Bill Hagerty

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I am looking forward to a robust debate today. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I move to proceed to H.J. Res. 26.

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, just to set the stage before a few more of my colleagues come to speak on this resolution, just moments ago, over at Union Station, where there is a protest going on right now protesting our actions here, with people protesting in favor of this soft-on-crime position that the DC Council has taken, those protesters just witnessed an attempted carjacking. The assailant who was attempting the carjacking was confronted, and as that person fled, they ran right through the crowd. That is the situation that we are dealing with right now, and I so appreciate my colleagues being here to speak on it. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, I would just like to say thank you to all of my colleagues today who have joined me. I thank Senator Lee for his thoughtful remarks. I am looking forward to a very robust showing this evening as we vote on my resolution. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, the Senate will soon take up my resolution to nullify the Revised Criminal Code Act recently passed by the DC Council--a measure that becomes more central every day as the harrowing reports of lawlessness and deadly violence in our Nation's Capital steadily accumulate. Carjackings in DC have increased for 5 consecutive years and have more than tripled in the past 3 years. For the first time in 20 years, DC has experienced back-to-back years with more than 200 homicides. Car thefts are up 111 percent this year. It has gotten so bad that the city recently announced that it is giving away free steering-wheel locks to owners of frequently stolen cars here in the District. Instead, how about just enacting laws that stop crime in the first place? Sadly, violent crime has become an epidemic in our Nation's Capital, where our constituents, Americans from across the country, and people from around the world come to live, come to work, and come to visit, from schoolchildren to World War II veterans. Yet, unbelievably, despite escalating crime and palpable unease from all who visit or live in DC, the DC Council recently passed legislation to reduce penalties and eliminate minimum sentences for violent criminal offenses, including carjackings, robberies, and even homicides. DC's crime bill also dramatically expands jury trials in misdemeanor cases, which may sound good to a law school classroom but in practice will overwhelm the system and force dropped charges and crippling delays in countless criminal cases integral to preserving order and public safety. The DC crime bill reduces penalties on violent crime in the midst of a violent crime wave. It is the opposite of good policy and will make the crime wave even worse. It sends the wrong message-- that DC is not serious about fighting crime. DC's own police chief recently concluded that one of the main reasons for rising crime in the District, especially among youth, is the perception among criminals that they will suffer no consequence. Yet the council proposes to reduce the consequences even further. Make no mistake, this DC crime bill will deliver the wrong results. Under these soft-on-crime policies, public safety will deteriorate further. This is common sense to most people. It should be no surprise, then, that Mayor Bowser recently vetoed the DC crime bill just this January. She said: This bill does not make us safer. I couldn't agree more. Yet, putting woke ideology over public safety, the DC Council overrode the Mayor's veto. That is why I am bringing forth this resolution to block the DC crime bill. Washington is a Federal district, and the Constitution puts Congress in charge of governing it. This makes sense. Countless Americans from all over the country visit our Nation's Capital each week to meet with their Federal representatives and to enjoy our national history. Congress has a constitutional obligation to make sure these visitors can walk down the sidewalk or enjoy a meal without fear of becoming victims. This resolution passed with significant bipartisan support in the House of Representatives, and I am confident that an even larger bipartisan majority of this body will support it tonight. Numerous law enforcement groups, including the DC Police Union, are supportive. Polling shows that 72 percent of DC residents believe that the DC crime bill sends the wrong message. A few weeks ago, the White House put out a statement of policy opposing my resolution--based on the President's support for DC Statehood, I presume--but last week, the President indicated he would, in fact, support my resolution. I am glad the President has recognized that Congress has a legitimate, constitutional role in reviewing and in rejecting DC's harmful legislation. To this point, given the now-widespread recognition that this is a bad bill, imagine if Congress did not have the authority under the Constitution and the DC Home Rule Act to block DC laws. This dangerous bill would become law. Apparently seeing the writing on the wall this week, the chairman of the DC Council cooked up a desperate and legally baseless ploy to ``un- submit'' the bill to Congress in an attempt to avoid a vote of disapproval. But the DC Home Rule Act is clear: There is no valid action of this nature. No matter how hard they try, the council cannot avoid accountability for passing this disastrous, dangerous, soft-on- crime bill. Violent crime has become an epidemic in America. This resolution is a referendum on it. Do you want to decrease jail time for violent criminals? Do you want to prioritize the interests of law-abiding citizens or the interests of criminals? This will be one of the only opportunities during this Congress for this body to send a broad message on violent crime--a message that may impact the safety and security of Americans throughout our Nation. I appreciate that many of my colleagues have cosponsored or indicated their support for this resolution, and I urge all of my colleagues to support it tonight. Stopping violent crime should not be a Republican or Democrat objective; it should be a commonsense one. I hope the Senate sends that message today by adopting this resolution and by sending it to the President's desk. I yield back all time.

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

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I move to discharge H.J. Res. 26 from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I would like to say that I appreciate and am very touched by the remarks of the good Senator from South Carolina, Mr. Graham. And I thank Senator Graham so much for his support and his presence here tonight.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I would just like to thank my colleagues Graham, Bozeman, and Lankford for being here this evening to support this effort. We need to make certain that our Nation's Capital doesn't become a national embarrassment, and we need to make certain that we send a strong message that the American public have had it with crime in America. The crime spree that is happening in our major cities must come to an end. We are putting a marker on the ground tomorrow. I want to thank all my colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, who are joining me in this. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I rise today to congratulate my dear friend, Fredrick D. Schaufeld, for receiving the 2023 Horatio Alger Award. Fred has spent decades giving back to his community by creating job opportunities and a path to prosperity for so many, while at the same time contributing significantly to philanthropic efforts. No one is more deserving of this honor than Fred Schaufeld. The Horatio Alger Award symbolizes the values of personal initiative and perseverance, leadership, and commitment to excellence, belief in the free- enterprise system and the importance of higher education, community service, and the vision and determination to achieve a better future. These are the ideals that serve as Fred's North Star. Throughout his career, Fred has exemplified the best of American exceptionalism. In addition to his time in the private sector, Fred has spent decades giving back to his community, whether through his time as the chairman of the Inova Health System Foundation or through his participation on the board of the Wolf Trap Foundation for the Performing Arts. Additionally, and one of my personal favorites, Fred is a recipient of the Loudoun Laurels award and the Loudon County Boy Scouts' Good Scout award. I would also like to congratulate his wife Karen for her contributions to these causes over the decades. I know firsthand how important a supportive partner like Karen can be, and I am so pleased that you both are recognized in such an appropriate manner for your efforts. Congratulations.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of Senator Blackburn and myself to honor the legacy and impact of Brad Gioia's 29 years of service as the head of school for Montgomery Bell Academy. Since Brad was called to serve the MBA community nearly three decades ago, he has grown the preparatory school into a world-renowned institution. MBA's mission is to ``provide each student with the tools to reach his maximum potential as a gentleman, a scholar, and an athlete.'' Brad Gioia has dedicated himself to fulfilling this mission. Senator Blackburn and I are honored to recognize his great service. During the past 29 years, Brad has grown MBA's student population by two-thirds, increased the school's budget by 1,100 percent, and quadrupled the school's endowment. Most impressively, he has developed the comprehensive Wilson Grant program, which has sent hundreds of students to study and serve others all over the world. Throughout his tenure, Brad has been a constant figure of support, dedication, and commitment to the students of MBA. He created a culture of support where all boys are celebrated when they excel, whether it is in academics, athletics, music, art, debate, mock trial, service, or theater. The strong sense of community that Brad Gioia built at MBA will reverberate for decades to come, and our community is forever grateful for his selfless service to the thousands of young MBA men over the years. His dedication to the MBA community and the greater Nashville community will be missed, and his legacy will not be forgotten. On behalf of Senator Blackburn and the entire Nashville community, I thank you for your tireless years of service as the head of school for Montgomery Bell Academy. We wish you, Minna, Christopher, and Gabby all the best as you enter the next chapter of your life.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, in the last week, new details have come to light regarding Twitter's top executives' past collusion with political figures to censor speech that they did not want the American people to see. This problem is not limited to Twitter, but this news underscores the problem and the need for congressional action to protect the rights of the American people. Americans deserve to know when their government and Big Tech platforms are trying to manipulate what they can say or what they can read. Recently published emails among Twitter executives reveal the extent to which the company worked to prevent Americans from seeing a New York Post story, and this was just weeks before the election. The extent of the suppression was breathtaking. Indeed, the Twitter executives locked the Twitter account of the White House Press Secretary who simply mentioned a story that was published in an established American newspaper with one of the largest circulations in the country. Facebook admits that it likewise limited the spread of this story based on a general warning from the FBI about ``propaganda.'' Evidence has also emerged that in 2020, Biden and Democrat campaign officials were going so far as to send lists of tweets for their corporate allies to remove--requests that Twitter granted. 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'.'' For example, a Facebook official emailed Surgeon General Vivek Murthy stating: I know our teams met today to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on ``misinformation'' going forward. A Facebook employee later told the HHS Department that a number of posts had been deleted. In addition to regularly flagging posts for Twitter and Facebook to take down, the CDC proposed setting up a monthly ``misinformation meeting'' with Facebook in order to censor American speech. Additional Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits have also revealed improper coordination between government Agencies and social media companies to restrict speech here in America. 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, U.S. Election Assistance Commission, and 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 the Biden administration officials don't like what Americans are saying, they simply reach out to their allies at unaccountable big tech companies to silence it. Government using its power to coerce censorship of disfavored information is what the Chinese Communist Party or what the North Korean regime might do. It is not only fundamentally un-American, but often, it is unconstitutional. Government cannot use Big Tech as a tool to end-run the First Amendment. The American people deserve to know when their government, which is supposed to work for them, is using Big Tech to censor their speech or manipulate the information they see. I introduced legislation in July of 2021 to require this transparency. Yet the Senate has failed to act on it. The Disclose Government Censorship Act would require that government officials publicly disclose communications with Big Tech regarding their actions to restrict speech--actions that would plainly violate the First Amendment if the government did it itself. The act contains appropriate exceptions to protect legitimate law enforcement or national security activity. It would also require a cooling-off period to address the revolving door that occurs between government and Big Tech. This Washington revolving door fuels politically driven censorship, as evidenced by the fact that the former FBI general counsel who resigned because of the Steele dossier scandal was then hired by Twitter and, unbelievably, was at the center of the decision to suppress the New York Post story in 2020. Our Nation was founded on the ideal that protecting citizens' speech from government censorship--under the First Amendment--would protect the people's right to govern themselves by preventing the government from controlling information and ideas. Americans deserve to know when their government is covertly trying to accomplish what the First Amendment prohibits. Now, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 2527 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, my Democratic colleague is objecting to legislation that simply allows Americans to see when the government is trying to censor them. My colleague states that his objection is largely on procedural grounds, and he has concerns that my bill hasn't been marked up in committee, but the committee to which this bill was referred has had over a year to review the legislation, and no progress has been made. I would ask that my colleague commit to working with me on my legislation to address this important First Amendment issue in the next Congress. This problem is simply too significant to ignore. Our government works for the American people. To ensure this continues, the First Amendment prohibits the government from controlling what Americans say or read. But now government is using Big Tech to accomplish that censorship. 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. This is a basic element of self-government. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Mrs. Blackburn, I ask unanimous consent that the following remarks be placed in the Congressional Record in recognition of Dr. Thomas Zacharia, Director of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory--ORNL. For 35 years, Dr. Zacharia has provided transformative scientific leadership that has established ORNL as one of the world's premier research institutions, fulfilling national missions in diverse fields, including advanced materials, nuclear science and engineering, neutron science, and high-performance computing. Dr. Zacharia's vision guided the creation of the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility and established ORNL as the Nation's leading supercomputing institute with the deployment of 10 supercomputers, including the launch of Frontier in 2022, the first machine to break the exascale barrier. Under Dr. Zacharia's leadership, ORNL has operated a research reactor with the highest neutron flux in the United States, the most powerful accelerator source of pulsed neutrons for materials research, the largest and most advanced additive manufacturing equipment, and facilities that produce, purify, and ship the most isotopes. He has positioned the laboratory to play a central role in our Nation's pursuit of breakthrough technologies for energy, cybersecurity, quantum, and other diverse fields. Dr. Zacharia has also expanded the Laboratory's impact in the Oak Ridge Corridor by leading new ventures to attract technology startups and create a pipeline for the next generation of scientists and engineers. I hope our colleagues join us in recognizing Dr. Zacharia for his tremendous contributions to the Nation, and on behalf of the U.S. Senate, we wish him the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, earlier this week, a Federal judge in Washington, DC, outlawed the continued use of title 42 pandemic-related authority for the expedited removal of aliens who enter our country illegally. The judge found that the policy should be updated because the COVID-19 pandemic has changed since 2020. I agree. The pandemic is over. But the border crisis is not over. In fact, it is worse than ever. That is why I have introduced legislation that provides a far stronger reason for invoking title 42 authority--the deadly drug smuggling crisis at our southern border that is killing a record number of Americans. The Biden administration has dismantled our Nation's most effective border security policies. When I led a group of Tennessee sheriffs and mayors to the border this past April, Border Patrol agents in Laredo told me that the Migrant Protection Protocols, which are also known as MPP, or ``Remain in Mexico,'' were a painful illustration of the Biden administration's destruction of these border security tools. MPP required that migrants seeking asylum in the United States remain in Mexico until it has been determined whether they were actually entitled to asylum. The vast majority of those claiming asylum are not entitled to it. When MPP was implemented in 2019, the agents said it was like flipping a switch because people stopped coming when they learned they couldn't get in. Once the Biden administration halted this policy, illegal immigration catapulted to record numbers. In fiscal year 2021, more than 1.7 million known illegal border crossings occurred--a new record. That record was short-lived, however, because in fiscal year 2022 that just ended in September, nearly 2.4 million illegal crossings were documented, exceeding the 2021 record by 37 percent. And that doesn't take into account the got-aways. Last month set a new record for October, with more than 230,000 illegal aliens. These figures are just the crossings that the agents see and document. When I traveled to the border in April, Border Patrol agents told me that title 42 was the last tool that they had to at least partially stem the tide of illegal border crossings. If we allow a DC judge to remove title 42 authority, our Border Patrol agents will have no tool to stem the massive increase in illegal immigration that is certain to follow. And that is why, given this recent court ruling, passing my legislation today is imperative. To illustrate, Border Patrol currently has capacity to process a maximum of roughly 5,000 illegal immigrants per day. Right now, they are already overwhelmed, processing nearly 8,000 per day. Predictions from agents and former immigration judges are that, without title 42 authority, this number would likely double to between 15,000 and 18,000 per day. This would overwhelm processing capability, and the border would effectively cease to exist. Such a surrender of American security and sovereignty is intolerable. The Department of Homeland Security itself said in response to this week's court decision: We will prepare for an orderly transition to new policies at the border. We know that smugglers will lie to try to take advantage of vulnerable migrants, putting lives at risk. Yes, it is true that we need policies to replace title 42, and it is true that smugglers will use this court ruling to entice thousands more migrants per day to cross the border illegally, which will risk lives and will magnify the humanitarian crisis at our southern border in a variety of ways. If swift removal under title 42 is a possibility, would-be border crossers may decide not to embark. But without title 42, there is nothing left to dissuade them. Further, without title 42, the drug cartels send migrants across the strategic points to bog down Border Patrol agents with paperwork processing. And the paperwork processing timeframe is five times longer without title 42. Do the math. Removing title 42 will collapse what is left of our Border Patrol's capacity. And with Border Patrol bogged down further, the cartels will use the resulting enforcement gaps to move their fentanyl, which they produce with the help of the Chinese Communist Party, across our southern border. We cannot allow more enforcement gaps for deadly drug smuggling. That is why I have introduced legislation to add drug smuggling as an additional basis for title 42 authority. It is called the Stop Fentanyl Border Crossings Act. Overdoses have become an epidemic in America. This legislation would allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to use title 42 to combat substantial dangerous drug trafficking across the border. This bill would give Border Patrol a necessary tool to focus on stopping drug traffickers. According to the CDC, drug overdose deaths reached another record high last year. Nearly 107,000 Americans died, many from fentanyl and other synthetic opioids coming across this southern border. We desperately need title 42 to aid in the fight against this drug epidemic. Without this authority, the recordbreaking border crisis, and the deadly drug overdose crisis that it fuels, will become unimaginably worse. Therefore, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be discharged from further consideration of S. 3959 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 public health. More than 100,000 Americans are dying annually of drug overdoses, many of which result from drug smuggling at our southern border. The 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 far worse without title 42. American lives and communities hang in the balance. Yet my colleagues across the aisle are categorically opposed to a commonsense policy to address this glaring problem. It begs the question: What do Democrats propose that we do in response to this title 42 ruling? refuse to deal with the problem? hope this crisis won't spiral further out of control? These are not acceptable answers. More broadly, is any volume of illegal immigration or drug overdose deaths adequate to get this administration to secure the border? How much longer will we allow our broken border policies to be manipulated by a criminal alliance between the Chinese communists and the billion- dollar Mexican drug cartels that are shipping huge quantities of deadly illegal drugs into the United States across our southern border? I yield the floor.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. HAGERTY. Dr. Gupta received a tie vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. There is a Senate process that has been agreed to by both parties by which the leader can discharge a nomination with a tie vote from this committee to bring it before the full Senate, if he so chooses. I am saying this as a person who has been put through 30 hours of cloture himself when I served in the executive branch and went through this very process. We should not break from Senate process and procedure with regard to Dr. Gupta's nomination. Members should have the opportunity to vote, and the majority leader can schedule it. Additionally, I think the vast majority of Senators from both sides value the economic empowerment of women everywhere around the globe. The previous administration made economic empowerment for women worldwide one of its signature initiatives. I served as a diplomat at that time in the previous administration, and the senior Senator from New Hampshire was a valuable partner in many of our efforts, which I very much appreciate. So I think that there is a goal we share, but there are valid concerns on our side that the current administration is tainting this worthy goal and dismantling the bipartisan achievements of the previous administration. We deserve to have a better understanding of what this administration is doing before we rush ahead and totally bypass the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to confirm the person who will be the chief implementer of this administration's policies. I am not comfortable giving consent to expedite consideration of this nominee. Therefore, I object.

Mr. HAGERTY. Madam President, I have great respect for my colleague from New Hampshire. I worked very hard on the WGDP initiative that was put in place by the previous administration. It has the potential to do so much good. I am very concerned about elements of that being dismantled right now, and I would like to remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that this is a matter of priorities. Again, I will reiterate that I was put through 30 hours of cloture. The rules have been improved since then to reduce that amount of time. I think it would be a total of 4 hours in this case, yet the priorities set by the leadership of the other side indicate that they don't care as much about these positions because they won't even schedule it. It is certainly within the Senate majority leader's power to do that. Rather, the Senate majority leader would rather prioritize seating the Postal Board of Governors than putting Ambassadors into place. So I have difficulty with this argument, and, with all due respect, my objection stands.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I wish to recognize Fred Smith, founder and executive chairman of FedEx for receiving the distinguished L. Welch Pogue Award for his outstanding lifelong contributions to the field of commercial aviation. On September 14, Mr. Smith, a proud Memphian and generous benefactor to his city, will receive due commemoration for his renowned achievements and contributions involving his organization, career, and passion. Since 1971, the iconic Tennessee company he founded has facilitated deliveries not just in the United States but across the world. This includes FedEx's work on the Project Airbridge Operation, a partnership executed by FedEx under the direction of the Federal Government that expedited the importation of critical supplies at the height of the pandemic. This award, first presented in 1994, recognizes individuals with a lifetime of achievement in aviation and recognizes individuals who not only have a vision for where the industry is headed, but have acted to make it a reality. I can think of no one more deserving to receive such an award. Let us celebrate this achievement and commitment to excellence that Mr. Smith has shown throughout his career.

Mr. HAGERTY

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I ask to dispense with the reading.

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

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, in fiscal year 2021, Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested more than 12,000 illegal aliens with aggravated felony convictions. An alltime record number of illegal border crossers entered our country last year. This is an unprecedented national security crisis. Before we spend billions of dollars on Green New Deal programs, the Department should first do its core job of securing the homeland. This same policy was adopted 53 to 46 during the budget resolution process last August, with four of my Democratic colleagues joining me. Now, 1 year later, we have a worse crisis and an opportunity to provide real funding to protect our citizens from individuals who endanger our communities. I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will maintain their previous support for this commonsense approach to fund law enforcement and put public safety and national security over partisan politics. We have a chance to address this in a real manner right now. Solving a major crisis like this is worth taking a little more time. I urge my colleagues to support this motion.

Mr. HAGERTY. Mr. President, do I have more time left?