Bill Hagerty

Mr. HAGERTY

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

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, on behalf of myself and Senator Blackburn, I ask unanimous consent that the following remarks be printed in the Congressional Record in recognition of David Dill, the chairman and chief executive office of LifePoint Health. Since 2017, David Dill has led LifePoint Health, a diversified healthcare delivery network consisting of 62 community-based acute hospitals, more than 60 rehabilitation and behavioral health hospitals, and more than 250 additional sites of care. Under his leadership, LifePoint Health has become a leader in rural healthcare, serving as an influential voice for healthcare in communities across the Nation and helping to educate the industry on shaping policies that ensure that the needs of patients are met timely and effectively. David grew up in a small community in Kentucky, giving him a unique understanding of healthcare providers in non-urban areas. Throughout his time at LifePoint, the company has invested significant capital into the communities it serves, including $1.1 billion in charitable donations and $5.5 billion in total economic impact during the year 2022 alone. In addition to his success at LifePoint Health, Mr. Dill has served as the chairman of the board for the Federation of American Hospitals, the immediate past chair of the board of directors for the Nashville Health Care Council, and a member of the American Hospital Association's Health Systems Committee. Most recently, Mr. Dill was appointed to serve on the Tennessee Rural Health Care Task Force, which was formed by Tennessee Governor Bill Lee to advance his administration's efforts to better serve rural communities across the State. On November 30, 2023, Mr. Dill received the 2023 B'nai B'rith Charles S. Lauer National Healthcare Award, which was established in 1983 to highlight the standard bearers within the healthcare industry throughout the country. This award further recognizes his dedication to community service, excellence in leadership, and outstanding philanthropic commitment to the healthcare community and beyond. I congratulate David Dill on his achievements, and I hope the rest of my colleagues join us in recognizing his tremendous contributions to rural healthcare across this country.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to engage in a colloquy with my colleague from Virginia, Senator Kaine.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I am here today to discuss worrying developments in Mexico, one of the United States' most important international partners and our neighbor to the south. The nearly 2,000-mile border that our nations share both binds us together and presents a series of challenges, including illegal migration, drug trafficking, and human trafficking. As we work through those difficult issues, our robust economic relationship has provided a firm foundation to strengthen and stabilize our efforts with an eye toward the future. The innovative United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, or USMCA, deepened the connections between our economies such that Mexico is now one of our largest and most strategic trading partners. However, actions over the past 2 years by the government of Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador have weakened that bond and are threatening the economic and diplomatic ties between our nations. Through increasingly arbitrary and aggressive moves against companies based here in the United States and their lawfully owned assets in Mexico, the Mexican Government has abused its permitting and regulatory powers in ways that violate the letter and the spirit of our trade agreements, not to mention the special relationship historically enjoyed between our two countries. These decisions directly impact critical sectors of the U.S. economy from agriculture to energy and mining and from transportation to tourism. These capricious actions, which are falsely labeled as ``reforms,'' risk substantially undermining confidence in the commercial rule of law in Mexico. They also jeopardize the essential economic relations between North American partners. Further, these actions likely violate our trade agreements by abrogating contracts, stripping investors of value, and eliminating private competition and oversight, thereby sending a clear message to U.S. capital markets that Mexico is no longer safe or profitable for investing. I want to highlight the specific case of Vulcan Materials. For almost 2 years now, President Lopez Obrador has personally harassed, interfered with, and obstructed Vulcan's lawful operations in Mexico. Vulcan is a U.S.-based construction aggregates company with a strong Tennessee and, I might add, a strong Virginia presence that has more than a 30-year track record of responsibly operating in Mexico and investing in the community that surrounds its Mexican facility. In May of 2022, President Lopez Obrador ordered the illegal shutdown of Vulcan's operations, which had an immediate and detrimental impact on the supply of construction aggregates to the United States. Then, in March of 2023, President Lopez Obrador ordered a military invasion of Vulcan's property and occupied the company's quarry and port for 2 weeks. As shocking as this sounds, video footage of this invasion is available online. President Lopez Obrador has initiated a process to illegally take the company's property by declaring it a supposed naturally protected area. The President of Mexico is abusing a process designed to protect regionwide ecosystems in order to illegally expropriate land that, coincidentally, exactly matches Vulcan's property lines. This is an egregious abuse of the law that undermines the very trust that should be foundational to the U.S.-Mexico relationship. By illegally closing Vulcan's business and now attempting to steal their property, the Mexican President is signaling to other American companies that Mexico cannot be trusted when it comes to foreign investment. If not quickly corrected, actions like these risk choking off the economic relationship between our two nations. Many important supply chains stretch across the U.S.-Mexico border, supplying millions of good jobs and making both countries more attractive for capital investment. This is certainly true for my home State of Tennessee. Because of the successes that I witnessed between my home State of Tennessee and Mexico, I have been a strong advocate for reshoring integrated supply chains from Communist China to North America. Building upon the successes of USMCA as a foundational component of North American competitiveness supports both American and Mexican economic prosperity and both nations' national security. But without a basic respect for private property and the rule of law, the prospects for expanding our shared economic and national security via commerce and investment are greatly diminished. In fact, failing to protect private property and the rule of law will inevitably lead to the disintegration of our economic ties. Therefore, I again urge President Lopez Obrador to reverse course before more damage is done. Instead, we should be looking for opportunities to work together to attract investment and unlock the economic opportunity that is being presented to both of our nations as supply chains are rebalanced away from communist China. Let's seize this opportunity together rather than damage our shared interests for short-term political gains. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I thank Senator Kaine for lending his expertise as a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and, most importantly, as chair of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee. I thank the Senator from Virginia for bringing his respected voice to this matter of serious diplomatic concern. As former Governor of his home State of Virginia, he has an acute appreciation of the economic opportunity that exists that is in danger of being destroyed by the illegal actions of the Mexican President. So thank you very much for joining me in this.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I rise to address my colleagues in the U.S. Senate and to posthumously honor the life and achievements of Mr. Shoichiro Toyoda of Japan. Mr. Shoichiro Toyoda built upon the strong foundation established by both his grandfather, Sakichi Toyoda, the founder of the successful Toyoda Automatic Loom Works, and his father, Kiichiro Toyoda, who transitioned the company to automobiles by establishing Toyota Motors. Shoichiro, while never intending to join the family business, stepped in at the age of 27 to help following the unexpected death of his father. Determined to ``develop a high-quality passenger car that would perform well anywhere in the world,'' Shoichiro Toyoda's efforts eventually established Toyota as a world leader in quality and introduced one of the bestselling cars of all time. Both a talented engineer and businessman, Shoichiro expanded Toyota's production globally and deployed manufacturing facilities in 22 countries, specifically investing billions in Toyota's U.S. operations and creating an untold number of jobs for American workers. He was inducted into the U.S. Automotive Hall of Fame in 2007 and served on the board of Denso, a valued corporate citizen of my home State of Tennessee, for 58 years. On a very personal level, I would also like to acknowledge the tremendous accomplishments of his son and my friend, Akio Toyoda, who continues his father's legacy, ably leading Toyota Motor Corporation as chairman of the company's board of directors. I applaud Shoichiro Toyoda's contributions in making Toyota a shining example of the Japanese commitment to excellence, and I appreciate the great legacy that he left in support of U.S.-Japan relations.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. In the aftermath of the barbaric massacre committed by Iran-backed terrorist organization Hamas, there has been significant attention given in the U.S. Senate to the $6 billion the Biden administration unfroze as part of a ransom deal with Iran. This is understandable. Because money is fungible, the combination of waivers and nonenforcement of sanctions has enabled Iran to spend billions of dollars bankrolling terrorists, including Hamas. The $6 billion was just the latest installment of an enormous windfall the Iranian regime has enjoyed ever since Joe Biden took office. But not enough attention has been paid to the way Congress has willingly abdicated its responsibility and allowed the executive branch to get away with a reckless policy of appeasement toward Iran. According to many recent news reports this year, the Biden administration was negotiating an unwritten agreement with Iran in which the United States would relieve billions of dollars of sanctions on Iran in return for a number of Iranian promises. One of the architects of this strategy of pursuing an informal and unwritten agreement with Iran as part of a broader strategy of appeasing the Iranians was none other than Rob Malley. Rob Malley was placed on unpaid leave by the State Department in June. He has had his security clearance suspended amid a probe into the possibility that he mishandled classified material. The results have been catastrophic. Iran has received tens of billions of dollars in revenue it would not have received had sanctions been properly enforced. Iran has continued to obstruct nuclear inspection efforts, and its proxies have continued engaging in terrorism across the region, most recently and most tragically in Israel. Furthermore, rewarding hostage-taking by paying $6 billion for the potential release of five American hostages, as the Biden administration recently did, is just one element of this unwritten agreement. It only incentivizes more hostage-taking of U.S. citizens abroad, both by Iran and by other adversaries. To that point, as of now, it appears that Iran-backed Hamas is holding 13 American citizens hostage in Gaza. Let me be clear. I believe the Biden administration's Iran policies are deeply misguided and threaten the security of Americans and of our partners and allies in the Middle East. But I am not here today to debate the pros and cons of resurrecting the Iran deal or any specific agreement the Biden administration has made with Iran. The massacre in Israel last week should have settled that debate; though I suspect we will likely continue to have that debate in the months ahead. Rather, I am here today to argue for preserving the role of Congress amid concern that the Biden administration has continuously refused to enforce sanctions as part of a gradually unfolding agreement with Iran and is doing so in such a manner that is designed to circumvent its legal obligation to submit an agreement to revive the Iran nuclear deal to Congress for review and for an up-or-down vote. When President Obama pursued the original Iran nuclear deal, his administration blatantly disregarded its constitutional duty to submit the agreement as a treaty requiring the advice and consent of two- thirds of the Senate. In response, Congress passed a law known as the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, or INARA, by a vote of 99 to 1. In brief, the INARA law says that if the United States and Iran make any agreement related to Iran's nuclear program, the White House must submit it for congressional review and potential up-or-down votes in the Senate and the House of Representatives. The nearly unanimous bipartisan passage of INARA by the Senate reflected the Senators' bipartisan frustration that the executive branch was ignoring the Constitution and trying to circumvent Congress on such an important matter. And yet since taking office, the Biden administration has disregarded its legal obligations under INARA, and the U.S. Congress has allowed this administration to get away with it. If the multitude of reports are accurate, the Biden administration was intentionally avoiding calling its unfolding agreement with Iran an official agreement. That was an effort to, again, sidestep congressional approval that is required under INARA. In early 2021, I was concerned that this might happen, so I introduced the Iran Sanctions Relief Act, or ISRRA, in the 117th Congress and reintroduced it in the 118th Congress. As a backup to INARA, my bill requires congressional review and an up-or-down vote on any Presidential waiver of Iran sanctions, whether that is labeled as an agreement or not. My vote borrows a provision from the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA, that overwhelmingly passed Congress back in 2017. The CAATSA provision allows for congressional review and an up-or-down vote on any Presidential waiver of Russian sanctions. My bill takes, word for word, that same provision and applies it to any Presidential waiver of Iran sanctions. This is important because any new agreement to revive the Iran deal will require, once again, the executive branch to waive Iran sanctions. Additionally, in light of reports that the $6 billion the Biden administration unfroze was part of the larger unwritten and informal agreement with Iran, Congress would have had the opportunity to object before the money was unfrozen had my bill had the force of law. In other words, my bill protects the role of Congress as the executive branch continues to ignore its legal obligations and refuses to submit a new agreement to the Senate and to the House. So far, 41 Senators have cosponsored the Iran Sanctions Relief Review Act. This number is significant because 41 Senators would be more than enough to deny the Senate's advice and consent if the executive branch actually followed the Constitution and presented a new Iran agreement to the Senate as a treaty. The House companion to this bill has passed through the House Foreign Affairs Committee with bipartisan support. We must protect the first branch of government from an executive branch that seeks to encroach it or to ignore it. As in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged of further consideration of S. 2210 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I would welcome the opportunity to work with my colleague Senator Murphy on sanctions policy, sanctions policies that make sense, but I would say this. If this policy is good enough for CAATSA in Russia, why wouldn't it be good enough for Iran? The Senate has already passed CAATSA. I have used the exact language. I would also like to say this. If it is true that this administration is not waiving sanctions and is not entering an agreement, they should have no difficulty with this level of review. I don't believe that is the case. And I also would like to address the accusations, I should say, leveled against the policy in the last administration after the withdrawal of the JCPOA. Iran never stopped their nuclear program. Israel, in a very brave and courageous raid, proved that they were continuing on that path. As part of my prior job as U.S. Ambassador to Japan, it was my responsibility to get Japan to stop buying Iranian crude. I was successful at that after many rounds of negotiation. We cut Iran's fund flows down to a trickle. That starved Iran's ability to fund its proxies, like Hamas and Hezbollah. In fact, it was widely reported in the media that Hamas and Hezbollah were going broke. That all changed when the policy of appeasement came back in 2021. By avoiding sanctions, by not enforcing sanctions, the estimates are as high as $80 billion of fresh illicit oil revenues that have entered Iran's coffers. We know about the payment that was allowed by Iraq to Iran by this administration. Senator Cotton just addressed this and the $6 billion that has received so much scrutiny in the media just recently. All of this has enriched Iran. All of this has put Iran in a better position to fund its proxies and fuel them, and I think all of this is part of a very misguided policy of appeasement. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

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

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, just last week, a Federal judge ruled that the First Amendment prohibits the Biden administration from colluding with Big Tech to censor Americans' speech. So the court ordered Biden administration officials and Agencies not to coordinate with Big Tech platforms in order to suppress American speakers and Americans' viewpoints that they disagree with. This seems obvious. The First Amendment would mean little if government simply used Big Tech to get around it. Who disagrees with this basic principle that government-directed censorship is un-American and unconstitutional? Well, I can tell you who disagrees with that. The Biden administration disagrees with it. The Justice Department, almost immediately, asked the court of appeals to stay this ruling to allow it to continue to censor Americans while it appeals. In recent years, increasing evidence has emerged regarding a disturbing alliance in which Big Government and Big Tech work together to censor speech that they don't want Americans to see nor to hear. Published emails among Twitter executives reveal the extent to which the company worked to prevent Americans from seeing a New York Post news story just weeks before the 2020 election. The extent of the suppression was breathtaking. Indeed, the Twitter executives locked the Twitter account of the White House Press Secretary simply for mentioning this New York Post story. Facebook admits that it, likewise, limited the spread of the story based on a general warning from the FBI about it being propaganda. This is even though the FBI had verified the authenticity of the laptop in question. This censorship activity has carried over into the Biden administration. In 2021, then-Press Secretary Jen Psaki stated that the government is ``in regular touch with social media platforms'' and ``flagging'' problematic posts for Facebook that spread what she called ``disinformation.'' Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, disclosed that it had communicated with more than 30 Federal officials about content moderation on its platform, including senior employees at the FDA, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, and, of course, the White House. YouTube, which is owned by Google, disclosed that it had such communications with 11 Federal officials. The disturbing truth is that when Biden administration officials don't like what Americans are saying, they simply reach out to their allies at Big Tech to silence it. Government using its power to coerce censorship of disfavored information is what the Chinese Communist Party or the North Korean regime would do. It is not only fundamentally un-American; most often, it is unconstitutional. The other day, a Federal court confirmed that the government cannot use Big Tech as a tool to end-run the First Amendment. The judge wrote that the case ``arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States' history.'' Americans deserve to know when their government and Big Tech platforms are trying to manipulate what they can say or what they can read. I introduced legislation last Congress and again this past May to require this transparency. The Disclose Government Censorship Act would require that government officials publicly disclose communications with Big Tech regarding actions to restrict speech. The act contains appropriate exceptions to protect legitimate law enforcement or national security activity. Our Nation was founded on the idea that protecting citizens' speech from government censorship under the First Amendment would protect the people's right to govern themselves by preventing government from controlling information and ideas. Americans deserve to know when their government is covertly trying to accomplish what the First Amendment prohibits. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 1672 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I appreciate the sentiments my Democratic colleague expressed, and I very much appreciate his work and his concerns with respect to Big Tech. I share those concerns. And I share some optimism today that we will find common ground to work together. The legislation I have put forward simply allows Americans to see when the government is trying to censor them. My colleague suggests that this is because of concern over protections for law enforcement and national security work. I would like to say this. My legislation contains appropriate exceptions to protect legitimate law enforcement or national security activity and preserve the confidentiality of those communications. But in assuming that the details of those protections are my colleague's only concern, I am happy to work with my colleague to address those concerns and ensure that the core of this legislation, which requires disclosure of government censorship efforts, is quickly enacted. I hope that Senator Peters and I can work together and do this because it is too significant to ignore. Our government, at the end of the day, works for the American people, and to ensure that this continues, the First Amendment prohibits the government from controlling what Americans can say or read. But now government is using Big Tech to accomplish such censorship, and without disclosure of such communications, Americans' free speech rights become a dead letter because there is no way to address improper government efforts to ban speech. My legislation would preserve these rights by allowing Americans to see when government is trying to silence them. It is a basic element of self-government. I look forward to working with Senator Peters and his committee to try to make this something that can be acceptable to all.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Blackburn and myself, a Vanderbilt alumnus, we would like to congratulate the Vanderbilt University bowling team on winning the National Collegiate Athletic Association--NCAA--championship, the third national championship for the women's bowling program and the sixth national championship in Commodore athletic history. The Commodores were a dominating force during the 2022-2023 season, compiling a 98-29 record and winning four tournament championships including a regional NCAA crown. Five team members earned All-America honors with Mabel Cummins, a neuroscience senior, being named the national player of the year. The team earned an outstanding 3.559 GPA and placed seven members on the Dean's List. This achievement would not have been possible without the hard work, talent, and teamwork of the following outstanding student athletes: Alyssa Ballard, Kailee Channell, Mabel Cummins, Kaylee Hitt, Amelia Kiefer, Jennifer Loredo, Amanda Naujokas, Paige Peters, Caroline Thesier, and Victoria Varano. John Williamson, the head coach of the Vanderbilt bowling team, was named the national coach of the year for the fourth time and has led the program since its inception in 2004. Over the past 19 years, Coach Williamson has transformed Commodore bowling into one of the Nation's finest, winning both on the lanes and in the classroom. Coach Williamson should also be commended for combining athletic excellence with academics as well as international service experiences. These student athletes were coached and mentored by a dedicated team of coaches and athletic department staff, including: head coach John Williamson, associate head coach Josie Barnes, deputy athletic director Dr. Kristene Kelly, associate athletic trainer Alda Burston, associate director of strength and conditioning Darren Edginton, assistant director of event management Renee Mackin, assistant director of student services Max Martin, sports dietitian Jasmine Gilbert, and head of athletic communications Rod Williamson. We would also like to acknowledge the outstanding leadership of Vanderbilt University athletic director Candice Storey Lee, an alumna and former Vanderbilt women's basketball player. Congratulations, Commodores. We are proud of you.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. I thank Senator Blackburn. Mr. President, I join Senator Blackburn today to honor the heroic, lifessaving actions by Officer Rex Engelbert of Nashville, TN; Detective Michael Collazo of Smyrna, TN; Detective Sergeant Jeffery Mathes of Nashville, TN; Detective Ryan Cagle of Charlotte, TN; and Detective Zachary Plese of Nashville, TN. These dedicated officers showed exceptional courage by putting their lives on the line to save others. On March 27, 2023, an unspeakable tragedy took place at The Covenant School in Nashville, TN. A cowardly and depraved murderer's gruesome actions took six innocent lives--including those of three 9-year-old children. I join the families affected, the Nashville community, Tennesseans across our State, and millions of Americans in mourning this heartbreaking and outrageous act of evil. What is unmistakably clear is the incredible bravery and heroism of the first responders, who prevented this tragedy from being even worse. Officer Engelbert, Detective Collazo, Detective Sergeant Mathes, Detective Cagle, and Detective Plese, nobly and without hesitation, rushed into an active shooter situation at The Covenant School. Released body camera and surveillance footage shows that these officers confronted and eliminated the lethal threat within a mere 3 minutes. The rapid response and swift assessments of the emergency not only underscore the strength of their training, but also their bravery as they quickly entered the school despite obvious risks to their own safety. Their actions likely saved countless lives. I echo the words of Governor Bill Lee when I say, ``Gratitude doesn't begin to cover it.'' Today, we honor the heroic actions of Officer Engelbert, Detective Collazo, Detective Sergeant Mathes, Detective Cagle, Detective Plese, and the other brave first responders who rushed to the aid of strangers, putting others before themselves that day. I join Tennesseans and all Americans to express our heartfelt gratitude.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, title 42 will terminate tomorrow with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Title 42 is one of the last tools available to Border Patrol agents, and the President is surrendering it during a record-shattering border crisis. It is unconscionable for Congress to stand aside and do nothing to preserve this critical authority. Title 42 authority was initially based on the pandemic. While I agree that the pandemic is over, the border crisis is worse than ever. Whether to keep effective border security policies in place should not depend on the pandemic. There is a new epidemic that is plaguing our Nation, one that demands immediate action. Deadly fentanyl--produced with the help of the Chinese Communist Party and smuggled across our southern border by drug cartels--has flooded into our communities. More than 100,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in the last 12 months alone--most from synthetic opioids like fentanyl. It is the No. 1 cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 45. The rise of fentanyl overdose deaths affects every State and every congressional district. It kills the young, the old, the rich, the poor. It affects cities and small towns alike. It is not a partisan issue, and finding a solution shouldn't be partisan either. With the end of title 42, even the Biden administration is openly preparing for an already-recordbreaking crisis to get far worse by sending 1,500 Active-Duty troops to the southern border. It is an admission of the impending invasion. To allow title 42 to end without creating a permanent new authority to replace it only empowers drug cartels. It enables them to illegally send migrants across the border at strategic points, bogging down Border Patrol agents with paperwork and processing that takes five times longer than under title 42. This dramatic increase in processing times will significantly decrease scarce resources available to actually patrol our southern border. Cartels will use the longer and more frequent enforcement gaps to move fentanyl across our border. We cannot allow this to happen. Title 42 is an effective and important tool for controlling the flow of illegal migration at the southern border, but it is also an effective and important tool for dissuading migrants from making the dangerous journey to the southern border, to ultimately be exploited by drug cartels. But the current administration has no interest in dissuading migrants from coming to the United States. Instead, through Biden's border policies, they entice thousands more migrants per day to illegally cross into the United States, risking their lives as they magnify the humanitarian crisis at our border. That is why I introduced legislation to add drug smuggling as an additional basis for invoking title 42 authority. It is called the Stop Fentanyl Border Crossings Act. Overdoses have become an epidemic in America, and no one can deny that. My legislation would allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to use title 42 to combat substantial, dangerous drug trafficking across our southern border. This bill would give Border Patrol a necessary tool to focus on stopping drug traffickers. It seems like an obvious step to take. Everyone agrees fentanyl trafficking is a dire problem. Yet, in the last Congress, Democrats blocked this legislation three times. Now that title 42 is actually coming to an end, it is time to get past the political posturing, and I hope my colleagues will join me. We cannot sit idly by. Without this authority, the recordbreaking border crisis and deadly drug overdose crisis that will follow will become unimaginably worse. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration of S. 1192 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, my Democratic colleague is objecting to legislation that simply gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to limit border crossings when necessary to combat substantial, dangerous, illicit drug smuggling. It doesn't provide authority to stop all asylum claims. It only applies where substantial illicit drug smuggling is endangering health. More than 100,000 Americans are dying annually of drug overdoses, many of which result from drug smuggling at the southern border. This legislation isn't a mandate; it is a tool to help save American lives whenever that is possible. Everyone acknowledges that an already recordbreaking crisis will get worse without title 42. American lives and American communities hang in the balance. Yet my colleagues across the aisle are categorically opposed to any commonsense policy that will help us address this problem. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 72, as modified, and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, in the last fiscal year alone, appropriations to FEMA's Emergency Food and Shelter Program have increased by more than 5 times, totaling approximately $1 billion in the last 2 years alone. Currently, hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars appropriated to this program are doled out annually by a national board comprised of the very same organizations that receive those funds. This amendment in no way impugns the integrity of the organizations involved. Rather, it helps them avoid the reputational risks that can occur when the pitcher is also the umpire. My amendment is simple and common sense. It will restructure the Emergency Food and Shelter Program to ensure that the individuals sitting on that board do not have this obvious conflict of interest. Instead, the national board composition would be shifted to include qualified individuals who do not work for the organizations that seek funding from the board. At a minimum, Congress must resolve this blatant conflict of interest within the Emergency Food and Shelter Program, especially given its dramatic increase in funding in recent years. That is what this amendment does. I yield back.

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

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, in February, the Biden administration argued to the U.S. Supreme Court that title 42 will terminate in May of 2023 with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Removing one of the last tools available to Border Patrol agents during a record-shattering border crisis is intolerable. Congress should not stand by and refuse to address this obvious problem. Title 42 authority was initially based on the pandemic, and while I agree that the pandemic is over, the border crisis and the deadly drug overdose crisis that it fuels are worse than ever. Whether to maintain border security policy should not depend on whether there is a pandemic. That is why I am reintroducing the Stop Fentanyl Border Crossings Act today. This legislation would preserve continued use of title 42 authority to combat drug trafficking at the border. Clearly, the deadly epidemic has not ended. Deadly fentanyl is flooding American communities--deadly fentanyl, produced with the help of the Chinese Communist Party and smuggled by drug cartels across our southern border. More than 100,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in the last 12 months, most of them from synthetic opioids like fentanyl. It is the No. 1 cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 45. The rise in fentanyl overdoses and deaths affects every State and congressional district. It kills the young and the old, the rich and the poor, in cities and in small towns alike. It is not a partisan issue, and finding a solution shouldn't be partisan either. When I talk to Tennessee sheriffs, they tell me that fentanyl is becoming more and more lethal, how a so-called ``bad batch'' can kill dozens of people. Once this deadly substance arrives in American communities, it is too late. We have to stop it before it crosses our borders. That is why I have reintroduced this legislation to combat drug smuggling. When I travel to the border, Border Patrol agents tell me that the cartels use human waves of illegal border crossers as cover to transport fentanyl and other deadly narcotics. While Border Patrol agents are diverted to manage caravans of border crossers, the gap in coverage is then exploited by the smugglers. In many cases, these are well-planned and carefully coordinated occurrences. The agents told me that ``the people don't stay at the border, and the drugs don't either.'' They also told me that title 42 is the last tool the Border Patrol has left to partially slow this ongoing tidal wave of illegal crossings. We can't afford to take away this tool in the midst of a crisis. Letting title 42 end without creating a permanent, new authority to replace it empowers drug cartels. It enables them to send migrants across the border at strategic points, bogging down Border Patrol agents with paperwork and processing that takes five times longer without title 42. This dramatic increase in processing times absent title 42 will significantly decrease the scarce resources available to actually patrol our southern border. Cartels will then use the longer and more frequent enforcement gaps to move more fentanyl across the southern border. We cannot allow this to happen. My legislation simply adds drug smuggling as an additional basis for using title 42 authority. It would help Border Patrol stop drug traffickers. This should not be controversial. Yet, last Congress, Democrats blocked its passage three times on the Senate floor. Now that we are staring down at the end of title 42, it is time to pass this bill. I hope my colleagues across the aisle will not let title 42 expire without action. We must protect the border security tools we have to stop the fentanyl flowing across our southern border before more lives are lost.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, in February, the Biden administration argued to the U.S. Supreme Court that title 42 will terminate in May of 2023 with the expiration of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Removing one of the last tools available to Border Patrol agents during a record-shattering border crisis is intolerable. Congress should not stand by and refuse to address this obvious problem. Title 42 authority was initially based on the pandemic, and while I agree that the pandemic is over, the border crisis and the deadly drug overdose crisis that it fuels are worse than ever. Whether to maintain border security policy should not depend on whether there is a pandemic. That is why I am reintroducing the Stop Fentanyl Border Crossings Act today. This legislation would preserve continued use of title 42 authority to combat drug trafficking at the border. Clearly, the deadly epidemic has not ended. Deadly fentanyl is flooding American communities--deadly fentanyl, produced with the help of the Chinese Communist Party and smuggled by drug cartels across our southern border. More than 100,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in the last 12 months, most of them from synthetic opioids like fentanyl. It is the No. 1 cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 45. The rise in fentanyl overdoses and deaths affects every State and congressional district. It kills the young and the old, the rich and the poor, in cities and in small towns alike. It is not a partisan issue, and finding a solution shouldn't be partisan either. When I talk to Tennessee sheriffs, they tell me that fentanyl is becoming more and more lethal, how a so-called ``bad batch'' can kill dozens of people. Once this deadly substance arrives in American communities, it is too late. We have to stop it before it crosses our borders. That is why I have reintroduced this legislation to combat drug smuggling. When I travel to the border, Border Patrol agents tell me that the cartels use human waves of illegal border crossers as cover to transport fentanyl and other deadly narcotics. While Border Patrol agents are diverted to manage caravans of border crossers, the gap in coverage is then exploited by the smugglers. In many cases, these are well-planned and carefully coordinated occurrences. The agents told me that ``the people don't stay at the border, and the drugs don't either.'' They also told me that title 42 is the last tool the Border Patrol has left to partially slow this ongoing tidal wave of illegal crossings. We can't afford to take away this tool in the midst of a crisis. Letting title 42 end without creating a permanent, new authority to replace it empowers drug cartels. It enables them to send migrants across the border at strategic points, bogging down Border Patrol agents with paperwork and processing that takes five times longer without title 42. This dramatic increase in processing times absent title 42 will significantly decrease the scarce resources available to actually patrol our southern border. Cartels will then use the longer and more frequent enforcement gaps to move more fentanyl across the southern border. We cannot allow this to happen. My legislation simply adds drug smuggling as an additional basis for using title 42 authority. It would help Border Patrol stop drug traffickers. This should not be controversial. Yet, last Congress, Democrats blocked its passage three times on the Senate floor. Now that we are staring down at the end of title 42, it is time to pass this bill. I hope my colleagues across the aisle will not let title 42 expire without action. We must protect the border security tools we have to stop the fentanyl flowing across our southern border before more lives are lost.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, I just want to convey my thanks and deep respect to our Republican whip for his thoughtful comments and my other colleagues who have been here today to speak on this serious matter. Thank you, all. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, I understand that this was the first opportunity for my colleague from Nebraska to speak before the Senate. I want to commend him and thank him for being here to support my legislation today. Congratulations. I yield the floor.