Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last week, China announced that it would now allow families to have three children--a profound shift from their previous one- and two-child policies. Why the change? China looked to the future and realized that its population policies would hamper economic growth. Now, the U.S. Government will never tell families how many children to have. That choice is profoundly personal. Yet we must ask ourselves the same questions China is asking: What kind of changes will lead or deter the United States from a future of economic growth and prosperity? How can we enhance America's competitiveness? And more than just compete, how can we make sure America comes in first? The answer is obvious: Invest in American creativity. China is investing heavily in electric vehicles, critical minerals, energy production, computer chips--the list goes on. In all of these areas, China is beginning to pull ahead of the pack. They are aiming for first. And what underscores all of their efforts? Research. Every breakthrough, every new technology, every scientific step forward opens new markets and drives their economy into the future at high speed. Unfortunately, it is a different story in America. For decades, in both the public and private sectors, we have downsized our discovery and innovation investments. Since the days of the space race, we have stepped away from the great challenge of discovery. If we were to commit the same percentage of our national budget to research today as we did in the Apollo era, we would invest $900 billion over 5 years. That kind of an investment puts people on the Moon. That kind of investment puts us in first. So how do we get there? The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act would set us back on track and at a fraction of the cost of Apollo-era spending. As we debate and hopefully pass this bill, we must keep asking: What are we willing to do to be No. 1? One important way we can compete with countries like China is by increasing support for domestic manufacturing and strengthening our domestic supply chains. The legislation before us does exactly that. It provides $52 billion in emergency funding to boost our domestic semiconductor manufacturing capabilities. In 1990, the United States produced 37 percent of the world's semiconductors, but today, just 12 percent of semiconductors are manufactured in the United States. Now, we are facing a global shortage of microchips, which is impacting jobs in my State and many others. I am proud that Illinois has long been a leader in auto manufacturing, thanks to dedicated workers like those at a Stellantis plant in Belvidere, IL, who assemble Jeep Cherokees. Unfortunately, that plant was forced to shut down in March due to the global shortage of semiconductors. And last month, Stellantis announced that as many as 1,640 employees at the plant could be laid off in July--again, because it does not have enough microchips. After briefly resuming operations last week, the plant already has had to shut down again for 2 weeks because of this shortage. Last week, I spoke to representatives from Stellantis who shared that the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act could make a real difference in terms of boosting supply of these chips. This funding is not just important for the assembly plant in Belvidere. Sadly, we are seeing similar impacts of the semiconductor shortage at Ford's Chicago Assembly Plant, which supports 5,800 jobs. That plant was idled through April, with shutdowns extended into May. We urgently need to act to address this global microchip shortage to provide certainty to the workers whose livelihoods depend on a stable supply of semiconductors. The legislation before us will not only address our immediate market needs but it will also help prevent these shortages again the future. This investment supports jobs across the entire supply chain, from construction of new facilities, to manufacturing and development of chips, to workers in the auto industry who depend on a reliable supply of semiconductors, to American consumers. The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act is the result of weeks of negotiation and bipartisan work. I was puzzled by some of my Republican colleagues' arguments for voting against cloture on this bill. If you don't want China's products and values to dominate the global marketplace, why would you cede that marketplace to China--or anyone else, for that matter? If you believe in America's products, values, and most of all, its people, then do the smart thing: Invest in them. Although some of my colleagues seem to believe otherwise, invective isn't going to win this global competition. We need investment to remain No. 1. No one bill will secure America's economic prosperity or national security or resolve all of the outstanding issues in our relationship with China, but strengthening America's role as a global leader in science and technology is an essential piece of our effort to preserving American leadership in this world. So I put it to my fellow Senators: Let's take a step forward today. Let's invest in the research, the jobs, and the future that all Americans deserve. I plan to vote in favor of the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Let's not settle for second best. Let's put America in the lead.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, one of the major responsibilities of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which I chair, is the selection of judges to serve our Nation. It is important not only because it is a question of measuring their standards of integrity, honesty, and judgment but also because these are lifetime appointments. Literally, the women and men who are chosen for these slots will have an impact on the future of America in their courts which could last for many years and decades. That is why we are careful with the Biden administration to not only bring good nominees before the Committee but to make certain they bring the necessary qualities. This week, the Senate will consider several of President Biden's judicial nominees. I believe they understand the role of a judge in our system. They will bring much needed experiential and demographic diversity to our Nation's courts. I have tried throughout my career, and many others like me have tried, to choose men and women for the bench who will reflect the diversity of America. The face of justice is often as important as the fact of justice, and if people appearing before our courts feel that there is at least a chance for success based on the background and experience of a judge, I think it is a positive thing. Given the background of these judges in trying cases, arguing appeals, and issuing rulings from the bench, I believe, and the committee agreed, that these judicial nominees are ready for service. Today, I would like to speak in support of two of them: Julien Neals, nominated to the District Court of New Jersey, and Regina Rodriguez, nominated to the District Court of Colorado. New Jersey is really in desperate need of Federal judges. They are facing a judicial emergency. In each of the States' six judicial vacancies, they have been designated as a judicial emergency status by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. Today, we can begin to address this judicial emergency by finally confirming Julien Neals to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. He is an extraordinary public servant. He has served the people of the State of New Jersey for decades. As an expert in municipal law, he handled several legal disputes that were tried to verdict, judgment, or final decision, including multiple--multiple-- jury trials. He was the chief judge of the Newark Municipal Court. He presided over 6,000 cases in that capacity. He received a unanimous rating of ``well qualified'' from the American Bar Association. He has the strong support of his home State Senators, Senators Cory Booker and Bob Menendez. He has received broad bipartisan support in the Judiciary Committee, with five Republicans joining all the Democrats in supporting his nomination. I urge my colleagues to support him. This week, the Senate will also consider the nomination of Regina Rodriguez to be a judge in the District Court of Colorado. What a life story she brings. Ms. Rodriguez is the daughter of a Japanese-American mother, whose family was interned during World War II, and a Mexican- American father who was one of the first Hispanic coaches in the National Football League. Her father's job as a coach took the family across the country. Although Ms. Rodriguez was born in Colorado, she spent several of her formative years in my home State of Illinois. When she was 17 years old, Ms. Rodriguez thought she might want to be a lawyer, so she put on her best suit, as she says, and knocked on doors in Macomb, IL, until she found a lawyer who said: ``Come on in. I'll show you the ropes.'' Lucky for us, Ms. Rodriguez held on to that passion that first developed when she was a teenager. Over the past 30 years, she has served as a talented litigator who has tried 35 cases to verdict. She has a range of experience in government and the private sector. In the public sector, she served as an assistant U.S. attorney and rose to become the first Latina Chief of the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Colorado. In private practice, she represented a broad array of clients, from individuals to Fortune 500 firms. During her tenure as a litigator, Ms. Rodriguez has demonstrated that she understands the importance of applying the law to the facts in a fair manner. She has represented plaintiffs, defendants, government, and those who have sued the government. As a woman of color, she has risen as a partner in several leading law firms--no mean feat. Ms. Rodriguez has taken out time from her demanding schedule to mentor young attorneys, just as that lawyer in Macomb, IL, did for her. She has received a unanimous ``well qualified'' rating from the American Bar Association, as well as positive blue slips from both Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper. Her nomination is also supported by the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, the Latinas First Foundation, and the Colorado Lawyers Committee. She has earned support across the aisle. On May 20, Ms. Rodriguez was voted out of the committee by a vote of 17 to 5, with the support of six of my Republican colleagues. When confirmed, she will be the first Asian-American judge to serve not only in the District of Colorado but in the entire Tenth Circuit. Her historic, well-deserved confirmation will bring our Federal judiciary closer to reflecting the lives and experiences of all Americans. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for Ms. Rodriguez's nomination. The judicial nominees we are voting on this week illustrate something that is substantial and profound. They illustrate that President Joe Biden is dedicated to appointing legal experts with outstanding credentials and a wealth of experience. During his first several months in office, President Biden has nominated public servants who will bring to the bench a variety of professional perspectives and personal experiences. Too often, those things have been missing in previous nominees. By confirming judges who reflect the experience of all Americans and who demonstrate fealty to the rule of law, we can continue building a justice system that works for everyone. Over the last 4 years, we have seen a concerted effort on the Republican side to fill vacancies. They broke records, in some respects, in the number of nominees that they brought before the Senate for approval. Some of the records are not ones to be proud of, from my perspective, and 10 of the nominees who were submitted for consideration during the last 4 years before the Senate Judiciary Committee were found unqualified by the American Bar Association. Nevertheless, most of them made it to the bench in lifetime appointments. Many nominees came before us, of the Trump administration, who were seeking lifetime appointments to become a trial judge and had no personal experience in a courtroom. It is hard to imagine that anyone would be thrust into that situation and expected to perform as a professional. Imagine, if you will, the parties to those lawsuits, many of whom stake their lives and reputations on the outcome, to find a judge who couldn't find their way through the Code of Civil Procedure if they were forced to. That, unfortunately, was the standard that was used. As long as these nominees in the past had the blessing of the so- called Federalist Society, that was good enough for many of my Republican colleagues. Joe Biden is really responding to that by suggesting nominees who meet much higher standards. I want to work with the Biden administration to continue in that tradition, so at the end of the day we can fill the vacancies with women and men who are not only competent and honest but have the integrity and experience, both legal and otherwise, to serve our Nation for the rest of their lives, should they choose, in these judicial capacities. I commend these two nominees who passed out of our committee with a strong bipartisan votes. To my colleagues on the floor today, I hope they will join me in supporting them. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, there are still millions of women across this country today who are doing the same jobs as their male colleagues and are being paid less. It is more clear than ever that we must take steps to close loopholes that allow for pay discrimination and empower women to hold their employers accountable when pay discrimination occurs. Nearly 60 years after passage of the Equal Pay Act and 12 years after passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, women still only earn 82 cents for every dollar paid to men on average. For women of color, the wage gap is even worse. Black women make only 63 cents for every dollar paid to White men, and Latina women make only 55 cents. Mothers make just 75 cents for every dollar paid to fathers. Throughout the pandemic, too many families have wondered how they will feed their families, keep their homes, and care for their children amid an unprecedented public health and economic crisis. For working mothers, it has been especially challenging. The labor force participation rate among women has dropped to 57.4 percent, the lowest it has been since 1988. A survey last fall found that almost 40 percent of working mothers in Illinois lost their jobs or were working reduced hours. Nearly half of working mothers of color reported the same. Why has this economic crisis been so economically devastating for so many women? The reasons are clear. Women tend to be overrepresented in the industries that were hit hardest by the pandemic, such as restaurants, retail, and leisure and hospitality. And many women are the primary caretakers for their families. With schools and childcare programs closed, what choice did mothers have other than to step back from work? The economic hardship women have faced during the pandemic has only been made worse by the wage gap. From wage discrimination to the unavailability of childcare, women are not getting a fair deal. That means working families are not getting a fair deal, and it must change. This week, we have the opportunity to pass legislation that would close the loopholes that allow paycheck discrimination to continue. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which prohibits gender-based pay discrimination, was the first bill signed into law by President Obama back in 2009. Unfortunately, it is hard to enforce because employers still maintain policies that punish employees who voluntarily share salary information with their coworkers. Women can't demand equal pay if they don't know they are being underpaid. The Paycheck Fairness Act would ensure workers cannot be retaliated against if they disclose their wages. It also would prohibit employers from asking prospective employees about their salary history. And it would require employers to prove that pay disparities exist for legitimate, job-related reasons--not just because they believe ``women's work'' is worth less. I am happy to join Senator Murray and my Democratic colleagues in supporting this important legislation. Women have carried America's families through this pandemic, but it may take years for women to recover from the economic and career setbacks they have suffered. By passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, we can take an important step toward helping women and their families fully recover from this pandemic and economic crisis. I am disappointed that Republican opposition has previously prevented the Senate from passing this bill. I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can agree it is time to pass this commonsense measure that will help put more money in the pockets of women and their families across the country.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, for over a year now, people worldwide have experienced immeasurable pain, suffering, and loss. This pandemic has tested each and every one of us in ways that we didn't know possible. But perhaps no one has been more tested than our Nation's frontline, essential healthcare workers. They, like so many other frontline workers, did not have the option to telework, to socially distance, to remain in their homes, with their families, while the coronavirus ravaged our communities--no, just the opposite. They showed up more than ever before. Not only did our Nation's doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals put their own health concerns aside to treat COVID patients, they continued to see all their other patients who couldn't afford to delay treatment, the heart attack and stroke victims, the chemotherapy and dialysis patients, the pregnant moms and new babies, people who had been involved in car accidents or were victims of gun violence. When the rest of the world was being encouraged to stay home and avoid interactions with people, our medical providers continued to report to hospitals, community health centers, doctor's offices. They did so even when they weren't provided the proper personal protective equipment. They did so even when it meant that they had to quarantine from their own families. They did so even when it meant extra shifts on little to no sleep. They did so even when it meant spending each day watching dying patients say their final goodbyes to loved ones over Zoom. And they did so even when, in the midst of all of this, they were subjected to racism, sexism, and hate. An essay that appeared in the New York Times last month detailed one doctor's experience. Dr. Chaya Bhuvaneswar--a female, Asian-American, Boston-area physician--recalled an incident last April, when a patient spit on her and said she ``brought the sickness.'' Anti-Asian bigotry is, sadly, nothing new in this country, and the rise of it during COVID was certainly fueled by our former President, who seemed to delight in coining hateful, racist terminology to describe the coronavirus. Like so many others, our healthcare providers, whether they are Asian American or African American, or members of other minority groups, are subjected to racism, simply in the course of doing their jobs. Racism is inexcusable always, but imagine how much worse it must have felt this past year, risking your life every single day to help a nation in the midst of a deadly pandemic, only to be subjected to racial slurs, offensive stereotypes, and vile actions. If this past year has taught us anything, it is that our Nation still has a long way to go on issues of race and immigration. Consider this: One in six healthcare and social service workers are immigrants. Yet our broken immigration laws prevent many immigrants from contributing more fully to the battle against the pandemic. As long as I am a U.S. Senator, I will continue to come to fight for all immigrants. We must ensure that the hundreds of thousands of immigrant workers in our essential workforce are not forced to stop contributing when the need for their service has never been greater, and we must give them the chance they deserve to become American citizens. They have waited long enough. I hope that, even in these divided times, we can come together in Congress to quickly aid our immigrant healthcare heroes and other essential workers. Whether we are witnessing horrific, racially motivated acts of police brutality on the nightly news or reading about bigoted verbal and physical assaults in our hospitals, it is clear that the epidemic of racism, which long predated this pandemic, has not gone anywhere. It is my hope that, someday soon, we can look at one another and see how much more unites us than divides us, but for now, let me just offer another word of thanks to our Nation's healthcare workforce: You have all given so much and endured so much. We are eternally thankful for all you have done and all you will continue to do.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, imagine this: In one of the great nations of the world, there is a controversy over transition of power, the peaceful transfer of power. And in this country, those who are about to lose power are concerned--so concerned that their backers are turning to the streets. They plan on demonstrations against the supposed new leadership in their country, and people fear violence. It was against this background that Nadav Argaman, the director of Shin Bet, Israel's internal security service, made a rare public intervention on Saturday night, warning of discourse that is ``liable to be interpreted by certain groups or by individuals as one that permits violent and illegal activity that is liable, heaven forbid, to reach mortal injury.'' Without mentioning any politicians directly, Mr. Argaman added, ``It is our duty to come out with a clear and decisive call to stop immediately the inciting and violent discourse. The responsibility for calming spirits and reining in the discourse rests on all of our shoulders.'' I bring this matter to the floor of the Senate because it parallels what we endured and experienced just a few months ago. I am sure you remember it well, Madam President. I do. The election last November, which was won by Joseph Biden over Donald Trump, the incumbent President, by some 7 million votes--one of the largest turnouts, if not the largest turnout, in the history of the United States. It was a decisive electoral college victory in the same margin that Trump had triumphed over Hillary Clinton just a few years before. Yet, because of the Big Lie and the denial by Donald Trump, he inspired his followers to come to Washington, DC, and participate in a rally to protest, and not to come just any day but to come on January 6, 2021, of this year because that is when the electoral college votes would be counted. We know what followed. We know that mob was turned loose in the streets of Washington and turned loose on the Capitol Building, and those who were here that day will never forget it. I can recall the Vice President of the United States being pulled from that chair you are sitting in, Madam President. He was taken out that door. It was about 2:15 in the afternoon. Then a member of the Capitol Police stood before us and warned us: Stay in your seats. This will be a safe place to be. We are going to gather all the staff around the walls here. Just sit tight. Ten minutes later, he came back and said: Change of plans. The mob is advancing on this Chamber as we speak. Leave immediately. Everyone picked up as fast as they could and left. It was a scene that seemed so unrealistic, you wouldn't imagine it could happen in the Capitol of the United States of America. But the insurrectionist mob inspired by President Donald Trump was here for business. They were here to stop the ordinary course of business in the Senate and the House, which would announce at the end of the day the selection of Joseph Biden as our new President. Now a parallel is taking place in Israel, and a new coalition to replace Benjamin Netanyahu is being contested by those who are going to march in the streets. The Israeli leaders--at least those in the security services--are begging people not to do it. I put that in context to think that that idea in the United States somehow has taken root in Israel. I pray that nothing happens. I want nothing to happen there. But we should be forewarned to take this seriously. There are forces at work in the United States and Israel and other countries to stop the orderly transfer of power in a democratic nation. We ought to take that seriously. We ought to take it so seriously that we appoint a bipartisan Commission to investigate what happened here on January 6, 2021. Just a few weeks ago, Republican Members of the House of Representatives were dismissing the January 6th events, the mob action here in the Capitol, and saying that they were somehow ``orderly tourists.'' That is what one of the Congressmen said, a Congressman from Georgia, a Republican. Those were ``orderly tourists.'' Look at those videos and imagine under any circumstance that you would describe them as ``orderly tourists.'' They weren't orderly tourists when you see five people losing their lives as a result of their actions and 140 of our law enforcement officials being personally attacked, many of them still bearing the scars of that day. I bring this to the attention of the Senate and the American people because I think the answer is obvious. Israel is taking it seriously. They don't want a Trump-like mob to take control in their country. We shouldn't be allowing this to happen, nor should we stop with what we have done and say no more will be said. This was a direct attack on our democracy. We cannot find, unfortunately, in the Republican leadership one Republican leader who will support this idea of a bipartisan Commission. When it comes to January 6, the job isn't finished. The last point I will make is, we received a letter--an anonymous letter--from the Capitol Hill Police asking us to form this Commission and to get to the bottom of it. To think that we walk through this Capitol every day and those men and women are risking their lives for us and we would not even allow a bipartisan Commission to look into that day and the threats to the lives of those policemen on that day is shameful. It is disgraceful. It is unacceptable. Senator Schumer said we will vote on it again. I hope we do, and frequently, so we can remind the American people who is taking this matter very seriously and who is not

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Maine (Mr. King) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) and the Senator from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last week, something happened here in the Capitol which was unique. I am not sure it has ever happened before. It was reported that an anonymous group of Capitol Police officers published an open letter to Members of Congress. I have been here a few years. I never heard of anything quite like this. Here is what these Capitol Police officers, who are entrusted with the responsibility of keeping us safe in the Capitol, wrote: ``On Jan 6th where some officers served their last day in US Capitol Police uniform, and not by choice, we would hope that Members whom we took an oath to protect, would at the very minimum support an investigation to get to the bottom of EVERYONE responsible and hold them 100 percent accountable no matter the title of position they hold or held.'' A challenge from the Capitol Police to the Members of Congress not to sweep under the carpet January 6 but to get to the bottom of it. Capitol policemen were attacked and died as a result of that insurrectionist mob on January 6, and these officers, who risk their lives every day for us, are begging us not to ignore what happened. Yesterday, in POLITICO, the mother of fallen Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick wrote: ``Not having a January 6 Commission to look into exactly what occurred is a slap in the faces of all the officers who did their jobs that day.'' I met Gladys Sicknick when the memorial to her son was held in the Rotunda. I talked to her and her husband about their son, how they were worried when he decided to become a policeman, but they thought at least if he worked in the U.S. Capitol, it is a pretty safe assignment. Well, he died the day after January 6, many believe from complications which occurred in the attacks of that day. To Gladys Sicknick, to the Sicknick family, to all of our Capitol Police officers to whom we entrust our lives every day, and to the members of the DC Metro Police and the other heroes who defended the Capitol on January 6, I say: We hear you, and you deserve justice. It is hard to believe that before we adjourn today, we are likely to consider a January 6 Commission proposal that is doomed to fail. Imagine, the worst attack on this building since the War of 1812, and sadly, it has become a partisan issue. It is my understanding because of his public announcement that Senator McConnell is going to oppose it, and I understand that his caucus will follow his lead. It is hard to imagine what is going on in the U.S. Congress these days. Earlier this week, a Member of the House of Representatives--I am afraid she is already notorious for her inflammatory rhetoric--likened coronavirus masking guidelines to the Holocaust--the Holocaust. I feel no need to point out the absurdity, if not the anti-Semitic nature of such a comparison, but I do want to point out that that comparison was made by one of the lawmakers who were party to the January 6 insurrection attack on the Capitol. The day before the insurrection, that same Congresswoman, a Republican Congresswoman, tweeted: ``Tomorrow is an important day in American history. The people will remember the Patriots who stood for election integrity. Let's go #FightForTrump!'' And fight they did. I remember being in the Chamber that day. I still remember the sound of rioters banging on the doors and windows of this building, the sight of hundreds of them lined up outside, the disgusting display of Confederate flags. And the violence we saw that left 5 people dead and 139 law enforcement officers attacked. So many shocking sights on January 6, 2021--a gallows was erected on the Capitol lawn and rioters attacking police officers with flagpoles bearing American flags or Trump flags. One of the most painful images--and I am sure it was more painful to some than even to me--is a photo of a middle-age White man standing in the halls of our Capitol wearing a sweatshirt that read ``Camp Auschwitz.'' Below those repugnant words was another set of words: ``Work makes you free.'' That cruel slogan was emblazoned atop the black iron gates in Germany leading into the Auschwitz concentration camp. And one of the rioters--mobsters--on January 6 in the U.S. Capitol boldly wore that shirt. These are the people who stormed the Capitol on January 6. They weren't Patriots by any measure. Included in their ranks were neo- Nazis, White supremacists, and clear enemies of the United States. They were incited by the former President of the United States, Donald Trump, at a rally earlier that day, and his allies in Congress, like that Congresswoman I mentioned earlier, were party to the incitement as well. I agree with those who have said that an insurrection without consequences--without even an examination--is a dress rehearsal for the next insurrection. That is why we cannot sweep January 6 and the events that led to it under the rug. Incendiary rhetoric, especially from the mouths or the keyboards of elected officials, has a cost. Comparing mask requirements in a pandemic to the Holocaust has a cost as well. It belittles the worst genocide in the history of the world. And it encourages the kinds of anti-Semitic attacks we have seen in recent days and weeks, like the vandalism in my home State at the synagogue in Skokie, IL. Baselessly claiming that the Presidential election of last year was stolen and repeating that lie has a cost. It undermines the faith in our government and legitimizes a radical, anti-government movement that aims to overthrow this government. It is time for us to tally up the costs, understand how the January 6 attack on our democracy happened and who incited it, and that investigation should not be a matter of controversy. It is part of our obligation, is it not? By our oath of office to defend this Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic? Future generations are counting on us to record in detail what did happen on January 6. And we ought to do it on a bipartisan basis. But why is it necessary? With all of the videotapes and all of the photos and all of the statements of 400-plus people already arrested, why do we need to keep asking questions about that day? Because just 2 weeks ago, two different Republican Congressmen proclaimed that those who were in the Capitol that day were somehow peaceful patriots. That was the phrase that was used--peaceful patriots. Another one talked about them and believed the videotapes proved they were just orderly tourists--orderly tourists. Attacking police officers; five people died; crashing through the windows and doors; breaking down offices; desecrating this Chamber with their antics captured on videotape, and we have all seen them. Orderly tourists? Not by any measure. We ought to investigate this on a bipartisan basis. Several Republican Senators have agreed. Thirty-five Members of the House Republican caucus thought so as well. Surely, all of us can appreciate the importance of working together to investigate why, for the first time in history, America was challenged when we were in the process of the peaceful transfer of power. Here is the thing that I don't understand. Several of us in leadership were asked to leave the Capitol complex and go to a separate place. The identity of that location is kept confidential and private. But it was an interesting gathering of Democratic and Republican leaders in the wake of the January 6 insurrection which was underway as we were taken to the separate location. And I looked around at the Democratic as well as the Republican leaders from the Senate and the House who were gathered, and it was clear to me--they say they felt the same feelings of anger and outrage that this mob had desecrated this building. And they were determined-- we were all determined--that the mob would not have the last word. We were determined to return to this Capitol that same day and finish our work counting the electoral college votes that declared Joe Biden President of the United States. Calls were being made in every direction to police, to the military, to political leaders: Resecure this Capitol. Make certain that you remove those people who were responsible for the violence and insurrection we have seen. Let us get back to our work. Let us prove to the American people that the mob didn't have the last word. I saw that bipartisan determination, and I felt damn good about it. Of all the differences we have had, of all the debate we have had, January 6, that afternoon, Democratic and Republican leaders were standing shoulder to shoulder, passing cellphones back and forth, and speaking to our leaders, talking about getting back into this Capitol and throwing that mob out. And it happened. By 8 o'clock that evening, we were back on the floor of the U.S. Senate. By 2:30, we were gone, racing through the exit doors. At 8 o'clock, we were back to prove that they didn't have the last word. But, sadly, we know now they may have the last word because the call for a bipartisan commission to investigate this January 6 event and to put on the record exactly what happened is being opposed on a partisan basis. There ought to be 100 Senate votes for investigating this attack and making a clear record for history so that those who mock the danger of the moment by calling this mob a peaceful, patriotic mob, or calling the members orderly tourists don't have the last word; yet we may not even have 60 votes today when the measure is called. Why? Let's get down to basics here. Many of the Republican Members are afraid of the man who incited this mob. They are afraid of the former President and what he will say of them if we call for an investigation. They are afraid of Donald Trump. As a result, they are refusing to let this Commission move forward. Are they worried that this investigation into what happened on January 6 will hurt Republicans in next year's election? I think the position they are taking opposing an investigation will hurt them. The events of that date are not fodder for political campaigns, really. They are a stain on our history. If we ignore them or allow the history of that day to be rewritten by deniers, shame on them. The events of January 6 deserve and demand careful, thorough, and principled examination. That is why the independent Commission we are proposing is modeled after the same investigatory body that was created after 9/11. It will be led by 10 commissioners, evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. Together, they would be called on to produce a definitive account of what happened and led to January 6, 2021. This is not an opportunity to score political points; it is an opportunity to score national unity and reconciliation. When Senator McConnell, the Republican Senate leader, announced his opposition to this Commission last week, he said: ``It's not at all clear what new facts or additional investigation yet another commission can lay on top of the existing efforts by law enforcement and Congress.'' My response to Senator McConnell is this, respectfully: The public servants who lead this Commission will be charged with a different set of responsibilities than law enforcement and Members of Congress. The investigations being led by intelligence officials and members of law enforcement are criminal investigations. They will determine how the individuals who participated in the insurrection should be held legally accountable. And the ongoing investigation in Congress have largely been focused on our government's response to the violence of January 6, not to what provoked it. The Commission we are considering today is different. It will be comprehensive by design, evenly divided on a partisan basis. It will examine all of the factors that inspired that riotous mob. And this Commission isn't just about uncovering truth. It goes back to the point I made opening this statement. This Commission is designed to honor the police officers who defended us and defended this Capitol on January 6, some of whom gave their lives in the process. That letter from the police officers to us is a reminder that we owe them the same loyalty and the same dedication they give to us every single day. Dismissing this January 6 Commission and the gravity of this responsibility, sadly, does not honor the police officers who are prepared to give their lives for us every single day. Here is a chance for my Republican colleagues to prove that they really care about law enforcement. So many speeches on the floor of the Senate in the last several weeks have derided and criticized people for calling on defunding the police. Well, I would tell them that the failure to create a Commission to objectively determine what happened when so many of our police officers were attacked on January 6, that doesn't defund the police; failing to create that Commission, sadly, defames them. And that is unacceptable by any standard. Isn't it time we stand with the police officers and their request for this Commission? Isn't it time we make sure that heroes like Brian Sicknick and his family know that he did not die in vain? He paid the ultimate sacrifice to protect us. Let's honor it by supporting the creation of an independent Commission. His family, and all of America, deserve nothing less than the truth Memorial Day Mr. PRESIDENT, this Memorial Day weekend, we pause to remember and honor the patriots who paid for our freedoms with their lives. They fell in battles from Bunker Hill to the Bulge to Baghdad. Today, they are laid to rest throughout the world--from national cemeteries and other hallowed grounds in America to the cliffs of Normandy and far beyond. Nearly 20 years ago, a new generation of American service members went off to fight a war in an ancient land. They traveled to Afghanistan to hunt down the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks and the government that had given him sanctuary. Few imagined then that Afghanistan would become America's longest war. There are Americans serving today in Afghanistan who were not yet born on 9/11. There are veterans who served in Afghanistan in the early years who have seen their own children go off to fight in that war. President Biden recently announced the last U.S. troops in Afghanistan will be home by September 11th--the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on America that spurred the war. I support the President's decision. While there are legitimate concerns about protecting social gains made in Afghanistan, and we must bring home Americans detained in Afghanistan, like Mark Frerichs from my State, it is time for America's longest war to end. On this final Memorial Day with U.S. troops in Afghanistan, we remember especially the 2,312 U.S. servicemembers who died in that war and the families they leave behind. SSG Jacob Frazier is one of those fallen heroes. His friends called him Jake. He grew up in Ohio, and in St. Charles, the son of a Marine who fought in Vietnam, and the eldest of five siblings. He was 18 years old in 1997--just a few months out of high school-- when he enlisted in the Illinois Air National Guard and was assigned to the 169th Air Support Operations Squadron of the 182nd Airlift Wing in Peoria. In 2003, he was in Afghanistan, working alongside Army Special Forces. His job was to call in air cover to protect troops on the ground. On March 29th of that year, Jake Frazier and Special Forces soldiers were returning from a meeting with Tribal leaders in the Helmand province when their convoy was attacked by Taliban fighters. Staff Sergeant Frazier and a Special Forces solider were killed. Jake Frazier was the 75th American service member--and the first Illinois service member--to die in combat in Afghanistan. He was 24 years old and engaged to be married. I want to tell you, also, about another fallen hero from an earlier war. Army CPL Asa Vance grew up in Decatur, IL, one of 14 siblings. His friends called him Bud. He enlisted in the U.S. Army in 1950 at the age of 18 and was sent to Korea. On November 24 GEN MacArthur ordered what would become known as the ``Home by Christmas'' offensive. U.N. forces, he said, would push Chinese troops out of Korea, reunite North and South Korea, and be home by Christmas. What happened was very different. Three days after MacArthur's pronouncement, 120,000 Chinese troops surrounded 30,000 U.N troops near North Korea's Chosin Reservoir. The next 2 weeks brought some of the most brutal combat in modern warfare history. On December 2, at the height of the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir, CPL Asa Vance was killed. He was 18 years old. For nearly 70 years, his remains stayed in North Korea. Following a 2018 meeting between the leaders of North Korea and the United States, however, North Korea returned 55 boxes of remains of U.S. servicemembers killed during war. DNA tests ultimately proved that Corporal Vance's remains were among them. Two weeks ago, this son of smalltown Illinois finally returned home. All 13 of his siblings had already passed on. But Asa Vance was not alone. As an honor guard of police officers, sheriffs deputies, State troopers and members of the Illinois Patriot Honor Guard led his remains from St. Louis's Lambert International Airport to a memorial service in his hometown of Decatur and onto his final resting at Camp Butler National Cemetery in Springfield. Hundreds of folks who never knew CPL Asa Vance came out to pay their respects. They stood on street corners and highway overpasses with their hands on their hearts. Many held small American flags, some wiped away tears. Archibald MacLeish was a son of Illinois, a poet laureate of the United States, and a soldier in World War I. Decades after that war, he wrote about the soldiers who do not come home: The young dead soldiers do not speak. Nevertheless, they are heard in the still houses: Who has not heard them? They have a silence that speaks for them at night and when the clock counts. They say: We were young. We have died. Remember us. They say: Our deaths are not ours: they are yours, They will mean what you make them. We leave you our deaths. Give them their meaning. SSG Jake Frazier's father, Jim Frazier, honors his son's sacrifice by working with other Gold Star families who have lost loved ones in wars. On this Memorial Day, we would do well to ask: How can we honor those who gave all for our Nation? How can give meaning to their deaths? In addition to keeping our promises to their families and to the veterans who returned home, let us honor our fallen heroes by never taking for granted the freedoms for which they died. Let us also remember that our political differences must never make us enemies, and let us search together in good faith to protect this Nation we all love. Economic Recovery Mr. President, let's turn the clocks back to the end of 2019. A novel coronavirus is detected in the city of Wuhan. Little is known about the pathogen, aside from the fact that it is highly contagious and magnitudes more lethal than the flu. In just 3 months--3 months--that virus causes a global pandemic, the likes of which none of us has seen in our lifetimes. It grinds the global economy to a halt. Stay-at-home orders become the new normal, and supply chains are disrupted at nearly every stage in the production process. Tragically, because of delay and denial by the former administration, the United States experiences the world's highest rates of COVID infections and deaths for all of 2020. Then comes a new year and a new administration. Today, thanks to the Biden administration's competence and the scientific community's relentless pursuit of a vaccine, America is finally turning a corner in the fight against COVID-19. But the damage was deep, and our scars are still fresh. While the coronavirus raged, people lost their loved ones, and millions lost their livelihoods. Now, as we restart the engine of our economy, our Republican colleagues would have you believe that the reason America's economy hasn't bounced back fully is because American workers are lazy; they would rather collect unemployment benefits than work. Republicans would have you believe that the American people would rather binge-watch ``The Office'' than return to it. They must not know many American workers well--because Americans work longer and harder than workers in nearly every advanced economy. And for the workers who have been laid off over the past year, unemployment assistance has been lifesaving. Here is what enhanced unemployment benefits have meant for my constituents in Illinois. One Chicago resident reached out to my office, saying that ``my sister has been out of work since the pandemic hit Chicago . . . her husband works a full-time job during the day five days a week and cleans offices three to four nights a week just to make ends meet . . . unemployment assistance is essential.'' That constituent wrote to me out of concern for her family, not herself--her sister, her brother-in-law, and her nieces and nephews. Tell me, does that father--working a full-time day job and cleaning offices at night--sound lazy to you? Does that family sound like they are coasting through this pandemic on Easy Street? Not to me, they don't. Another constituent wrote to me out of concern for his wife. Because of the pandemic, she was laid off from the job she had for 20 years. He wrote, ``She is actively looking for work but so far there are hardly any openings in her field.'' That sentiment was echoed by another constituent, who wrote, ``My 35 years of experience and outdated master's degree in marketing mean nothing in this job market.'' I also heard from a single mother of three who lost her job as a banquet server due to the pandemic. She has emptied her savings and is 3 months behind on mortgage payments. She worries that at 58 years old, it will be difficult to find new work. And one more story, my office received a letter from a 63-year-old woman living with an autoimmune disease. She thought the job she had before COVID-19 would be her last job ever. But then she got laid off. Now, she relies on SNAP benefits to put food on the table and on Medicaid for the doctors and medicines she needs to control her disease. She wrote, ``What a horrible thing to rely on the government, but we have no choice.'' Let me say that again: ``We have no choice.'' Do these sound like calculating con artists or loafs trying to scam Uncle Sam for a quick buck? These are Americans, our neighbors, and they are barely making their way through an unprecedented public health crisis. And they made it because of unemployment assistance. And jobless benefits don't just help the workers and families who receive them. They help communities. They keep money circulating during hard times. People are spending their enhanced unemployment benefits on groceries, rent, mortgage, and other necessities. Now, as we begin to recover, let's not bash the workers who have borne the brunt of this pandemic. Let's focus on what is actually holding our economy back. Let's look at the facts. On Thursday, the Department of Labor published a report showing that new claims for unemployment insurance have fallen to their lowest level since the pandemic began. As more and more people get vaccinated, as we start bringing this virus under control and the world starts opening up, it is clear that Americans want to get back to work. They want to earn a living. So what is preventing more Americans from returning to the workforce? For one, people are still concerned about safety. It was only 2 weeks ago--May 13, to be exact--when the CDC announced that it is now safe for fully vaccinated people to take off their masks and resume activities that they had put on hold--May 13. The jobs report that our Republican colleagues have been so eager to cite as proof that unemployment benefits are keeping people from working was based on data from early April. Remember what was happening in April? Lethal new COVID variants were tearing through the U.K., India, and other nations, and they were starting to show up in this Nation, too. Scientists weren't yet sure whether the COVID vaccines would protect against the new variants. Thankfully, we now have an answer. But back in April, is it any wonder that some workers might have been uncertain about returning to work under those conditions? And then there are the continued challenges facing caregivers in America. Many parents--especially mothers--of young children still can't return to work because so many schools and childcare programs remain closed. You can't leave little kids home alone. Harry Truman used to say that what he really needed was a one-handed economist because all of the economists he knew told him, ``On one hand, this . . . and on the other hand, that.'' A new report coauthored by an economist who formerly worked in the Obama administration questions to what extent the lack of childcare is preventing parents from returning to the workforce. I expect to hear a lot about this report from our Republican colleagues. So I would point out that Mr. Furman and scores of other economists continue to warn that our failure to invest in high-quality, affordable childcare will undoubtedly impede America's future economic growth and global competitiveness. There is no ``other hand'' about that. If we want to cultivate the world's most educated, skilled workforce--a goal I am sure we all share--we need to ensure our children are cared for-- because cultivating that workforce begins before kindergarten. Yet the United States is the only advanced economy in the world that doesn't guarantee parental leave for working parents. And we are one of the only advanced economies that doesn't provide some form of universal early childhood education. If you want to have a child in America, guess what? You are on your own. This is a structural problem in our economy that has existed for decades. The pandemic just brought it into sharp relief. The pandemic has also highlighted another structural problem for our economy. While last month saw big job growth in the leisure and hospitality industries, as restaurants, bakeries, and coffee shops started opening back up, those gains are just one part of the story. Jobs in manufacturing declined. Supply chain disruptions may account for some of these losses. But there is a bigger problem. Employers in high-skilled manufacturing companies have had difficulty for years filling positions. As a nation, we simply are not doing enough to train American workers for the manufacturing jobs of the 21st century, jobs like assembling electric car batteries or wind turbines. Workers who want to make a career change and learn these skills often have to take on thousands, even tens of thousands of dollars in student debt. We treat worker training as a personal problem rather than a collective good from which we all benefit. As I said, America's childcare crisis and a shortage of high-skilled workers existed long before COVID. Enhanced unemployment benefits have been an economic lifeline for millions of Americans families during this pandemic. Severing that lifeline prematurely won't solve the long-term structural challenges facing our economy. It will only make things harder for already struggling families. But we can address the challenge of childcare and take steps to help workers develop new skills. In fact, President Biden and Senate Democrats have a plan to do it. It starts by investing in our children. With the American Families Plan, we can make childcare more accessible and affordable, like nearly every other advanced economy in the world. With the American Jobs Plan, we can invest in workers. It would direct billions of dollars toward helping dislocated workers develop new skills and secure stable, well-paid jobs building wind turbines or electric vehicles or making other American-made goods that will be in high demand for years to come. The American Jobs Plan and the American Family Plan are blueprints for building a sustainable, prosperous economy that will create good jobs for decades to come. I commend President Biden for meeting with my Republican colleague in hopes of moving the country forward and urge Republicans to work with Democrats to achieve these shared goals instead of rejecting our proposal immediately. We can remain the strongest, most dynamic economy in the world and make the 21st century another American century, but we have precious little time and a lot of competition. We can't waste that time wagging our fingers at Americans who are struggling or ignoring the structural challenges that have existed for decades and have only gotten worse during the pandemic. The American Rescue Plan saved our economy. Now, let's build it back better than ever before with the American Jobs Plan and the American Families Plan. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Ms. Sinema) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand in recess under the previous order.

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 when the Senate completes its business today, it recess until 9 a.m., Friday, May 28; that following the prayer and pledge, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and finally, that all recess count postcloture on the Schumer substitute amendment No. 1502.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I have 8 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry The Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on a nomination. Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 9:45 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 11 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 10:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing on a nomination. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 27, 2021, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.

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. These Special Drawing Rights of the International Monetary Fund are the only way the poorest nations on Earth could have the money to buy vaccines to save their people. That is what it boils down to. But Senator Kennedy says: Well, some of this money might get into the wrong hands. I pray that it doesn't. I pray that they administer it properly, and I think they will. But how would you like to have on your conscience the fact that our amendment vote on the Senate floor is the end of the funds for vaccines for some of the poorest countries on Earth? I would not want that on my conscience. Support my amendment, which makes it clear where the Americans do stand when it comes to this issue. Vote on Amendment No. 2014

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

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I rise at this moment to oppose the amendment that is going to be offered by my colleague and friend from Louisiana Senator Kennedy. This amendment would endanger the lives of thousands, if not millions, of innocent people and prolong this terrible coronavirus pandemic. I am sure that is the not the intention of the Senator from Louisiana, but that is what his effort would do. His amendment would gut a critical tool to help stop the spread of the pandemic globally, as well as stem the economic fallout that would hurt us here in America. The International Monetary Fund has a fund with the ability to release money in what are called Special Drawing Rights, foreign exchange reserve assets that it maintains. This can be exchanged by member nations for hard currency in times of crisis. This is exactly what was done in 2009 amid the global economic crisis and what is being considered now amid the pandemic and related economic downturn. The amendment, which I am going to offer, has the support of American business, labor, and global health, and poverty groups--for good reason. The Special Drawing Rights are a no cost way for Americans to help poor nations buy the vaccines they need to save lives and to stop the spread of this coronavirus. And it would also help aid in economic recovery. Isn't that exactly what we should be doing at this moment? This pandemic doesn't know any boundaries. This virus doesn't pick and choose good nations and bad nations. Our ability to protect the hard-fought gains against the pandemic here in the United States, after all that we have been through, ultimately depends on getting it under control around the world so variants and strains don't attack us anew. I know what we have been through. If we ignore the reality, the fact is, this pandemic came roaring at us from a city in China that most Americans have never heard of, and now we have to decide whether we are going to take it on directly. You don't tell the fire department to not help with the fire at your neighbor's house at a time of crisis. Sadly, that is exactly what the Kennedy amendment would do. And the one part that he is missing that is so critical is to take it or leave it on the Special Drawing Rights. You can't pick and choose the Nations that might or might not receive the benefits to buy vaccines. We can use other mechanisms and persuasion to achieve that goal, but I am sorry to say that Senator Kennedy's approach would cut off the Special Drawing Rights for friendly nations as well as those who are not friendly. And that to me is shortsighted. The way the IMF Special Drawing Rights process works, we cannot dictate which countries will receive the benefits. Because of our majority position at the IMF, we either stop the Special Drawing Rights completely or let them go forward. So the United States should stand for public health, stand for people to be spared the suffering and death of this coronavirus, and move forward with humanitarian aid that will help the world. The Treasury Department is working with our allies to halt the ability of any rogue nation that might want to exchange Special Drawing Rights for hard currency and pushing transparency measures for how any Special Drawing Rights are spent. As such, I am offering a substitute amendment that makes it clear that we want to make certain that nations do not misuse these funds. But unlike the Kennedy amendment, it would move forward and provide resources for countries desperately in need of vaccines to save lives. I further support the Treasury's efforts to make sure that the SDR allocation is used to help to stem the pandemic. I urge my colleagues to vote for my substitute amendment and to oppose the amendment being offered by the Senator from Louisiana.

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, do I have 1 minute?

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, there is one fundamental flaw in what you have just heard from Senator Kennedy, and let me read it to you: The United States retains the right to refuse to purchase special drawing rights from any [country]. It is voluntary--it is up to us to do it--and we don't purchase them from a lot of countries because of that. Let me tell you further that all we can do is stop the special drawing rights which are providing our currency to countries to buy vaccines. Why do we care whether some country far away had a vaccine? Well, how far away was Wuhan, China? We have to be in this together to try to put an end to this pandemic crisis. Vote to defeat the Kennedy amendment. Vote on Amendment No. 1710

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin) is necessarily absent.