Dianne Feinstein

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Clean Commute for Kids Act,'' which I introduced today. I know firsthand how outdated diesel school buses expose our children to harmful and unnecessary pollution. I grew up in the San Fernando Valley and for many years, I rode a bus to school. I can still smell the diesel exhaust that my classmates and I would breathe in on our way to and from school. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly 25 million American children were exposed to this same diesel exhaust when they ride over 500,000 predominantly diesel buses to school nationwide. This pollution not only harms our children's health, but it also impacts student achievement. Studies show that transitioning to cleaner bus fleets can spur both health and academic improvements. As we work to build back better and combat climate change, we must help school districts accelerate the deployment of zero-emission buses to reduce the exposure of our children to pollutants and cut greenhouse gas emissions. That is why I am proud to introduce this bill together with Senator Warnock to authorize $25 billion for a new grant program to help school districts replace existing buses with clean, zero-emission buses. This funding represents an essential aspect of building more equitable, sustainable transportation infrastructure, and it represents an investment in our children, our environment, and our future. This legislation recognizes the disproportionate impact this pollution has on underserved populations by setting aside 40 percent of the grant funding for replacing school buses serving environmental justice communities. Some of California's school districts have already begun the transition to zero-emission buses. The California Air Resources Board has leveraged federal funding to assist school districts and local air boards with the costs of school bus replacements. This bill will accelerate this transition and provide funding to reach more schools in California and across the nation. I want to thank Senator Warnock for co-leading this bill with me, and I hope our colleagues will join us in support of this bill that would transform our nation's school bus fleet, protect air quality, and improve the health and wellbeing of our children. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Canal Conveyance Capacity Restoration Act,'' which I introduced today. Representatives Jim Costa (D-CA) has introduced companion legislation in the House. The bill has two major provisions, benefiting both drought resilience and the environment: First, it would authorize more than $653 million to restore the capacity of three canals of national importance. Restoring these canals would improve California's drought resilience and help the nation's leading agricultural economy comply with limits on groundwater pumping under the state's Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Second, the bill authorizes an additional $180 million to restore salmon runs on the San Joaquin River. The funding is for fish passage structures, levees and other improvements that will allow the threatened Central Valley Spring-run Chinook salmon to swim freely upstream from the ocean to the Friant Dam. The bill authorizes a \1/3\ Federal cost-share for restoring the capacity of the Friant-Kern Canal, the Delta-Mendota Canal, and the California Aqueduct. Coordinated legislation in the State legislature introduced by State Senator Melissa Hurtado would authorize a \1/3\ state cost-share for restoring the canals' capacity. Under the coordinated Federal and State legislation, the locals would also be responsible for a \1/3\ cost- share for the canal restoration projects. This legislation would help California water users and California's nation-leading agricultural industry comply with a recent State requirement to end the overpumping of groundwater. The stakes are huge: bringing groundwater into balance will reduce the water supply of the San Joaquin Valley by about 2 million acre-feet per year. Unless local water agencies and the State and Federal governments take action, a recent U.C. Berkeley study has projected severe impacts from these water supply losses: 798,000 acres of land would have to be retired from agricultural production, nearly \1/6\ of the working farmland in an area that produces half the fruit and vegetables grown in the nation; and $5.9 billion would be lost in annual farm income in a region that is almost entirely reliant on agriculture and has been called ``the Appalachia of the West'' due to its severe economic disadvantage. One of the most cost-effective and efficient ways to restore groundwater balance is to convey floodwaters to farmlands where they can recharge the aquifer. California has the most variable precipitation of any State. When we get massive storms from atmospheric rivers, there is plenty of runoff to recharge aquifers--but only if we can effectively convey the floodwaters throughout the San Joaquin Valley to recharge areas. Here is where the challenge arises. For a variety of reasons, the ground beneath the major canals has dropped by as much as 10 to 20 feet, which has caused canals designed to convey floodwaters to buckle and drop in many places. Other parts of the canals have not subsided, so the amount of water that the canal conveys must be reduced so that the canals don't overrun. As a result, these essential canals for conveying floodwaters have lost as much as 60% of their conveyance capacity. The bill I am introducing today would provide Federal assistance to help fix these Federal canals. Specifically, the bill would authorize $653.4 million in a Federal funding-cost share for three major projects to repair Federal canals damaged by subsidence to achieve their lost capacity: $180 million for the Friant-Kern Canal, which would move an additional 100,000 acre-feet per year on average; $183.9 million for the Delta Mendota Canal, which would move an additional 62,000 acre-feet per year on average; and $289.5 million for California Aqueduct repairs, which would move an additional 205,000 acre-feet per year on average. While parts of the California Aqueduct are state-owned, the majority of the repairs are on its federally-owned portion. If the Federal government covers a portion of the cost of restoring these three essential Federal canals for conveying floodwaters, it will give local farmers a fighting chance to bring their groundwater basins into balance without being forced to retire massive amounts of land. Critically, the ability to deliver floodwaters through restored Federal canals will allow the water districts to invest in their own turnouts, pumps, detention basins and other groundwater recharge projects. The South Valley Water Association, which covers just a small part of the Valley, provided my office with a list of 36 such projects for its area alone. The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) has determined that groundwater recharge projects are the best option to help the San Joaquin Valley comply with the new state groundwater pumping law. PPIC projects that the Valley can make up 300,000 to 500,000 acre feet of its groundwater deficit through recharge projects. A study commissioned by the coalition group called the ``Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley'' estimates that required reductions in groundwater could cause a loss of up to 42,000 farm and agricultural jobs in the San Joaquin Valley. Another 40,000 jobs or more could be lost statewide each year due to reductions in Valley agricultural production, putting the total at approximately 85,000 jobs statewide. Most of these impacts will fall disproportionately on economically disadvantaged communities. These impacts will be significant unless we address them through collaborative planning, policies, infrastructure, recharge and necessary financial support. Let me now turn to the three critical canals that the bill would authorize assistance to restore. The Friant-Kern Canal is a key feature of the Friant Division of the Federal Central Valley Project on the Eastside of the San Joaquin Valley. For nearly 70 years, the Friant Division successfully kept groundwater tables stable on the Eastside. This provided a sustainable source of water for farms and for thousands of Californians and more than 50 small, rural, or disadvantaged communities who rely entirely on groundwater for their household water supplies. But unsustainable groundwater pumping in the Valley has reduced the Friant-Kern Canal's ability to deliver water to all who need it. Land elevation subsidence caused by over-pumping means that not all of the supplies stored at Friant Dam can be conveyed through the canal. In some areas, the canal can carry only 40 percent of what it's designed to deliver. In 2017, a very wet year in which we should have been banking as much flood water as possible, the Friant-Kern Canal couldn't deliver an additional 300,000 acre-feet of water that it would have been able to convey had its capacity not been limited by subsidence. This significant amount of water would have been destined for groundwater recharge efforts in the south San Joaquin Valley, where the impacts of reduced water deliveries, water quality issues and groundwater regulation are expected to be most severe. The California Aqueduct serves more than 27 million people in Southern California and the Silicon Valley and more than 750,000 acres of the Nation's most productive farmland. But despite its name, much of the California Aqueduct is owned by the Federal government and serves portions of Silicon Valley, small towns and communities in the northern San Joaquin Valley, and farms from Firebaugh to Kettleman City. The aqueduct represents a successful 70-year partnership between the Federal Government and the State of California. In recent years, particularly recent drought years, the California Aqueduct has subsided. It has lost as much as 20% of its capacity to move water to California's families, farms and businesses. California is leading efforts to repair the aqueduct and is working to provide its share of funding, but the Federal government will also need to pay its fair share. The bill I am introducing today would authorize $289.5 million toward restoring the California Aqueduct. The Delta-Mendota Canal stretches southward 117 miles from the C.W. Bill Jones Pumping Plant along the western edge of the San Joaquin Valley, parallel to the California Aqueduct. The Delta-Mendota Canal has lost 15% of its conveyance capacity due to subsidence. The bill I am introducing today would authorize $183.9 million toward restoring its full ability to convey floodwaters to farms needing to recharge their groundwater, and to wildlife refuges of critical importance for migratory waterfowl along the Pacific Flyway. This bill responds to a potential crisis that very possibly could cause the forced retirement of nearly 1/6 of the working farmland in an area that produces half of America's fruits and vegetables. These are Federal canals, and the federal government must help give these farmers and communities reliant on the agricultural economy a fighting chance to keep their lands in production. In addition, this legislation helps to restore an historic salmon run on California's second-longest river, the San Joaquin. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Canal Conveyance Capacity Restoration Act,'' which I introduced today. Representatives Jim Costa (D-CA) has introduced companion legislation in the House. The bill has two major provisions, benefiting both drought resilience and the environment: First, it would authorize more than $653 million to restore the capacity of three canals of national importance. Restoring these canals would improve California's drought resilience and help the nation's leading agricultural economy comply with limits on groundwater pumping under the state's Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. Second, the bill authorizes an additional $180 million to restore salmon runs on the San Joaquin River. The funding is for fish passage structures, levees and other improvements that will allow the threatened Central Valley Spring-run Chinook salmon to swim freely upstream from the ocean to the Friant Dam. The bill authorizes a \1/3\ Federal cost-share for restoring the capacity of the Friant-Kern Canal, the Delta-Mendota Canal, and the California Aqueduct. Coordinated legislation in the State legislature introduced by State Senator Melissa Hurtado would authorize a \1/3\ state cost-share for restoring the canals' capacity. Under the coordinated Federal and State legislation, the locals would also be responsible for a \1/3\ cost- share for the canal restoration projects. This legislation would help California water users and California's nation-leading agricultural industry comply with a recent State requirement to end the overpumping of groundwater. The stakes are huge: bringing groundwater into balance will reduce the water supply of the San Joaquin Valley by about 2 million acre-feet per year. Unless local water agencies and the State and Federal governments take action, a recent U.C. Berkeley study has projected severe impacts from these water supply losses: 798,000 acres of land would have to be retired from agricultural production, nearly \1/6\ of the working farmland in an area that produces half the fruit and vegetables grown in the nation; and $5.9 billion would be lost in annual farm income in a region that is almost entirely reliant on agriculture and has been called ``the Appalachia of the West'' due to its severe economic disadvantage. One of the most cost-effective and efficient ways to restore groundwater balance is to convey floodwaters to farmlands where they can recharge the aquifer. California has the most variable precipitation of any State. When we get massive storms from atmospheric rivers, there is plenty of runoff to recharge aquifers--but only if we can effectively convey the floodwaters throughout the San Joaquin Valley to recharge areas. Here is where the challenge arises. For a variety of reasons, the ground beneath the major canals has dropped by as much as 10 to 20 feet, which has caused canals designed to convey floodwaters to buckle and drop in many places. Other parts of the canals have not subsided, so the amount of water that the canal conveys must be reduced so that the canals don't overrun. As a result, these essential canals for conveying floodwaters have lost as much as 60% of their conveyance capacity. The bill I am introducing today would provide Federal assistance to help fix these Federal canals. Specifically, the bill would authorize $653.4 million in a Federal funding-cost share for three major projects to repair Federal canals damaged by subsidence to achieve their lost capacity: $180 million for the Friant-Kern Canal, which would move an additional 100,000 acre-feet per year on average; $183.9 million for the Delta Mendota Canal, which would move an additional 62,000 acre-feet per year on average; and $289.5 million for California Aqueduct repairs, which would move an additional 205,000 acre-feet per year on average. While parts of the California Aqueduct are state-owned, the majority of the repairs are on its federally-owned portion. If the Federal government covers a portion of the cost of restoring these three essential Federal canals for conveying floodwaters, it will give local farmers a fighting chance to bring their groundwater basins into balance without being forced to retire massive amounts of land. Critically, the ability to deliver floodwaters through restored Federal canals will allow the water districts to invest in their own turnouts, pumps, detention basins and other groundwater recharge projects. The South Valley Water Association, which covers just a small part of the Valley, provided my office with a list of 36 such projects for its area alone. The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) has determined that groundwater recharge projects are the best option to help the San Joaquin Valley comply with the new state groundwater pumping law. PPIC projects that the Valley can make up 300,000 to 500,000 acre feet of its groundwater deficit through recharge projects. A study commissioned by the coalition group called the ``Water Blueprint for the San Joaquin Valley'' estimates that required reductions in groundwater could cause a loss of up to 42,000 farm and agricultural jobs in the San Joaquin Valley. Another 40,000 jobs or more could be lost statewide each year due to reductions in Valley agricultural production, putting the total at approximately 85,000 jobs statewide. Most of these impacts will fall disproportionately on economically disadvantaged communities. These impacts will be significant unless we address them through collaborative planning, policies, infrastructure, recharge and necessary financial support. Let me now turn to the three critical canals that the bill would authorize assistance to restore. The Friant-Kern Canal is a key feature of the Friant Division of the Federal Central Valley Project on the Eastside of the San Joaquin Valley. For nearly 70 years, the Friant Division successfully kept groundwater tables stable on the Eastside. This provided a sustainable source of water for farms and for thousands of Californians and more than 50 small, rural, or disadvantaged communities who rely entirely on groundwater for their household water supplies. But unsustainable groundwater pumping in the Valley has reduced the Friant-Kern Canal's ability to deliver water to all who need it. Land elevation subsidence caused by over-pumping means that not all of the supplies stored at Friant Dam can be conveyed through the canal. In some areas, the canal can carry only 40 percent of what it's designed to deliver. In 2017, a very wet year in which we should have been banking as much flood water as possible, the Friant-Kern Canal couldn't deliver an additional 300,000 acre-feet of water that it would have been able to convey had its capacity not been limited by subsidence. This significant amount of water would have been destined for groundwater recharge efforts in the south San Joaquin Valley, where the impacts of reduced water deliveries, water quality issues and groundwater regulation are expected to be most severe. The California Aqueduct serves more than 27 million people in Southern California and the Silicon Valley and more than 750,000 acres of the Nation's most productive farmland. But despite its name, much of the California Aqueduct is owned by the Federal government and serves portions of Silicon Valley, small towns and communities in the northern San Joaquin Valley, and farms from Firebaugh to Kettleman City. The aqueduct represents a successful 70-year partnership between the Federal Government and the State of California. In recent years, particularly recent drought years, the California Aqueduct has subsided. It has lost as much as 20% of its capacity to move water to California's families, farms and businesses. California is leading efforts to repair the aqueduct and is working to provide its share of funding, but the Federal government will also need to pay its fair share. The bill I am introducing today would authorize $289.5 million toward restoring the California Aqueduct. The Delta-Mendota Canal stretches southward 117 miles from the C.W. Bill Jones Pumping Plant along the western edge of the San Joaquin Valley, parallel to the California Aqueduct. The Delta-Mendota Canal has lost 15% of its conveyance capacity due to subsidence. The bill I am introducing today would authorize $183.9 million toward restoring its full ability to convey floodwaters to farms needing to recharge their groundwater, and to wildlife refuges of critical importance for migratory waterfowl along the Pacific Flyway. This bill responds to a potential crisis that very possibly could cause the forced retirement of nearly 1/6 of the working farmland in an area that produces half of America's fruits and vegetables. These are Federal canals, and the federal government must help give these farmers and communities reliant on the agricultural economy a fighting chance to keep their lands in production. In addition, this legislation helps to restore an historic salmon run on California's second-longest river, the San Joaquin. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. The bill before us today fixes a drafting error from legislation enacted last December. The unintentional error occurred accidentally against a longstanding rule under which California is able to use Medicaid funding to reimburse hospitals serving uninsured and Medicaid patients. Today's bill fixes that drafting error. It makes no other changes to law and does not provide additional funds to California or any other State. CBO says that this provision has no budgetary effect. Because of the sheer number of Medicaid and uninsured patients that receive care in California's safety net hospitals, Congress, in 1997, granted the State additional flexibility. It can use Federal funds it receives to cover hospital expenses for those in need. If the Scott amendment passes, hospital care for half of the children in California and the vulnerable populations most affected by COVID would be at risk. Please vote no on this amendment. Vote on Amendment No. 1411

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Battleship Iowa National Museum of the Surface Navy Act,'' which I introduced today. This simple bill would designate the Battleship USS Iowa Museum located in Los Angeles, California, as the ``National Museum of the Surface Navy.'' The Battleship, USS Iowa Museum, would be the official museum to honor the millions of Americans who have proudly served and continue to serve in the United States Surface Navy since the founding of the Navy on October 13, 1775. The Battleship USS Iowa is an iconic ship that served as a home to hundreds of thousands of sailors from all 50 states. Commissioned in 1943, the Battleship Iowa has received accolades as the ``World's Greatest Navy Ship'' and had several namesakes, including the ``Mighty I'' and the ``Big Stick,'' which referred to President Teddy Roosevelt's famous adage: ``Speak softly and carry a big stick.'' The USS Iowa was also known as the ``Battleship of Presidents.'' In 1943, President Franklin D. Roosevelt used the ship for meetings with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet Primer Joseph Stalin. President George H.W. Bush re-commissioned the USS Iowa in 1984 while serving as Vice President of the United States. Prior to the USS Iowa's decommissioning in 1990, President Ronald Reagan used the ship for our nation's Celebration of Liberty in New York City on July 4, 1986. The USS Iowa earned nine battle stars for service in World War II and two for service during the Korean War. The ship was also awarded the Navy Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Navy Occupation Service Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the Navy ``E'' Ribbon--four times. In 2012, the Navy donated the Battleship Iowa to the Pacific Battleship Center, which established the Battleship USS Iowa Museum at the Port of Los Angeles. Since its opening, the Museum has welcomed millions of visitors. The Museum also hosts numerous military activities, including enlistments, re-enlistments, commissionings, promotions, and community service days. The museum also provides on-site training for federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the museum has closed all of its indoor exhibits and has struggled to attract visitors. As a non-profit organization, the museum is supported solely by admissions, donations, event space rentals, and gift shops. How the bill would help Our bill would designate the USS Battleship Iowa Museum as the ``National Museum of the Surface Navy'' to raise awareness and educate the public on the important role of the United States Surface Navy. The ``National Museum of the Surface Navy'' would build on the success of the Battleship USS Iowa Museum by introducing new exhibits and programs with a focus on education, veterans, and community. Conclusion It is imperative that we preserve the legacy of those who have served on the Battleship USS Iowa and all Surface Navy ships. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, nationally, psychostimulant overdose deaths, including methamphetamine-related deaths, increased by nearly 42% between July 2019 and July 2020. This increase is second only to synthetic opioids, a category which includes fentanyl. My home State of California has been particularly hard hit. Between 2014 and 2019, methamphetamine-caused deaths in San Diego increased from 262 to 546, a stunning 108 percent increase in just five years. Similarly, in Los Angeles County, methamphetamine was involved in 44 percent of all drug overdose deaths in 2018. Unfortunately, these figures are not unique to California, as other localities throughout the country are also seeing increases. That is why I am introducing the Methamphetamine Response Act, which was passed by the Senate unanimously during the last session of Congress, with my colleague, Senator Grassley. This bill does two things. First, it declares methamphetamine an emerging drug threat. Second, it requires the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) to develop and implement a national plan that is specific to methamphetamine, in accordance the ONDCP Reauthorization, which I was proud to co-author, and which was enacted in 2018 as part of the SUPPORT Act. This plan must include: An assesment of the methamphetamine threat, including the current availability of, and demand for, the drug, and the effectiveness of evidence-based prevention and treatment programs, as well as law enforcement programs; Short- and long-term goals focused on supply and demand reduction and the expansion of prevention and treatment programs; Performance measures related to the plan's goals; and The level of funding needed to implement the plan, including an assessment of whether available funding can be reprogrammed or transferred, or whether additional funds are needed. It is clear that methamphetamine is re-emerging as a major drug threat to our Nation: Data shows that methamphetamine use is no longer limited to Mid-West and Western States, but is increasingly prevalent in Northeastern States. Between 2018 and 2019, psychostimulant overdose deaths, including methamphetamine deaths, increased in 27 of the 38 States that provide drug-specific data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This amounts to a 27 percent increase nationally. Methamphetamine continues to be highly potent, pure, and cheap. By the end of 2019, its availability and use had both increased. Between 2016 and 2019, the number of individuals aged 12 and older with a methamphetamine use disorder increased from 684,000 to one million. That's a 46 percent increase in just three years. Emergency room admissions for suspected stimulant overdoses, including methamphetamine, increased by 23 percent between January 2019 and 2020. These increases occurred in 36 States and the District of Colombia. Two of the largest methamphetamine seizures on record occurred in 2019: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) seized 3,000 pounds of methamphetamine at the port of Otay Mesa while the Drug Enforcement Administration seized 2,224 pounds of methamphetamine in Riverside County. Both of these seizures were in California. Given the increasing size of these seizures, it is not surprising that in the first five months of fiscal year 2021, CBP has already seized more than 75,000 pounds of methamphetamine. In a one year span, psychostimulants, including methamphetamine, killed more than 21,000 Americans. Absent immediate action and a comprehensive plan, these fatalities will continue to increase. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate and in the House to see Methamphetamine Response Act enacted. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today in honor of Women's History Month to recognize the extraordinary achievements of past generations of women, and to pay tribute to the vital role they have played in the political, economic, and social development of this nation. Women's History Month provides a special opportunity to reflect upon women's countless accomplishments that touch all aspects of our society--from government, to business, the arts and sciences, the military and much more. I look upon the courage our predecessors displayed with great admiration, and I continue to be inspired by those who blazed the trail for women like me. In December of this past year, I was incredibly proud to see the Smithsonian Women's History Museum Act, which I co-led with Senator Susan Collins, enacted into law. This law will create a long overdue, permanent museum to collect, study, and create programs that celebrate women's experiences and contributions. However, the last year also brought with it the loss of a number of pioneering women, including Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, NASA mathematician Katherine Johnson, and the brave Civil Rights Movement champion Lucille Bridges. Though these icons are no longer with us, their contributions will live on and their accomplishments have shattered glass ceilings for future generations of women. May we honor their work and memory with a commitment to elevate and support future women leaders. This past election year marked a new high water mark for women in politics, as more women ran for and were elected to office in 2020 than ever before. Of the many notable wins, I was overjoyed to see my friend and former Senate colleague, Vice President Kamala Harris, elected to the nation's second-highest office. The election of more women to places of power is crucial for our continued progress. I am eager to work with Vice President Harris and the 144 women serving in Congress in 2021 to address the challenges before us. One of our first priorities must be to address the ongoing pandemic, which has had devastating consequences for the health of our country and economy. The pandemic has also uniquely harmed women and girls-- especially women of color. A disproportionate number of women have lost their jobs as a result of the pandemic, and are often unable to maintain work commitments with children learning from home while schools are closed. As far as we have come, this unequal harm borne by women during the pandemic reminds us of the work toward equality that is yet to be done. We must continue our work to ensure fairness and equity for women everywhere. As we undertake to celebrate Women's History Month, I ask my colleagues to celebrate with me how far we have come and to continue the fight for the progress of all women--especially those who are struggling during these trying times. Thank you Mr. President and I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of Xavier Becerra's nomination to be Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. I am proud to have known Xavier Becerra for many years as both a friend and colleague. He has spent decades serving California, including as the State's attorney general and as a 12-term Congressman from Los Angeles. Mr. Becerra was the first in his family to receive a 4-year college degree, earning his bachelor of arts in economics from Stanford University and, later, his juris doctorate from Stanford Law School. As a member of the House of Representatives, he was a strong advocate for the healthcare of his constituents and fought to make the Affordable Care Act law. And as California attorney general he has been a staunch defender of the Affordable Care Act, leading 20 States and the District of Columbia in defense of the Affordable Care Act before the Supreme Court. As part of his focus on protecting the health of Americans, Mr. Becerra has worked on a bipartisan basis with multistate coalitions of attorneys general on issues still affecting our country today. These include the need to reduce youth exposure to tobacco products like e- cigarettes, increasing access to COVID-19 treatments, as well as addressing the opioid epidemic and the considerable harm it has caused families. As our State's attorney general, Mr. Becerra has led the Nation's second largest department of justice behind only the U.S. Department of Justice. His experience leading large and diverse organizations will position him to successfully lead the Department of Health and Human Services, which is the Nation's largest Federal agency by budget. As Secretary, he will lead the Nation's top health agency charged with enhancing the health and well-being of all Americans. In this global pandemic, he will play a lead role in overseeing the implementation of President Biden's national strategy for COVID-19 response, which is vital to defeating the virus that has plagued our country for far too long. His history-making nomination as the first Latino to manage this Department comes at a time when this pandemic is affecting communities of color at much higher rates than white Americans. And those of us who know him personally know the level of his concern and the strength of his dedication to protect the health and safety of all hard-working Americans and their families. In short, Xavier Becerra is the right candidate to lead the Department of Health and Human Services at this time, and I strongly urge the Senate to confirm his nomination. Thank you.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Help Independent Tracks Succeed (HITS) Act,'' which Senator Blackburn and I introduced today. Representatives Linda Sanchez (D-CA) and Ron Estes (R-KS) have introduced companion legislation in the House of Representatives. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, I have consistently heard from independent musicians and producers in California who have lost a large percentage of their incomes due to concerts, festivals, and other events being cancelled. With many live performance stages and venues across the Nation closed for months as a result of the pandemic, independent musicians and music makers such as technicians and creators have suffered significant loss of income. According to a survey by the Copyright Alliance, 88 percent of creators have lost income due to the coronavirus pandemic, which is more than double the national average. Approximately half of survey respondents had lost 90 percent or more of their income. Our bill would provide some relief to music creators by allowing independent musicians, technicians, and music producers to deduct the cost of producing new musical recordings, putting them on a level playing field with other arts productions. The U.S. Tax Code allows film, television, and theater productions to fully deduct production expenses in the year they are incurred. However, recording artists are not given the same treatment, and are forced instead to amortize their production expenses over a number of years. The HITS Act would allow qualified sound recording producers to deduct 100% of recording production expenses--up to $150,000--in the year they are incurred, rather than in later years. Because this change would simply accelerate a tax deduction that already exists, the bill's expected cost would be minimal. In addition, because the deduction would be capped at $150,000 per production, our legislation would benefit smaller, independent musicians and music producers rather than large companies. The coronavirus pandemic has had a dramatic impact on music creators around the Nation. Our bill would help create parity between musical creators and other creative producers, stimulate the economy, and get music makers back to work. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to re-introduce the ``Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act.'' For over two decades, cleaning up the Tijuana River Valley has been one of my top priorities for Southern California. The wastewater, trash and sediment that continues to flow into San Diego and Imperial Counties is an alarming danger to public health and our economy. Although we have made recent strides in cleaning up this pollution, there is much work remaining. That's why I am proud to introduce this important legislation, once again, to help address this decades-long issue. I am very pleased Senator Padilla has joined me as an original cosponsor and I look forward to working with him on this important issue. Polluted water from the Tijuana and New Rivers flows north across the border into the United States causing unsanitary water conditions, pollution and beach closures across Southern California. It also jeopardizes military training exercises for Navy Seals in Camp Pendleton. Three-quarters of the 1,700-square-mile Tijuana River watershed lies in Mexico. However, the watershed, along with all its pollutants, drains into San Diego County and the Tijuana River Valley. In addition to jeopardizing human health and safety, two of the most drastic effects from this cross-border water pollution are harm to wildlife and damage to the tourism industry, integral to Southern Californian communities. As the coronavirus pandemic continues to threaten our nation's health and economy, it is critical we work to address the pollution in the region so California can welcome visitors back to their beaches when it is safe to do so. The beaches in the region are central to San Diego's tourism economy. In recent years, beaches in the communities of Coronado and Imperial Beach were closed for more than 200 days in a single year due to pollution. Health and safety of residents and workers are also at risk. In recent years, local Border Patrol union officials reported that 80 officers suffered from contamination, rashes, infections, chemical burns and lung irritation due to toxic cross-border flows. In addition, pollution from Mexico harms sensitive areas that provide critical habitat for more than 300 species of birds as well as marine animals like leopard sharks and bottlenose dolphins. The region is home to multiple parks and public lands, including the Tijuana River's National Estuarine Research Reserve, the River Mouth State Marine Conservation Area and River Valley Regional Park Preserve. The harmful effects of pollution in the Tijuana River Valley on our residents, businesses, economy and environment are simply unacceptable. In February 2020, the Government Accountability Office issued a comprehensive report, ``International Boundary Water Commission: Opportunities Exist to Address Water Quality Problems.'' My office worked closely with the GAO to utilize their findings to craft meaningful change through this legislation. Simultaneously, we were able to secure $300 million in the U.S.- Mexico-Canada trade agreement to address pollution in the Tijuana River Valley Watershed. With significant funding and detailed findings by the GAO investigation, we developed this legislation in concert with federal, state and local agency input. As beaches in both the United States and Mexico continue to close due to high levels of pollution, it is as imperative as ever to advance a solution that engages all stakeholders. The Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act includes key reforms to advance concrete solutions. One of the problems is that no one agency is in charge of this problem. A whole range of agencies--EPA, International Boundary and Water Commission, State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Defense Department--all have jurisdiction or interest in this international issue. What we need is one agency in charge, taking input from the others so decisions can be made. This approach is similar to other large, regional environmental challenges like the Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, Everglades and Chesapeake Bay. Here in California, we have also seen great success with this model of interagency coordination at Lake Tahoe. Here's how the bill would work: The EPA would be officially named the agency with overall control of this effort. The EPA, along with its federal, state and local partners, would be directed to identify a list of priority projects. It also would be authorized to accept and distribute funds to build, operate and maintain those projects. The bill would permanently authorize the Border Water Infrastructure Program to manage storm water runoff and water reuse projects. State and local authorities would also be authorized to contribute funding to federal projects, which is currently not allowed. The International Boundary and Water Commission would be authorized to mitigate storm water from Mexico and the pollution that comes with it and is required to construct, operate and maintain projects on the priority list developed by the agencies within the U.S. that improve water quality. We need a new and comprehensive approach to this issue that has plagued border communities for too long. This bill creates a formal process to consider effective, long-term solutions and additional wastewater infrastructure to mitigate cross-border pollution and I hope the Senate can move on this bill quickly. I want to thank California Environmental Protection Agency, California Natural Resources Agency, San Diego and Imperial counties, cities of Imperial Beach and Coronado, Mayor of Chula Vista, Mary Casillas Salas, the City of San Diego and the Port of San Diego for supporting this legislation. These communities, and others, have been negatively impacted by this issue for far too long. It's past time that we finally solve this problem to safeguard local health and economic growth. Once again, I thank Senator Padilla for his cosponsorship. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Affordable Housing Redevelopment Act,'' which I introduced today. I want to thank Senator Padilla for joining me on this important bill, and Representatives Jared Huffman and Mike Thompson for leading a companion measure in the House of Representatives. Established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the Neighborhood Stabilization Program was created by Congress to help provide assistance to communities hit hard by the recession by funding the acquisition and rehabilitation of troubled residential properties. The program helped States, local governments, and nonprofit organizations acquire properties and rehabilitate or repurpose them as long-term affordable housing. Between 2008 and 2019, Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds have facilitated the construction or rehabilitation of more than 50,000 homes, and the program has generated $1.8 billion in return income, allowing communities to stretch Federal investments even further. Today, more than 7.4 million units of affordable housing are needed across the U.S. to meet the needs of low-income renters. In my home State of California, more than 1.4 million units are needed to address the State's affordable housing shortage. Due to financial burdens and loss of income resulting from the COVID- 19 pandemic, millions of people in the United States are at risk of eviction or foreclosure, and the need for more affordable housing is expected to increase dramatically. In addition to making long-term investments in building new affordable housing in the United States, it is also critically important to focus resources on more immediate solutions, such as acquiring and rehabilitating existing buildings. Acquisition and rehabilitation provides two distinct advantages: it lowers per-unit construction costs and makes affordable housing units available to low-income households much faster. The ``Affordable Housing Redevelopment Act'' would reauthorize and expand the Neighborhood Stabilization Program to help State and local governments purchase blighted, vacant, abandoned, foreclosed, or surplus properties, and convert them into affordable housing. Eligible projects would include mixed-use development and conversions of non- residential office and retail properties. All new units would have to serve households whose income does not exceed area median income, and at least 25 percent of units would serve households whose income does not exceed 50 percent of area median income. Long-term affordability requirements would apply in all cases. The bill would authorize $1.5 billion in discretionary appropriations to be allocated as a competitive grant program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This bill provides a targeted and cost effective way for the Federal government to help communities build more affordable housing, while also stimulating local economies and creating jobs. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Affordable Housing Redevelopment Act,'' which I introduced today. I want to thank Senator Padilla for joining me on this important bill, and Representatives Jared Huffman and Mike Thompson for leading a companion measure in the House of Representatives. Established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the Neighborhood Stabilization Program was created by Congress to help provide assistance to communities hit hard by the recession by funding the acquisition and rehabilitation of troubled residential properties. The program helped States, local governments, and nonprofit organizations acquire properties and rehabilitate or repurpose them as long-term affordable housing. Between 2008 and 2019, Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds have facilitated the construction or rehabilitation of more than 50,000 homes, and the program has generated $1.8 billion in return income, allowing communities to stretch Federal investments even further. Today, more than 7.4 million units of affordable housing are needed across the U.S. to meet the needs of low-income renters. In my home State of California, more than 1.4 million units are needed to address the State's affordable housing shortage. Due to financial burdens and loss of income resulting from the COVID- 19 pandemic, millions of people in the United States are at risk of eviction or foreclosure, and the need for more affordable housing is expected to increase dramatically. In addition to making long-term investments in building new affordable housing in the United States, it is also critically important to focus resources on more immediate solutions, such as acquiring and rehabilitating existing buildings. Acquisition and rehabilitation provides two distinct advantages: it lowers per-unit construction costs and makes affordable housing units available to low-income households much faster. The ``Affordable Housing Redevelopment Act'' would reauthorize and expand the Neighborhood Stabilization Program to help State and local governments purchase blighted, vacant, abandoned, foreclosed, or surplus properties, and convert them into affordable housing. Eligible projects would include mixed-use development and conversions of non- residential office and retail properties. All new units would have to serve households whose income does not exceed area median income, and at least 25 percent of units would serve households whose income does not exceed 50 percent of area median income. Long-term affordability requirements would apply in all cases. The bill would authorize $1.5 billion in discretionary appropriations to be allocated as a competitive grant program administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This bill provides a targeted and cost effective way for the Federal government to help communities build more affordable housing, while also stimulating local economies and creating jobs. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to re-introduce the ``Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act.'' For over two decades, cleaning up the Tijuana River Valley has been one of my top priorities for Southern California. The wastewater, trash and sediment that continues to flow into San Diego and Imperial Counties is an alarming danger to public health and our economy. Although we have made recent strides in cleaning up this pollution, there is much work remaining. That's why I am proud to introduce this important legislation, once again, to help address this decades-long issue. I am very pleased Senator Padilla has joined me as an original cosponsor and I look forward to working with him on this important issue. Polluted water from the Tijuana and New Rivers flows north across the border into the United States causing unsanitary water conditions, pollution and beach closures across Southern California. It also jeopardizes military training exercises for Navy Seals in Camp Pendleton. Three-quarters of the 1,700-square-mile Tijuana River watershed lies in Mexico. However, the watershed, along with all its pollutants, drains into San Diego County and the Tijuana River Valley. In addition to jeopardizing human health and safety, two of the most drastic effects from this cross-border water pollution are harm to wildlife and damage to the tourism industry, integral to Southern Californian communities. As the coronavirus pandemic continues to threaten our nation's health and economy, it is critical we work to address the pollution in the region so California can welcome visitors back to their beaches when it is safe to do so. The beaches in the region are central to San Diego's tourism economy. In recent years, beaches in the communities of Coronado and Imperial Beach were closed for more than 200 days in a single year due to pollution. Health and safety of residents and workers are also at risk. In recent years, local Border Patrol union officials reported that 80 officers suffered from contamination, rashes, infections, chemical burns and lung irritation due to toxic cross-border flows. In addition, pollution from Mexico harms sensitive areas that provide critical habitat for more than 300 species of birds as well as marine animals like leopard sharks and bottlenose dolphins. The region is home to multiple parks and public lands, including the Tijuana River's National Estuarine Research Reserve, the River Mouth State Marine Conservation Area and River Valley Regional Park Preserve. The harmful effects of pollution in the Tijuana River Valley on our residents, businesses, economy and environment are simply unacceptable. In February 2020, the Government Accountability Office issued a comprehensive report, ``International Boundary Water Commission: Opportunities Exist to Address Water Quality Problems.'' My office worked closely with the GAO to utilize their findings to craft meaningful change through this legislation. Simultaneously, we were able to secure $300 million in the U.S.- Mexico-Canada trade agreement to address pollution in the Tijuana River Valley Watershed. With significant funding and detailed findings by the GAO investigation, we developed this legislation in concert with federal, state and local agency input. As beaches in both the United States and Mexico continue to close due to high levels of pollution, it is as imperative as ever to advance a solution that engages all stakeholders. The Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act includes key reforms to advance concrete solutions. One of the problems is that no one agency is in charge of this problem. A whole range of agencies--EPA, International Boundary and Water Commission, State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Defense Department--all have jurisdiction or interest in this international issue. What we need is one agency in charge, taking input from the others so decisions can be made. This approach is similar to other large, regional environmental challenges like the Great Lakes, Gulf of Mexico, Everglades and Chesapeake Bay. Here in California, we have also seen great success with this model of interagency coordination at Lake Tahoe. Here's how the bill would work: The EPA would be officially named the agency with overall control of this effort. The EPA, along with its federal, state and local partners, would be directed to identify a list of priority projects. It also would be authorized to accept and distribute funds to build, operate and maintain those projects. The bill would permanently authorize the Border Water Infrastructure Program to manage storm water runoff and water reuse projects. State and local authorities would also be authorized to contribute funding to federal projects, which is currently not allowed. The International Boundary and Water Commission would be authorized to mitigate storm water from Mexico and the pollution that comes with it and is required to construct, operate and maintain projects on the priority list developed by the agencies within the U.S. that improve water quality. We need a new and comprehensive approach to this issue that has plagued border communities for too long. This bill creates a formal process to consider effective, long-term solutions and additional wastewater infrastructure to mitigate cross-border pollution and I hope the Senate can move on this bill quickly. I want to thank California Environmental Protection Agency, California Natural Resources Agency, San Diego and Imperial counties, cities of Imperial Beach and Coronado, Mayor of Chula Vista, Mary Casillas Salas, the City of San Diego and the Port of San Diego for supporting this legislation. These communities, and others, have been negatively impacted by this issue for far too long. It's past time that we finally solve this problem to safeguard local health and economic growth. Once again, I thank Senator Padilla for his cosponsorship. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today in support of Governor Jennifer Granholm's nomination to be Secretary of the Department of Energy. I can think of no one better than Governor Granholm to lead the Department of Energy during this critical and transformative period for our country. Governor Granholm has the experience to lead and oversee the 13,500 employees at the Energy Department. She served as the Governor of Michigan from 2003 to 2011 and as Michigan's attorney general from 1998 to 2002. During her tenure as Governor, she led Michigan through the tumultuous years of the 2008 financial crisis and the resulting bailout of the auto industry. She shepherded over a billion dollars in Federal funding to her State to manufacture electric vehicles and batteries. She diversified Michigan's energy portfolio and signed into law the State's first renewable energy standard. I won't hold against the Governor the fact that she is a graduate of UC Berkeley--I am sure a Stanford Cardinal and a Golden Bear can still find some common ground and I am sure it will help that she will bring the innovative spirit of California along with her to her new role as Secretary. Following her tenure as Governor, Jennifer became a faculty member at the UC Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy. She has spent her career, both inside and outside of public office, as a steadfast advocate for clean energy. I have no doubt she will bring the same passion if confirmed as Secretary. With this appointment, Governor Granholm has gained the opportunity to understand our unique national lab system, which is a critical aspect of the Department of Energy. She was a project scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, and I look forward to her getting to know our 16 other National Labs. From basic science to nuclear safety, these are gems of the Energy Department. Finally, I would be remiss if I did not mention the trailblazing nature of the Governor's career. She was Michigan's first female attorney general; Michigan's first female Governor; and, if confirmed, will be only the second woman to lead the Energy Department since its formation in 1977. She has been and will continue to be a role model for young women across this country. The Governor does not have an easy task ahead of her, but I have full confidence that she is up to the challenge. As chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, I look forward to working with her closely over the coming years to fund clean energy programs, confront climate change, and fulfill the energy and water infrastructure needs of California and our country.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, the Constitution reserves impeachment for cases of ``treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.'' Congress must never take this action lightly and only in the most extreme circumstances. On January 13, the House of Representatives voted 232-197 to impeach Donald Trump on a count of inciting the insurrection that took place on January 6. I have taken care over the past week to fulfill my charge as an impartial juror in this trial. I have listened carefully to the presentations made by both sides. And I believe the House impeachment managers proved the case that Donald Trump bears responsibility for inciting the violence and the insurrection on January 6. I therefore cast my vote to convict him of the impeachment charge. The argument has been made that Donald Trump is no longer President, thus he cannot be removed from office, as he has already left. I understand the argument, but it fails on several counts. First, failure to act would set the precedent that a President can get away with anything at the end of his term. Relying on criminal proceedings in place of impeachment is insufficient; Congress must have the power to impeach, regardless of when actions occur. Indeed, the House approved the Article of Impeachment when Donald Trump was still president. Second, there is legitimate fear that, if allowed to run for office again, we could see an emboldened Trump wouldn't hesitate to repeat the actions of January 6. If convicted, a simple majority vote would bar him from running for office. And third, a conviction would send a clear message to Trump's followers, particularly the ones who accept violence as a legitimate means of protest, that perpetrators of insurrection and those who enabled them will be held responsible for their action. As impeachment manager Diana DeGette said of the mob at the Capitol: ``All of these people who have been arrested and charged, they're being accountable, held accountable for their actions. Their leader, the man who incited them, must be held accountable as well.'' It is important to understand that Donald Trump's actions on January 6 weren't without precedent. The House impeachment managers made a compelling case that Donald Trump has a long history of urging and supporting violence among his supporters, knowing full well that they would take action. This is a key matter for this impeachment trial: Did Donald Trump's words inspire violence? Were those carrying out the insurrection following his direction? The House managers gave several examples of Trump's past practice. After Republican Congressman Greg Gianforte in 2018 pleaded guilty to assaulting a reporter who asked him a question, former President Trump praised him. ``Any guy that can do a body slam--he's my guy.'' After a 2017 rally of White supremacists and neo-Nazis turned violent in Charlottesville and killed a woman, former President Trump said there were ``very fine people on both sides.'' Last year, Trump sent a message for his followers to ``liberate Michigan.'' Weeks later, messages threatening violence were directed against Governor Gretchen Whitmer. And later in the fall, a plot to kidnap Governor Whitmer emerged, led by Trump followers. President Trump made a call to action, and his followers responded. And during the 2020 Presidential debates, when Donald Trump was asked if he would condemn White supremacists and other groups like the Proud Boys, a far-right group that endorses violence, he wouldn't answer, instead saying, ``Proud Boys--stand back and stand by.'' It is clear that Donald Trump's supporters, including those who participated in the insurrection on January 6, heeded his words and support of violence. The Proud Boys took Trump's words--``stand back and stand by''--and made it their official motto. Rioters at the Capitol told U.S. Capitol Police officers as they were threatening violence that they had been ``invited'' by President Trump. While the insurrection was going on, Trump supporters were reading Trump's tweets over a megaphone. The pattern is clear: Donald Trump has no qualms about asking his followers to commit violence. In fact, he celebrates them when they do. After the November 2020 elections, Donald Trump immediately set out to undermine the results. His lawyers and his supporters filed 60 lawsuits to object to the results, as was his right under the law. But when those cases were tossed out, then-President Trump sought to cheat. He urged the secretary of state for Georgia to ``find'' enough votes to declare him the victor. When officials rebuffed his efforts to reverse his electoral loss, he led efforts to bring thousands of people to Washington to, in his words, ``Stop the Steal.'' The day he chose was January 6, the day Congress was meeting to certify the election results. Trump directed his followers to go to the Capitol and to ``fight like hell.'' As was documented extensively in this trial, Trump knew that this group was preparing for violence when he directed them to walk to the Capitol. What we learned this week is that Donald Trump was also aware of the violence at the Capitol as a frenzied insurrection mob ransacked the Capitol and sought to physically harm Members of Congress and even kill the Vice President. After being told that Vice President had been removed from the Senate Chamber for his safety, Trump tweeted to his supporters that Pence lacked ``courage'' to reject the electoral college results. This happened precisely as Trump's supporters were building a gallows and chanting ``Hang Mike Pence.'' Indeed, new information revealed during the course of this trial indicates that President Trump knew the state of violence in the Capitol. One Senator has stated publicly that he told President Trump on the phone that Vice President Pence had been removed from the Senate Chamber by his Secret Service detail. We have also heard on-the-record reports that in a phone call between President Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy while the Leader's office was under attack, then-President Trump apparently continued to support those carrying out the violent insurrection. So despite direct pleas from Members of Congress and the former President's closest Republican confidants, Trump refused for hours to call off the mob or urge calm. As House impeachment manager Jamie Raskin said during the presentation, ``Donald Trump surrendered his role as commander-in-chief and became the inciter-in-chief of a dangerous insurrection.'' Five people, including a U.S. Capitol Police Officer, lost their lives as a result of this insurrection guided by Donald Trump. And nearly 140 officers from the Capitol Police and Washington Metropolitan Police Department were injured, some severely. The evidence presented this week shows that Donald Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors and that he should be convicted. I thank the House managers for their hard work in making a thoroughly compelling, convincing, and fair case, and I hope we can move past this terrible moment in our Nation's history.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about an issue of critical importance to California: doctor shortages. First, I want to express my deepest appreciation and gratitude to the entire medical community, particularly the doctors, nurses, and support staff who have been on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic. Amidst a severe shortage of protective equipment, they nevertheless continue to work around the clock to save countless lives. I--and my colleagues--are eternally grateful. I have heard from countless Californians who have said the same thing: we need more doctors. That is why Congress established the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program in 2007 to encourage doctors to pursue careers at public and nonprofit facilities, especially in areas experiencing physician shortages. As a result, physicians who provide care in a nonprofit or public hospital can have their student debt forgiven by the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program after making 120 qualifying monthly payments under a qualifying repayment plan. However, when the Department of Education issued implementing guidance for the program, it unintentionally excluded California and Texas physicians from being eligible to receive loan forgiveness by requiring that borrowers be classified as employees in order to be eligible for loan forgiveness. The problem is that under state law in California and Texas, doctors are prevented from being directly employed by corporations, including nonprofit organizations. As a result, physicians in California and Texas who provide medical services at nonprofit hospitals do not currently qualify for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. To make matters worse, the United States is facing a shortage of physicians, especially in California. The Council on Graduate Medical Education recommends 60 to 80 primary care physicians per 100,000 people. However, statewide in California, the number is already down to just 50 per 100,000 people. And in some places, it is even lower: down to 35 primary care physicians per 100,000 people and 39 per 100,000 people in the Inland Empire and San Joaquin Valley, respectively. During this difficult and challenging time, it is clear that more medical professionals are needed. And long after this pandemic ends, we will still need more doctors to provide high-quality care, in both rural and urban areas. That is why I am pleased to introduce the bipartisan ``Stopping Doctor Shortages Act.'' This legislation would help attract more doctors to public service and address the looming physician shortage by fixing a loophole that prevents thousands of doctors from participating in the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. According to the California Medical Association, this bill alone could bring as many as 10,000 physicians to California over the next ten years. Similar legislation, soon to be introduced in the House by Representatives Josh Harder, Jay Obernolte, Joaquin Castro, and Van Taylor, also enjoys bipartisan support. I would like to thank Senator John Cornyn for his support on this critical issue and for cosponsoring the bill. I ask my colleagues to join us to pass the ``Stopping Doctor Shortages Act'' in a timely manner as we continue to find ways to combat the coronavirus pandemic and save lives. Thank you, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the ``Driftnet Modernization and Bycatch Reduction Act.'' I thank Senator Capito for her cosponsorship as well as continued partnership on this important legislation. This bipartisan bill passed the Senate last Congress by unanimous consent and then passed the House of Representatives in December 2020. Unfortunately, then President Trump chose to veto the bill based on misguided policy and inaccurate data. I urge my colleagues to once again support this bill, which solely affects California fishery management, but has far-reaching beneficial impacts for a wide range of marine animals, including endangered species. This legislation modernizes a commercial fishery to promote sustainable fishery management and creates a win-win for conservation goals and commercial fishing profitability. The Issue Large mesh drift gillnets, as defined in this legislation, have a mesh hole size of 14 inches or greater and are used to target swordfish and thresher shark off the California coast. However, alarmingly, these nets utilized by this one fishery in Federal waters, according to NOAA, are responsible for 90% of porpoise and dolphin deaths in all west coast fisheries combined. These substantially sized nets are between 1 and 1.5 miles long and extend more than 100 feet below the ocean's surface. This creates a ``net wall'' that ensnares approximately 60 non-target species, known as bycatch, leading to severe harm or drowning of endangered marine turtles, whales, dolphin, and numerous fish species. In addition to being banned everywhere else in the United States and in some international waters, these specific nets were also banned in California's state waters in 2018. This bill would bring much needed parity to state and federal laws on the west coast. After the State ban, a large majority of the remaining commercial fishery using drift gillnet gear voluntarily turned in their permits to the State and received compensation to transition to alternative, sustainable gear, such as deep set buoy gear. This bill is critically needed to complete the transition of the fishery and provide Federal partnership to the successful State program. The Federal waters off the California coast are the last place in the United States where these dangerous nets are still used. How our bill would help This bill is identical to the legislation that passed in the 116th Congress. It provides a common-sense solution by phasing out drift gillnets over a five-year period from enactment in favor of more sustainable alternatives, such as deep-set buoy gear. This sustainable gear has already been proven to yield higher market prices for fishermen and considerably reduces the amount of bycatch. In fact, 2020 landings data from the PacFIN database for swordfish shows that drift gillnet gear caught only 19.8 metric tons of swordfish at an average of $3.62 per pound yielding a total of $157,728. In the same fishing season, deep set buoy gear caught 79.4 metric tons of swordfish at an average of $5.88 per pound for a total value of $1,028,932. Important to note, deep set buoy gear also had an extremely low bycatch rate--less than 2 percent--illustrating how this fishery can be both more sustainable and profitable. The transition program includes a grant authorization for Federal funding to match State funds for local fishermen to exchange their current permits and purchase new, sustainable gear. This bill has broad support at the State and Federal level, as well as national groups such as American Sportfishing Association and Oceana. In addition, this bill includes a provision important to the Pacific halibut fishery in Alaska that I have worked with Senator Sullivan and the Commerce Committee to include. The provision would enable the Secretary of Commerce to approve certain charter vessel operators who guide recreational anglers and harvest Pacific halibut in certain federal waters to collect fees that would fund the Recreational Quota Entity Program for the purposes of halibut conservation and research. I look forward to working with my colleagues to once again pass the ``Driftnet Modernization and Bycatch Reduction Act'', and I urge them to support the swift passage of this bipartisan bill. Thank you once again to Senator Capito and to Commerce Committee leadership, Senator Cantwell and Senator Wicker for their assistance on this important legislation. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the Floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Cannabidiol and Marijuana Research Expansion Act with my colleagues. This bill is identical to our bill which was unanimously passed by the Senate during the last session of Congress. While anecdotal evidence suggests that marijuana and its derivatives, like cannabidiol, commonly known as CBD, may be helpful in treating serious medical conditions, anecdotes alone cannot be the basis for developing new medications. Rather, medication development must be based on science. That is why our bill seeks to streamline the process associated with researching marijuana that may have unintentionally stymied important research. It does so by requiring the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to quickly approve or deny applications to research CBD or marijuana and by establishing a process through which applicants may submit supplemental information, if necessary. It also improves regulations related to changes to approved quantities of marijuana needed for research and approved research protocols. In addition, the CBD and Marijuana Research Expansion Act seeks to increase medical research and reduce reliance on a single source of marijuana or CBD for research purposes. It authorizes medical and osteopathic schools, research universities, practitioners and pharmaceutical companies to produce the marijuana they need for approved medical research that can then be used to develop proven, effective medicines. Upon FDA approval of these medications, pharmaceutical companies are permitted to manufacture and distribute them. Our bill also facilitates better communication between doctors and patients. It is my understanding that some doctors and patients are hesitant to have frank conversations regarding the use or marijuana, CBD, or other marijuana derivatives because of marijuana's status as a schedule I drug. This can adversely impact patient care, especially if patients are using marijuana or its derivatives without their doctor's knowledge. That is why our bill specifically authorizes doctors to discuss the potential harms and benefits of using such products with their patients. Finally, to broaden our understanding of marijuana and CBD even further, our bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to expand and coordinate research to determine the potential medical benefits of CBD or other marijuana-derived medications on serious medical conditions. I have heard from many parents and adults who have turned to CBD and marijuana as a last resort to treat medical conditions. In many cases, these individuals have seen positive results. Despite this, however, many are also concerned about the lack of science-based information related to proper delivery mechanisms, dosing, or potential interactions that CBD or marijuana may have with other medications. Some also worry because these products aren't well regulated or factory sealed, and often are labeled incorrectly. Additional research will increase our ability to adequately address these concerns. Not only are patients asking for additional research, but so too is the medical community. In fact, the need for additional research, along with the need to increase the supply of CBD and marijuana for research purposes was underscored in the National Academy of Sciences report, titled ``The Health Effects of Cannabis and Cannabinoids: The Current State of Evidence and Recommendations for Research.'' If the science shows that marijuana and its derivatives, including CBD can effectively treat serious medical illnesses, we should enable products containing these substances to be brought to the market with FDA approval. But in order to make this determination, we must reduce the barriers that currently impede important research. I hope my fellow Senators will join me in supporting this important piece of legislation again, and I look forward to working with my House colleagues to ensure it is enacted. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce a bill to facilitate improved access to the Indian Health Service's Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center in Hemet, California. My colleague Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) is joining me as an original cosponsor of the bill. The Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center is the only currently operating center in the State of California that provides culturally-sensitive substance use disorder treatment to indigenous youth. The Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center, located in Hemet, is run by the Indian Health Service. The facility not only provides healthcare, but also academic support, family therapy, and treatment plans to support the healing and long-term recovery of youth enrolled at the Center. Currently, the Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center is only accessible by a dirt road. This limits access to the Center during California's extreme wet and dry seasons. The dirt road frequently cracks or floods during these times and creates significant challenges to those depending on the Center's important work. The Indian Health Service does not currently have the authority to buy land from willing private landowners who are supportive of selling their land to provide for a paved access road. It is necessary that we provide for safe and dignified access to the center, and I am pleased to reintroduce this legislation to do so. This commonsense bill would authorize the Director of the Indian Health Service to purchase land from willing sellers and construct a paved road to improve access to the Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center. After the road's construction, Riverside County would maintain it. This bill has the support of local stakeholders, including Riverside County. An identical, bipartisan bill is being introduced by Representatives Raul Ruiz (D-CA), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Nanette Barragan (D-CA), Tony Cardenas (D-CA), and Pete Aguilar (D-CA) in the House of Representatives. This bill passed the Senate unanimously last year, and I look forward to working with my colleagues this Congress to enact this bill into law. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce a bill to facilitate improved access to the Indian Health Service's Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center in Hemet, California. My colleague Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) is joining me as an original cosponsor of the bill. The Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center is the only currently operating center in the State of California that provides culturally-sensitive substance use disorder treatment to indigenous youth. The Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center, located in Hemet, is run by the Indian Health Service. The facility not only provides healthcare, but also academic support, family therapy, and treatment plans to support the healing and long-term recovery of youth enrolled at the Center. Currently, the Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center is only accessible by a dirt road. This limits access to the Center during California's extreme wet and dry seasons. The dirt road frequently cracks or floods during these times and creates significant challenges to those depending on the Center's important work. The Indian Health Service does not currently have the authority to buy land from willing private landowners who are supportive of selling their land to provide for a paved access road. It is necessary that we provide for safe and dignified access to the center, and I am pleased to reintroduce this legislation to do so. This commonsense bill would authorize the Director of the Indian Health Service to purchase land from willing sellers and construct a paved road to improve access to the Desert Sage Youth Wellness Center. After the road's construction, Riverside County would maintain it. This bill has the support of local stakeholders, including Riverside County. An identical, bipartisan bill is being introduced by Representatives Raul Ruiz (D-CA), Ken Calvert (R-CA), Nanette Barragan (D-CA), Tony Cardenas (D-CA), and Pete Aguilar (D-CA) in the House of Representatives. This bill passed the Senate unanimously last year, and I look forward to working with my colleagues this Congress to enact this bill into law. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``West Los Angeles VA Campus Improvement Act,'' which I introduced today. Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) is introducing companion legislation in the House. Background on the West Los Angeles VA Campus In 1888, the 388-acre campus that is now home to the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center was deeded to the federal government by Arcadia Bandini de Stearns Baker and Senator John P. Jones in order to establish a home for disabled Civil War Veterans. Until the 1970s, the land served primarily to house Veterans, and the campus long represented the largest Veteran housing development in the nation. Unfortunately, in 1972, 2,800 Veterans living on the West LA VA campus were displaced after the Sylmar Earthquake caused major damage on campus. Rather than repair the housing units, the VA eventually leased portions of the property to non-VA tenants. Forty years later, homeless Veterans and advocates sued the VA for illegally leasing facilities on campus and for failing to use the property to support Veterans, as required by the original deed. A U.S. District Court subsequently ruled that many leases on campus were illegal under the terms of the original deed, and in 2015, the VA agreed to facilitate the development of 1,200 housing units for homeless Veterans on campus. In 2016, Congress enacted legislation that I introduced with Senator Barbara Boxer and Congressman Ted Lieu, entitled the ``West Los Angeles Leasing Act of 2016,'' to set up an oversight framework for the housing development and to ensure that lease revenues from ongoing leases stayed on campus. Need for Legislation In 2018, the VA selected a ``Principal Developer'' to complete housing renovation and construction projects on campus, allowing for a more streamlined and efficient building process. However, the VA has determined that current law restricts it from using on-campus lease revenues for housing construction, maintenance, or services. The VA has determined that clarifying language is needed to ensure that funds generated on campus can be used for these purposes. Giving VA the flexibility to use locally-generated revenue in this way could significantly reduce the time it takes to get homeless Veterans into housing. Bill Summary The ``West LA VA Campus Improvement Act'' would explicitly authorize the VA to use any funds collected pursuant to leases, easements or other use agreements at the West LA VA for the development of supportive housing and services on campus. The bill would also increase the time period for enhanced use leases on the campus from 75 to 99 years. Increasing the length of the leases would align with other leasing terms the VA has, and help reduce the financing costs for new housing. Conclusion Last year, the regional homelessness count reported that more than 3,900 Veterans are experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles. It is long past time for this land to be returned to its intended purpose: to serve as a home where Veterans can receive the care and treatment they deserve. This bill will help move us closer to that reality. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Wildland Firefighter Fair Pay Act,'' which I introduced today. Background Fueled by climate change, the annual Western wildfire season has grown longer and more intense. Where the threat used to peak between August and November, we are now seeing massive wildfire events earlier in the Summer and continuing through the end of the year. Last year alone, California experienced more than 9,600 fires which burned more than 4.1 million acres, consumed more than 10,000 structures, and claimed 33 lives. It is imperative that we commit enough manpower and resources to combat the threat that such devastating wildfire seasons pose to life and property. Unfortunately, some of our most experienced Federal firefighters work so many overtime hours each year that they reach an overtime pay cap and become ineligible for additional overtime compensation. Others are forced to pay back money they have rightfully earned fighting wildfires. Need for Legislation Federal firefighters from the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior are paid on the General Schedule (GS) pay scale based on their seniority and performance. They make a base salary and are paid overtime when they exceed eight hours a day. However, there is an annual premium pay cap that limits how many overtime hours for which these firefighters can be compensated. This arbitrary pay cap places an unfair expectation on federal fire personnel to work long hours for less or even no pay, and serves as a dangerous disincentive to respond to more fire incidents, especially later in the fire season. California's worst wildfires often occur late in the fire season, further illustrating the problem we face. The Forest Service estimates that up to 500 senior-level firefighters either stop participating or do not request pay for hours worked once they reach the pay cap. This has a significant negative impact on federal wildfire response capabilities. What the Legislation Would Do Our bill would create a statutory waiver for Federal firefighters responding to wildfire emergencies to ensure they receive fair compensation for all overtime hours they work. This waiver would apply to Forest Service and Department of the Interior personnel engaged in emergency wildland fire suppression activities. Conclusion For wildland firefighters, working long hours in dangerous conditions is often considered a necessary part of the job. It is crucial that this demanding work be recognized, and that these heroes be appropriately compensated for the critical service that they perform. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Ms. FEINSTEIN

Ms. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``Wildland Firefighter Fair Pay Act,'' which I introduced today. Background Fueled by climate change, the annual Western wildfire season has grown longer and more intense. Where the threat used to peak between August and November, we are now seeing massive wildfire events earlier in the Summer and continuing through the end of the year. Last year alone, California experienced more than 9,600 fires which burned more than 4.1 million acres, consumed more than 10,000 structures, and claimed 33 lives. It is imperative that we commit enough manpower and resources to combat the threat that such devastating wildfire seasons pose to life and property. Unfortunately, some of our most experienced Federal firefighters work so many overtime hours each year that they reach an overtime pay cap and become ineligible for additional overtime compensation. Others are forced to pay back money they have rightfully earned fighting wildfires. Need for Legislation Federal firefighters from the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior are paid on the General Schedule (GS) pay scale based on their seniority and performance. They make a base salary and are paid overtime when they exceed eight hours a day. However, there is an annual premium pay cap that limits how many overtime hours for which these firefighters can be compensated. This arbitrary pay cap places an unfair expectation on federal fire personnel to work long hours for less or even no pay, and serves as a dangerous disincentive to respond to more fire incidents, especially later in the fire season. California's worst wildfires often occur late in the fire season, further illustrating the problem we face. The Forest Service estimates that up to 500 senior-level firefighters either stop participating or do not request pay for hours worked once they reach the pay cap. This has a significant negative impact on federal wildfire response capabilities. What the Legislation Would Do Our bill would create a statutory waiver for Federal firefighters responding to wildfire emergencies to ensure they receive fair compensation for all overtime hours they work. This waiver would apply to Forest Service and Department of the Interior personnel engaged in emergency wildland fire suppression activities. Conclusion For wildland firefighters, working long hours in dangerous conditions is often considered a necessary part of the job. It is crucial that this demanding work be recognized, and that these heroes be appropriately compensated for the critical service that they perform. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the ``West Los Angeles VA Campus Improvement Act,'' which I introduced today. Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA) is introducing companion legislation in the House. Background on the West Los Angeles VA Campus In 1888, the 388-acre campus that is now home to the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center was deeded to the federal government by Arcadia Bandini de Stearns Baker and Senator John P. Jones in order to establish a home for disabled Civil War Veterans. Until the 1970s, the land served primarily to house Veterans, and the campus long represented the largest Veteran housing development in the nation. Unfortunately, in 1972, 2,800 Veterans living on the West LA VA campus were displaced after the Sylmar Earthquake caused major damage on campus. Rather than repair the housing units, the VA eventually leased portions of the property to non-VA tenants. Forty years later, homeless Veterans and advocates sued the VA for illegally leasing facilities on campus and for failing to use the property to support Veterans, as required by the original deed. A U.S. District Court subsequently ruled that many leases on campus were illegal under the terms of the original deed, and in 2015, the VA agreed to facilitate the development of 1,200 housing units for homeless Veterans on campus. In 2016, Congress enacted legislation that I introduced with Senator Barbara Boxer and Congressman Ted Lieu, entitled the ``West Los Angeles Leasing Act of 2016,'' to set up an oversight framework for the housing development and to ensure that lease revenues from ongoing leases stayed on campus. Need for Legislation In 2018, the VA selected a ``Principal Developer'' to complete housing renovation and construction projects on campus, allowing for a more streamlined and efficient building process. However, the VA has determined that current law restricts it from using on-campus lease revenues for housing construction, maintenance, or services. The VA has determined that clarifying language is needed to ensure that funds generated on campus can be used for these purposes. Giving VA the flexibility to use locally-generated revenue in this way could significantly reduce the time it takes to get homeless Veterans into housing. Bill Summary The ``West LA VA Campus Improvement Act'' would explicitly authorize the VA to use any funds collected pursuant to leases, easements or other use agreements at the West LA VA for the development of supportive housing and services on campus. The bill would also increase the time period for enhanced use leases on the campus from 75 to 99 years. Increasing the length of the leases would align with other leasing terms the VA has, and help reduce the financing costs for new housing. Conclusion Last year, the regional homelessness count reported that more than 3,900 Veterans are experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles. It is long past time for this land to be returned to its intended purpose: to serve as a home where Veterans can receive the care and treatment they deserve. This bill will help move us closer to that reality. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. President, and I yield the floor.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce the ``West Coast Ocean Protection Act.'' This important legislation would prohibit oil or gas drilling in federal waters off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington. After four years of an Administration intent on allowing drilling off the West Coast and in waters across the United States, I am hopeful we will finally pass this bill to ensure no drilling ever occurs in Pacific waters. I'm pleased to be joined today by Senators Padilla, Wyden, Merkley, Murray, Cantwell, Menendez, Booker, Markey, and Sanders in introducing this bill, which has been introduced in every Congress since the Deepwater Horizon disaster in April 2010. 11 people were killed and 17 others injured when the Deepwater Horizon well blew out. Oil and gas spewed into the Gulf of Mexico for 87 days. Oil slicks covered the Gulf. Tar balls and toxic sludge covered beaches and wetlands. More than one-third of federal waters in the Gulf were closed to fishing. While the Deepwater Horizon disaster reminded the world of the dangers of offshore drilling, Californians never had to be convinced; before Deepwater Horizon and Exxon Valdez, there was the tragic 1969 oil spill in Santa Barbara. A well blowout on an offshore rig spilled more than 3 million gallons of crude oil according to some estimates--the worst spill in U.S. history at the time. The spill closed local beaches--which were covered by a thick layer of oil--and thousands of marine mammals and birds were killed. Tourists were turned away and commercial fishing operations were halted, hurting the local economy. After the Santa Barbara spill, California had enough. The State blocked all new offshore drilling in state waters--which extend three miles from the shore--and in 1994 enacted a permanent offshore drilling ban. Through local ordinances, congressional opposition, and presidential moratoria, all new drilling in federal waters off California has been blocked since 1984. Today, opposition to offshore drilling is higher than ever. A 2018 poll found that nearly 70% of Californians oppose new drilling off our coast. The evidence is quite clear: Californians do not want any more drilling. The California coast is an economic engine of growth for the state and the nation. A 2015 report produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found that California's 19 coastal counties created $662 billion in wages and $1.7 trillion in GDP in 2012. Overall, California's ocean economy supports over 1 million jobs and generates significant growth for the U.S. Because of the unique nature of the West Coast ocean shelf, potential drilling would occur near the coastline and directly threaten the environment and robust economy. It is long past time to respect the view of California and our fellow West Coast states by passing the ``West Coast Ocean Protection Act'' to permanently ban offshore drilling and protect the Pacific coast for generations to come. I yield the floor.