Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I thank the chairman for that clarification.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Wyden. There is some question as to the proper ordering of the calculation of the credit under section 53 and a taxpayer's liability under section 59A, the base erosion and anti-abuse tax. Does the Treasury have authority to issue regulations dealing with potential issues with the ordering of the calculation of the credit under section 53 and the tax under section 59A?

Mr. CARDIN. I thank the chairman for that clarification.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, the legislation being considered today includes a historic expansion of the section 179D commercial buildings energy-efficiency tax deduction. The deduction, made permanent in 2020, is an important tool to tackle climate change by encouraging investments in energy-efficient buildings. I have been made aware of a discouraging trend among those who use section 179D that some entities attempt to receive payments in exchange for providing section 179D allocation letters to private sector building designers. As I have said before, entities seeking to avail themselves of the tax benefits of section 179D cannot seek, accept, or solicit payments from designers in exchange for providing section 179D allocation letters. The issuance of a section 179D allocation letter shall not be used as leverage to request a payment from a designer; allocation letters should be duly issued once the applicable design services have been performed. These actions run counter to the intent of section 179D(d)(4)'s express direction to allow the allocation of the section 179D deduction ``. . . to the person primarily responsible for designing the property in lieu of the owner of such property.'' Consistent with congressional intent, section 179D allocation letters are administrative in nature and serve to formalize the allocation of the tax deduction to the eligible designer. As section 179D is rightly expanded in the legislation being considered in the Senate, it must be reaffirmed that it is congressional intent that entities cannot seek, accept, or solicit payments in exchange for providing 179D allocation letters.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, Senate Democrats have stepped up and passed legislation that will make it easier for American families to afford health insurance coverage and prescription drugs and lower energy costs and boost domestic job creation in the growing clean energy sector. We have done so while reducing the deficit and without raising taxes on families and small businesses. The Inflation Reduction Act--IRA--tackles climate change, makes the Tax Code fairer, and invests in long-overdue environmental justice programs. This is an historic bill, and polling indicates that large majorities of Americans support its major provisions. While a simple majority of Senators can pass a budget reconciliation bill, there was nothing to prevent our Republican colleagues from joining us in supporting this measure to lower essential costs for American families and enhance our economic and national security. These are policies that all Senators and all Members of Congress should embrace, and this legislation contains many bipartisan policies. Reconciliation does not have to be a partisan process. Just in the past year, the Senate passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act-- IIJA--the CHIPS + Science semiconductor manufacturing bill, the Honoring Our PACT Act, and Treaty Document No. 117-3, which contains Protocols to the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden, with strong bipartisan majorities. I regret that our Republican colleagues did not join us today in passing the IRA. As for me, if asked to choose between the status quo or lowering health coverage costs for Maryland families and having large companies pay a minimum, fair share of taxes, there is no contest. I will choose Maryland families every day. I find it incomprehensible that anyone-- other than perhaps some billionaires--thinks it is acceptable that teachers, nurses, and mechanics and most small businesses often pay a greater percentage of their income in Federal taxes than the ultrawealthy or a company that makes billions of dollars in profits. The bill we passed today changes that calculation and holds the richest Americans and companies that make over a billion dollars accountable for paying their fair share of taxes, like everyone else in this country. This past Wednesday, Timothy F. Geithner, Jacob J. Lew, Henry M. Paulson Jr., Robert E. Rubin and Lawrence H. Summers issued the following statement: As former Treasury Secretaries of both Democratic and Republican Administrations, we support the Inflation Reduction Act, which is financed by prudent tax policy that will collect more from top-earners and large corporations. Taxes due or paid will not increase for any family making less than $400,000/year. And the extra taxes levied on corporations do not reflect increases in the corporate tax rate, but rather the reclaiming of revenue lost to tax avoidance and provisions benefitting the most affluent. The selective presentation by some of the distributional effects of this bill neglects benefits to middle-class families from reducing deficits, from bringing down prescription drug prices, and from more affordable energy. This legislation will help increase American competitiveness, address our climate crisis, lower costs for families, and fight inflation--and should be passed immediately by Congress. The original top-line estimates from the Congressional Budget Office--CBO--and the Joint Committee on Taxation--JCT--were that the bill would raise $725 billion in revenue, invest $433 billion, and apply the balance--nearly $300 billion--to deficit reduction. These numbers will change some with the final score, but they illustrate the magnitude of what this bill will accomplish. The IRA will help to build a better America for all Americans. Let's start with health care. The bill we passed today will lower prescription drug prices and make healthcare more affordable for millions of Americans. Finally, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will have the authority to negotiate lower drug prices for the Medicare Program, benefitting both millions of seniors on fixed incomes and taxpayers. In the private sector, no plan sponsor or manager would ever accept responsibility without the ability to decide how to negotiate. Medicare negotiation will ensure that patients with Medicare get the best deal possible on high-priced drugs, saving Medicare approximately $100 billion. The IRA will further lower drug costs for seniors by capping out-of- pocket costs for part D prescriptions at $2,000 each year, requiring drug manufacturers to pay penalties if they raise their prices faster than inflation, and delaying of the Trump administration's drug rebate rule. Although these provisions alone will lower beneficiary costs, the IRA also lowers costs through a redesign of the Medicare Part D formula, expansion of the low-income subsidy--LIS--in part D, and Federal coverage for vaccines. The IRA also invests $64 billion to extend ACA healthcare premium subsidies through 2025. These subsidies, first provided through the American Rescue Plan, have guaranteed millions of Americans access to affordable health insurance. Access to affordable health insurance saves lives and reduces costs because people get the care they need and they get it sooner. As Benjamin Franklin said, ``An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.'' The IRA will save Maryland families with median income about $2,200 annually. The IRA raises several hundred billion dollars by making the Tax Code fairer through three major provisions. The first provides up to $80 billion to the Internal Revenue Service--IRS--to modernize its computer systems, some of which are 60 years old, and rebuild its workforce to ensure greater tax compliance. CBO estimates that investing $80 billion in tax enforcement and compliance will generate $203 billion in additional revenue over the next 10 years. Since 2010, the IRS budget has been cut by roughly 20 percent, and the budget earmarked for enforcement has dropped by 24 percent. Audit rates for the largest corporations and the ultrawealthy have fallen dramatically, by 54 and 71 percent, respectively. We now have the perverse situation where the poorest American families are audited at about the same rate as the top 1 percent richest taxpayers, even though that 1 percent is responsible for 28 percent the ``tax gap,'' the difference between taxes owed and collected. According to recent polling, nearly three-quarters of Americans believe the IRS should conduct more tax audits of large corporations and millionaires. The IRA provides 10-year funding for the IRS as follows: $3.2 billion for taxpayer services; $45.6 billion for enforcement; $25.3 billion for operations support; and $4.8 billion for business systems modernization. These appropriated funds are to remain available until September 30, 2031, and no use of the funds is intended to increase taxes on any taxpayer with taxable income below $400,000. The bill also makes it easier for the IRS to establish a free, direct e-file tax return system. The IRS currently outsources its free e-file program to private, for-profit tax preparers. Not surprisingly, only 3 percent of taxpayers--of 70 percent eligible--use the existing free e- file option. The second major provision establishes a minimum corporate income tax of 15 percent of book income on fewer than 200 of the Nation's largest corporations that currently pay less than the statutory corporate tax rate, which is 21 percent. The corporate alternative minimum tax-- CAMT--proposal would impose the 15 percent minimum tax on adjusted financial statement--``book''--income for corporations with profits in excess of $1 billion. Corporations would generally be eligible to claim net operating losses and tax credits against the AMT and would be eligible to claim a tax credit against the regular corporate tax for AMT paid in prior years, to the extent the regular tax liability in any year exceeds 15 percent of the corporation's adjusted financial statement income. In 2020, 50 of the biggest corporations paid $0 in Federal corporate income tax, despite recording substantial profits. Some of these companies effectively had a negative Federal income tax because they received more in credits and rebates than they paid in taxes. The AMT makes the existing corporate tax structure fairer, especially for smaller businesses that often pay their taxes at higher rates than the largest corporations. Consider that many small businesses pay taxes through the individual tax code, where the highest tax rate is as much as 37 percent. Setting a baseline of taxes to be paid by the largest corporations gives small businesses a better chance to compete and succeed. The third provision is a 1 percent excise tax on stock buybacks. Corporations can choose to distribute profits either by issuing dividends or buying back shares of stock, which inflates stock prices. Stock buybacks are taxed at a lower rate than dividends and create profit gaming opportunities for companies, which have been abused over time. By levying a small 1 percent tax on these buyback transactions, it improves tax efficiency and raises revenue that will significantly contribute to deficit reduction. The IRA's tax provisions will increase compliance and close the tax gap, which costs the U.S. $1 trillion per year in unpaid taxes, according to the IRS. That is important for the revenue they raise. It is also important that millions of hard-working Americans who play by the rules and pay their taxes believe that the system is fair and that the ultrawealthy and large corporations aren't dodging their financial responsibilities. We need to address climate change by rapidly reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and cutting our greenhouse gas emissions. The IRA does that. It will cut our emissions by 40 percent or more by 2030 and put us on track to meet 70 percent of our Paris agreement obligations. It contains a Methane Emissions Reduction Program to reduce leaks from the production and distribution of oil and natural gas. The IRA contains roughly $370 billion in clean energy, energy security, and climate change investments that will lower Americans' electricity bills and prices at the pump and create as many as 9 million good-paying jobs here in America in the clean energy sector over the next decade. I am pleased the IRA includes a provision I have championed, a production tax credit for our existing fleet of nuclear reactors. They are an essential source of baseload power and provide 20 percent of the Nation's electricity and over 50 percent of our carbon-free electricity. According to the non-partisan Resources for the Future, all told, the IRA will drive down retail costs of electricity by 5.2-6.7 percent over the next decade, saving electricity consumers $209-$278 billion. The average household will experience approximately $170-$220 in annual savings from smaller electricity bills and reductions in the costs of goods and services over the next decade. The clean energy investments will help to insulate ratepayers from volatility in natural gas prices, with electricity rates projected to decrease even under a high natural gas price scenario. More importantly, the IRA will bolster our economic and national security by strengthening our grid and reducing reliance on foreign energy supplies. The legislation also includes a historic expansion of a tax program I have led, the section 179D energy efficient commercial buildings deduction, which provides a tax deduction for energy efficient building investments. Energy efficiency is good business and good policy. This legislation will expand section 179D, which was made permanent in 2020 under my leadership, to increase the deduction amount, improve its administration, allow more nonprofits to use the deduction, and expand its use to building retrofits. In addition to the important steps the IRA takes to advance clean energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the bill delivers major Federal investments to make our communities healthier, safer, and more resilient in the face of increasing impacts of climate change. It provides Federal assistance for monitoring environmental quality, mitigating the harmful impacts of air pollution and excessive heat, and enhancing walkability in our neighborhoods. It does this through $3 billion for Neighborhood Access and Equity Grants and $3 billion for Environmental and Climate Justice Block Grants. By targeting resources to disadvantaged or underserved communities, the bill advances equity in our infrastructure planning and investments. Climate change is happening now. We need to address its impacts on the ground. The IRA invests $2.6 billion for the conservation, restoration, and protection of coastal and marine habitats and resources, including fisheries, to enable coastal communities to prepare for extreme storms and other changing climate conditions, as well as $250 million to rebuild and restore units of the National Wildlife Refuge System and State wildlife management areas. The bill supports America's farmers and rural communities, with around $20 billion in funds for climate-smart agricultural practices through existing farm bill conservation programs, including the regional conservation partnership program--RCPP--and $1 billion for the Natural Resources Conservation Service, to provide technical assistance on conservation to producers. Many sustainable practices such as expanding cover crops and riparian buffers that mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and help farmers adapt to climate change also cost- effectively reduce pollution to the Chesapeake Bay. The IRA makes investments to accelerate clean energy deployment, help achieve our climate goals, and create millions of jobs over the next decade. These investments include an expanded tax credit to support domestic manufacturing of clean energy technologies, including solar panels, wind turbines, and batteries; and tax credits that will make battery and fuel cell electric vehicles--EVs--more affordable for millions of families. The bill provides over $9 billion for Federal procurement of American-made clean technologies, including $3 billion for the U.S. Postal Service to purchase zero-emission vehicles, helping to create a stable market for clean, Made in America products. Researchers Robert Pollin, Chirag Lala, and Shouvik Chakraborty at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst's Political Economy Research Institute estimate that the IRA's more than 100 climate, environmental, and energy provisions will generate an average of about 912,000 jobs each year over the next decade through combined annual public and private investments of $98 billion. The IRA tax credits and other provisions won't just help create jobs; they will help create jobs that pay prevailing wages. The middle class has experienced wage stagnation for half a century. Income inequality has grown. The IRA will help to rebuild the middle class. Unions from the Communication Workers of America and the United Auto Workers to the National Treasury Employees Union and the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers all support the IRA because it promotes union jobs and apprenticeships and because it will lower healthcare costs. In May, the Treasury Department estimated that the budget deficit this year will decline by $1.5 trillion. As President Biden noted at the time, ``The bottom line is that the deficit went up every year under my predecessor before the pandemic and during the pandemic. And it's gone down both years since I've been here. Period.'' The IRA is fiscally responsible and will help reduce our budget deficits. Deficits remain too high, of course, but one of the best ways to address them is by getting unemployed Americans back to work. The July jobs report released on Friday put the unemployment rate at 3.5 percent, matching the lowest it has been in 50 years. The U.S. economy added 528,000 jobs in July, more than twice the number economists anticipated. As Myles Udland, Senior Markets Editor of Yahoo! Finance, stated, This staggering increase in employment completes a milestone for the U.S. economy: Pre-pandemic employment is now fully restored. In February 2020, the last month before the COVID-19 pandemic tipped the U.S. economy into recession, there were 152.504 million people employed in the U.S. As of July 2022, 152.536 million people in the U.S. were working. And despite the labor market contraction during the pandemic being the sharpest in modern history, the bounce back marks the second-fastest job market recovery since 1981. In a little over two years, we've seen job losses that topped 20 million at one point be fully erased. This recovery stands in stark contrast to the malaise we saw in the labor market following the financial crisis, when it took the better part of a decade for pre-crisis employment levels to be restored. Inflation is also too high, but its root causes are COVID-19 pandemic-related supply chain disruptions and Vladimir Putin's war on Ukraine. The IRA tackles these disruptions by promoting domestic manufacturing and supply chains and reducing our reliance on foreign energy. On August 2, 2022, over 120 prominent economists wrote a letter to Senate and House leadership stating that the IRA ``addresses some of the country's biggest challenges at a significant scale. And because it is deficit-reducing, it does so while putting downward pressure on inflation.'' There is much to celebrate in this bill, but there are many priorities that we were not able to add. This ``to do'' list includes reinstating the expanded child tax credit and making child care accessible and affordable. My priority list includes legislation I have long championed to expand dental coverage to Medicare beneficiaries, as well as to Medicaid beneficiaries, along with expansions to home and community-based and maternal health services. Congress also needs to address housing supply and economic development priorities, including the Neighborhood Homes Investment Act, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, the New Markets Tax Credit, and the Historic Tax Credit. While the IRA will help create good-paying union jobs, we need to do more to protect and enhance workers' rights to form and join unions and engage in collective bargaining. And I will continue working to fund water infrastructure programs the IIJA created to address urgent affordability and resilience issues. While that seems like a long list, we must not let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and the IRA is so much better than good. It is transformational legislation, and I am proud to support it. I want to commend Majority Leader Schumer and so many of my colleagues who have worked diligently both in the spotlight and behind the scenes to bring us to this point. I also want to acknowledge committee and personal staff; CBO and JCT staff; Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough and her crew; leadership, floor, and cloakroom staff; the Senate legislative counsels; and others. You toil anonymously, but I hope you know how important you are. The Senate could not function without you. You are among our Nation's finest public servants, and you are making a critical difference in the lives of all Americans. The American essayist Charles Dudley Warner famously said, ``Everybody complains about the weather, but nobody does anything about it''--a quote commonly misattributed to his friend Mark Twain. Passing a reconciliation bill is like that. We all complain about the process, especially the so-called vote-a-rama, which is grueling and grinding and befuddling to just about everyone, but we don't fix it. In fact, it seems to get worse each time, not better. I know I would prefer not to go through the process again, but the Inflation Reduction Act and the American Rescue Plan before it have been worth it. Dahlia Rockowitz, Washington director of Dayenu: A Jewish Call to Climate Action, noted that the Senate consideration of the Inflation Reduction Act began on the Shabbat and Tisha B'Av, a Jewish day of collective mourning for historic destructions. But as she pointed out, `` . . . according to Jewish tradition, this day of despair is also the day that new hope and the potential of a rebuilt, reimagined, redeemed world is born. These investments in clean energy and transportation can help us emerge from climate-fueled disasters to a more hopeful, clean energy future for generations to come.''

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Kim Brinkman, who will be retiring on August 11, and to thank her for her 34-plus years of exemplary service to the Senate community. Kim has spent her entire career working in the Senate Disbursing Office. Her colleagues in disbursing will miss her, but so, too, will all Senators and Senate staff and their families. We have all relied on Kim for expert advice and guidance on pay and health and retirement benefits and other issues. Kim is a constituent, but she originally hails from Nevada, IA. She attended Stephens College in Columbia, MO, for 2 years and then transferred to the University of Iowa, where she graduated with a degree in economics. She is a proud Hawkeye. In 1985, Kim had a summer internship working at the Federal Aviation Administration and decided she wanted to return to Washington, DC, after she graduated from college. She went to a library in nearby Ames, IA, and checked the ``Help Wanted'' section of the Washington Post's classifieds. The Senate Disbursing Office had an opening; she applied and returned to Washington to interview for the job; and she got it. She started working in the disbursing office on October 5, 1987. When Kim started her career, the disbursing office had a staff of 43; just 10 of them were women, including Kim. The Senate had just two female Senators: Senator Nancy Kassebaum of Kansas, and my former colleague, Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, who had just assumed office a few months before Kim arrived. Fast forward to today, and 45 of the disbursing office's 58 staffers are women. There are 24 female Senators, plus Vice President Harris. That has been one of the biggest changes Kim has witnessed over the course of her career. The other is the advent of the internet, email, and other information technology, which has revolutionized the way we all work, including Kim. Senators Leahy, Grassley, McConnell, and Shelby are the only Members currently serving who arrived here before Kim, and just one of her colleagues at disbursing has more seniority. Kim began her career as a staff assistant in the front office, moved to the employee benefits section, became the employee benefits manager, and later was promoted to her current position as assistant financial clerk of the Senate. I have often said that the Senate is a family, and we are so grateful to staff members like Kim who make it function. Certainly, Kim has made the thousands of Senators and staffers she has helped over the years feel like family. She isn't just a subject matter expert when it comes to pay and benefits; she is friendly, cheerful, patient, and kind. Everyone who knows Kim has the highest regard and affection for her. Kim will travel back to Iowa this month to visit her parents and help celebrate her father's 90th birthday. She will also travel to Kentucky to celebrate her daughter Maya's graduation from the University of Kentucky. While Kim and her sister will continue to look after their parents as needed, I know Kim's legions of friends in the DC metropolitan area are glad that she will be coming back here, where she will step up her gardening and her antique shopping in Rappahannock County. She will have more time for her artwork and playing the piano and clarinet and volunteering at her church, where she is part of the visiting ministry team. Ralph Waldo Emerson said, ``To laugh often and much; To win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; To earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; To appreciate beauty, to find the best in others; To leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch, or a redeemed social condition; To know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.'' He was describing Kim Brinkman. On behalf of my colleagues, but especially on behalf of all the Senate staffers and their family members whom she has counseled and assisted over the years, I want to thank Kim for her outstanding service and wish her all the best as she embarks on the next chapter in a life well lived.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, first of all, I want to applaud the Senator from Alaska for his comments. I agree completely with his statements, and I think his amendment making it clear that we expect the 2 percent to be honored by all member states is something that we all should welcome and agree to. I thank you for your leadership. I also thank you for how you have articulated the importance of NATO to our national security. NATO is a transatlantic security partnership that has served our national security interests so well for so many years since the end of World War II. Today, we are going to have a chance to vote to expand the NATO alliance by adding Finland and Sweden. I hope all my colleagues will support that. I will point out that Finland already exceeds the 2 percent that Senator Sullivan is talking about, the percentage of their GDP that they are spending on defense. So I think this is another reason why we have countries that we want to add to the alliance. We have 30 strong now. This will even be stronger with Finland and Sweden being added to the NATO alliance. But what is unique about the two countries that we will have a chance to vote on in a few moments is that they give us added value to our alliance. They make our alliance stronger. It is in our national security interest to include Finland and Sweden. They add value militarily and economically to this alliance. The geostrategic location of these two countries is critically important to our national security. Just think for a moment about the threats to the Baltic nations that we have seen by Russia--Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. Think about where Poland has been threatened because of Russia's aggression in Ukraine. Adding Finland and Sweden will help us round out the security alliance necessary to provide the security that we need. Both of these countries are already committed to interoperability with the NATO alliance. They are already familiar with how NATO's process and procedures are utilized. So we have two countries that are ready from day one to be active participants in the alliance. They both participate in regular participation and training exercises with NATO and U.S. forces. Both Sweden and Finland have done that. They have contributed troops. Sweden has contributed troops to NATO-led operations in Kosovo, to Afghanistan, to Iraq. So we have countries that have already stepped up to help us in security and now will be a formal part of the security alliance. They will add, also, a dimension that is important for us in regards to winter warfare. The cold response winter warfare exercises have been participated in. Finland has the arctic capabilities that will be critically important to us as we move forward. So we are adding value to the NATO alliance as well as expanding the number of countries. I want to mention one other area: cyber and misinformation. We have two countries that have been very active in being victimized by the misinformation campaign by Russia. Sweden has a Psychological Defence Agency that they created in 2016 that is going to be important for us. As we know, Mr. Putin uses every weapon in his arsenal, including misinformation, in order to try to bring down democratic states. We know that in Sweden's case, they are already taking decisive action to counter the misinformation. Finland has an anti-fake-news initiative, which is actually fascinating. They recognize that Russia is trying to invade their country through misinformation, and they have an active way of defending against it. So, as I said earlier, we have two countries that will add value to the alliance. The timing here couldn't be better. We have stood up an international resolve to support Ukraine in the invasion by Russia. Expanding NATO at this moment is a clear message to Mr. Putin that we stand with the democratic countries of Europe and we are prepared to expand our NATO alliance to guarantee their protection. So these two stalwart, democratic nations, Finland and Sweden, have been robust partners to the United States and Europe on countless fronts. They have provided humanitarian aid to many countries in need, including Ukraine during the unprovoked invasion by Russia. Combined, Finland and Sweden provided over $120 million in military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine between February and June of 2022. These two nations have also shown a commitment to democratic governance, ranking third and fourth respectively on the global Democracy Index of 2020, according to an economist group. So we have two of the leading democratic states. Finland and Sweden have proven time and time again that they have the defense capabilities and commitment to democracy in Europe to make them essential NATO allies. The Senate must act now to bolster this global peace and security by voting in favor of Finland and Sweden's accession to the North Atlantic Treaty. I urge my colleagues to do that.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to note that, during this coming recess, we will mark the somber occasion of the 1-year anniversary of the fall of Kabul and the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. I want to draw the attention of the Senate and the American people to one of our most urgent priorities in Afghanistan: providing immediate assistance for Afghan citizens that risked their lives to further U.S. interests and whose lives now stand in jeopardy should we not act soon. Nine days--in the short span of 9 days after seizing control of the first province to fall on August 6, 2021--Nimruz--a whirlwind of chaos ensued. The world watched as, one by one, all of the country's provinces fell to Taliban forces until finally reaching the capital Kabul on August 15. With little resistance from the Afghan forces we had trained and equipped over two decades, the Taliban simply entered and took control. In terrified desperation, many Afghans gathered what they could carry with them and fled. People left their whole lives behind--their houses, their jobs, their friends and family--risking their lives to flee the country in the wake of the Taliban takeover. Shocking images of Afghans clinging to U.S. evacuation flights as they took off could not have shown a clearer picture of the despair of so many Afghans. Amid this panic, the Biden administration acted swiftly to evacuate American personnel and most American citizens. We joined our international allies to call for a new Afghan Government that is united, inclusive, and representative, including with full participation of women. We joined international voices to reaffirm our commitment to ensuring rights of women and girls in Afghanistan. And along with our NATO allies, we committed to evacuate at-risk Afghans. And make no mistake, we as Americans remain committed to all these priorities. We stand united with our allies to further these goals and ensure a stable and secure Afghanistan. Central to the Taliban's beliefs is the Pashtun code of ethics, ``Pashtunwaly,'' in which ``nang''--which means honor--stands as the central tenet. It is with ``nang'' in mind that we call on the Taliban to honor their commitment to provide an accountable and inclusive government. We urge them to honor their original and oft-repeated promise to uphold human rights and support education for women and girls--commitments that recent reporting suggests they are not fulfilling. We call on them to honor their commitment to provide a safe and secure Afghanistan for all Afghans. We join our allies in the international community in these calls for action. Yet in the aftermath of the fall of Afghanistan, there remains one priority for the U.S. alone to undertake: ensuring the well-being of Afghan citizens who put their lives on the line to serve our country. These are the Afghans who worked at our Embassy and other diplomatic facilities, served as our translators, helped us engage with the Afghan Government, and provided us information and assistance. They are the Afghans that served and studied in U.S.-affiliated centers and universities. They are the Afghans who worked tirelessly to promote our principles as journalists working for U.S.-affiliated outlets, like the Afghan services of RFE/RL, Radio Azadi, and Ghandara. Without their assistance, U.S. lives would have been lost. Without their support, we would have been unable to talk about our U.S. values and priorities to the Afghan people. Without them, we would not have been able to work with the Government of Afghanistan to promote our shared goal of regional stability and security. To these individuals and their families, we owe a great debt for their assistance. The 77,000 Afghans currently in the pipeline for special immigrant visas, the 44,000 that await processing for their P1/ P2 visas, and yet another almost 5,000 that seek humanitarian parole, these individuals are all counting on us. So I call on the State Department to make renewed efforts to expedite these cases. I would like to recognize that, to date, our government has made enormous strides in this herculean effort; tens of thousands of these individuals were evacuated from Afghanistan following the collapse of the government. Yet tens of thousands more remain stranded in limbo, both in Afghanistan as well as in third countries--among others, in Pakistan, Qatar, UAE, Georgia, Albania, and the Kyrgyz Republic. They wait patiently, many of them running through their personal savings, many unable to work. We continue to support these individuals, oftentimes maintaining a delicate dialogue with the host countries about the long-term plans for these individuals. I would like to share with you the story of one such individual whose life hangs in the balance. It is with her permission that I share this story, and I will call her ``Arezo'' to safeguard her anonymity. Arezo is a bright young Afghan woman of Hazara heritage who studied at a U.S. university and later worked for an international human rights NGO. By all accounts, up until the collapse of Afghanistan, she was one of the many Afghans working to build a bright future for Afghanistan. When Kabul fell, like so many others, Arezo shred all the documents tying her in any way to the United States. She knew that if the Taliban discovered this connection, both her life and her family's lives could be at risk. While attempting to flee, Arezo and her brother were discovered by the Taliban and taken in for questioning about their reasons for wanting to leave the country. Arezo's brother was savagely beaten. Arezo was subjected to a humiliating virginity test. They were both taken into custody for several weeks, during which they endured brutal and inhumane treatment, often ridiculed by the Taliban guards for their Shi'a faith as ``untrue Muslims.'' While incarcerated, Arezo witnessed the brutal rape of a 12-year-old girl at the hands of the Taliban. The crime of this child? She had been imprisoned for riding in local transport without a male family member escort. Miraculously, after external pressure, Arezo was released, but not without the threat hanging over her head that the Taliban would keep tabs on her. Arezo now waits for the United States to process her visa. Hers is one of the over 44,000 cases that remain backlogged, while her life hangs in the balance. I tell you this: It is in our direct, immediate interest to dedicate and reallocate resources to resolve pending cases like those of Arezo. Until we resolve their cases, we continue to expend enormous U.S. resources to support them in third countries, with no clear end in sight. We continue to ask much of our bilateral partners that have generously agreed to take in these evacuees. Our Embassies and government Agencies will continue to struggle with the overload caused by the burden of managing these extra cases. But most importantly, we owe it to these individuals who put their own lives on the line for our county to process their cases quickly. It is no accident that I chose the name ``Arezo'' as a stand-in for the young Afghan woman who, like so many others, awaits our action. Arezo is a Hazara name that means ``hope'' or ``faith.'' And like so many others, she has taken it on faith that the U.S. Government will make good on its promise to take care of the Afghans like her that have served--and continue to serve--U.S. interests and who still believe in the American dream and still believe that America will fulfill her promises. I encourage that at all levels of government, we work to identify resources to reallocate towards this goal. We have the resources, but we must redirect these resources and make it a top priority. I call on our State Department and USCIS colleagues to elevate the task of processing cases to a high priority status. I propose that we convene in committee to discuss additional ways that Congress can support the successful resolution of their cases and permanent resettlement. On the eve of the 1-year anniversary of an ignominious American withdrawal from Afghanistan, after a two-decade effort, I urge that across all lines of government, we recognize this priority and work promptly to resolve the cases of the many Afghans who have put their lives on the line for our country.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, let me thank Chairman Carper and Ranking Member Capito and my counterpart on the Subcommittee on Infrastructure, Senator Cramer, for bringing us to this moment where we will soon be voting on the Water Resources Development Act. I must tell you, this is an extremely important bill that gives the Army Corps the authorization they need to advance critically important water projects in our country. Mr. President, this was passed by a unanimous vote in the Environment and Public Works Committee. Due to the leadership of Senator Carper and Senator Capito, this bill involves the input of all the members of our committee and--dare I say--all the Members of the U.S. Senate. So I want to thank them for getting this bill to the point where we will be able to vote on it this afternoon. This bill is truly bipartisan. It incorporates the input from every single Senator and reflects priorities for our water resources in States and communities across the country. It provides crucial authority for projects and guidance for the Army Corps of Engineers to engineer better solutions to our Nation's toughest water infrastructure supply and quality challenges. The work of the Army Corps of Engineers is vital for keeping commerce flowing in our waterways, for restoring aquatic ecosystems, and for helping communities deal with the risks and impacts of flooding. In my State of Maryland, we have challenges in all of these areas, and we are partnering with the Army Corps to address them. The Port of Baltimore, for example, is critical in our national supply chains and an economic engine for the State of Maryland. To enhance the port's ability to serve commerce and provide safe navigation, the Army Corps is moving forward with a Mid-Chesapeake Bay Island Ecosystem Restoration Project, or Mid-Bay, which will put dredged material to beneficial use restoring our ecosystems in the Chesapeake Bay, a major win-win for commerce and the environment. Here we are taking dredged materials and using it for environmental restoration, providing a very popular place to put dredged material so we can keep our harbors and our channels dredged but we also can restore our environment at the same time. A project the size of Mid-Bay also has the opportunity to benefit smaller channels along the Chesapeake Bay. In Maryland, we have dozens and dozens of smaller channels that support economic activity, recreational opportunities, and are an integral part of the identity of the small communities they serve, but these channels have not received the maintenance that they require. I am proud that this year's WRDA bill provides the Corps with new authorization to address these underserved harbors and channels, directing the Corps to take a closer look at them according to the significance to their community and not just based on the total amount of cargo they move. This is going to help many of our communities around America. In doing so, this bill adds new perspective to the Army Corps' thinking so that the Chesapeake Bay is fully understood not just as an artery for commerce but as a national environmental treasure that is home to living waterfronts that support a variety of community, economic, and nature-based activities. The WRDA reauthorization takes an important step in that direction with its provisions for underserved harbors. I am also proud that this bill includes a new statewide authorization for the Army Corps to provide assistance to Maryland on environmental infrastructure. We very much will take advantage of this opportunity. We know that we have challenges with the Chesapeake Bay, and this environmental study assistance will certainly help us in meeting our obligations. This authorization will also help communities across my State deal with the impact of aging infrastructure and move forward on the backlog of critical repairs and upgrades to water supply, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. The bill recognizes that because the Army Corps work is in high demand around the country, the Corps needs to be accessible to communities and engage with them directly on the challenges they face. The Planning Assistance to States Program, which has been so important to Maryland, will now include a new authority for the Corps to conduct this outreach to communities. The Army Corps is carrying out its important work on navigation, flood risk mitigation, ecosystem restoration, and environmental infrastructure against the backdrop of a worsening climate crisis. This reality is forcing us to act with new urgency to protect our communities from multiple hazards that our country is already experiencing with increased frequency and severity, including concentrated catastrophic rainfall events, sea level rise, and the associated erosion and flooding that these impacts bring. It is also forcing us to prioritize the restoration of ecosystems harmed by climate change that can still play a role in building resilience. All of that is incorporated in this bill, and we will be able to have those tools that are available. I just want to mention that one example is marshlands, which absorb tons of carbon dioxide in the United States each year. They buffer waves and reduce flooding during storms. We had a hearing in the Environment and Public Works Committee yesterday--it was a good hearing--on how we can get carbon capture. Well, one of the ways we can get carbon capture through natural causes is to restore wetlands, which trap carbon, and this bill will allow us to move forward in that direction. Finally, I want to note that, this year, the Army Corps' Baltimore District is celebrating its 175th anniversary. I congratulate the Baltimore District on this important milestone. The district has played an instrumental role in the history of our Nation and the State of Maryland, dating back to the construction of Fort McHenry, and I am proud of the ongoing partnership of Colonel Pinchasin, the current regional director. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I again applaud the great leadership we have on our committee, the very open way that we do business, the way that we listen to each other and are able to get the priorities accomplished. To Senator Carper and Senator Capito and Senator Cramer, it is a pleasure to work with you, and thank you for making this possible. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I rise to express my support for the substitute amendment to the House message accompanying H.R. 4346, which is the vehicle for the so-called CHIPS Act. Semiconductors are crucial to nearly every sector of our economy. They are in our cars and trucks, medical devices, and 5G telecommunications equipment. America created the semiconductor industry in the 1960s. We ceded global leadership in the 1970s. We regained it, to an extent, in the 1990s but have lost it again. In 1990, the U.S. share of semiconductor manufacturing was 37 percent. By 2020, that share had declined to 12 percent. As Mark Muro and Robert Maxim of the Brookings Institution recently reported: While the 1990s saw a significant expansion in U.S. innovation capacity in semiconductors, the nation's production capacity continued to decline. In some cases, this owed to foreign countries out-competing the U.S. on labor costs. But more can be attributed to the significant subsidies foreign governments have been providing to build and maintain fabrication plans--a level of support that the U.S. hasn't matched. The Senate is poised, with strong bipartisan support, to get the United States back on track with respect to domestic semiconductor manufacturing, which is critical for our national and economic security. The substitute amendment provides $54 billion in grants to domestic manufacturers and another $24 billion in tax credits through the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors--CHIPS--for America Fund. The substitute amendment also authorizes $102 billion over the next 5 years for the National Science Foundation--NSF--the Department of Commerce, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology--NIST--a $52 billion increase over the Congressional Budget Office--CBO--baseline. These funds will be a ``shot in the arm'' for domestic manufacturing; here is a list of some firms that plan to use funding to expand or establish manufacturing facilities: Intel and TSMC plan to build factories in Ohio and Arizona; GlobalFoundries wants to expand a facility in upstate New York; SkyWater Technology and Purdue University want to collaborate on a new $1.8 billion factory and research facility West Lafayette, IN; and IBM and the State University of New York at Albany want to establish a semiconductor research center in Albany. While the substitute amendment is necessary, it is not sufficient. It does not extend the Trade Adjustment Assistance--TAA--Small Business Innovation Research--SBIR--or Small Business Technology Transfer-- STTR--Programs, for instance. Fortunately, conferees are still working on those and other provisions from the Senate-passed United States Innovation and Competition Act--USICA--and the House-passed America Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing, Pre-Eminence in Technology, and Economic Strength--America COMPETES Act. I hope the Senate will have the opportunity to vote on a conference report that covers many issues the substitute amendment does not address. Many Senators have spoken on the floor about the importance of the semiconductor incentives in division A of the substitute amendment, and I have just added my voice to that chorus. But I would also like to highlight the science provisions included in division B, which are also important. division B authorizes: $20 billion for the first-of-its-kind NSF Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships, which will accelerate domestic development of critical national and economic security technologies such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, advanced manufacturing, 6G communications, energy, and material science; $9 billion--$4 billion over the CBO baseline--for several NIST initiatives and programs, including a tripling of funding for the Manufacturing Extension Program--MEP--and leverages the MEP to create a national supply chain database, which will assist businesses with supplier scouting and minimize supply chain disruptions; and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's--NASA--Artemis Program to return Americans to the Moon as a prelude to sending humans to Mars. Division B also extends the International Space Station through 2030 and supports a balanced science portfolio, including Earth science observations and continued development of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. Division B codifies the Planetary Defense Coordination Office and requires NASA to continue efforts to protect Earth from asteroids and comets. Just 2 months from now, the Double Asteroid Redirection Test-- DART--will deliberately crash a probe into the minor-planet moon Dimorphos of the double asteroid Didymos to shift Dimorphos's orbit. The asteroid poses no actual threat to Earth; it was merely selected for the test to assess our ability to deflect an asteroid on a collision course with Earth through kinetic energy. I introduced the Cleaner, Quieter Airplanes Act in the previous Congress and again this year and am pleased that division B directs NASA to continue research in aeronautics, including the use of experimental aircraft, to advance aircraft efficiency and supersonic flight. Finally, division B requires the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy--OSTP--to promulgate guidance to all Federal research Agencies that would: prohibit Federal research Agency personnel from participating in foreign talent recruitment programs; require covered individuals on applications, e.g., principal investigators, to disclose participation in foreign talent recruitment programs; and prohibit awards in cases where covered individuals are participating in malign foreign talent recruitment programs. In the aggregate, the substitute amendment will help the United States recapture and maintain its technological preeminence in so many sectors. I want to thank and congratulate Leaders Schumer and McConnell and Senators Cantwell and Cornyn and so many others who have been instrumental in bringing the Senate to this point. As I said a moment ago, however, our work does not end here. I entreat the USICA/America COMPETES Act conferees to reach an agreement so that the Senate may consider the myriad provisions not contained in the substitute amendment--provisions that are equally important to our economic and national security. As with the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, we are demonstrating that the Senate can work in a bipartisan fashion to pass bills that make life better for all Americans.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I am wondering if my colleague would yield for 1 minute.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on the resolution.

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 411, S. Res. 568.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 412, S. Res. 589.

Mr. CARDIN. I further ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment to the resolution be agreed to; the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; the committee-reported substitute amendment to the preamble be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, for the past 6 months, I have been pleased to work with a bipartisan working group of about a dozen Senators for potential reforms of the Electoral Count Act and some related matters. I particularly want to thank our leaders of that bipartisan group, Senators Collins and Manchin, for organizing the group, keeping us focused on getting results, and leading to a process that has resulted in a positive outcome. This week, we are unveiling our proposed legislation. Our legislation, the Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022 will reform and modernize the badly outdated 1887 ECA. In 1887, the Electoral Count Act was passed. It is in bad need of reform. On July 18, 2022, the Wall Street Journal ran an editorial authored by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State Jim Baker, who had previously served as Chief of Staff for President Reagan. In this editorial they wrote: We stand on opposite sides of the partisan divide, but we believe it is better to search for solutions together than to remain divided. This is particularly true of a vexing problem that could wreak havoc during the 2024 presidential election: the inadequacy of the Electoral Count Act of 1887. The act is an antiquated, muddled and potentially unconstitutional law that allows uncertainty during a critical step in the peaceful transfer of power. . . . Weaknesses in the law started to become apparent after the 2000 election. The editorial continues: In 2021, the ambiguities of that law helped lead to the violent assault on the U.S. Capitol as efforts were being made to toss out several states' slates of electoral votes. Fortunately, those efforts failed, and the rightful winners took office. But the threat of confusion remains. Left unclosed, loopholes in the act could allow a repeat of the same destructive path that occurred in 2021. The Washington Post has written several editorials on this subject as well. The June 19, 2022, editorial in the Post entitled ``Fix the electoral count law now, before Trump tries to exploit it again'' reviewed the recent House committee hearings on the January 6 insurrection. The editorial wrote: The House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack heard damning testimony detailing how President Donald Trump and a coterie of partisan lawyers advanced a dangerous argument: that the vice president has the legal authority to overturn a presidential election when Congress meets to count electoral college votes. Trump official after Trump official testified that they knew it was wrong. John Eastman, a lawyer who advocated for the theory, acknowledged as much in front of Mr. Trump on January 4, according to testimony from Greg Jacob, who was Vice President Mike Pence's general counsel. But Mr. Trump and his allies nevertheless waged a relentless public campaign to pressure Mr. Pence to betray the Nation's democracy. Belief in this antidemocratic nonsense spurred the January 6 mob, which infamously chanted, ``Hang Mike Pence.'' The Post editorial continued: Americans went most of their history without having to worry seriously about arcane electoral college procedures. Even in closely fought, acrimonious presidential elections, losing candidates accepted their defeats with grace rather than seeking the vulnerabilities in the law to exploit. The country no longer has that luxury. Congress should have no higher priority than fixing the electoral college process. The recommendations that are coming out of this bipartisan group would do just that--fix the Electoral Count Act. I want to thank the work of the American Law Institute, which convened a bipartisan working group to consider possible ECA reforms. In particular, I want to thank cochairs Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith for their contributions to our efforts. I also want to thank the staff at Protect Democracy for their suggestions and work here. Our legislation aims to ensure that Congress can accurately and correctly tally the electoral votes cast by the States, which should be consistent with each State's popular vote for President and Vice President of the United States. Our legislation clarifies some of the ambiguities in terms of the appropriate State and Federal roles in selecting the next President and Vice President of the United States as set forth in the U.S. Constitution. In our constitutional system, election law, like many other areas of law, involves shared powers between the Federal Government on the one hand and State and local governments on the other. Article I, section 4 of the Constitution provides: The Times, Places, and Manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof. That clause of the Constitution continues by concluding: But the Congress may at any time [by law] make or alter such Regulations. We have the power here, and that is what the Electoral Count Act is about. Article II, section 1 of the Constitution provides: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress. The Constitution also provides: The Congress may determine the Time of choosing of the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States. The 12th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1804, sets out a framework for Congress to tally and count the electoral votes from the States. Congress later passed the Electoral Count Act, the ECA, in 1887, in the aftermath of a contested Hayes-Tilden Presidential election of 1876 in which States sent competing slates of electors to Congress. Our legislation takes several key steps to modernize the ECA and reduce the opportunity for constitutional mischief when it comes to Congress properly counting the electoral votes of the States. First, the legislation helps to make it easier for Congress to identify a single, conclusive slate of electors from each State. The legislation requires each State's Governor as responsible for submitting the certificate of ascertainment identifying that State's electors. A State may designate another individual besides the Governor to carry out this function, such as the Secretary of State, if such an individual is named before the election day itself. Again, the State executive official reporting their electoral votes to Congress must do such ``under and in pursuance of the laws of such State providing for such ascertainment enacted prior to election day.'' Our legislation, therefore, seeks to avoid circumstances in which a State attempts to change the rules after election day due to political pressure that may arise if a particular favored candidate loses the election. Congress could not accept a slate of electors from an official not authorized to do so by State law enacted prior to election day. Our legislation provides that States following these rules will have their appointments of electors treated as conclusive by Congress subject to any subsequent State or Federal judicial relief granted prior to the date of the meeting of electors. Our legislation states that the determination of the Federal courts shall be conclusive on questions arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States. Second, the legislation modernizes the ``failed election'' language in the ECA to specify that a State could modify its period of voting on election day only as necessitated by ``extraordinary and catastrophic'' events ``as provided under the laws of the State enacted prior to [the election day].'' This provision makes it clear, if a State legislature tries to override the popular vote in their State, that that would not be allowed. Third, the legislation provides for the expedited judicial review of certain claims relating to a State's certificate identifying its electors. We have limited this special judicial review in our legislation to only be available to the aggrieved Presidential candidates. This special procedure allows for challenges made under Federal law and the U.S. Constitution to be resolved more efficiently by using a special three-judge panel with a direct and timely appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Fourth, the legislation makes clear that the Vice President has a purely ministerial role in the joint session of Congress to count the States' electoral votes. In particular, our legislation states that the Vice President does not have the power to solely determine, accept, reject, or otherwise adjudicate disputes over electors. That specifically includes objections over the proper list of electors, the validity of electors, or the votes of the electors. President Trump pressured the Vice President to use this illegal method in order to overturn the 2020 election results. Ultimately, this effort was rejected by Vice President Pence, in his capacity as President of the Senate, as he presided over the January 6, 2021, joint session. Fifth, our legislation increases the threshold needed to lodge an objection to electors from one Senator and one Representative to one- fifth of the duly chosen and sworn Members of both the House and the Senate. Similarly, article I, section 5 of the Constitution provides ``the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those present, be entered on the Journal.'' This will reduce the risk and likelihood of frivolous objections being lodged, which requires a lengthy debate and vote in the separate Houses. The House has to vote separately; the Senate has to vote separately; and it takes a lot of time. For example, on January 6, 2021, the Senate voted to reject, by a vote of 6 to 93, the objection against the electors of Arizona and voted 7 to 92 on the objections raised as to the electors from Pennsylvania. Sixth, our legislation clarifies that, if electors are not lawfully appointed or if an objection is sustained by Congress rejecting electors as not lawfully appointed, those electors would not be included in the denominator for determining the majority of the whole number of electors appointed. That means we can reach a decision on the day that we count the votes. The main focus of our work over the past 6 months has been on this sorely needed reform in the ECA, but our working group came up with a number of bipartisan reforms on some other matters related to elections. The Presidential Transition Improvement Act would help promote the orderly transfer of power between Presidential administrations. As we saw in 2020, the failure of a timely ascertainment of the winner by the Administrator of the U.S. General Services Administration and the uncooperative attitude of the Trump administration led to a delay in providing transition resources to the incoming Biden administration. This legislation provides clearer guidelines for eligible candidates for President and Vice President to receive Federal resources to support their transitions, including allowing more than one candidate to receive these resources during the time period when the outcome of an election is in reasonable doubt. The Postal Service Election Improvement Act seeks to improve the handling of mail-in ballots by the U.S. Postal Service and provides guidance and best practices to the States to improve their mail-in ballot processes if State law allows. The Election Assistance Commission Reauthorization Act would reauthorize the Election Assistance Commission for 5 years. The EAC administers grants to States and develops nonbinding guidance and best practices for election officials in various areas, including cyber security, election audits, and voting accessibility. What this legislation does not include is any substantive provision to strengthen voting rights in this country, which is desperately needed, and I am sorely disappointed by that omission. Our Nation has a long history of bipartisan work on voting rights issues. I repeatedly raised voting rights issues with our larger group as well as with our smaller subgroup on voting practices. Let me take a moment to remind my colleagues of our voting rights history. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was approved by a broad bipartisan vote of 328 to 74 in the House and by a vote of 79 to 18 in the Senate, and Congress had a long bipartisan track record of clarifying its intent in response to restrictive Supreme Court decisions--that is, until recently. In 1982, Congress amended section 2 of the Voting Rights Act after the Mobile v. Bolden decision in which the Supreme Court interpreted section 2 as prohibiting only purposeful discrimination. That was very restrictive, making the Voting Rights Act much less effective. Congress responded to that decision by clarifying that section 2 explicitly bans any voting practice that had a discriminatory result irrespective of whether the practice was enacted or operated for a discriminatory purpose. The 1982 amendments--these are the amendments that corrected the Supreme Court's restricted decision--passed the House by a vote of 389 to 24 and the Senate by a vote of 85 to 8. They were signed into law by President Reagan, a bipartisan action. Over 20 years later, Congress acted to address two Supreme Court rulings to clarify congressional intent regarding section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. This reauthorization passed 390 to 33 in the House and 98 to 0 in the Senate. It was signed into law by President George W. Bush--again, a bipartisan action. So, after the Supreme Court's decision in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 and after Brnovich in 2021, Congress should have acted to clarify the intent of the Voting Rights Act, but it didn't, and now we are faced today with totally unnecessary partisan gridlock on voting rights. We saw this gridlock play out this January when the Senate refused to even take up and debate the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act. Let me mention one section of the VRA in particular. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act protects against discriminatory voting laws. It prohibits any jurisdiction from implementing a ``voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure . . . in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right . . . to vote on account of race,'' color, or language minority status. For nearly 40 years, case law has interpreted section 2 to combat racial discrimination without partisan favor. Prior to the Brnovich case, the Supreme Court and several circuit courts had adopted a standard to ensure the effective implementation of these provisions consistent with the text and purpose of the Act as amended in 1982. The Brnovich decision deviated from congressional intent behind section 2. The Court adopted an unduly narrow reading of section 2 and went beyond the statutory interpretation by courts for decades by outlining five new guideposts. The decision is not tethered to the statutory text and is inconsistent with the statute's purpose and historical usage. It wasn't the first time the Court narrowed our law, but in previous efforts, we came together, Democrats and Republicans, to make sure that the Voting Rights Act was effective. So I am disappointed that we could not make progress in our working group to address the needed fix to section 2. We should have also looked at the issue of the right of private action. Since the Voting Rights Act's enactment in 1965, Congress has intended that voters be able to sue directly to enforce the Voting Rights Act rather than depend entirely upon the U.S. Department of Justice, which has finite resources to protect voting rights. I want to thank my colleague Senator Murkowski for consistently raising this issue. The Voting Rights Act's private right of action is settled law as Congress has repeatedly noted in its Voting Rights Act's amendments. Even though the private right of action is clear and settled law, our group should have removed any ambiguity about its intent by proposing language making it more explicit the statute's existing right for private action. Just as we resolved ambiguities in the ECA and its potential misinterpretation, we should have done the same with this critical right of private action under the Voting Rights Act--a missed opportunity. As a recent report from the Brennan Center points out, State legislatures have been working to make it harder to vote after the 2020 elections, even after witnessing record turnout during the pandemic. The Brennan Center wrote that in 2022: [S]tate lawmakers, who spent 2021 passing laws that made it harder to vote, have focused more intently on election interference, passing nine laws that could lead to tampering with how elections are run and how results are determined. Election interference laws do two primary things. They open the door to partisan interference in elections, or they threaten the people and processes that make elections work. In many cases, these efforts are being justified as measures to combat baseless claims of widespread voter fraud and a stolen 2020 election. The Brennan Center noted that in many of these same State legislatures, lawmakers have continued to introduce or enact laws that restrict access to the vote. Legislation is categorized as restrictive if it would make it harder for eligible Americans to register, stay on the rolls, and/or to vote as compared to existing State law. Free and fair elections are fundamental to who we are as a nation. For this reason, I strongly support the bipartisan working group's proposal to reform and modernize the ECA. As we saw in the 2020 elections, different interpretations of the Electoral Count Act can lead down a dangerous path to another January 6-style insurrection, when former President Donald Trump and his enablers attempted to overturn a free and fair election won by President Joe Biden. Congress's work will not be complete when we pass this bipartisan proposal. We still must take up and pass voting rights legislation in order to safeguard the right to vote, which should be a right guaranteed to all Americans, regardless of their race, wealth, or social status. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Cortez Masto, Cardin, and Hickenlooper be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions from July 21, 2022, until July 25.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 1045, 1046, 1047, 1049, 1057, 1058, and all nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Foreign Service; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc without intervening action or debate; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table; that any statements related to the nominations be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's actions; and that the Senate resume legislative session.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders. Pursuant to Rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3 p.m., Monday, July 25, and that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon the conclusion of morning business, the Senate resume consideration of the House message to accompany S. 3373; further, that the cloture motion filed during yesterday's session ripen at 5:30 p.m. and that the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

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