Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, today, the Senate will vote to confirm Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. Born in Sumter, SC, Judge Austin earned her B.S. from the University of South Carolina School of Engineering and her J.D. from the University of South Carolina School of Law. After law school, Judge Austin completed a clerkship for Judge Matthew J. Perry on the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. She then entered private practice as a patent attorney for the Hardaway Law Firm, where she was responsible for drafting and prosecuting patent applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Judge Austin also worked in business litigation at Womble Carlyle Sandridge and Rice, PLLC, where she handled matters ranging from intellectual property litigation to Fair Housing Act claims. In 2011, Judge Austin was appointed to an 8-year term as a federal magistrate judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. She was reappointed to the position in 2019. Throughout her time on the bench, Judge Austin has issued thousands of reports and recommendations. She also presides over the district's drug court program, which identifies criminal defendants whose presence in the criminal justice system is primarily a function of drug abuse rather than independently motivated criminal behavior. The American Bar Association unanimously rated Judge Austin as ``well qualified,'' and she has the strong support of Senators Graham and Scott. Judge Austin's dedication to service, knowledge of the District of South Carolina, and judicial experience make her an outstanding nominee. I will vote in favor of her confirmation and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the cloture motion with respect to the Lund nomination be withdrawn, and notwithstanding rule XXII, the Senate vote on confirmation of the nomination at 11:30 a.m. on Thursday, January 25, the year 2024.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, today, the Senate will vote to confirm Judge Cristal C. Brisco to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. Born in Granger, IN, Judge Brisco earned her B.A., cum laude, from Valparaiso University in 2002 and her J.D. from the University of Notre Dame Law School in 2006. After graduating from law school, Judge Brisco worked as an associate in the litigation and labor and employment department at Barnes & Thornburg, LLP from 2006 to 2013. Following her work in private practice, she was appointed to serve as the corporation counsel for the city of South Bend, IN, by then-Mayor Pete Buttigieg. From 2017 to 2018, Judge Brisco served as the general counsel of the Corporation of Saint Mary's College. After that, Judge Brisco served as a magistrate judge on the St. Joseph Circuit Court-- Mishawaka Division, from 2018 to 2021. In July 2021, Judge Brisco was appointed by Indiana Governor Eric Holcomb to serve as a judge on the St. Joseph Superior Court. Then, in February 2022, Judge Brisco was appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court to concurrent service on the Indiana Commercial Court. During her time on the bench, she has issued approximately 1,818 written decisions. The American Bar Association unanimously rated Judge Brisco as ``well qualified'' to serve as a district judge on the Northern District of Indiana. She has the support of her home State Senators, Mr. Young and Mr. Braun. With deep ties to the Hoosier State, Judge Brisco's experience as a superior court judge and former civil litigator have prepared her to serve honorably on the Federal bench in Indiana. I am proud to support her nomination, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to honor the sixth annual National Gun Violence Survivors Week. This week, we recognize the unbelievable toll of gun violence in America, and we offer our support to the survivors who are left behind. No State or city is safe from the epidemic of gun violence. Just yesterday, in Joliet, IL, less than an hour outside of Chicago, seven lives were taken within minutes by a shooter with a gun. Joliet Police Chief Bill Evans said: I've been a police officer for 29 years, and this is the worst crime scene I've ever been associated with. In Highland Park, IL, a shooter with an assault rifle fired 83 rounds in less than 60 seconds at a Fourth of July parade in 2022, killing seven innocent people and wounding dozens before law enforcement could finally even identify where he was. So much for the theory of a good person with a gun stopping a bad person with a gun. When it comes to assault rifles, that is not even in the realm of possibility. Katie Gillman is one of many of my constituents who was there in Highland Park. She was with her husband and two daughters to see the Fourth of July parade when the shooter opened fire on the crowd. She and her children ran for their lives. Katie still lives in fear that what happened that day could happen again and that she may not be able to protect her kids this time. She recently wrote to me and said: For close to a year, I have had a deep-seated fear that my children won't make it through the school day due to gun violence. And each week in the news, there is proof of these fears. The unfortunate reality is that Americans are forced to worry about whether their kids will be safe from gun violence at school, at the movies, at concerts, and at church--virtually everywhere. Since 2020, the United States has suffered more than 600 mass shootings each year--almost 2 a day. There is no place in America that has been spared. And guns are now the No. 1 cause of death for American kids and teenagers. Think of that. In the entire world, it is in America that the No. 1 cause of death of kids and teenagers is guns. It is not auto accidents, not cancer--guns. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an editorial opinion, published this morning in the Sun-Times, entitled ``Illinois' ban on assault weapons is working,'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it reflects the fact that Illinois decided to change its law a little over a year ago. We decided to finally come to grips with the assault weapons scourge that hit Highland Park and continues to threaten America. This is an article that was written by the CEO of Gun Violence Prevention PAC, Kathleen Sances. In it, she makes note of the fact that the new law in Illinois is being measured as to whether it has been successful on its 1-year anniversary. The analysis and data from the Gun Violence Archive shows 10 percent fewer mass shootings in Illinois between 2022 and 2023. She writes: Gun dealers haven't sold assault weapons in Illinois in the past 12 months, and there isn't any evidence of violations by dealers. Gun dealers are complying with the ban, and that's evidenced by their complaints about the loss of sales, collectively costing dealers millions of dollars, and saving an untold number of lives. In fact, when assault weapons or high-capacity magazines are used in shootings, 155 percent more people are shot, and 47 percent more people are killed. That simple, commonsense effort to put an end to gun violence is working in Illinois, thank goodness, but we must do more. We cannot lose hope. Instead, we should focus on what we can do to address the gun violence crisis. In cities like Chicago, dealing with the drumbeat of gun violence has turned public health professionals into battlefield experts. I heard from doctors in Chicago who were sick of treating gunshot victims on the operating table, 50 percent of whom, if they survive, would leave the hospital and return as gunshot victims again. They wanted to prevent this gruesome injury scenario from happening in the first place and then repeating. So, in 2018, I brought together the CEOs of the 10 largest hospitals serving in Chicago to talk about how we could help. We formed a group known as the Chicago HEAL Initiative, which has emerged as a national example of how hospitals can collaborate and reach outside their walls to prevent gun violence. Most importantly, they aren't just stitching up physical injuries; they are addressing the emotional scars of their patients. We must do more for survivors. That means providing resources like the HEAL Initiative to help those who have experienced trauma and preventing weapons of war from causing bloodshed in the first place. It is time for us to build on the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and come together to create real change. Congress must pass commonsense legislation to help keep America's children and communities safe.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I would like to turn briefly to another urgent topic. We must restore order at our southern border and enforce our immigration laws in a fair and humane way. That is why the Senate has been engaged in bipartisan talks on a path forward for weeks. The Republican Governor of Texas takes a much different view. He has implemented cruel--even deadly--and ineffective immigration policies that sow chaos, risk lives, and prevent Federal border officials from doing their jobs. Last week, a woman and two children tragically died in the Rio Grande River while Mexican authorities rescued other migrants in distress. The U.S. Border Patrol could not reach these migrants in need because the Texas National Guard actively blocked access to the Rio Grande River. This is just the latest tragedy resulting from Governor Abbott's policies. As part of its so-called Operation Lone Star, Texas has strung razor wire along the border which has seriously injured migrants, and it has dropped migrant children off at truck stops in Illinois in subzero temperatures. We warned him. The Governor of Illinois warned Governor Abbott of Texas that if you haphazardly drop these migrants off in Chicago at this time of year, terrible things can occur. A few weeks ago, a little boy died. God knows who others were in danger because of the Governor of Texas and his strategy. Texas passed a new law that makes it a State crime to cross the border without inspection and recently began arresting immigrants who crossed the border, placing them into State custody. Governor Abbott defends these policies, even though there is zero evidence they deter migrants from crossing the border. We must discourage migrants from risking their lives by approaching the United States between ports of entry, but we cannot stand by while Governor Abbott increases the likelihood of injury or death. Despite their desperation to reach safety, most migrants wish to enter the United States lawfully. Many wait months at our border for appointments to make asylum claims. In defending his policies, the Governor of Texas recently bragged: [T]he only thing that we're not doing is we're not shooting people who come across the border, because of course the Biden Administration would charge us with murder. This is a direct quote from Governor Abbott. His actions are not only dangerous and cruel, they are unconstitutional. Under our Constitution, States do not have the right to pass their own laws preempting Federal laws on immigration. Just yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Federal Government, allowing Border Patrol agents to cut through or remove razor wire that the Governor of Texas installed on the border. As former Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his opinion in Arizona v. United States, which found parts of Arizona's anti-immigration law unconstitutional: [T]he history of the United States is in part made of the stories, talents, and lasting contributions of those who crossed oceans and deserts to come here. With that sentiment in mind, Congress must do its job and pass immigration laws that honor our history as a nation of immigrants and provide the critical resources necessary to address the challenges at our border. I guess I pretty well know, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in favor of immigration--legal immigration--to this country, I believe immigration is a critical element of who we are and what we will become. It is part of our past, and it should be part of our future. My mother was an immigrant to this country, and I have never forgotten it. I am lucky to be standing here today as a U.S. Senator, because her parents had the courage to come to a country where they didn't speak the language in the hopes of a better life for her and her children. One of her children is now standing in the U.S. Senate. I believe that is part of America's history, but there are certain elements which we must acknowledge. No. 1, the United States cannot absorb all of the people who want to come to this country at this moment. We have to have an orderly process that makes sense not only for the migrants but that also makes sense for America, first and foremost. We have to be cognizant and sensitive to our Nation's safety and security. That is No. 1. We should never knowingly allow anyone to come to this country who would cause us harm. Secondly, we have to make sure that those who come will add to America, and I believe most will. If given a chance, they will become part of our economy, even starting at the lowest levels and working their way up. It is the story of immigration in America. In addition to that, we need to work with other countries to regulate the flow of refugees. The refugee crisis in the world today is the worst it has ever been, and we are seeing it evidenced in the fact that those who present themselves at our southern border are often from places like China and Asia and Africa, and they find their way to the Mexican border with the United States in the hopes of a future. We need an orderly process. We also need to make sure that we have the legal authorization of people to come to this country to work. I can't tell you how many people in Illinois have come to me and said: We are desperate for workers. Americans won't fill these jobs, and we need people who will. All the way up from farming to industry, that is the story, and that is the reality. What we need to do is come to an agreement that is sensible here, a bipartisan agreement, and do it quickly. The numbers approaching our border are so overwhelming, we have no choice but to do that. I want to work on a bipartisan basis with those in good faith and good will who will recognize that immigration is not only our history but our future, but it must be in an orderly fashion. That is what I am looking for, and I think America is as well. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fetterman), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kelly), the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Welch) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, 51 years ago today, our Nation's highest Court issued a ruling that protected a woman's right to make the most fundamental choice in her life. Roe v. Wade enshrined into law that in America, women would have legal autonomy over their own bodies. As a result of the constitutional protections in Roe, America's women took a giant step forward toward gender equity: being afforded the right to choose whether, when, and how to start a family. But after nearly 50 years of progress, in June 2022, this Supreme Court overruled Roe in its Dobbs v. Women's Health Organization ruling, taking women's rights back half a century. The Dobbs decision was a win for extreme conservative activists who waged a relentless campaign to capture the Supreme Court and overturn Roe v. Wade, but it was a tragic loss for women in America. Take the case of Kate Cox, a married woman, mother of two, from Texas. Kate was elated to learn that she was pregnant with her third child. However, tests revealed that her baby had trisomy 18, a genetic condition that is almost always fatal very soon after birth. The prognosis was grim. Moreover, carrying the child could damage Kate's future fertility for another child. Kate and her husband made one of the hardest decisions. They made the decision to go forward with an abortion. But in Texas where they live, it is illegal in nearly all circumstances. The Cox family hoped that the exception in Texas law for the life and health of the mother would allow her to terminate this ill-fated pregnancy. Shockingly, it did not. Although a State court judge initially ruled that Kate could obtain an emergency abortion, Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton immediately took legal steps to block Kate from receiving the care that she needed. In addition to appealing the trial court's decision to the Texas Supreme Court, Attorney General Paxton sent a letter to hospitals and doctors, warning them that anyone involved in performing an abortion for Kate would face civil and criminal liability. The Texas Supreme Court, controlled by Republicans, joined in the rule against Kate. She was forced to leave her home State and go across State lines to terminate the pregnancy. Let's take the case of Brittany Watts, a 34-year-old from Ohio. Brittany was arrested after miscarrying in her bathroom. Thankfully, just 2 weeks ago, a grand jury with empathy, common sense, and reason declined to indict her, understanding that miscarriages are devastating and extremely common, a pregnancy outcome that women should not be punished for. But in a post-Roe America, these are the horrific situations that women and the doctors who provide them care often face. Republican politicians in States like Texas and Ohio have made it clear they do not trust the judgment of women and their families in these matters. But even amidst this devastation unleashed by Dobbs, Democrats continue to fight for women. In our home State of Illinois, we have become an oasis for women in an area that otherwise would be left without abortion options. New data shows the number of women traveling to our State of Illinois for abortions rose nearly 50 percent in 2022, and we experienced the largest increase of any State in the number of patients traveling out of State for abortions last year. Remember, in each and every case, there is the cost and burden of travel as a part of this calculation. Our commitment to reproductive health has real-world impacts. In June of 2022, Margaret from Cook County, IL, lost her son. She was devastated. But one thing that made the experience less painful was living in a State that respected her right to make healthcare decisions privately with her doctor. Only a week after Margaret lost her son, Roe was overruled, throwing women's bodily autonomy and reproductive freedom in States across the country into real uncertainty but, fortunately, not in Illinois. Margaret wrote to my office and said: I cannot stress how awful it was to lose a child I loved so much, but how glad I was to be in Illinois when this devastating thing happened. We are proud to be a State that fights for women. But there are consequences to blue States meeting increased demand for abortion care. More than 28 million women of reproductive age live in States where abortion is banned, unavailable, or restricted--28 million American women living in those States. When thousands of women are forced to go out of State to get an abortion, it increases wait times for people in blue States, and it puts enormous stress on providers and clinics. Moreover, not every woman is able to afford the trip, find childcare, and take time off to travel to another State. This creates inequities for those who are trying to access safe and legal abortion. One thing is clear: Dobbs does not stop abortion. In fact, the numbers show us quite the opposite has happened. The data shows that in the year following the Dobbs decision, abortions actually increased nationwide. Moreover, public opinion polls show that the majority of Americans still support abortion rights. And from the States of Kansas to Kentucky, in every State where it has been put on the ballot, abortion and the rights of women to make these choices remains a winning issue. Republicans may continue to attack women's rights and freedoms, but these unpopular, dangerous policies will catch up with them. Let's not be naive. From trying to outlaw medication abortion--even in States where abortion is legal--to challenging a Federal law that requires access to reproductive care in emergencies is a reality. Antiabortion activists continue trying to chip away at women's reproductive rights and healthcare, and they are not going to stop. That is why we must pass the Women's Health Protection Act, enshrining the woman's right to choose into Federal law. It is the right thing to do. I urge my colleagues to swiftly stand up for women in this country. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, last week, we received remarkable news about a milestone in America's healthcare: A record 20 million Americans are now covered by health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. This is a sign of progress as we improve the quality of life and healthcare protections under President Biden. Having quality, affordable healthcare coverage means having peace of mind if you get a diagnosis, an accident, or if you need access to care and are facing medical debt. I know this story. I have been there. I was a law student at Georgetown when my wife and I were blessed with the birth of our first child, a baby girl born with a serious medical condition. As a young father without insurance, I can tell you, there is no greater feeling of helplessness. That is why Democrats have been committed to expanding health insurance to millions more Americans and ensuring it contains protections for patients with preexisting conditions. But even with these successes, there are serious gaps in America's healthcare system, gaps which are unimaginable until you learn specifically what I mean. I want to focus on one of them: access to dental care. I spent the August recess last year visiting small towns in Southern Illinois. I met with the new mayor of Carbondale, IL, Carolin Harvey. I asked her: OK. You have a U.S. Senator in your office, Mayor. What is your ask? What do you want? Her answer: pediatric dentistry, of all things. I couldn't imagine that. I thought it would be a sewer line or a street or something for law enforcement--pediatric dentistry. She said: Senator, we just don't have enough dentists for kids in Southern Illinois. In fact, there are 10 rural counties in the State that have only 1 dentist to serve their community. In Lawrence County, there is 1 dentist for 15,000 people. That ratio--a local ratio--is 11 times worse than the national average. What is the result of a shortage of dentists, particularly for kids? Patients' conditions worsen as they face delays to getting an examination. My office was recently contacted about a child in Southern Illinois who was found to have tooth decay in her 18-month checkup. The patient is covered by Medicaid, and her parents had a hard time finding a dentist who would even see her. Imagine this for a minute as I tell you this story, that you are a father or mother of a child who is 18 months old and has tooth decay and pain. After nearly a year, the patient was finally treated for severe tooth decay, erosion of the upper incisor teeth, and a large tooth abscess, but her condition did not improve after multiple rounds of antibiotics so her dentist called around to find a specialist to see her. They were told by the specialist that ``unfortunately, we have over 200 patients on our [waiting] list, so we really cannot help [her].'' This child is going to have to develop a much worse condition known as facial cellulitis, then she can be sent to an emergency room and then ``we can see her.'' Listen to what I just said. You have a child who is a year and a half old, who has already been treated by a dentist, who has complications, who is trying to find her way back to the dentist and is being told: Sorry. There is a waiting list here of 200 people. Get to the end of the line, and wait. Perhaps, though, there is a way out. If this child's condition worsens or is complicated, then maybe we can qualify under a new code under Medicaid to finally see her and treat her. In other words, this toddler had to develop deep-tissue infection--putting her at risk of sepsis, jaw damage, and other life-threatening illnesses--to get her decayed teeth pulled. Imagine that as a parent, would you. Think about that for a minute. Her dentist called a specialist in a neighboring State. Thankfully, they were able to perform emergency surgery to remove the decayed teeth but not before risking life-threatening illnesses. That is the reality for people in the United States of America and in the State of Illinois today. That is unacceptable. In fact, it is embarrassing. So what are we going to do about it in Washington, with all our money and all our power? Thankfully, there is a Federal program that can help. It is called the National Health Service Corps. It provides a scholarship and loan repayment to dental, medical, and mental health providers who work in rural and urban areas in need. It is the primary Federal program intended to build a pipeline of healthcare providers and address shortages such as the one I just described to you. Nationwide, there are 20,000 professionals serving in the National Health Service Corps, treating 21 million patients. But $310 million in mandatory funding for this program will expire at the end of this month. We cannot allow this to happen. Senator Marco Rubio--a Republican from Florida--and I have a bipartisan measure to extend this program and nearly triple its funding. It is supported by more than 65 leading medical organizations. They know the reality on the ground for poor people in America, particularly in rural areas and urban areas in need. The Senate HELP Committee passed a major bipartisan package last fall that included significant new funding for this program. I urge my Republican colleagues to join and support it. But there is a lot more we need to do. For example, in Illinois, only one-quarter of practicing dentists accepts Medicaid. Think about that. Only one-quarter of practicing dentists accepts Medicaid. Since so few dentists take Medicaid patients, it means that kids in Illinois, with private insurance, are six times more likely to get a dental appointment than those who have Medicaid. In other words, if you are poor, that child complaining of a toothache is just going to have to take it. That, unfortunately, in my State and in many States, is reality. Low reimbursement rates and arbitrary practices by companies that administer dental benefits under Medicaid contribute to this. So I recently sent a letter to the three major insurance providers-- DentaQuest, Avesis, and Envolve--to understand their tactics and their corporate strategies and ensure they are not putting unnecessary barriers up for basic dental treatment. I am also working with stakeholders to bring in Federal dollars to expand dental residency training programs, fund mobile clinics that drive into rural areas, and expand surgical capacity. I might just say this as an aside. I am often asked the question: Why in the world do we treat dentistry as anything other than a medical specialty? It certainly is. If you have got a sore tooth or a decayed tooth or a problem in your mouth, you want help, and you want it now; and you want a professional to provide it. They go through years and years of training. Yet, instead of being treated like a medical specialty like orthopedics or cardio, they are in a different category altogether. It makes no sense. Today, I am announcing a new bill that I am introducing with Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas. Our bipartisan legislation will authorize funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to enhance public health activities to improve dental care across America. It will support education, data collection, sealant treatments in schools, water fluoridation efforts, the development of the dental workforce, and community outreach efforts, such as the distribution of toothbrushes--the basics--to new parents and children. Illinois has not received funding for this important work in nearly 20 years due to a lack of funding. I want to change that. If we improve the health of Americans, especially kids, then we must invest in preventing cavities, tooth decay, and infections. We must also ensure that patients have access to treatment, regardless of their ZIP Codes. I appreciate the partnership of my colleague Senator Marshall, and I will be working to pass this bipartisan legislation quickly. I want to say, just in closing, to the mayor, Carolin Harvey of Carbondale, IL, that you shocked me when you suggested pediatric dentistry was your ask. It told me a lot about you, your heart, and your caring for kids. Now that we know the reality of kids waiting for months and months and even years for basic dental treatment, let's do something about it, not just in Illinois but across this country. This is fundamental and basic, good health, and we need to make sure it is included in all healthcare coverage. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, last week, we received remarkable news about a milestone in America's healthcare: A record 20 million Americans are now covered by health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. This is a sign of progress as we improve the quality of life and healthcare protections under President Biden. Having quality, affordable healthcare coverage means having peace of mind if you get a diagnosis, an accident, or if you need access to care and are facing medical debt. I know this story. I have been there. I was a law student at Georgetown when my wife and I were blessed with the birth of our first child, a baby girl born with a serious medical condition. As a young father without insurance, I can tell you, there is no greater feeling of helplessness. That is why Democrats have been committed to expanding health insurance to millions more Americans and ensuring it contains protections for patients with preexisting conditions. But even with these successes, there are serious gaps in America's healthcare system, gaps which are unimaginable until you learn specifically what I mean. I want to focus on one of them: access to dental care. I spent the August recess last year visiting small towns in Southern Illinois. I met with the new mayor of Carbondale, IL, Carolin Harvey. I asked her: OK. You have a U.S. Senator in your office, Mayor. What is your ask? What do you want? Her answer: pediatric dentistry, of all things. I couldn't imagine that. I thought it would be a sewer line or a street or something for law enforcement--pediatric dentistry. She said: Senator, we just don't have enough dentists for kids in Southern Illinois. In fact, there are 10 rural counties in the State that have only 1 dentist to serve their community. In Lawrence County, there is 1 dentist for 15,000 people. That ratio--a local ratio--is 11 times worse than the national average. What is the result of a shortage of dentists, particularly for kids? Patients' conditions worsen as they face delays to getting an examination. My office was recently contacted about a child in Southern Illinois who was found to have tooth decay in her 18-month checkup. The patient is covered by Medicaid, and her parents had a hard time finding a dentist who would even see her. Imagine this for a minute as I tell you this story, that you are a father or mother of a child who is 18 months old and has tooth decay and pain. After nearly a year, the patient was finally treated for severe tooth decay, erosion of the upper incisor teeth, and a large tooth abscess, but her condition did not improve after multiple rounds of antibiotics so her dentist called around to find a specialist to see her. They were told by the specialist that ``unfortunately, we have over 200 patients on our [waiting] list, so we really cannot help [her].'' This child is going to have to develop a much worse condition known as facial cellulitis, then she can be sent to an emergency room and then ``we can see her.'' Listen to what I just said. You have a child who is a year and a half old, who has already been treated by a dentist, who has complications, who is trying to find her way back to the dentist and is being told: Sorry. There is a waiting list here of 200 people. Get to the end of the line, and wait. Perhaps, though, there is a way out. If this child's condition worsens or is complicated, then maybe we can qualify under a new code under Medicaid to finally see her and treat her. In other words, this toddler had to develop deep-tissue infection--putting her at risk of sepsis, jaw damage, and other life-threatening illnesses--to get her decayed teeth pulled. Imagine that as a parent, would you. Think about that for a minute. Her dentist called a specialist in a neighboring State. Thankfully, they were able to perform emergency surgery to remove the decayed teeth but not before risking life-threatening illnesses. That is the reality for people in the United States of America and in the State of Illinois today. That is unacceptable. In fact, it is embarrassing. So what are we going to do about it in Washington, with all our money and all our power? Thankfully, there is a Federal program that can help. It is called the National Health Service Corps. It provides a scholarship and loan repayment to dental, medical, and mental health providers who work in rural and urban areas in need. It is the primary Federal program intended to build a pipeline of healthcare providers and address shortages such as the one I just described to you. Nationwide, there are 20,000 professionals serving in the National Health Service Corps, treating 21 million patients. But $310 million in mandatory funding for this program will expire at the end of this month. We cannot allow this to happen. Senator Marco Rubio--a Republican from Florida--and I have a bipartisan measure to extend this program and nearly triple its funding. It is supported by more than 65 leading medical organizations. They know the reality on the ground for poor people in America, particularly in rural areas and urban areas in need. The Senate HELP Committee passed a major bipartisan package last fall that included significant new funding for this program. I urge my Republican colleagues to join and support it. But there is a lot more we need to do. For example, in Illinois, only one-quarter of practicing dentists accepts Medicaid. Think about that. Only one-quarter of practicing dentists accepts Medicaid. Since so few dentists take Medicaid patients, it means that kids in Illinois, with private insurance, are six times more likely to get a dental appointment than those who have Medicaid. In other words, if you are poor, that child complaining of a toothache is just going to have to take it. That, unfortunately, in my State and in many States, is reality. Low reimbursement rates and arbitrary practices by companies that administer dental benefits under Medicaid contribute to this. So I recently sent a letter to the three major insurance providers-- DentaQuest, Avesis, and Envolve--to understand their tactics and their corporate strategies and ensure they are not putting unnecessary barriers up for basic dental treatment. I am also working with stakeholders to bring in Federal dollars to expand dental residency training programs, fund mobile clinics that drive into rural areas, and expand surgical capacity. I might just say this as an aside. I am often asked the question: Why in the world do we treat dentistry as anything other than a medical specialty? It certainly is. If you have got a sore tooth or a decayed tooth or a problem in your mouth, you want help, and you want it now; and you want a professional to provide it. They go through years and years of training. Yet, instead of being treated like a medical specialty like orthopedics or cardio, they are in a different category altogether. It makes no sense. Today, I am announcing a new bill that I am introducing with Senator Roger Marshall of Kansas. Our bipartisan legislation will authorize funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to enhance public health activities to improve dental care across America. It will support education, data collection, sealant treatments in schools, water fluoridation efforts, the development of the dental workforce, and community outreach efforts, such as the distribution of toothbrushes--the basics--to new parents and children. Illinois has not received funding for this important work in nearly 20 years due to a lack of funding. I want to change that. If we improve the health of Americans, especially kids, then we must invest in preventing cavities, tooth decay, and infections. We must also ensure that patients have access to treatment, regardless of their ZIP Codes. I appreciate the partnership of my colleague Senator Marshall, and I will be working to pass this bipartisan legislation quickly. I want to say, just in closing, to the mayor, Carolin Harvey of Carbondale, IL, that you shocked me when you suggested pediatric dentistry was your ask. It told me a lot about you, your heart, and your caring for kids. Now that we know the reality of kids waiting for months and months and even years for basic dental treatment, let's do something about it, not just in Illinois but across this country. This is fundamental and basic, good health, and we need to make sure it is included in all healthcare coverage. Madam 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 at a time to be determined today, Senator Sanders be recognized to make a motion to discharge S. Res. 504; and that if the motion is made and upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate vote in relation to the motion to discharge; further, that the cloture motion with respect to the motion to proceed to H.R. 2872 ripen upon disposition of the motion to discharge.

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

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, when is enough enough? At the start of 2024, we find ourselves in another Presidential election cycle, and as we move closer to election day in November, we can expect political tensions to rise. But, as the new year begins, a rise in political violence threatens to overshadow the traditional Presidential process. Across the country, at every level of government, we are experiencing a surge in violent threats against public officials and government workers. Some officials have been victims of swatting incidents, in which false 9-1-1 calls lead to law enforcement swarming the homes of targeted individuals. In other cases, officials have received death threats or bomb threats where they live or work, and in some tragic instances, violent threats have escalated into violent acts. It should go without saying, but it is worth repeating: Political violence in furtherance of any cause--any cause--is unacceptable. But it is undeniable that the recent spike in violent threats and acts has one major source: the grievances of former President Trump. Just over 3 years after President Trump called his supporters to Washington, DC, and directed them to this Senate Chamber and Capitol Building, where they staged a violent insurrection, his calls for retribution against his perceived enemies continue on an almost daily basis. Recent victims have included the secretary of state in the State of Maine, the former speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, and the employees of the Georgia secretary of state's office--all of whom were targets of swatting and violent threats. These individuals were targeted for their roles in upholding the lawful result of the 2020 Presidential election or for their involvement in the upcoming election. Many election workers at lower levels have also been threatened, especially women and people of color. Just this morning, POLITICO published an article about the fears and concerns of local election workers and the conspiracy theories and threats they face. These threats deter Americans from engaging in civic life or even seeking public office. The recent rise in political violence has not just affected those who run for office or help to run our elections; judges, jurors, and officers of the court have also faced threats. Just last week, Justice Arthur Engoron--the New York State judge presiding over the former President's civil fraud trial--had his home swarmed by police after someone called in a fake bomb threat. This occurred hours after Trump took to his now favorite social media platform, Truth Social, and called Judge Engoron ``a Trump-hating judge.'' This came on the heels of similar swatting, targeting the homes of Jack Smith and Judge Tanya Chutkan--the special prosecutor pursuing criminal charges against the former President for election interference and the judge overseeing the case. The former President has repeatedly attacked both of these public servants by name. Last August, Judge Chutkan received a voice mail saying: If Trump doesn't get elected in 2024, we're coming to kill you, so tread lightly. On Christmas Eve, Trump called Special Counsel Smith ``deranged'' and claimed he was one of President Biden's ``misfits and thugs.'' The very next day, the special counsel's home was targeted with a swatting call. The justices of the State Supreme Courts of Colorado and Wisconsin, along with staff, jurors, and prosecutors, have also faced threats due to their involvement in the former President's legal case. All of these individuals have been targeted simply because they continue to fulfill their duties to uphold the law. All the while, former President Trump has refused to condemn the actions of his supporters, and at times, he clearly encourages it. Yet we rarely hear any of our Republican colleagues criticize their de facto leader for his public threats of violence or his encouragement of his most extreme supporters. Threats of violence and violence are antithetical to our democracy, whatever their political source. In a free country, there are countless ways for people to legitimately and peacefully react and respond to political events and outcomes with which they disagree. People can vote as they choose. They can encourage their fellow citizens to do likewise. They can organize and advocate whether by knocking on doors, speaking at rallies, or posting on social media. They can peaceably assemble and protest public officials and the policies they pursue. In the United States, these kinds of political activities are not merely tolerated; they are encouraged, and they are protected by the Constitution and the force of law. But we cannot as a nation tolerate, let alone encourage, threats of political violence by anyone, including the former President of the United States. The recent rise in political violence marks a renewed attempt to use violence and the threat of violence to intimidate public officials, election workers, and our fellow American voters. Sadly, the specter of political violence is not new. In 1968--another Presidential election year, one marred by heinous acts of violence-- Robert Kennedy gave remarks the day after Martin Luther King was assassinated. He spoke about the mindless menace of violence in America, and he quoted Abraham Lincoln, who more than a century before wrote: Among free men, there can be no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet; and [those] who take such appeal are sure to lose their case, and pay the cost. Today, I am calling on my colleagues in both political parties to publicly condemn the state of violence which is dominating in this country. We have come to accept it as commonplace. Shame on us in that regard. If this true democracy is to succeed, we all have to speak out against violence on both sides of the equation. We must stand together in opposing violence and threats of violence. Our democracy is strong, but it is only as strong as the people who participate in it, who protect it, and who serve it. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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