Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, before I start my remarks, I want to underscore how valuable the Department of Defense fellows program is to our individual offices. I can tell you firsthand that Captain Ng's presence in my office has given me capacity to deal with issues concerning appointments that I have or issues that are pending in Congress of a military nature. For those of us who have never served in the military service, having someone like Captain Ng in our office is incredibly important. I really want to underscore that and thank all of our Defense fellows for the services they are performing for our country. Mr. President, on May 22 of this year, I stood before this body and expressed my deep concerns about the media reports that President Trump was considering granting pardons to certain U.S. military personnel who had been convicted of committing war crimes in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Now 6 months later, President Trump has followed through with setting a very dangerous precedent, pardoning three military personnel of war crimes, two who were found guilty under the U.S. military's Uniform Code of Military Justice and one whose trial never concluded. President Trump's pardons significantly disrupt the foundations of our own institutions, particularly the U.S. military. First, President Trump's pardons cause confusion for our military servicemembers on what actions are acceptable on the battlefield--an already difficult task given the complexity of war. Second, he undermines the military justice system. Finally, these pardons degrade America's global standing and influence. Stephen Preston, a former General Counsel at the Department of Defense, wrote the following in the Department of Defense Law of War Manual in June of 2015: The law of war is part of who we are. . . . [T]he laws of war have shaped the U.S. Armed Forces as much as they have shaped any other armed force in the world. The law of war is part of our military heritage, and obeying it is the right thing to do. . . . [T]he self-control needed to refrain from violations of the law of war under stresses of combat is the same good order and discipline necessary to operate cohesively and victoriously in battle. The Law of War Manual goes on to outline the five interdependent principles that serve as the foundation of the law of war: One, military necessity; two, humanity; three, proportionality; four, distinction; and five, honor. These principles are pillars of American values and the guideposts we expect America's sons and daughters to operate within so they remain trusted and respected by all citizens of the world. President Trump's ill-advised pardons have placed those pillars on shaky ground. He has blurred the lines of morality for our troops and has disregarded the constitutional values the Founding Fathers set forth. By virtue of their oath and training, members of the U.S. military are accountable for their individual and collective actions through the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Department of Defense policy states: Each member of the armed services has a duty to: (1) comply with the laws of war in good faith; and (2) refuse to comply with clearly illegal orders to commit violations of the law of war. Two of these military personnel President Trump pardoned were found guilty of violating the law of war through the prescribed Department of Defense investigative and judicial processes. They violated international and domestic law, and they failed to uphold their constitutional oath. President Trump's pardons of war crimes erode the trust, confidence, and the legal and moral authority of the military justice system. He never gave the military justice system a chance to work and determine all the facts surrounding the third individual whom he pardoned. Our own Commander in Chief has now compromised and degraded the integrity of the U.S. military judicial system--a system America relies on to maintain good order and discipline within the ranks of our millions of uniformed servicemembers. Perhaps most important and most damaging, President Trump's actions have eroded America's moral standing and global influence. That erosion emboldens our adversaries to cite our actions in committing and justifying their own war crimes. Have we become a country that now justifies and embraces the type of acts that occurred at My Lai during Vietnam or Abu Ghraib in Iraq? Will we continue to allow horrific acts committed by rogue actors who strategically diminish America's global standing? Moving forward, how will other nations trust the United States to implement and enforce the law of war, as required by our own domestic laws, policy, regulations, and orders, and by the multiple treaty obligations with other countries? Our Nation cannot tolerate crimes committed by rogue actors who violate their oaths and who turn their backs on American laws and values. If our government does not hold those individuals accountable for their actions, the United States will never recover from the strategic losses they incur. Under no circumstance is adopting the behavior of our worst adversaries ever justified, ever. Just as we seek to hold foreign actors accountable for war crimes, we also have an obligation to hold ourselves accountable. We cannot willfully allow our institutions or the individuals who serve them to deviate from the laws and standards of conduct that underpin our great Nation, but that is precisely what President Trump has done. Our former colleague, Senator John McCain, suffered many years of torture at the hands of the North Vietnamese captors. Nonetheless, he stood in this Chamber to decry our use of the same tactics. He said: ``This question isn't about our enemies. It is about us. It is about who we were, who we are, and who we aspire to be. It is about how we represent ourselves to the world. Our enemies act without conscience. We must not.'' Senator McCain was correct. Great power competition with our adversaries is not just about who wins on a battlefield; ultimately, it is about preserving international recognized norms and values that uphold the rule of law, individual freedoms, and human dignity. If the U.S. fails to be the global champion of current international norms and democratic values, then our adversaries will replace those values with their own ideology predicated on intimidation, fear, and violent oppression. The United States must not willfully commit or condone war crimes. We must bring those who commit them to justice, regardless of citizenship, affiliation, or background. Even in the fog of war--especially in the fog of war--we must so act. We must always endeavor to act with moral clarity and preserve the international norms and values that took so long and have cost so many American lives to establish. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize an inspiring young man, Ellis McKennie. I had the good fortune of getting to know Ellis when he was an intern in my office, first in the summer of 2018 in my State office and then again this past summer in Washington. He was a diligent worker, always searching for ways to help. He was keen to take advantage of every opportunity to learn. One thing that became obvious right away is that Ellis is an empathetic young man; in one instance, as a youngster, he asked his mother to make lunches for less fortunate fellow students. I am very grateful to Ellis for his service to the people of Maryland during his internships and for his service to the University of Maryland as the epitome of a student athlete. Ellis has been an offensive lineman on the Terrapins' football team for the last 4 years. Perhaps more important than his leadership on the field, though, has been his leadership off the field, where he has advocated fiercely for meaningful athletic reform in the wake of his boyhood friend and teammate Jordan McNair's tragic death from heatstroke last year. Ellis has worked hard to mobilize his teammates and the entire campus to become more engaged politically. In recognition of his ability to bring people together for positive change, the student body elected Ellis to the university senate this year. Somehow, among Ellis's football career, activism, and student governance, he has also found time to set an exemplary academic record, twice earning All-Big Ten academic honors and completing his undergraduate degree in just 3 years. Now, while he plays his final season for the Terrapins, he is busy earning a graduate degree in public policy. Next, Ellis plans to attend law school and hopes to serve as an elected official 1 day, perhaps here in the Senate. I have been so impressed by everything that Ellis has been able to accomplish at such a young age and by everything that he aspires to achieve in the future. Most of all, I am proud of his enduring commitment to building community, helping those in need, and fighting for what's right. Young people like Ellis should reassure all of us that the future of our country is in capable hands. On November 20, the Baltimore Sun ran an article by Don Markus entitled ``Maryland's Ellis McKennie found his voice when Jordan McNair died. Now he looks to finish his career strong.'' The article captures the qualities that make Ellis such a special young man. I ask unanimous consent that the article be printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that floor privileges be granted to retired Army CPT Jonathan Ng, a Department of Defense fellow serving in my office, for the remainder of this session of Congress.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, November 16 was the 10th anniversary of the tragic death of Sergei Magnitsky. Sergei Magnitsky was a Moscow-based lawyer who represented an investment company, known as Hermitage Capital, whose American-born founder was Bill Browder. In the course of Mr. Magnitsky's representation of his client, he discovered a major tax fraud issue-- $230 million of taxpayer moneys being funneled through shell companies with business ties to President Putin. Mr. Magnitsky did what any good lawyer would do in discovering corruption and reported it to the local authorities. As a result, he was arrested and tortured. Ultimately, he died in prison. He was in prison for nearly a year without having a trial. Unfortunately, this is not a unique circumstance in Russia, but we in the global community decided that we could not let this injustice go without taking action. Those responsible needed to be held accountable. Yet, in Russia, those responsible for this tragedy were promoted and received awards. So there needs to be accountability for those who violate basic human rights and their government will not take action. I first learned of the Magnitsky tragedy in my role as a member of the Helsinki Commission. I was the chair and ranking Democrat on the Helsinki Commission. The Helsinki Commission is the way we enforced the Helsinki Final Act that was passed in 1975, and it adheres to basic principles of human rights. It gives every member-signator of the Helsinki Final Accords the right to challenge what is happening in other states. Russia is a signator to the Helsinki Final Act. The United States is a signator, and we raised the Magnitsky issue. Then, working with the late Senator John McCain, I authored legislation known as the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act. It was enacted into law in 2012, and what it does is it says that those who were participating in gross human rights violations in Russia--related to what happened to Sergei Magnitsky--that those who were responsible would not be allowed to visit the United States by being granted visas or to use our banking system. Why was that so important? Because these corrupt officials like to have their assets in dollars, not rubles, and they like to visit the United States, and they like their families to visit the United States. What is unique about the Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act is that Congress can initiate the executive branch taking up particular names. It is interesting--I have heard from many Russians who fully support what we are doing. We are giving them an opportunity for their voices to be heard. Mr. Putin lobbied against its passage, but it passed Congress by an overwhelming vote. To date, 54 individuals have been sanctioned under the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012, and it has been very effective. We have been told through press accounts that in the summit meeting between Mr. Putin and President Trump, it was one of the first subjects that Mr. Putin raised in regard to the Magnitsky sanctions. And I must tell you, it provided U.S. leadership a way to stand up and hold human rights abusers and corrupt individuals accountable for their crimes. As a result of our action, other countries acted--Canada acted; European countries acted--and we were able to get much more effective use of this sanction against human rights violators. The Magnitsky legacy is not limited to Russia. Unfortunately, there are powerful, corrupt, and dangerous human rights violators globally, where countries do not hold these violators accountable for their actions. So once again partnering with the late Senator John McCain, I authored the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, which was enacted in 2016, and we have used that act. We used it in Saudi Arabia to deal with the tragic death of Jamal Khashoggi. Over 100 individuals have been sanctioned under Global Magnitsky, including those in the DRC, Nicaragua, and Burma as result a result of the Rohingya tragedies. Once again, U.S. leadership was there. As a result of our action, we saw action in Canada, and we saw action in the European Union. As we commemorate the 10th anniversary of Sergei Magnitsky's tragic death, let us recognize that Sergei's life and legacy have led to two of the most significant human rights accountability laws that exist today. Because of Sergei Magnitsky, the United States and many of our allies now have the tools available to hold human rights abusers accountable and to deter would-be perpetrators from committing such crimes in the first place. I urge my colleagues to continue to honor Sergei Magnitsky through our actions. Let us stand by our values and continue to ensure the protection and defense of human rights around the world. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, let me first thank Senator Rubio for his leadership on this issue and Senator Menendez and Senator Risch for their leadership in our committee and so many others who have been involved, because tonight we have a chance to reaffirm our commitment for human rights and democracy. That is exactly what our legislation does. It recognizes the fact that for 24 consecutive weeks, the people of Hong Kong have been asking for their basic democracy and freedom. On Monday, it was reported--just yesterday--that police fired 1,458 rounds of tear gas, 1,391 rubber bullets, 325 beanbag rounds, and 265 sponge grenades--that is just yesterday--on peaceful protesters. They are asking nothing more than to exercise the rights they were told would be protected to express their views and to be able to have democracy in Hong Kong, which is the way it was in the previous time. Senator Rubio and I introduced legislation, and the chairman and ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Risch and Menendez, joined us, and we passed this bipartisan legislation on June 13. It reaffirms the principles set forth in the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, which supports democratization, human rights, and the autonomy of Hong Kong. Now, Senator Rubio already talked about this, but this is a very important thing. We gave Hong Kong a special status in its relationship with the United States that China does not enjoy, and we gave them that special status upon their protecting democracy and human rights in Hong Kong. That was the commitment. If they don't comply with that, this special status should no longer be available, and this legislation requires that we get information on a regular basis as to whether China is respecting the rights that we put in our legislation in 1992, that they notify us on a regular timeframe. That is an important point, because if they don't, we shouldn't give them that protected status. Secondly, it identifies persons who suppress basic freedoms, similar to the Magnitsky Act sanctions. Those that are taking away the human rights of the people of Hong Kong would be subject to the same type of visa restrictions to visit America and to use our banking system. That makes a great deal of sense, and we know that is pretty effective. So it is time that we back up our words and our commitment to supporting Hong Kong's democratization, human rights, and autonomy with action. Let's make sure the people of Hong Kong know that the U.S. Congress and the American people stand in solidarity with them, as the Chinese authorities, as we speak, are repressing the legitimate rights of the people of Hong Kong. We can stand with the people of Hong Kong for democracy and human rights by our actions this evening. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I implore the Senate to take up legislation addressing America's gun violence epidemic. We must pass legislation requiring universal and completed background checks for individuals seeking to purchase a gun, to help insure that guns do not fall into the wrong hands, with deadly results. Last week, on the morning of November 14, it was a normal Thursday at Saugus High School in Santa Clarita, CA. Just before second period, a 16-year-old boy pulled a semiautomatic pistol out of his backpack. In just 16 seconds, he shot five of his classmates, killing two. A short time later, he turned the gun on himself. After hearing the gunshots, Katie Holt, a teacher at Saugus High School, rushed students into her classroom and barricaded the door. One of the injured girls made it into Holt's classroom. Thankfully and incredibly, Holt had a gunshot wound kit in case of a school shooting. The girl had been shot twice, and Holt only had one kit. Holt dressed the two wounds as best she could with one kit, while a freshman student applied pressure. The injured girl survived. Katie Holt's preparedness and quick action likely saved that young girl's life. As we commend her heroic actions, we have to ask ourselves: How did we get to this point? How did we get a place where American teachers feel obligated to keep gunshot wound kits in their classrooms? We also mourn the tragic loss of life in several other recent mass shootings. On November 18, three people were killed outside a Walmart in Duncan, OK. Just this past weekend, on November 17 in Fresno, CA, 10 individuals were shot and 4 were killed at a football watch party. On October 31 in Orina, CA, five individuals were killed and four wounded at a Halloween block party. And we all remember the horrific spate of mass shootings this summer, including those in Texas, Ohio, California, and Virginia, leading to dozens killed. In February 2019, the House passed H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, by a bipartisan vote of 240-190. That month, the House also passed H.R. 1112, the Enhanced Background Checks Act. Since that time, these bills have languished in the Senate where the Republican leader refuses to allow Senate consideration. By refusing to take up legislation to require universal and completed background checks, the Senate is failing the American people. We have a responsibility to pass commonsense gun reform to end the senseless bloodshed. We need gun reform now, not only to address our country's seemingly endless cycle of mass shootings, but we need gun safety legislation now because our communities are ravaged by daily gun violence that does not make news headlines. On average, about every 13 hours, someone is killed with a gun in Maryland. On average, 656 Marylanders die from fatal gunshot wounds every year. Firearms are the first leading cause of death among children and teens in Maryland. African-American children and teens in Maryland are five times as likely as their White peers to die by guns. In Maryland, African-Americans are 16 times as likely to die by gun homicide as White people. In 2017, 53 percent of the guns recovered from Maryland crime scenes came from another State. Often, these guns used in crimes in Maryland are from States with more lenient gun control laws. American women are 21 times more likely to be killed with a gun than women in other high-income countries; 4.5 million women in the United States have been threatened with a gun by their current or previous intimate partner. It has estimated that 900,000 American women have been shot or shot at by their current or previous intimate partner. When there is a gun present during a domestic violence situation, a woman's risk of being killed goes up 500 percent. In Maryland, from 2013 to 2017, 48 women were fatally shot by an intimate partner. African-American women are 1.7 times more likely as White women to be fatally shot by a partner. These are women like Maryland resident, Timira Hopkins. Hopkins' relationship with her boyfriend was abusive, and he had made threats before. One night in 2014, Hopkins' boyfriend delivered on his threats, shooting Hopkins five times before killing himself. Incredibly, Hopkins survived, but the right side of her face is paralyzed, and she is deaf in one ear. In September of this year, Hopkins shared her story on NPR in the hopes she can help other survivors. We need to do more for brave women like Timira Hopkins. We need to join her in the fight to protect people suffering domestic violence. This body understands the dangerous potential consequences of domestic violence perpetrators owning guns. That is why, in 1996, we passed the Lautenberg amendment, banning gun ownership for individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. However, without universal background checks, we can't effectively enforce this prohibition and keep guns out of the hands of violent abusers. An estimated 22 percent of U.S. gun owners purchased their most recent firearm without a background check. When background checks are not required, domestic abusers get ahold of guns. In 2018, Sara Schmidt was murdered by her husband, who should have be prohibited from purchasing a firearm because of a domestic violence felony. Schmidt's husband purchased the gun he used to murder Sara from an online private seller, bypassing background check requirements. Passing legislation to expand background checks to every gun sale, including those conducted online, at gun shows, and through private transfers, should be the top priority in Congress. Congress should also make sure that background checks are fully completed before a gun sale is finally approved. There is no one answer which will fix America's gun violence epidemic. But we can't let the complexity of the problem paralyze us. We need to take steps forward. The American people deserve action. They are demanding action. An overwhelming majority of Americans--97 percent--support expanding background checks. Congress must listen to the 97 percent of Americans and take action. We cannot wait any longer. While we wait, Americans are dying, and communities are traumatized by violence. We must do the right thing and take up the House legislation requiring universal and completed background checks for individuals seeking to purchase a gun. The time for action is now.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. ``Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.'' Most Americans believe that the Equal Rights Amendment is part of our Constitution today, but it is not. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated: Every Constitution written since the end of World War II includes a provision that men and women are citizens of equal stature. Ours does not. The State of Maryland has a provision very similar to that in its State constitution. Many of our States have acted on the Equal Rights Amendment, but, as Justice Scalia said, ``Certainly the Constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex. The only issue is whether it prohibits it. It doesn't.'' We need to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in the Constitution of the United States for many reasons. The most basic reason is that it provides additional protection against discrimination against women. It has a higher standard to prevent discrimination. It shows America's leadership globally on human rights. In 1972, Congress started the process by passing the Equal Rights Amendment. We passed it in 1972. Now, of course, it requires 38 States to ratify it before it can become law. To date, 37 States have ratified the Equal Rights Amendment. We are one short of accomplishing our objective of putting the Equal Rights Amendment at long last in the Constitution of the United States. But there is an additional potential hurdle; that is, when Congress passed the resolution in 1972, it put a 7-year time limit for the States to act. They extended that to 10 years. This is strictly a provision that is discretionary to Congress. Article V of the Constitution puts no limit on the time for ratification of a constitutional amendment proposed by Congress for the States to ratify. In fact, the 27th Amendment was ratified in 1992. That deals with congressional pay raises. It was first proposed in 1789 to be part of the Bill of Rights, and over 200 years later, it was ratified. So there is no time limit in the Constitution for the ratification of a constitutional amendment. To remove any doubt, Congress should extend the time, as it did once before. In order to accomplish that, I joined with Senator Murkowski, the Senator from Alaska, in a bipartisan effort on S. Res. 6 that removes the deadline, the time limit on the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an op-ed piece written by Senator Murkowski and myself in regard to why we need to get that resolution passed.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, on November 13, the House Judiciary Committee took up a very similar resolution, H.J. Res. 79 by Representative Jackie Speier, and it has now been reported out favorably. So we now have moving through the House of Representatives a resolution that would remove this time limit that was imposed in the 1970s on the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. What I am imploring upon my colleagues is, we are very close to getting this done. We know there was a change in leadership in Virginia. Virginia could very well be the 38th State. But let's remove the ambiguity as to a time limit. We will celebrate in this Congress the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, the women's suffrage amendment that passed in 1920. Why did it take so long for women to have the right to vote? Well, people are asking: Why is it taking so long to put the Equal Rights Amendment into the Constitution of the United States? We have a plan to get this done by passing the resolution I talked about, the 38th State to ratify it, and that at long last, the United States will provide the leadership on universal human rights by placing the Equal Rights Amendment in our Constitution. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, it is with great pride that I name K. Neal Truck and Bus Center the United States Senate Small Business of the Week. K. Neal Truck and Bus Center is a family-owned business based in Hyattsville, MD. Following a decades-long career in the grocery business, Stephen Neal purchased a trucking business and renamed it after his son, Korey Neal. Together, the father-son team has turned K. Neal into the second largest minority-owned truck and bus supplier in the country, with more than $100 million in annual revenue and just under 100 employees. On the Senate Small Business Committee, we often speak of small businesses as drivers of economic growth and innovation, but they are often also pillars in their communities, and K. Neal is no exception. I had the privilege of meeting with Stephen, Korey, and several K. Neal executives last month, and I was impressed by the company's commitment to empowering all its employees and investing in its community. Half of the executives at K. Neal are women, and for the past 5 years, the company has partnered with the Prince George's County Economic Development Corporation to train workers from underserved communities to become diesel technicians. I am proud to share that 14 individuals have completed the program, and 8 of them are currently employed by the company. The company also voluntarily banned the box for returning citizens convicted of nonviolent crimes. Thanks to K. Neal's history of business success and commitment to investing in their community and their neighbors, the U.S. Black Chambers of Commerce presented its 2019 Emerging Leaders & Influencers Award to the company. I applaud Stephen and Korey for building a successful company and using their company to make a positive difference in the lives of so many. They have truly made Prince George's proud.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce new legislation called the Cleaner, Quieter Airplanes Act. This legislation sets an ambitious goal for accelerating the National Aeronautics & Space Administration's (NASA) important, ongoing work on electric aircraft propulsion and other technologies to be integrated on new aircraft that are both cleaner and quieter. It challenges us to bring about a transformational shift in our aviation industry to airplanes that produce less greenhouse gas pollution and less noise: 50 percent less by 2030 for regional transport aircraft and by 2040 for larger aircraft serving transcontinental markets. To achieve this goal, this bill proposes $1.2 billion in funding for NASA over six years, with a ramp-up and then a decline in the annual amounts. This funding will push NASA to accelerate its work and to expand its collaboration with industry partners to get this done. A growing number of Maryland citizens have expressed concerns about airplane noise in their communities. We all want a thriving aviation industry. Air travel is important to our way of life, and it is a key sector of our economy, accounting for more than 5 percent of our total gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014 and supporting more than 10 million jobs. As air traffic volumes increase, however, we are increasing our communities' exposure to noise pollution that has an adverse impact on our quality of life. We need to find new solutions for supporting our need for air travel while addressing these concerns about noise. This legislation is also about finding new and innovative ways to fight climate change. Today, transportation is the leading source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Aviation accounts for approximately 3 percent of all emissions. Three percent may not sound like much, but consider that emissions from aviation are expected to triple by 2050 and could account for as much as 25 percent of global emissions. If we want to continue flying as we do now while protecting ourselves from the perils of climate change, now is the time to act. There is some exciting innovation happening right now, with companies working on new, electric aircraft technologies--including work by large, established companies and by smaller start-ups. We have heard from some of them, and two things they have said stand out. The first is that government-funded research undertaken by NASA is critical to the development and testing of new technologies in electric aircraft. The work that NASA does in collaboration with industry partners addresses a wide array of technical challenges, like how to make certain electrical components work at high altitudes and what sorts of air frame designs might best enable new kinds of propulsion. The second thing we hear is that if we do not act with greater urgency, we risk allowing other countries to pass us by in a critical industry. Europe, in particular, is moving quickly with strong government investments in research, development, and demonstration of new, electric aircraft technologies. If we fail to match this ambition and build these skills at home, we will be left out of this drive to innovate and our businesses and workers will be at a competitive disadvantage. This will become even more difficult as other countries embrace new, stricter standards for aircraft noise and greenhouse gas pollution. So there are a few reasons for the urgency behind this legislation. It responds to the need to support research and development in our aviation industry to remain competitive with other countries. It responds to the need for new ideas to combat climate change. And it responds to our need for air travel with fewer noise impacts on our neighborhoods. This legislation calls on our innovative spirit to produce a new generation of airplanes that are cleaner, quieter, and ultimately more sustainable, both for our environment and our economy. Thank you.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce new legislation called the Cleaner, Quieter Airplanes Act. This legislation sets an ambitious goal for accelerating the National Aeronautics & Space Administration's (NASA) important, ongoing work on electric aircraft propulsion and other technologies to be integrated on new aircraft that are both cleaner and quieter. It challenges us to bring about a transformational shift in our aviation industry to airplanes that produce less greenhouse gas pollution and less noise: 50 percent less by 2030 for regional transport aircraft and by 2040 for larger aircraft serving transcontinental markets. To achieve this goal, this bill proposes $1.2 billion in funding for NASA over six years, with a ramp-up and then a decline in the annual amounts. This funding will push NASA to accelerate its work and to expand its collaboration with industry partners to get this done. A growing number of Maryland citizens have expressed concerns about airplane noise in their communities. We all want a thriving aviation industry. Air travel is important to our way of life, and it is a key sector of our economy, accounting for more than 5 percent of our total gross domestic product (GDP) in 2014 and supporting more than 10 million jobs. As air traffic volumes increase, however, we are increasing our communities' exposure to noise pollution that has an adverse impact on our quality of life. We need to find new solutions for supporting our need for air travel while addressing these concerns about noise. This legislation is also about finding new and innovative ways to fight climate change. Today, transportation is the leading source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Aviation accounts for approximately 3 percent of all emissions. Three percent may not sound like much, but consider that emissions from aviation are expected to triple by 2050 and could account for as much as 25 percent of global emissions. If we want to continue flying as we do now while protecting ourselves from the perils of climate change, now is the time to act. There is some exciting innovation happening right now, with companies working on new, electric aircraft technologies--including work by large, established companies and by smaller start-ups. We have heard from some of them, and two things they have said stand out. The first is that government-funded research undertaken by NASA is critical to the development and testing of new technologies in electric aircraft. The work that NASA does in collaboration with industry partners addresses a wide array of technical challenges, like how to make certain electrical components work at high altitudes and what sorts of air frame designs might best enable new kinds of propulsion. The second thing we hear is that if we do not act with greater urgency, we risk allowing other countries to pass us by in a critical industry. Europe, in particular, is moving quickly with strong government investments in research, development, and demonstration of new, electric aircraft technologies. If we fail to match this ambition and build these skills at home, we will be left out of this drive to innovate and our businesses and workers will be at a competitive disadvantage. This will become even more difficult as other countries embrace new, stricter standards for aircraft noise and greenhouse gas pollution. So there are a few reasons for the urgency behind this legislation. It responds to the need to support research and development in our aviation industry to remain competitive with other countries. It responds to the need for new ideas to combat climate change. And it responds to our need for air travel with fewer noise impacts on our neighborhoods. This legislation calls on our innovative spirit to produce a new generation of airplanes that are cleaner, quieter, and ultimately more sustainable, both for our environment and our economy. Thank you.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I honor the service and sacrifices of our veterans and their families every day. As we approach the 101st Veterans Day on Monday, I want to take a moment to pay special tribute to the men and women who have worn a uniform in defense of our great Nation, its people, and our values. Progress usually is a good thing, but sometimes it comes with frightful consequences. The industrial revolution brought the development of weapons and tactics that enabled humankind to wage war and carnage upon itself at a level never before seen. By the end of World War I, there were approximately 40 million military and civilian casualties. H.G. Wells predicted it would be ``the war to end war.'' Tragically, that was not the case. The United States played an instrumental role in ending World War I, then known as the Great War. On the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month in 1918, Germany signed an armistice with the Allies in a railroad car outside Compiegne, France. One hundred years ago, on November 11, 1919--exactly 1 year after the signing of the armistice with Germany--President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed the first ``Armistice Day'' to commemorate the day. On that occasion, he stated: ``To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country's service and with gratitude for the victory.'' Maryland played a critical role in ending that conflict with victory. Prominent military installations such as Fort Meade and Aberdeen Proving Grounds rapidly trained and deployed troops to Europe, and about 2,000 Maryland servicemembers made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our freedom and ideals. Congress passed legislation to establish Armistice Day as a legal holiday in 1938, ``dedicated to the cause of world peace.'' The advent of World War II brought new challenges to America. Just as before, countless brave men and women stepped forward to do their part in service of their country. And just as before, Marylanders stepped forward arm-in-arm with their fellow citizens. The mighty Bethlehem- Fairfield Shipyard in Baltimore produced hundreds of ships at dizzying speed to fight a war across a great ocean. Just a few miles from there, Glenn L. Martin Company's Aircraft produced A-22 Maryland bombers among other critically important aircraft in the battle for air superiority. Marylanders heroically fought on battlefields across the European and Pacific theatres. In all, 6,454 Marylanders lost their lives in World War II. Their names are memorialized in the granite of the Maryland World War II Monument in Annapolis. In 1954, after the Korean war, veterans service organizations urged Congress to amend the 1931 act by striking out the word ``Armistice'' and inserting the word ``Veterans.'' With the approval of this legislation on June 1, 1954, November 11 became a day to thank and honor all American veterans who have served in wartime and peacetime. Successive conflicts and a rapidly modernizing world have brought their own unique national security challenges, but Americans' bravery and willingness to serve has never wavered. Our Nation's security has always depended on the men and women of our military, and for their service, we are eternally indebted. Maryland continues to play a strategic role in our Nation's security infrastructure. The Old Line State is home to 11 military installations. Among the facilities are Joint Base Andrews, which is home to the President's two Boeing VC-25 airplanes, which have the call sign ``Air Force One'' while the Commander-in-Chief is on board, and the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, which has been training midshipmen since 1845. We honor all those men and women who have endeavored to protect our country and preserve our democracy so that Americans may live free from tyranny. Maryland is fortunate to be home to about 371,000 military veterans. These servant-leaders live amongst us as schoolteachers, small business owners, homemakers, public servants and most every other profession and they continue to give back to our communities. Let us all honor our veterans on this solemn day and every day by holding the values they fought so gallantly to defend and by providing them with the benefits they earned through blood, sweat, courage, and perseverance. On this Veterans Day, I join all Americans in thanking our veterans for their service, their sacrifice, and for being role models for future generations of Americans who will pick up the mantle of defending our great country.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, we need to pass the FUTURE Act to help students in historically Black colleges and universities, minority- serving institutions, and we need to do that now. I am here to advocate on behalf of Maryland's four HBCUs that face a funding cliff due to congressional inaction. Without the immediate passage of the FUTURE Act, Bowie State University, Coppin State University, Morgan State University, and the University of Maryland Eastern Shore face a collective $4.2 million funding shortfall now that the Higher Education Act's authorization for mandatory funding for these institutions lapsed October 1 of this year. This clean, bipartisan, and paid-for 2-year authorization gives breathing room to continue to negotiate the full reauthorization of the Higher Education Act without holding these historically underfunded institutions hostage. Our HBCUs and MSIs know they can count on this mandatory funding each year to strengthen their course offerings and in-demand STEM programs, make infrastructure improvements, and provide academic counseling and student support services to first-generation and historically underrepresented students. Throwing the budgets of these institutions into chaos directly harms their ability to serve their students and communities. Institutions would have to make decisions about potentially reducing levels of academic services, delaying needed infrastructure investments, and make longstanding staffing decisions. These decisions are being made all across the country at schools of each of our States. Collectively, the MSIs risk losing out on $255 million in mandatory funding. This is an unnecessary obstacle our HBCUs and MSIs do not need to face. We have a paid-for available for us today to address this issue. We can get this done now. The House is prepared to accept this 2-year extension, which gives us a chance to negotiate a complete reauthorization of the Higher Education Act but does not hold these institutions hostage with the mandatory funding that is provided by law. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 212, H.R. 2486; that the Murray amendment at the desk be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I greatly respect the chairman of the committee. I know of his sincerity in dealing with higher education and education in our country, but the issue is pretty simple. Without the continuation of mandatory funding as provided by current law, historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions cannot rely upon the funding source the chairman is talking about. There are going to be tough decisions that have to be made on infrastructure improvements, tough decisions on staffing, and there is no need for it. We all agree that mandatory funding should continue. I am all for permanent extension. This UC will give us the 2-year window to make sure we pass the Higher Education Act reauthorization to fund that. The issues the chairman is going to talk about are all matters that are under discussion and debate that have to be worked out between the members of his committee, the floor, and reconciliation between the House and the Senate. In the meantime, historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions will suffer. I fully support what the chairman is trying to do getting matters accomplished, but if I understand the unanimous consent he will be asking for, it doesn't deal with all the issues that need to be dealt with. We have to fully address the challenges students face with college access, affordability, accountability, and campus safety. The chairman's bill does not meet that test and limits what we could do in the future to meaningfully address the cost of attending and succeeding in colleges. The bill continues to let the realities of getting a college degree--the challenges of childcare, housing, food, textbooks-- go unaddressed for our country's growing diversity of students, including student veterans, students with disabilities, students of color, and students of low-income families or those who are the first in their families to attend college. I agree with the chairman. Let's bring the Higher Education Act forward and debate it but don't hold these institutions that have historically been discriminated against hostage to a program we all agree needs to be continued.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object and for the reasons I have already stated, there will be ample time to bring up the permanent reauthorization of the funding for historically Black colleges and universities and minority institutions. That is why the unanimous consent for which I asked was for 2 years. My party doesn't control the activities on the floor of the Senate. This reauthorization bill is going to take some time on the floor. We are going to have to deal with amendments, and we are going to have to reconcile the differences between the House and the Senate. There is no other category of expenditures that is mandatory of this nature to underserved and historically discriminated institutions that is being held hostage as we debate a broader bill. I think this is a truly unique circumstance and should not be held hostage. We need to have a way of debating the issues to make sure that in a reauthorization that occurs only every so often within the Higher Education Act that we deal with the current gaps we have for diversity--for students with disabilities, for students of color, for students from low-income families, and for those who are the first in their families to attend college. For those reasons, I object to the request.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that floor privileges be granted to Michael Thomas, a member of my staff, during today's session of the Senate.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that floor privileges be granted to Tessa Silverman, a member of my staff, during today's session of the Senate.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I stand here today to mourn the loss of Kay Hagan. Kay was a warm, kind person with a wonderful sense of humor, and she was an inspiring public servant. I feel fortunate to have been her friend and colleague here in the U.S. Senate. I am deeply saddened to be among the many who will miss her profoundly. Kay knew from a young age that her destiny was in politics, starting when she worked here as an intern. She often recalled operating the Senate elevators in the 1970s. She would watch the Nation's leaders and influencers pass by, including her maternal uncle, then-Senator Lawton Chiles from Florida. She would dream of riding those elevators herself as an elected official. Kay worked incredibly hard to achieve that dream. She earned her BA degree from Florida State University and her JD from Wake Forest University School of Law. Before Kay began her political career, she worked in financial services and became a vice president of North Carolina National Bank, which is now part of Bank of America. In 1998, she was elected to the North Carolina State Senate, where her talent in setting the State's budget and her devotion to her constituents earned her a spot among North Carolina's ``Ten Most Effective Senators'' 3 years in a row. Then, in 2008, she became a U.S. Senator in a historic election. Kay was North Carolina's second female Senator ever and its first Democratic female senator. From the moment Kay arrived in the Senate, she concerned herself with how to use her platform to clear the way for other people, especially other women, to achieve their ambitions. The very first bill she cosponsored was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which created a fairer system for filing claims of pay discrimination. She also worked with Senator Schumer to open the Senate swimming pool to female Senators for the first time. Where Kay saw injustice and where she saw indignity, she saw opportunities to make the world a better place. She was committed to fighting for anyone who needed her help. She was a fierce advocate for servicemembers, veterans, and military families. Both her father and brother served in the U.S. Navy. She also spent much of her Senate career campaigning to improve education, financial literacy, and job training for underserved communities. She rallied people to these causes--not with strong-arming or with steamrolling but with cleverness and compassion and coalition-building. Kay was the type of legislator who dug into issues that made a real difference in people's lives, even if they weren't necessarily headline-grabbing. I had the honor of working alongside Kay in the Senate Small Business Committee for 4 years, and I watched her tirelessly create economic opportunity for North Carolinians and all Americans. The programs and policies we spearheaded there may not have made front page news, but Kay knew she was making a difference for entrepreneurship opportunities in our country. The only thing to rival Kay's dedication to her constituents was her dedication to her family. Kay was endlessly devoted to her husband Chip and their three children, Tilden, Jeanette, and Carrie, and all of her loved ones. Her brother-in-law, Henry Hagan, is a fellow Baltimorean, and he has told me over the years how Kay truly was the Sun around which the entire family orbited. She was a source of gravity and life for them, as she was for so many people who were lucky enough to know her. May her gravity continue to ground us, and may her light continue to warm and guide us. I wish all of Kay's family and friends comfort during this difficult time. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I rise to sound the alarm on the Trump administration's expected announcement of its withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in an effort to limit global temperature increase in this century to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, while pursuing means to limit it even further to 1.5 degrees. Article 28 of the Paris Agreement that was entered into in COP 21 2015 specifies that after joining, no country can withdraw for 3 years, after which a 1-year waiting period must occur before the withdrawal takes effect. The United States entered into this historic agreement on November 4, 2016; thus, the earliest date the United States can initiate withdrawal is November 4, 2019. After the U.S. files withdrawal documents, the 1-year waiting period begins, making November 4, 2020, the earliest possible date the United States can fully--and I might add, recklessly--get out of this agreement. I urge my colleagues to support a Senate resolution that I certainly will be filing expressing our need for U.S. climate diplomacy. Withdrawal is terrible. The cost of inaction is high. For example, in my State of Maryland, by the year 2100, climate change could force the Navy to relocate the U.S. Naval Academy from where it has made its home in Annapolis, MD, since 1845. Surrounded by water on three sides, the Naval Academy is especially vulnerable to sea rise. The Severn River runs along the east, Spa Creek extends to the south, and College Creek runs along the north. Parts of the academy adjacent to the water stand 3 feet above the waterline. Sea levels around Annapolis have risen about 1 foot over the past 100 years. The Naval Academy is only one of scores of U.S. military bases that may be inundated by rising seas. Unlike this administration, the academy is taking action. In 2015, the Sea Level Rise Advisory Council formed to create an adaptation plan and make decisions about flood-related matters. Staff are installing door dams and flood barriers on doorways, repairing seawalls, and installing backflow preventers in storm drain systems to reduce funding. Newly constructed buildings will have elevated entrances and limited first-floor openings to keep rising water out. But these actions have high costs that are compounded by inaction. On October 12 of this year, a combination of seasonal high tides, a full Moon, and a tropical storm stalled off the eastern seaboard caused a ``nuisance flood'' in downtown Annapolis, disrupting the festivities at the annual Annapolis Boat Show, flooding booths at the city dock and closing streets. One week later, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation--the key nonprofit partner in the restoration effort--announced that it will close the Fox Island Education Center due to subsidence and rising sea levels--a casualty of our failure to address climate change. For the past 40 years, the Fox Center has helped educate students on the importance of a healthy Chesapeake Bay watershed. Environmental literacy is an essential goal of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, and institutions like the Fox Island Center serve a key role. The marshes and wetlands the foundation is dedicated to protecting are among Maryland's best natural defenses in mitigating the effects of climate-related impacts like more frequent storms and rising sea levels. The untimely closure is a reminder of the very real presence of changes to the bay in our communities and the urgent need to prepare. On October 17, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco released a report. The collection of 18 papers by outside experts amounts to one of the most specific and dire accountings of the dangers posed to businesses and communities in the United States--a threat so significant that the Nation's central banks are increasingly compelled to act. Climate change has begun to affect the real estate market, according to a paper by Asaf Bernstein, an economist at the University of Colorado in Boulder. His research shows that properties likely to be underwater if the seas rise 1 foot now sell for 15 percent less than comparable properties with no flood threat. Our failure to act on climate change has a real economic impact on American families. Coastal cities are already unable to pay for the types of projects that could prevent them from the growing effects of climate change. On October 23, in a briefing for the Maryland Senate Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee, NOAA oceanographer Will Sweet said that Annapolis is on pace for another record-breaking year in 2019, with 10 high-tide flood days so far. By 2030, there could be between 15 and 25 high-tide flood days a year. By 2050, that number could rise to between 50 and 170. That compares to how it was at the turn of the century when we only had two such events in a year. This is not only a coastal issue. In addition to an update from NOAA, the committee heard from officials in Howard County--Howard County, I would state, is a landlocked county in Maryland--about their plan to mitigate flooding in Ellicott City, 35 miles inland from Annapolis, where flash-flooding has claimed the lives of three people since 2016. Officials discussed their $140 million plan, which includes demolishing some buildings and constructing a tunnel 15 feet in diameter, 80 to 100 feet deep, and 1,600 feet long on the north side of the city's Main Street. The tunnel would divert about two-thirds of the floodwaters. It is an expensive project. Will it keep Ellicott City safe? It will keep it safer, but the threat will still be there because of our inaction as far as dealing with climate change. That is $140 million we would not need to find as fast if we were slowing the rate of sea level rise; that is, if we were reducing the use of carbon emissions in accordance with the Paris Agreement. Many small business owners took out loans in 2016 and 2018 from the Department of Housing and Community Development and are struggling to repay them. These are not international competitors with an agenda being hurt by inaction on climate change; these are local residents, constituents, Americans. We need to act. I am proud to lead bipartisan legislation to help critical water infrastructure adapt to natural hazards. We need to do adaptation. I am for that, and it is bipartisan in this Chamber, but adaptation mitigation must go hand in hand, from the local to the international level. I led the congressional delegation to COP 21 with nine of our colleagues in the U.S. Senate. We had a delegation 10-strong in Paris at COP 21 in 2015 when the United States agreed to lower its gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below the 2005 levels by 2025. Entering the 25th conference of the parties, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions rose an estimated 3.4 percent in 2018--a spike that comes as reports like the Fourth National Climate Assessment and the IPCC special report tell us the world needs to be aggressively cutting its emissions to avoid the most devastating effects of climate change. The findings, published by the independent economic research firm Rhodium Group, mean that our Nation now has a diminishing chance of meeting the pledge it made in Paris. This is a horrible embarrassment for our country, which was once a global leader on climate change. When the United States doesn't lead, other countries are going to step in and take over that leadership, as we have seen with regard to China stepping forward in regard to climate issues. China should be the United States. I urge this administration to reassert strong leadership in implementing the Paris Agreement. I urge the Senate to act to return America's leadership to this critical global challenge. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, today I wish to discuss this administration's perpetual actions to weaken protections for people with preexisting conditions. Last fall, the administration issued guidance for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act--ACA--that would loosen the statutory guardrails for 1332 State waivers. The guidance encourages states to increase access to ACA non-compliant coverage. The actions of the administration cannot make this message any clearer: President Trump does not support protections for people with pre-existing conditions. Because of the ACA, health insurance companies cannot refuse to cover someone or charge someone more just because they have a prexisting condition. Among the most common pre-existing conditions are high blood pressure, behavioral health disorders, high cholesterol, asthma/chronic lung disease, heart conditions, diabetes, and cancer. In 2017, HHS released a report stating that as many as 133 million non-elderly Americans have a preexisting condition. The Maryland Health Benefit Exchange estimates that there are approximately 2.5 million nonelderly Marylanders with a preexisting condition, 320,000 of which are children. Unfortunately, the Trump administration is taking actions that directly threaten these 133 million Americans, actions, which can lead to them being denied access to healthcare. The Trump administration's updated guidance on section 1332 waivers skirts the intention of the law. Originally section 1332 of the ACA provided States with the flexibility to test new health coverage programs, as long as innovation waivers met certain criteria. States applying for 1332 waivers had to show that their proposal provided residents with health coverage with at least the same level of protections guaranteed by the ACA, that was at least as affordable, and covered at least a comparable number of State residents as currently covered under the ACA. For example, Maryland was able to use a 1332 waiver to establish a State reinsurance program, which lowered insurance premiums by as much as 22 percent from 2018 premiums. However, the Trump administration has issued guidance that redefines the guardrails of section 1332 and will now allow States to include plans that do not comply with the ACA's consumer protections. The guidance also encourages states to allow premium tax credits for non- ACA compliant plans, plans that don't offer essential health benefits or protect those with preexisting conditions. The updated 1332 guidance allows State waiver applications to ignore statutory guardrails to ensure that coverage is not less affordable under a waiver, especially for those with high healthcare spending. This new guidance also sets a dangerous precedent, where a State waiver could skew numbers to disproportionately count junk plans in a State's total number of lives covered. The updated 1332 guidance again makes it very clear that President Trump and this administration do not support affordable insurance for those with preexisting conditions. I was proud to join Senator Warner in introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution to overturn the administration's 1332 waiver guidance to ensure protections for individuals with preexisting conditions. The harm done by this administration towards individuals with preexisting conditions will lead to higher costs of care for the millions of Americans. This resolution is a clear opportunity to show our opposition to the actions of the Trump administration to deny coverage for individuals with preexisting conditions. My Democratic colleagues and I are calling attention to ACA, which has worked and is working, and how the Trump administration's actions seek to overturn the progress we have made to strip consumer protections like protections for preexisting conditions away from patients. We can't afford as a country to go back to the days before the ACA. Nearly 130 million non-elderly Americans relay on the protections provided by the ACA to guarantee that no insurer could deny them coverage.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, my heart is heavy today as we mourn the loss of Congressman Elijah Cummings. He was a powerful voice for the people of Baltimore, a champion of justice for our country, and a dear friend to me and so many others. I first met Elijah when he was elected to the Maryland House of Delegates, where I was the speaker, but our lives had intersected in formative ways even before that. We both grew up in Baltimore and shared a deep and abiding love for the city. We went to the same high school--Baltimore City College High School--and we both earned law degrees from the University of Maryland before balancing private law practices with public service in the Maryland General Assembly. So when I met Elijah, I couldn't help but feel a kinship with him, but I think that was perhaps just Elijah's power--the ability to build kinship with anyone and the commitment to do so with everyone. He was constantly searching for common ground, always looking to make human connections. As a result, he developed meaningful friendships with people all over the political, social, religious, and geographic map. Elijah's talent for building consensus, as well as his work ethic and dedication to his constituents, propelled him early on to positions of leadership in the Maryland House of Delegates. There, he became the youngest ever chairman of the Legislative Black Caucus and the first African American to be named speaker pro tempore. He served in that chamber for 14 years, during which he worked tirelessly to advance the rights and opportunities of Maryland residents. Then, in 1996, Elijah was elected to represent Maryland's Seventh District, including our home of Baltimore, in the U.S. House of Representatives. He filled a seat previously occupied by civil rights legacies Parren Mitchell and Kweisi Mfume, and, let me tell you, there was no person more prepared to carry on their fight for equality and freedom. Elijah was the son of sharecroppers who worked the same land in South Carolina where his ancestors had been enslaved. His parents moved to Baltimore to build a better life for their family, but the city was rife with racial intolerance. From a young age, Elijah faced prejudice and discrimination. He attended a segregated elementary school, and he was pelted with bottles, rocks, and jeers when he and other children integrated the local public swimming pool. In the face of all that hatred, he found the hope and determination to overcome every obstacle set before him so that he could rise up and lift others up too. He worked diligently, excelling as an undergraduate at Howard University, going to law school even though people told him he could never become a lawyer, successfully practicing law, and then launching a career of public service that led him to the U.S. Congress. Elijah continued to climb until he was elected Chairman of the House Oversight Committee. All the while, he remained firmly based in his community. He lived in the same house in West Baltimore for more than 30 years--in the inner inner city, as he put it--and he returned home every night after a long day of work in DC. He was known to sit on the stoop of that house and feed the neighborhood pigeons. And every Sunday, he went to church, where he was often met by a line of people waiting to share their concerns, and he would listen to them and try to help them all. Elijah never for a moment forgot that his purpose was to represent the folks back home in his district, to be a voice for the many who were silenced. He once said that while it was his ``constitutional duty to conduct oversight of the executive branch,'' it was his ``moral duty'' to fight for his constituents. And fight, he did. In the 23 years that he spent in Congress, he was a fierce advocate for his district, especially for Baltimore. Where others saw problems and danger, he saw opportunities and solutions. He advanced measures to improve education, to expand affordable housing, to curb addiction, to enhance public infrastructure, to promote gun safety, and to reform police practices. He worked to erase the racial and class divides that he had grown up with, so that future generations of Baltimoreans would not face the same obstacles he did. Although he never shied away from contentious issues, he also understood when harmony and healing were needed. After the tragic death of Freddie Gray, Elijah went to the streets to ask the citizens of Baltimore to come together and find a peaceful path forward. Then, true to form, he launched into action, pushing hard for policies and programs to help the city recover. Because of his heroic service to his constituents, Elijah was beloved by his community, perhaps more than any other elected official I have known. His loss is a devastating blow to Baltimore and to Elijah's entire congressional district. But it is not just Maryland that will feel this loss--Elijah's passing leaves an unfillable void for the Nation as a whole. He loved this country deeply. Elijah believed in the potential of American ideals, so he held us to the highest moral standards. In moments of moral crisis, he would famously remind whoever was listening, ``We are better than this!'' He was passionate about rooting out corruption, protecting our democracy, and achieving equality and freedom for all. As chairman of the Oversight Committee and in life, he fought for what was right simply because it was right. And Heaven forbid anyone should stand between Elijah Cummings and justice, because, while Elijah was always calm and respectful, he was never afraid to hold someone's feet to the fire. He gave every ounce of himself, up until his last day on Earth, to defending the honor of our Republic. We have lost a booming voice for truth, fairness, and liberty that can never be replaced. I grieve for a nation without Elijah's leadership. I know that we will hold his legacy close to our hearts and that we will strive to follow his example of moral clarity, but the loss of Elijah Cummings has ripped a hole in the fabric of our country that cannot be fully mended. My thoughts and prayers are with Elijah's wife Maya, his three children, and all of his loved ones. Know that we are mourning alongside you. And to Elijah--you left this world a better place than how you found it. Now it is time to rest.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I stand here today to grieve the loss and honor the memory of Thomas D'Alesandro III, a true public servant. I feel extremely fortunate to have benefited from Tommy's wisdom, his friendship, and his example over the years. He will be dearly missed. Thomas--or ``Little Tommy,'' as he was known--was born in Baltimore in 1929. He grew up in a very politically active home. His father was a Congressman and three-term mayor of Baltimore. His sister, Nancy Pelosi, went on to become the first female Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. So, in a sense, it seems that Tommy was destined for life in the public sphere. But he never behaved like leadership was his birthright. Whatever the import his name carried, Tommy was always humble, always hard-working, always determined to earn the support and trust of his community. And that is exactly what he did. As president of the Baltimore City Council and then as the city's mayor, Tommy was on the ground, fighting alongside his constituents for what was right. Tommy was the mayor of Baltimore from 1967 to 1971. It was a tumultuous time for Baltimore and for the entire Nation. After just 4 months in office, Tommy had to lead his city through the grief and unrest that followed the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. Despite being personally devastated, he did that with courage and grace. He went on to serve a term marked by an unyielding commitment to civil rights. Tommy passed laws to ban discrimination in housing and public accommodations. He fought the racist practice of blockbusting in real estate. He funded anti-poverty programs and new schools in underserved neighborhoods. And he appointed more African Americans to public posts than any Baltimore mayor before him, including to positions that had only previously been held by White people. He was a man of ideals, certainly. His Catholic upbringing instilled in him the values of generosity and fairness. He had a nuanced understanding of racial inequality in the United States, and he was profoundly disturbed by the intolerance plaguing the country. But I believe that he earned the support and trust of his community because he didn't just espouse ideals--he didn't simply demand justice or condemn hatred. He delivered concrete, meaningful action to make Baltimore a more equal and harmonious place. Tommy did all of this because he sincerely cared, not because it was politically convenient. In fact, he faced a lot of criticism for his leadership on civil rights from those who wished to preserve their own privilege. The easy thing would have been to turn a blind eye to the injustices around him and protect the status quo, but that wasn't Tommy. He wasn't concerned with what was easy; he was concerned with what was right. He had a good heart, and he listened to it. Even after leaving political office, Tommy continued to give back as a mentor and adviser to future leaders. I am immensely grateful for the counsel that he offered me as a budding lawmaker. As a Baltimore native myself, I have long looked up to Tommy and strived to follow in his footsteps. I can only hope to emulate his integrity, bravery, and compassion. We have lost a hero and a legend but not a legacy. Tommy was somebody who always led by example. Even though he is no longer here with us, his example lives on. It lives on in the blossoming Baltimore that he cultivated. It lives on in the generations of dedicated public servants that he inspired. And it lives on in the quest for justice that he championed. Nevertheless, this loss is a painful one. My heart and prayers are with Tommy's wife, children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and all of his loved ones as they grieve and heal.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I think everyone in this Chamber would agree that free and fair elections are the bedrock of our democracy. We know it has been under attack. We know, from the Mueller report, that Russia, in 2016, used a systematic and comprehensive attack on our free election system to try to undermine our democracy. That attack occurred in the State of Maryland. Let me just quote, if I might, from the Washington Post article that said: Maryland was never in play in 2016. The Russians targeted it anyway. The article states: Russia's Twitter campaign to influence the 2016 presidential election in Maryland began in June 2015, 17 months before Election Day, when the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency opened an account it called @BaltimoreOnline and began tweeting about local news events. Yet, the IRA, the Russian troll factory that U.S. prosecutors blame for the massive disinformation efforts during the 2016 campaign, devoted enormous attention and preparation to its Maryland operation, all in a likely effort, experts say, to widen racial divisions and demoralize African American voters. That is what happened in 2016. Our intelligence community tells us that Russia is active today trying to influence our 2020 elections, and they are using technology to try to undermine our free election system. We must do more to protect our system. It was for that reason and many others that I introduced S. 1834, the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2019. It is cosponsored by Senator Klobuchar, Senator Leahy, Senator Feinstein, and others. This bill is an effort to try to protect us from this type of international interference in our elections, as well as local efforts that are aimed at trying to intimidate voters targeted at minority voters. That should have no place in American politics. This bill did pass the House of Representatives in March of this year in H.R. 1. Very quickly, let me tell you what this bill does. It prohibits individuals from knowingly deceiving others about the time, place, eligibility, or procedures for participating in a Federal election; addresses new digital challenges that pose a threat to citizens exercising their right to vote, particularly the use of digital platforms to disseminate false information regarding Federal elections; and combating voter intimidation, especially efforts aimed at suppressing voter rights. I would hope every Member of this Chamber would support these efforts. Unfortunately, the majority leader has failed to bring any of these issues to the floor or give us any time to take up legislation in order to protect our free election system. Time is running out. The election primaries will start early next year. We need to take action now. That is why I am going to make this unanimous consent request. I hope we can agree to it. I ask unanimous consent that the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1834, the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2019; that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; that the bill be read a third time and passed; and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.