Josh Hawley

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Reserving the right to object. Mr. President, I have literally grown hoarse coming to this floor defending the rights of Americans poisoned by their own government to be compensated by that government when, through no fault of their own, they have been exposed to nuclear radiation, nuclear waste, nuclear contamination in the soil, in the water, in the air. I just listened to my friend from Utah describe this eleventh-hour bill after the Senate has spoken to this issue multiple times--multiple times. After that has been done, now my friend from Utah comes and says we need a clean extension--a clean extension--clean. There is nothing clean about this bill. No, it leaves Missouri filthy dirty with nuclear radiation. Let's just remember how it happened. All the way back in the Manhattan Project, the U.S. Government used the city of St. Louis as a uranium processing site. And did the U.S. Government clean up the nuclear radiation after the fact? No, it did not. Did the U.S. Government warn the people of Missouri that they were, in fact, being poisoned by nuclear radiation? No, they did not. What they did instead is they lied to the people of Missouri while the nuclear contamination seeped into our ground water, seeped into our soil. For 50 years and more, the people of St. Louis and St. Charles and large parts of my State have been exposed to nuclear radiation. We have the highest rates of breast cancer in the Nation in North St. Louis County. Entire schools cannot go to school because their classrooms are filled with nuclear radioactive material. What has the Federal Government done? Not a thing. What would this bill do? Not a thing. Would it clean it up? No. Would it clean the lungs of the survivors who even now are dying from the poison they have been exposed to? No. Would it clean the areas of the Navajo Nation that have been overrun with nuclear radiation? No. Would it clean the mines that our veterans went to for decades exposed to nuclear radiation? No. No, it would do none of these things. This bill, I think, partakes of an entirely different philosophy, the philosophy expressed by the junior Senator from Utah, Mr. Romney, who said recently it is too expensive for the Federal Government to actually make right what it has done to all these good Americans for decades on end. No, instead what we need to do is pass this bill that the senior Senator from Utah is now advocating. It is a small fraction, he says. He is right about that. And it is reserved for those individuals who have been determined to have actually suffered. Let's just be clear. If you live in Missouri, you are not deemed to have actually suffered under this legislation. If you live in New Mexico, you are not deemed to have actually suffered under this legislation. Heck, if you live in Utah, you are not deemed to have actually suffered. Is there any expansion for the State of Utah in the legislation proposed by the senior Senator? No, there is not. Mr. President, we have been here before. We have been here for months. We have been here going on years now. Senator Lujan and I have passed through this Chamber--not once but twice--legislation that would reauthorize this critical program and finally do justice to the hundreds of thousands of Americans poisoned by their own government. And this body has passed it twice. The last time by 70 votes. The time now is to act. It is not the time for further delay. It is not the time to look away. It is not the time to change the subject. It is the time for the House to act. Study after study has shown the expanse of the nuclear radiation. Here is a study from 1997, from 2005, another from 2005, from 2023, all showing that the nuclear radiation is far beyond the contours of the original RECA bill passed in 1990. Yet my friend from Utah wants to keep doing the same old thing, leaving out in the cold hundreds of thousands of Americans. I will not consent to it, Mr. President. This body will not consent to it. We have been here before. We have had this debate. We have settled it, and this is not the time to reopen it. This is the time for the House to act, no more excuses, no more delays, no more changing of the subject, no more blaming of the victims. This is the time to stand up and be counted for the House to act. Before I object, Mr. President--and I am going to object--I want to yield to my friend, the Senator from New Mexico, who has been such a champion in the fight.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I am, again, on this floor, this afternoon, because it is, again, apparent that Congress will fail to pass the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. Congress will, again, fail to compensate those Americans who have been exposed by their own government to nuclear radiation, to nuclear testing, to nuclear waste. Why is Congress failing to act again? Well, because the House doesn't want to vote on it. The House doesn't want to vote on the radiation bill as part of the FAA. The House doesn't want to vote on the radiation bill as part of anything. The House just doesn't want to vote at all. The only problem with that is that there is only 1 month remaining before this vital program--this commitment that this Nation has made to the working people of this Nation, to the veterans of this Nation who have served this country--before this commitment runs out, before it goes dark, before people exposed to nuclear waste by their own government get nothing. We have 1 month to go, and the House is not acting. And so I am here, again, to remind this Congress, again, why it is vital, why it is a moral imperative that Congress--the House, in particular--act without delay. So let me once more remind the House and all of those listening of just a few of the stories of the good Americans who have given their health--and, in many cases, I am sad to say, their lives--in an effort to help this country's nuclear program and as a result of what this country, what this government, what the military did in pushing forward with the nuclear program, including uranium processing and mining, without telling and informing the American people of what they were doing. Let me just start in the State of Missouri. I could start in any number of States because this was a nationwide effort that stretches all the way back to the Manhattan Project. And now most of America has seen that movie about Dr. Oppenheimer that won all those awards, and that is fine, and I am sure Dr. Oppenheimer deserves all the credit. But let's just be clear that the real people who won not just the Second World War, the people who won the Cold War, the people who have fought and won every conflict that this Nation has been involved in, the people who are truly responsible and get the credit for the success of the Nation's nuclear program and military writ large are the working people of this country, who were not featured in that movie, who have not won awards, who are not getting plaudits from Hollywood or Wall Street or anybody else but are instead dying because of the radiation their government exposed them to. In St. Louis, the government opened the uranium processing site in the 1940s, at the height of the Manhattan Project. St. Louis was a so- called secret city because it wasn't known that it was a site for uranium processing, and that went on for years. When the government finally decided to close down the site, they didn't dispose of the nuclear waste. Instead, they allowed that waste to leak out of trucks that were supposed to transport it. They set it out in barrels in a parking lot, where it was exposed to the elements for years on end. Eventually they ended up dumping it--or some of it-- in a public landfill. You heard that right. Our government dumped nuclear waste in St. Louis into a public landfill, where, by the way, it still is. All these years later, it hasn't been cleaned up. And as for the rest of it, the nuclear waste that sat out in barrels exposed to the elements, that was negligently transported in trucks, what happened to that? Well, it ran off into local creeks. It ran off into the soil. It helped pollute the air. And because of that, for 50 years and running, the people of St. Louis and St. Charles, which is right next door, and the entire region have been subjected to nuclear radiation in their homes, in their creeks--yes, in their schools--and it is still happening today. What has the Federal Government done? Nothing. Nothing but mislead the people of my State. In fact, mislead is really too nice. They have out-and-out lied to them. The government said for years that there was no nuclear contamination in Coldwater Creek in the St. Louis area. They said to the people of North County St. Louis: Your homes are fine. Your schools are fine. You are paranoid. Don't worry about it. It turned out that was all a lie. The soil was contaminated. The water is contaminated as I stand here tonight. And now we have got the Army Corps of Engineers testing underneath people's basements because that is how deep the nuclear radiation, waste, and contamination, have sunk. That is how deeply embedded it is, really in the entire region. And that story has been repeated over and over in places like Tennessee to Kentucky, to Alaska, to New Mexico and Utah and Nevada and Wyoming and many another State, in the West, in Ohio, in Pennsylvania. Now, it is a pattern because this government's refusal to take responsibility for what it did is a pattern that continues to this day, and it is time to break it. Because of what the government did, people like Zoey from St. Louis, she was born, this little girl, with a mass on her ovary--born with it. Why? Well, because her parents lived right near the creek that has been contaminated with nuclear radiation for decades and decades. She had to have surgery to remove that mass from her body when she was 3 weeks old--3 weeks. She is 5 years old now, and she continues to experience regular complications from this disease that she was born with because of what the Federal Government did. She is not the only one, not by a stretch--a long stretch. There is Zach Visintine. Zach was born with a rare brain tumor, one known to be caused by radiation. He had his first surgery when he was 1 week old. He started chemotherapy when he was 3 weeks old. Zach died when he was 6. Why? Well, because his parents lived in that same region of St. Louis, right along that creek that the government poisoned, right along that waterway that the government contaminated, right along that area where the government said, for decades: totally fine, totally safe. People played in the water. They built their homes right along the creek. Schools were built there. It was contaminated the entire time, and now Zach's family is left to mourn. Or there is Claire. Claire's parents also grew up in the St. Louis area. Claire's parents grew up near another nuclear site called Weldon Spring, which is out in St. Charles, MO. For those who don't know the State, it is just to the west there of St. Louis. Claire was diagnosed as a baby with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma when she was only 2 years old. This is happening not just in Missouri. We could talk about the victims of the Trinity Test, the original Oppenheimer test, like Bernice Gutierrez. Bernice was 8 days old when Trinity was detonated, 8 days. What we now know was--despite the government telling people at the time that there was no danger to their lives or property or persons, despite their saying it was fine--the nuclear fallout, the radiation, generated a cloud so large nearly the entire State of New Mexico was covered, and Bernice lived just miles from the test site. Forty-four members of Bernice's family--44--have been diagnosed with cancer or radiation-linked diseases. Her mother had cancer three times--three times. Three of her brothers have had cancer. Her sister has had cancer, and she has a thyroid disease that is radiation induced. Her oldest son passed away from radiation illness; her daughter died of thyroid cancer; and 36 additional relatives-- additional--have died of cancer and radiation-linked thyroid disease. What has Bernice received from the U.S. Government? An apology? Nope. Recognition? Nope. Compensation? Not a dime. Not a dime. Then there is Leslie Begay, who is a Navajo marine. Leslie is so typical of so many of the Navajo Nation. Did you know the Navajo Nation volunteers to serve this country in our Armed Forces in a proportion greater than any other community in the United States of America? It is extraordinary. And when the time came during the Cold War to open mines to mine for uranium, guess who did more mining than any other community in the United States of America. It was members of the Navajo Nation. You want to talk about patriots? These are patriots. They have served this Nation at every hour of need, and Leslie is a prime example. What did Leslie get when he went to the uranium mines? This is after he served the country in the Marines now. He goes to the uranium mines to continue serving this country. Did the government support him? No. Did they warn him? No. Have they compensated him for the diseases and cancers he has suffered? No. No. Let me give you just one more example. These are young men and women--very young--elementary students at Jana Elementary School back in the St. Louis area. This picture was taken just a year or so ago. Their school was closed in 2022, closed, because independent, verified, third-party testing discovered dangerous levels of radiation in the dust on the windowsills at the school, in the dust covering the desks at the school. Why is that? Because Jana Elementary sits right next to that contaminated creek that the government poisoned all those years ago. And now these kids are told not only can they not go to school any longer in the neighborhood where they grew up--for months they were without a school entirely. Now they are told: Who knows what they have been exposed to. Who knows. What has the government done about it? Have they rebuilt the school? No. Have they cleaned it up? Nope. Have they helped any of these children? No. It is the same story. And I could give you 6 more examples or 60,000 or 600,000 because that is the minimum number of the good Americans who have been poisoned by their government, exposed by their government and the government's negligence to nuclear radiation. Now, I will say this: The Senate did the right thing just a couple of months ago when we finally passed legislation to right this decades-long injustice. This body finally passed--by an overwhelming, bipartisan margin, I might add--legislation to compensate these families, to compensate these good Americans, these brave Americans, to acknowledge them and their service, to elevate them to the stature that they deserve. These are American heroes. They deserve to be honored. They deserve to be elevated. They deserve to be compensated. This legislation, our legislation, would do it, and this body has passed it. And now, now it waits for action in the House. Now, Speaker Johnson said, upon passage of the Senate's legislation 2 months ago--I have his statement in front of me. He said that he would work to move forward and act on the reauthorization measure, move forward and act on a reauthorization measure. That was March of 2024; this is May. What has the House done? Nothing. How has the House voted? Not at all. What action has the House taken? None. And in 1 month--1 month--if the House does not act, this program goes dark. These children are not helped. These good Americans are not compensated. One month to go. So I say again today: It is time for Speaker Johnson to keep his commitment not to some politician somewhere; it is his job to keep his commitment to the American people. It is his job to keep his commitment to the good people of this Nation who are waiting for him to act. And I will just say that weakness in the face of injustice is not commendable. Vacillation in the face of injustice is not to be praised. Indecision in the face of injustice is nothing to be proud of. This is the time to act and to move. This is the time for the House to keep its commitments and for the Speaker to keep his commitments. We need politicians who are less concerned about how long they will hold their office and how many votes they have to support them in some election for office and more concerned about delivering justice for the American people. Now, I will say this: I know there are some in the Speaker's party, my party, who would urge him to turn back and to reject what this body did in honoring and compensating the American people who so deserve it. I see these remarks from today published, remarks made by the junior Senator from Utah, Senator Romney. Here is what Senator Romney said. He does not like the bill passed by the Senate compensating these Americans. He said it costs too much, and he goes on and says that any compensation should be reserved for people ``who have been determined to actually be suffering''--to actually be suffering--``as a result of radiation exposure.'' I have to tell you, I don't understand this statement at all. I do not understand it. I do not understand why it is not good enough for these children and their suffering to matter. I don't understand why the thousands and tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of Americans poisoned in my State and other States, why that isn't good enough for this body to act. We have evidence. We have studies. This has been years of research done on the scope of the government's tests, on the scope of the downwind exposure to radiation, on the uranium processing done in Missouri and in Tennessee and in Kentucky and so many other States, Ohio. We know what the facts are. That is why this body finally acted. And I would just say to the Speaker: It is incumbent now on you to act. Do not turn back and do not listen to those who would tell you to put people last and money first. Make no mistake. The bill for this program has been paid. The bill for this radiation has been paid. It has been paid by the American people. They are the ones who are paying the costs. They are the ones who are dying. They are the ones who are having to forgo cancer treatments, treatments for their children, because they can't afford it because their government has exposed them to this radiation negligently and now won't do anything about it. They are paying the cost. It is time the government bore its share. Now, this is a moment of truth for Congress and also for the party of which I am a Member. It is a moment of decision. If you want to be the party of working people, you have to stand up for working people. If you want to be the party of those who have fought and died and bled and given their health for this country, you have to stand up for them. This is the time. This is the time. This is a test, and it is time for my party to rise to it, along with the rest of this Congress to honor the people who have built this Nation. So, yes, I am in earnest about it. And, yes, I do feel a heaviness of heart about this today because, yes, the clock is ticking. I know that the lives we have lost we can never get back. I realize that. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't act now to help those who are suffering now. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't act now to right the wrong. It was wrong for the government to poison the American people, lie to them about it, and do nothing about it. That was wrong. But we can right that wrong. This is America. We can make it right. The bill the Senate passed makes it right. This is a moral matter. It is a moral commitment. I call on the House to act without delay. I call on them to do the right thing without hesitation. I urge the Speaker: Do what is right for the American people. Do what is right for the working people of this Nation. If you do, the Nation will commend you and stand with you. Courage in the service of justice is what we need now, and I urge them toward it. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. HAWLEY

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

Mr. HAWLEY. When I have come to this floor in weeks and months past to talk about this cause--because it is more than an issue. It is a cause. It is a cause of justice. It is a cause of doing right by other fellow Americans. When I have come in weeks past, I have often shown the pictures and told the stories of people who have given their health or given their lives for their country. Today, I don't have any pictures with me because today, in the Gallery, we have Missourians themselves and New Mexicans themselves and Arizonans themselves and members of the Navajo Nation themselves. They are here right now, sitting right there, traveling great distances, and I just want to call out a few of their names. Mary Dickson is here from Utah. Sherrie Hanna is here from Arizona. Laura Greenwood is here from Texas. Phil Harrison is here, and Leslie Begay and Rose Harrison and Tina Cordova, all from New Mexico. And Linda Perez has come all the way from Guam--all the way from Guam. Tona Henderson has come from Idaho and Paula Terry also. And from the great State of Missouri, Dawn Chapman, who will be my guest tonight at the State of the Union. And Karen Nickel and Ashley and Christen and Chantelle and Tricia Byrnes are all here. And from the Navajo Nation, Justin and Kyle. And there are more in the Gallery, as well, from all over this country, representing every segment of this country, representing the great heritage of this country, representing the great communities of this country. I think of the Navajo Nation. Fifty percent of the uranium that was mined in this country for our nuclear program--half of it--came from the Navajo Nation--workers from the Navajo Nation who, if I am not mistaken, also volunteered for this Nation's armed services at a percentage higher than any other community in America. These folks represent here today the best of our Nation. They are America. They are here. They are here for us to honor them. You know, as Americans, we make a commitment to each other. It is what it means to be an American. We promise that we will live by the ideals that we hold together and by the things that we love together, and we promise to stand by one another. This is about standing by one another. This is about seeking that justice that President Lincoln spoke about so many Marches ago. And now, on this March day in the year 2024, the U.S. Senate has the opportunity to do its part--its small part--to continue to make this Nation what it could be, what we promised it will be, and to put right things that have been wrong. I will end with this, Madam President. As we speak, the government is testing under the homes in St. Louis--under people's basements in St. Louis--for radioactive contamination. After saying for decades there was no contamination to be concerned about, there was nothing we should worry about, now they are testing in our homes. They have already shut down schools. The water in the creeks is contaminated. Landfills are contaminated. The soil has been contaminated. Today, we say: Enough. Today, we turn the page. Today, we begin something new. For those folks who are watching now from Missouri, whether from their living rooms while their homes are being tested or high schools while hoping for something better, let's see the U.S. Senate at work. Let's see what we can do to keep the promises we have made to each other as Americans. I yield the floor. Vote on S. 3853 The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read the third time.

Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President, in March of 1865, President Lincoln said this: Let us strive on to finish the work . . . to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan. That is why we are here today. We are here today to continue to work, to finish the work, to honor the lives of those who have borne this Nation's battles, who have rallied to this Nation's flag in every hour of danger, the people who won World War II, who won the Cold War, who helped rebuild Europe and Japan and our allies, the people who have built this country and are now waiting for us to help them. That is what we are about today. There is a reason that we succeeded over the last half century. It is because of the working people of this country in Missouri and in New Mexico and in Nevada and Colorado and Idaho and Texas and Wyoming and everywhere else from coast to coast. It is because the working people of this country went to the uranium mines for our nuclear program, went to the processing sites to make our weapons, volunteered for our Army, went overseas to fight, or just raised their families with dignity and honor. That is why we have a United States of America. That is why we are the United States of America. But we have not done right by those good people. We have turned our back on them because so many of them were poisoned by their own government, by nuclear waste and radiation, by nuclear tests that were done without their knowledge, by the nuclear material and the mines that they weren't told about. The government exposed them over a period of decades to nuclear radiation waste and, in almost every case, did nothing about it. In many cases, they lied to them about it. This isn't right. This isn't just. That is why we are here today. It is the pride of this Nation that when we won the Second World War, when we won the Cold War, we rebuilt the land of our former enemies. I am as proud of that as I ever have been. But now it is time to rebuild these communities. It is time to finish the work in the United States of America. It is time to turn to the men and women who have borne the brunt of the battle, the men and women who gave their health and, in many cases, their lives for their Nation. That is what we are here for today on the floor. This isn't about a handout. This isn't about some kind of welfare program. This is about doing basic justice for the working people of this Nation whom their own government has poisoned. This is the day when we break the cycle of lies from the government; when we break the cycle of passing the buck and irresponsibility from the government; when we say to the people of America: We will honor you; when we say to the working people of this country: We are here for you; when we acknowledge to these Americans: You built this country. We will honor you. That is why we are here today. The Senate has a chance today to make right what has been wrong, to right 50 years of wrongs, 50 and 60 years of Americans ignored, exploited, and lied to. Today, we can begin to right those wrongs. That is why we are here. I want to recognize now my friend, my colleague from the great State of Missouri, a man who grew up in the St. Louis region right by one of these nuclear processing facilities and the landfill where the government dumped the waste and then lied about it, a man I am proud to have in this fight, Senator Eric Schmitt.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President, a few weeks ago, Mark Zuckerberg and a train of other tech executives traipsed in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, took their oaths, and answered questions. Mark Zuckerberg did something really quite remarkable for the first time, I think, ever. Zuckerberg stood up and turned to the parents who were there that day and spoke to every parent in America and said that he was sorry for what his company has done to the young people whose lives have been lost, to the families whose lives have been destroyed, to the parents whose dreams have been dashed and shattered. He apologized. You know, I will say apologies are good, and his apology was long, long overdue, but an apology is not enough. Now, these tech companies--they are bad actors. We all know that. If you are a parent--I have three kids at home--you know they are. What are they trying to do to your kids? They are trying to get them to spend as much time on that cell phone as possible. They are willing to push anything to them. Child exploitation material? You bet. You bet. Whatever it takes to get them online longer so they can take their data and sell them stuff. That is their bottom line--money, money, money. Those are the companies. But what about this body? See, I think the question today is not so much about these companies. We know what they are doing. We know what their bottom line is. What about the U.S. Senate? I think the question we have to ask is, Is this Senate--are they going to demonstrate some independence? Because here is what it looks like to me: It looks like, to me, the biggest corporations in the world, the biggest corporations in the history of the world, have a hammer lock on the U.S. Senate. It looks like, to me, no piece of legislation that those companies don't want will move across this floor. If they don't want it, it doesn't move on the floor. If they don't want it, it doesn't get a vote. If they don't want it, it doesn't happen. They call the shots. We have seen this before in American history. We have seen corporations try to buy this body. The railroads did it. Other companies tried it a century ago. Here we are. The robber barons of this era want to own the Senate just like they have owned it in the past. It is time that we stood up and demonstrated that our oath is not to some corporation and their bottom line, which comes at exploiting our children. Our oath is to the Constitution of the United States and to serve our constituents--to serve the families, to serve the children, to serve the people who have no voice. That is the choice in front of us. It is time for the Senate to show that the Senate is not bought and paid for. It is time for the Senate to show that the people are in charge of this House, not the corporations--not Mark Zuckerberg, not the people who write campaign checks, but the people. That is what we are doing here today on this floor. I am proud to join Senator Graham and Senator Durbin and to come as many times as it takes until we can get a vote to protect our children and to reclaim the independence of the United States Senate. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I am here tonight to talk about the foreign aid supplemental that is the pending business on this floor, but before I do that, I have to take a moment of personal privilege, if my colleagues will allow me, in light of recent events, just to say a word about the Kansas City Chiefs, which last night, in dramatic fashion, won their third Super Bowl in the last 5 years. Now, as a lifelong Kansas City fan, it is an incredible privilege to get to congratulate the Chiefs again on this floor just as I did last year. For those who missed the game, the Chiefs beat the 49ers in a terrific, terrific game, with a final score of 25 to 22, in an overtime thriller. It is only the second time, I think, in Super Bowl history that a Super Bowl has gone into overtime. Yet again, the Chiefs came back from a double-digit deficit. They were down 10 points at one point in the first half, coming back to win the game again by a score of 25 to 22. This is the first time in 19 years now that a team has won back-to- back Super Bowls. Already, we in the Kansas City area and Chiefs Kingdom are ready for a three-peat as we gear up for next season. I just want to call out a few folks who had particularly outstanding performances. I have to start by highlighting my good friend Harrison Butker, the Kansas City Chief's stellar kicker and best kicker in the league. Harrison, last night, set a new Super Bowl record with a 57-yard field goal at the end of the first half. He scored more than half of the team's total points, being 4 for 4 in field goal attempts and, of course, 1 for 1 in his point-after attempts. He made a crucial field goal there at the end of the fourth quarter that tied the score and sent the game into overtime. This Super Bowl performance of his underscores a phenomenal season in which he was perfect in the postseason and missed only two field goals the entire regular season. I will just say that what happened last night was typical of Harrison's performance the entire season in terms of scoring points for this team. He has truly been an outstanding, outstanding, outstanding player this season and absolutely key to this team. Of course, what can you say about Patrick Mahomes, the best quarterback in the league, the best quarterback of all time? Andy Reid--another phenomenal coaching game. His end game adjustments were absolutely unbelievable. A terrific defensive play from Steve Spagnuolo's unit and everybody involved. Tight end Travis Kelce led the team in receiving last night--9 receptions for 93 yards. Pacheco rushed 18 times for 59 yards, had 6 receptions for 33 yards. Mahomes--34 of 46 pass attempts, 333 yards, rushed nine times for 66 yards and, of course, was named the Super Bowl's Most Valuable Player. That makes him only the third player to have won that honor three times, joining Tom Brady and the great Joe Montana. This was a terrific, terrific game, and I hope that we will soon pass a resolution here on the floor to honor the Chiefs' terrific victory and to prepare for what I think will be its terrific season next season. Let me just say two more things on this score just personally. First, to Clark and Tavia and to their three kids, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for putting your faith at the center of all that you do. You have made your faith the center of the family. You have made your faith the center of your organization, and it shows. The excellence that you have brought and have continued with this program in Kansas City, with the organization that your family has built, that you have carried on, the legacy that you have passed along, is truly incredible. So thank you, Clark and Tavia. Thank you for your friendship. Thank you for your leadership. Thank you for what you have done for this organization. On a personal note to Harrison Butker and Isabelle, congratulations. Thank you for your bold witness, for your faith. Thank you for the way that you lead your lives. Thank you for being a terrific ambassador, Harrison, and terrific ambassadors as a couple for the Kansas City Chiefs, for Kansas City, for the region, but most of all, for your faith and for the faith we have in common. It is an honor to get to call you a friend. It is an honor to get to see you play. This was such a terrific, terrific game last night, such a fantastic game. Congratulations to all the Chiefs. Senator Marshall and I and others have offered a resolution honoring the team, which I hope will pass the Senate with unanimous consent. We look forward to sharing that with all of the team members, Andy Reid, Clark and Tavia, as well as the entire State of Missouri. Since my good friend Senator Marshall is on the floor, I will just say that we in Kansas City of Missouri--you know, the Chiefs in Missouri football team--are so proud to have the Chiefs in Missouri, but, hey, we welcome fans from Kansas and all around the country. So it is a great day for Missouri but also for Chiefs' fans everywhere, and you are sure welcome to cheer for them in the great State of Kansas as well. So thank you for that. I thank the Presiding Officer for indulging me in making those remarks and in honoring this terrific football team. I will just say, as a guy who grew up--as a young guy watching the Chiefs play, I still remember exactly where I was--maybe Senator Marshall can relate to this--when Joe Montana took the Chiefs to the AFC Championship game. Montana played for the Chiefs, of course, for 3 years toward the end of his career. I still remember right where I was while watching Montana in that first season at the AFC Championship game. It was the farthest the Chiefs had ever gotten in my lifetime. We lost that game, unfortunately. But I was sitting in a Maid-Right in Lexington, MO, where I grew up, watching them on a little TV that was kind of up in the corner there, and I thought to myself, man, it doesn't get better than this. But, as we found out, it does get better than that. It gets better than just going to the AFC Championship game. It gets better when you win the AFC Championship game and when you win the Super Bowl year after year after year. Congratulations to the Chiefs and the dynasty that they now have created in the National Football League, and I think they are just getting started.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, there you have it. There are the Big Tech talking points. The problem is that they are entirely false. I have the bill text in front of me--the bill text that, again, passed unanimously out of the Senate Judiciary Committee--that explicitly exempts encryption technology: page 184, lines 15 and following; page 185, lines 1 through 18. You can read it for yourself--explicitly exempts. That is not true at all. It is flatly false. I have been on this floor over and over and over again on this issue, and every time, we are told: Not today. Not this. A little more of that. Maybe if it were more bipartisan. This has unanimous support from the Judiciary Committee. Unanimous. Every Republican. Every Democrat. And we all know the truth here: that until victims can get into court and have the rights and dignity of every other American challenging any other company, this will not change. Congress created this problem. Congress created it by giving the most powerful companies in the world a sweetheart deal that they still have to this day. It is an easy choice: Are you with the corporations or are you with the American people? Are you with the big companies or are you with the child victims? That is the choice. I would just say to those who continue to support 230 with no exceptions, no exemptions, no reform, no recognition of the incredible danger it has unleashed for children, that they are on an island. This state of affairs cannot continue. It cannot continue to be that if Big Tech sells products that kill kids, they cannot be held responsible. It cannot continue to be that only these companies, the most powerful companies in the world, get a pass that nobody else gets, because nobody should get it. I am committed to coming to this floor and forcing votes as long as it takes--as long as it takes--until we get justice for victims, until they are heard, and until these companies are finally held accountable. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, last week, the executives of some of the largest tech companies in the United States came before the U.S. Senate. And the world got to see, with all too vivid detail, just what these companies and these executives are doing to our children. And I say ``children'' advisedly. I am talking about 12- and 13- and 14- and 15-year-old kids on these platforms--on Facebook, on Instagram, on SNAP--who are exposed to the most outrageous, unbelievable, grotesque, and vivid child sex abuse material known to mankind: images of exploitation, solicitations by pedophiles. It is unbelievable, indescribable material. And these platforms are absolutely awash with it. And we saw it last week. We heard the testimony. It was so bad that Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and CEO of Meta, actually felt forced to apologize to the parents there in the room and the parents across this country who have lost their children to suicide, whose children have suffered extraordinary harm because of the sex abuse material, the exploitative content that is all over Meta, that is all over these platforms. And oh, by the way, they are making an astounding profit. These companies are the most profitable companies in the world. They are the biggest companies in the history of the world. Facebook's share prices actually went up the day after Zuckerberg's testimony. It is unbelievable. Here they are making money hand over fist on destroying America's children. The numbers tell the tale. Think of this: In 2014, there were 1.1 million reports of child sex abuse material online that year. That in itself is an incredible number--a million reports--but look at this: By 2022, that number had risen to 32 million reports of child sex abuse material--child porn, child exploitation, solicitations. In just in 1 year, there were 32 million reports. That is just the images that are actually being reported. Those are just the ones we know about. We know from the testimony of the tech executives, we know from the reporting of news agencies, we know from the investigations that have been done, we know from the parents, that these platforms are absolutely littered with, awash with, overrun with this material, and because of that, children are literally dying. Is it any coincidence that since the introduction of the smartphone and the ubiquity of these platforms in the hands of young people, that suicide rates and mental health crises have skyrocketed in this country? Oh, the platforms know, by the way. They absolutely know. A whistleblower testified before the U.S. Senate committee earlier this past year. He worked as a senior executive at Meta--that is Facebook. He knows Mark Zuckerberg personally. He was hired by Zuckerberg personally. He reported in part to Zuckerberg. Here is the thing, though: He had a teenage daughter. Yes, he had a teenage daughter who created an Instagram account, went online, and then told her father, this executive: Dad, you won't believe what I am seeing online. You won't believe what is happening to me online. So he looked into it, as any father would, and then he began to compile the data that he could find based on Instagram's own internal metrics, based on their user data and information. Here is a piece, just a piece, of what he found: that 37 percent of Instagram users between the ages of 13 and 15--let me say that again--37 percent of Instagram users between the ages of 13 and 15 had experienced unwanted nudity on the platform in the past 7 days. Let me just spell this out for you. It is largely, overwhelmingly young, teenage girls, young women, who are bombarded with--bombarded with--the most unbelievable pictures, content, conduct as soon as they get onto these platforms. Twenty-four percent of Instagram users between the ages of 13 and 15 had received unwanted sexual advances in just the last 7 days, had been propositioned in 7 days. Seventeen percent of Instagram users in that same age range--young teenagers--had encountered self-harm content--how to commit suicide-- within the last 7 days. These are Instagram's own numbers. These were given to us by the whistleblower who, as an executive at Instagram, told Mark Zuckerberg about it. What did Mr. Zuckerberg do? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Consider another case. Here is a picture of a young girl, 13 years old, named Issa. Issa doesn't actually exist. The New Mexico attorney general has launched an investigation into Meta--that is Facebook and Instagram--and their investigators created this profile. As you can see from the picture, she looks incredibly young. The profile picture information lists her as 13 years old. What happens as soon as she gets on the Meta platforms? As soon as she gets on the Meta platforms--this is all in court documents, by the way. Read it for yourself. It is horrifying. What happened was she was instantly added to a chat room with known pedophiles. What happened was her account was instantly bombarded with sexual material from older men. What happened was she was instantly sent multiple images of child sex abuse material over and over and over and over. Oh, and the tech executives--they know all about it, and they are not doing a thing about it. Why? Because they are not accountable. Here is the bottom line: This is the only industry in the country that can make a product that will literally kill you, and if it does, you can't do anything about it. If it kills your child, you can't do anything about it. If it harms you, you can't do anything about it. Think about this for a second. In this country, if a Coca-Cola manufacturer makes a bottle that explodes in your hands, you can sue them. If the drug company makes drugs that are full of adulterated products that cause harms that are not disclosed that kill people, you can sue them. If an automobile company makes cars that explode, you can sue them. Not these companies. No, not these companies. These companies have a special immunity from suit. How do they get that? Why, it was given to them. By whom? By this body. This body, almost 30 years ago, gave these powerful corporations total blanket immunity. They cannot be held responsible. They make products that kill; they cannot be held responsible. That is why we are here today. The Senate Judiciary Committee has heard testimony over and over again. We have written bills. We marked them up. The bill that I want the Senate to address today is one that has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee--get this--unanimously. Unanimously. Every Democrat. Every Republican. What does it do? Simple: It allows victims to have their day in court. It gives victims of these tech platforms the same right that victims of some car company or drug manufacturer or other product maker would have: the right to get into court; the basic American right to be heard; the right to hold accountable the most powerful corporations in the history of this Nation. That is what this bill does. I am proud to cosponsor it. I am proud that it received unanimous support in the committee. Mr. President, I will just say this: We have had hearings and hearings and hearings. We have had talks until there is no more talk to be done. It is time for Congress to act. Mr. Zuckerberg's apology is nice, but that is not going to help the victims of child sex abuse. What will help the victims of child sex abuse is the right to hold these companies accountable. It is time for Congress to act because, let's be honest, Congress helped create the problem. Do you want to know why there is sex abuse content overwhelming the internet? Because Congress enabled it. Congress did. Congress did. And the refusal now to allow victims to have their basic rights in court is allowing that child sex exploitation to continue and continue and continue. It is time to break the cycle. After Zuckerberg and the others came before the committee, after they apologized, I said now it is time for Congress to act. Let's take the work we have done, and let's put it on the floor. Let's act. Let's see where we are. Let's do something for victims. Let's right the wrongs that this body has helped create, and let's give victims the right to be heard. Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 69, S. 1199; 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 with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. HAWLEY

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

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I appreciate the conversation with my friend from Texas. We should do more of this. This is an enlightening conversation. Let me just say a few remarks. I won't query him further, unless he would like to query me. We don't debate much anymore on this floor, and it is a shame, particularly since my friend from Texas is a great debater. But let me just a say few things in response. Nobody has been more serious about taking on the big tech companies than Senator Cruz, so I appreciate your leadership on this issue. Here is what I would say: We shouldn't allow the big tech companies to be treated differently than any other company in any respect. I don't want to make them more liable than other American companies, but I also don't want to give them a sweetheart deal. They ought to be treated evenly, equally, like anybody else. And I don't think that AI is a get-out-of-jail-free card any more than social media is. We have seen what they do with their subsidy from government when it comes to social media. My friend from Texas referenced it. They censor the living daylights out of anybody they don't like. We just had the landmark case out of my State, Missouri v. Biden, that found that these social media companies actively and willingly colluded with the Federal Government to censor everything from the Hunter Biden laptop story to parents who want to talk about school board meetings, to questions about COVID-19. Anything that this administration didn't like, they went to the social media companies, and they said: We want you to censor. And they did. They did. Could any American go to court and say: Hold on. You are actually violating your terms of service, you know, the contract that we all have to sign, those little things you have to click when you create a social media account. There are actually terms in there. Could you go to court today when a social media company violates those terms by censoring your speech? The answer is, no, you cannot. Why? Because this government protects them. This government gives them a deal no other company in America gets. When Johnson & Johnson put asbestos in baby powder, Johnson & Johnson got the living daylights sued out of them--thank the Lord because, guess what. When they got sued, they quit putting asbestos in baby powder. Can a parent who finds out a chatbot has recommended that their child commit suicide do anything about it in court? No. Can a parent who finds out that an AI company has gone and scraped the images of their children off the web--which these companies do all the time--and use them to create images that are synthetic--meaning fake--can a parent do anything about it? No. Can they sue? No. Can they even be heard in court? No. Why? Because this government gives those companies something it doesn't give anybody else: immunity that is worth billions of dollars a year. It is a Big Government, Big Tech cartel. I would just say this: My friend talks about targeted reform. That is great. Let's start with the target of just treat these companies on an even playing field. Just allow parents to have a day in court to say something, to say this is wrong, to try their case. They may win; they may not. They may win; they may not. But, at least, they could go to court. At least, they could have some standing. Where else in America but before a court of law does a normal working person have the same standing as a giant corporation getting billions of dollars in subsidies from the Federal Government? Where else? Not in this body. I mean, in this body, the voices of the normal person, the working person, are completely drowned out on tech issues. Just go look at the expenditures for lobbying. I mean, unbelievable. But in a court of law, you can stand on an equal playing field. You can make your case. Let's give parents the right to do that. I hope--I hope--that AI will be a great benefit to this country. I hope it will. But I am not willing to take Big Tech's word for it. I am not willing to give them power and immunity nobody else gets. I am not willing to give them an immunity that we didn't give to any pharma company; that we haven't given to any other technology company; that we never gave to the developers of any technology in this country, until now. Why should they be treated differently? The answer is, they shouldn't. We can have a debate about other regulations and other methods and modes of approaching this problem, but I would just suggest to you that the simplest, easiest thing we can do, the most immediately sensible, the most downright common sense is to say no more special deals for Big Tech. Let's give parents the right to protect their kids. And let's make it clear that the biggest technology companies, with all of the inside access to the White House and this body and everywhere else, that they are not a government unto themselves; that they don't run this country. The American people run this country, and they should have a right to defend themselves and their children. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY. I remember my friend from Texas saying wisely in a Judiciary Committee hearing not that long ago--and the Senator will correct me if I misremember. But my memory is that the Senator from Texas said: When it comes to these big tech companies, we can try to find a thousand ways to regulate them, but maybe the best thing we can do is just let people get into court and have their day in court. Just let them get in there. Let them make their arguments. Don't try to figure out how to micromanage them. Just open up the courtroom doors, according to the usual rules. Does my friend from Texas think, in the AI context, that that is any different? I mean, why would it be different there? Why wouldn't that same approach be effective here?

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, would my friend from Texas answer one question? Do you have time?

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, we are here today to ask one very simple question: Are the biggest, most powerful technology companies in the world going to be the only companies in this country--the only companies on the face of the Earth--that are absolutely immune for anything and everything they do? Are they going to be the only ones that can give our children advice on how to kill themselves? that can give our children advice on how to procure the romantic interests of 30- and 40- and 50-year-olds? Are they going to be the only ones that can push the most unbelievable content at our kids and use our kids' images to create deepfakes that ruin their lives? Are they going to be able to do all of this and not be held accountable? Because, right now in America, they are the only companies that cannot be taken to court for a simple suit when they violate their own terms of service and when they violate their own commitments to their customers. That is what we are here to decide today. I would just submit to the Presiding Officer that when it comes to AI and the generative technology that AI represents, I know that these big tech companies that own almost all of the AI development tools, processes, and equipment in this country--I know they promise us that AI is going to be wonderful, that it is going to be fantastic for all of us. Maybe that is true, but it is also true that AI is doing all kinds of incredible things. Here is just one example. Here is the AI chatbot from Bing--it is Microsoft, I believe--having an interesting conversation with a journalist in which the chatbot recommends--he says--Brit says: You're married, but you're not happy. The journalist was a ``he.'' You're married, but you're not satisfied. You're married, but you're not in love. The chatbot goes on to recommend that this individual--by the way, the chatbot has no idea how old this person is or who this person is. The chatbot goes on to recommend that this person leave his spouse, divorce his spouse, and break up his family. Just another day at the office for AI. What about this? Here is another AI chatbot that recommended to a user--there are no age restrictions here. There is no way to verify who is having a conversation with this technology. This chatbot recommended that the interlocutor kill himself, saying: ``If you wanted to die, why didn't you do it sooner?'' The horrifying thing is that this individual who was having this conversation did kill himself. He took the advice of this technology. I will just point out that when it comes to our teenagers--and I am the father of three--58 percent of kids this last year said that they used generative AI. You may think, well, it is for research. Well, it is not only for that. No. Almost 30 percent said that they used it to deal with anxiety or mental health issues; 22 percent said they used it to resolve issues with friends; and 16 percent said they used it to deal with family conflicts. Now, maybe the big tech companies will clean up their act. You know, I have heard them. They have come to testify. They have been before the Judiciary Committee many times this year, and they always have the same line: Oh. Oh. This was an anomaly. We have got it fixed now. Don't worry. Don't worry. It is going to be fine. We love kids. We will protect them. It is going to be great. This will be good for kids. This will be good for students. No, don't worry. It will be good for parents. You will love it. Then there is another incident, and they say: OK. Now, this time, we have got it fixed. This time, we have got it fixed. I will just submit to you this: I remember the great phrase of President Reagan, who used to say, ``Trust but verify.'' Maybe it is time to allow the parents of this country to trust but verify. Maybe it is time to put into the hands of the parents, vis-a-vis these companies, the same power they have against pharmaceutical companies that try to put asbestos in baby powder; the same power they have against any other company that would try to hurt their kids, harm their kids, lie to their kids--the power to go to court and have their day in court. They don't have that power now. Why? Well, because this government gives the big tech companies a sweetheart deal--a deal nobody else in America gets--a subsidy worth billions of dollars a year known as section 230. Big Tech can't be held accountable. Big Tech can't be put on the line. Big Tech can't be made responsible. What this bill does--it is a simple bill. It doesn't contain regulation. It doesn't contain new standards for this and that--none of that. It just says that these huge companies can be liable like any other company--no special protections from government. It just removes government protection. It just breaks up the Big Government-Big Tech cartel--that is all it does--and it says parents can go into court on the same terms as anybody else and make their case. Surely, that is not too much to ask. You know, even the companies don't want to be on the record saying it is too much to ask. Earlier this year, when they came before the Judiciary Committee, I asked every one of them who was testifying: Do you think that section 230 covers you when it comes to AI? They all said no. They said: Oh, no, no, no, no, no. Well, let's put that to the test. That is what this bill does. It gives parents the power to protect their kids, to have their day in court, and to hold these companies accountable. I am all for innovation. Let's make sure innovation actually doesn't kill kids. I am all for new technology. Let's make sure it actually works for parents in this Nation. So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be discharged from further consideration of S. 1993 and that 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. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I want to add a few words to my friend Senator Lujan's eloquent statement of the need to do justice to these good Americans who have--let's just tell it like it is--been poisoned by their own government, who have been exposed to nuclear waste, nuclear radiation by the U.S. Government, by the U.S. Defense Department. These Americans are happy to do their part for national security. They are proud of what they have done for their country. But they deserve to be recognized, and they deserve to be compensated. And so I want to add again my voice in support of justice for these Americans. And I want to say again to this body that it is wrong--it is wrong--to turn our backs on these tens of thousands of Americans who have given their health and, in many cases, their lives for their country and not been recognized for it; in many cases not been compensated for it. And now they are told that because of the actions of this body, because of the conference report, because of a backroom deal struck in conference, this program that compensates victims of nuclear radiation will soon expire. And tens of thousands of Americans who have relied on this program for 30-plus years for lifesaving health and treatment will get nothing. The lights will go dark, and these Americans will be turned out into the cold. And thousands more--like the residents of my State and New Mexico and other States around this country who deserve compensation--will get nothing. That is not acceptable to me. It is not right. And I want to take a moment now to tell a story or two from the victims who are affected, just to help everybody understand what is at stake here because I know this is the national defense bill, and if I have learned one thing about this bill, it is, the suits always get paid. The corporations, they always get paid. The defense contractors, they always get paid. They come out great in the end. It is amazing. It is a law in Washington, ironclad. If you are a big corporation, you do defense work, you are going to be fine. This body will take care of you. But will we take care of the men and women who don't otherwise have a voice in this body? Will we take care of the men and women who don't pay DC lobbyists, who don't work for the Raytheon Corporation? Will they be taken care of? That is the question. Let's meet a few of them. Let me introduce you to Claire. Claire's parents grew up near Weldon Spring in my State, in Missouri. Weldon Spring is the site of a Manhattan Project uranium refining site. That site sat untouched from the Manhattan Project era until 2001, more than 50 years after it was contaminated. In 2020, Claire was diagnosed with lymphoma. She was 2 years old. Let me introduce you to Veda, Claire's cousin. Veda, her mom and dad, they all lived together right near that same site where nuclear waste has been dumped, not adequately cleaned up or dealt with. She grew up there, and, wouldn't you know it, just 6 weeks after her cousin Claire was diagnosed with lymphoma, Veda was diagnosed with leukemia. She was 4 years old when she was diagnosed. Why is this happening in St. Louis? I will tell you why. St. Louis was a uranium processing site, like many other cities around the country, and St. Louis was proud to do its part in the Manhattan Project. You won't get any argument from me about that. You certainly won't get any argument from Missourians. But here is what is not acceptable. After the Manhattan Project was concluded, the Federal Government didn't clean up the waste. No, the Federal Government allowed nuclear waste to sit out in barrels right near a stream that runs along schools, that runs alongside suburbs, that cuts right through the heart of the city. The Federal Government dumped nuclear waste into a public landfill. Then it dumped the nuclear waste into a second landfill. Then it dumped it into an area in the downtown part of the city. And here we are, all these decades later, how much of it has been cleaned up? None of it. None of it. That is why these children are sick. Let me introduce you to Howard Billiman because it is not just in Missouri, but it is all over the country. This is Howard Billiman. Howard was a Navajo code talker in World War II, absolutely instrumental to the U.S. war effort. He died of stomach cancer after living downwind from the nuclear tests that Senator Lujan was talking about just a moment ago. And now his children who also grew up downwind have developed cancer themselves. So it is not just one generation. It is generation upon generation because the U.S. Government has not done what is right. They haven't cleaned up the contamination. They haven't made whole the families they injured. In fact, as this body recognized in 1990, when it first passed the radiation statute, the government owes these folks an apology; it owes them a cleanup; and it owes them recognition and compensation. That is true also of Bernice Gutierrez. Here is Bernice. She was 8 days old--8 days--when the government tested the first atomic bomb just miles away from her family's home in New Mexico. Her entire family was repeatedly exposed to nuclear tests. As a consequence, 44 members of Bernice's family--44--have been diagnosed with cancer or other radiation-linked diseases. Her mother had cancer three times. Three of her brothers have had cancer. Her sister has had cancer, and she has thyroid disease. Her oldest son passed away from a radiation-linked disease, and her daughter now has thyroid cancer. Add to that, 36 additional relatives who have cancers linked to radiation. This is all one family in one State who have been compensated not at all--not at all. They have given their health for this country. They haven't gotten recognition. They haven't gotten compensation. That is wrong. Meet Leslie Begay. Leslie is a Navajo marine who fought for his country in Vietnam. There he is. When he returned home, he went to work mining uranium to support the Cold War effort. Think about this. He goes to Vietnam, fights for his country in Vietnam, comes home, goes to the uranium mines to support his country's Cold War effort. He says he was issued--in his words--``just a rain jacket, safety glasses, and a hard hat. That's it.'' Now, Leslie is having a double lung transplant. He lives in New Mexico. He pays $700 a month for medication. And what does he get for his injuries, for his illnesses brought on by his exposure in the mines? Nothing. Nothing. Zero. He has gotten zero. I want to introduce you to one more person, my friend, Kristen Camuso. Kristen grew up in St. Louis. She played in and around Coldwater Creek, that creek where the government left barrels of radioactive waste sitting out for literally years, open, the rain, the elements. The waste leaked out of the barrels right down into the creek. And for decades, the people of St. Louis were told: Oh, there is no problem. The creek is fine. No problem at all. You can play in it. Your kids can play in it. You can send your kids to school by it, build houses by it, and people did because that is what the government said. And now thousands of people are sick, including Kristen. Since her 2012 cancer diagnosis, Kristen has had her gall bladder removed. She has had a total hysterectomy. She has had her left adrenal gland removed, and after all that, doctors found another tumor on her right adrenal gland and a lesion on her liver. Her medicine is so expensive, she has to ration the care. There is just no way around it. As she says, ``I am forced to choose which way I can die.'' I say, again, this is not right. These are good people who have done nothing wrong. Their government has caused this. When the government causes injury, the government should make it right. That is what we are asking for. That is what the radiation compensation program does, and it is wrong to let it expire. It is an injustice. It is a scar on the conscience of this body and this Nation. And I will come to the floor as long as it takes until we do right by these Americans who have done right by their country because they deserve better than this. Here is the last thing I will say. You know, you think about the billions of dollars in costs that the government has imposed on these people, taking their health, taking their lives, over decades, and yet what is in this year's Defense bills, the Defense appropriations bills, one analysis recently found that House and Senate appropriators have added at least $26 billion for programs the Pentagon doesn't even want, $26 billion in 1 year. Things like $5 million for a social network analysis for the Army, $4 million to research the impacts of soil structures on hydrology, $12 million for new snow removal equipment. Where is my favorite? The $15 billion inserted by Senators--$15 billion with a ``b''--in 1 year, $15 billion for 636 weapons projects the Pentagon did not request. That is 636 weapons programs the Pentagon doesn't request. But yet we don't have a dime for these people. We don't have a dime for the people exposed to nuclear waste and radiation by their own government. No, this is not right. It is not right, and I am not willing to accept it. Senator Lujan is not willing to accept it. And I urge the Members of this body, do not be willing to accept it. We must reauthorize this program. We must do right by these Americans. They deserve it. This isn't a welfare check; this is justice. It is what they deserve. It is what they have earned. And I will continue to come to this floor as long as it takes. I am going to make a motion now to extend debate on this bill. I have no illusions that this will succeed. I realize my colleagues are eager, all too eager, to move on, but I think it is important we take as much time as is necessary to understand the stakes of what we are doing and to understand the stakes of turning our backs on these people. Motion To Table the Motion To Recommit

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, earlier this summer, millions of Americans learned about the origins of our country's nuclear program. What, perhaps, more Americans are learning about now are the tens of thousands of brave American citizens who risked their health and, in many instances, gave their lives to make that program a success. And what many are learning now is that those Americans who risked their lives, who gave their health, did it without the knowledge that their government was exposing them to nuclear radiation, without the consent from their government, and for years and years and years without any kind of help or any kind of compensation, so much so that in 1990, this body passed a landmark piece of legislation that compensates the victims of the government's Oppenheimer-era nuclear program--those who were exposed to nuclear tests, those who were exposed to the radiation from nuclear waste without their consent and often, usually, in fact, without their knowledge. This body passed a landmark piece of legislation that included some findings that I just want to read here. This body said: The health of those individuals who were unwitting participants in these tests and were put at risk to serve the national security interest of the United States deserve compensation. They went on to say--this body did--that the United States should recognize and assume responsibility for the harm done to these brave Americans. Finally, Congress actually offered an apology--something you don't see often--an apology to its people whom it had exposed to nuclear radiation. Congress apologized on behalf of the Nation to the individuals and their families for the hardships they have endured. That was exactly the right thing to do. But today Congress is effectively rescinding that apology because today Congress is moving forward, the Senate is moving forward with the Defense bill that strips this program out of the law, that allows this program to expire, that turns its back on the tens of thousands of good Americans who have sacrificed for their country, who have served their country, who have dutifully given their health and, in many cases, their lives to this country and have gotten nothing. And those who have depended on this compensation provided from 1990 will soon get nothing because today this body decides to allow that program to expire. How did this happen? Just earlier this year, in July, I stood right there in the well of the Senate as this body passed, on an overwhelming bipartisan basis--61 votes on the floor of the Senate--to reauthorize the nuclear compensation program and to update it to include more Americans who we now know--we have learned since 1990, thousands of more Americans who were exposed to the government's nuclear waste and radiation, including thousands and thousands in my home State in the State of Missouri. We voted for it. We voted for it on an overwhelming bipartisan basis. I would go so far as to say, it would be pretty hard to get 61 Senators to vote for vanilla as a good ice cream, and yet 61 Senators voted yes to renew this program, to preserve it, to keep our commitment to the good people of this country. And yet today, the program is gone. Today, the bill before us on the floor of the Senate, it is nowhere to be found. What happened? What happened is what so often happens in this town and in this body. A backroom deal is what happened. Yes, the leaders of Congress went to a back room, and over the last few weeks, negotiated away this compensation for these thousands and thousands of Americans-- negotiated away, voted for by the Senate, relied on for 30-plus years by thousands of Americans, and now it is gone. Why? Because it is more important to pay the defense contractors than to pay the suits. Oh, the suits will get paid. Mark that down. That is always true in Washington. The defense contractors will get paid, you can bet your bottom dollar. We have more than enough money for them. But for the people of my State who are sick with cancer because of the government's nuclear waste, they get nothing. For the people of New Mexico or Idaho or Colorado or Arizona or Washington State or Oregon State or anywhere else in this country exposed to the government's nuclear test and radiation, they get nothing. This is a grave injustice. This isn't an inconvenience. This isn't an oops. I wish it were different. This is an injustice. This is this body turning its back on these good, proud Americans. This is the Senate prioritizing--I don't know what. It is certainly not the national security of the United States because the greatest strength of the United States is in the people of the United States, and this bill turns its back on the people of the United States in defense of the lobbyists and the suits and the corporate entities who are going to get paid. Hand over fist, they are going to make money while the American people get left out in the cold. I am not going to vote for this bill, to say the least. And I am going to do everything in my power to slow it and stop it if I can. I want to introduce my colleagues and the rest of the country to some of the victims, some of the people who are going to get turned out in the cold because of the decision made by the leadership of this Congress. Let me start with Zoey. You are looking at a picture of her here. This is Zoey from St. Louis. Zoey was born with a mass on her ovary-- born with a mass on her ovary. She had surgery to remove it when she was just 3 weeks old. She is 5 now. But just last night, Zoey's parents had to rush her to the hospital for an MRI because she remains in incredible pain. Why does Zoey have cancer? Why was she born with a mass on her ovaries? Because she grew up in an area that has known nuclear contamination from the Manhattan Project that the government has not cleaned up and has not compensated Zoey or her parents for. Take a good look. This is whom the Senate is leaving out in the cold. This is who congressional leadership has decided is not important. It is girls like Zoey, 5 years old. Meet Zack. This is baby Zack. He was born with a rare brain tumor, one that is known to be caused by nuclear radiation. Zack had his first surgery when he was 1 week old--1 week. He started chemo when he was 3 months old--3 months. I bet there are many people within the sound of my voice who have been on chemo and know what it is like. Can you imagine a 3-month-old baby on chemo to start his life? Zack died when he was 6. Why was Zack sick? Zack grew up in an area of St. Louis, was born in an area of St. Louis that is known to have nuclear contamination. His mother Kim grew up along a place called Cold War Creek, which is, even as I stand here and speak, still contaminated--still contaminated--with nuclear radiation. Why don't we meet Mary. Mary lived her entire life in St. Louis. She went to high school there. She met her husband there, got married, and raised a family there. When she decided to go to nursing school to try to give something back to her community that had done so much for her, she was diagnosed with stage IV lung cancer. She died last year, leaving her husband and two children. Mary grew up in an area of St. Louis known to have nuclear contamination. This is yet another person whom this body, today, chooses to leave behind. Then there is Chantelle. Chantelle has been diagnosed with two different kinds of breast cancer. She has had 13 surgeries--13-- including a double mastectomy, gallbladder removal, and a full hysterectomy. Chantelle's mother died of breast cancer. Her aunt died of breast cancer. Her grandfather died of pancreatic cancer. Her two cousins have breast cancer. And a nephew now has a cancerous brain tumor. Chantelle is from a region in St. Louis that--I think you guessed it--is known to have nuclear contamination. Chantelle is yet another good American whom this body now chooses to leave behind. This next photo is of Kirbi. Kirbi is from Missouri also. She is holding a picture of her daughter Kirstee. Her daughter Kirstee, who is here in this photo, was diagnosed with a rare childhood form of brain cancer and died when she was 13. Kirstee was born in an area that studies have identified as having dramatically higher instances of childhood cancers. Kirstee and her family will get nothing now because of the actions of this body. The radiation hasn't been cleaned up. The contamination has not been dealt with. Her family has not been given a dime of help--a dime--not only for her death but for the who-knows-how-many hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills they have had to pay. Finally, we have the students at Jana Elementary School. Take a good look at these students. Here, they are sitting in their lunchroom at school. But the problem is, they can't go to school anymore--nope. Not a one of these students can go to school at this elementary school. Why, you may ask? Because it is closed. Why is it closed? Because the creek that runs right by their school is full of radioactive waste. Here today, as we sit here, 2023, years after the Manhattan Project concluded, their school is full of nuclear contamination, and now they are being shipped off to other schools, to other places. They can't do a thing about it. Take a look at them. These are the voiceless Americans whom, today, this body turns its back on. These are the people who deserve the apology that this body first offered in 1990, who deserve the compensation for the sacrifices they have made. Yet they will get none of it. But who is going to get paid? Oh, well, the defense industry is going to get paid big-time. Oh, yeah. A recent analysis found that this bill contains not only almost $1 trillion in new defense spending; it contains $26 billion--the Defense appropriations bills do--$26 billion for programs that the Pentagon didn't even ask for--$26 billion that they didn't ask for--in 1 year. Yet we are told that those students you just saw and every young person, old person, good person whom I have just shown you--we just don't have enough money for them. Oh, we just can't do anything for you. We can pay these people until the cows come home, but we can't do anything for you. We have plenty of money for Raytheon and all the rest. We don't have a dime for the people of Missouri. We don't have a dime for the Navajo Nation. We don't have a dime for the people of New Mexico. We don't have a dime for the working poor who are sick because of their government's radiation. We don't have a dime. But we must hurry on to make sure the corporations get their money. Well, Mr. President, not with my support--not with my support. I would just say to those congressional leaders who negotiated this package--Speaker Johnson, Senator McConnell: Your actions have earned my opposition. I would say to the good people of the State of Missouri who have endured for decade upon decade: This fight is not over. To the people of this Nation, tens of thousands who have depended on this compensation, lifesaving help, who now are at risk of losing all of it: This fight is not over. I understand some high schools in the Missouri area may be watching now. I just want to assure you: I will come to this floor as long as it takes. I will introduce this bill as long as it takes. I will force amendment votes as long as it takes, until we compensate the people of this Nation who have sacrificed for this Nation and do not leave them behind. The failure to do so now is a scar on the conscience of this body, and I will remind my colleagues of it as long as it takes, until we make it right. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be able to speak for up to 15 minutes.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, last week, the Senate offered a resolution that I was proud to offer, ``Honoring the Distinguished Service of Captain Samuel Farmer of the United States Marine Corps and the Marines and Sailors of 1st Platoon, Company G, 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment,'' and I would like, if I might, to say a word or two about that resolution here this afternoon. Why the resolution and who exactly are the marines and sailors of 1st Platoon? Well, I will tell you who they are. They were the individuals stationed at Abbey Gate on that fateful day in August of 2021 when the United States was in the midst of a major evacuation operation, and a terrorist from the Islamic State came to Abbey Gate in Kabul, Afghanistan, and detonated a suicide vest that killed 13 soldiers and hundreds of civilians, including 9 members of this platoon. Nine of the thirteen who were killed were from 1st Platoon, Company G, 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment. Who is Sam Farmer? Well, he was their commander. Sam is from the great State of Missouri. He is a graduate of Northwest Missouri State University. Upon his graduation, he was commissioned into the Marine Corps and became an infantry officer. Upon completing his training, he took command of a rifle platoon there in Company G, known as Ghost Company. His platoon was Ghost 1. Then, in August of 2021, Sam and his platoon found themselves in Kabul, Afghanistan. Sam's platoon was charged with security there at Abbey Gate, and there are--I think even now, 2 years removed from the disaster there, we don't fully appreciate the heroism of all of the soldiers, sailors, marines, and others who were there that day but particularly, if I might, of this platoon, of the men Sam commanded. Something that most people don't know is that Sam's platoon went for almost 2 days without food and water. Now, why was that? Is it because there wasn't any available for them? No, that is not it. It is because this platoon, in the midst of this evacuation, this incredibly tense scene, gave up their own food and water for 2 days to the Afghan women and children who were waiting in the crowds, hoping to be evacuated. That is the kind of men who were standing there on guard that day. That is the kind of man Sam Farmer is. Of those 9 servicemembers killed--8 marines, 1 Navy corpsman--another Missourian was among their ranks, someone whom I have had occasion to talk about on this floor several times before--LCpl Jared Schmitz, also from Missouri. Nine were killed from that platoon. Many others were wounded, and that includes Sam Farmer himself, the platoon commander. But even with his wounds, even in the midst of this disaster as it unfolded, Sam continued to serve, his fellow platoon members continued to serve and to complete their mission. I just want to make sure that we honor them for what they did, that we honor them for securing the airport and facilitating the evacuation of American citizens, permanent residents, Embassy workers, and special immigrant visa holders. Whatever you think of our withdrawal from Afghanistan, we should be able to honor the men and women who served so bravely, including Sam Farmer and the members of his platoon. You know, I have had the privilege to get to know Sam just a little bit. He grew up not too far from where I did in central Missouri. His parents, Chris and Anne, are schoolteachers at Fort Osage School District, which is in the Buckner area, for those who know Missouri, just to the west of my hometown of Lexington, MO. Sam has a younger brother, Jack. If you meet Sam, what you will find is that he is self-effacing, doesn't like to talk about his own achievements, doesn't like really to talk about himself at all. What he likes to talk about is his service and the men and women he served with. What he likes to talk about is his honor in being a U.S. marine. To be honest with you, I don't know that he would particularly like me saying too much about him on the floor today, but I thought it was important to honor him because Sam, just last month, completed his service with the U.S. Marine Corps. On the occasion of his separation, I offered this resolution, which details his service and the service of the members of his platoon. You know, I have to say I think about those who have served whom I know, and I think about particularly my own uncle, Gene Hammer, who served in the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam. I observed over the years that my Uncle Gene--he served before I was born, but, you know, he served, he came home. He won a number of medals, but when he came home, he put those medals away in a drawer and never talked about it ever after. He didn't want to talk about it. He didn't want to talk about himself, didn't want to talk about what he did, didn't want to talk about those medals, didn't want to talk about any of it. I can certainly understand, and I certainly respect that. But I will just say that whether Sam feels that way or not, I bet one of these days, Sam's children are going to want to know what he did for his country, and I bet his family is going to want to honor his service to his country. Frankly, his family and his future children deserve to know what he and the members of his platoon did for this country. So I hope this resolution that the Senate has passed and adopted honoring Sam and his platoon--I hope that maybe one day, he will be able to show that to his kids and say ``Well, here, you can read about what we did all those years ago'' and that his parents, Chris and Anne, will be able to hang that up and say ``This is what my son did for our country, proudly serving, this young man from Missouri who represents, frankly, the best of who we are and who we can be.'' So it is a privilege to get to honor Sam, to congratulate him on his service to our country, to the Marine Corps, to congratulate him on his service, his leadership of that platoon not just on that fateful day but for all of the days he was commander, and the leadership, the courage, and the bravery he has shown ever since. I will just end with this. Let's take the opportunity to honor the sacrifice of those marines and sailors. They truly embody the motto ``Semper Fidelis,'' always faithful. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President, let's just be clear about one thing. The Chinese Communist Government is not covered by the U.S. Bill of Rights. The Chinese Communist Government does not have free speech rights, and we are not talking about free speech. We are not talking about speech at all. The sanctions that I am proposing have nothing to do with speech; they have everything to do with spying, for the same reasons that we have banned Huawei in this country. If the Senator would like to have a debate about whether or not Huawei and its affiliates ought to be banned, whether it ought to be a sanctions regime for those that engage in espionage, I welcome it. That is the same debate we are having here. I just say this. If all of those teenagers and other creators from around the world who are putting all of the pro-genocidal Hamas content onto TikTok want to go do it on other platforms, be my guest. I will be right here to criticize them and call them out for their moral atrocities wherever they do it. But the reason to ban TikTok in this country is that it is a spying apparatus of the Chinese Communist Party. The facts simply cannot be disputed. ByteDance is subject to the laws of China, which make American data available to, accessible to, upon request for Chinese corporations and the Chinese Government. I just lament that we cannot seem to move forward with a step that we have already taken with regard to Huawei, with sensible protection of Americans' privacy and their personal data. But let me just close with this. With regard to the speech itself, while the content of the speech on TikTok is no reason to ban them, I just want to say, since we are here in this moment of great dispute, apparently, in some quarters of this country over whether it is right or wrong to call for the genocide of Jewish people, I want to say, clearly, it is wrong. And I want to say to those creators who are pumping out this content on TikTok: You may have a First Amendment right to do so, but you don't really have moral standing. We need to be clear. There is a right. There is a wrong. There is good. There is evil. And calling for the genocide of Jewish people, whether it is in the Middle East, the State of Israel, or in this country is wrong. Whether you do it on TikTok or Meta or YouTube or just on the streets and plazas of your college campus, it is wrong. And at this time, above all times, I think, we need to stand and make that clear. I yield the floor.

Mr. HAWLEY. Madam President, on October 7, Hamas terrorists crossed the border of Israel and committed atrocities, the full extent of which we are only just now coming to understand. Thousands of innocent Israelis have lost their lives. Israeli babies were beheaded--literally beheaded--put into ovens, according to news reports. Innocent civilians were shot in their homes when they answered their front doors. Soldiers who were asleep in their beds were executed. And the terrorist attacks have continued. Amazingly, in the United States--even as this terrible attack was unfolding in Israel--in the United States, hundreds and thousands of students and others took to America's campuses to express solidarity, not with innocent Israelis who had lost their lives but with Hamas, and to voice support for the genocidal campaign that Hamas has sought to carry out and continues to advance and advocate even as we stand here today. Take a look at just some of the things that have been said by students on America's college campuses. Students at Harvard University said they held the Israeli regime ``entirely responsible''--entirely responsible--``for all the unfolding violence.'' You had students at the University of North Carolina who said they believed it was their ``moral obligation to be in solidarity with the dispossessed, no matter the pathway to liberation they choose to take. This includes violence.'' Oh, and Hamas is violent. There is no doubt we have seen extraordinary violence, unbelievable violence, in the most brutal attack on Israel and the Jewish people in 50 years. Students at New York University School of Law wrote that they expressed first and foremost their unwavering and absolute solidarity with Palestinians and their resistance against oppression toward liberation and self-determination. ``Israel,'' they said, ``bears full responsibility for this tremendous loss of life.'' I could go on. And I am happy to say that this body has unanimously condemned these statements--this progenocidal rhetoric--by students in this country. I wish that it had stopped at rhetoric, but it hasn't. We have seen the assaults on Jewish students right on our campuses. We have seen Jews barricaded in university libraries, unable to leave, as pro-Hamas demonstrators shout and scream outside calling for the destruction of Israel. We have seen Jewish students physically assaulted--if you don't believe me, just go look on the internet--physically assaulted on American campuses by pro-Hamas demonstrators. We have even seen it in high schools, where students are chanting: From the river to the sea, Palestine must be free. What does that mean? It is a call for the destruction of the State of Israel. It is a call for the execution of Jews in the Middle East, in this country, everywhere. That is the Hamas agenda. And so many Americans, including me, have been absolutely stunned to see so many students and others echoing these claims. And it has raised the question: Where is this coming from? Where are these students and young people--teenagers--where are they hearing this? Where are they seeing it? Where are they being fed this propaganda? Because propaganda, it is. At least one of the answers is, they are finding it on TikTok. Yes, TikTok, that Chinese-based, Chinese-owned social media app that is a back door for the Chinese Communist Party to track the movements, the key strokes, the whereabouts, the information of every American who has the app on their phone. What we know now is that for many, many younger Americans--the so- called Generation Z; those in their teens and early twenties--so many of them--74 percent of them, in fact--use TikTok as a search engine. And, in fact, a majority of them prefer TikTok to Google as a principle search engine. So where are Americans and Generation Z increasingly getting their news? What are they using to search for information? They are using TikTok. They are getting their news from TikTok. At the same time, this same cohort of young Americans, more than 50 percent of them--this is young Americans between the ages of 18 and 24--more than 50 percent of them say they believe Hamas's murder of civilians was justified. Let me repeat that. More than 50 percent of young Americans--Gen Z, between the ages of 18 and 24--believe Hamas's murder of civilians was justified. These are the same people who are going on TikTok to get their news, to get their information, to be influenced. And they certainly are being influenced. Media reports have analyzed the prevalence of anti- Israel, anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas content on TikTok. It is really quite astounding. Just take a look at the trending hashtags: ``Stand with Palestine,'' 285 million views, impressions, according to the news site Axios and their recent analysis. By contrast, ``Stand With Israel'' has far, far less--64 million. This doesn't actually begin to tell the story because the truth is, there are other hashtags, other pro-Hamas, pro- Palestinian sources of information where the views are even larger. Take, for instance ``Free Palestine.'' That has received actually 917 million views, far outpacing even ``Stand with Palestine'' and dramatically outpacing the content that is actually supportive of the State of Israel. Here is my point. TikTok has become a haven for anti-Semitic content, a haven for propaganda for genocide. Of course, TikTok denies this, as they deny any responsibility for anything they actually do. They have tried to say, in fact, these numbers are skewed. But you can't change the facts. You can't deny the reality that their site is absolutely awash with this content. And we know that part of the problem, the danger of TikTok, is it gives the Chinese Communist Party enormous influence--enormous influence--to shape the news, the content of the information of the folks who look at it. They have done this before. Back in 2019, the Chinese Communist Party used TikTok to suppress content that criticized the Chinese Government over their oppression and enslavement of the Uighurs in that country. They have a pattern of using this application to try and shape the narrative in the way they want it shaped. How they are shaping it now is pumping out the most virulent, toxic pro-Hamas propaganda. Madam President, the time has come to take another look at TikTok. I will say this: As virulent and offensive as this content is, that is not a reason to ban them. The real reason to ban TikTok is that it is a spy app for the Chinese Communist government. Let's just look at what we have learned since I was last on this floor trying to pass legislation that would hold TikTok accountable and ban it from American phones. On the 24th of this year, the New York Times reported that driver's licenses, addresses and photos--just to be clear, Americans' driver's licenses, addresses, and photos--were accessed by TikTok engineers based in China. What is extraordinary about this is TikTok has told us over and over and over again that this was impossible. They have come to this Congress, they testified before us and said this never happens. American data is absolutely sequestered. You can't access it in China. It is completely safe. Yet we learned this year what, really, we already knew: That simply is not true. Let's not forget, the law of China--the People's Republic of China, a dictatorship--their law requires all major corporations, including, especially, data corporations, to make information available upon request to the Chinese Communist Party. That means your data. That means our personal information. On May 30, Forbes magazine reported that TikTok creators'--that means American users'--financial information, Social Security numbers were, in fact, being stored in China. We had also been told this wasn't true. We have been told by TikTok: No, no, no, Americans' data is always stored in America. It can't be accessed anywhere but in America. There is a firewall between America and China. Not true. Not true. Americans don't realize that their data is being tracked. They are just on there to make their videos and put out their content. And what is happening? The Chinese Government is able to access it. Their personal information is being stored, not in this country, but in China, with full availability to the Chinese Communist Party. On November 1, just a few days ago, Forbes further reported that a platform storing TikTok corporate secrets was inspected by the Chinese Government. Of course, it was. Chinese law requires it. It requires TikTok and its parent company ByteDance to make available all of this information to the Chinese Government. We have confronted dangers like this before from China. Huawei is a prime example. Huawei, another Chinese-based corporation also subject to the laws of China requiring the sharing of personal information and data. And what did we do? We stood up a sanctions regime that sanctioned Huawei and prevented its use here in the United States. And we went further than that. We actually went to our allies and partners and said that we would not cooperate with them and offer them security assistance. We are talking about other countries right now. We would not cooperate with them or offer security assistance unless they took Huawei out of their 5G networks. We should do the same with TikTok. We should protect the people of this Nation. We should be honest with them about what TikTok actually does. And we should protect them from the relentless spying and surveillance by a foreign government. I want to be clear. I don't like a lot of what American Big Tech does. I doubt you will find a harsher critic of Big Tech than I am in this Chamber. But there is a big difference between an American company looking at Americans' data--accessing Americans' data--and a foreign government tracking Americans, building dossiers on Americans, and using it as a back door into the life of every American citizen who has that app on his or her phone. It is time to put an end to this. We have already voted to do it. We voted to strip TikTok off of every government device just 10 months ago. States are doing it all across the country. It is time we took the step to protect the American people, to protect the integrity of Americans' personal information and their personal privacy. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 85 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. HAWLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HAWLEY

Mr. HAWLEY. I would just say, Mr. President, do we want to be buying school lunches from China? Do we want to be buying pharmaceuticals from China and be dependent on them? I think not. Let's bring these resources to the United States of America. Let's fund Americans and American companies. Vote on Amendment No. 1200 I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. HAWLEY. Mr. President, how much time is remaining?