Susan Collins

Ms. COLLINS

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I have a brief statement. I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to complete my statement before the vote begins.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise in support of the resolution to terminate the emergency declaration. I want to thank Senator Udall, the Senator from New Mexico, for his leadership. The question presented by this resolution is not whether you are for a border wall or against a border wall. The question is not whether you believe the security at our southern border is sufficient or it should be strengthened. Instead, the question is a far more fundamental and significant one. The question is simply this: Should the Congress of the United States of America yield its constitutionally prescribed power of the purse to the President? The answer to that question, regardless of who is in the White House and who is controlling Congress, should be no. Congress alone is empowered by the Constitution to adopt laws directing money to be spent from the U.S. Treasury. We must stand up and defend our role that the Framers very clearly set forth in the Constitution. Congress must do that even when to do so goes against the outcome that we might prefer. I have consistently supported funding for the construction of physical barriers and for strengthening security on our southern border. I will continue to support those efforts and believe and understand they are important, but I cannot support the President's unilaterally deciding to take money that has been appropriated for one purpose and diverting those billions of dollars for another purpose no matter how important or worthy that goal may be. My colleagues, irrespective of whether you support or oppose a border wall, I urge you today to support this resolution and stand up for the separation of powers laid out in our Constitution. In doing so, you are standing up for our Constitution. Thank you.

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

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, earlier today we paused and commemorated those who lost their lives on September 11, 2001. Eighteen years have passed, but the memory of that day remains as vivid as if it were yesterday. We each have our own recollections of where we were and what we were doing as the horrifying terrorist attacks on our country began to unfold. I remember having the television on and watching a report that a plane-- originally reported as a small plane--had struck one of the Twin Towers. I then shortly thereafter saw the second aircraft strike the World Trade Center. It was then that I knew our country was under attack. I told my staff to stay away from the Capitol Building because I feared it, too, could be a target. Today, we all still share the powerful emotions of shock, anger, and grief. I was worried about not only my staff, those in the buildings, but also staff members who were on their way back from Portland, ME, which turns out to be where some of the terrorists began their journey of death and destruction that day. On the evening of that terrible day, Members of Congress gathered together on the steps of the U.S. Capitol. With tears in our eyes and sorrow in our hearts, together we sang ``God Bless America.'' The emotions of shock, anger, and grief were joined by unity, resolve, and patriotism. That sense that swept over us as we sang was a source of strength in the challenges that we faced in the fight against terrorism. So many were killed that horrific day. In my State of Maine, we remember Robert and Jackie Norton of Lubec, a devoted retired couple who boarded Flight 11 to celebrate a son's wedding on the west coast. We remember James Roux of Portland, an Army veteran and a devoted father, who was on his way to a business meeting in California. We remember Robert Schlegel of Gray, who was celebrating his recent promotion to the rank of commander in the U.S. Navy and was still settling into his new office at the Pentagon when the plane struck. We remember Stephen Ward of Gorham, who was working on the 101st floor of the North Tower that terrible morning. On this solemn anniversary, we join all Americans in remembering the nearly 3,000 people who lost their lives that day--lives of accomplishment, contribution, and promise. Each loss leaves a wound in the hearts of families and friends that can never be fully healed. We honor the heroes of that day. We are still moved by the selfless courage of the men and women on Flight 93 who wrestled that plane to the ground in Pennsylvania, sacrificing their lives so that others might live. We are inspired by the firefighters, EMS personnel, and police officers at the World Trade Center who continued to climb upward to rescue those who were in peril even as the Twin Towers were tumbling down. The New York City Fire Department alone lost 343 firefighters who responded to the attacks. We pay tribute today and every day to the first responders, the military personnel, and the civilians who rushed into the smoke and flames at the Pentagon to lead others to safety. We express our gratitude to those who have given so much to defend our Nation against terrorism, the men and women of our Armed Forces. While millions of Americans watched in horror as the tragedy unfolded on that terrible day, the thousands of courageous first responders who rushed to the World Trade Center, who rushed to that field in Pennsylvania, who rushed to the Pentagon to help search for victims and to help bring anyone they could to safety, still inspire us. They put themselves in imminent danger to save the lives of others. Later on, years later, we learned that the toxic dust and debris that many were exposed to have caused chronic illnesses. The overwhelmingly bipartisan vote in the Senate in July to permanently reauthorize the 9/ 11 Victim Compensation Fund ensures that those first responders who risked their lives to save their fellow Americans will always be supported and their illnesses treated. September 11 was a day of personal tragedy for so many families. It was also an attack on the United States of America and an assault on civilization. We must never forget what was lost and what remains at stake. We must continue our pledge--the pledge we made that horrific day--to do all we can to prevent future attacks. The fundamental obligation of government is to protect its people. Since September 11, 2001, we have done much to meet that obligation, but more work remains. In the aftermath of those attacks, former Senator from Connecticut Joe Lieberman and I, as the leaders of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, worked in a bipartisan way with the leaders of the 9/11 Commission and the families of those who were lost to terrorist attacks on that day to pass the most sweeping reforms of our intelligence community since World War II. It is significant that the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act passed the Senate by a vote of 96 to 2 and that, of the hundreds of amendments that were considered, not a single one was decided by a party-line vote. In what seemed like a moment, September 11, 2001, was transformed from a day like any other into one that forever will stand alone. The loss we relive reminds us of the value of all that we must protect. The heroism reminds us of the unconquerable spirit of the American people. Our accomplishments remind us that we can meet any challenge. As long as we keep this day of remembrance in our hearts, we shall meet the challenges that lie ahead. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam Speaker, in 1819, young Henry Bailey opened a general store on Ingraham's Wharf in Portland, ME, and began auctioning salvaged goods. Two hundred years later, the F.O. Bailey Company is still going strong, and I am delighted to congratulate this outstanding Maine business on its bicentennial anniversary. The company was purchased in 2014 by the husband and wife team of real-estate broker David Jones and antiques professional Nancy McInnis- Jones, who continue the two-century tradition of integrity, expertise, and experience. Founded 1 year before Maine achieved statehood, F.O. Bailey exemplifies the traditions of entrepreneurship, innovation, and hard work that define our State. In 1827, the Bailey Company diversified by manufacturing rolltop desks and display cabinets and moved to a larger facility on Exchange Street. Despite national and local economic ups and downs and the disruption of the Civil War, the auctioneering business was a solid foundation for growth. In 1866, the booming city of Portland was devastated by the Great Fire, the worst urban fire in America to that date. Among the many impressive buildings destroyed by that catastrophe was the Bailey store. Henry Bailey died the following year, and the company was carried on by his son, Frederick Orville Bailey. As Portland rose from the ashes with a new downtown of brick, stone, and cast iron, F.O. Bailey led the family business into a new era of growth. Today, under the leadership of David and Nancy, F.O. Bailey's real estate and antiques and auction divisions provide 38 good jobs. It is significant that, in addition to antiques, the company promotes contemporary Maine art and quality handcrafted furniture. The F.O. Bailey Company was founded when Maine was just coming into its own. The optimism and confidence of that time continue today, and I wish this remarkable company great success in the years to come.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to highlight the bipartisan work that is underway in the Senate to help Americans who struggle with the high cost of prescription drugs. This problem particularly affects our seniors, 90 percent of whom take at least one prescription drug. It is critical that we continue to build on the momentum of this important pocketbook issue that, I believe, bridges the partisan divide. Since 2015, as the chairman of the Senate's Special Committee on Aging, I have chaired eight hearings on drug pricing, and we have heard so many heartbreaking stories from people who struggle to afford the medication that they need. I will never forget standing in line at the pharmacy counter in Bangor, ME, where I live, when the couple ahead of me received a prescription drug and the unwelcomed news that the couple's copay was going to be $111. The husband turned to his wife and said: ``Honey, we simply cannot afford this.'' They walked away and left that needed prescription on the drug store counter. I told the pharmacist I didn't mean to overhear but that I just happened to be the next in line. I asked him how often this happens, and he gave me the terrible news that it happens every single day. At a hearing on the skyrocketing price of insulin, we heard compelling testimony from Paul Grant, a father of four who lives in New Gloucester, ME, who discovered one day, because the 90-day supply of insulin for his 13-year-old son with type 1 diabetes had tripled to more than $900, that he had to resort to paying out-of-pocket for a much lower cost insulin from Canada without his receiving any credit toward his insurance deductible. At our hearing on the cost of treating rheumatoid arthritis, Patty Bernard, from Falmouth, ME, testified that her out-of-pocket costs soared from $10 to $3,800 per month for Enbrel when she transitioned from employer-sponsored insurance to Medicare. She simply could not afford this expense and had to switch to a different drug that was not self-administered. This switch required her to go to her doctor's office once a month for a 2\1/2\-hour infusion, and it did not work nearly as well for her. At another hearing, we heard from Pam Holt, who was diagnosed with multiple melanoma. Ms. Holt is among the 1 million Medicare beneficiaries who have annual out-of-pocket prescription drug costs that exceed $5,100, which places her in the catastrophic part of Medicare Part D. Seniors still pay 5 percent of a drug's cost above that threshold, and Ms. Holt had to refinance her home to be able to afford her treatment. The price of her medication is staggering at more than $250,000 per year, and this is not an optional cost. These are costs that are necessary to preserve the lives and well-beings of, in particular, our seniors. These stories of Americans like Paul, Patty, Pam, and millions of others who find it extremely difficult to afford the exorbitant costs of the medications they need in order to maintain their health or the health of their loved ones have motivated Congress to act on a bipartisan-bicameral basis. The Senate's Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, for example, recently approved the Lower Health Care Costs Act, which incorporates more than 14 measures to increase drug price competition and uses market forces to do so. It includes major provisions from the Biologic Patent Transparency Act, which is a bipartisan bill that I coauthored with Senator Kaine and is also cosponsored by Senators Braun, Hawley, Portman, Shaheen, Stabenow, Paul, and Murkowski. It is intended to prevent drug manufacturers from gaming our patent system. Patents play a key role in encouraging what can be billions of dollars of investment to bring new drugs from the lab table to a patient's bedside, but the patent system should not be misused to prevent lower priced generic drugs from coming to market once an initial patent has expired. Our bill requires an earlier and greater disclosure of the web of patents that is held by biologic manufacturers, thus making it easier for their competitors, which are known as biosimilar companies, to develop more affordable alternatives without their being stymied by the filing of last-minute new patents that are intended simply to keep competition out of the marketplace. It is particularly important that we look at biologics. They have been miracle drugs for many Americans, but they are also the most expensive category of drugs, accounting for approximately 40 percent of total drug costs. According to former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, if all of the biosimilars that have been approved by the FDA were successfully marketed in the United States in a timely fashion, Americans would have saved more than $4.5 billion in 2017. This is an expert calculation from the former FDA Commissioner. Instead, what happens in too many cases is that the biosimilar competitor is available now in Europe or in Canada but not in the United States. The HELP Committee package also includes the CREATES Act, which addresses anti-competitive practices of companies that delay or even block access to a sufficient quantity of the brand name drug to conduct the bioequivalency test required by the FDA as part of the generic drug approval process. This addresses one of the problems identified by a major investigation that the Aging Committee undertook in 2016, examining the explosion in prices of off-patent prescription drugs for which there still is no generic equivalent. What we found in some cases is that the brand name manufacturer was making it extremely difficult for the generic competitor to buy up a sufficient quantity of the drug to do these bioequivalency tests that are required as part of the generic approval process. That is just plain wrong. Due to the provisions in the bill to spur competition, the CBO--the Congressional Budget Office--estimates that ``the entry of certain generic or biosimilar products could be accelerated by one or two years, on average.'' This would make a tremendous difference and would reduce consumer as well as Federal and private insurance spending for prescription drugs. The point I want to make is that this is just allowing the market to operate as it should, with competition, transparency, and an end to the obstacles and the gaming of the system that prevent lower priced pharmaceuticals. In addition, the Lower Healthcare Costs Act contains several important provisions to shed light on what is currently a complex and opaque system. In fact, I cannot think of any other product we buy where the price is so opaque and lacking in transparency and in which there are such variations in what the cost may be from plan to plan, from pharmacy to pharmacy, from manufacturer to manufacturer, and that is due to a very complex system that I am going to refer to. At the Aging Committee's hearing on the high cost of insulin, the American Diabetes Association spoke about the lack of transparency when you trace insulin from the manufacturer to the pharmacy counter. Keep in mind that insulin was first isolated nearly a century ago, in 1921 in Canada, and the discoverers provided it for only a dollar because they wanted to make it widely available. The ADA chart illustrated the complexity and the perverse incentives in the supply chain for prescription drugs, and what was clear was that rebates are a key problem in driving up the cost of insulin. There is a system here that is rife with conflicts of interest. If the manufacturer has a high list price, then the pharmacy benefit manager, who is negotiating on behalf of the insurer, has an incentive to choose that manufacturer's version of insulin rather than another manufacturer's because the pharmacy benefit manager is usually compensated by getting a percentage of the list price. Well, obviously, the manufacturer wants to have its version of insulin chosen to be offered by the insurer to its customers. So here we have this system, which is rife with conflicts of interest and incentives that encourage higher prices because then the middleman is going to make more money, and that discount that the middleman--the pharmacy benefit manager--is negotiating almost never makes it to the pharmacy counter, to the patient who is purchasing the prescription drug. Sometimes part of that does, indeed, go to the insurer, which can use it to lower overall premiums slightly, but we are talking about trying to help the person who desperately needs the drug and who is buying it at the pharmacy counter. As cochairs of the Senate Diabetes Caucus, Senator Jeanne Shaheen and I, as well as Senators Cramer and Carper, have introduced legislation to address the flaws in the system and to hold PBMs and manufacturers accountable. We have come up with a bill that would help to reduce the price of insulin, and what a benefit that would be for the parents of children who have type 1 diabetes, for whom insulin is literally a matter of survival. It would also help those older Americans with type II diabetes, some of whom are insulin dependent. Another significant change included in the Lower Healthcare Costs Act requires significantly more disclosure on the costs, the fees, and the rebate information associated with PBM contracts. It also includes an amendment that was offered by Senator Baldwin, which I supported, to require more reporting of drug prices to the Department of Health and Human Services and a justification for why prices have increased. These provisions all build on a law that I authored last year to block pharmacy gag clauses. I told the story about the pharmacist who was so frustrated because so many people, day after day, were unable to afford the copays or the deductibles on their needed prescription drugs. Well, I met with a group of community pharmacists who told me how the system worked, and they told me that there were actually gag clauses in their contracts where they were prohibited from sharing with the consumer whether it was cheaper to pay out-of-pocket rather than through insurance. Well, I am pleased to say, in working with former Senator Claire McCaskill and Debbie Stabenow and others, we were able to get gag clause prohibitions enacted into law last year. According to one study, banning these gag clauses could help Americans save money in nearly one out of four prescription transactions. So this is significant legislation. I talked recently to a pharmacist in Maine who said what a relief it was to her to now be able to volunteer to her patients that there may be a less expensive way for the patient to purchase needed prescription drugs. One out of four--nearly one out of four--prescription transactions should benefit from the laws that we wrote last year. Another bill that I authored in 2017 will promote more competition from lower priced but equally effective generic drugs, and it is already showing promise. To date, the FDA has granted nearly 200 application requests under the new, expedited pathway that my law provides, and 10 have been approved. That is a much faster pace than in the past. As cochair of both the Senate Diabetes Caucus and the Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease, I know all too well from listening to families in Maine and across the country that the path toward finding new discoveries and treatments is often long and difficult and that success can be elusive, but we must continue our efforts. When pharmaceutical companies start twisting around the incentives that were designed to encourage innovation and, instead, distorting them into obstacles to competition, Congress simply must act, and that is exactly what we are doing. I want to applaud the work of the HELP Committee. All of us contributed to the bill, and we were ably led by Chairman Lamar Alexander and Ranking Member Murray. I also want to recognize the hard work of Senator Graham and Senator Feinstein on the Judiciary Committee for the bipartisan package of reforms they produced last month. Finally, I want to salute the Finance Committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, and the ranking member, Ron Wyden, for taking bipartisan actions just last week in passing the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act. That has many important provisions in it that will require more disclosure. It includes a bill that Senator Casey and I have authored, as well as many other important provisions, including putting a medical inflation cap on certain pharmaceuticals. I know how much the Presiding Officer personally cares about this issue, and he has contributed greatly to this work as well. My hope is that we can build upon this momentum, that we can seize the moment when three different committees of the Senate have all been successful in reporting to the full Senate three bipartisan bills. Our HELP Committee bill was reported by a vote of 20 to 3. That is remarkable consensus. Let us bring all of these bills to the Senate floor this fall--or certainly by the end of the year--so that we can deliver real results to the American people by lowering the price of prescription drugs. We would then be very proud of listening to our constituents and addressing a problem that affects millions of Americans. I yield the floor.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I rise today to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Town of Madawaska ME. Located in Aroostook County, our State's northernmost region, Madawaska is in the heart of the St. John River Valley, the center of our rich Acadian culture. I am honored to celebrate the generations of industrious and caring people who have made Madawaska such a wonderful place to live, work, and raise families. Madawaska has a fascinating history. For thousands of years, the St. John River Valley has been the home of the Maliseet Tribe. French explorers, led by Samuel de Champlain, first visited the area in 1604 and established friendly relationships with the Native Americans. In 1785, French-speaking Canadians fleeing persecution in British Canada journeyed up the St. John River in search of liberty. They marked the spot of their landing with a large wooden cross in gratitude for the safe haven they had found. Today, the rebuilt Acadian Cross is an enduring reminder of the determination and courage of those first settlers. The Tante Blanche Museum honors the heroism and compassion of Marguerite Blanche Thibodeau Cyr, who fed the hungry and cared for the sick during a famine in 1797. The Maliseets often provided vital assistance during the first difficult years. From fertile soil, vast forests, and their own hard work, the settlers created a prosperous community that laid the foundation for the vibrant Acadian culture that is so important in Maine, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and as far away as Louisiana. Following the American Revolution, the region was the scene of a decades-long border dispute between our new Nation and British Canada. Although the bloodless Aroostook War did not result in armed conflict, it was a period of great tension and uncertainty, with both sides seeking control of the increasingly valuable timberlands. As the national governments of Great Britain and the United States negotiated a peaceful resolution, the province of New Brunswick laid claim to the disputed area. On July 4, 1827, a band of pro-American settlers declared the independence of the Republic of Madawaska with its own flag and the intention of joining the United States. In response, the Maine Legislature established the Territory of Madawaska in 1831, creating what was called the world's biggest town, with an area of more than 4,000 square miles. The border dispute was settled by treaty in 1842. Peace was maintained between the United States and Canada. Settlement to the region increase greatly, and in 1869, the town of Madawaska was incorporate. Today, more than 80 percent of the town's residents speak French, and they continue to uphold the Acadian traditions of great food, music, and dance, and of close-knit families and lasting friendships. The annual Acadian Festival in August is a highlight of the year and a funfilled celebration of this great heritage. To my Franco-American friends, it is a pleasure to congratulate you on this landmark anniversary. Across the generations, you have worked hard and worked together to create a community that combines your rich heritage with the values that define our State and our Nation. Mr. President, the celebration of Madawaska's 150th anniversary is not merely about the passing of time, it is about human accomplishment. We celebrate the people who pulled together, cared for one another, and built a great community.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague from Michigan, Senator Peters, in introducing the Animal Freedom from Testing, Experiments, and Research Act, known as the AFTER Act, to promote the adoption or retirement of animals used for research at Federal agencies. I would also like to thank Senators Shaheen and McSally who are original cosponsors of this legislation. In fiscal year 2018, the Federal government experimented on approximately 50,000 animals for research purposes. The experiments occurred across twelve different Federal agencies and the animals used were mainly cats, dogs, monkeys, and rabbits. While tracking these animals following experimentation is challenging, once animals are no longer needed for research, they are often killed, since many agencies lack formal retirement or adoption policies. With that said, recent studies indicate that research animals who are adopted often thrive in their new environments. In 2013, led by Senators Harkin, Alexander, Cantwell and myself, the Senate passed the CHIMP Act, which allowed for the retirement of hundreds of primates that were formerly being used in National Institute of Health (NIH) experiments. In addition, the Departments of Defense, Veteran Affairs, and NIH recently enacted successful animal retirement policies. While I am encouraged by the Senate's past work on primates and the recent policies developed by a few agencies; there are still many Federal agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Interior, Commerce, NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency that lack formal policies for animals that have been used in experiments. The AFTER Act builds on successful policies at DOD, VA, and NIH by directing all Federal agencies to promulgate regulations that would facilitate the retirement of laboratory animals. The bill provides flexibility for each agency to devise its own policy, with the goal of ensuring that such animals, whenever possible, are retired and not killed. Additionally, the AFTER Act requires animals to be evaluated by a licensed veterinarian and pronounced both mentally and physically healthy before leaving an agency. This will help ensure a smooth transition to a new environment. Our legislation also encourages Federal agencies to work with non- profit organizations to ensure retired animals are distributid to sanctuaries and shelters across the Nation, not just those closest to the research facility. This would allow a State like Maine, which does not have Federal research labs that use animals, to play a role in retiring these animals and providing homes for them. Mr. President, there is no reason animals that are suitable for adoption or retirement should be killed by our Federal government. The AFTER Act would provide the necessary direction Federal agencies need in order to move forward with developing retirement policies. I urge all of my colleagues to join in support of this important bipartisan legislation, the Animal Freedom from Testing, Experiments, and Research Act.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague from Michigan, Senator Peters, in introducing the Animal Freedom from Testing, Experiments, and Research Act, known as the AFTER Act, to promote the adoption or retirement of animals used for research at Federal agencies. I would also like to thank Senators Shaheen and McSally who are original cosponsors of this legislation. In fiscal year 2018, the Federal government experimented on approximately 50,000 animals for research purposes. The experiments occurred across twelve different Federal agencies and the animals used were mainly cats, dogs, monkeys, and rabbits. While tracking these animals following experimentation is challenging, once animals are no longer needed for research, they are often killed, since many agencies lack formal retirement or adoption policies. With that said, recent studies indicate that research animals who are adopted often thrive in their new environments. In 2013, led by Senators Harkin, Alexander, Cantwell and myself, the Senate passed the CHIMP Act, which allowed for the retirement of hundreds of primates that were formerly being used in National Institute of Health (NIH) experiments. In addition, the Departments of Defense, Veteran Affairs, and NIH recently enacted successful animal retirement policies. While I am encouraged by the Senate's past work on primates and the recent policies developed by a few agencies; there are still many Federal agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, Interior, Commerce, NASA, the Environmental Protection Agency that lack formal policies for animals that have been used in experiments. The AFTER Act builds on successful policies at DOD, VA, and NIH by directing all Federal agencies to promulgate regulations that would facilitate the retirement of laboratory animals. The bill provides flexibility for each agency to devise its own policy, with the goal of ensuring that such animals, whenever possible, are retired and not killed. Additionally, the AFTER Act requires animals to be evaluated by a licensed veterinarian and pronounced both mentally and physically healthy before leaving an agency. This will help ensure a smooth transition to a new environment. Our legislation also encourages Federal agencies to work with non- profit organizations to ensure retired animals are distributid to sanctuaries and shelters across the Nation, not just those closest to the research facility. This would allow a State like Maine, which does not have Federal research labs that use animals, to play a role in retiring these animals and providing homes for them. Mr. President, there is no reason animals that are suitable for adoption or retirement should be killed by our Federal government. The AFTER Act would provide the necessary direction Federal agencies need in order to move forward with developing retirement policies. I urge all of my colleagues to join in support of this important bipartisan legislation, the Animal Freedom from Testing, Experiments, and Research Act.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to three great patriots, three inspiring women, from the town of Freeport, ME. Their names are Elaine Greene, Carmen Footer, and JoAnn Miller. They are known by our men and women in uniform, veterans, and grateful citizens throughout America as the Freeport Flag Ladies. On September 11, 2001, an act of terror transformed a beautiful Tuesday morning into a day of unfathomable horror. Three days later, President Bush asked grief-stricken Americans to step outside their homes with lighted candles in memory of the heroes of 9/11 and of the nearly 3,000 innocent men, women, and children who perished. Living on a secluded road, Elaine, Carmen, and JoAnn instead took their candles and an American flag to busy Main Street. Their location quickly began a rallying point for all of Freeport, the site of a spontaneous, heartfelt memorial service. Then they did something even more remarkable. They made a promise to stand with their flags on Main Street each and every Tuesday morning between the hours of 8 and 9, to mark the day and time of the attacks. This coming September 11th will be their final vigil. When that day comes, they will have kept their promise for more than 900 consecutive Tuesdays, in rain, sleet, and snow, in bitter cold and in blistering heat. Carmen, the youngest of the three at 74, says their ``retirement'' is due solely to the fact that ``Age wins, all the time.'' For the past 4 years, the Freeport Flag Ladies have been joined each Tuesday by Darlene Jolly and frequently by Elaine's sister, Amy Gove. They have kept their promise, and they have done so much more. From 2002 to 2016, they spearheaded a wonderful 9/11 tribute in Freeport. They have regularly made the long drive to Bangor International Airport, to join the legendary Maine Troop Greeters, and to Pease International Airport in New Hampshire, to meet the members of our Armed Forces as they head overseas or return home. They have greeted thousands of soldiers, and they are remembered by them all. They have made a special effort to reach out to those who serve our country and to their families. Thousands of photographs of outbound troops have been sent back home, and families receive a weekly message. They have sent packages of games, magazines, and food to troops overseas. Parcels to combat support hospitals contain clothing and special pillows to make the transport of wounded soldiers more comfortable. They have funded these amazing efforts themselves, with yard sales, growing and selling ``Flowers for Freedom,'' and donations. Describing what Elaine Greene, Carmen Footer, and JoAnn Miller have done falls far short of putting into words what the Freeport Flag Ladies mean to our country. Perhaps the best words were spoken by Elaine: ``Freedom shines on America, so let us shine for America.'' The Freeport Flag Ladies shine brightly, and their light will continue to inspire us all. Their prayer to be of service was answered with a mission to commemorate, to honor, and to remember. They are among those throughout our Nation who transformed one of America's darkest days into one of our finest hours.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 2 p.m. for the weekly conference meetings.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill with my friend and colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, that will benefit the brave women and men who volunteer as emergency personnel: The Volunteer Emergency Services Recruitment and Retention Act. Across our Nation, volunteer emergency personnel play a critical role in ensuring the safety of our communities and the well-being of our neighbors. They serve as the firefighters, EMS, and other first responders that we depend on in our times of need. The State of Maine, for example, has approximately 9,785 firefighters who serve the State's 1.3 million citizens. Maine is largely a rural State, and more than 90 percent of firefighters are volunteers. Without these dedicated volunteers, many smaller communities would be unable to provide firefighting and other emergency services at all. Often, communities seek to recruit and retain volunteers by offering modest benefits. One of the most common benefits are Length of Service Award Programs or LOSAPs. These are retirement accounts provided to volunteer emergency responders. The legislation we are introducing today would support these efforts by helping to ensure that these nominal benefits to volunteers are not entangled in bureaucracy or needlessly held back by regulations. Specifically, the Volunteer Emergency Services Recruitment and Retention Act would simplify how LOSAPs are taxed without increasing or reducing Federal spending or taxes. It would do this by eliminating burdensome and confusing IRS requirements that make it unnecessarily difficult for volunteer emergency personnel to receive benefits and for departments to administer plans. Mr. President, we should take care to protect our volunteer emergency personnel who serve this country with such bravery. Our legislation would help us achieve that goal, and I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this bill.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill with my friend and colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, that will benefit the brave women and men who volunteer as emergency personnel: The Volunteer Emergency Services Recruitment and Retention Act. Across our Nation, volunteer emergency personnel play a critical role in ensuring the safety of our communities and the well-being of our neighbors. They serve as the firefighters, EMS, and other first responders that we depend on in our times of need. The State of Maine, for example, has approximately 9,785 firefighters who serve the State's 1.3 million citizens. Maine is largely a rural State, and more than 90 percent of firefighters are volunteers. Without these dedicated volunteers, many smaller communities would be unable to provide firefighting and other emergency services at all. Often, communities seek to recruit and retain volunteers by offering modest benefits. One of the most common benefits are Length of Service Award Programs or LOSAPs. These are retirement accounts provided to volunteer emergency responders. The legislation we are introducing today would support these efforts by helping to ensure that these nominal benefits to volunteers are not entangled in bureaucracy or needlessly held back by regulations. Specifically, the Volunteer Emergency Services Recruitment and Retention Act would simplify how LOSAPs are taxed without increasing or reducing Federal spending or taxes. It would do this by eliminating burdensome and confusing IRS requirements that make it unnecessarily difficult for volunteer emergency personnel to receive benefits and for departments to administer plans. Mr. President, we should take care to protect our volunteer emergency personnel who serve this country with such bravery. Our legislation would help us achieve that goal, and I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this bill.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the rollcall vote scheduled for 1:45 p.m. start at this time.

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

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation with my friend and colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Shaheen. The Helping Entrepreneurs Affect Regulatory Decisions Act or the HEARD Act is a straightforward bill that would make our government agencies more accessible to our Nation's small business owners and improve participation in the regulatory process. When Federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, propose a new regulation with a potential large economic impact, these agencies must convene Small Business Advocacy Review panels. These panels allow for the views of small business owners to be heard. The small businesses provide input on how a particular regulation may affect their business and have a chance to work with the regulators to address challenges and concerns. As it stands, these panels are open to invitees, but participating is often a challenge, especially when small businesses are often asked to go to these panels at their own expense. Small businesses owners in Maine and other parts of our country can little afford to shut down for the day or use their own money to travel to these panels. Business will not stop because of a meeting held hundreds of miles away. To address these barriers, the HEARD Act would allow a small business to participate remotely. Small businesses, which are the backbone of the American economy, deserve to be heard, especially when we ask for their input, and this bill would help facilitate that. Small businesses and their advocates support this effort. In my State, the Maine Chamber of Commerce has endorsed this bill because it would allow Mainers to give their input on new regulations more easily. Nationally, the NFIB, which advocates for America's small businesses, supports this bill because it would ensure that Main Street has a voice in the regulatory process. Our bipartisan legislation would allow small businesses to be a part of the process by providing input and recommendations on regulations that would affect them. I encourage my colleagues to support the HEARD Act to ensure that the Federal Government hears from our small businesses, the backbone of our economy.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Anti- Spoofing Penalty Modernization Act of 2019'' with my colleague, Senator Sinema, who serves with me on the Senate Committee on Aging, which I chair. I am also pleased that Senators Hawley, Peters, and McSally have joined as original cosponsors. This morning, the Senate Aging Committee held its 23rd hearing in the past six years to examine scams targeting our Nation's seniors. Scams the Committee has examined include the infamous IRS imposter scam the Jamaican Lottery scam, computer tech support scams, grandparent scams, elder financial exploitation, identity theft, and the notorious ``Drug Mule'' scam--where seniors are tricked into unwittingly serving as drug couriers. Two things are central to nearly all of these scams: first, the scams are initiated by robocallers who cast a wide net in their hunt for potential victims, and second, the scammers ``spoof' the victim's Caller-ID to mask their identity, a key to the success of their outrageous frauds. When victims see the ``Internal Revenue Service'' or the ``local Sheriff's Department'' pop-up on their Caller-ID, they are understandably worried, scared, and often easily hustled into doing whatever the scammers demand. Last year, robocallers generated more than 26 billion unwanted calls that reached American mobile phones. When landlines are included, the number soars to 48 billion. In Maine alone, our residents received an astonishing 93 million robocalls last year. That averages out to 73 calls to every person in Maine. So far this year, scammers are on pace to generate more than 58 billion unwanted, illegal robocalls targeting Americans. Putting a stop to these illegal robocalls requires a coordinated approach from all levels of our government, working in coordination with the private sector. Recently, this body overwhelmingly passed the bipartisan ``TRACED Act,'' which makes a number of important changes to our law that will help make it easier to fight illegal robocalls, such as increasing civil penalties on robocallers and extending the statute of limitations for violations to three years. The TRACED Act also requires telecommunications carriers to implement the so-called SHAKEN/ STIR technology to verify whether Caller-IDs that appear on incoming calls are authentic. When fully implemented, this technology will be a major advance against illegal spoofing. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of the TRACED Act, and I am hopeful it will soon become law. The bipartisan bill we are introducing today complements the TRACED Act by doubling the penalties on illegal spoofing. Except for inflation adjustments, the penalties on illegal spoofing have not been updated since they were first passed into law through the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009. Our bill also extends the statute of limitations to three years for spoofing violations to match the extension for robocalling violations included in the TRACED Act. Mr. President, putting an end to the scourge of illegal robocalls will take an aware public, aggressive action by regulators and law enforcement agencies, and a coordinated effort at every level of our telecommunications industry. The enhanced penalties called for by the ``Anti-Spoofing Penalty Modernization Act'' are an important tool in the fight. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Anti- Spoofing Penalty Modernization Act of 2019'' with my colleague, Senator Sinema, who serves with me on the Senate Committee on Aging, which I chair. I am also pleased that Senators Hawley, Peters, and McSally have joined as original cosponsors. This morning, the Senate Aging Committee held its 23rd hearing in the past six years to examine scams targeting our Nation's seniors. Scams the Committee has examined include the infamous IRS imposter scam the Jamaican Lottery scam, computer tech support scams, grandparent scams, elder financial exploitation, identity theft, and the notorious ``Drug Mule'' scam--where seniors are tricked into unwittingly serving as drug couriers. Two things are central to nearly all of these scams: first, the scams are initiated by robocallers who cast a wide net in their hunt for potential victims, and second, the scammers ``spoof' the victim's Caller-ID to mask their identity, a key to the success of their outrageous frauds. When victims see the ``Internal Revenue Service'' or the ``local Sheriff's Department'' pop-up on their Caller-ID, they are understandably worried, scared, and often easily hustled into doing whatever the scammers demand. Last year, robocallers generated more than 26 billion unwanted calls that reached American mobile phones. When landlines are included, the number soars to 48 billion. In Maine alone, our residents received an astonishing 93 million robocalls last year. That averages out to 73 calls to every person in Maine. So far this year, scammers are on pace to generate more than 58 billion unwanted, illegal robocalls targeting Americans. Putting a stop to these illegal robocalls requires a coordinated approach from all levels of our government, working in coordination with the private sector. Recently, this body overwhelmingly passed the bipartisan ``TRACED Act,'' which makes a number of important changes to our law that will help make it easier to fight illegal robocalls, such as increasing civil penalties on robocallers and extending the statute of limitations for violations to three years. The TRACED Act also requires telecommunications carriers to implement the so-called SHAKEN/ STIR technology to verify whether Caller-IDs that appear on incoming calls are authentic. When fully implemented, this technology will be a major advance against illegal spoofing. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of the TRACED Act, and I am hopeful it will soon become law. The bipartisan bill we are introducing today complements the TRACED Act by doubling the penalties on illegal spoofing. Except for inflation adjustments, the penalties on illegal spoofing have not been updated since they were first passed into law through the Truth in Caller ID Act of 2009. Our bill also extends the statute of limitations to three years for spoofing violations to match the extension for robocalling violations included in the TRACED Act. Mr. President, putting an end to the scourge of illegal robocalls will take an aware public, aggressive action by regulators and law enforcement agencies, and a coordinated effort at every level of our telecommunications industry. The enhanced penalties called for by the ``Anti-Spoofing Penalty Modernization Act'' are an important tool in the fight. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, today I wish to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the town of Fort Kent, ME. The motto of our State's northernmost community, ``The Little Town That Could,'' describes a past of hard work, courage, and determination. ``The Little Town That Can'' describes Fort Kent today: a wonderful place to live, work, and raise families. Located where the Fish River joins the St. John River, Fort Kent has a rich history. For thousands of years, the region has been the home of the Micmac and Maliseet. French explorers, led by Samuel de Champlain, first visited the area in 1604. In the early 1800s, French-speaking Canadians began settling in the area, laying the foundation for the robust Acadian culture that is so important in Maine, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and as far away as Louisiana. The Acadian settlers created a vibrant community. They cleared farmland, established lumber and grain mills, schools, and churches. The namesake of the town is the Fort Kent Blockhouse, a fort named for then-Governor Edward Kent and carefully preserved today, which was built in 1839 during a long-running border dispute between the United States and British Canada. Settlement to the region increased dramatically when the ``Bloodless Aroostook War'' ended peacefully with a treaty in 1842. Fort Kent's dedication to education began shortly after the town became established. In 1878, the Madawaska Training School was established in Fort Kent, one of the first institutions in Maine dedicated to preparing students for careers as bilingual educators. That school continues today as the University of Maine at Fort Kent, which in 2019 was named for the 14th consecutive year as one of the best northeastern colleges by the Princeton Review. As the only institution in the United States located at the center of French culture in northern Maine, the University of Maine at Fort Kent offers opportunities for students of all heritages to study and live in a bilingual community. Today, more than 60 percent of the town's residents speak French, and they continue to uphold the Acadian traditions of great food, music, and dance, and of close-knit families and lasting friendships. The Maine Acadian Heritage Council continues to help preserve these traditions and is working to teach the next generation about the Acadian heritage through programs like the Youth Renaissance. The can-do spirit of Fort Kent is evident today. It is an agricultural powerhouse. and the potato industry remains an essential part of its economy. The town is home to an Olympic biathlete training center and frequently hosts world-class biathlon competitions. For 26 years, the Can-Am Crown International Sled Dog race has attracted teams from around the world. The International Muskie Fishing Derby highlights the valuable fishing grounds and the pristine environment the people of the community work to preserve. The Fort Kent Ploye Festival celebrates the pancake-like dish that is a staple of Franco- American-Canadian cuisine. To my Franco-American friends, it is a pleasure to congratulate you on this landmark anniversary. Across the generations, you have worked hard and worked together to create a community that combines your rich heritage with the values that define our State and our Nation. The celebration of Fort Kent's 150th anniversary is not merely about the passing of time. It is about human accomplishment. We celebrate the people who pulled together, cared for one another, and built a great community. ``The Little Town That Can'' has a fascinating past and a bright future.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I wish to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Town of Frenchville, ME. As one who was born and raised in Aroostook County, I am honored to celebrate the generations of industrious and caring people who have made Frenchville such a wonderful place to live, work, and raise families. The story of Frenchville begins long before its incorporation in 1869. For thousands of years, the St. John River Valley has been the home of the Maliseet Tribe. French explorers, led by Samuel de Champlain, first visited the area in 1604 and established friendly relationships with the Native Americans. In the late 1700s, French- speaking Canadians began settling in the area, and the Maliseets often provided vital assistance during the first difficult winters. These settlements laid the foundation for the vibrant Acadian culture that is so important in Maine, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and as far away as Louisiana. The Acadian settlers created a prosperous community. They planted crops, established lumber and grain mills, and built schools, churches, and thriving general stores. Later in the 19th century, the people of Frenchville joined their neighboring towns in connecting their remote region to the world with their own hands. Town by town, they built roads and railroads with pick, shovel, and wheelbarrow. These transportation networks, combined with rich soil. made the region an agricultural center, and the potato industry remains an essential part of the economy. The town was incorporated in 1869 as Dickeyville, in honor of Major William Dickey, an early civic and political leader in the region. Two years later, the name was changed to Frenchville to recognize the language and origins of its original settlers. Today, 80 percent of the town's residents speak French, and they continue to uphold the Acadian traditions of great food, music, and dance, and of close-knit families and lasting friendships. (English translation of the statement made in French is as follows:) To my Franco-American friends, it is a pleasure to congratulate you on this landmark anniversary. Across the generations, you have worked hard and worked together to create a community that combines your rich heritage with the values that define our State and our Nation. While the people of Frenchville cherish their fascinating history, they build for the future. Last year, the Dr. Levesque Elementary School was named a 2018 National Blue Ribbon Exemplary High Performing School, marking the second time this outstanding school received that prestigious recognition. For nearly 50 years, Frenchville and neighboring communities have joined hands to make the Northern Aroostook Regional Airport an invaluable transportation link between the St. John Valley and the world. In addition to the airport's important role in economic development, the volunteer pilots of the Patient Airlift Service provide a crucial lifeline to people needing advanced medical treatment. The celebration of Frenchville's 150th anniversary is not merely about the passing of time. It is about human accomplishment. We celebrate the people who pulled together, cared for one another, and built a great community. Thanks to those who came before, Frenchville, ME, has a wonderful history. Thanks to those there today, it has a bright future.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, before I deliver comments on a bill that I am introducing, let me express my disappointment that the Senate will not be voting today on the amendment that Senator Jones and I have filed to eliminate the military widow's tax. This is a tremendous inequity, as is recognized by the fact that 75 of our colleagues have cosponsored our freestanding bill. Nevertheless, I am heartened by the commitment and the compassion of the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Senator Inhofe, who has indicated his receptivity to dealing with this issue but in a different way on a different bill. I hope that today is just a temporary setback and that we can see this bill taken up as a freestanding bill by the entire Senate. Mr. President, I send a bill to the desk and ask that it be appropriately referred.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the American Broadband Buildout Act of 2019, or ABBA. This legislation would help ensure that rural Americans have access to broadband services at speeds they need to fully participate in the benefits of our modern society and economy regardless of whether they live in the largest cities or the smallest towns. I am delighted to be joined by my friend and colleague Senator Doug Jones in introducing this bill. Twenty-five years ago, when the internet was known as the World Wide Web, Americans typically accessed the web using their home phone lines via modems capable of downloading data at just 56 kilobits per second-- too slow even to support MP3-quality streaming music. Today, the threshold for broadband service as defined by the FCC allows downloads at speeds nearly 500 times faster--25 megabits per second. At these speeds, Americans not only can watch their favorite movies on demand in the comfort of their very own living rooms but can also participate in the global economy while working from home, upgrade their skills through online education, stay connected to their families as they age in place, and access healthcare through advances in telemedicine. While the increase in broadband speeds has been dramatic and is encouraging, these numbers mask a disparity between urban and rural Americans. Nearly all Americans living in urban areas have access to the internet at speeds that meet the FCC's broadband threshold, while one in four rural Americans does not. Similar disparities occur in terms of broadband adoption--the rate at which Americans subscribe to broadband service if they have access to it. According to the Pew Research Center survey last year, 22 percent of rural Americans don't use the internet at home, compared to just 8 percent of urban Americans. The bipartisan bill that we are introducing would help close the digital divide between urban and rural America by directing the FCC to provide up to $5 billion in matching grants to assist States and State- approved entities in building ``last-mile'' infrastructure to bring high-speed broadband directly to homes and businesses in areas that lack it. Let me briefly discuss a few key points about the bill that I would like to highlight. First, projects that receive funding must be located in unserved areas where broadband is unavailable at speeds that meet the FCC standards. Narrowing the focus to those areas will ensure that the money goes where it is needed most and will also protect against overbuilding where broadband infrastructure is already in place. Second--and this is important--the bill requires that this Federal funding be matched through public-private partnerships between the broadband service provider and the State in which the last-mile infrastructure project will be built. This means that States and their private sector partners will have ``skin in the game'' to balance the Federal commitment, ensuring that projects will be well thought out and designed to be sustainable. Third, the bill requires that projects be designed to be ``future proof,'' meaning that the infrastructure installed must be capable of delivering higher speeds as broadband accelerates in the future. This will ensure that Federal tax dollars are used to help build a network that serves rural Americans now and in the future without our having to rebuild it every time technology advances. Furthermore, the bill directs the FCC to prioritize the funding of projects in States that have traditionally lagged behind the national average in terms of broadband subscribers and are at risk of falling further behind as broadband speeds increase. Finally, the bill provides grants for states and state-designated entities for digital literacy and public awareness campaigns, highlighting the benefits and possibilities of broadband service and helping to attract employers to rural parts of our country in which broadband services are lacking and yet are essential for a business's success. The key reason to do this is to address the disparity in the adoption rates I have already mentioned, which will help drive down the costs of the service and make it more affordable for everyone. One broadband application that holds special promise for rural America is telemedicine. As a native of Aroostook County--the largest county by land area east of the Mississippi, with fewer than 70,000 residents--I know how important healthcare is to the vitality and even to the survival of rural communities. Often, these communities struggle to attract and retain the physicians they need to ensure their having access to quality care for their citizens. Broadband can help to bridge this gap by enabling innovative healthcare delivery in these rural communities. In an example described to me in a recent letter, hospice workers at Northern Light Home Care and Hospice were able to use the internet and video technology to help support a patient who was living on an island off the coast of Maine--not as far as the seagull flies but hours away in travel time. Although the connection was very poor, the video enabled the hospice nurses to monitor the patient's symptoms and provide emotional support to her family. As the author of that letter, Lisa Harvey-McPherson, put it, ``Our hospice team could be doing so much more with video and telemonitoring technologies if Maine had better connectivity.'' I ask unanimous consent that immediately following my remarks, this letter from Lisa Harvey-McPherson be printed in the Record. Mr. President, in closing, rural Americans deserve to enjoy the benefits of high-speed internet in the same way that urban Americans do, but a digital divide has arisen due to the simple fact that rural areas are more sparsely populated than urban ones and are therefore more expensive to serve. The bill that Senator Jones and I are introducing today would help to bridge this digital divide by funding future-proof broadband where it is needed most and giving a real boost to job creation in rural America. I urge my colleagues to support our bill.