his primary issues of concern as a member of the Ashland County Board. One way or another, Joe was a part of virtually every significant environmental and treaty-rights struggle in the region over the past half century. While soft-spoken, Joe had a voice that proved powerful and deeply resonant. He believed that he had the responsibility to ``go out and share this knowledge and wisdom of how to live in harmony and balance with the natural world.'' With this ethos and an indomitable faith in grassroots organizing, he never turned down an opportunity fight the good fight and share his knowledge with others. The countless people who were fortunate enough to know and learn from Joe Rose, Sr., will keep his memory alive and continue his good work for generations to come.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. I call for the yeas and nays.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I rise to recognize the distinguished life of Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, who died on December 19, 2020, at the age of 87. Justice Abrahamson was a consummate public servant who was passionately driven by the principle of fairness when applying the law and serving the people of Wisconsin. Her unparalleled commitment to judicial independence and justice had an immeasurable impact on Wisconsin's judicial system and the countless women and men who have been inspired to work in public service by her leadership. She was the first woman to serve on the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the first woman to serve as chief justice, but her legacy is even richer than those exceptional accomplishments. Justice Abrahamson's life had modest beginnings in New York City in 1933, as the child of Polish immigrants. Her passion for the law started at the tender age of 6, when she decided she wanted to become a lawyer. Those who knew her at all stages of life--from childhood to retirement--consistently commented on her thirst for learning. She was a voracious reader even at a very young age and a dedicated student, earning honors in high school and college. Justice Abrahamson graduated magna cum laude with a bachelor's degree from New York University in 1953. She earned a law degree with high distinction from Indiana University in 1956 and a doctor of law in American Legal History from the University of Wisconsin Law School in 1962. Justice Abrahamson began her career as a practicing attorney and distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School. Justice Abrahamson's career is an inspiration to all women who are fighting forces that tell them they don't belong because of their gender. She faced significant discrimination when she entered the legal profession in the 1950s. From being denied employment at a law firm after graduating first in her class at Indiana University, to the denial of jobs, clients, and even social club memberships because of her gender, Justice Abrahamson remained undaunted by prejudice. She refused to back down from those who stood in the way of a woman's path to success in the legal profession. She carried that steadfast commitment to fairness and equality in her work on the court. In 1976, Justice Abrahamson broke the glass ceiling in Wisconsin's judicial system by becoming the first female justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. She again changed the judicial landscape in 1996 when she became the first woman to serve as chief justice. For the chief, serving on the supreme court meant serving the people of Wisconsin as an independent, fair, and impartial justice because, after all, the court and our court system belong to the people, not powerful special interests. That is why she spent a lot of her time traveling the State, meeting with people. Whether it was meeting with local judges, riding along with local law enforcement, or meeting with advocates for victims of sexual assault and domestic violence, she always understood that you can't serve the people if you don't walk in their shoes. That is why the people of Wisconsin elected her to the supreme court four times and she served 43 years on the court--serving the people. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Justice Abrahamson was ``most courageous and sage, and ever mindful of the people--all the people--that the law exists or should exist to serve.'' Justice Abrahamson was cherished and respected as a mentor, teacher, advocate, wife, mother, grandmother and friend. She was known for her strong work ethic, often the last person working at night at the State capitol preparing for a case. Even as she faced pancreatic cancer at the end of her last term on the State supreme court, Justice Abrahamson fearlessly continued working, noting, ``On any day in this state, more than a quarter-million people are facing a cancer diagnosis.'' She tried to make the law more accessible and understandable to clients and the general public and brought a caring perspective to her professional and personal interactions. Her passion was also seen outside of the courtroom in her travels and treasured relationships with family and friends. Justice Abrahamson was a true American hero. From her incomparable tenure on the Wisconsin Supreme Court to her efforts as a pioneer for gender equality, Justice Abrahamson lived a life devoted to service and justice for all. Her greatest legacy is the trail she blazed for countless young women, who can see themselves in a courtroom or on a judicial bench because of the barriers she fearlessly broke through. She will shine in Wisconsin's history as one of the most influential women who shaped not only our judicial institutions but the State as a whole.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I rise to honor Neil Heinen, editorial director for WISC-TV and Madison Magazine, on his retirement. Throughout his remarkable career, Neil has been steadfast in his commitment to fair and honest reporting, clear-headed editorials and fascinating stories about the community he loves. Born in Milwaukee, WI as the oldest of 11 children, Neil first attended St. Norbert College in Green Bay in 1969. He dropped out to spend 4 years working in a mental hospital, where he said he received his real education. He worked as a bartender and actor in Madison before deciding to study journalism at the University of Wisconsin- Madison. He began his career at WIBA radio station, spending 10 years on the air before joining the team at WISC-TV News as a news assignment editor. It was there that Neil worked with longtime station manager Tom Bier to create an editorial director job just as most stations were eliminating their editorial departments. Neil delivered more than 7,400 on-air editorials since he first conveyed the station's views in April of 1992. He also hosted a Sunday morning public affairs program, ``For the Record,'' that ran 1,500 episodes over 30 years. Perhaps Neil's greatest legacy is his leadership in guiding the growth and creativity of Madison Magazine, which won countless awards for providing its nearly 170,000 readers with interesting coverage of local people, entertainment, and issues. Neil's contributions included monthly columns on issues of importance to Madisonians and a monthly food column he coauthored with his wife, Nancy Christy. Madison readers particularly enjoyed his cover stories focused on leadership and visions for Madison's future. Neil has been a familiar and trusted voice in many of Madison's most important events and controversial issues for the past 30 years. He is known for his support of major community projects such as the Monona Terrace Convention Center, the UW-Madison Kohl Center and Overture Center for the Arts. He helped launch We the People/Wisconsin, one of the most successful civic journalism projects in the country in the 1990s, and worked to start Schools of Hope, an initiative to help close the achievement gap in Madison schools. While Neil's last day of work was this past September 15, I know he will remain active in the community for many years to come, lending his voice to complex community conversations and championing causes that bring us together. I will be forever grateful for Neil's commitment to the Madison community and for offering his wise perspective in critical times.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. BALDWIN

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

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that our vote begin now.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, last Tuesday, in my home State of Wisconsin, in-person early voting started. Over the past week, people have showed up to vote in record numbers, as they have across our entire country, because they want to make sure their voices are heard. Why? Because they know how high the stakes are for them in this election, an election that will determine our next President and control of the U.S. Senate, an election that is just 1 week away. My position on President Trump's Supreme Court nomination has been very clear since the tragic passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Voters across America should be allowed to cast their ballots first and have their votes counted before this Senate votes on a lifetime appointment to our Nation's highest Court. The people should be heard first, but it is clear that the majority leader and a majority of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have no interest in listening to the people. That is why they are rushing and ramming President Trump's Supreme Court nomination forward just days before the election. This rigged and illegitimate process is wrong, and it follows a pattern of the majority leader and Senate Republicans abusing their power to break their own standards on Supreme Court nominations. Back in 2016, 8 months before the election, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland to a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court after the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia. Judge Garland is a highly experienced and qualified judge, and I have no doubt that had he been given the opportunity, he would have earned more than 60 votes in the U.S. Senate. But he was never given that opportunity because the majority leader decided to deny Judge Garland a hearing and a vote in the Senate. With the standards broken on the Garland nomination, the majority leader established a new one: no Supreme Court nominations by the Senate during an election year. Here we are in an election year. However, Majority Leader McConnell has broken his own rule and created yet another new one. Instead of applying the same standard that he imposed on President Obama with the Garland nomination in March of 2016, 8 months before an election, he created a new standard now for President Trump with his nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett made 39 days before an election. The majority leader is rushing President Trump's nominee forward, with a Senate vote as people are voting, as we stand 1 week--1 week--before election day. What is the rush? My home State is a national red zone for COVID-19. We are experiencing our worst outbreak of infections since the pandemic began, breaking records for new cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Right now, people want action, support, and relief from Washington. The House passed the Heroes Act over 5 months ago. Was there a rush for the Senate majority to take action to confront the public health and economic crisis that has only gotten worse since then? No, this legislation has been sitting on the majority leader's desk since May, while businesses have closed, millions have lost their jobs, and hundreds of thousands of Americans have died. At the beginning of this month, the House, once again, passed an updated version of the Heroes Act to provide local communities and frontline healthcare workers with the support they need to stop the spread of this deadly virus. This legislation provides support to workers, families, schools, local governments, and small businesses. Was there a rush from the Senate majority to take action? No, instead, the majority leader told the White House not to support this legislation because it would divide the other side of the aisle and they needed to focus on pushing this Supreme Court nomination forward before the election. What is the hurry? My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act and take away people's healthcare since I came to the Senate back in 2013. I remember that vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act well. It was 2017, right here on the Senate floor. As President Trump and Senate Republicans sought to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Senator John McCain did something we are not seeing from the majority now with this illegitimate Supreme Court nomination process. Senator McCain stood by his principles and gave a thumbs-down to repealing our Nation's healthcare law. President Trump's response has been to try to do what the American people will not let this Senate do. In 2015, President Trump made clear his intentions with Supreme Court nominations when he said: ``If I win the Presidency, my judicial appointments will do the right thing, unlike Bush's appointee John Roberts, on ObamaCare.'' In May of this year he said: ``We want to terminate healthcare under ObamaCare.'' The day after he announced his nomination of Judge Barrett, he tweeted that the Supreme Court invalidating the Affordable Care Act would be ``a big WIN for the USA!'' Just last week, he said he would like to ``terminate'' the Affordable Care Act and ``we have a very good chance of doing it.'' He is right, but that is the problem. President Trump, with his Department of Justice, has supported a Republican lawsuit to overturn the Affordable Care Act completely. On November 10, 1 week after the election, the Trump-backed lawsuit will come before the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Barrett has a record of criticizing and opposing the previous Supreme Court decisions that have upheld the Affordable Care Act. It is clear as day that the majority leader and Senate Republicans are driving a vote on the President's Supreme Court nomination in order to do what Trump wants--overturn the Affordable Care Act completely, terminate people's healthcare, and take away protections for people with preexisting health conditions. Here is what is at stake if Judge Barrett does what Trump and Senate Republicans have been trying to do for years. Over 186,000 Wisconsinites have been infected with COVID-19, which could now be considered a preexisting health condition. These people need the guaranteed protections that our Affordable Care Act provides, and they cannot afford to have the Supreme Court terminate their healthcare. If the Affordable Care Act is overturned, over 133 million Americans with preexisting health conditions could stand to lose their guaranteed protections or be charged more, including more than 2 million Wisconsinites who have preexisting health conditions. This issue is personal to me, as it is for so many others. When I was 9 years old, I got sick--really sick. I was in the hospital for 3 months. I eventually recovered. But when it came to health insurance, it was like I had a scarlet letter. My grandparents, who had raised me, couldn't find a policy that would cover me, not from any insurer and not at any price, all because I was a child who had been labeled with those terrifying words--``preexisting health condition.'' This is also personal for Chelsey from Seymour, WI, whose daughter Zoe was born with a congenital heart defect. Right now, thanks to the Affordable Care Act, Zoe is guaranteed access to coverage without being denied or charged more. Chelsey wrote to me: ``I'm pleading with you as a mother to fight for the kids in Wisconsin with pre-existing [health] conditions that are counting on you to protect that right.'' Her fight is my fight today. No parent or grandparent should have to lay awake at night wondering if the healthcare they have today for themselves and their children and grandchildren will be there tomorrow. The fact is, more children have become uninsured in every year of the Trump administration, and striking down the Affordable Care Act would be the final, devastating blow to children's healthcare. If President Trump succeeds with his lawsuit and gets a ruling from the person he is putting on the Supreme Court, Judge Barrett, an estimated 800,000 children would lose healthcare insurance. When Congress passed the Affordable Care Act over a decade ago, I led the effort in the House to include a provision that now allows young people to remain on their parents' health insurance until they turn 26. In Wisconsin, that means over 40,000 young adults in their twenties who have been infected with COVID-19. Many of these young people are likely already on their parents' health insurance plan or are receiving premium tax credits provided by the Affordable Care Act to lower costs and make healthcare more affordable. Recently, I heard the story of Amy from Neenah, WI. Her daughter is a nursing student at Marquette University in Milwaukee. She is on her mother's insurance plan, and they are worried that if the Senate shoves this nomination forward and Judge Barrett does what President Trump says she will do, this young nursing student and future frontline healthcare worker will be kicked off her mother's insurance and lose access to her healthcare. Kirsten from Green Bay, WI, told me her story of being diagnosed with a very serious heart defect when she was just 11 days old. By the time she was 13 years old, she had undergone 17 angioplasties. Before the Affordable Care Act was passed, she struggled to keep insurance coverage, and she doesn't want to go back to the days when insurance companies wrote their own rules and could choose to deny people coverage, charge people more, or set annual or lifetime limits on people's healthcare. Kirsten, who is now 24 years old, said: Amy Coney Barrett has made it clear that she opposes the [Affordable Care Act]. With this nomination, the Republican Party is actively saying that our lives do not matter. If a decision is made on the Supreme Court nominee before the election, the American people are taken out of the selection. The message I have heard from Wisconsin has been clear. People want to be able to vote before the Senate votes. People want their voices to be heard. People want their healthcare protected, and they certainly don't want it taken away by President Trump or his nominee to the Supreme Court during a deadly pandemic that has taken over 1,700 lives in my home State of Wisconsin and over 221,000 American lives. I would remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that for the women I have spoken about today, as well as all American women, if the Affordable Care Act is terminated, insurance companies could once again charge women more than men, and insurance companies could stop covering basic services, like maternity care, cancer screenings, and contraception. The threat this nominee poses to women's health cannot be overstated. The threat isn't limited to the Affordable Care Act; it extends beyond that. President Trump took office with a promise to nominate Justices and judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade. He has nominated Judge Barrett, and her judicial record reveals a firm disagreement with the Supreme Court's five decades of established constitutional protections for women's reproductive rights. Let's all be honest with the American people. Since day one of this administration, a woman's constitutional right and freedom to make her own healthcare choices, including access to birth control, has been under assault. We know what Amy Coney Barrett's personal views are, and I know that some of you support her for them. But let's be clear. I don't oppose her because of her personal views. What I do oppose is the phony game that is being played where the people pushing this nomination forward pretend that this nominee is simply a blank slate and will consider nothing more than words on a page in her Court decisions concerning women's reproductive health. Right now, in States across the country, Roe v. Wade is under attack, and millions of women are at risk of losing the freedom to make their own healthcare decisions without interference from politicians playing doctor. Dozens of abortion rights cases are headed toward the Supreme Court as we speak. The stakes could not be higher for women's health than they are right now with this nomination We all know what Judge Barrett's judicial record is, and her public advocacy is clear. This is a nominee who has been fundamentally hostile towards reproductive health and rights. That is what is relevant here because our Supreme Court plays an essential role in protecting and upholding civil rights and civil liberties, including the constitutional right for all women to make their own personal healthcare decisions and to have access to safe and legal reproductive care. The least this nominee's Senate supporters could do is be honest with the American people. We all know that, if given the opportunity, a Justice Barrett would overturn Roe v. Wade. Don't pretend you don't know how she will come down on this issue. You should at least have the courage of your convictions and say to the people who are voting right now in this election that you support Amy Coney Barrett's nomination because you support overturning Roe v. Wade, too, and you know she will help do it. Just as I don't trust this nominee to protect people's healthcare or women's reproductive rights, I have no faith in Judge Barrett to respect the progress that the LGBTQ community has worked so hard to achieve. Unlike President Trump's nominee, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a strong belief in equality for all, which was reflected in her life's work and in her judicial record on LGBTQ rights issues. In June, we again saw real progress in the Supreme Court with a landmark victory for justice and equality when the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 that workplace discrimination against LGBTQ people is wrong and our Nation's civil rights laws forbid it. But we have a lot more work to do. LGBTQ people in many States can still be evicted from their homes or denied services simply because of who they are or whom they love. The House passed the bipartisan Equality Act to end this kind of discrimination well over a year ago, but that, too, has been in the majority leader's legislative graveyard and has not even received a vote in the Senate because he is afraid it just might pass. Here we are today moving forward on a Supreme Court nominee who I believe is a real threat to LGBTQ rights--again, not because of her personal preference to oppose marriage equality; rather, because she has openly and publicly defended the dissenters in the Supreme Court's landmark Obergefell case by questioning the Court's role in even deciding that case. Earlier this month, two of the dissenters in that case whom Judge Barrett defended previously--Justices Thomas and Alito--came out and attacked the Court's 2015 decision, which declared that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry under the 14th Amendment guarantee to equal protection under the law. We just celebrated the 5-year anniversary of marriage equality becoming the law of the land, and I have no faith in Judge Barrett to protect this constitutional right. President Trump wants to overturn the Affordable Care Act completely and take away people's healthcare and protections for preexisting health conditions in the middle of a deadly pandemic. This President wants to overturn Roe v. Wade and have the government take away reproductive freedoms for women. He has done nothing to move equality and fairness forward for the LGBTQ community and has worked to turn back the clock on hard-won progress. Judge Barrett has been nominated and will likely be confirmed by this Senate to do what President Trump wants. This nominee's complete and total unwillingness to show any independence from the President makes that clear to me. I believe it is wrong for Senate Republicans to rush this confirmation vote before the American people have voted and our next President and the next Senate have taken office. I oppose this illegitimate process, and I oppose Judge Barrett's confirmation for a lifetime appointment to our highest Court because I do not have faith in her being a fair and independent Supreme Court Justice for the American people. With that, I yield the floor.

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

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues in mourning an American hero, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. We called Ruth Bader Ginsburg the ``Notorious RBG,'' and we called her that for a reason. She lived an inspiring and historic life, and her advocacy and public service changed America for the better. As a lawyer and a public servant and as a woman, I owe so much to Justice Ginsburg, and I know I am not alone. I join so many women in this body and across this Nation who will simply not allow for Ruth Bader Ginsburg's legacy to be diminished or disrespected. Today, that means standing up and speaking out about what is at stake right now in this country. We are 8 months into a global pandemic--the worst public health crisis of our lifetime. It has taken 200,000 American souls and cost millions of Americans their jobs and their economic security. Now, President Trump knew that this pandemic was deadly, and he refused to take decisive action early in order to control the virus. He still has no plan to this day, and he has refused to lead. He has continued to put politics over science, and he still insists the virus will just go away. In fact, this pandemic will not just go away, and in Wisconsin and in States across our country, things continue to get worse. As our Nation fights this unprecedented public health crisis, President Trump continues his efforts, spanning the past 4 years, to sabotage our healthcare system and make it harder for people to get the coverage that they want and that they desperately need. Since the President took office, more and more Americans are going without health insurance with each passing year. More than 6 million American workers have lost access to their employer-sponsored health insurance since the very beginning of this pandemic. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, they have a safety net in place that allows them to sign up for a healthcare plan while they are unemployed. But right now, we should be making it easier, not harder, for people to get healthcare. We should be building on the progress that we made with the Affordable Care Act by providing additional support for the navigators and those who provide enrollment assistance. We should be extending open enrollment and making sure that Americans know that they have options for comprehensive coverage. But, instead, President Trump has doubled down in his support for a Federal lawsuit to eliminate the Affordable Care Act completely, including the protections for millions upon millions of Americans who have preexisting health conditions. And, mind you, a positive test for COVID-19 is a preexisting condition. Let me say that again. During the worst public health crisis of our lifetimes, President Trump and Republicans support a Federal lawsuit to eliminate the Affordable Care Act completely--taking healthcare away from millions of Americans, including those with preexisting conditions. And that, plain and simple, is the Republican healthcare plan--eliminating the Affordable Care Act. If Senate Republicans disregard the very precedent that they set, ignore the fact that there is an election in 6 weeks where many Americans are already voting, and push to fill this Supreme Court vacancy with a judge committed to furthering their anti-healthcare agenda, it will mean the end of the Affordable Care Act and the end of guaranteed protections for people with preexisting health conditions. Just like that, our Nation will be thrust back to a time where the insurance companies wrote the rules, when a cancer diagnosis or diabetes or asthma meant insurance companies could drop the ER coverage, charge astronomical premiums for the coverage or, worse, could decline to cover you at all and leave you with the bill. I have stood in this Chamber and told story after story of Wisconsinites who depend upon the Affordable Care Act and are worried about what a future without it might look like, stories of mothers who lie awake at night wondering how they will be able to afford a lifesaving procedure for a child, and stories of fathers who don't know if they will be able to afford the insulin that a son may need. I have shared my own story. As a 9-year-old, I got sick--really sick. I was hospitalized, but, ultimately, I fully recovered. But then I was denied health insurance for much of my youth because I had been labeled as a child with a preexisting health condition. These stories are real, and there isn't a Senator in this body who hasn't heard one or dozens or hundreds of stories just like this from their own constituents. I implore my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to listen to your constituents now. Justice Ginsburg was one of the deciding votes to save healthcare each time it had been challenged in the Supreme Court. She was one of the deciding votes on case after case threatening a woman's right to make her own healthcare decisions about her own body. Justice Ginsburg was protecting our healthcare and women's reproductive freedom, and she bore the weight of that for the last years of her life through her own battles with cancer. She fought for as long as she could because she knew what was at stake. Justice Ginsburg has earned the right to rest now, and my deepest condolences go out to her children, her grandchildren, her family, and her friends for their loss. I urge my Republican colleagues not to diminish her tremendous contributions to our Nation and not to disrespect her decades of service by casting aside her dying wishes and their own precedent in forcing through a nomination with only 42 days before the election. I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, instead of suing in court to overturn the Affordable Care Act, to work with us on a real healthcare plan, and work with us to protect quality, affordable healthcare that America's families need. That is why we are here. My promise today to my constituents and my colleagues is that I will not stop fighting to save healthcare for millions of Americans. This is the fight that brought me to public service in the first place, and I will not stop now. I will keep working to protect access to quality, affordable healthcare for all, and I will keep fighting on behalf of the many, many Wisconsinites who depend on it I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, President Trump's response to this pandemic has been a failure of leadership. So we are here today to provide leadership in the Senate to do what the Trump administration has failed to do. In April, with my good friend Senator Murphy from Connecticut, the two of us introduced legislation called the Medical Supply Transparency and Delivery Act. That act would force President Trump to take action and scale up American production of things like test kits, swabs, reagents, personal protective equipment, and the medical equipment needed at the local level to address the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in our country. Three months later, States still do not have the supplies they need. Now more than 3.8 million Americans have been infected with the coronavirus, and, tragically, over 141,000 people have died in our country. For 3 months, our legislation has been in the majority leader's legislative graveyard. Since this public health crisis started, the Trump administration has had no national testing plan, and they have never had a plan to provide States with the testing supplies they need to combat this pandemic. As a matter of fact, last month, the President said we needed to slow down testing, and, this weekend, as President Trump once again said the coronavirus would disappear, there were reports that the White House is trying to block Federal funding for States to conduct testing and contact tracing. President Trump has not only abandoned each and every one of our States, he has also turned his back on frontline healthcare workers, who continue to face shortages of personal protective equipment, including gloves, gowns, face shields, and masks. The Trump administration has created absolute chaos in the medical supply chain, leaving healthcare workers at hospitals and long-term care facilities at the forefront of this crisis to fend for themselves, rationing the scarce personal protective equipment that has been provided to them. In fact, just a couple of weeks ago, Vice President Mike Pence, who was put in charge of our pandemic response, said the administration will be issuing guidance encouraging healthcare workers to reuse personal protective equipment. This is the same Vice President who declared that the United States would ``have this coronavirus pandemic behind us'' by Memorial Day weekend. He was tragically wrong, and this White House continues to play catchup on a pandemic and a virus that is spreading faster than ever. The person whom President Trump put in charge of our medical supply chain was his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Jared Kushner predicted in April that by June we would be back to normal and that in July we would be ``rocking again.'' It is July. It is July, and this is where we are. Last Thursday, America had its highest number of new coronavirus cases in 1 day. And in my home State of Wisconsin, we had our highest case count ever yesterday--yesterday--and we have many hospitals across my State with less than a week's supply of face shields, goggles, gowns, paper medical masks, and N95 masks. This public health crisis has not disappeared. We are not back to normal, and we are not ``rocking again.'' The fact is, President Trump has failed to lead, and this White House has taken us in a wrong direction in our fight against this pandemic. New coronavirus cases are rising in the States that we work for, which means we need more testing supplies, more testing, and more personal protective equipment for our workers. The question this Senate needs to answer is whether we are going to let this President continue to take our country in the wrong direction, or are we going to lead and do what we all know needs to be done? Not one of my Senate colleagues can make an honest case that their State has everything it needs to fight this pandemic. In Wisconsin, we have been shortchanged by this administration. They have failed to provide adequate supplies for our State's clinical and private labs, paralyzing our ability to expand testing to the levels we need. In some cases, what we have received from the Trump administration were unsuitable and unusable testing supplies--foam applicators that cannot be used for swabs and saline tubes that were too short to transport swabs used in the majority of COVID-19 tests. In addition, the majority of labs conducting COVID-19 tests in Wisconsin are clinical or private labs. These labs cannot access resources from the administration and are essentially being told to ``figure it out.'' Over 80 Wisconsin labs that are currently performing tests do not have access to a consistent supply of reagent. We are not alone. States across the country have been abandoned by the Trump administration. They have been forced to go this alone, while President Trump has tried to pass off responsibility for his own failures. Every single one of us knows that our States need more resources and supplies so we can ramp up testing, identify those who are infected, isolate positive cases, and safely trace all contacts so that the spread of this virus can finally be contained. We all know that President Trump's broken supply chain has been a failure, and my legislation with Senator Murphy, supported by 46 Democrats, will help fix it. In order to put people back to work and safely reopen businesses and schools, we need both a national testing plan and the supplies to implement it. This is true in Wisconsin and every other State in our Nation. Our legislation will help respond to this public health crisis and prepare for the future by mobilizing a Federal response to increase our national production of the testing and medical supplies we need at the State and local level. Specifically, the bill will provide critical oversight of the distribution of medical supplies and put an expert in charge to oversee COVID-19 equipment production and delivery so we know we are putting science and facts over politics and private distributor profits when it comes to responding to this pandemic. Finally, our legislation unlocks the full authority and power of the Defense Production Act so that we can produce and deliver tests, testing supplies, personal protective equipment, and medical equipment that we need to take on this pandemic, treat patients, protect workers, open businesses and schools, and save lives. My friends on the other side of the aisle have a choice: They can continue to ignore President Trump's failure to respond to this public health crisis, knowing full well that until we confront it in the bold and effective way that we should, we will not solve our economic crisis, or they can choose to liberate themselves from this failure and support a solution that will serve the people who sent us here to work for them. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe, as this Vice President does, that this pandemic is behind us, then object. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe, as Jared Kushner does, that we are rocking again in July, then object. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe, as President Trump does, that the coronavirus will just magically disappear, well, then, object. If you oppose the failures of this President and this administration in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, then I ask for your vote to pass the Medical Supply Transparency and Delivery Act today. So I ask unanimous consent that the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee be discharged and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 3627, the Medical Supply Transparency and Delivery Act. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President.

Ms. BALDWIN. I am, of course, very disappointed that we cannot move this forward. I want to respond to a couple of the comments made by my colleagues from the State of Wisconsin, the chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. It is July. It is July, and cases are rising. Action was not taken in February, March, April, May, June, or so far in this month of July. We had more than fair warning that we had shortages of masks and gloves and gowns and face shields and testing swabs and testing media and reagents, and yet it is July. As I said earlier, yesterday Wisconsin announced the most cases positive for coronavirus in a single day that we have seen since the pandemic began. As we strive to reopen our economy, the President exhorts all schools to hold 5-day-a-week, in-person classes. We know that the demand for testing and the demand for masks will only increase exponentially--the need to keep workers safe as they return to work and the need to keep customers safe as they enter and engage in commerce. To say that this needed to happen back in February is an understatement. I am pleased that my colleague has held hearings, but this bill was filed in April when it became apparent that the President was not going to act. This bill has been available for committee review since April. The House passed many elements of the Medical Supply Transparency and Delivery Act in their Heroes Act, which they passed 2 months ago. I just ask, where would we be today had this been put into law? There has been time to review. There has been time to study. But it is past time to pass the Medical Supply Transparency and Delivery Act. I hope we can create another opportunity for the Senate to act on this in the days to come because it is so overdue. I want to again thank my colleagues who joined me on the floor this afternoon--my coauthor, Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut; my colleague from Michigan, Debbie Stabenow; and my colleague from Ohio, Senator Sherrod Brown; and the 45 other Members of the U.S. Senate who have joined me in sponsoring this bill. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I want to also join in commending Senators Murray, Schumer, and Hassan. I am proud to be a part of this effort to make sure that children, from early childhood education to lifelong learning, are able to continue and not fall behind. It is critical that we act on this legislation. I rise to speak to another measure that has gone undebated in this body. It underlies the reopening of our economy, including K-12 education and many other activities. In fact, I started working on this legislation with Senator Duckworth when it was only essential workers who were reporting to work every day, but now, as we reopen, it is so required. As our Nation battles an ongoing and deadly pandemic, thousands of American workers have been on the job from the start, keeping our economy running and keeping people safe. They are healthcare workers, food service and grocery store workers, warehouse workers, transportation workers, and all those working on the frontlines every day to confront this pandemic. Today, even as coronavirus cases continue to rise, many States have already reopened businesses and restaurants, calling more and more people back to work to serve their community. More than 125,000 Americans, including tens of thousands of frontline workers, have died, and these numbers are rising every single day. Yet there is no Federal enforceable standard in place to protect American workers from getting infected with or spreading COVID-19. I have heard from a nurse in Wisconsin who is having to ration personal protective equipment, or PPE, and wear the same mask for 3 weeks or longer. I have heard from a grocery store worker in Racine who says their store still lacks basic protections like protective plexiglass partitions. I have heard from a meatpacking plant worker in Green Bay, WI, who still has to stand shoulder to shoulder with colleagues on the plant floor rather than standing 6 feet apart. The lack of basic protections are putting Wisconsin workers at risk. I have repeatedly called on the Trump administration to take action. The Department of Labor and OSHA, the agency in charge of protecting workplace safety and health, need to establish protections that aren't voluntary guidance but are mandatory standards. OSHA has the authority to issue an emergency temporary standard if employees are exposed to grave danger from new hazards, but this administration has done nothing but recommend voluntary guidelines to workplaces. Voluntary recommendations are not binding, and OSHA currently has no enforceable standard to protect workers from airborne infectious diseases, leaving the Nation's workers at an elevated risk of exposure to the coronavirus. Voluntary compliance is not enough when hundreds of thousands of American lives are on the line. Now, some businesses are voluntarily making the necessary investments to keep their workers safe, but without a mandatory Federal requirement, businesses doing the right thing are left at a comparative disadvantage. We cannot combat this pandemic if we do not take immediate action to protect workers. Months ago, as I said, I introduced legislation with Senator Duckworth to protect U.S. workers from COVID-19 in response to disturbing and widespread reports of unsafe workplaces leading to preventable illnesses and deaths. The COVID-19 Every Worker Protection Act would require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to issue emergency temporary standards that establish a legal obligation for all workplaces to implement comprehensive infectious disease exposure control plans and keep workers safe during the COVID-19 pandemic. This legislation passed the House of Representatives more than 6 weeks ago as part of the HEROES Act, but Leader McConnell has buried this bill in his legislative graveyard. This legislation is the single best way to require all workplaces to protect the health and safety of their workers and to prevent additional outbreaks and further spread of the coronavirus. It is not enough just to say ``thank you'' and label our frontline workers heroes. We need to create a safe workplace so that these heroes can continue to do their heroic work. Congress can take immediate action right now to require workplaces and employers to put enforceable standards in place to protect their workers. We can and we should do more in this country to do right by our workers. That is why I am asking right now for unanimous consent to pass my COVID-19 Every Worker Protection Act. I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration of S. 3677, the COVID-19 Every Worker Protection Act of 2020; that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I am very disappointed. I think this is one of the most critical actions that our country could take in the face of this pandemic that has created so much havoc in our economy and has also has taken too many precious souls from us. I would state this on examination of this bill: It is not, in fact, a one-size-fits-all. If there is any agency anywhere that has the wherewithal to promulgate an emergency temporary standard, and, ultimately, after 24 months a permanent standard, it is the Department of Labor and its Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The failure of leadership that this administration--as in OSHA--is not doing its job is unfathomable to me. But I believe that it sits in the best position to issue an emergency temporary standard and protect our workers and customers and students and patients who necessarily interact with these workers. I am disappointed. But, again, we will continue to press this issue until every worker does have these protections. I yield the floor.