Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Good news to report to my colleague from the Commonwealth of Kentucky: a gallon of gasoline on the way to the airport this morning--$3.46 a gallon. I wish it were lower, but we have made progress from the days when it was over $5. We are moving in the right direction. And, incidentally, this President has created more jobs than any President in a similar period in the history of the United States. Do we have challenges? You bet we do. But to write this administration off as unproductive is to ignore the obvious. We came out of this pandemic, and when we did, we faced the problems that nations around the world were facing. Literally, could we deal with inflation? Demand was pent up, and it overwhelmed the services and goods that were available and inflation started to rise. It took its toll--it still does--on American families, but to ignore what we have been able to do is to really turn our backs on reality. What about that rescue plan, the American Rescue Plan? I remember it, and I remember there wasn't a single Republican voting for it. Almost 20 percent of the American Rescue Plan went to State and local governments to deal with issues like crime to make safer streets and safer neighborhoods for Americans across the board. That is the kind of money well-spent, and yet the Republicans wouldn't give us a single vote. You heard the Senator from Kentucky deriding it at this moment as a waste of billions of dollars. It is money well-spent, and I found out personally, firsthand, when I went back in my State over the August recess. I didn't just confine myself to the blue areas of the State, and there are big ones and a big part of our State, and I am happy to visit there. I went to some of the redder sections of our State, the areas that voted for Donald Trump in the last election over Joe Biden. I don't do particularly well there either, but I wanted to visit with them, and I felt that there were things I needed to learn about what families and communities were facing. I went to Herrin, IL, in the southern part of our State, where my family has its roots, and I went to Southern Illinois Healthcare, which is a major healthcare consortium serving most of downstate Illinois-- rural, smalltown America, struggling with providing professional medical care but doing a fine job. We have something called congressionally directed spending now. It used to be known as earmarks. I am unapologetic about it. I believe that if you make a public disclosure of these earmarks to justify them, taxpayers understand this is Federal money being brought home from Washington to their States and communities, where it is needed. So I went to Herrin, IL, where we were able to announce an earmark of $1 million, which is going to provide for about half the cost of a new physical rehab facility--critically important. I met some interesting people there. I met a little fellow, 4 years old, the victim of cerebral palsy. His name is Maverick. Maverick had a big smile on his face. He was there at the rehab center to introduce me to the nurse that has been working with him, strong, courageous little fellow--the pride of his family, the kind of courage he is showing. Now, he has a rehab facility that is world-class in his region, in his neighborhood--the alternative, drive to St. Louis. You hear that over and over again in that part of the State: We just don't have any. We have to drive to St. Louis. When it comes to rehab services for Maverick, kids like him, and adults as well, they now have a fighting chance to get something local. And let me add, another fellow was there by the name of Riley Baird. Riley is a high school student, and he is an amazing kid himself. He is a Boy Scout, and I used to be a Boy Scout a long, long time ago. He had that sash with all the merit badges on it. I think I had five of them when I finally quit. He must have had 50, maybe 100. He had them all on his way and past as an Eagle Scout. He decided to make that rehab clinic his project. He and his family built some toys that the kids are using there, and he was there to accept the recognition and praise he deserved. He has a brother named Corbin--twin brother named Corbin, also an Eagle Scout, who picked a different charity to provide help to. I just want to say for anybody who is despondent about the future of this country, you ought to meet Corbin and Riley Baird. Those two young men are going to be leaders, I am sure, in their community and beyond. And it reminded me, too, that we ought to take a look at the positive things that are coming about. This notion of the reconciliation bill not serving America is ignoring the obvious. How many of us in the Senate--Republicans and Democrats--have had press conferences put on campaign ads talking about the cost of prescription drugs? Guess what. We finally did something about it. After all these years and all these headlines and all these brochures and all these ads, we finally did something. The reconciliation bill, which passed the U.S. Senate without a single Republican vote--without one--will finally address the cost of prescription drugs for people on Medicare. And it starts reaching beyond that to say the pharmaceutical industry has to be responsible. They have never been able to defend or explain why the same drugs-- exactly the same drugs--made in America are charged in Canada for a fraction of what people have to pay in this country; why Americans have to go without, while in other countries there are discounts that allow families to afford the drugs they need to be healthy and to live. Well, we have done something about it. We passed a bill that will make a difference. And when we talk about issues like electricity--I am going to brag a little bit here--my wife and I decided 2 or 3 weeks ago to start producing electricity. We bought solar panels for our roof in Springfield, IL. We are not the first family to have them, but we are one of the few. I predict that is going to change in a hurry. Why? Because in that reconciliation bill, we started taking an honest look at what it takes to reduce climate change and to give our kids a planet they can live on. It means that each of us has to change our lifestyle some. Well, I left this morning a little bit of sunshine in Springfield, IL, and it means that I am producing electricity with the local utility. I am going to try to do even more. My wife and I are devoted to showing--at least setting an example in this region, in this area. The bill we passed in reconciliation is going to create incentives for people to put solar panels on their homes, to buy heat pumps, electric water heaters--things that will reduce the use of fossil fuels and, instead, move us toward a more electric economy. And, yes, automobiles are headed in that direction too, and it didn't take a Federal mandate. The major car producers are headed that way, whether we like it or not. They understand where we need to go as a country and where the consumers are headed, and I think that is a good indication as well. So when I hear the Republican leader come to the floor and say that things are so awful, I don't doubt that many families are struggling, and we should be sensitive and mindful of that every single day, but a lot of good things are happening too. The employment figures are encouraging. Our move toward dealing with climate change is encouraging, as well. The fact the pharmaceutical companies are going to be held responsible and the fact that corporations that have had a net profit of $1 billion or more--listen to that closely--net profit of $1 billion or more in the last 3 years are finally going to have to pay some Federal income taxes. Americans are used to paying their fair share of taxes. Why are these corporations making over $1 billion in net profits each year not paying a penny? That is going to change, and it is in the bill too. And I know it is a bone in the throat of my Republican colleagues, but it is only fair. This week we return after a 4-week recess. I was traveling around my State, listening to ideas and concerns. And you know what I heard over and over again? And this is overwhelming, particularly in the area of healthcare, but not exclusively: We just don't have enough people to fill the vacancies and jobs in America. We have roughly 11 million vacancies and 5 million people unemployed. That is the reality. And when it comes to healthcare workers, it is a reality that means the cost of medical care is going up. If you can't find a local nurse to go on staff, on payroll, and be with you for a while and you have to rely on contract nurses, those who come and go, they have all the skill and training, but they are looking for a pretty big paycheck, sometimes three times what the regular nurses are receiving. That drives up the cost of healthcare. And hospitals and clinics are desperate for these nurses to be there. I found all across my State--from the city of Chicago to the smallest town downstate--this is a challenge that we face and need to do something about. But people, over and over again, despite what we saw in many of the reports on television, really do still love this country. They are concerned about the divisions we see every single day. America has always been a can-do nation. Faith in the future and in our ability to solve our problems, create a better future, has always been part of American DNA. It is hard to find common ground on scorched earth. As President Lincoln warned us long ago, ``a house divided against itself cannot stand.'' A few years later, as the Civil War ended and victory was in sight, President Lincoln pleaded, just outside this room, on his inauguration, with the people of the North and the South, and he said: We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. He said that after the deadliest war that America ever experienced. He knew that the work of rebuilding this battered Nation and creating a better future would only be achieved if we were united--the United States of America. This week marks the 21st anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attack on America. I will never forget that day as long as I live. I know, Mr. President, that you won't forget it either because it affected your State and many people who live there. Those who are old enough to remember not just the shocking grief of that day will also remember the intense sense of national unity that sustained us through the terrible days and weeks that followed. We lost so much, but we found a common purpose. We understood that we are one Nation, one people, with one destiny. We rise or we fall together. As the Senate returns to the work of legislating, I hope that we will remember President Lincoln's plea that ``we must not be enemies.'' Politics is not war. It is where we resolve our differences without war, in a democracy. People in Illinois are concerned about our state of the economy. They are worried about inflation. I understand that. They are also feeling something that many haven't felt for a while, and that is hope. Why? Because of results. Inflation is, in fact, slowing. Gas prices are falling. At $3.46 a gallon, I would have grabbed that a few weeks ago, and I hope it can go lower. Gas is down by more than $1.20 a gallon on the average since the start of the summer. Wages are up. People are back at work. We now have more than recovered all the jobs that our economy lost during the pandemic. Our economy has added more than 10 million new jobs, including 600,000 manufacturing jobs, under President Biden. We are investing in infrastructure. I remind myself over and over again: Don't complain if construction on highways just slowed you down. You voted for it, Senator. And I would vote for it again. President Biden said yesterday, on Labor Day, in one of his speeches, that when we make this investment in infrastructure--a recordbreaking, historic amount--we will have the most modern infrastructure in the world. Now, that is what a nation that is prepared to compete does. We passed the CHIPS Act to preserve America's leadership in research and innovation and to produce semiconductors and jobs and the industries of the future in America, not in China. As the President also said yesterday, why wouldn't it be in America? We invented the chip. Shouldn't we be leading the world still? Well, with the passage of the CHIPS legislation in a strong bipartisan vote on the floor, we are going to reclaim that lead. We passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes the biggest ever investment in climate change and climate resilience. It will reduce inflationary pressure by cutting energy costs now and in the future, and it also reduces the cost of prescription drugs. We are investing in the American people on the basis of a shared, sustainable economic prosperity. Oh, one footnote that is well worth mentioning: The Federal deficit will shrink by $1.7 trillion this year. All of the things that I have mentioned and all of the criticism we have heard from the other side of the aisle, and the deficit is going down. Nearly all of these economic prosperity proposals were passed with Democratic votes only. Chips is an exception. Infrastructure is an exception. But the American Rescue Plan and the inflation reduction plan were strictly Democratic votes. It is our hope that our Republican colleagues will now join us and help us get back to work in fighting the common challenges facing the Nation.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Illinois (Ms. Duckworth), the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Ossoff), the Senator from Nevada (Ms. Rosen), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, first, let me say I am joining in with the action just taken by the Senate, led by Senator Coons, who has shown an extraordinary gift of understanding of the importance of the African continent and the people that need to be part of its future. I wholeheartedly support the effort which he initiated on the floor this afternoon. And I believe that Dr. Muyangwa is going to be a valuable asset to AID and to Africa, and I thank him for his leadership in bringing this issue before us today.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, the United States has done some good, important, even historic work this week. On Tuesday, we passed the PACT Act, expanding VA healthcare to an estimated 3.5 million veterans. Their service to our Nation exposed them to potentially deadly toxic chemicals from Agent Orange in the Vietnam conflict to toxic burn pits, which were found to be ubiquitous in Iraq and Afghanistan. It took too long: 12 years. Toxic exposed veterans and family members had to stand on the steps of the Capitol, literally camped out for 5 days and nights to remind us that the veterans suffering from toxic exposure deserve care as surely as veterans injured by bullets and bombs. But in the end, thank goodness, we did the right thing. The vote to pass the PACT Act was 86 to 11--86 votes in a 50-50 Democratic/ Republican Chamber. It was a remarkable, bipartisan rollcall. And then we made history this week when the Senate voted to ratify the entry of Finland and Sweden to NATO. Vladimir Putin gambled that Russia could seize Ukraine in just a few days, could use his victory to shatter NATO's unity and to deepen divides around the world. Vladimir Putin, again, was dead wrong. NATO is more united, larger, and more powerful than ever, while Vladimir Putin has become an international pariah. Russia's military is bogged down in Ukraine, suffering heavy losses. And the Russian economy is staggering under the weight of global sanctions imposed by the freedom-loving nations of the world against Russia. The Senate vote in favor of enlarging NATO to include Sweden and Finland was 95 to 1--95 votes in favor of it in a body that is divided equally, 50-50. Two major achievements in just 2 days, both with huge bipartisan majorities. That is proof for the doubters that the Senate can work together when the need is urgent and the solutions are just. Now we are debating another historic plan that should have the support of both parties. I listen to the speeches each day on the floor of the Senate. And every day our Republican colleagues stand on the floor and say it is about time we did something about inflation. They know that is exactly the way the American families feel--and I feel, as well. And then, sadly, when given a chance, as they will be in just a few minutes, my Republican friends try to stop legislation that will lower the cost and give American families a break on their cost of living. All the speeches notwithstanding, they refuse to vote for a provision which will actually lower families' living costs. They oppose cutting taxes for families. They oppose banning price gouging by oil companies. They oppose cutting healthcare premiums. They oppose extending the Child Tax Credits. They oppose lowering prescription drug prices. But we are going to give them another chance to do the right thing. They are going to have a chance to actually lower some of those big ticket costs which they gave all their speeches about and--listen to this bonus--reduce the deficit at the same time. Yes, the Democrats have a proposal which will reduce our national debt by $300 billion. Our plan is called the Inflation Reduction Act. It does exactly what it says and even more. The Inflation Reduction Act will cut energy costs, now and in the future, by deploying American-made clean energy and by making the biggest investment to battle the climate crisis in U.S. history. You can't miss on the news the terrible things that have happened in the Commonwealth of Kentucky in the last week. Horrible things. Thirty- seven people--at least 37 people--have lost their lives with the flooding in that State. They go to these remote, rural villages. It just breaks your heart to look at the devastation. And the reporters go to families still, I guess, trying to get back on their feet, trying to imagine tomorrow and do these interviews. And many times, the people are clearly in pain and distraught over their personal losses. There was one man I remember yesterday, particularly. He did not appear to be the kind of person who spends a lot of time thinking about Congressional issues or even great political issues. He was a fellow, a hardworking fellow, who just lost his home. And you know what he said? He said: This is climate change; what you are looking at here is climate change. I have lived in this town for 40 years. And I have never seen anything like that. And I can't imagine if it comes again. For him to use the words ``climate change'' really was an eye opener for me, because it means that he is sensitized to the reality that we face in this world. Extreme weather has become the norm in our country, whether it is an extreme drought, an extreme flooding situation, more tornadoes than ever at different times of the year. The list goes on and on. Some people think it is just God being restless. I think there is more to it. I think we--those of us who inhabit this planet Earth--bear some responsibility. The question is, will we give speeches, will we lament these extreme weather events, or will do something? That is why this bill that is coming up today, starting today, subject to amendment, is so important. We can't allow our energy and national security to be dictated by some foreign power or some foreign leader like Vladimir Putin or anyone else who doesn't share America's national interest. The Inflation Reduction Act, which is coming before us, invests in clean, new American energy sources so that our future can be determined by American ingenuity, not by some foreign cartel or some Kremlin kleptocrat. Earlier today, the Senator from Kentucky came to the floor and talked about the EPA police checking on whether people are buying certain products or not buying other products. That isn't what this bill is about at all. Incentives are there. And I--just from a family point of view--am going to take a look at it. Is it time for my family to buy a heat pump? I will take a look and see. Tax credits, tax incentives could be an incentive for me to make that decision with my family and my wife. And that is all that we are offering--incentives for people to choose the right things, the environmentally smart things to deal with climate change. The more energy solutions we discover, the cheaper our energy bills will be. Importantly, the Inflation Reduction Act will enable the United States--listen to this--to cut greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 40 percent by the year 2030. We have a lot of young pages here who come and work in the summer. We are glad to have them. They brighten up the place, and their energy is a sight to behold. They probably listen to this debate and wonder if these graying politicians, these Senators and Congressman, really do care about the planet that they are going to be living on, raising their own families, building their own futures. Well, this bill is an indication we do care. And to reduce greenhouse gas emissions not only does the right thing for America, it sets an example for the world. Despite all the excuses, there is no excuse for ignoring climate change, as that poor fellow down in Kentucky made obvious. For anyone who still says global warming is a hoax--and I guess there are a handful of those folks left--or admits that it is real and says we just can't afford to fix it, know this: The costs of ignoring the climate crisis are far greater than dealing with it. A recent analysis by the Office of Management and Budget warns, if left unchecked, climate change could reduce our Nation's gross domestic product by 10 percent and cost Americans $2 trillion a year by the end of the century--$2 trillion in the production of goods and services. To put that in perspective, that is about a third of the entire U.S. budget this year. And in case you are dismissing these warnings because they happen to come from a Democrat or from the Biden administration, maybe you should listen to Deloitte--a well-known accounting firming in this country--their center for sustainable management. They released a report in May estimating that left unchecked, climate change will cost the global economy $178 trillion for the next 50 years. If rising sea levels don't swamp us, rising costs of ignoring climate disasters very well may. The Inflation Reduction Act will enable us to make reasonable changes now that will pay for themselves many times over. It will also cut families' healthcare costs in four important ways. First, we extend the enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies for 13 million Americans for 3 more years. I was so surprised to read recently that there are still 8 million Americans uninsured. There should be none. And our goal is none. But we made such dramatic progress cutting by a third to a half the number of people uninsured since the passage of the Affordable Care Act. Have you ever had a young child in your family who was sick and you worried because you had no health insurance as to whether they would be seen by the right doctor, the right hospital? I went through it. It happened right after our first child was born. We didn't have health insurance. I never felt more vulnerable, and I never had an emptier feeling when it came to being a father caring for his child as to not have health insurance and worrying about that. I don't think any family should ever have to go through that. It is an experience I will never forget. Second, our plan allows Medicare to finally negotiate fair prices for prescription drugs. I listened to the Republican leader on the floor this morning talking about what a terrible idea that is. Well, I just want to suggest to him, we have been doing that at the Veterans' Administration for years. They have been negotiating pharmaceutical prices so that our veterans get affordable drugs and taxpayers get a break and don't have to subsidize them. That, to me, is just common sense, and it is humane. The notion that we are going to extend that to Medicare recipients is not a radical idea. It involves something that we think is fundamental to the free market economy: competition. If these pharmaceutical companies want to sell their drugs to the Medicare recipients, we say to them, let's negotiate, on a certain number of those drugs, reasonable prices. Now, some people say that is too much government, government stepping in there and trying to establish the prices that will be paid for these pharmaceuticals. Well, I would say to the same pharmaceutical companies that are raising these objections: Look what you are doing today in Canada. You take exactly the same drug made here in the United States, sold to Americans at an inflated price, and sell it at a deep discount to people living in Canada. Why do you do it? Is it out of the kindness of your heart? No. The Canadian Government stood up and said you are not going to gouge Canadian families. Yes, we would like to have your pharmaceuticals and, yes, we will put them in our formulary, but you cannot dictate the prices to us. We are going to negotiate those prices. And the pharmaceutical companies sat down and did it--not just in Canada but in Europe. When you say the same thing in the United States, that they treat Americans and those under Medicare the way they treat Canadians, you have the Senator from Kentucky coming to the floor and calling it a college sophomore socialist answer. I don't think so. I think it is just common sense. These pharmaceutical companies are some of the most profitable companies in the United States year in and year out. They make money hand over fist. And I am glad they do, in many respects, because they can invest that money in the next generation of drugs. You say to yourself: Wait a minute. If you are going to give them less for the product, they will have less for research. Not necessarily because there is something that you ought to remember that I think is very important. I want to make sure I get these figures right. The big pharmaceutical companies today spend more on advertising than on research. Let me give you a couple of examples. Bayer, one of the makers of Xarelto--you have heard that one, haven't you, on TV--spent $18 billion on sales and marketing, $18 billion. How much did they spend on research for new drugs and new products? Eight billion. More than twice as much of the research budget went to be spent on marketing and television advertising. Incidentally, the United States is only one of two nations in the world that allows direct-to-consumer drug advertising. The other one is New Zealand, if you can imagine. They put all this money on television advertising drugs like Xarelto. Why? So that people say: Wait a minute. Maybe that is what I have needed all along. I have to write down that name. How do you spell ``Xarelto?'' They get it right, finally, because ads keep coming on hour after hour on television, and they go to the doctor and say: I need Xarelto. The doctor may have second thoughts about whether that is a good drug, but he doesn't have a lot of time for each patient. He is not going to debate his customers. He ends up writing a script for a high- priced drug like Xarelto, and Bayer makes more money. They are not the only ones. Johnson & Johnson--that is a pretty well- known company. They spent $22 billion on sales and marketing. How much, if they spent $22 billion on sales and marketing, did they spend on research? Twelve--twelve. Do you see a pattern here? To be fair, not all of pharma's big bucks go into TV ads. Over the past 5 years, the 14 largest drug corporations spent more on stock buybacks lining the pockets of their CEOs than on R&D. Remember what I just said. They took their profits, turned them into stock buybacks so that the wealthiest people in America got a better balance sheet. Money that could have gone into research for new drugs, they diverted into profit-taking. So this notion about saying that Medicare should be able to negotiate more competitive and fairly priced drugs is not unreasonable, and it isn't going to stop research. We know that. Can I add one other element to this? Each of these pharmaceutical companies has a benefactor, a major benefactor. Think of it. It is an Agency that generates research by the billions each year, and the product of that research--which is a suggestion for new drugs, for example--is literally given to the pharmaceutical industry to use and make a profit. What is that Agency? The National Institutes of Health. It does the basic research by the Federal Government, paid for by American taxpayers--billions of dollars--and makes it available to pharmaceutical companies to develop the next generations of drugs. That is as it should be. But this notion that the pharmaceutical companies are just making it on their own and their own skills goes way beyond the obvious. NIH is helping very much. We want to cut healthcare costs to make sure as well that seniors cap their out-of-pocket prescription drug costs at $2,000 a year, and $2,000 a year is still a sacrifice for many seniors, but it is a reasonable amount. We know what is happening now. Many seniors have drugs that they are supposed to be taking. They can't afford to fill the prescriptions or they take half the dose when they should be taking a full dosage. That is the reality of the prescription drug pricing in America. Is it a serious problem? Well, just ask Blue Cross Blue Shield in Chicago, and I have: What is the impact of these inflated prescription drug prices on healthcare premiums? Blue Cross Blue Shield said to me that it is the No. 1 driver of increased health insurance premium costs, the cost of prescription drugs. So when we start bringing down these costs, we are also going to create a situation where we have less incentive to increase premiums for health insurance. Fourth, we penalize drug companies if they try to increase the price of the drug more than the rate of inflation. That was another on the list of sophomore in college socialist ideas, according to the Republican leader on the floor this morning. Well, I think he is wrong. We know what happens to the price of these drugs year in and year out. They just don't go up with the cost of inflation, they go up by multiples that reach the point people can't afford to pay it. That has to come to an end. Five years ago, Republicans used this same process we are using called reconciliation to pass a nearly $2 trillion tax bill that overwhelmingly benefited big corporations and the wealthiest people in America, and they put the whole boondoggle on the credit card. It was unpaid for--tax cuts unpaid for. They claimed their tax cuts would pay for themselves. Dynamic scoring, they called it. Instead, they blew up the national debt. Our plan is paid for, and here is the bottom line: No one in America--no one earning less than $400,000 a year--is seeing any increase in their taxes. Now, the Republicans say: Well, if you raise taxes on the wealthiest people, it is going to hurt the poorest people. When it gets right down to it, many of these corporations are extremely profitable--a billion dollars a year in profits and pay no Federal taxes. What is wrong with this picture? The average American family is paying their taxes, as the law requires, and yet these corporations have found an escape hatch to avoid paying any taxes whatsoever. If they pay any taxes, they are going to hurt the poor families. The poor families are doing their part to pay their taxes. It is time these wealthy individuals and corporations did the same. Instead of adding to the national debt, as our Republican colleagues did with their tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, our proposal that we will vote on today will reduce the deficit by $300 billion. That is on top of the $1.7 trillion we have already cut from the deficit this year. Cutting the deficit reduces inflation pressure in the long run. In the short term, we are fighting inflation by lowering the cost of energy and healthcare, two of the biggest ticket items in family budgets. And lastly, Senator McConnell and our Republican colleagues seem to have developed a great respect for the economic wisdom of former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. I can't tell you how many times Senator McConnell has mentioned Larry Summers' name as if he is the great leader of all the great thinkers in the economics field in America. Let me tell you what Mr. Summers happens to say about our plan that we are going to vote for today and that all the Republicans are going to oppose. He said: This bill is fighting inflation. He also said: This is an easy bill to get behind. I didn't hear that this morning when Senator McConnell came to the floor and talked about his view of this bill. Larry Summers was his expert previously. Now he is ignoring when Summers says we ought to vote for this bill to reduce inflation. Do our Republican friends really want to tame inflation and help families with energy and healthcare or just come to the floor and complain? That is the choice they have. If they want to help, we have a plan. It is fair; it is paid for; it fights inflation; and it lowers the deficit. Wouldn't it be great if they would join us in a bipartisan effort to pass this at this moment in history? It is what America is waiting for and looking for. I hope that a number of Republicans will surprise us and join us. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 675 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Van Hollen amendment at the desk to the resolution be agreed to; the preamble be agreed to; and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 3115 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 466, S. 4205.

Mr. DURBIN. I ask that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 698 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that all remaining time on the bill be yielded back; that there be 2 minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to each vote with respect to the reconciliation bill; and that following the disposition of Sanders amendment No. 5210, the following amendments be the first Republican amendments in order: No. 1, amendment No. 5301, Senator Graham; No. 2, amendment No. 5409, Senator Barrasso; No. 3, amendment No. 5382, Senator Capito; No. 4, amendment No. 5384, Senator Lankford; and No. 5, amendment No. 5404, Senator Crapo.

Mr. DURBIN. Would the Senator from Montana hold for just one moment, please? Thank you. Order of Business Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that following disposition of the Crapo amendment No. 5404, the following amendments be the next Republican amendments in order: No. 5358, Collins; motion to commit, Scott; No. 5389, Marshall; No. 5383, Capito; and No. 5421, Grassley.

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I raise a point of order that the pending amendment does not produce a change in outlays or revenues and therefore violates section 313(b)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Collins amendment No. 5358 be in order following Grassley amendment No. 5421.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the senior Senator from Florida says we should stop our efforts on reconciliation until we put money in law enforcement. So we checked the record. When we put billions in local communities for law enforcement in the American Rescue Plan, the senior Senator from Florida voted no. And when it came to the Omnibus bill and Byrne grants and COPS money that local organizations and law enforcement needed so they could be stronger and fight crime, 31 Republicans voted no, including the senior Senator from Florida. So I would suggest we vote no on his amendment.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be the next Republican amendments in order: 5316, Lee; 5418, Shelby; Motion to Commit, Tim Scott; 5263, Cruz; 5425, Daines; 5361, Ernst; 5360, Fischer; 5265, Cruz; 5385, Kennedy; motion to waive budget with respect to insulin; 5472, Thune; 5406 Hagerty; 5224, Portman; motion to commit, Hoeven; Cruz motion to commit on vaccines; Cruz motion to commit on targeting parents; further, that the Sanders amendment No. 5208 occur following the Scott motion to commit; and Sanders No. 5281 following the Daines amendment No. 5425.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments and motions be the next amendments and motions in order: 5265, Cruz; 5281, Sanders; 5385, Kennedy; motion to waive the budget with respect to insulin; Cruz motion to commit on vaccines; Cruz motion to commit targeting parents; and that all provisions under the previous order remain in effect.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the FBI has told us repeatedly that domestic extremism is a very real threat in America. Last November, 60 percent of America's school leaders said that someone in their schools had been verbally or physically threatened over school policy. There is no evidence--none--that the Department of Justice is threatening the constitutional right of parents to peaceful, free speech. But there is no excuse--none--for violence against school teachers or board members. If you believe there is nothing peaceful or legitimate about threatening teachers, school board members or their families, vote no on this amendment. Vote on Motion to Commit

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions, submitted earlier today: S. Res. 749 and S. Res. 750.