Thomas Carper

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, as this day comes to an end, a very sad chapter in the history of this body comes to an end, mercifully. I stand here before you and my colleagues as the last Vietnam veteran serving in the U.S. Senate, a retired Navy captain, a grandson of a Gold Star Mother, and from a family who believes in the Navy blue. I want to say to the hundreds of military families who have endured the uncertainty of whether or not their loved ones--their husbands, their fathers, their brothers, their sisters--were going to be able to assume the promotions that they have earned for their years of service in protecting our country and in helping to defend our Constitution that this sad chapter has come to an end. I want to apologize to those families. I spoke last week and urged that we turn this page and move on, and I am grateful that that has happened. I want to especially commend the work behind the scenes of our chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Jack Reed, an Army veteran, for the work that he has done in enabling us to end this sad chapter. I remember serving in a number of tours in Southeast Asia in the Vietnam war. In some of those years, we were not home for Christmas, for the holidays. We were on the other side of the world, and our families were back here in the States. Those were not happy days for us, and I know the last months have not been happy days for a lot of people in the armed services who deserve better. My hope is and my prayer is that at this Christmas season--at this holiday season, as we move toward Christmas--and as we move toward the end of the year and into a new year that the memories of what they have had to endure will fade and that what they will remember is that there are a number of our colleagues who stood up and said that this has got to end, and let's treat our military folks--all of them--with the respect that they deserve. We have a big Air Force base in Delaware, Dover Air Force Base. We have C-5s and C-17s. Through their large cargo aircraft, they provide an air bridge to Ukraine by literally carrying in those large aircraft the munitions, the supplies, and the materiels that are needed to help Ukraine fight back against the Russian invasion. I have kept very close tabs with the Air Force base, gosh, for 30- some years. One of the challenges we have at the Dover Air Force Base, with the Delaware National Guard, and at military installations across the country is the workforce. We find, for civilians, there are all kinds of businesses and all kinds of employers. When I go visit them in Delaware and across the country and I ask them how are they doing, how are we doing, what can we do to help--we in the Federal Government and the State government--they say: We just need people to come to work, people who are employable and trainable who will come to work. We have similar challenges in our armed services these days. We need people who are willing to step up, be trained, and serve in the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the Marine Corps, and the Coast Guard. We want to make sure, when they do that, that we will respect them and their families as we traditionally have done since the beginning of this country. So, as we wrap this up and prepare to go home for the day--at least in Delaware--I will be back tomorrow to, hopefully, do more of our Nation's business. I am hopeful we will, and I am encouraged by what has happened today. Again, to those who serve us throughout the world in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, the Navy salutes you, and God bless. To each and every one of you out there who is serving us, whether you happen to be in the States or someplace around the world, God bless you. Be safe, and thank you so much. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, one of the joys for me of serving here is serving as the chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, right next to Ben Cardin and about two seats away from Sheldon Whitehouse. And we appreciate your participation and leadership and membership on our committee as well, Madam President. We have a bunch of pages down here in the well--one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. They are high school juniors or seniors, and they are probably like 16, 17, or maybe 18 years old. Pretty soon, they are going to head out into the world and, hopefully, go on and do bigger and better things than we have and than their parents and grandparents have done. I want to make sure, and I think my colleagues want to make sure, that they actually have a planet to grow up on and a planet to grow old on. When I was about their age, I became a Navy midshipman and raised my right hand to defend the country and the Constitution, in those days. I learned a little bit about leadership when I was not much older than these guys. One of the things I learned about leadership is the importance that leadership by example is not ``do what I say'' but, rather, ``do what I do.'' One of the great things about going to the COP, with the leadership of Senator Cardin and with our colleagues, was that we didn't just go and sit and tell the rest of the world: Do x, y, or z. We went and said: This is what we are doing, and this is why it is important. We want you to join us in this. And, more and more, folks around the country--around the world, rather--are doing that. Today, I think the majority of Americans agree that climate change actually is a major threat--maybe the major threat facing our planet and the people who inhabit it. Every day, Americans see the impacts of climate crises, particularly in the form of more frequent and destructive storms throughout the--really, throughout the planet. A decade ago, the United States experienced, I am told, 10 weather disasters--10--that cost at least a billion dollars each--10 that cost at least a billion dollars each. This year, there have been 25--25--of these billion-dollar events. That includes this summer's wildfire on the Hawaiian island of Maui, which, tragically, took some 100 lives-- our Nation's deadliest wildfire in a century. We also know that 2023 was not one of the hottest years on this planet; it was the hottest year on our planet, without question. Scientists tell us that global temperatures are going to keep rising if we don't do more to transition away from fossil fuels. So, Madam President, the question that I am asking myself and I think we need to ask ourselves is, What are we going to do about it? And as Senator Cardin and Senator Whitehouse have laid out, we are doing a lot. Can we do more? Yes, we can do more. Are we going to do more? Yes, we are going to do more. We will hear from the chairman of the Finance Committee here in a little bit, and he will talk a bit about the great work that has been done under his leadership in the Finance Committee to make sure that we follow through and build on what we have already done. But the United States, while I think we are getting our act together on this front, for a long time, we were the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases on the planet--far and away the biggest--and I think we have a moral obligation. Having put so much greenhouse gases up into the air, I think we have a moral obligation to actually lead in the reduction of emissions and make sure that these young people up here and my grandchildren and your grandchildren and all have a planet to grow up on. I want to just commend Senator Cardin. I think he did a great job leading our codel. It was an honor to be a part of that codel. I want to say how much I enjoyed it. It was bipartisan. We ran into a bunch of folks from the House of Representatives over there, Democrats and Republicans. So it had a good bipartisan, bicameral feel, and we came away and felt good about it--really good about it. As for COP28, Senator Cardin has already mentioned this, but our message to the rest of the world was that the United States is--I am tempted to say ``once again,'' but I will just say is again--leading the global effort to tackle the climate crisis, and my colleagues have already mentioned a couple of ways that we are doing that. It has been mentioned--Kigali. There may be good people at home watching this saying: What in the world is Kigali? Well, it refers to a treaty, a treaty that actually reduces the emission of something called HFCs. What are HFCs? My wife told me about a year or 2 ago: Stop talking about HFCs. Nobody really cares about HFCs. Well, here is why they do. They are refrigerants. We all have refrigerators. We have air-conditioners. We have freezers and chillers and coolers. And the ingredient that helps make all of those work is HFCs, or hydrofluorocarbons. That is the good news: they work. It cools things off. But the bad news is it is bad when those HFCs leak into the atmosphere. They are 1,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. I will say that again: 1,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. So the idea of reducing those and phasing out those HFCs is a big deal. That is what we are doing. We are doing that. That one thing alone is worth about half a degree centigrade toward meeting our goals coming out of the Paris accords a year or 2 years ago. The agreement out of Paris was 1\1/2\ degrees Celsius reduction, and from this one thing alone with the HFCs, we are going to get a third of that. Following that COP26, we put our heads down, and we got to work. After months of intense negotiations, we passed the Inflation Reduction Act. Big provisions in the legislation came out of our committee, Mr. Chairman, which included almost $370 billion in incentives for clean energy and climate change--the largest ever investment in climate action and environmental justice. Where I come from, that is real money, and, hopefully, we will do even more on that. But soon after we had done that, the Senate came together on a bipartisan basis to ratify the Kigali Amendment that I talked about. That is a big deal, and we have to make sure that we actually implement it as intended. But, if taken together, these historic wins are advancing our Nation's climate goals, and, importantly, they are also helping to create hundreds of thousands--hundreds of thousands--of good-paying clean-energy jobs in our country and many more around the world. We have heard for years: We can't address climate change; we can't address the warming of our planet and create jobs and economic opportunity. Hogwash. We can do both. And if you look at the inflation numbers, inflation is down. If you look at employment numbers, employment numbers are up. And the work that we are doing on the greenhouse gas side is going forward. So we are doing it all. We are doing it all. But still, we are clear-eyed that there is more work to be done. COP28 resulted in--Senator Cardin had mentioned that--a historic global agreement that called for transitioning away from fossil fuels which are causing global warming. And our success in achieving our shared climate goals will depend on the actions we take in the decade to come. With that in mind, as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I remain focused on overseeing the implementation of our recent climate wins. And over the next year, I hope we are going to build on our Nation's climate goals, including advancing bipartisan legislation to strengthen our Nation's nuclear industry--I think Senator Cardin may have referred to that--and helping confirm President Biden's nominees for key leadership posts. I believe the last time I checked, nuclear energy is providing, I don't know, a half or more than half of our carbon-free electricity in this country. We have the potential to build on that, and we need to do that. Hopefully, we will. I want to close by words spoken down at the other Chamber. A couple of years ago, French President Macron came and spoke to a bipartisan House-Senate gathering. In talking to us about climate change and global warming, he said: ``There is no planet B.'' That is what he said: ``There is no planet B.'' This is the only planet we are going to have--no planet B. We have to make every day count. And I think what we heard coming out of the COP28, we have every intention of helping lead this planet to that direction. And with that, I yield the floor. I want to again thank Senator Cardin and yield back to him, thanking him for terrific leadership in the COP and so many other forums.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I would like to be recognized for maybe 5 minutes to speak on behalf of the nomination of former Governor Martin O'Malley. Senator Cardin and others have known Martin for a long time; I have as well. I think I met him when he was 18. He was part of an Irish folk group that was performing not just around Maryland or around Baltimore but as far away as Delaware--great places where people would come for great music, Irish music, and maybe a drink or two. Martin, I think, was too young to get in as a customer, but he could come in, apparently, as a part of a troupe and provide entertainment. I knew at that time he was a future Commissioner for Social Security--not really. Seriously, what I did know was he does pretty good harmony. In the jobs he has had since then, he has demonstrated that again and again. He and I both served as Governors of respective States part of Delmarva. We were not Governors at the same time, but very close together. He provided great leadership for our neighboring State of Maryland as Governor for many years, and I was pleased to be not just his colleague but just a friend. The day I was sworn into the House of Representatives a million years ago in 1983, we were told as freshmen at our orientation that Social Security was running out of money and if somebody didn't do something about it, eventually, there would be a haircut, benefits would be reduced. And, ultimately, if we didn't take some strong action, there would be a lot more than a haircut and we might even see those benefits go away. With strong bipartisan leadership from our President Ronald Reagan and strong bipartisan leadership from the House Speaker with whom Senator Wyden and I served, Tip O'Neill, we worked together to enact to reform--a whole host of reforms, as you recall--that ended up saving the Social Security Trust Fund. Today, the Social Security Administration programs are an important safety net that provide financial support for not just a couple of million people but tens of millions of people in this country--mostly people in their sixties, seventies, eighties, and nineties, but also people who are disabled and not able to work, and in some cases, children lose a parent in a tough situation. I have known Martin forever and respect him in his leadership, not only as a Governor but also as mayor of Baltimore and other State and local jurisdictions. I think they make him exceptionally well-suited to lead the administration in its efforts. As a Governor, you get to be involved with a lot of retirement issues, a lot of pension issues for not just the State employees in Delaware but with county and local folks, educators, all kinds of people. In the State of Delaware, you have to be conversant with health insurance benefits for people with wide ranges of ages and needs. When you are Governor, you are trained on the job. He has had excellent experience to help him prepare him for this responsibility. The other thing I want to mention is it is an interesting lineup of organizations that have endorsed him and are supporting his nomination. Some we would expect, but others come as sort of a surprise. This is part of a large group. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters is among them. Social Security Works is among them. The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare is among them. But the list goes on and on and on. So from one recovering Governor--that is me--to another--that is Martin--I want to thank Governor O'Malley for really extraordinary service to our country and for doing it in a way that doesn't rub people the wrong way--it doesn't create animosity--but in a way that really fosters harmony, the kind of harmony his singing group used to excel at all those years ago. He will do a great job. He will make us proud. I know from my colleagues in Maryland and others who served with him as Governor and other capacities, we have already seen him in action, and we would be hard-pressed to do better than Martin O'Malley. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, as some of our colleagues know, I am a retired Navy captain and the last Vietnam veteran serving in the U.S. Senate. Today, I want to take a couple of minutes, if I could, to share what military service has meant to my family and to me and to discuss one of the critical lessons that we should have learned with the failure to welcome home many of my generation from our service while in the Vietnam war. I come from a family who for several generations--for several generations--has sacrificed for our country and has been privileged to serve our country. My dad and Uncle Jim were chief petty officers in the Navy in World War II. My dad went on to serve a bit in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam war. My Uncle Ed was a marine who served in combat, heavy combat, in Korea. My Uncle Bob was killed in a kamikaze attack on his aircraft carrier in the Pacific at the age of 19. His body was never recovered. My grandmother was a Gold Star mother. In my family, we bleed Navy blue. My father's generation returned home to a hero's welcome at the end of World War II, but that was not the case for those of us who returned home from the Vietnam war many years later. With little fanfare, no welcome-home ceremonies, no parades, we returned to our hometowns to begin our lives anew, and we did, in some cases, with extraordinarily good fortune, and I am one of those. In the years since then, I have witnessed a growing willingness from people across our country to atone for the kind of welcome home my generation received and to make clear that our service is now appreciated--fully appreciated. It is a wonderful feeling. But for a good part of this year, we have once again failed to treat hundreds of our best and brightest military leaders with the respect and gratitude they deserve and have earned by their service. The situation manufactured by our colleague from Alabama to block the promotions of hundreds of well-deserving military officers is unprecedented, it is unwarranted, and I believe it is shameful. For nearly a year, he has jeopardized our national security and thrust the lives of some 450 military servicemembers and their families--put their lives in limbo. These families have been stuck both physically and professionally. They have been unable to move to new assignments at home and abroad, where they will assume their new responsibilities. Military spouses have been unable to find new jobs, and their children have been unable to continue their education in new schools. While I was relieved that the majority of these remarkable men and women were finally able to accept their promotions recently, there are still 11 four-star officers and their families who are suffering because of the actions of one of our colleagues. By using the lives of our military servicemembers and their families as a bargaining chip, we are failing to learn from history and once again disrespecting the sacrifices they have made for our Nation. What kind of message does this send to our veterans across this country, to our men and women in all service branches who have served in some cases for decades? It is unacceptable. What kind of message does this send to countries around the world about how we treat those defending democracy every single day? Moreover, the actions of our colleagues may deter potential recruits from joining the ranks of our military during a time when we are working especially hard to recruit and retain talented servicemembers. As we go into the holiday season, every military family--every military family--deserves peace of mind. Yet, today, there are still 11 extremely deserving and well-qualified officers whose families continue to face uncertainty. I will repeat: It is unacceptable, it is unwarranted, it is shameful, and it must end. Today, I urge our colleague from Alabama to think again about what is really at stake. Strong leadership is vital to our national security, and we cannot undercut senior leaders of our Armed Forces without jeopardizing our democracy. To our colleague from Alabama, let me just say this: Please, please lift your hold. Let's learn from mistakes of our past. Give these 11 officers and their families the respect they also deserve, along with a truly happy holiday and a promising new year. With that, I yield the floor. I note that we have been joined by my friend and colleague from Iowa, Senator Grassley.

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

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the recorded vote begin immediately.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, good afternoon. I rise to join my two colleagues who just spoke in opposition to S.J. Res. 38, a Congressional Review Act resolution to disapprove of the Biden administration's temporary waiver of the ``Buy American'' requirements for the electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Why is this important? Why should Americans care about this issue? Well, we continue to see, on almost a daily basis, daily reminders that our planet is on fire. Scientists tell us that we are running out of time to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to avoid the worst of the climate crisis. The rest the world is looking at us. The rest of the world is looking at us, the United States, for leadership right now on this issue. Instead, we are voting on a resolution that President Biden will certainly veto. That means it will not go into effect. Having said all of that, let me explain why I oppose the resolution offered by our colleague from Florida. The way this resolution works is more than a little bit confusing, so let's take a couple of minutes to try to make clear what it would actually do. My colleagues have already referred to this. To better understand that, it is important to understand how we got to this point. As I mentioned, addressing the existential threat of climate change is one of the most challenging events we currently face as a planet. We also know that our transportation sector, including the cars, trucks, and vans on our roads, is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. economy. In fact, the cars, trucks, and vans we drive create nearly 30 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions in America. To that end, we included $7.5 billion--billion with a ``b''--in the bipartisan infrastructure law to help build out a national network of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, supporting our climate goals and creating jobs--lots of jobs--right here in America. We are already seeing the impact of our investment. Since enacting the bipartisan infrastructure law nearly 2 years ago, the electric vehicle charging industry has announced investments of over $500 million in more than 40 plants for assembling American-made EV chargers. Let me say that again. The electric vehicle charging industry has announced investments of over $500 million in more than 40 plants for assembling American-made EV chargers. These plants in States like Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and North Carolina are bringing more manufacturing jobs back to the United States--back to the United States. That means relying less on countries like China to enable our clean energy transition. If enacted, Senator Rubio's resolution would undermine this progress. His resolution would create greater uncertainty for our domestic EV charging industry, directly contradicting our goal of having this equipment made and assembled right here in the U.S. of A. That is why groups like the AFL-CIO and, as we have just heard, the United Steelworkers oppose the Rubio resolution. They oppose it. The reason why they oppose it is because its adoption would mean shipping jobs overseas instead of building our supply chain right here at home. So, in reality, this resolution would actually weaken ``Buy American'' requirements. It would result in more EV charging products being built overseas, not here. It would undermine American workers and our Nation's ability to be global leaders in electric vehicles. Put simply, a vote for this resolution is a vote against American manufacturing of EV chargers. That is why I oppose this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so as well. With that, I yield the floor. I am looking to see if there is anyone else to speak. I don't see anyone, so I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong support for the nomination of ADM Lisa Franchetti to serve as the Chief of Naval Operations. As some of my colleagues know, I was 17 years old when I raised my right hand to take the oath to defend our country and Constitution, Navy ROTC midshipman at Ohio State at the height of the Vietnam war. We had no women in our Navy ROTC unit at Ohio State or at any other Big Ten college, no women in the ROTC units. In the service academies, no women served in those roles, training roles. How things have changed. How things have changed. We are here today to actually put a really strong marker on that change and to applaud it. I spent, all in, 23 years in Active and Reserve duty, and I am the son of a Navy chief petty officer, the nephew of a Navy chief petty officer, and the nephew of a deceased 19-year-old Navy veteran who was killed in a kamikaze attack in World War II on a carrier in the Pacific. My grandmother is a Gold Star mother. In my family, we bleed Navy blue. I can tell you firsthand, folks, that we have before us a terrific, terrific nominee to serve as Chief of Naval Operations. She spent practically her whole life in the Navy, serving our country around the world in places including Italy, South Korea, as well as a number of posts here closer to home. Admiral Franchetti's career has spanned nearly every theater of engagement, every level of service--commanding ships, squadrons, strike groups, and fleet levels. She has been a commander of U.S. Naval Forces Korea, deputy commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Africa, commander of Carrier Strike Group 9, Vice Chief of Naval Operations, and Acting Chief of Naval Operations, just to name a few. What a career. What a career. For her tremendous work, she has received almost two dozen prestigious awards and recognitions. She has even received some of the awards multiple times. What an impressive servant. Admiral Franchetti has been making our country proud for not just a couple of years but for decades, from the day she signed up for the Navy ROTC Program at Northwestern University to this day. The Senate stands poised to confirm her as Chief of Naval Operations, where, again, she will become the first woman to serve in that role and the first woman to serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I know she will continue her outstanding work as she breaks barriers for the Navy and for women everywhere. So, today, I am here to urge my colleagues to join me and others to confirm ADM Lisa Franchetti to serve as the U.S. Navy's Chief of Naval Operations. I would just say to the admiral, to her husband Jim, and to their daughter Isabelle: We have two words in the Navy that we use when we want to applaud service, and they are ``Bravo Zulu.'' I can think of no woman more deserving of those two words. As a human being--for my colleagues who had an opportunity to meet with her, you could just tell, you could see and feel why she has received the kinds of promotions and the kind of recognition and the kind of responsibility. She is one terrific human being as well. So I am honored to stand here on her behalf. I would also say that we have about 300 other men and women--senior officers in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps--who are ready to be promoted, deserve to be promoted, and are not being promoted because we are not confirming them. Today, we have a chance to do something about it, and we can start with Admiral Franchetti. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, on September 27, the Environment and Public Works Committee favorably reported the Strengthening Coastal Communities Act of 2023 as an original bill by voice vote. This bill, S. 2958, expands and improves the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, also known as CBRA. I would like to formally recognize the colleagues who have worked with me on this bill and share some thoughts on its significance. According to Senate procedure, original bills are considered a product of the committee and do not have sponsors or cosponsors. With this in mind, I wish to acknowledge for the record that Senators Graham, Whitehouse, and Tillis assisted in authorship of the Strengthening Coastal Communities Act of 2023. While these colleagues cannot be formally added as cosponsors, I want to thank them for their participation in developing this bipartisan legislation and note that I consider them to be cosponsors. I would also like to ask our colleagues across the Senate for their support to pass this bill. CBRA was originally enacted in 1982, and it protects sensitive habitats along the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coasts by restricting Federal investment within designated areas. In doing so, CBRA has saved billions of Federal tax dollars since enactment, while simultaneously protecting hundreds of thousands of acres of coastal wetlands from development. In 2019, a scientific study found that CBRA had saved the Federal taxpayer roughly $9.5 billion since its passage and is projected to save up to $108 billion over the next 50 years. Coastal wetlands that CBRA protects continue to provide key habitat areas for commercial and recreational fisheries, migratory birds, and endangered species. Importantly, the areas protected under CBRA play a crucial role in coastal resilience by mitigating hurricane and flood damage. A 2023 study found that CBRA provided $112 million per year in prevented National Flood Insurance Program claims, a 7-percent savings in annual claims. Given this broad range of benefits, CBRA has enjoyed strong bipartisan support since its inception. CBRA was developed and introduced on a bipartisan basis in 1982, with 58 cosponsors in the Senate led by sponsor Senator John H. Chafee of Rhode Island. CBRA's co-author, Representative Thomas B. Evans from my home State of Delaware, said CBRA was needed because ``the U.S. taxpayer should not subsidize and bear the risk for private development on coastal barriers.'' President Ronald Reagan signed the bill into law, noting that CBRA adopts a ``sensible approach'' to conservation that also saves taxpayer dollars. CBRA has continued to enjoy strong bipartisan support in subsequent improvements, map enactments, and reauthorizations in 1988, 1990, 2000, 2006, and 2018. The areas protected under CBRA are identified in official maps that must be authorized by Congress and have not been comprehensively revised since 1990. The 1990s-era maps were created using now- antiquated mapping techniques and, as a result, are imprecise, difficult to apply in practice, and contain errors that impact property owners and project proponents. Congress has recognized this problem and directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to undergo a yearslong modernization process to recommend updates to these maps. In 2013, the Fish and Wildlife Service received supplemental appropriations related to Hurricane Sandy in order to modernize CBRS maps, resulting in extensive recommended revisions along the Mid-Atlantic and New England coasts. The Strengthening Coastal Communities Act of 2023 adopts the comprehensively revised maps prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 187 updated CBRS maps and 11 new maps, including maps prepared through the Hurricane Sandy Remapping Project and other technical correction reviews. Enacting this legislation will provide critical modernization of CBRA implementation, in addition to making other improvements and technical corrections in CBRA. With that said, I would like to reiterate my gratitude to Senators Graham, Whitehouse, and Tillis, who have been indispensable partners in the development of the Strengthening Coastal Communities Act of 2023. I look forward to continuing to work with them and our colleagues in the House to pass S. 2958 and enact it into law.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I rise today to voice my support for Jennifer Hall's nomination to serve as the next U.S. district court judge for Delaware. Before I describe what makes Jennifer Hall particularly well suited for the role, let me just take a moment, if I can, to describe our approach to filling court vacancies in the First State. For over a decade, my colleague--my wingman, if you will--from Delaware, Senator Chris Coons, and I have relied on a collaborative process for putting forward U.S. district court recommendations to the White House, regardless of who is in the White House. With the help of a judicial nominating commission, Senator Coons and I have worked to identify some of those qualified individuals in Delaware in order to recommend them to the President, regardless of political party. The process serves Delaware well, it serves our Nation well, and it has yielded yet another extraordinary nominee before us today. As I often say, justice delayed is justice denied. Justice delayed is justice denied. It is critical that we act swiftly to confirm Jennifer Hall to Delaware's U.S. district court. It is one of the busiest if not, maybe, the busiest district court in the Nation. I also want to take a moment to thank Judge Rich Andrews for his service to this court and also to our State and to our Nation. I know that when he takes senior status at the end of this year, Jennifer Hall will be well prepared to help take on an enormous workload before the court. I would like to share just a little bit more, if I could, about her with our colleagues today. Jennifer grew up in Minnesota and is a proud graduate of the University of Minnesota--home of those Golden Gophers-- where she earned a bachelor's degree in biochemistry. She then made her way to Yale, where she met her husband Dave and earned not one but two degrees--a master's and a Ph.D. in both molecular physics and biochemistry. But apparently three degrees weren't enough, so she continued her studies at the University of Pennsylvania's Law School, where she graduated magna cum laude and immediately began a successful legal career. In the years that followed, she had the distinction of clerking for two Federal judges appointed by President George W. Bush. Jennifer went on to work at Fish & Richardson, a Wilmington, DE, law firm, where she focused on patent law and other complex business issues. After 3 years in private practice, she felt called to serve the people of Delaware and of America. She spent the next 8 years at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Delaware. Then, in 2019, Jennifer was selected to serve as a magistrate judge at the U.S. district court for Delaware--the same court to which she has now been nominated to serve as a Federal judge. The last 4 years have given her some of the best preparation and on- the-job training that anyone could ask for. Magistrate Judge Hall has impressed her colleagues on the bench both with her intellect and her work ethic, and she has a deep respect for and knowledge of the law. Her background as a scientist, as a legal scholar, and as a magistrate judge has prepared her well for this new role. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote to confirm Magistrate Judge Jennifer Hall to serve as the next U.S. district court judge for Delaware. I am certain she is going to be ready to hit the ground ready on day one, especially in a district court as busy and as important as Delaware's. Before I yield back my time, I am going to be joined here momentarily, I believe, by Senator Coons, my colleague from Delaware, who serves on the Judiciary Committee and with whom I serve and enjoy the opportunity to serve with him for our State. We have, I think, probably not the kind of close working relationship when it comes to judicial nominations that you find in most other States. We do it as a team. We have great help from the folks on the nominating commission who help make sure we not only identify excellent candidates but actually are able to present them for confirmation to the Senate. The Presiding Officer, as my friend, I think you know that I am a recovered Governor. I served as Governor of Delaware for 8 years. As Governor in Delaware, the Governor gets to nominate people to serve on the court of chancery, superior court, family court, supreme court, and to submit those names to the legislature for their consideration--to the Senate, rather. I always looked for three or four qualities, if you will, in the people I nominated as Governor to serve on the bench in Delaware. Even as State courts, we considered some of the major issues of our country, business laws and others. One thing I always looked for in nominees was people who are smart, not just book smart but actually wise. I looked for people who had a strong work ethic. I looked for people who believe in the Golden Rule, treating the folks who come before them in their courtroom the way they want to be treated, and people who have integrity that just could not ever be questioned. Those are just some of the criteria I looked for in my judicial nominees. For 8 years, I submitted names to the State senate in Delaware. They all went before the executive committee and eventually were considered. Every one of those nominees was confirmed, which says a lot about Delaware--a lot about Delaware. I hope we will take a similar kind of action here today. Jennifer got a good vote on cloture, and my hope is that we can replicate that as well. I will yield back. I don't know if I can reserve time so that when Senator Coons arrives, he will have time left as well because I know he is trying to get here. But this is, I think, a proud day for Delaware, and I know it is for Jennifer and her family. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 300 and 324; 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 the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate resume legislative session.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Good afternoon, Madam President. I am here today to urge my Senate colleagues to join me in considering the confirmation of two excellent people to serve on the Postal Regulatory Commission, which is the governing body for the U.S. Postal Service: Robert Taub, who is currently a commissioner and we are seeking to reconfirm him; and also Thomas Day, who has come through our Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and, I think, unanimously recommended for a position on the Postal Regulatory Commission. Both of these public servants have spent literally decades bettering our country. Mr. Taub has served on the Commission since 2011, and he actually served as its chairman for, I think, more than 6 years. Mr. Day has spent--listen to this--over 35 years at the Postal Service--35 years at the Postal Service--and another service, as I recall, in uniform for our country. I would like to add that we have unanimously confirmed Mr. Taub not once but twice previously, and there is no doubt that he has served our country well. I want to share three stories with you, if I could: a little bit about the history and the importance of the Postal Service; another about Mr. Taub's role in making the Agency what it is today; and a third about Mr. Day's influence on the function of our postal system across this country. In 1787, the Founding Fathers of our country gathered in Philadelphia literally to draft a constitution to be able to outline how a new country might be formed and actually operate and work for the betterment of people who lived here then and in the future. They drafted the Constitution, and they sent that Constitution out across the 13 colonies and asked the colonies to look at it, kick the tires, find out what they liked and what they thought ought to be changed. The first State to actually take it up and affirm--ratify, if you will--that Constitution was the colony that is now Delaware, the State of Delaware. On December 7, 1787, after a week or so of debate at the Golden Fleece Tavern, the Founding Fathers of Delaware said: We like this Constitution. They maybe tweaked it a little bit and sent it on down to the other colonies, who followed suit. Delaware was, for one whole week, the entire United States of America. Then we opened it up. We let in Pennsylvania and Maryland. And the rest, I think, has turned out pretty well, for the most part, until now. Hopefully, we will continue to exist for many, many years, decades, centuries into the future. One key element of the Constitution was the creation of the Postal Service. Our first Postmaster General was actually, believe it or not, Ben Franklin. Ben Franklin. The establishment of the Postal Service represented an important early effort to bind us together as a nation--to bind us together as a nation--to unite us in communication with one another. That work continues today as postal workers cover all 50 States. They did it today; they will do it at least 6 days this week--and to also make sure that we have the ability to provide the Postal Service to the folks who live in the U.S. territories, deliver the mail that helps unite our families and helps to grow our businesses and helps, really, to enable our democracy to function and thrive. More than two centuries later, we continue to live up to that promise. In 2006, one of our colleagues, Senator Susan Collins and I led the passage of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act literally on this floor where we are gathered today. That legislation modernized the Postal Service for the first time, I think, since 1970. Just last year, we went on to pass, on top of that, the Postal Service Reform Act to shore up the Agency's financial foundation, including a requirement for all Postal Service retirees to enroll in Medicare when they became eligible for those benefits. Over the past couple of years, I have had the opportunity to work with Postmaster General Louis DeJoy and the Postal Commission to make the Agency even more energy efficient. Together, we successfully secured billions of dollars to expand the number of electrical vehicles in the Postal Service's delivery fleet. The Postal Service has one of the biggest delivery fleets in the country. They also have one of the oldest and one of the most polluted. What we have done is worked with the leadership of the Postal Service to make sure that those old vehicles time out. They really, for the most part, have timed out. They need to be replaced. They are going to be replaced with vehicles that will not only help us deliver the mail-- and do an even better job of that--but to make sure the delivery vehicles that are out there aren't making worse the climate crisis that we are going through as a nation, as a planet. I want to tell you a little bit more about Mr. Taub, if I could, and how he has been integral to the changes that we have seen in the Postal Service, especially as it has become more modern and more efficient. After spending years as a staff member to Members of Congress and Ambassadors and working for the Government Accountability Office, Mr. Taub, native New Yorker, became chief of staff to then Congressman John McHugh--an old friend and a very good Member of the House; a Republican, as I recall. Under Representative McHugh's leadership, Mr. Taub helped to craft the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act in the House of Representatives. That is the same legislation that I mentioned earlier that I worked on with Senator Collins. Together with Representative McHugh and his team, we ushered the bill to the President's desk, where it was signed into law, again, in 2006. This transformation of the Postal Service was just the beginning of Mr. Taub's involvement with the Postal Service. After establishing his expertise in the public sector, he continued on beyond this work when Representative McHugh was appointed Secretary of the Army. As Secretary McHugh's principal civilian advisor, Mr. Taub helped lead a workforce of more than--get this--1.2 million people and managed an annual budget exceeding $200 billion--no small feat. For his exemplary work, Mr. Taub was awarded the Army's Decoration for Distinguished Civilian Service. All this led to Mr. Taub serving on the Postal Regulatory Commission on not one, not two, but three Presidents, including both Democrats and Republicans. He was first nominated to the Commission in 2011, and his strong leadership led to his appointment as chairman of the Commission in 2014. As I like to say: In adversity lies opportunity. And despite the troubles left over from a previous chairman, Mr. Taub took adversity in stride. He embraced the role of chairman with diligence and grace. He led a massive undertaking to study and to revise a postal rate system. As a result was the Postal Accountability Enhancement Act he helped to pass. In 2016, his work paid off when he was once again confirmed to be chairman to the Commission and continued to serve as chairman. Mr. Day has had an incredible record with the Postal Service as well. Let me just take a minute to talk about him. In his 35 years at the Agency, he has held almost every role imaginable, including that of vice president of the engineering department and the government affairs department, as well as the chief sustainability officer. In his role on the sustainability team, Mr. Day helped lead the Postal Service into the environmentally conscious practices of the 21st century. As chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I know the importance--that is my role--but I know the importance of our Agencies carrying out practices that protect our planet. Mr. Day shares this belief and understands it firsthand. For example, he has been working to reduce the fuel emissions of the aging postal fleet I talked about and has done that over the past decade. Let me be clear, if I could. The kind of institutional knowledge and expertise that Mr. Day holds is unique, and it would make him an extremely valuable asset on the Commission. Mr. Day also has experience working with the exchange of mail on an international scale, serving in senior positions at the Universal Postal Union, the United Nations agency, and at the International Post Corporation. On top of that, he is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and has bravely served in the U.S. Army. Besides being a captain and a Vietnam veteran serving in the U.S. Senate, when I learned about his service in the Army--I am a Navy guy--I said: Different uniforms, same team, and thanked him for all of his service in uniform as well. There is no doubt that someone with his commitment to our Nation would make a terrific addition to the Postal Regulatory Commission. Together, Mr. Taub and Mr. Day will continue revising the postal rate system and modernizing the Agency for the betterment of our country. For this reason, among many others, we think it is imperative that we confirm both of them--not one of them but both of them--and make sure the Commission is fully, fully staffed. Congressional and Postal Service customers rely on the Commission to hold the Agency accountable for its service performance and to ensure its prices follow the law and its practices follow the law, and it is our duty to make sure the Agency can perform at the highest level, including for the good of our planet. I like to say service to others is the rent we pay for the space we take up on this Earth. I think Mr. Taub and Mr. Day's decades of service to this country is more rent than most of us will ever be asked to pay. I urge our colleagues to confirm both Mr. Taub and Mr. Day to ensure that the Postal Regulatory Commission can continue to do its important work on behalf of all of us, who are the fortunate beneficiaries of the Constitution that was written all those years ago and the promise it provided for our country. With that, Madam President, I would note the absence of a quorum, and I thank the Presiding Officer and I thank my colleagues and ask for their support of the nomination of these two excellent, excellent candidates. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, while the Senator from Massachusetts is still on the floor, he and I have been friends for, gosh, 35 years. We served together in the House. We used to travel all over Latin America and South America during the contra war. We are still friends and compadres today in a different war--a war to save or planet and to make sure that we do that and that we provide a lot of jobs and economic opportunity. I am here to talk about the nomination of David Uhlmann to serve as Assistant Administrator. But before I do that, let me say that, among the most important things that we are working on--it is not legislation, but it is legislation that we have already passed. And it is the climate provisions that are part of the bipartisan infrastructure bill that we adopted and the President signed a year ago. And there are climate provisions there that are enormously important, and we want to make sure that that legislation is fully enacted. Part of that is the responsibility of the administration, but it is the chair's responsibility. So that is hugely important. The other thing that is hugely important is the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act, which has extraordinary provisions that deal with climate change, sea level, and all. So it is not enough just to introduce legislation. It is not enough to enact legislation. We have to make sure it is implemented, and that is what our responsibilities and our oversight responsibilities include. Having said that, I want to rise today in support of the nomination of David Uhlmann to serve as Assistant Administrator for the EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. Over the last 6 years, some of our greatest achievements--some of Congress's greatest achievements--have been passed in a series of bedrock environmental laws. I just mentioned a couple of them a minute ago. They are laws that have revolutionized how to protect our natural environment and our people--people who live in this country and around the world--from the dangers of pollution. These laws, such as the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act-- also known as CERCLA--have made the air that we breathe cleaner, the water that we drink safer, and the lands that we live on healthier. And in the process, we have revolutionized ecosystems, we have improved the living conditions of entire communities throughout this country, and we have saved countless of lives. However, these indispensable lifesaving environmental laws are only as effective, as I have mentioned, as our ability to enforce them and to make sure that they are complied with. And in the years immediately before President Biden took office, enforcement of our environmental laws had been dramatically undermined. According to the data from EPA, between 2018 and, I think, 2021, environmental enforcement and compliance actions had fallen to half of what they had been during the Bush and the Obama administrations. This lack of enforcement presented a threat to public health and a threat to the well-being of our environment, potentially letting many big polluters off the hook after violating some of the fundamental bedrock and environmental laws. That is why I am so pleased the Senate is again taking up the nomination of David Uhlmann to serve as the EPA's top enforcement officer, leading the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. There has not been a Senate-confirmed official leading the EPA's enforcement efforts for far too long. As I said before, Mr. Uhlmann is exceptionally qualified to do this job. He brings to this position a long career that includes 17 years with the Department of Justice, serving in both Democratic and Republican administrations. Let me say that again: a 17-year career with the Department of Justice, serving in both Democrat and Republican administrations. During seven of those years served, Mr. Uhlmann served as the Chief of the Department of Justice's Environmental Crimes Section. In addition, Mr. Uhlmann's nomination is supported by five former EPA Administrators, including three who served under Republican administrations. I am going to say that again. Mr. Uhlmann's nomination has earned the support of five former EPA Administrators, including three who served under Republican administrations: William Reilly, Lee Thomas, and Christine Todd Whitman. His nomination also earned the support of dozens of other former senior EPA and DOJ officials--some from Democratic administrations, others from Republican administrations, and some from career officials. In the words of former Deputy Attorney General for President George W. Bush, Larry Thomson, this what he had to say about David Uhlmann: David is a top-notch environmental lawyer and an outstanding leader with unsurpassed integrity, compassion, and commitment to fairness. I wish that we could say that about all of us. Those are high words of praise. In fact, Mr. Uhlmann received bipartisan support from the majority of this body nearly 1 year ago when we voted to discharge his nomination from the Environment and Public Works Committee. Let me close by saying that I am confident that David Uhlmann will make an outstanding--an outstanding--Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Assurance at EPA. I am eager to see him confirmed. I encourage my colleagues to join us in supporting his nomination. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, folks that are back in Delaware are probably wondering as they are watching on C-SPAN, What is our Senator doing there giving a floor speech and talking about a woman from Wyoming? There is a Wyoming, DE. It is in Kent County, which is just south of Dover. We have great restaurants, plenty of restaurants. In fact, the Senator from Wyoming described that Svilar's--is it Svilar's? I think it is Svilar's--still exists. We have a huge Air Force base in Dover, the Dover Air Force Base. They fly huge airplanes and have a mortuary there to receive the remains of our fallen heroes. That is part of our State. We just have very strong support for military personnel and all things Air Force. I am Navy. So it is the idea that we have a woman here--you know, it is one thing for a guy to have done some of this stuff that Dessie did, but it is another to have a woman in World War II volunteer and enlist on the heels of the attack on Pearl Harbor and to go on and serve, really, with distinction. In my family, we believe in the Navy blue. My dad was a chief petty officer, and my uncles were chief petty officers. My mother's youngest brother died in a kamikaze attack on his aircraft carrier, and my grandmother got the Gold Star for the Great Green Fleet Navy blue. So I just get inspired by Dessie's heroism that we are hearing about here today. For the people who might have been listening carefully when Senator Barrasso was talking about the restaurant that she opened, he said that, when the people were hungry, she fed them. That is a line out of the Bible. It is actually a line out of Matthew 25: When I was hungry, you did feed me. When I was naked, you did clothe me. When I was sick and in prison, you did visit me. When I was thirsty, you did give me drink. This is a woman who not only served her country in uniform and who not only ran a successful business--it sounds like--for over 100 years for family but who actually felt a moral responsibility to make sure that people did not go hungry. I also am the senior Democrat--I am the senior, actually, member of a committee called Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. We have jurisdiction, among other things on that committee, over the Postal Service. We have, literally, tens of thousands of people who serve in the Postal Service across the country today. It is a tough job and sometimes a thankless job, but we are grateful to them for their service. A lot of them, it turns out, served in the military. They may have served in the Korean war, and they may have served in Vietnam; they may have served in Afghanistan, and they may have served in Iraq. But they wore the uniform of our country, and they wore or wear the uniform of the Postal Service. In either instance, they are serving this country. They are serving their communities and are doing so, in some cases, at great risk to themselves. There is a little bit of a love story in this as well. It is kind of a mixed marriage of a Navy woman and an Air Force man who get married and raise a family--have all of these kids--and go on to do amazing things as a family in their own community. It is a story that I am inspired by, and I am honored that Senator Barrasso would ask me to join him and Senator Lummis to tell the story, too. I remember a couple of years ago when we were on the floor here-- Senator Barrasso and myself and a fellow named Mike Enzi, the late Mike Enzi, who held the seat that Senator Lummis now holds today--hearing them talk about the naming of a post office in Wyoming in a place called Thermopolis, which I had never heard of but that I will never forget. The question was, Should they rename that post office there after Bobbi Barrasso's dad? They didn't have a Democratic cosponsor for the bill. I talked to Senator Barrasso and to Senator Enzi and said: I would be honored. If you are looking for a bipartisan bill, I would be happy to be your wingman on this particular flight. And they were good enough to let me join the team. So, to Dessie Bebout, your family members are out there, watching and listening. I want to just say thank you for sharing a remarkable person, not just with the folks in the town in which she and her family have lived, worked, and served for all of those years, but thank you for sharing her with our country in a broader way. Thank you for serving as an inspiration. We are in your debt, and I am honored to be part of this trio to offer this legislation today and to ask for its passage.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, folks that are back in Delaware are probably wondering as they are watching on C-SPAN, What is our Senator doing there giving a floor speech and talking about a woman from Wyoming? There is a Wyoming, DE. It is in Kent County, which is just south of Dover. We have great restaurants, plenty of restaurants. In fact, the Senator from Wyoming described that Svilar's--is it Svilar's? I think it is Svilar's--still exists. We have a huge Air Force base in Dover, the Dover Air Force Base. They fly huge airplanes and have a mortuary there to receive the remains of our fallen heroes. That is part of our State. We just have very strong support for military personnel and all things Air Force. I am Navy. So it is the idea that we have a woman here--you know, it is one thing for a guy to have done some of this stuff that Dessie did, but it is another to have a woman in World War II volunteer and enlist on the heels of the attack on Pearl Harbor and to go on and serve, really, with distinction. In my family, we believe in the Navy blue. My dad was a chief petty officer, and my uncles were chief petty officers. My mother's youngest brother died in a kamikaze attack on his aircraft carrier, and my grandmother got the Gold Star for the Great Green Fleet Navy blue. So I just get inspired by Dessie's heroism that we are hearing about here today. For the people who might have been listening carefully when Senator Barrasso was talking about the restaurant that she opened, he said that, when the people were hungry, she fed them. That is a line out of the Bible. It is actually a line out of Matthew 25: When I was hungry, you did feed me. When I was naked, you did clothe me. When I was sick and in prison, you did visit me. When I was thirsty, you did give me drink. This is a woman who not only served her country in uniform and who not only ran a successful business--it sounds like--for over 100 years for family but who actually felt a moral responsibility to make sure that people did not go hungry. I also am the senior Democrat--I am the senior, actually, member of a committee called Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. We have jurisdiction, among other things on that committee, over the Postal Service. We have, literally, tens of thousands of people who serve in the Postal Service across the country today. It is a tough job and sometimes a thankless job, but we are grateful to them for their service. A lot of them, it turns out, served in the military. They may have served in the Korean war, and they may have served in Vietnam; they may have served in Afghanistan, and they may have served in Iraq. But they wore the uniform of our country, and they wore or wear the uniform of the Postal Service. In either instance, they are serving this country. They are serving their communities and are doing so, in some cases, at great risk to themselves. There is a little bit of a love story in this as well. It is kind of a mixed marriage of a Navy woman and an Air Force man who get married and raise a family--have all of these kids--and go on to do amazing things as a family in their own community. It is a story that I am inspired by, and I am honored that Senator Barrasso would ask me to join him and Senator Lummis to tell the story, too. I remember a couple of years ago when we were on the floor here-- Senator Barrasso and myself and a fellow named Mike Enzi, the late Mike Enzi, who held the seat that Senator Lummis now holds today--hearing them talk about the naming of a post office in Wyoming in a place called Thermopolis, which I had never heard of but that I will never forget. The question was, Should they rename that post office there after Bobbi Barrasso's dad? They didn't have a Democratic cosponsor for the bill. I talked to Senator Barrasso and to Senator Enzi and said: I would be honored. If you are looking for a bipartisan bill, I would be happy to be your wingman on this particular flight. And they were good enough to let me join the team. So, to Dessie Bebout, your family members are out there, watching and listening. I want to just say thank you for sharing a remarkable person, not just with the folks in the town in which she and her family have lived, worked, and served for all of those years, but thank you for sharing her with our country in a broader way. Thank you for serving as an inspiration. We are in your debt, and I am honored to be part of this trio to offer this legislation today and to ask for its passage.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for 5 minutes and that Senator Stabenow be permitted to speak for 5 minutes prior to the scheduled votes.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, it is good to see you, and it is good to see my colleague John Cornyn here in the Senate today, all the pages, and folks who came back to go to work. There is a lot of work to do. One of the first items of business before us is a critical nomination, a nomination for the Department of Agriculture--and not just any job at the Department of Agriculture but the No. 2 job, the Deputy Secretary of Agriculture. The person who has been nominated is a woman who serves currently as the Under Secretary at the Department of Agriculture, and she has been nominated to be the Deputy Secretary for the Department. She has a hard name to pronounce, and it is a name I have never seen before. It sounds something like this: So-cheel, like S-O, cheel, like C-H-E-E-L. You look at it down on paper, and you say: How would you pronounce that name? That is the way to pronounce it. But the rest of her name is Torres Small. She is somebody I have known for a relatively brief period of time. You know who knows her really well? It is a guy who used to serve with us for many years, a Senator from New Mexico, Tom Udall. In fact, as I recall, I think she actually worked for Tom Udall when he was a U.S. Senator. Agriculture is a hugely important part of our economy in Delaware. I see Senator Stabenow is going to speak immediately after me. I know it is hugely important in Michigan. As she is the chairman of the Ag Committee, she knows that much better than I do. The Department of Agriculture, the No. 2 job--huge industry, important in every State in our country. This is a big deal. This is a big deal. As it turns out, the administration has given us a terrific nominee. The Department of Agriculture plays a critical role in ensuring that people from every corner of this country have something to eat-- hopefully, something nutritious to eat--and also helps us with respect to farming and farming agriculture and farming economy, public health, broadband, and a whole lot more. And the role of the Deputy Secretary of the Department is a big deal, a very big deal. It requires someone who is diligent. It requires someone who is sharp. It requires someone who ultimately understands the Department. It is a big department. It requires someone who is diligent, and I know that Under Secretary Torres Small possesses all of those qualities and a whole lot more. In her current position as the Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development, she has been involved with every function of the Department, including overseeing the deployment of $2 billion for rural broadband that was secured in the bipartisan infrastructure law that we passed here by almost a unanimous vote more than a year ago. This month, we saw States across our country receive this significant funding to expand broadband access for literally millions of people in many parts of our Nation--rural parts of our Nation--including Delaware's own Sussex County, one of the largest counties in the country. We only have three counties in Delaware. The second largest is Sussex. It is one of the top counties in the country for growing corn and soybeans, and it is one of the top counties in the country for growing chickens. We have, in Delaware, over 200 chickens for every person. So it is a big deal for us, big deal for us. Prior to serving at the Department of Agriculture, Under Secretary Torres Small has had a history of serving her country. She was a U.S. Representative for New Mexico's Second Congressional District, where she grew up as--get this--a granddaughter of farmworkers. As a U.S. Representative, she served as a member of the House Agriculture Committee, among other committees, and previously spent time on the ground in New Mexico, as I mentioned earlier, as a field rep for our old friend and colleague Senator Tom Udall, who is now the U.S. Ambassador to New Zealand. I talked to him about a month ago, and, I say to Senator Stabenow, he thinks he has the best job on the planet. If the Senator talked to him, she will know what I mean. But Xochitl is also an accomplished attorney, practicing water and natural resources law, and served as a former clerk in the U.S. District Court for a fellow named Judge Robert C. Brack. All these experiences help make her well suited to take on the role of Deputy Secretary because I know that she understands our Nation and understands this on a human level as well. That was made especially clear during her nomination hearing. Under Secretary Torres Small spoke of her goals to better communicate through the role of the Department across our country so that programs are deployed more efficiently, more effectively, more humanely. She also highlighted how she will work to support underserved producers and small farmers by raising awareness of the Federal resources that they may be eligible for. So, in closing, before yielding to Senator Stabenow, I strongly urge our colleagues to confirm Under Secretary Xochitl Torres Small as the Deputy Secretary for the Department of Agriculture. She will make us proud. She will make New Mexico proud. She will make our country proud. With that, I will just stop talking and yield the floor to Senator Stabenow.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I appreciate the opportunity to come to the floor. This is like what they call in Delaware a ``threefer''-- three for one. And I appreciate the cooperation of the floor staff and from you to enable me to do this. One of the things I always look for when I am hiring somebody is I ask for recommendations and references of people they have worked for in the past. As it turns out, in the nomination of Dr. Colleen Shogan to be the Archivist of the United States, one of the people she used to work for was Senator Joe Lieberman, a good friend to all of us, Democrats and Republicans. He was good enough to reach out to me several weeks ago, and we had just had a hearing on Dr. Shogan before us in the Homeland Security Committee. I was really impressed. He called and said: She used to work for me. And I said: No kidding? Well, I wouldn't disqualify her for that. I am just kidding. But he went on to tell me what a remarkable human being she was, even at a younger age in her life. But as the Chief Administrator of the National Archives and Records Administration, the Archivist of the United States plays a vital role in a couple of different ways: one, especially with the preservation of the history of this country that we are all sworn to protect. This person who has been nominated, this nominee, would serve as our Nation's recordkeeper for executive agencies and for Presidential records while also being responsible for the National Archives and Records Administration. This role has been critical in leading the Federal Government's ongoing transition from paper to electronic records for a long time. Dr. Shogan is extremely well qualified to take on what is not a small responsibility; it is a great responsibility and important, too. As Senior Vice President and Director of the David M. Rubenstein Center for White House History at the White House Historical Association, Dr. Shogan has already demonstrated her extensive skill set as an archivist. She is a dedicated public servant, pulling a decade's worth of senior roles at the Library of Congress. She has developed a career in academia, Federal Government service, and nonprofit management. And one of those folks she worked with--worked for--was our former colleague, Senator Joe Lieberman. At our hearing to consider her nomination before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee earlier this year, Dr. Shogan reaffirmed her commitment to nonpartisanship, which is very important for this role. She highlighted her service as the Vice Chair of the Women's Suffrage Centennial Commission. Dr. Shogan also shared how she will work to address the backlog of veterans' record requests at the National Archives and Records Administration. As the last Vietnam veteran serving here in the United States Senate, that means a lot to me. She also has vowed to make sure that the oftentimes long and arduous process that can prevent our veterans from receiving their critical services and benefits that they are entitled to, that they are addressed. I strongly urge my colleagues to confirm Dr. Shogan as the Archivist of the United States, and I know she will serve our country well. My talking points now say to yield the floor, but I am not, because I have been asked by the folks who help us manage the floor if I would like to go ahead and speak on two CRAs, which is the Congressional Review Act resolutions. And I would like to do that, if I may. I appreciate the tolerance and consideration of the chairman of our committee.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I rise for a second time today and this time in opposition to S.J. Res. 9, a Congressional Review Act resolution to disapprove of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's rule protecting a bird known as the lesser prairie-chicken under the Endangered Species Act. Before I explain why my colleagues should reject this resolution, let me first answer two basic questions. Some who may be watching this debate could be asking: First, what is a lesser prairie-chicken? And, second, why do we need to protect it? Those are two pretty good questions. Native to the southern Great Plains, the lesser prairie-chicken has long been considered an indicator for healthy grasslands and prairies upon which hundreds of species depend. If the lesser prairie-chicken is in peril, in time, other species could be in peril, as well. Today, the lesser prairie-chicken can be found in five States-- Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico. We know that this colorful and, some would say, charismatic bird's distinct call was once a familiar part of the prairie soundscape, so much so that it has earned a representation in ceremonial dances of several Native American Tribes and celebration in communities across its multistate habitat. Sadly, the population of the lesser prairie-chicken has declined by some 97 percent throughout the last century--97 percent. This decline is primarily due to loss of habitat and climate-related drought in the West. In addition to the cultural and ecological losses that come with a declining lesser prairie-chicken population, there are impacts for communities, as well. For example, a local prairie chicken festival in Roosevelt County, NM, hasn't been held since 2012 because there are no longer enough birds in the area to sustain this tourism. There are no lesser prairie-chickens in 45 of our 50 States. There are none. Still, we know firsthand the benefits that wildlife tourism can have on local economies. For example, people travel from all across the country--and, actually, around the world--to come to Delaware to see the beloved bird called the red knot. That is a familiar face and welcomed face along the shores of Delaware. This tiny bird, which is now a threatened species due to climate change, migrates more than 18,000 miles. This tiny little bird migrates more than 18,000 miles on its roundtrip from the southern tip of South America to the tundra of the northern Arctic. Along the way, flocks of red knots stop for lunch, and they stop for lunch in Delaware. They stop for lunch along our beaches in Delaware. They stop and lunch on horseshoe crab eggs, often doubling their weight during this process. It is quite a spectacle. Horseshoe crabs have been around for millions of years. Every year, during certain parts of the year, they lay their eggs and they lay them along the Delaware beaches, and the red knots come in and swoop them up and go to town, literally, doubling their weight before they head north or head south. People come from all over the world to witness this. When they come from all over the world, they stay in our hotels. They eat in our restaurants. We have no sales tax. They shop safe with no sales tax. For us, it is a pretty good thing, and it is an even better deal for the red knots. They benefit and, frankly, so do we in our economy. So while some might suggest that providing Endangered Species Act protections for the lesser prairie-chicken would hinder economic development, given our experience in Delaware, I have a different perspective based on our experience with threatened and endangered species in the First State. Delaware is not the only State that pays homage to our Nation's iconic birds. In fact, five National Football League teams use birds as their mascot, including the Seattle Seahawks, the Arizona Cardinals, the Atlanta Falcons, the Baltimore Ravens, and the Philadelphia Eagles. Go birds. In addition, the great State of Louisiana is known as the Pelican State. Today, the distinctive brown pelican is thriving along the Louisiana's coast because of the Endangered Species Act. To the west, the well-loved California condor actually became extinct in the wild in the year 1987. But with the help of the Endangered Species Act, there are now more than 550 condors in the wild. Unfortunately, Endangered Species Act protections for the lesser prairie-chickens have been delayed for decades. Now the species is in serious peril, which is why we should not wait any longer. Some of our colleagues who oppose this rule for the lesser prairie- chicken have claimed that the Fish and Wildlife Service did not properly account for longstanding voluntary conservation efforts. That is just not true. While I commend the voluntary actions to conserve the lesser prairie-chicken, science shows existing efforts are not nearly enough to protect and recover this species. That said, even with the data clearly demonstrating the need for enhanced protection for this extraordinary bird, the Fish and Wildlife Service worked hard to create a flexible rule that would mitigate the negative impacts on impacted industries. Specifically, the many years of volunteer conservation actions are not for naught. Under the Biden rule, those voluntary actions remain the foundation for current habitat and conservation plans to protect lesser prairie-chickens, while allowing continued industry operations. Under the rule, farmers, ranchers, and energy producers can generally continue their normal activities, as long as they adhere to reasonable conservation plans. That is true even if these activities have a small negative impact on this species. And this flexibility applies to the range for the entire northern population, including all known habitats in Kansas, in Colorado, and in Oklahoma, and about half of the State of Texas. What is more, the Fish and Wildlife Service delayed the effective date of this rule for 60 days to allow more time to work with partners and to work with stakeholders. Doing so allowed impacted industries to create conservation plans and minimize disruption to activity in the region. The Service also continues to collaborate closely with States to ensure that all interested parties have the tools that they need in order to comply with the rule. Despite this effort by the Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure a smooth implementation, this CRA resolution would take a sledgehammer to the rule. And this CRA is, indeed, a sledgehammer. If enacted, this resolution would not only invalidate the rule issued by the Fish and Wildlife Services, but it could also prevent the Service from ever issuing a listing for the lesser prairie-chicken in the future. To put it simply, enacting this resolution could set this species on a path to continued decline and eventual extinction. The resolution also undermines the Endangered Species Act. How is that, you ask? Well, this resolution violates the basic premise that the law should be applied based on science and not politics. In 2019, an intergovernmental panel issued an alarming report. What did the report say? That report found that roughly 1 million species on our planet are endangered of extinction. Let me just say that again. In 2019--4 years ago--an intergovernmental panel issued an alarming report. What did it report? They found that roughly 1 million species on our planet are in danger of extinction. We know that preserving our planet diversity is critical for innovation, it is critical for human health, and it is critical for our environment. And the Endangered Species Act is our best tool for protecting species and preserving environment. Let me conclude this afternoon by offering a reminder of what is at stake here today: Extinction is forever. Let me say that again. Extinction is forever. Overturning this listing may well mean the permanent loss of an iconic American species. That would harm our planet that we pass on to future generations and the communities and cultures that hold lesser prairie-chickens in high regard. For all of these reasons, I oppose this resolution, and I strongly urge our colleagues to join me and others in voting no. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I want to start off by thanking you for your good work on this subject--this important subject--at issue. I rise today because our critical work to combat the harmful effects of climate change is at risk. I am particularly concerned about the efforts some of our colleagues are undertaking to make even more dire the situation that our planet already faces, make it worse. Every day that goes by, we hear about the horrific scenes that are caused by natural disasters--wildfires in the West and in the Northeast; flooding and hurricanes in the South; tornadoes like the ones we had just last month in Sussex County, DE--the southern part of our State--that took a life; along with countless tornadoes across the Northwest. The list goes on and on and on. These disasters are devastating families not just in my State, not just in your State, but also in States across our country, and wreaking havoc on our economy. Over 3.3 million Americans were displaced due to natural disasters last year. Let me say that again. Over 3.3 million Americans were displaced due to natural disasters. On top of that, billions of dollars are spent every year--billions of dollars spent every year--in the aftermath of these disasters. That is double the number of people in Montana and Vermont combined. Let me say that again. That is double the number of people in Montana and Vermont combined. We cannot sit idly by, like some of our colleagues today would have us do, or allow for a reversal of the policies that are working to mitigate this devastation. As we all know, the solar industry has been critical in helping us combat the effects of climate change. By transitioning to cleaner energy solutions, we are taking the necessary steps to reduce our impact--the human impact--on our warming planet. The solar industry is not just good for our planet; it is good for American workers--a lot of them. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been created right here on our own American soil to grow the solar energy and strengthen our supply chain. The Inflation Reduction Act took these efforts one step further, allocating the largest investment we have ever made in the solar industry. The Inflation Reduction Act is already creating more jobs for more Americans across our country, while expanding our domestic solar manufacturing capacity. With the commitment of the Biden administration, we are on track to increase domestic solar panel manufacturing capacity eightfold by the end of next year, generating up to $40 billion in new investments. Let me say that again. We can increase our domestic solar panel manufacturing eightfold by the end of next year. Why would we get in the way of that progress? We can only ensure that this outcome is possible if we overcome the significant challenge presented here today. As you might remember, last year, the U.S. Department of Commerce's investigation into solar tariffs imposed on countries in Southeast Asia paralyzed the industry and halted the supply chains of critical materials for American solar deployment. Rightly, the Biden administration stepped in and announced the suspension of these tariffs. This action saved tens of thousands of jobs, allowing our transition to cleaner energy solutions to continue as demand for solar products continues to increase exponentially. Today, we are once again facing the same threats to American jobs that we faced a year ago. It is unimaginable. At least it is unimaginable to me that we would be willing to make an unforced error-- an unforced error--in our commitment to protecting our planet. We shouldn't be fighting the Biden administration's work to preserve the trade balance. We simply can't afford to make mistakes that would halt solar employment and cost us a whole ton of American jobs. With current U.S. solar manufacturing, we are only able to meet one- third of domestic demand--one-third. It is imperative that we protect this industry and the tens of thousands of jobs it produces. If the pause on solar tariffs were to end, the consequences would be devastating. Let's take a minute just to walk through what Americans would face. Here is what they would face: First of all, 30,000 good-paying jobs would be eliminated this year-- not next year or the year after that; this year, 30,000. Of that 30,000, 4,000 are manufacturing jobs stemming from a $4.2 billion domestic investment in the solar industry from legislation like the bipartisan Infrastructure Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. Second, CO2 emissions would increase by 42 million metric tons. That is about the same amount of emissions generated by the electricity use of 8 million homes in a year. This would undermine our progress on solar deployment and starve the solar market of the critical panels and cells that cannot be obtained in the United States at this time. Third, our efforts to strengthen the supply chain by developing our own manufacturing would be severely harmed. The retroactive solar tariffs on materials that are currently not available in the United States would directly undercut our own efforts and send the supply chain into a downward spiral. Fourth, roughly 14 percent of the industry's anticipated projects would be canceled. I will say that again. Roughly 14 percent of the industry's anticipated projects would be canceled, significantly setting back our transition to a green energy economy. We cannot afford to let this happen. We need to do everything in our power to lift up innovators in the solar industry, to boldly cut emissions from our power sector, and to attack this climate crisis head-on, all while continuing to create good-paying jobs. Heaven forbid that the future generations look back and see that our own hand--our very own hand--forced this error. I want to thank you, our Presiding Officer, Senator Rosen, for your wonderful leadership on this issue. I want to urge all of our colleagues to vote no on this resolution for the good of our country, for the good of our planet, for the good of the people who inhabit this planet with all of us, and also for generations to come, our kids and their kids. I want to take just a moment and get some other papers from my binder, so I suggest the absence of a quorum. I will be back in 1 minute. Don't go away.

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