Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I agree with my colleague that the SBIR Program and the STTR Program are critical to our American small businesses. It offers them incredible opportunities to develop technology important for our Nation. I also agree with my colleague that it is important we prevent critical national security technology developed by the programs from being acquired by China and Russia. I do point out that if you look at the COMPETES Act, there are safeguards to prevent our foreign adversaries from acquiring sensitive technology--and not just China and Russia but all foreign countries of concern, including Iran and North Korea. This effort builds on section 223 of the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act that provides protection and requires disclosure to guard against foreign influence on federally funded research and development. I am going to support the motion to instruct and work with my colleague so we can develop clear language and make it clear that the technology developed by the SBIR Program and STTR Program are protected against being taken into China and Russia. I look forward to working with my colleague. I support the motion. Vote on Motion

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing April as National Minority Health Month. For over 35 years, commemorating National Minority Health Month every April has provided us the opportunity to celebrate the progress we have made in addressing health disparities and recommit to achieving health equity. I thank my colleagues, especially Senator Scott of South Carolina, for working with me to recognize this occasion formally through a Senate resolution. Minority groups now make up more the 40 percent of the American population, and that number will continue to rise. Health disparities persist among racial and ethnic minorities. These disparities are plainly visible if we examine the mental health crisis or diseases such as diabetes and asthma. Adults and children across all groups continue to experience increased behavioral health issues, but the burden on minority populations is heaviest. For instance, for American Indian and Alaska Native adults the death rate from suicide is about 20 percent higher than non-Hispanic White population. In 2019, suicide was the leading and second leading cause of death for Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders and African-Americans aged 15 to 24 respectively. High school-aged Asian American males were 30 percent more likely to consider attempting suicide than non-Hispanic White male students were. This is why I continue to work with my colleagues in the Senate Finance Committee to improve access to behavioral healthcare for everyone. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues in the Senate to get the bipartisan package signed into law and am proud to continue my work to improve behavioral health, especially through increased telehealth access. More than 30 million Americans live with diabetes, but African- Americans are twice as likely and Hispanics are over 1.3 times as likely to die from diabetes as non-Hispanic Whites are. African- Americans are also over three times more likely to suffer from diabetes-related end-stage renal disease than non-Hispanic Whites are. African-Americans and Hispanics are also at higher risk of having other related complications, such as the need for lower extremity amputations. Asthma is another disease that disproportionately harms African- American, Hispanic, and American Indian and Alaska Native peoples. These groups have the highest asthma rates, hospitalizations, and deaths. For example, African-Americans are nearly 1.5 times more likely to have asthma than non-Hispanic White Americans and 5 times more likely to visit the emergency room due to asthma. Social determinants of health such as access to transportation, education, housing, and income play a key role in health and well- being. According to the Healthy Baltimore 2020 report, the discrepancy in life expectancy between higher-income and lower-income neighborhoods within the city is as high as 20 years--20 years based on one's Zip code. That is unconscionable. To tackle health inequity, we must understand its underlying causes. I am proud of the work that the National Institutes of Health--NIH-- based in Maryland, and NIH's National Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities--NIMHD--are doing to advance the field of scientific research into health disparities. The evidence-based research that NIMHD invests in at institutions throughout the country is expanding the scientific knowledge base and informing practice and policy to reduce health disparities. Some recent work of NIMHD has focused on the prevention, treatment, and management of comorbid chronic diseases, as well as COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy within communities of color. COVID-19 has disproportionately affected communities of color, particularly African-Americans, Hispanic Americans, and American Indian or Alaska Native people, who are at an increased risk of getting sick, having more severe illness, and dying from COVID-19. This is why I have fought for additional outreach and better data to close this gap. As part of that effort, Senator Menendez and I introduced our legislation, the COVID-19 Health Disparities Action Act, which would support targeted and culturally competent public awareness campaigns about COVID-19 vaccines and preventive measures such as masking and social distancing. I am glad to see NIMHD also targeting these issues through the theme of this year's National Minority Health Month, ``Give Your Community a Boost!'' which focuses on the continued importance of COVID-19 vaccination, including boosters, as one of the most effective ways to protect communities from COVID-19. Accessible and affordable health coverage is key to addressing health inequities. I was proud to help pass the Affordable Care Act--ACA-- which expanded health coverage to millions of Americans across the country. The American Rescue Plan built on the success of the ACA and expanded care to an additional 5.8 million Americans including 181,000 Marylanders. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to build on this progress. As we recognize April as National Minority Health Month, let us recommit ourselves to ensuring all Americans have access to affordable, high-quality healthcare and renew our pledge to do everything possible to eliminate health disparities and ultimately achieve health equity for all.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about two of the Federal government's most important innovation programs: the Small Business Innovation Research program, also known as the SBIR, and the Small Business Technology Transfer program, or STTR for short. It is very appropriate we are having this discussion as we are about to go into conference in regards to legislation that affects America's competitiveness. The SBIR and the STTR program represent the best of government industry partnerships. The programs harness the creativity and ingenuity of America's entrepreneurs and innovators, solve the most pressing public health and national security challenges of our time. The programs are also primed to help our Nation rebuild our domestic production capacity, to reduce our reliance on foreign supply chains on critical products, and reduce costs for the American people. I would like to remind my colleagues that fighting inflation and rebuilding our domestic manufacturing capacity are inextricably linked. When factories close, when products sit in shipping containers in ports, when production capacity decreases due to sick employees, and when products take longer to get from the warehouse to the store, prices go up. I have no doubt that every Senator has heard from businesses in all sectors of the economy about solving this critical issue. According to a recent survey the National Federation of Independent Business conducted, more than half of all small business owners reported a significant impact due to supply chain disruptions. Thirty percent reported that the disruptions were causing a ``moderate impact,'' and 14 percent reported a ``mild impact.'' Only 5 percent of those surveyed reported that they were unaffected by the disruptions. Of the small business owners affected by disruptions, 80 percent reported that the disruptions have caused them to miss out on business opportunities. I am very pleased to hear that President Biden announced during his State of the Union address that rebuilding America's domestic production capacity is central to his administration's plan to fight inflation and keep our Nation secure. SBIR and STTR are two of the best tools in the Federal government's toolkit to achieve our goal. Congress created the SBIR in 1982 to increase the participation of small businesses and Federally funded research and development opportunities in areas ranging from clean energy to advanced manufacturing. Under the program, Federal agencies that budget at least $100 million annually for outside research must allocate a portion--3.2 percent since fiscal year 2017--to support R&D and small businesses. There are 11 Federal agencies and departments currently in the program, including the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, Department of Education, and Health and Human Services. The program awards funds in three phases: Phase 1 awards are worth up to $225,000 and may be used to conduct a feasibility study to determine an idea's scientific and commercial promise. Phase 2 awards up to $1.5 million and may be used to conduct further R&D on the feasibility of turning an idea into a commercial product. And phase 3 does not involve an award of funds, but denotes that an idea is ready to move from the laboratory to the marketplace. During the commercialization phase, small businesses must raise funding from the private sector or secure non-SBIR Federal funds. Congress created the STTR program in 1992. While the program is similar to the SBIR in structure, utilizing a similar three-phase progression, the STTR awards go to small businesses engaging in collaborative R&D with Federal labs, as well as nonprofit educational and scientific institutions. The program requires Federal agencies and departments to spend at least $1 billion on outside research to allocate at least 0.45 percent of the funds to STTR opportunities. Most people may not be familiar with SBIR or STTR, but they definitely recognize the products and companies in the programs that it helped create. Sonicare Electric toothbrush, iRobot, Lasik eye surgery, all received SBIR/STTR funding when they were startups. Qualcomm, which makes computer chips, semiconductors, and other technologies critical to our national communication infrastructure, also received funding from these programs. Progeny Systems, a small business based in Manassas, VA, received more than 300 SBIR and STTR awards to conduct research over a 20-year period. Progeny's research produced technology that drastically improves the Navy's torpedo capacity. The company is now the sole supplier of torpedos to the Navy; and, yes, it is still a small business. This is another benefit of these programs: They expand and diversify the supplier base from which the Federal agencies source goods and services, increasing competition and investment in high-growth sectors, which reduce costs over time. On the manufacturing front, several agencies, including NASA and the Department of Defense, are currently funding research on advanced manufacturing techniques, such as 3D printing and glass that can handle temperatures as high as 900 degrees, which would revolutionize our ability to monitor nuclear reactors and power plant furnaces to prevent accidents. Simply put, SBIR and STTR are invaluable to our national security, and we should fund these programs adequately to rebuild our domestic supply chain. Unfortunately, authority for these critical programs will expire at the end of September unless Congress acts to extend them. The House and Senate will go to conference soon on America COMPETES Act, which includes a 5-year extension of SBIR and STTR. I urge all my colleagues, especially those who will be conferees, to support this critical provision. The junior Senator from Iowa has submitted a motion to instruct conferees to couple this effort to extend the SBIR program and the STTR program by 5 years with authorizing language to prevent China and Russia from acquiring critical national security technology developed by the program. I agree with the Senator that the United States needs to safeguard technologies from being compromised and stolen, and I am pleased that the House Competes Act bill includes safeguards to prevent our adversaries from affecting our innovation--not just China and Russia, but all foreign countries of concern, including Iran and North Korea. This effort builds off of section 223 of the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act that provides protections and requires disclosure to guard against foreign influence on Federally funded research and development. So I will support the motion the Senator from Iowa will make; but we must recognize that if we are able to compete with China and Russia, extending the authorization for SBIR and STTR are critical. I hope she will work with me to keep this important program from shutting its doors on September 30. I would like to add that this issue is very important to my constituents in Maryland. Our State ranks number one in the Nation in R&D spending due to the presence of Federal and academic research institutions such as the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Johns Hopkins University, and the University of Maryland. I have had many discussions with State government officials and leading scientists in Maryland who have told me that one of the most sensible steps we can take to improve the SBIR and STTR program were to make these programs permanent. The research SBIR and STTR funds often continues for several years before producing a product ready to go to the market. Researchers need to know that these programs will not disappear in the middle of years-long research projects. It is our responsibility to make sure that we act timely so that there is no lapse in these programs or reduced funding that is critically needed for these programs' success. Any such action would be shortsighted and would have a devastating impact on small businesses engaged in cutting-edge research Nationwide. Reducing the size of these programs or allowing them to lapse altogether would hinder our efforts to restore the production of critical products. I recently convened a hearing of the Senate Small Business Committee to examine the impacts of supply chain disruptions on small businesses. One of our witnesses, Dr. Sridhar Kota, who leads an organization that advocates for increased public and private sector investment in America's manufacturing sector, called the SBIR and the STTR ``one of the really good tools in the toolbox'' and urged the committee to strengthen the programs to support even more researchers. I could not agree more. Instead of leaving the researchers who are inventing the tools that will power the economy of the future guessing about the SBIR and STTR, we in Congress have an opportunity--and I would say an obligation--to reauthorize these programs before they expire in September. We should also make them permanent, which both the Pentagon and NASA have urged us to do. This is in our national security interest, as well as our economic interest and fairness to small businesses. Arthur C. Clarke wrote: New ideas pass through three periods: (1) It can't be done. (2) It probably can be done, but it's not worth doing. (3) I knew it was a good idea all along. The SBIR and the STTR programs help visionary entrepreneurs get through one and two to reach three. Getting to three makes America stronger and more prosperous. Let us make sure that we act in time. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as Lady Bird Johnson said, ``The environment is where we all meet, where we all have a mutual interest; it is the one thing all of us share.'' This quote from when she served as First Lady of the United States during President Lyndon Baines Johnson's time in office, from 1963 to 1969, still resonates with us today as we commemorate Earth Day 2022 and reflect on our relationship with nature and the world we share with each of us every day. April 22, 1970, marked the first annual Earth Day, which led to the formation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--the Agency that is responsible for implementing environmental regulations and standards. We have made great strides in protecting the environment and public health through the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Endangered Species Act, but the data and science surrounding the harmful effects of climate change are alarming. Climate change is harming our ecosystems, waterways, forests, wildlife, and our general environment. This year's sustainable development goals theme and call to action is ``Invest in Our Planet.'' The question for climate action is no longer ``if'' or ``when'' but ``how much?'' if we want to have a healthy, habitable Earth. Strong policies that protect our water resources, fisheries, and wildlife and address the challenges of climate change are a top priority of mine in my role as a member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. I applaud President Biden for setting forth ambitious but attainable climate-friendly goals, driven by science, to help preserve the health and safety of our planet and the public. I applaud President Biden's Executive actions in January of 2021 to reverse steps President Trump took that weakened Federal protections under the Endangered Species Act. I applaud President Biden's commitment to conserving 30 percent of America's lands and oceans by 2030, also known as the America the Beautiful Initiative. With the understanding that we need to meet the moment on climate change and preserve our planet, Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which President Biden signed into law last November. This historic legislation serves as a significant downpayment on our future as we seek to strengthen resiliency and mitigation measures against flooding and sea level rise; shift towards greener, cleaner energy and technology; and form meaningful habits to clean up the world around us by recycling, composting, and disposing of waste products properly. The threat of sea level rise and warming temperatures is already detrimental to our coastlines and ecosystems, especially along the Chesapeake Bay. With numerous and successful restoration efforts underway, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act authorizes an additional $238 million to the Chesapeake Bay Program to make even bigger reductions in nutrient pollution to improve water quality in the surrounding tributaries. In partnership with local jurisdictions, stakeholders, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the bipartisan infrastructure act will deliver $37.5 million in Federal funding for the Mid-Chesapeake Bay Island Ecosystem Restoration Project. The purpose of the project is to rebuild the declining James and Barren Islands in Dorchester County and provide a substantial increase of habitat for a variety of fish and wildlife species by repurposing dredged material from the shipping channels for the Port of Baltimore. This is beneficial use of dredged material to keep our channels at the necessary depth for commerce but do it in a way that restores our environment. Wetlands provide natural flood control solutions as climate change brings increasingly frequent and severe weather events. We only have one planet, which is why every decision and every failure to act matters. I would like to thank our Federal workforce this Earth Day for its efforts to maximize this window for action on climate and environmental justice. The Biden administration has directed each Federal Agency to take strong action when it comes to dealing with our climate and environmental justice. Many civil servants are working around the clock to promulgate rules, strategy documents, and much, much more. For example, White House officials this month announced equity action plans for more than 90 Federal Agencies designed to combat systemic barriers to opportunities in underserved communities. Each day of COP26 U.N. Climate Change Conference in Glasgow explored a new topic. Our Senate delegation had an opportunity to attend on the day that was devoted toward Nature Day. I mention that because our nature depends upon us dealing with the climate agenda. I would just call to my colleagues' attention the series that is hosted by former President Barack Obama, ``Our Great National Parks.'' Take a look at how important it is in preserving our environment for the species around us, which affects not only their ability to live but our ability to live. The month of April represents the opportunity to celebrate other related environmental and nature-focused holidays, such as Arbor Day, which falls on April 29 this year. My home State commemorated Maryland Arbor Day at the beginning of the month, on April 9. This year, we celebrate the 150th anniversary of Arbor Day. The goal of Arbor Day is to celebrate nature within our communities by organizing tree planting or trash and litter cleanups. As President Franklin Delano Roosevelt remarked, ``A nation that destroys its soil destroys itself. Forests are the lungs of our land, purifying the air and giving fresh strength to our people.'' The bipartisan infrastructure law also provides $275 million grant funding for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Post-Consumer Materials Management Infrastructure Grant Program, which the Save Our Seas 2.0 Act established. This program will help prevent plastic waste from entering our environment in the first place. The program will provide grants to States to improve local waste management systems, including municipal recycling programs, and to improve postconsumer materials management and infrastructure to reduce plastic waste in our waterways and oceans, ultimately protecting our planet. I agree with Paul Hawken, who said this in a commencement address at the University of Portland in 2009: At present, we are stealing the future, selling it in the present, and calling it gross domestic product. We can just as easily have an economy that is based on healing the future instead of stealing it. We can either create assets for the future or take the assets of the future. One is called restoration and the other [is called] exploitation. And whenever we exploit the earth we exploit people and cause untold suffering. Working for the earth is not a way to get rich, it is a way to be rich. Protecting our planet is a collective and ongoing effort. While we still have much to do, I am encouraged by the legislative and administrative progress we have made so far. I urge my colleagues to take the next step and pass the Build Back Better Act--transformative legislation for a clean energy economy. This Earth Day, let us heed Paul Hawken's comments: ``Working for the earth is not a way to get rich, it is a way to be rich.'' With that, Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise today in strong support of Judge Jackson to be the 116th Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. As a Senator, one of the most important responsibilities I have under the Constitution is whether to provide my consent to a President's nomination to the Supreme Court, the highest Court in our land. The Framers carefully designed our Constitution using an intricate system of checks and balances. The Framers designed the third branch of government, the judiciary, to be an independent branch from the political branches of government: the legislature and the executive branch. Judges were given the unusual protection--unlike Congress and the President--to have lifetime tenure and to hold their offices during good behavior. Judges, therefore, do not have to fear retribution or loss of their office or diminution of their paycheck if they make an unpopular decision. So while the Supreme Court must show a healthy respect for the other coequal branches of government, it must, at the same time, preserve its own independence and ultimately interpret the laws and Constitution of the United States. A critical part of the Supreme Court's role is to preserve and protect the Constitution and to make sure that all Americans are treated equally under the law. The marble entrance of the Supreme Court has etched above it the promise of equal justice under the law for all persons who enter. The Supreme Court must vigorously uphold the civil rights and civil liberties of all Americans and pay special attention to safeguarding and enforcing the constitutional rights guaranteed in our system of government. As we know from our history, the Supreme Court has not always protected all Americans and, indeed, in the past has treated some Americans as less equal than others, simply due to their race, religion, or gender, among other factors. So let us remember the preamble to the Constitution, which declares that ``We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice''--it is certainly not a perfect union, but I do believe in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that ``the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.'' Americans know that the Supreme Court makes profound decisions every day that impact the lives of people across this country. The Supreme Court regularly tackles so many of the controversial issues of the day that involve issues such as voting rights, criminal justice, labor law rights, environmental protection, and many, many more. Turning now specifically to Judge Jackson's nomination, she would replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Court, who, fittingly, she had clerked for after graduating from law school. Judge Jackson has an extremely impressive background and legal credentials and now sits as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, often called the Nation's second highest court. The American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary gave Judge Jackson a unanimously ``Well Qualified'' rating for the Supreme Court, which is its highest rating. The committee notes that to receive this highest rating: A Supreme Court nominee must be a preeminent member of the legal profession, have outstanding legal ability and exceptional breadth of experience, and meet the very highest standards of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament. Judge Jackson passed all these tests with flying colors during her Senate confirmation process. I had the privilege of chairing Judge Jackson's first Senate confirmation hearing in 2009, when President Obama nominated her to serve on the U.S. Sentencing Commission. I then had the opportunity to visit with Judge Jackson earlier this month, prior to her confirmation hearing. It was a real pleasure to speak with her. I am familiar with her background and many of her rulings. She is also a former Maryland resident. We had much to talk about, as she had many connections to my State. Her brother served both as an infantryman and officer in the Maryland Army National Guard, during which he was twice deployed overseas; and he also served as an undercover narcotics recovery officer in the Baltimore City Police Department. Judge Jackson is eminently qualified. In our meeting, we talked about her personal experience and her commitment to equal justice under the law, especially for those who have had difficulty accessing our legal system. She discussed her work as a public defender and providing defense free of charge to the most vulnerable members of our society. In this work, Judge Jackson carried out the mandate of the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution, which provides that: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial . . . and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. She talked about her outreach to our next generation, in terms of talking to students in high school and college, as well as our next generation of lawyers in law school. I am often reminded of the words of my dear friend, the late Congressman Elijah Cummings of Baltimore, that ``our children are the living messages we send to a future we will never see.'' I do think Judge Jackson is having an important and ongoing conversation about democracy with our students. I frankly think she will be a powerful role model for so many who will follow in her footsteps--in particular, women and women of color who see Judge Jackson break yet another barrier and glass ceiling at the Supreme Court. These students can believe that, yes, they belong even in the highest Court in the land and the most elite corridors of power in our Nation's Capital. We discussed the importance of an independent judicial branch of government and protecting the rights of individuals against powerful special interests that would abuse their power. I was impressed with Judge Jackson throughout our conversation. Judge Jackson exemplifies the American story and experience. Her parents were public schoolteachers, and Judge Jackson said she was inspired to go into law by watching her father study when he was in law school. Raised in Miami, FL, she attended Florida public schools. She then went on to earn her BA magna cum laude from Harvard University and, later, her JD cum laude from Harvard Law School. She went on to clerk for three different Federal judges: Judge Patti Saris in the District of Massachusetts, Judge Bruce Selya of the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and then Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court of the United States. After working in private practice, she joined the U.S. Sentencing Commission as an assistant special counsel before serving as an assistant Federal public defender in Washington. Judge Jackson then returned to private practice again before being nominated in 2009 by President Obama to serve as a commissioner and, later, vice chair of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. As I noted earlier, I had the privilege to chair this confirmation hearing for Judge Jackson, after which she was unanimously confirmed by voice vote in the Senate in 2010. In this role, I noted that Judge Jackson often worked to find common ground with her fellow commissioners, who brought very different backgrounds and perspectives to the Commission. In particular, Judge Jackson made significant strides to make our criminal justice system and sentencing policy more fair and just. For example, she worked on a bipartisan basis to effectively implement the Fair Sentencing Act, which addressed the 100-to-1 disparity in the law regarding crack cocaine and powder cocaine, which had led to disproportionate and discriminatory treatment of minorities in our criminal justice system. I am hopeful that Judge Jackson can use these same skills of finding common ground with individuals from different backgrounds and build a consensus as a Justice on the Supreme Court. In 2013, President Obama nominated Judge Jackson to serve as the U.S. district judge for the District of Columbia, and again, the Senate unanimously confirmed her nomination by voice vote. As a district court judge, Judge Jackson wrote more than 500 opinions and considered a wide array of issues that would come before the Supreme Court. She has a real breadth of experience here, including cases involving constitutional, civil rights, and national security issues; administrative issues involving Federal Agencies; environmental issues; criminal law and procedure issues; and matters involving government transparency. On the bench, her record clearly demonstrates that Judge Jackson impartially applies the law and precedent to the facts in a fair and impartial manner, regardless of her own personal views on the subject. Judge Jackson took special care to make sure the parties before her understood her approach to deciding cases, and she issued clearly reasoned decisions. As Judge Jackson said in her confirmation hearing for the district court circuit, When I worked with clients as a defender, ``[m]ost of my clients didn't really understand what had happened to them. [N]o one really explained to them what they were supposed to expect, so they did not know where things might have gone wrong.'' Therefore, as a judge, Judge Jackson said that she will ``take extra time to communicate with'' the parties. ``I speak to them directly and not just to their lawyers. I use their names. I explain every stage of the proceeding because I want them to know what is going on.'' In reviewing her record, I notice that Judge Jackson's analysis and decision making have led her to rule both for and against the government in different cases, both for and against employers and workers, for and against criminal defendants and prosecutors, based on the merits of the case and her application of the law to the facts of that particular case. In her confirmation hearing and written answers to questions for the record, Judge Jackson pledged to support and defend the Constitution and further pledged to rule without fear or favor or prejudice or passion, consistent with her judicial oath. She indicated she understood the limits of the judicial role and the importance of adhering to precedents of the Court. Just last year, President Biden elevated Judge Jackson to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The Senate confirmed Judge Jackson to this position by a bipartisan vote of 53 voting in favor in an evenly divided Senate. In that confirmation hearing, Judge Jackson again stressed the importance of courts having ``a duty of independence from political pressure, meaning that judges must resolve cases and controversies in a manner that is consistent with what the law requires, despite the judge's own personal views of the matter, and this is so even with respect to cases and controversies that pertain to controversial political issues.'' She is committed to carrying out her oath as a judge. She particularly noted that she did not pay attention to who was in the administration when ruling on cases, which is consistent with her case record, ruling both for and against the Trump administration in different cases. Judge Jackson did a superb job during the recent confirmation hearings, as our Presiding Officer knows, and consistently impressed me with her talents. Not only was she eminently qualified--we already knew about her outstanding qualifications; not only was she in command of all the legal subjects--we knew that she would excel in discussing the law and her job as a judge; but her demeanor in the face of repeated and often outrageous assaults by Republican Members of the Senate truly set her apart. She maintained her judicial temperament throughout this week's hearing and showed why she will be a major factor on the Supreme Court. Judge Jackson's confirmation hearing reinforced to me how critical it will be to have her on the Supreme Court. Members of the committee unsuccessfully tried to distort Judge Jackson's sentencing record. The record clearly rebuts these charges, as Judge Jackson's sentences are well within the judicial mainstream, and Judge Jackson often followed the recommendations made by the probation office. The ABA Standing Committee debunked several of these myths when they analyzed Judge Jackson's record as part of their review process before her confirmation hearing. The ABA testified at the hearing: We did speak to various prosecutors and defense counsels for Judge Jackson. . . . None of them felt that she demonstrated bias in any way. . . . One prosecutor said, ``I did not observe any bias, and the Judge was fair to all sides in connection with sentencing in all aspects.'' . . . We asked pointed questions as it related to bias--whether it be to defendants, whether it be to the government, and we found no bias. That was the ABA. In terms of the allegations that Judge Jackson is ``soft on crime,'' the ABA testified: We heard consistently, from not only defense counsel but prosecutors, how unbiased Judge Jackson is. We heard phrases like ``doing things by the books.'' For example, one prosecutor described the sentencing hearing involving a very high profile, sensitive national security matter. What she said was, it was classic Judge Jackson. . . . What really impressed this prosecutor was that after oral argument, Judge Jackson took a recess, went back to [her] chambers, and when she resumed the bench, came out with a sentence that was more in favor of the government. What more impressed the prosecutor was that the Judge's ruling included arguments that had been made both by the defense and [the] prosecutors during oral arguments. It is not as if she came into the hearing with her mind made up. She listened to what counsel on both sides said and came up with a sentence that the prosecution was quite happy with. Several prominent law enforcement organizations support Judge Jackson's nomination. The Fraternal Order of Police wrote: From our analysis of Judge Jackson's record and some of her cases, we believe she has considered the facts and applied the law consistently and fairly on a range of issues. There is little doubt that she has the temperament, intellect, legal experience, and family background to have earned this appointment. We are reassured that, should she be confirmed, she would approach her future cases with an open mind and treat issues related to law enforcement fairly and justly. The International Association of Chiefs of Police supports Judge Jackson's nomination. They wrote: [W]hen the IACP chooses to support an individual, we do not take it lightly, and [we] take into careful consideration their background, experience, and previous opinions issued as they relate to law enforcement and criminal justice issues. . . . During her time as a judge, she has displayed her dedication to ensuring that our communities are safe and that the interests of justice are served. We believe that Judge Jackson's years of experience have shown she has the temperament and qualifications to serve as the next Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. That was the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Judge Jackson has an unusually broad range of support from law enforcement groups, crime victims and survivors, business associations, and civil rights groups. Former DC Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith introduced Judge Jackson at her confirmation hearing. Judge Griffith, a President George W. Bush appointee, vouched for Judge Jackson's ``careful approach, extraordinary judicial understanding, and collegial manner. . . . Judge Jackson has a demonstrated record of excellence, and I believe, based upon her work as a trial judge when I served on the Court of Appeals, that she will adjudicate based on the facts and the law and not [in a] partisan [manner]. Former Fourth Circuit Judge Michael Luttig, a President George H. W. Bush appointee who recently advised Vice President Pence, offered a similar endorsement when he wrote that she is ``eminently qualified to serve on the Supreme Court'' and is ``as highly credentialed and experienced in the law as any nominee in [recent] history.'' Her colleagues have given her the highest ratings. Those who know her best, those who have worked with her, give us all great confidence in her qualifications and ability to serve on the Supreme Court. A group of conservative lawyers--many of whom served in previous Republican administrations--wrote in strong support of Judge Jackson and said: While some of us might differ concerning particular positions she has taken as a judge, we are united in our view that she is exceptionally well-qualified, given her breadth of experience, demonstrated ability, and personal attributes of intellect and character. Indeed, we think that her confirmation on a consensus basis would strengthen the Court and the nation in important ways. It is long past time for the Supreme Court to seat a highly qualified, Black, female attorney as a member. As we strive to provide equal justice under the law to all Americans, she would be only the sixth woman out of 116 Justices to serve on the Supreme Court and only the second woman of color and the first Black woman. A Justice Jackson will bring sorely needed diversity to the Supreme Court, both demographically and professionally. The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights noted: This professional diversity is another critical step in ensuring our courts look more like America. Judge Jackson will be the first justice with any significant criminal defense experience since the retirement of Justice Thurgood Marshall in 1991, and she would be the only Supreme Court justice to have served as a public defender. Public defenders play a [critical] role in our legal system, yet they are vastly underrepresented on the federal bench. At all levels of our judiciary, there are nearly six times as many former prosecutors on the federal bench than former criminal defense lawyers, and just over 5 percent of federal appellate judges have experience as a public defender. . . . Our highest court should reflect the diversity of the legal profession, and Judge Jackson's meaningful experience is greatly needed on our Supreme Court. I believe that Judge Jackson will faithfully uphold her judicial oath, which contains a special provision whereby judges promise to ``administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and the rich.'' I believe she respects the separation of powers and checks and balances in our system and that she is committed to uphold the civil rights and civil liberties of all Americans. I will proudly vote to confirm Judge Jackson so she will become Justice Jackson. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, we are at a critical point in our battle against COVID-19. While we are still losing Americans to the virus, we have reached a stage where most of us are able to resume many of the daily activities we used to regard as normal. But our sustained effort to improve health outcomes and keep our economy on track is running out of funding. Now is the time to act. Over the last 2 years, our communities have taken necessary mitigation measures. Healthcare and frontline workers have given everything they have to care for our loved ones. The Biden administration, with funding provided through the American Rescue Plan, has worked hard to ensure we had the resources necessary to continue to adapt our response to COVID-19. After the peak of the Omicron variant, the reduced COVID-19 transmissions has made it safer to reconnect with friends and family and resume some of the activities we have all missed during the past 2 years. Due to the tireless work of the Biden administration, testing capacity and therapeutics are more available than they have been at any time during the pandemic. Over 81 percent of Americans who are 5 years or older have had at least one COVID-19 vaccination, and nearly 50 percent of Americans who are eligible are fully vaccinated and have had a booster. In Maryland, 91 percent of Marylanders 5 and older have had at least one COVID-19 vaccination shot. Overall, we have made significant strides in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic, but the threat is not over. Many Americans have children who are too young to be vaccinated and are immunocompromised or otherwise at high risk, so they may not be able to resume normal activities. While positivity rates and hospitalizations are decreasing, almost 700 Americans still are dying, on average, each day. Additionally, new variants continue to emerge. Countries across Europe and Asia have seen new spikes in cases due to a more contagious version of Omicron known as BA.2. We could soon see a renewed surge as we are oftentimes only weeks behind rising cases in Europe. This latest subvariant already makes up 35 percent of the cases here in the United States. Fortunately, at this stage, BA.2 appears no more severe than the original Omicron variant. In the United Kingdom, however, as BA.2 increased, children 2 to 11 years old had the highest rate of infections of any group in the country, the younger children. To respond rapidly to emerging variants, we must keep financing pandemic prevention and response needs. The White House and the Department of Health and Human Services have made it clear that at least $22.5 billion of additional funding is necessary to replenish pandemic prevention programs that are nearing completion or have already been depleted. Without these funds, we will have to cut back on critical aspects of the pandemic response. Here are some examples. Our national testing capacity will decline, leaving us vulnerable and less able to detect emerging variants. It will become harder to diagnose infections early enough to take effective treatments. Also, uninsured individuals may no longer be able to access vaccines, tests, and treatments for free. This will cut off a critical support for uninsured individuals and health providers who care for them if they become ill with COVID-19. In addition to testing and acute care, vital COVID-19 research will suffer if we do not provide sufficient funding. Continued development of new medications and vaccines is critical, but without additional funding, research will stop, leaving us potentially vulnerable to a variant resistant to our current arsenal. Specifically, the National Institutes of Health may shut down some of its COVID-19 research. Further, the Food and Drug Administration recently granted an emergency use authorization for a new monoclonal antibody treatment that is effective against the Omicron variant. Without additional funding, however, the Federal Government won't be able to continue ordering the monoclonal antibody treatments, vital therapies for immunocompromised patients, and antiviral pills, all of which are already in short supply. Additional funding is critically important if we want to see the United States continue its leadership role in distributing vaccinations across the world to prevent more and worse variants from taking off and arriving on our shores. I will continue to fight to ensure that we get additional COVID-19 funding. The American Rescue Plan Act demonstrated our ability to pass legislation that quickly ramped up pandemic response efforts and effectively mitigated the negative economic impact of the pandemic. This legislation has been critical in helping individuals and communities respond to the challenges brought on by the pandemic. Local governments have had to provide essential services at an unprecedented level, and they have risen to the occasion without falling into financial ruin. Now is not the time to take the foot off the gas. Restaurants, for example, still need help. The American Rescue Plan created the Restaurant Revitalization Fund, but the $28.6 billion provided to the program was not enough to meet demand. I remain gravely disappointed that the fiscal year 2022 omnibus spending package Congress passed earlier this month did not include additional assistance for restaurants and other hard-hit small businesses. For the last 2 years of the pandemic, nearly all restaurants have been under great strain as they have struggled to keep staff and adapt to the new variants, while facing increased pricing due to supply chain disruptions and inflation. And those have been the restaurants fortunate enough to survive the pandemic. Thousands have closed their doors for good. More than 100,000 restaurants received grants from the Restaurant Revitalization Fund that have helped them keep their doors open, but more than 180,000 restaurants that submitted their applications on time to receive funds--their applications were there--have received no funds at all. That is not fair, and they desperately need our help. If Congress had not acted quickly to replenish the Paycheck Protection Program when it ran out of money weeks after it opened in April 2020--and we did that, by the way, with strong, almost unanimous support, and it was hundreds of billions of dollars that we were short--the program would have been a half-measure, necessary but not sufficient. Instead, we extended the emergency aid needed to meet the crisis we faced, and that is exactly what we need to do again with the Restaurant Revitalization Fund. For the past 2 years plus, I have worked hard to secure vital resources to fight the COVID-19 pandemic and ensure that those who are struggling from the economic effects or emotional toll have the necessary support going forward. I will continue that fight. The novel virus continues to challenge our Nation and the world, so we must be prepared. I urge the Senate to pass necessary additional funding for COVID-19 relief so Americans can continue to face this challenge head-on and prevail. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, this March, as we mark National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month, we must remember those we have lost to colorectal cancer, acknowledge the progress we have made to date to reduce colorectal cancer cases, and renew our commitment to fighting this devastating illness. Since its inception in 2000, National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month has given us the opportunity to raise awareness and remind people of the importance of cancer screening in the early detection and prevention of colorectal cancer. While cases of colorectal cancer have declined, it is still the second leading cause of cancer death among men and women combined in the U.S. This year alone, more than 150,000 Americans will be diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Over 52,000 people will die from the disease. In 2018, 2,597 Marylanders were diagnosed with colorectal cancer, and 982 patients died from it. Colorectal cancer has a disproportionate impact among racial and ethnic minorities, particularly Black Americans, Jews of Eastern European descent, and Indigenous communities. Black men are 22 percent more likely than non-Hispanic White men are, and Black women are 18 percent more likely than non-Hispanic White women to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer. American Indians and Alaska Natives are 10 percent more likely than non-Hispanic White Americans to die of colorectal cancer. Jews of Eastern European decent are two to three times more likely to get colorectal cancer than the greater population. Fortunately, because of early detection and prevention tools, colorectal cancer is among the most preventable of all cancers. Colorectal cancer screenings not only detect the disease in its early stages, but can catch precancerous growths, or polyps, too. When these polyps are found, they can be removed and prevent cancer from occurring. Regular screening saves lives. Over 60 percent of deaths from colorectal cancer could have been prevented with screening, but one in three adults in the U.S. aged 45 to 75 years old is still not getting screened as recommended. Colonoscopies are one of the most effective screening methods for colorectal cancer. That is why I have long worked to increase access to colonoscopies. The Affordable Care Act ensured that Medicare would cover the cost of screening colonoscopies without cost-sharing for most seniors, but the work was not done. Since 2013, I led the Removing Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening Act with Senators Brown, Wicker, and Collins to ensure Medicare beneficiaries would not be charged for a colonoscopy, regardless of whether a polyp or tissue is removed. This legislation was included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. The law decreases barriers to screening by ensuring that seniors do not have to worry about unexpected medical costs if a polyp is detected and removed during a screening colonoscopy. I am also proud of the work Maryland is doing to decrease rates of colorectal cancer. Through the Maryland Colorectal Cancer Control Program, Maryland has used funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention--CDC--and the State's CRF Cancer Prevention Education, Screening, and Treatment Program to promote screening. The program partners with local health departments, community health centers, and various health systems, among other entities. Because of these and other initiatives, 72.5 percent of adults 50 years and older in Maryland were up-to-date with colorectal cancer screenings in 2018, slightly above the Healthy People 2020 target of 70.5 percent. Still, we must do more to ensure younger Americans are aware of their risks of colorectal cancer and its symptoms and get the appropriate screenings to prevent and detect the disease. This year, Fight Colorectal Cancer placed 27,400 blue flags on the National Mall to represent the number of people under 50 expected to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer in 2030. The installation not only raises awareness of the increase in colorectal cancer in this younger population but also serves as a tribute to all those touched by the disease. By 2030, colorectal cancer is projected to be the leading cancer killer for those aged 20 to 49. This is why continued investments in awareness and screening programs and research into effective treatments are so essential. Colorectal cancer research is one of the least funded among different cancers. I am proud of the work that the National Institutes of Health's National Cancer Institute and other Maryland-based research institutions and healthcare providers have done to reduce colorectal cancer rates, but they all need more resources. We have made progress in combatting colorectal cancer, but there is more work for us to do. This is why I will continue to work my colleagues to fight this terrible disease.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I rise to recognize the outstanding leadership of Donald B. Tobin, Esquire, as dean of the University of Maryland Francis Carey King School of Law, following his announcement that he will step down at the end of the 2021-2022 academic year and return to full-time teaching as a member of the Maryland Carey Law faculty. This decision concludes an 8-year chapter in service to the school's 645 students, 176 faculty members, and thousands of alumni. Dean Tobin has been a tireless advocate and instructor who truly treasures the law school community. Donald Tobin has been dean and professor of law at my alma mater, the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law located in Baltimore City, since 2014. Under his leadership, the law school has built upon two centuries of distinguished history to deliver its core academic mission of integrating legal theory and practice, serving as a resource and partner to neighboring communities and training the next generation of excellent lawyers and leaders. As dean, he has risen to meet the unprecedented challenges of the last decade. Donald Tobin grew up in Columbia, MD, and began his career on Capitol Hill, as a professional staff member for my predecessor, the inimitable U.S. Senator Paul Sarbanes. Donald also staffed the Senate Committee on the Budget and the Joint Economic Committee. He worked on the Hill before, during, and after the time he was attending law school at Georgetown University, where he earned his J.D. in 1996. It was here in this Chamber that Donald first contributed to policy at the national level. He went on to serve as a law clerk for the Honorable Francis Murnaghan, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and as an appellate attorney in the Tax Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Donald remains a leading expert on the intersection of tax and campaign finance laws, an area of law more critical to our democracy today than ever before. Donald was professor of law and associate dean for academic affairs and associate dean for faculty at the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law before he decided to come back home to Maryland. Given his wealth of expertise, I am particularly excited for him to rejoin the faculty as a professor in this next phase of his career. Donald has demonstrated an abiding passion for education, scholarship, and the public service mission of the law school. He has wisely invested his time in understanding the needs of the Maryland legal and nonprofit community. And he has fostered a supportive community that provides personalized learning experiences, which empower the school's students to realize countless possible career pathways. Donald has always provided a welcoming presence around the school. He has taught the popular ``Lawyers as Leaders'' class, and he has put his tax law knowledge and Maryland Bar membership to use by working with students in the Low-Income Taxpayer Clinic. The Clinical Law Program makes experiential education a core component of the law school's curriculum, and it makes advancing access to justice a prerequisite for graduation. This program is unique among law schools nationally. The law school requires every student who initially enrolls as a first year, full-time day student to provide legal services to people who are poor or otherwise lack access to justice in order to graduate-- a provision known as the ``Cardin Requirement,'' which I championed. It attracts students who care deeply about their clients and their communities. It is no surprise that students attracted to a law school for its spirit of excellence in public service would choose someone of Donald's character for its leader. He brings that same personal attention to the law school's relationships among its many constituents, the bar, and the surrounding community. Donald's positivity and kind nature were critical to his success throughout a deanship ``book-ended'' by unthinkable events. In the aftermath of the killing of Freddie Gray in the spring of 2015, Donald led efforts to expand the law school's positive impact in the community, bolstering channels to local volunteer opportunities and providing forums for students and faculty to explore the systemic causes that led to Baltimore's unrest and to possible solutions. Donald redoubled the school's efforts to recruit and retain highly qualified and diverse students, while keeping legal education accessible and affordable. Our law firms, judicial benches, and nonprofit leadership should all equitably reflect Maryland's population. Donald's commitment to facilitating an inclusive law school community has brought us closer to this imperative. As a member of the Law School Board of Visitors, I greatly appreciate Donald's support for establishing the Honorable Elijah E. Cummings `76 Scholarship Endowment at the law school in 2019. The scholarship pays apt tribute to our former colleague--another luminary of the Maryland congressional delegation--and to his many contributions to his District and to our Nation as one of our most distinguished alumni. Board of visitors member and former chair Bob Kim--class of 1983--has spearheaded establishing the scholarship, which will support law school students who have an interest in public service, a record of academic excellence, and demonstrated financial need. Toward what would be the end of his time as dean, Donald maintained a cohesive law school community despite the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustained high turnout at virtual versions of beloved events such as the alumni honors banquet and Morris Brown Myerowitz Moot Court Competition evinced this resilience and unity, with alumni volunteers serving as mock judges or interviewers, during a time of social distancing. Even before the global pandemic, Donald took an active role in protecting student health and well-being, instituting Kindness Week to promote student resources and self-care in partnership with the board of visitors. William Butler Yeats wrote, ``Education is not the filling of a pot but the lighting of a fire.'' For over 20 years now, Donald Tobin has been lighting fires among his students, and their glow has brought light to the law school community, the city, our State, and the Nation. I thank him for his tremendous service to the law school's students, faculty, staff and alumni, and I wish him well on this exciting new chapter in his exemplary career.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I reserve the right to object in regard to the Senator from Kentucky's request. Mr. President, first, let me just correct some of the statements that were made. This bill went through the committee. It was voted on in the committee. Amendments were offered in the committee. The Senator from Kentucky was present during the markup in the committee. That is the way legislation should be considered in this body. We are talking about how the Senate can work the way it should? Let the committees function. And that is exactly what we did in regard to the legislation that is on the floor. It went through the regular process. And the Senator's request is despite the fact that the majority leader has said he will allow a vote on the floor and let the Members of the Senate make the decision as to whether they agree or disagree with the arguments made by the author of the amendment. That is how a democracy should work. That is how the legislative process should work. So I am somewhat shocked that the Senator would object to the majority leader's request that would allow the legislation to come to the floor and let the Senate work its will by majority vote. That is what the majority leader said. Let me give you a little bit more history on this. The original Magnitsky bill was originally attached to the PNTR for Russia, and it was aimed solely at the tragic death of Sergei Magnitsky. We wanted to hold those responsible for his death accountable. That is why the language the Senator is referring to was included in the original act. It was aimed at one episode and one set of abusers. It became such a successful tool for diplomacy that, working with Senator McCain, the two of us worked on making it a global bill so that it would apply beyond just Russia and that we could use this to advance American foreign policy. And we worked--and quite frankly, we didn't have the enthusiastic support of the administration because the Senator from Kentucky is right: Administrations like to have their own authority; they don't like Congress to intercede. And on the Magnitsky, we can make recommendations as to who should be considered for sanctions. So it was a major step forward, and we were able to pass Global Magnitsky. In the meantime, President Trump worked with us on this. He was a supporter of using this tool. And he passed an Executive order--signed an Executive order, that included provisions that we asked him to include in the Executive order because we recognized that corruption was the fuel for Mr. Putin and Russia and authoritarian regimes. So we wanted to make sure that we could include corruption. We wanted to make sure that we could include the enablers--those who enabled these human rights abusers to do what they do, and that was included in the Executive order. And we worked with the Trump administration. And we have worked with the Biden administration. And we now have a workable standard. And better than that, as a result of our leadership, we have gotten our countries around the world to conform to our tool. The European Union has passed Global Magnitsky. The UK has passed Global Magnitsky. Canada has passed Global Magnitsky. Japan is considering it as we speak. It is becoming the standard. So from a process point of view, what was passed out of our committee, what was passed out of the House committee, both authorizing committees have agreed on this language, which has been signed off by Treasury so they know they can use it, which has due process in it because we are dealing with property rights. So now let's get to the substance of what the gentleman's amendment would do. The substance of it is that it would not allow us to do what we need to do in regards to Mr. Putin and Russia as a result of his invasion of Ukraine. And the sponsor of this amendment is very clear what he is trying to do. He is trying to take back the current authority under the Executive order and would, therefore, not even be useful at all in regards to going after Mr. Putin. We would be taking a step back. It was just a few days ago that President Zelenskyy asked us to expand the individual sanctions, and that is what is on the floor right now in the majority leader's request, so we can expand it, we can give him the tools he needs, so that we can respond and help the people of Ukraine. That is what is involved here. But with the amendment being offered by the gentleman from Kentucky, we would be moving backwards. We would be doing just the opposite. It would weaken where we are today. So I am really puzzled as to why we can't trust the judgment of the Members of the Senate to make this decision. Let's argue over the 2 hours that the majority leader will give us to argue this point. I look forward to that argument on the floor of the Senate. I already had that argument in our committee. Because the two--the gentleman from Kentucky and I, along with the Presiding Officer, served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. We had this argument in committee. And if I am correct, I believe, the vote was all but one supporting my position. So we have already had this debate where it should take place among the experts. And the gentleman's not satisfied with that. I am at a loss here because I know how important it is for us to move forward to help the people of Ukraine. Every day, we see the bodies on the ground. We see the horrific action by Mr. Putin, and we really want to do everything we can to help the people of Ukraine. The action the majority leader is asking us to take will help the people of Ukraine. And as I understand it, one Senator is going to deny us the opportunity to take a very positive step, to stand up for democracy, and for standing up for the people of Ukraine. I object to the request.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session and vote on the confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 683, the nomination of Julie Rubin, under the previous order.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, reserving the right to object to the request from the Senator from Idaho, it is my understanding that the Senator's modification would not include provisions that were included in the House-passed legislation that modifies the global Magnitsky sanction regime. I just would like to speak for a moment, if I might. There is no question that we stand with the people of Ukraine against the unprovoked attack by Mr. Putin. We are inspired every day by the courage of the Ukrainian people and by their inspirational leader, President Zelenskyy. The United States has shown leadership, and I congratulate the Biden administration. We have led the free world in providing defensive lethal weapons to Ukraine to defend itself. We have provided humanitarian assistance, joining the global community, including dealing with 3 million Ukrainians that are now refugees in other countries and 10 million that have been displaced as a result of Mr. Putin's unprovoked attack. And we have led on sanctions. We have led in getting the global unity to impose sanctions against not just the Russian sectors, but also against individuals. And when Mr. Zelenskyy spoke before the Members of Congress, he specifically mentioned the importance of these sanctions; and he asked us to expand those covered by the sanctions to include the enablers, those that are enabling Mr. Putin--the oligarchs--to be able to fund his aggression against Ukraine. So what did the House send over to us? In their bill, they sent over a global Magnitsky modification. It is identical to legislation that was filed by Senator Portman and myself that included the revocation of PNTR for Russia, along with the global Magnitsky. First and foremost, it removes the sunset that is in the legislation that would sunset this year. Mr. Zelenskyy asked for us to be resolved in being willing to stand up to Mr. Putin, that it would take some time. A clear message is that we remove the sunset on the global Magnitsky statute. And we know how difficult it is to get legislation passed in this body. It also expands the global Magnitsky to include the enablers--exactly what Mr. Zelenskyy asked us to do--those that enabled--the oligarchs that allowed him to be able to finance this. The language that is included in here is very similar to the language that was included in President Trump's Executive order. This is critical legislation. Now, let me just tell you how appropriate it is that it is included in a PNTR bill--because the first Magnitsky sanction bill--and Senator Wyden was very important in getting this done--was included in the original PNTR bill for Russia, and we were able to get it done at that time. We then made it a global Magnitsky, and my partner on that was the late Senator McCain. It has always been bipartisan. My partner now is Senator Wicker. The two of us have joined forces to make sure we get it done now. It is critically important in order to impose banking restrictions on those that are targeted under the global Magnitsky, as well as visa restrictions on being able to travel. How important is it? Ask Mr. Usmanov, who is one of the principal oligarchs to Mr. Putin, who solves Mr. Putin's business problems. Guess how he solves those problems? Well, his yacht has now been confiscated in Germany. That is how important these sanctions are and how we have to move them forward. So, if I understand my colleague's request, it would deny the opportunity for us to act on the global Magnitsky, which Mr. Zelenskyy has specifically asked us to do. We would lose that opportunity. We would be sending this bill back to the House that is not in session, which means there will be a further delay in repealing PNTR for Russia, which is something we need to do now, today. We can get it to the President for signature today under the majority leader's request. And as the majority leader has indicated, I support the energy ban--I support the Russian energy ban. President Biden has already taken steps to do that. And I agree with my colleague from Idaho. I would like to incorporate that in statute, but there is no urgency to do that as there is on repealing PNTR and the global Magnitsky. That is the urgency. That is what we need to get done today. That is what we can get to the President this afternoon under the majority leader's request, and that will be denied if my friend from Idaho's request were granted. So, for all those reasons, I object.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, let me thank the chairman on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for his incredible leadership on this issue and so many others. I want to point out that our committee has already approved this language. This is already approved. This is not something that is new to this body. We have been debating this for some time. It has been the United States and the U.S. Senate that have taken the leadership to provide tools to go after human rights abusers. We were the first to act, but, as a result of our action, Europe has now acted, the UK has acted, and Canada has acted. So we have provided global leadership. It is one of the strongest tools we have against human rights violators, and our No. 1 target today is Mr. Putin and what he has done. So we have a chance to really show our leadership--continued leadership--in this area. I am also encouraged by Senator Crapo's assurances that we are going to try to get this done today. We want to get this bill to the President. We want to have it clear that we reauthorized it in a way that would be effective moving forward. On one last point, if I might, no one knows exactly what happened in the first summit meeting between President Putin and President Trump, but the reports were that probably one of the very first issues that was raised by Mr. Putin was global Magnitsky sanctions, how it is so sensitive to him. A clear message against Mr. Putin is the passage of the reauthorization and, as the chairman said, fine-tuning of the global Magnitsky statute. I hope we can get that done today. I thank my colleagues for their comments. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, before I start my remarks in regard to the 2-year anniversary of the CARES Act, I just want to compliment my colleague from Maryland on his statements in regard to Mr. Putin's aggression in Ukraine. Everything he said I totally concur in--the unity that President Biden has been able to instill not only among our traditional allies but the global community; the strength of our help to the Ukrainian people, the help that we have given in regard to humanitarian relief; and the sanctions that were led by the United States--but we now have global support for many of these sanctions, which are making a difference. This is clearly a battle between good and evil, and I just really wanted to compliment my colleague from Maryland on his statement, one on which I hope all of us agree, and that we can move forward very quickly on the legislation you refer to that passed the House of Representatives that would make it clear that we will not do business with Russia as normal; that we will revoke the favored nation status and normal trade relations; and that we will do what Mr. Zelenskyy has asked us to do, and that is to make it clear that the Magnitsky sanctions, which are individual sanctions imposed against the perpetrators, Mr. Putin and his enablers in Russia, will be maintained with reauthorization of the global Magnitsky statute. I hope we will get to that as early as this week because I agree with my colleague that every day we delay it, in fact, is helping Mr. Putin. We need to make it clear and enact that statute, which, by the way, the Biden administration strongly encourages us to do. CARES Act Mr. President, 2 years ago, the United States declared COVID-19 a national emergency. By then, it was clear that we were experiencing a once-in-a-century pandemic and that preventing the spread of this dangerous virus would require our Nation's greatest collective effort since World War II. Here in the U.S. Congress, we knew that this era- defining challenge would require unprecedented action from the Federal Government to confront the economic and public health crisis created by COVID-19. The pandemic has waxed and waned in the 2 years since then, so opportunities for American families and small business owners to return to their normal lives have come in fits and starts. But one lesson that has remained true through these ups and downs and has been confirmed on multiple occasions through the pandemic is that the U.S. Federal Government can--it must--play a role in solving our Nation's longstanding, difficult, and intractable problems. Let us remember those first few weeks of the pandemic. The vast majority of Americans did not know what to make of the Centers for Disease Control's January report of a novel virus, the coronavirus identified abroad. By mid-February, small business owners were already feeling the effects of reduced revenues. By the end of February, the U.S. economy was rapidly deepening into a recession. There were severe disruptions in domestic and global supply chains, leading to shortages in food and critical personal protective equipment, and the unemployment rate was increasing rapidly. Congress had to act and act fast, so that is exactly what we did. We passed the CARES act--a bold, unprecedented, and comprehensive $2.2 trillion COVID relief package that met the scale of the crisis we faced--and we did it without partisan rancor or political infighting. The bill passed the Senate 97 to 0. It is one of the greatest acts of bipartisanship I have witnessed during my career in politics. The CARES Act provided funding to our public health infrastructure for testing, tracing, and vaccine development. It directed funds to State and local governments that were straining under the cost of the pandemic. It also authorized the Treasury Department to get stimulus payments to American families and increased unemployment payments because we knew that millions of Americans would be unable to work as we came together to slow the spread of the virus. The bill also provided hundreds of billions of dollars to support our Nation's small businesses. I was proud to lead bipartisan negotiations on the small business provisions of this bill on the Small Business Task Force, which included myself and Senators Jeanne Shaheen, Marco Rubio, and Susan Collins. As we negotiated these provisions, we had several key facts in mind. First, small businesses have low profit margins and carry little in cash reserves, so they could only survive a few weeks of a closure without some form of support. Secondly, eventually, Americans unable to work would return to work, and it is much easier and quicker for small businesses to reopen with their existing staff instead of hiring new staff. Third, keeping small businesses in operation would make our eventual recovery come about more quickly and much more robustly. So we wanted to keep small businesses afloat. We wanted to keep their employees employed. We wanted to keep our economy moving forward. The Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program, which predates the pandemic, had already been approved to provide loans to small businesses harmed by COVID-19. So we knew that small businesses would have access to the long-term capital they needed to adapt their businesses and make other investments. EIDL can meet small businesses' long-term capital needs, but we knew that we had to move quickly to meet the immediate capital needs of these businesses, so we created the EIDL Advance Grant Program to send $10,000 grants to small businesses that applied for EIDL. We knew how important it was to a recovery to keep employees on payroll, so we created the Paycheck Protection Program to provide small businesses with loans worth up to $10 million to cover the cost of up to 8 weeks of payroll, and we made a promise to borrowers to forgive the loans as long as they used the funds for payroll or other allowable expenses. We created a debt relief program to cover all costs associated with new and existing SBA loans for 6 months. We invested in the SBA entrepreneurship development programs to hire experts and increase capacity to help small businesses navigate the ups and downs of the pandemic. In total, the CARES Act included more than $375 billion in aid to small businesses. The aid could not have come soon enough. The initial $349 billion in PPP funds were exhausted in less than 2 weeks. SBA approved more than 1.6 million loans in that time. SBA's laudable efforts to deliver relief to small businesses also came with disappointments and missed opportunities. Senator Shaheen and I fought to include a provision in the CARES Act that required SBA to issue guidance to the banks participating in PPP to prioritize loan applications for small businesses in underserved communities. We knew that those small businesses that had priority relationships with banks would be first in line, but we wanted the SBA to make sure that those that did not have those privileges would also be able to benefit by the PPP program. We insisted on the inclusion of this provision because we knew that a program like PPP, which relied on financial institutions to make loans, ran the risk of worsening the existing inequities in our private capital market. We simply could not allow small businesses in our most vulnerable communities to fall further behind. SBA failed to issue the guidance. So it was no surprise when organizations representing underserved small businesses sounded the alarm that women, minorities, small businesses in rural communities, and other underbanked borrowers were at risk of being frozen out of the program. The SBA's inspector general would eventually report that the Agency's implementation of PPP did not fully align with the intent of Congress. With funds exhausted after less than 2 weeks, the prior administration requested additional funds for PPP--and only PPP--which would have neglected the equally important EIDL Program, which had also exhausted its funds by then. It is important to keep in mind that since these programs were designed to work together, funding one without the other would not meet the needs of many small businesses. Once again, Members of this Chamber worked with our colleagues across the Capitol to create a comprehensive COVID-19 relief package that we all could agree on, which passed the Senate, again, unanimously. The bill provided an additional $370 billion of funds to the SBA COVID-19 relief efforts, with $310 billion for PPP, $10 billion for the EIDL Advance Grant Program. The bill also provided $50 billion for the EIDL Program, which allowed the Agency to make more than $350 billion in loans. And similar to the ways in which the CARES Act implemented lessons learned during a prior economic downturn, the second package implemented lessons learned during the first round of PPP. Since the SBA did not issue the guidance as required by the CARES Act, Senate Democrats championed more prescriptive policies to make the PPP fairer and more equitable. I remain proud that we were able to set aside $60 billion of PPP funds to be distributed by credit unions, community development financial institutions, minority depository institutions, community banks, and other small lenders that are better able to get funds to underserved and underbanked communities. We wanted to make sure that those who needed it could get it, and I am proud that we were able to include that in that legislation. Thanks to the set-aside, approximately 600 new, mostly nonbank, lenders that did not participate in phase 1, participated in phase 2 of the PPP program. We should take great pride in knowing that the set- aside worked. According to the Government Accounting Office report issued in September of last year, banks made the vast majority of PPP loans during phase 1 of the program. As a result, the program favored larger small businesses. During phase 2, however, the Agency found that the share of loans to underserved businesses and communities ``was proportionate to their representation in the overall small business community.'' We succeeded in the second round. For example, 42 percent of the loans approved during phase 1 of PPP went to businesses with between 10 and 499 employees, but those businesses only accounted for 4 percent of all the businesses in the United States. We know that women-owned and minority-owned small businesses are less likely to have employees at all, and when they do, they have less employees, on average. During phase 2, the share of loans to the larger of these businesses with 10 or more employees dropped to 17 percent. We achieved our objective. And while only 9 percent of the PPP loans issued during phase 1 went to businesses located in counties where women-owned businesses accounted for a large share of all businesses, the number doubled to 18 percent during phase 2, which is in line with the share of small businesses nationwide owned by women. Similarly, 36 percent of phase 1 loans went to small businesses in high-minority counties, and that number increased to 50 percent in phase 2. In every example in underserved communities--minority-owned small businesses, women-owned small businesses--because we targeted the funds to mission lenders, because we were able to get the entrepreneurial services to small businesses that needed the help, we reached the underserved community. I would like to take a moment to highlight the significance of these findings. The fact that women and minorities face historic and pervasive barriers to entrepreneurship is not new, and the primary barrier is their inability to access capital. But the GAO's report confirms that through the policies, the capital access gap is bridgeable. We can bridge this gap if we pass the right policies. After the end of phase 2 of PPP on August 8, Congress negotiated the next round of COVID-19 relief, which was not finalized until December 22. Negotiations may have taken much longer than any of us would have liked, but we once again found common ground to pass the bipartisan Economic Aid Act, providing $900 billion in COVID-19 relief, including an additional $325 billion for small businesses. In this bill, my Democratic colleagues and I secured an additional $30 billion set-aside for smaller lenders in addition to expanding eligibility to additional industries and nonprofits. The Economic Aid Act also provided eligible small businesses with an additional Second Draw PPP loan worth up to $2 million. The bill created new programs as well. The Shuttered Venue Operators Grant Program was created to provide grants of up to $10 million to live venues, independent movie theaters, and other cultural institutions that were shuttered as a result of COVID-19. And a new $20 billion Targeted EIDL Advance Program was created to provide additional EIDL Advance grants to our Nation's most vulnerable small businesses that couldn't afford to take out a loan. They needed grants. I would like to take a moment to speak on why the Targeted EIDL Advance Program was necessary. Similar to how the Trump administration initially handled the PPP, hindering the program's utility, the administration's implementation of the EIDL Advance Program also made it less useful to small businesses. The CARES Act directed SBA to provide $10,000 grants to all EIDL applicants, but the Trump administration only provided $1,000 per employee up to 10 employees. The Targeted EIDL Advance Program addressed the problem directly by targeting the program to the most vulnerable communities and providing small businesses in those communities with the remainder of the $10,000 Congress intended them to receive. We corrected the mistake initially made. It remains frustrating to know that our Federal response to the pandemic could have helped even more small businesses. So it was welcome relief when President Biden was inaugurated because I knew that America's underserved small businesses would have a champion administering phase 3 of PPP, and we in Congress would have a partner committed to ensuring that these programs helped as many small businesses as possible. The administration hit the ground running. In February of 2021, President Biden instituted a 14-day priority period for PPP, during which the SBA only processed applications for small businesses with fewer than 20 employees. The administration also changed the loan calculation formula for small proprietors and eliminated an exclusionary restriction that prevented small business owners with a prior nonfelony conviction from obtaining a PPP loan for their businesses. In addition to these administrative actions, President Biden also proposed and Congress enacted the American Rescue Plan. The bold relief package created the Restaurant Revitalization Fund to provide grants to restaurants and bars that lost revenue due to COVID-19, added additional funds to the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant Program, added additional funds to the Targeted EIDL Advance Program, and provided $350 billion to States and localities, which helped spur new State programs and replenish existing ones, like the RELIEF Act and the Maryland Strong Economic Recovery Initiative in my own home State, and created a new Community Navigator Program to get the SBA's entrepreneurial development resources in the communities that would benefit from them the most. We had the Federal programs. Then we had the navigators to help small businesses get those funds. And we provided local funds through State and local governments so they could help small businesses. We really went through everything we could to help those that needed the help the most. The significance of these actions--the passage of the bipartisan Economic Aid Act in December, the Biden administration's administrative steps, and the American Rescue Plan--cannot be overstated. They helped set our Nation on course for the most robust economic recovery in American history. Phase 3 of PPP--January to May 31, 2021--had the most equitable loan approval shares, according to a report released in January of this year by economists Robert Fairlie and Frank Fossen. Fairlie and Fossen, both of whom have been following PPP and the pandemic's impact on small businesses closely for the past 2 years, cited the extraordinary increase in loan volume of Prestamos, a CDFI that targets Hispanic- owned small businesses, as an example of the success of the PPP under the Biden administration. These numbers are impressive. During phase 1 of PPP, Prestamos ranked 4,274 among PPP lenders by volume. That was phase 1, where you really had to have an existing relationship if you were going to be able to get a PPP loan. In phase 2, where we did a better job of targeting, they ranked 325. In phase 3, they were among the top ranked PPP lenders by volume. They wrote that the 14-day priority period in particular ``helped to bring the PPP loans to disadvantaged small businesses.'' Thank you to the Biden administration and the Democrats in Congress. The program hasn't only been good for small businesses; it has also supported small community banks. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis wrote that small business lending was a ``key business line'' for small community banks during the operation of the program and that the program will help smaller banks regain some of the ground they have lost through larger competitors in the small business loan market. The Biden administration's implementation of the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant Program has also been a resounding success. After awarding more than 12,800 initial grants worth more than $11 billion at an average of more than 1 million per institution, the administration also awarded more than 8,700 supplemental grants worth more than $3 billion. I mention all of that because we know our shuttered venues would be out of business if it weren't for the shuttered loan program. It has kept them in business. And the administration successfully provided more than 100,000 restaurants with the Restaurant Revitalization Fund grants, worth more than $28 billion in grants. I have seen firsthand the benefit of these grants as I have traveled in Maryland. On Small Business Friday, last year, I did a walking tour down Main Street in Annapolis. Every single restaurant owner I visited shared that they may not have survived without the Restaurant Revitalization Fund grant. All of these restaurants are more than just a place to grab a bite to eat. These are decades-old institutions owned by small business operators, and their closures would have been deeply felt by the community. In the coming weeks, Congress must finish the job by replenishing the Restaurant Revitalization Fund. There are still hundreds of thousands of applicants waiting on funds. We have to finish the job for our restaurants, because if there are any lessons learned from the past 2 years, it is that when Congress comes together to produce thoughtful policies that address the system issues in our economy, it yields results. After enduring the deepest economic contraction since 1947, the American economy grew at the fastest rate since 1984 with the first year of Joe Biden's administration. We are back, but we still have pockets that need help. In an ironic twist of history, the lessons we have learned and the expertise and capacity that we have built up within the SBA have now prepared us for what can only be described as an entrepreneurial renaissance underway in our communities. According to the Census Bureau, Americans registered 4.4 million new businesses in 2020--4.4 million new businesses--the highest total on record and a 24-percent increase over the prior year. Remarkably, the surge is being driven by entrepreneurs in some of our most underserved communities, and our policies helped make that a reality. For example, data shows that between February 2020 and August 2021, the number of Black business owners increased by 38 percent. Congress needs to take advantage of the entrepreneurial spirit that is surging throughout our communities by continuing to invest in our entrepreneurs, especially those in underserved communities. We have demonstrated that the historic structural barriers that have inhibited the growth of small businesses in underserved communities are far from insurmountable. Now is not the time to retreat. It is time for us to double down. In implementing lessons learned during the implementation of PPP, we should create a new direct loan program within SBA and further empower small businesses. We must build on the inroads that the SBA has made with underserved communities during the pandemic to get entrepreneurial development, business mentorship, and technical training into communities that would benefit from it the most. And we should continue to work in a bipartisan way to ensure that American small businesses have the tools they need to emerge from the COVID-19 stronger than ever. The bottom line is our policies made a difference. We saved America's small businesses. We need to continue to work in the future to make sure the climate for small businesses is healthy so that our economy can continue to grow. We know that small businesses are the growth engine of job growth in America. We know that they are where most innovation takes place in our economy. Our policies during this pandemic helped save small businesses and now expand the opportunity for small businesses, but we need to continue to pay attention to these issues. I hope we can do this in a bipartisan way. We need to replenish the funds for those that have not been able to get it under the Restaurant Revitalization Fund, and we need to pay attention to small businesses in this country. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate T. Rowe Price and its development team on moving forward on building its new global headquarters in my home State of Maryland. T. Rowe Price has offices in 16 countries, but continues its long-standing commitment to Maryland by building its new global headquarters, with its thousands of employees, in Baltimore--what a wonderful testament to Baltimore. I am proud that T. Rowe Price has been a great partner in the areas of retirement security policy and innovation as I advance legislation to create a more robust retirement system for all Americans. This is no surprise given the founding mission of the company. In 1937, Thomas Rowe Price sought to create an organization ``with a reputation for the highest character and soundest investment strategy.'' In the 1950s, T. Rowe Price focused on growing their research in the area and greatly expanded their associate ranks in the 1960s. From the beginning, T. Rowe Price has been client-centered and collaborative in its research. T. Rowe Price grew from a five-person firm serving local clients to a 300-person firm serving clients nationwide. This is the type of entrepreneurship we strive to support and encourage at the Small Business Committee. In 1979, T. Rowe Price launched its international joint venture with Robert Fleming, which expanded T. Rowe Price into several locations around the world. It is an honor that even through the phases of expansion, T. Rowe Price has maintained its long tenure in Maryland, starting with its headquarters in Baltimore at 10 Light Street in the 1930s and continuing its presence in Baltimore by investing in a new global headquarters at Harbor Point as part of the historic redevelopment of the area. In addition to the building's contribution to developing a long unoccupied space in downtown Baltimore, the headquarters will be LEED-certified with high environmental standards, contributing to a sustainable Baltimore. As T. Rowe Price continues to help clients reach long-term financial goals, including a stable and dignified retirement, it utilizes technological advancements to ensure the firm reaches as many people as possible. In 2017, T. Rowe Price celebrated its 80th anniversary of serving Marylanders and people across the globe. I have heard from countless Marylanders about the positive impact this company has had on their communities. Not only through their intentional presence in the State and their sound financial strategy, but also through their charitable giving and initiatives. John Brother, president of the T. Rowe Price Foundation and T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving, stated that, ``The communities we support all have great assets and needs. To ensure our resources are channeled to create the best possible outcomes, we consult with local leaders and community organizations to get an informed perspective. We emphasize three pillars--education and youth development, human services, and arts and culture.'' To that end, T. Rowe Price has provided charitable giving to a range of projects with a strong focus on financial literacy. T. Rowe Price has published its Parents, Kids, and Money Survey for more than 10 years in order to help families work together to improve their money management skills. The survey explores the basic financial knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of both parents and their children to promote better spending and saving habits. Maryland is grateful for the company's continued commitment to investing in Baltimore and Marylanders alike. I look forward to seeing T. Rowe Price's continued impact in Maryland for decades to come, both in ensuring a strong retirement system and through ongoing and new projects that support Baltimore and Maryland communities. Congratulations to T. Rowe Price on moving forward on building its new global headquarters.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. First, I would ask consent that I be able to complete my brief remarks before the vote starts.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the confirmation of Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Julie Rubin to be a U.S. district judge for the District of Maryland. I recommended Judge Rubin, along with Senator Van Hollen, to President Biden, and we strongly support her nomination. Judge Rubin has been nominated to fill the vacancy created when Judge Ellen Hollander, appointed by President Obama in 2011, announced her intentions to take senior status. President Biden nominated Judge Rubin for this position on December 3 of last year, and the Judiciary Committee held her confirmation hearing on December 15. Judge Rubin was favorably reported by the Judiciary Committee on January 20 of this year by a bipartisan vote. She received a unanimous ``well qualified'' rating from the American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, which is the organization's highest rating. The ABA assesses the nominee's professional competency, integrity, and judicial temperament. Shortly after the November 2020 Presidential elections, I worked with Senator Van Hollen to establish the judicial selection committee in Maryland. We used an open application process with public advertisement and communicated closely with State, local, and specialty bar associations in Maryland. In particular, we sought out highly qualified and diverse applicants. Our committee interviewed everyone who submitted an application, which involved several dozen interviews. Senator Van Hollen and I personally interviewed several finalists before recommending names to the White House. Born in Baltimore, Judge Rubin received her B.A. cum laude from Mount Holyoke College in 1995 and her J.D. from the University of Maryland School of Law in 1998. She worked at Astrachan Gunst, handling intellectual property and employment law matters in both Federal and State court. Judge Rubin was appointed by the Governor of Maryland in 2012 as a Baltimore City circuit judge and was elected in 2014 by the people of Baltimore to a 15-year term. The circuit court is the State trial court of general jurisdiction in Maryland, covering both civil and criminal cases, and is the exclusive court for jury trials, including felony trials--similar jurisdiction to what the Federal district court handles. So she has that experience. Judge Rubin brings tremendous experience to the courtroom as a sitting Baltimore City circuit judge for nearly a decade. She has handled a substantial and diverse caseload in our State court in Baltimore, having served in the civil, family, criminal, and general trial divisions, as well as serving on special assignments to the asbestos docket. She previously served as a supervisory judge of alternative dispute resolutions. She estimates that she has presided over about 1,000 criminal and civil cases that have gone to verdict or judgment, including both bench and jury trials. Judge Rubin is known as a judge's judge, in terms of her excellent temperament, work ethic, and congeniality with lawyers and litigants. She is known to be fair in judgment to all litigants. She was selected to serve as a faculty member of the Judicial College and tasked with instructing newly appointed Maryland trial judges on judicial ethics and best courtroom practices. Judge Rubin has continued to give back to the community as an adjunct legal professor at the Maryland Law School. She cochaired the Bench Bar Committee of the Bar Association of Baltimore City, served on the board of the Baltimore Metropolitan Chapter of the Simon E. Sobeloff Law Society, and assisted the CollegeBound Foundation and the Baltimore Education Scholarship Trust to help underprivileged or at-risk youth. She has served as chair of the board of trustees for the Bryn Mawr School in Baltimore. She has given back to our community and understands the challenges in our community. As a fellow graduate of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey Law School, I am confident that Judge Rubin will meet the highest standards of integrity, competence, and temperament. I know she will uphold the rule of law for all Marylanders for this lifetime appointment. Finally, let me say that I know that public service is a sacrifice, not only for the nominee but for their family. So I want to thank Judge Rubin's husband James and her entire family for sharing Judge Rubin with the people of Maryland. Judge Rubin's confirmation will build on the quality and diversity of the Maryland District Court bench. All 10 of the confirmed judges have been recommended by me to the President for appointment as a Senator from Maryland. I am proud of their qualifications and diversity. In Maryland, our Federal bench is 50 percent women, 50 percent men, 40 percent people of color. We appointed the first African-American woman, the first person of Palestinian descent. We have a diversified, quality bench representing the people of Maryland and providing the justice the people of Maryland deserve. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the confirmation of Judge Julie Rubin to be a U.S. district judge for the District of Maryland. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, this March, as we mark National Kidney Month, we have the opportunity to remember those we have lost to kidney-related illnesses, recognize the work we have done to combat kidney diseases, and recommit to continue and expand on these efforts to improve the care available to those who are suffering. Kidney disease is the tenth leading cause of death in the United States. Today, more than 37 million Americans have chronic kidney disease. One in three adults is at risk of developing chronic kidney disease, which can lead to kidney failure or end-stage renal disease, an irreversible condition that is fatal without a kidney transplant or dialysis. In Maryland alone, almost 93,000 Medicare patients have been diagnosed with chronic kidney disease, and almost 10,000 of these individuals are currently on dialysis. As with many health issues, communities across the Nation do not suffer from kidney disease equally. Black Americans make up 35 percent of the people with kidney failure in the United States, despite only making up 13 percent of the U.S. population. Hispanic Americans are 1.3 times more likely to be diagnosed with kidney failure than non- Hispanics. End-stage renal disease is 3.7 times more likely in Black Americans, 1.4 times more likely in Native Americans, and 1.5 more likely in Asian Americans than in White Americans. Patients of color also wait longer than White patients to receive a deceased donor transplant and are less likely to receive a living donor transplant. While progress is often too slow, in the past year alone, we have made significant steps to understand and address factors leading to the overrepresentation of certain populations with chronic kidney disease. Following research from the National Kidney Foundation and the American Society of Nephrology, institutions like the University of Maryland Medicine ended the outdated use of race as a factor in diagnosing chronic kidney disease. This change will lead to earlier diagnosis and treatment of Black Americans. Not surprisingly, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on those with severe chronic medical conditions like kidney disease. Patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease are often immunocompromised, especially those on dialysis or taking immunosuppressive medicines as part of the process for a kidney transplant. Consequently, people with kidney disease are at a higher risk of developing a more severe case of, and dying from, COVID-19. Last year, I reintroduced the Chronic Kidney Disease Improvement in Research and Treatment Act with Senator Blunt. This legislation takes important steps to expand kidney disease awareness and education, improve the accuracy and transparency of end-stage renal disease quality programs, incentivize innovation in dialysis care, and expand patient choices of insurance coverage. Nearly one-half of the people suffering from chronic kidney disease do not know they have kidney disease because of inadequate screening programs and a lack of awareness about the disease. My legislation would expand Medicare's annual wellness benefit to include kidney disease screening for at-risk patients and improve access to pre- dialysis kidney education programs to better manage patients' kidney disease--an effort that, in some cases, could actually prevent kidney failure and reduce the $153 billion Medicare spends on care for kidney patients. To address health equity issues in chronic kidney disease, my legislation would also require the Department of Health and Human Services to submit a report to Congress on national kidney transplantation rates and make recommendations on prevention and treatment for communities disproportionally affected by kidney failure. Further, my legislation would expand choices in health insurance coverage to those with end-stage renal disease by guaranteeing access to Medigap policies to all end-stage renal disease Medicare beneficiaries, regardless of age. Currently, Medicare patients under 65, whether disabled or end-stage renal disease beneficiaries, do not have access to Medigap plans, even though Medicare is their primary insurance. The best treatment for kidney failure is kidney transplantation from a living donor, but only a third of kidney transplants are of this type. Over 100,000 Americans are on the transplant waitlist with 90,000 of them waiting for a kidney. Only 24,000 kidneys were transplanted in 2021. The average wait time for a deceased donor kidney transplant is 5 years but can be as long as 10 years in some States. But with the direct donation from a living donor, the average time is 3-6 months. Sadly, 114 patients in Maryland died while on the waitlist in 2021. This is why I am also a cosponsor of the Living Donor Protection Act, which works to remove barriers to organ donation and protect the rights of and prohibit discrimination against organ donors, with the goal of increasing the number of living donors. Although the scientific understanding of kidney disease has progressed immensely, significant gaps persist, and treatment has remained largely the same. Research on kidney failure is underfunded compared with the costs of treating chronic kidney disease and end- stage renal disease. I am proud of what the National Institutes of Health and other Maryland-based research institutions have done to combat kidney disease and other kidney-related illnesses. There is more to do, however, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to fight kidney diseases and bring relief to the millions of Americans who suffer from them.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to a wonderful professor and man, Dr. Stephen--``Steve''--J. Simpson, of Frostburg, who died on February 21, 2022, of pancreatic cancer. Dr. Simpson taught and inspired generations of students at Frostburg State University--FSU--in a career there that spanned four decades. He was a widely respected scholar of the American Presidency and the intersection of media and politics. Steve Simpson was born on October 10, 1951, in Abington, PA. He received his undergraduate degree from Dickinson College and his M.A. and Ph.D. in political science from Princeton University. Steve spent many years as FSU's dean of the college of sciences and provost and chief academic officer. While he excelled in these roles, his greatest enthusiasm was for being a professor of political science. He wasn't just an academic mentor to scores of students over the years; he was a life mentor who encouraged them to aim high in life as well as in school. Steve was cheerful, kind, generous, and respectful to everyone whom he met and knew. He was a devoted son, brother, husband, uncle, and in- law to many members of an extended second family. He loved to discuss politics and play card games, especially pinochle with his mother-in- law Mary Morshead as his partner. He instilled in his nephews, John and David Simpson, a love of history and politics, which they have since passed on to their children. Steve loved to travel with his wife of nearly 30 years, Lisa Morshead. They traveled to Colonial Williamsburg, Sanibel Island, and Fort Myers for spring training. He could not shake his Pennsylvania roots entirely, so he was an avid Phillies, not Orioles, fan--but we won't hold that against him. His love of baseball extended to participating in fantasy leagues. He claimed he disliked pets but he loved and cared for three rescue cats and a dog. Steve had a big heart. On behalf of the Senate, I would like to extend heartfelt condolences to Steve's wife Lisa; his brothers William and Robert and their wives Brenda and Carolyn; his nephews John and David and their wives Laurie and Alison; the rest of his extended family and friends; and the FSU community. Henry B. Adams wrote, ``A teacher affects eternity; he can never tell where his influence stops.'' I hope that the family and friends who mourn Dr. Stephen Simpson's passing can find solace in the knowledge that he surely has affected eternity and his influence will continue to ripple far and wide among the students he so ably taught and inspired.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, first, let me thank Senator Murkowski for her leadership on behalf of women's issues here in the U.S. Senate. I join her in calling for the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women's Act. I am glad that she mentioned that. I join her as her partner in the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. We have to pass a resolution here extending the date. Senator Murkowski has been a leader on all these issues. During Women's History Month, I am using this time to point out the progress we have made. Senator Murkowski mentioned that we have made tremendous progress on behalf of gender equality in the United States, but we still have a path in front of us. I was pleased to see Senator Murkowski point out the challenges that still exist and the reason why we need to be active in regard to gender equity issues, including the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act and the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment. So I thank her for her leadership, and I am glad to be her partner on many of these issues. So today, we can celebrate the progress that has been made and call attention to the obstacles that exist. Throughout our Nation's history, generations of women have won hard-fought battles in pushing closer and closer toward securing full citizenship and all that entails. Our Nation today is stronger from this progress, reaching new milestones in gender equality. President Biden announced earlier this month his historic selection of Judge Jackson to fill the role of the retiring Supreme Court Justice Breyer on the highest Court in our land. Judge Jackson would be the first Black woman to serve on the Court and only the fifth woman to serve as a Justice of the total of 115 who have served on the Supreme Court throughout our history. I was pleased, along with Senator Van Hollen, to recommend Lydia Griggsby to serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. She is the first Black female judge to serve in the State of Maryland. Yes, we have a lot to celebrate during Women's History Month here in March. During President Biden's recent State of the Union Address, which I attended, I was struck by the image of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Kamala Harris flanking President Biden. Vice President Harris is our first woman and first woman of color to hold the second highest office in the land. Though they undoubtedly both experienced significant challenges and obstacles on their career path due to their gender, they are now serving in two of the highest ranking offices in our government. President Biden has appointed one of the most diverse Cabinets in history, including the first women to serve as Treasury Secretary and Director of National Intelligence. We have a lot to celebrate on our path for gender equality in America, but we still have more that needs to be done. At the same time, structural disadvantages and inequalities on account of gender persist across so many areas here in America. As one example, as chair of the Small Business Entrepreneurship Committee, where the Presiding Officer also serves, I have been working over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic to understand the economic effects on small businesses and to help provide needed resources. In this role, I have seen firsthand the structural disadvantages experienced by women- owned small businesses and how they have been compounded by the challenges of this pandemic. We need to take action to help in regard to that issue. Further, the Supreme Court actions to date in cases related to reproductive freedom indicate an alarming openness to overturning the precedents that have given women control over their own bodies and futures for decades. Among many other very important reasons, full reproductive autonomy is essential in ensuring that women are able to participate fully as citizens in all facets of our democracy. I am pleased that President Biden established the first Gender Policy Council to advance gender equity across the entire Federal Government and that the Gender Policy Council issued the first-ever national gender strategy to support the full participation of all people, including women and girls in the United States and around the world. Yes, we have unfinished business in regard to gender equity issues. I am committed to working to advance the Equal Rights Amendment that Senator Murkowski talked about. The two of us are the lead sponsors of the resolution in this body that would remove the arbitrary time limit. This simple amendment, the Equal Rights Amendment, first written by Alice Paul in 1923, states: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. I can't understand any objection to including that fundamental protection in the Constitution of the United States. As President Biden stated in his Presidential Proclamation during this Women's History Month, ``But despite the progress being made, women and girls--especially women and girls of color--still face systemic barriers to full participation and wider gaps in opportunity and equality . . . The Congress sent the Equal Rights Amendment to the States for ratification 50 years ago and it is long past time that the principle of women's equality should be enshrined in our Constitution.'' And as Senator Murkowski said, the requisite number of States have ratified the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution. The arbitrary time limit that was put on by Congress is the only reason we haven't had a certification process. The vast majority of Americans agree with this principle today. A 2020 AP poll found that 74 percent of Americans--74 percent--favor the Equal Rights Amendment. A second spring poll conducted by Pew found that 78 percent of respondents were in support of adding women to the Constitution. In a nation as divided as ours has become, a principle with this level of support on this important topic compels our attention and our action. Given that so much has changed since this amendment was first written and since it was first proposed by Congress to the States, it is worth explaining some of the practical effects it could have if formalized today. First, it would expand legal recourse against gender discrimination. Second, it would empower those of us in Congress to enact stronger laws preventing gender discrimination across a wide array of issues. Third, it would require the Supreme Court--or courts--to use a higher standard of review than is currently applied in the cases of gender discrimination. The ratification of the ERA could be expected to have effects across such diverse areas as pay discrimination, LGBTQ rights, gender-based and domestic violence, sexual harassment, and more. This constitutional amendment would provide a firmer foundation for existing laws and create new authority for Congress to pass laws in areas in which it has historically lacked a constitutional prerogative. Our Constitution is a framework of, by, and for the people. It must be able to evolve to meet the changing views and beliefs of the people. Already a majority of the U.S. Senate has cosponsored the bipartisan resolution that I referred to, S.J. Res. 1, that Senator Murkowski and I introduced to remove the procedural deadline that Congress once set to honor the clear will of the people and to make the legitimacy of our 28th Amendment clear beyond a doubt. The House of Representatives has already passed this resolution twice. It is time for us to do the same. I look forward to the opportunity to bring this resolution to the floor in the coming months and would strongly urge every one of my colleagues to support that resolution. Thirty-eight States have already ratified it. Most Americans already think it is in our Constitution. Let's get that job done. Bicentennial Birth of Harriet Tubman Madam President, March 8, as has been pointed out, is International Women's Day. It happens during the month of March, which is Women's History Month, here in the United States. I wish to commemorate the bicentennial birth of one of Maryland's most iconic leaders, a true American hero who has inspired global human rights' defenders, and that is Harriet Tubman. As we close this year's chapter of Black History Month and ring in Women's History Month, what better way to celebrate these annual observances than by honoring the valor, journey, and life of Harriet Tubman and her fight for freedom, which intersects with our modern-day fight for civil rights, climate action, and environmental justice. Harriet Tubman was born Araminta Ross in Dorchester County, MD, along our Eastern Shore, around 1822. She was the ``Moses of her people,'' personally leading at least 70 enslaved people to freedom. She is a cherished daughter of Maryland. She did this at great personal sacrifice to her own safety and freedom on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. This year, in 2022, we observe the bicentennial of the start of her life as a key leader in the abolition and women's suffrage movements. She embodied extraordinary courage and took immeasurable risks as a soldier, spy, and conductor on the Underground Railroad, leading her family and communities to freedom. In an unjust country to her race, she was there, working for America's future and helping to liberate the enslaved people. In Maryland, this year also marks the 5-year anniversary of the Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad Visitor Center, which opened its doors to the public in 2017. In its first year, it drew nearly 100,000 visitors from every State and more than 70 countries, exceeding all expectations. It is inspirational to see this visitor center and to see her journey through life and what she was able to accomplish. One person can make a difference. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., told us frequently, ``Each one of us in this world can make a difference.'' Harriet Tubman made such a difference throughout her lifetime. The visitor center houses exhibit space that shares Tubman's compelling story, surrounded by landscape and waterways preserved to resemble how they would have appeared to her over 200 years ago in her early life as an enslaved child, young woman, and freedom seeker. The Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Monument and National Historical Park preserve these characteristics in her early home on Maryland's Eastern Shore. The visitor center serves as an orientation center to the national monument and historical park and gateway to the larger Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad Scenic Byway, which includes the Brodess Farm, where Harriet Tubman lived as a child; Bucktown General Store, where she first stood up against the oppressors as a young girl; and other places that were part of the Underground Railroad in Dorchester, Talbot, and Caroline Counties. I recently introduced legislation with my colleagues in the Baltimore congressional delegation, S. 3744, reauthorizing the designations of the Baltimore National Heritage Area, which encompasses listings on the Underground Railroad network. Harriet Tubman was not only a fierce defender for freedom from slavery but also for the women's rights movement, particularly for Black women. Following her treacherous journey to freedom, Harriet Tubman spoke on the importance of women's suffrage in New York, Washington, and Boston. In 1896, she was one of the first guests to speak at the National Association of Colored Women and was hailed a strong advocate. Women secured the right to vote in 1920 with the 19th Amendment, but it wasn't until 1965 that voting rights became a reality for Black women. Let me conclude my comments on Women's History Month by once again quoting from President Biden. As President Biden proclaimed Women's History Month this month, he said: As we reflect on the achievements of women and girls across the centuries and pay tribute to the pioneers who paved the way, let us recommit to the fight and help realize the deeply American vision of a more equal society where every person has a shot at pursuing the American dream. In doing so, we will advance economic growth, our health and safety, and the security of our Nation and the world. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now recess until 2:15 p.m.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Indian Head, MD. They were recognized as a winner in the 2022 Federal Laboratory Consortium National Awards Program, also known as the FLC. The FLC Awards Program annually recognizes Federal laboratories and their industry partners for outstanding technology transfer achievements. The Excellence in Technology Transfer Award recognizes employees of FLC member laboratories and non-laboratory staff who have accomplished outstanding work in the process of transferring federally developed technology. Indian Head received the award for its efforts in developing Silent Spring, a technology that desensitizes homemade explosives or HMEs. HMEs are extremely sensitive and unpredictable; a stray spark, a change in temperature, exposure to sunlight, or even an accidental bump can set them off. Silent Spring shields volatile explosive materials from these potential triggers. This allows explosive ordnance disposal and law enforcement personnel to more safely move the explosive materials, while preserving forensic evidence and minimizing damage to existing infrastructure. Silent Spring is now available commercially and is approved within the Department of Defense to address the highest priority EOD threats. The partnership has already provided hundreds of product units to Department of Defense explosive ordinance disposal users for demonstration and training and will soon do the same for the civilian public safety and law enforcement communities. ``This collaboration is one of many we have across the command that deliver innovative technologies to the warfighter,'' said NSWC IHD commanding officer Capt. Eric Correll. ``The faster we can get new innovative products to our warfighters and our first responder partners, the better.'' This emphasizes the need to invest in energetics experts. The need for this experience is more apparent than ever. As foreign threats emerge, the bright minds at Indian Head have been able to meet and exceed these threats. Indian Head does not just explore the detection of explosive devices. They also look at ways to enhance the United States' capabilities to deter foreign aggressors. Indian Head is a premier facility that has developed ejection seats for our pilots and have developed materials that ensure that our military has the best and sharpest tools to deter our adversaries and keep the people of this country safe. Indian Head is an unsung hero that has tirelessly worked to ensure our national security and has humbly provided to this country for over a hundred years. We must recognize the importance of energetics research in this country. Other countries are recognizing this, and we cannot ignore this. We need to continue to invest in this research and development, these are vital capabilities that keep our aggressors at bay. I want to recognize and thank Indian Head for all of their contributions to the security of our country and for this great achievement.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, yesterday, many of us in the Senate had the opportunity to meet with the Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States. It was an opportunity for many of us to express our admiration for the commitment of the Ukrainian people to the sovereignty of their country. They are motivated by the love of their country and a passion for freedom. Their President, President Zelenskyy, has shown courageous leadership. He has been inspirational as we have watched how he has put his own life at risk in order to serve his country. He has put country before personal safety. Ukraine versus Russia, good versus evil, this unprovoked attack on a peaceful sovereign country, orchestrated by Mr. Putin. We are not surprised. It was widely publicized, the use of his playbook. We knew what he was doing hour by hour in planning the invasion on Ukraine. It doesn't diminish the tragedy of Mr. Putin's actions. This is Mr. Putin's war, and he must be held fully accountable for what he has caused. I want to thank President Biden for his extraordinary global leadership on this issue. We have seen unity among our alliance, and we have seen global unity in condemning Mr. Putin's actions, which is so important in order to put the right focus on who is responsible and who can end this tragic war. We have imposed the strongest set of multilateral sanctions ever on Russia's leaders and institutions. We have cut off many of its banks from the Swiss system of banking. We have put personal sanctions on Mr. Putin and his enablers. We have frozen assets around the world. We have isolated Russia from international organizations and events. We have restricted airspace to Russian aircraft. All that has been done not just by the United States but in conjunction with our allies around the world, and it is having a major impact on Russia. We have seen unity in NATO. I think Mr. Putin thought that his campaign in Ukraine would weaken the NATO alliance. It has done just the opposite. It has strengthened the NATO alliance. We have sent NATO troops to the countries that border Russia that are members of NATO to make it clear that we understand our collective obligation under article 5 of the NATO treaty: an attack on one is an attack on all, and we will come to each other's mutual defense. And we have seen many countries that have been reluctant to get involved in war-type activities change their position because they realize how clear it is what Russia is doing violates every international commitment and jeopardizes not just the integrity of Ukraine but the integrity of Europe, the integrity of sovereign states around the world. So let me point out just one of our NATO partners, Germany. Germany canceled--put on hold Nord Stream 2. We know Mr. Putin has used energy as a weapon. He has weaponized the source of energy he has in his country. He has done that several times. Nord Stream 2 would give him additional wealth and energy--stopped by Germany. But Germany has gone further than that. For the first time, now they are going to be supplying lethal weapons to Ukraine, recognizing that all of us have a responsibility to help Ukraine in its hour of need. And, yes, Germany has now made a commitment that we have asked all NATO nations to do, devote 2 percent of their economy to our mutual defense, and Germany is now stepping up to meet that 2 percent commitment. That is what we are seeing from NATO partners. Turkey is going to block the use of warships from being able to use its waters in order to get engaged in the conflict; that is, Russian warships. We have seen non-NATO countries step up to the plate. We are very pleased with the global response, Finland's response, Switzerland's response. This is unprecedented that we had this type of global unity saying to Mr. Putin: Stop this invasion, an unprovoked attack on a peaceful nation. Stop it. Now, the consequences of our action have had major impact on the Russian economy. Their interest rates have gone up dramatically. The value of their currency, the ruble, has fallen dramatically. Their economy is suffering dramatically. And when the Russian people want to know who to blame as a result of their economy going into the tank--one person, the person who caused this war, Mr. Putin. The Ukrainians are defending their country and have disrupted Putin's military expectations. These are really people motivated for the right reasons to defend their country, and they have been able to do amazing things in stopping Russia's advancements. That is because of the will, determination, and bravery of the Ukrainian people. They need our help, and they need the help of our allies in supplying the necessary military equipment in order to defend themselves. We know how many Russian tanks are out there, and we know how many Russian aircraft are out there. They need anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons, and they need ammunition. They need a lot in order to defend themselves, and we and our allies need to step up to make sure they have what they need. They also, by the way, need humanitarian aid. We know that there are already over several hundred thousand refugees who have escaped the violence in Ukraine and have gone into neighboring countries. It is estimated that number could grow into the millions. We need to work with the international community in regard to the humanitarian needs of the refugees. We also have to realize that Ukraine's supply chain has been totally disrupted. We need to provide humanitarian aid within Ukraine, get it to the border, and work with the Ukrainian officials so they can get it inside the country. That is our responsibility in order to help in this hour of need. We need to do even more than that, and there are additional steps that we can take. We need to continue to ratchet up the sanctions that are being imposed against Mr. Putin and Russia. As I said earlier, these sanctions are severe today, and we need to consider doing more. The administration is already setting up a process by which we can trace laundered assets so that, when we say we are going to freeze the assets of those who are being sanctioned, we will find those assets wherever you try to hide them. We are going to work with our allies around the world in order to make it clear that there is no safe haven for you to hide your wealth. We need to continue to build on individual sanctions. We know that. Individual sanctions mean a great deal, and there are others who need to be sanctioned. Yes, I think we need to consider the oil and gas industry as to how we can make it clear that we are not going to let Mr. Putin benefit from his assets. Trading policies need to be reevaluated. A country that invades another country without any provocation whatsoever should not be entitled to normal trade relations with the United States, and we should be looking at how we can enforce those types of changes. Yes, there needs to be personal accountability. It has now become quite obvious that Mr. Putin has had no regard whatsoever for civilian casualties. In fact, there have been reports that he may have targeted civilians in his effort to gain control of Ukraine. We need to make it clear that, if the facts are there, we will pursue potential war crimes. No one should escape accountability. We should hold those who are responsible for these tragedies accountable for them. Let me make it clear. As Mr. Zelenskyy has said, the President of Ukraine, we will always look for a diplomatic way to end this war. We want this war never to have started, and we want it to end as soon as possible. We will look in any way we can for a diplomatic end to this war--preserving the sovereignty of Ukraine. We recognize that Mr. Putin's war has brought to our attention other issues that we need to really pay attention to. One is the energy policy of Europe and the United States. I have heard my colleagues talk about this, but the right answer is energy independence, investment in renewable energy sources, so that we can not only protect our national security but so that we can also protect our environment. We need to make those investments moving forward so none of our allies ever has to rely upon an autocratic government's supply of oil or gas. I want to underscore the importance that was brought to our attention yesterday. There was a parliamentarian from Ukraine who was there who said: Thank you so much for the Magnitsky sanctions that you have imposed on individuals because that really hurts. Well, we are proud because it was this body that initiated the Magnitsky sanctions. Let me remind my colleagues that our law expires at the end of this year. Now is the time to expand and extend the Global Magnitsky law. We need to protect our supply chains. We saw that during the coronavirus, but we also recognize, with supplies in autocratic countries, that we need to shore up our own supplies and make them in America. We have legislation that has passed the House and Senate. Let's get that bill to the finish line. That would be so important for our national security. Our immediate priority: Let us all stand with the people of Ukraine in their struggle for freedom. They have not only our admiration, but they have our support. We want to do what we can, and we stand with the people of Ukraine. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of a rare event happening this Saturday at my home synagogue of Beth Tfiloh in Pikesville, MD. At what is the largest Modern Orthodox Synagogue in America, with over 1,200 members, we will install only the fourth senior rabbi since the founding of the congregation in 1921. In Judaism, a rabbi is a leader or teacher. ``Teacher'' is the literal translation of the word. He or she is a spiritual guide for the community through spiritual learning and religious exploration. Our rabbi is an integral part of all life-cycle and congregational events. Rabbi Chai Posner was selected by a unanimous vote of the members of the Beth Tfiloh congregation as the next spiritual leader of our synagogue in September 2019, just before the pandemic transformed our world. While his official installation will take place on Saturday, March 5, Rabbi Posner officially became the senior rabbi of Beth Tfiloh Congregation and dean of the Beth Tfiloh Dahan Community School on January 1, 2022. Originally, from Brooklyn, he has been a member of the Beth Tfiloh clergy since 2010 and is often described as ``wise beyond his years.'' Rabbi Posner represents the next generation of leadership in our community. He has a keen understanding of where the community has been and where we are heading. In a recent interview with local Jmore Baltimore Jewish Living, he described the legacy he has taken on: ``One of the main reasons that Beth Tfiloh has been so successful is we have stayed true to our mission but have also adapted to the changing world around us. Rabbi Samuel Rosenblatt, Beth Tfiloh's founding rabbi, was committed to tradition, modernity, Israel, education, children and women's inclusion. All of those look different today than they did 100 years ago, but it's astounding to see that we are still committed to all of these same principles.'' The other part of this spiritual transition, along with Rabbi Posner, is Rabbi Mitchell Wohlberg, who held the position of senior rabbi for 43 years. He will serve in the position of rabbi-in-residence through December 2025. What can I say about Rabbi Wohlberg? He has been a friend and a counselor, a leader and guide for Beth Tfiloh Congregation and Baltimore over the course of four decades--for my family and me as well. Through his legendary sermons and community involvement, his moral leadership has inspired generations of community leaders. For 40-plus years, he has led our community through the most joyous and most painful moments in our lives, and everything in between. Through it all, he maintains, ``we are supposed to serve God in joy.'' As for those sermons--on every topic imaginable and then some--they stand as a legacy to Rabbi Wohlberg's love of scripture, his faith, and the world as a whole. In one such sermon, he shared ``It is said that actions speak louder than words. That may be so but words carry a lot of weight. They are what makes us human.'' Rabbi Wohlberg also has embodied the spirit of tikkun olam--repairing our world. I want to share one example among countless instances of how he has transformed the lives around him. A half-dozen years ago, Rev. Dr. Terris King of the Liberty Grace Church of God in Ashburton reached out to Rabbi Wohlberg in fellowship. This was a time when Baltimore was still healing from the death of Freddie Gray and some national leaders chose to attack Baltimore for their own personal gain. Rabbi Wohlberg and Dr. King connected over faith, shared community and shared history. Barely 5 miles separates the two congregations, but as the two clergy have explained: ``In some ways, Ashburton and Pikesville are in two different worlds. But the reality is, we are next-door neighbors. Maryland's recently maligned seventh district reminds us that there are no barriers separating Baltimore City and Baltimore County; the only barriers are the ones we establish in our hearts. We have discovered that getting to know each other not only brings us closer, but helps us to learn from each other, to better understand each other's lived experiences, and even to better understand ourselves.'' The interfaith and interracial relationship between Beth Tfiloh and Liberty Grace has grown stronger over the years, nurtured by Rabbi Wohlberg and Dr. King. Branded as ``Building Bridges Across Baltimore,'' volunteers from both communities have come together to provide fresh produce and meals to West Baltimore residents, renovate local schools, host local festivals and book fairs, promote reading and writing partnerships, and work together to reduce violence. This model of community involvement has maintained its focus of ``Working together to improve the education and health of Baltimore children and families [as] the only way we will improve the conditions of our city.'' Throughout Rabbi Wohlberg's four decades at Beth Tfiloh Congregation, I especially have been struck at how he has made the children of our congregation and our community a priority. During his tenure, the Beth Tfiloh Dahan Community School has grown in both size and reputation. Thanks in no small part to Rabbi Wohlberg's determination and high expectations, in 2000, the school, which now serves children from preschool through high school, was named a National Blue Ribbon School of Excellence. It was 1 of 12 schools nationally to receive an award for its special emphasis in technology. On a very personal note, I am a third-generation member of Beth Tfiloh congregation. Rabbi Wohlberg and I have been friends for years, and my children and grandchildren have attended the schools. He presided over the B'nai Mitzvahs of our children and the wedding of my daughter. Rabbi Wohlberg is and will forever be an indelible part of my family history. As Beth Tfiloh congregation begins to write a new chapter in its century-long history, I want to extend my heartfelt congratulations and thanks to both Rabbi Posner and Rabbi Wohlberg. Transitions are not always easy, but these two spiritual and community leaders, who have worked side-by-side for so many years, have forged a path forward that celebrates past successes and has the community excited for the future. As it says in Ecclesiastes Chapter 3, ``to every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.''