John Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I would like to talk for a few minutes today about my favorite subject, which is Louisiana. I could talk the rest of the day and through the entire weekend about the good things about Louisiana, but today I want to talk about one of our problems. It is not just a problem for Louisiana; it is also a problem for the United States of America; it is also a problem for the American people; it is also a problem for energy independence for our country. Louisiana is drowning. It is drowning because we are washing away. Our land is washing into the gulf. I live about 250, 300 miles north of the Gulf of Mexico--sort of in the toe of the boot, if you think of Louisiana as a boot. If things continue as they are going, I may not be alive then, but my home-- whoever lives in it after I am gone--will be gulf front property. Remember, my home is 250 to 300 miles from the coast. Why is that happening? Why is our land washing away into the gulf? There are a number of reasons. I will mention two, in particular. The sea levels in the Gulf of Mexico are rising. We can have a rigorous debate about the reason for that, and I know many smart people think it is for this reason and others disagree and think it is for that reason, but we can't deny the fact that sea levels are rising whatever the cause. In fact, as the gulf meets the southern part of my State, it is rising about 12 to 13 inches every 100 years. We have another reason, though, as to why my State is washing away-- our land in southern Louisiana is sinking. Why is that? The Mississippi Delta, of which Louisiana is a part, is an ecological and hydrodynamic masterpiece. What God did in creating our State is just breathtaking. It used to be the Mississippi River, which runs right through my State, would overflow every year. It would deposit its sediment in South Louisiana. The water would recede and go back into the river channel, but the sediment would remain. After thousands and thousands of years, the land was built up. Then we leveed the Mississippi River. I am not saying we did the wrong thing by leveeing the Mississippi River, for we have increased the quality of life for a lot of Americans and enhanced our economy. When we leveed the river, we prevented it from overflowing so that it would no longer deposit sediment, but the sediment that was already there before we leveed the river was slowly sinking. So we have sea levels in the gulf rising 12 to 13 inches every 100 years, and we have the land sinking. You don't have to be a senior at Cal Tech to figure out we have a problem. That is why our land is washing away. Now, why is this important? It is obviously important for the people who live on the land that is washing away, but it is also important for America's energy independence because underneath the land that is slowly being washed into the gulf--crisscrossing that land and extending over into Texas and into Alabama--are 26,000 miles of pipelines that carry oil and natural gas that heat American homes and generate American energy. When that land washes away, those pipelines are going to be exposed. Do you know what the saltwater is going to do to those pipelines? It is going to corrode them. When that land washes away, those pipelines now exposed are going to be exposed to ocean currents, and they are going to burst. It will not be all at once, but they are going to burst, and this country's energy independence is going to be undermined. Do you know how long and how much money it will take to move those pipelines? I don't know. I am not sure if there are enough ditches to quantify it. Let me shift gears and talk about the solution as I think I have defined the problem. We are helping ourselves, and I will give you an example. The Morganza to the Gulf project doesn't mean a lot to some of you, but trust me--it is a big deal to the people of Louisiana and to the American people who are familiar with it. We have been taxing ourselves for 20 years to pay for that project, which is part coastal restoration and part hurricane protection. We also received help from the American people. Thank you. Thank you, American people, for coming to our aid. In 2006, the U.S. Congress passed what we call GOMESA. It stands for the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act. That is what I mean when I talk about GOMESA, and GOMESA is a pretty straightforward bill. It says that, for all new oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, the Federal Government and the State government are going to share the oil royalties. The government, as you know, owns the seabeds. We lease them to oil companies, and they drill and produce oil and natural gas. In fact, off of Louisiana's coast, we have wells that produce about 16, 17 percent of the Nation's oil and about 3 percent of the natural gas. Those oil companies pay royalties to the Federal Government, and the royalties flow through the Federal Government to the State government. Under GOMESA, the American people, through their representatives, said: OK. On all new wells that are drilled after 2006, Louisiana gets 37.5 percent of the money that the Federal Government gets--but not just Louisiana. We didn't want to be greedy. We asked to have Texas included. We asked to have Mississippi included. We also asked to have Alabama included so it would get 37.5 percent too. Fair is fair. The Federal Government gets the rest. Louisianans have put their money where their mouths are. We have dedicated every single penny of that GOMESA money to coastal restoration in order to try to build up our land faster than we have been losing our land to the gulf. It has been a losing battle, but we have been holding our own. To give you an idea of how dramatic it has been, since 1930--I think 1932--Louisiana has lost land the size of Delaware. I believe, if you run the numbers in terms of square miles, we have lost land the size of two Rhode Islands. I think we have lost a football field a day. Remember, this doesn't just hurt Louisiana. This hurts America, and it hurts our energy independence. Louisiana has put its money where its mouth is. We said: Thank you, American people, for passing GOMESA. We appreciate the 37.5 percent of the oil royalties we are going to get out of the Federal Government's share, and we are putting every single penny into coastal restoration. There is still a basic unfairness because 20 other States get 50 percent. Now, these States aren't coastal States. I am happy for them. Don't misunderstand me. These are inland States that have Federal lands. When oil companies drill on those Federal lands and hit oil or hit natural gas, those States don't get 37.5 percent of what the Federal Government gets; they get 50 percent. That is just not fair. Everybody ought to be treated the same. Louisiana and Alabama and Mississippi and Texas are not asking for any extra. We call that lagniappe in Louisiana. We aren't asking for any extra. We are just asking to be treated like everybody else. In Louisiana, we are dedicating every single penny--I don't know if I mentioned this or not--to solving the coastal restoration problem, which is not just Louisiana's problem but is a problem for the United States. We have a bill. It is called the COASTAL Act. The full name is the Conservation of America's Shoreline Terrain and Aquatic Life Act. We call it the COASTAL Act. All the COASTAL Act would do would be to treat all the States the same. Everybody would get 50 percent--a 50-50 split. Louisiana wouldn't get more or less than any other State. Alabama wouldn't get more or less than any other State. Mississippi wouldn't get more or less than any other State. Texas would be under the same rule. All of the States would get 50 percent. It would also make one other change. When GOMESA was passed, it capped the amount of money that Louisiana and Mississippi and Alabama and Texas could get each year from that 37.5 percent at $500 million a year. Out of basic fairness, we are asking that the cap be removed if we can pass this bill, the COASTAL Act. The quarterback of the bill is the senior Senator from Louisiana, Dr. Bill Cassidy. I am helping him all I can as are the Senators from Texas and Mississippi and Alabama and other States. All we are asking is for equality. I don't want to end on a negative note by just talking about our problems. If you haven't visited Louisiana, please come. I have lived in five States and a foreign country. I have just never lived in a place like Louisiana. It is my home, and I know I am biased. God blessed our State, and in having blessed us, I think God blessed us a second time. I mean, look at our location. We are at the top of the gulf coast; we are in the middle of the Gulf South; we straddle one of the mightiest rivers in the entire world. We have more oil and gas than most nations do, which we share with the American people. My people are experts in things like agriculture, aquaculture, shipbuilding, petrochemical manufacturing, oil and gas exploration, food, timber, healthcare. I could keep going. Our people are hard-working, God-fearing, and fun- loving. I tell my friends Senator Cruz and Senator Cornyn all the time how much I love Texas--and I do. Gosh, Texas is a great State. Every day, it seems like it wins an award. Yet I tell Senator Cruz and Senator Cornyn--in jest, of course--look, Texas is 5\1/2\ times bigger than Louisiana, but give us credit as we are 10\1/2\ times more interesting than you are. We are just a fun, extraordinary, diverse State, but we need some help. We are not asking for extra; we are just asking for equity. I hope this Senate, in its wisdom, will pass the COASTAL Act. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

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

Mr. KENNEDY

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

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to spend a few minutes talking about a friend of mine from Louisiana who is a fine American and a fine Louisianian, and he is retiring. His name is Ronnie Anderson. I want to celebrate his 51 years of service. That number is correct. I know some of our pages here can't imagine someone being in a single job for 51 years, but Ronnie has served 51 years, and he has devoted those years, in large part, in service to our State's Farm Bureau. He has led the Louisiana Farm Bureau to greater influence, to growing membership, and that is not a small feat, because America was born on a farm. In some respects, Louisiana was born on a farm, and farming is, as you well know, Madam President, a challenging yet very rewarding vocation and profession. For 31 of the last 31 elections, the Louisiana Farm Bureau members have chosen Ronnie as their president. So he has won 31 elections in a row by our farmers in Louisiana, which is almost as good as the President's electoral record. Farmers from East Carroll, in my State, to Beauregard Parishes and elsewhere in between have come to trust Ronnie as someone who knows them, who cares about them, who cares about their farms, and who was willing to rack up 71,000 miles driving his truck across the State of Louisiana in an effort to win their confidence, as Ronnie did repeatedly. Ronnie spent most of his 71 years on this Earth working alongside the farmers whom he represents. He grew up caring for dairy cows in East Feliciana Parish. In Louisiana, as you may know, we call our counties parishes. Along with Ronnie's wife, Vivian, Ronnie still produces horses, hay, beef cattle, and timber. All the while he was doing this, he helped widen the arms of the Louisiana Farm Bureau and double its membership to nearly 150,000 women and men over the course of Ronnie's three decades as the organization's president. Louisiana is a very diverse agricultural State, where each region is distinct, and Ronnie has represented every nook and every cranny of our farming and ranching community. I am not alone in standing in awe of Ronnie Anderson's service. I am in awe, and I wish Ronnie and Vivian, in their next chapter, the chance to enjoy life. I know they have both enjoyed the 51 years of service to the Farm Bureau, but now will enjoy life in a different way. I wanted to come here today and celebrate Ronnie's service and that of Vivian's, his life partner, as well. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kyle Wood, an intern in Senator Sullivan's office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the month.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have 6 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 5, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 5, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 5, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 5, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 5, 2020, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, January 16, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: Fernando L. Aenlle- Rocha, Stanley Blumenfeld, and Mark C. Scarsi, each to be a United States District Judge for the Central District of California, John Charles Hinderaker, to be United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, John Leonard Badalamenti, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, William Scott Hardy, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania, John F. Heil III, to be United States District Judge for the Northern, Eastern and Western Districts of Oklahoma, David Cleveland Joseph, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Louisiana, Anna M. Manasco, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, Drew B. Tipton, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, and Grace Karaffa Obermann, of Virginia, Stephen Sidney Schwartz, of Virginia, Kathryn C. Davis, of Maryland, and Edward Hulvey Meyers, of Maryland, each to be a Judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to talk to the Senate for a few minutes about refrigerators and air conditioners. Thank the Lord for both of them. They make our lives so much better, especially in the Presiding Officer's home State of Mississippi and, certainly, in my home State of Louisiana. Refrigerators and air conditioners and the like are able to keep people and things cold by using coolants or refrigerants, I think some people call them. I am going to call them coolants. Basically, I will not go into the chemistry and/or the physics, but when a coolant in liquid form is converted to a gas, it is called phase conversion. It absorbs heat. That is why you will hear people, including but not limited to repair women and repair men, talking about coolant for an air conditioner or coolant for a refrigerator. It is that coolant that keeps us and our food cool. Years ago, we used to use a coolant called Freon. You probably have heard that term. It is seldom used today. There are some small occasions when it is used, but for the most part, we have decided Freon is not a good coolant, not because it doesn't work but because it is very, very harmful to our environment. So a number of years ago, people the world over, including the U.S. Government, said: OK, we are not going to use Freon anymore. We are going to use another coolant, which we generally refer to as hydrofluorocarbons. If you hear me use the expression HFC or the acronym HFC, that is what I mean. So we went along and, instead of using Freon, we started using HFCs, hydrofluorocarbons. Then we discovered--and by ``we'' I mean that most of the scientists throughout the world came to realize that hydrofluorocarbons or HFCs are not very good for the environment either. The people who made this decision, many of whom were American scientists, decided we need to develop a third type of coolant other than Freon and other than HFCs to run our air conditioners and run our refrigerators and protect our environment at the same time. A few years ago, most of the countries throughout the world made this decision. The representatives of these countries got together and said: OK, you remember we decided to stop using Freon, and now we have been using these HFCs. Yet we have discovered these HFCs are also harmful, so we are going to agree--all of these countries said--to develop a third type of coolant that is not as harmful to our environment. That is the direction in which the world is headed. Within 5, 10, 15 years, not only will Freon be eliminated, but so will hydrofluorocarbons because the rest of the world is going to be using a third type of coolant, which has been developed and is being developed as we speak. There is just one problem. The United States has not agreed with those other countries. That is OK. That is our right to do it our way. But that presents yet another problem because in 5 or 10 or 15 years, we are going to look up, and we are going to be the odd person out. The rest of the world is going to be using this new technology, and we are still going to be using hydrofluorocarbons. We are going to be isolated, and it is going to cost our business community a lot of business, and it is going to hurt us. I and Senator Tom Carper--a fine American and a good man--have a bill. It is called the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act--the Senator and I call it the AIM Act--and we have a lot of support. At last count, we had 32 cosponsors--half Republican, half Democrat--and that number is rising as we speak. That is a third of the U.S. Senate. You can't get a third of the U.S. Senate to agree on much of anything except that they like ice cream, but for this august body, having 32 cosponsors is a big deal. Let me also say that we have a lot of support from the business community. For example--and I will not read all of the groups that are supporting it--the Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute is supporting this bill. It is in charge of our refrigerators and air conditioners, and it is saying: Yes, we want to do this. The environmental community supports this bill. It is rare that we get both the environmental community and the business community on the same page, but mainly through Senator Carper's intellect and charm, we have been able to do that. As you know, we are in the process of considering an energy bill, and that energy bill is really an amalgamation of a lot of other bills that deal with energy that are going to be put together in one bill, ably handled by Senator Murkowski. Senator Carper and I want to take our bill--the AIM Act, the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act, which is supported overwhelmingly by the business community and by the environmental community--and add it to Senator Murkowski's bill as an amendment, and that amendment has already been submitted. We have a lot of support for the amendment. The last time I looked, we had 28 cosponsors to the amendment, and once again, the business community and the environmental community are supporting it. The Presiding Officer is probably thinking, OK, Kennedy. What is the problem? This is interesting, but what is the problem here? How can I put this? The problem is the way we operate. One person in the Senate can stop the entire Senate from ever voting on something, as we all know, and I am not going to go into the details. In some cases, that is not necessarily a bad thing. Our Founders intended the Senate to move carefully and slowly, but it is a bad thing, in my judgment, when it is used routinely to keep the Senate from having an up-or-down vote on something that is important to the American people. I mean, the logical approach would be, OK, you don't agree with the amendment. That is why God made rollcall votes. Let's vote. You can vote yea or you can vote nay or you can jump the rail, but everybody gets to weigh in. That is why I was sent up here. My people sent me up here to debate and decide. They didn't send me up here to participate and delay in stultification. So that is my message today: Let my people vote. Once again, I understand there are rare occasions on which a Senator feels so strongly about something that he or she can and should exercise his or her right to prevent the whole body from considering something, but it has become a routine political weapon. That is one of the reasons, in my judgment, that we don't get more done in the Senate. I am not criticizing anybody. I am part of this body. If I am criticizing this body, I am criticizing myself. But doing nothing is hard because you never know when you are finished. We can do a lot more in this body, and I think we all understand that, and I think we can all agree with that. I think one of the reasons the Senate polls right up there with skim milk among the American people is that we don't get more done, and one of the reasons we don't get more done is that we are not allowed to vote. Once again, I am not telling anybody how to vote, for our votes are sacred, but you can vote yea on my ideas and Senator Carper's ideas, or you can vote nay, or you can not vote at all--you can jump the rail-- but please let us vote. I am not criticizing anybody. I am really not. I know we are together a lot, as the Presiding Officer knows, and we all know each other, and I can honestly say I like and respect every one of my colleagues in this body. I truly do. I may not agree with them, but I like and respect them, so my criticism is not personal. Yet our process here is a problem, which is my plea today to my colleagues: Please don't object to this amendment. Please. It doesn't mean you have to vote for it--you can vote against it--but please let the entire body have a vote because that is what democracy is supposed to be all about. I yield the floor to my friend Senator Carper.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I want to talk for a few minutes today about 5G, the Federal Communications Commission, and swamp creatures. We have all heard a lot about 5G, and 5G is just incredibly fast internet. It will make possible things like driverless cars, telemedicine, and the internet of things. I want to caution all of us that these things are not going to happen overnight. In fact, some parts of our country already have 5G, and we don't have driverless cars and the internet of things and long-distance surgery. These innovations are going to happen over a long period of time, and in the meantime, there is going to be a lot of hype from the telecommunications companies. Why? Because they want to sell you 5G. They are going to tell you that 5G can do all these incredible things. They are going to tell you that 5G can grow hair, that 5G can cure erectile dysfunction, that 5G can do this and it can do that. Look, I want to be on record as saying 5G is going to be extraordinary, but it is not going to happen overnight. The emergency that some of our telecommunications companies are trying to create is not nearly the emergency that really exists because they have something they want to sell you. I am not putting them down. That is free enterprise. How does 5G work? Well, it is wireless technology. When I have 5G on my phone and you have 5G on your phone, we communicate--whether it is 5G wireless technology or otherwise--through radio waves. Radio waves go from my phone to your phone, and they carry data. It is called electromagnetic radiation, but all it is, is really radio waves. And there are all different kinds of radio waves. It depends on the frequency. Do you know who owns those radio waves? The FCC doesn't. The telecommunications companies, which use those radio waves, don't. The Federal Government doesn't, except in this sense: You own those radio waves. The American taxpayer owns those radio waves. And they are incredibly valuable because telecommunications companies line up when the FCC has new radio waves available for them. They line up to bid on those radio waves, which they can use. We call that spectrum. There is a certain type of radio wave going through the air--or spectrum, if you will--that is perfect for 5G. It is like Goldilocks' porridge--it is not too hot; it is not too cold; it is just right. The telecommunications companies want to use that C band, we call it, or midrange spectrum. I am going to call it C band. They want the FCC to license it to them. Well, right now, using that spectrum, that C band--remember, these are the radio waves, the spectrum, that are just perfect for 5G. Right now, using this C band spectrum are a number of satellite companies, most of which are foreign-owned. The major satellite companies that are using it right now happen to be domiciled in Luxembourg--wonderful country and wonderful people. Do you know what they pay to the American taxpayer to use that spectrum? Nothing. Zero. Nada. You say: Well, how did that happen, Kennedy? You just told me that these radio waves are very valuable and that the telecommunications companies are lined up to lease them. How did the foreign satellite companies get the C band for nothing if they are using it right now? I don't know. It wasn't this FCC, but some FCC just gave it to them and said: Here, use it for free. I wasn't there. I am not necessarily criticizing them. I am just telling you they got it for nothing. But they didn't get a license. They don't have a lease. They have a privilege to use it. In the fine print of the document that gives them this privilege, at any time, the FCC can take it back because the foreign satellite companies don't have a property interest. They don't own it. They don't have a lease. They didn't pay anything for it. They just have the privilege to use it until the FCC wants to take it back. Now, the foreign satellite companies--and I am not criticizing them. God bless them. They are making a lot of money using this spectrum that belongs to the American taxpayer for free. Well, that is the way it has been for a while. Now, some telecommunications companies like Verizon and others--good companies--they say: We need that C band, FCC. We need that C band to use for 5G. Well, the satellite companies--I will call them the Luxembourg satellite companies--once again, good people. Luxembourg is a good country. They said: Well, we are using the C band right now. We don't want to give it up to the telecommunications companies, but we will make you a deal. They went to the FCC. The satellite companies said to the FCC: We are using the C band right now, and even though we didn't pay a single solitary dime for it, we know the telecommunications companies want it to implement 5G, so here is what we will do. You, FCC, give us the C band. Give it to us, and we will turn around and make sure that the telecommunications companies get to use it. We will lease it to them. The amount of money that the foreign satellite companies would have made was about $70 billion. I call it ``The Bank Job'' robbery. Remember that movie that came out in 2008, ``The Bank Job''? It was a 2008 heist movie. It was about the 1971 Baker Street robbery in London. I call this proposal ``The Bank Job'' robbery. I don't see how the foreign satellite companies made the proposal with a straight face. Give us this C band that belongs to the American people. Just give it to us, and we are going to sell it to the telecommunications companies and pocket the $70 billion. Do you know what? Our FCC almost did it. They were this close. They said: Oh, we have to do this because we have to get this C band to the telecommunications companies because it is an emergency. We have to get 5G tomorrow, so let's just give the satellite companies that are using it now--didn't pay a red dime for it--let's give them the spectrum that belongs to the American people and let them sell it to the telecommunications companies and pocket the $70 billion because our hair is on fire and we have to do it. Swamp creatures. They came this close to stealing $70 billion from the American people, but they didn't pull it off because a number of Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives started raising fresh hell--fresh hell. I went to see the President of the United States. I said: Mr. President, do you know what is going on here? Here you are every day saying ``Buy American. We have to take care of America first.'' It doesn't mean we don't care about the rest of the world, but we have to buy American, and your FCC over here is giving away this C band to Luxembourg satellite companies. He said: What in God's name? He was like Rocketman. He got mad. I don't speak for the President, but I am just telling you what happened. So the FCC, to its credit, backed off. They said: No, we are not going to give it away. We are going to do what we should have done in the first place; that is, auction it off. They are going to hold an auction like on eBay, and these satellite companies--rather, these telecommunication companies can come in and bid. If the FCC would do it right, we would take in $70 billion for the American taxpayer, and we could use that money to implement rural broadband, and then everybody would be happy. It would have been great, but no, here comes the ``Baby Driver'' heist. Did you see that movie, ``Baby Driver''? Now there is a new proposal on the table. The Chairman of our FCC--who is a good man, by the way; I am going to come back to him--he has come up with a new proposal. To his credit, the Chairman says: We are going to bid it out, but we are going to take $15 billion of the money that comes in, and we are going to give it to the foreign satellite companies. For what? They don't own it. They don't have a license; they just have a privilege. He is going to give $5 billion to them to relocate to different spectrum, and then he is going to give them $10 billion--that is nine zeros--in walking-around money just to go away. That is why I call it the ``Baby Driver'' heist. That was a great movie. Did you see that, starring Jamie Foxx? Wonderful movie. Let me say this about the FCC Chairman: He is a friend of mine, and he is smart as a whip. He went to Harvard undergrad, honors degree, Chicago Law School, Chicago Law Review, and worked as an executive at Verizon Communications for a while. I consider him a friend, and I have the utmost respect for him, and I thank him for finally agreeing to do a public auction and not give the C band away to the foreign satellite companies. But as much as I respect the Chairman, I wouldn't take him with me if I was going to buy a car because he would pay the full sticker price. If I needed somebody to explain string theory to me or the Doppler effect or quantum engineering or genome sequencing, I would probably go to the Chairman of the FCC because he is that smart. But I don't agree with him that he has made a good deal to give $10 billion away to these foreign satellite companies--$10 billion of American taxpayer money that ought to be going to things like rural broadband. The Chairman is going to present that to the FCC to vote on it on February 28. He says he has the votes to pass it. I can tell you this, it is not going to be unanimous, and it is not going to be noncontroversial to give away $15 billion to somebody who doesn't have a property interest. He says: We have to do it because we are in a race with China. OK. I agree with that. And your point is? He says: Well, if we don't do it, the satellite companies are going to sue us. That is another straw man. Let me tell you something. The FCC gets sued every day. Do you know what the FCC Chairman needs to tell the satellite companies? He needs to tell them: Hey, do you need me to draw you a map to the courthouse? Go sue. We get sued every day, but I am not going to give you $15 billion of taxpayer money to go away because it is wrong. I am not sure the FCC has any authority to do this. Last time I checked, it was Congress that appropriates money, not the Federal Communications Commission. I told you that the FCC Chairman's proposal is to give the foreign satellite companies $5 billion to buy new satellites and to move to a new spectrum, and $10 billion just to go away because they say: Oh, we are scared of a lawsuit. We are scared of a lawsuit. I don't know how he arrived at $10 billion to give to them. I wish somebody would give me $10 billion. Why not $11 billion? Why not $8 billion? Why not $7 billion? There is no explanation. We are just going to give them $10 billion of taxpayer money, and they are going to go away. Of course, the satellite companies, they are happy as clams. They are as happy as a gopher in soft dirt because they are getting $10 billion for nothing. And they are also getting $5 billion to buy new satellites, but if you check, all the satellites now are worn out, so they would have to buy new satellites anyway--5G or not. The FCC needs to wait. On February 28, they need to announce and vote to have the public auction as they had promised. It will be held in December of this year. There is absolutely not a single solitary reason why the Chairman of the FCC has to put a vote in front of the FCC to give away $15 billion of taxpayer money. We can negotiate a better deal. We can negotiate a better deal. The Chairman of the FCC does not need to become known as the $15 billion man. He needs to hold up and let us talk to the satellite companies and negotiate a better deal. Now, if he is not willing to do that, he needs to at least tell President Trump because do you know who is going to get blamed for this? The President. It will not be his fault, but he is going to get blamed for it because it happened on his watch. Here he is, out there talking about the American economy, we have to protect our economy, and we have to buy American first. It doesn't mean we don't love the rest of the world, but his FCC is just giving away $15 billion of taxpayer money--of taxpayer money--to our friends and foreign satellite companies, and the President will get blamed. So I am hoping the FCC at least goes to see him and tell him what they are going to do. When the American public finds out about this, you are not going to be able to find the FCC members who came up with this idea. You are not going to be able to find them with a flashlight, with a map, or with a search party. You will not be able to find them with Google. They are going to be hiding. It is an embarrassment. They may have the votes to do this, but I am not giving up. I have a bill, along with Senator Schumer--yes, Chuck and I are working on a bill together--Senator Cantwell, Senator Schatz, and we are going to have some others on the bill, that says: Look, this is Congress's decision, not FCC's decision. It would allocate a much more modest sum to these foreign satellite companies. I would like the FCC, if it would, to step back, continue on with its auction planning and give us a chance to negotiate on behalf of the American taxpayer. I am going to close with this point: Not a single day passes in this Chamber that I don't hear one of us, Democrats and Republicans, talking about the deficits, and, boy, are they high--$22 trillion and climbing. We borrow $1 million a minute to run this place. So $1.4 billion a day, that is how much more we spend than we take in. We are mortgaging our kids' future. Everybody talks about it and says we have to do something about it. We are like a problem gambler chasing his losses. Some say we are like a drunk sailor, but we are worse than a drunk sailor. A drunk sailor stops spending when he runs out of money. We don't. We just borrow it. Here we are, in the middle of all of this, and our Federal Communications Commission is going to give away $15 billion. Our Chairman, henceforth, will be known as the $15 billion man. If they do this without telling the President, without consulting with Congress, and without trying to negotiate a better deal for the American taxpayer, then we ought to change their name from the Federal Communications Commission to the ``Federal Sucker Commission'' because that is all they are. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I will vote against each of the House Democrats' Articles of Impeachment, and I would like to explain why. The House Democrats' impeachment proceedings and their Articles of Impeachment were and are fatally flawed. My friends, the House Democrats, say that the President is out of control. What they really mean is that the President is out of their control. And that is not grounds for impeachment. First, the process. The House Democrats' impeachment proceedings were rigged. Speaker Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership decided before they even began to give President Trump a fair and impartial firing squad. Speaker Pelosi and the House Democrats' judicial philosophy from the very beginning was guilty. That is why much of the proceedings were held in secret. Democracy, they say, dies in darkness, and I believe it. That is why the House Democrats hid the identity of the original accuser, the so- called whistleblower, thus prohibiting the American people from being able to judge the accuser's motives. That is also why the House Democrats prevented the President and his counsel from cross-examining the House Democrats' witnesses, from offering his own witnesses, from offering rebuttal evidence, and even from being able to challenge the House Democrats' evidence. The House Democrats wouldn't even allow the President or his counsel to attend critical parts of the impeachment proceedings. The U.S. Senate cannot and should not consider an impeachment based on such a deficient record. It is true that in America no one is above the law, but no one is beneath it either. Fairness matters in our country. The House Democrats' impeachment is also flawed because it is a partisan impeachment. Its genesis is partisan rage. Not a single, solitary House Republican voted for the Articles of Impeachment--not one. The House Democrats made a conscious decision to turn impeachment into a routine Washington, DC, political weapon, to normalize it. Our country's Founders were concerned about impeachments based on partisan rage and our country's Founders were adamantly opposed. That is why in the Constitution they required a two-thirds vote of the Senate to impeach. Now, a word about the substance of the House Democrats' Articles of Impeachment. The House Democrats accused the President of obstruction of justice. Why? Because he chose to assert executive privilege and testimonial immunity when the House Democrats sought testimony and documents from some of the President's closest aides. Anyone who knows a lawbook from a J. Crew catalog does not take this charge seriously. Executive privilege and testimonial immunity are well-established, constitutionally based Presidential and executive branch privileges that every President at one time or another has asserted. The proper course by the House Democrats in the face of the assertion of these privileges was to seek judicial review--go see a judge to seek judicial review from our third branch of government, which then would have balanced the policies underlining the privileges against the public interest of overriding the privileges. But House Democrats chose not to do that. They cannot now complain. The House Democrats also accused President Trump of abuse of power. If you listen carefully to their allegations, you will see that they don't really argue that the President of the United States did not and does not have the inherent authority to pause U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine until Ukraine agreed to investigate corruption. That is clearly within the authority of the President of the United States. Instead, the House Democrats, claiming to be able to read the President's mind, say that the President did it with a corrupt motive because the investigation of corruption was against former Vice President Joe Biden, a political rival. But the President didn't get Joe Biden's name out of a phonebook. Why did the President ask for an investigation involving former Vice President Biden? Four words: Hunter Biden and Burisma. Now, these are the facts. President Obama put Vice President Biden in charge of the foreign affairs of our country for two other countries, Ukraine and China. And in both instances, the former Vice President's son, Hunter Biden, promptly walked away with millions of dollars in contracts from politically connected companies in those two countries, including Burisma Holdings. The message that this behavior sent to the world was that America's foreign policy can be bought like a sack of potatoes. No fairminded person can argue that an investigation of this possible corruption was not in the national interest. The House Democrats' impeachment proceedings and their Articles of Impeachment are an example of swamped-up Washington, DC, both procedurally and substantively. On the basis of partisan rage--partisan rage coursing through their veins--the House Democrats seek to annul the 134 million Americans who voted in the 2016 Presidential election, which resulted in the Trump Presidency, and to do so when a new Presidential election is just 10 months away. No one in the Milky Way who is fairminded can believe this is good for America. A nation as great as ours deserves better. So to my Democratic friends, here is what I say. The 2016 Presidential election is over. Let it go. Put aside your partisan rage. Stop regretting yesterday, and instead, let's try working together and creating tomorrow, because, after all, the future is just a bunch of things we do right now strung together. I yield the floor.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Thank you, Your Honor. On behalf of myself and Senator Ernst, I send a question to the desk for Mr. Nadler and Mr. Philbin.

Mr. KENNEDY. Your Honor.

Mr. KENNEDY. Your Honor, I send a question to the desk for counsel for the President.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chief Justice, along with Senator Blackburn and Senator Cornyn, I send a question to the desk for the House managers and for counsel to the President.

Mr. KENNEDY. Senator Moran, my colleague from Kansas, and I send a question to the desk for counsel for the President.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I rise briefly today to thank a number of my colleagues--first, the senior Senator from Mississippi, Roger Wicker, who has offered a bill called the 5G Spectrum Act. I have offered a bill pertaining to the 5G spectrum, as well, and my two Democratic friends, Senator Schatz and Senator Cantwell, have offered a bill on that subject as well. We have been working enthusiastically and in good faith for some time to try to work out our differences on this legislation so that we could pass it this calendar year. I regret that we are not going to be able to work out our differences for the moment, but we are going to continue our efforts in good faith. The good news about all this legislation is that we all agree that the FCC should conduct a public auction of the 5G spectrum. What does that mean? We all have heard about 5G. It is extraordinarily fast internet--100 times faster than we have right now. But in order for 5G to work, there is a certain part of our spectrum, or our radio waves, if you will, that the telecommunications have to use to deliver the 5G service. It is called the C-band. Of course, when we communicate between and among each other on the internet or by cell phones through wireless technology, all we are doing is sending electromagnetic radiation or radio waves from my device to your device. It is obviously more complicated than that, but at its fundamental level, that is what it is. These radio waves and the airwaves through which though radio waves travel--this electromagnetic radiation--belong to the American people. It is called spectrum, and that is what we mean when we talk about 5G spectrum. We can't lose sight of that fact. The wireless telecommunication companies provide an extraordinary service. They are going to make 5G possible with the help of the U.S. Government and our other forms of government, but we cannot lose sight of the fact that none of this would be possible without that spectrum, and that is owned by the American people. That spectrum is essential. As a result of the efforts of some swamp creatures both in and out of government, we came that close to having this spectrum, which belongs to the American people and is worth as much as $30 billion to $60 billion, given away in a backroom through a private auction to three satellite companies that happen to be domiciled in foreign countries. The excuse given was that these three foreign satellite companies can conduct an auction themselves and allocate it to the American telecommunication companies that need it for 5G faster than the FCC can, even though the FCC has only conducted about 100 of these public auctions generating about $123 billion for the American people. Why? Because the American people own the spectrum that is being auctioned off. It is theirs. But there was a proposal that came that close to passing the FCC to just give this spectrum to these three companies and let them keep the $30 to $60 billion that the spectrum auction would have generated and let them decide who was going to get to participate in the 5G throughout our country. I thank the FCC. Fortunately, the FCC, at the last minute, said no, and I want to thank them. Hence, we have the legislation by Senators Wicker, Cantwell, Schatz, and myself, and the good news about the legislation is that it would require a public auction by the FCC of the spectrum that belongs to the American people. The auction would be open to anybody who wants to bid. There would be a fair and level playing field, and it would be conducted in front of God and country in a public meeting. The best way to resist temptation is a strong set of values, a proper upbringing, and witnesses. There will be witnesses to this auction. What we cannot agree on is how much money, if any, to give to the foreign satellite companies. You ask: Why should we give them a dime? Well, the foreign satellite companies, the three companies to which this spectrum was almost given, are currently using this spectrum. They don't need all of it. They don't even need close to all of it, but they have been using it for a number of years. The FCC just gave it to them. They didn't pay a dime for it. Now, I am not criticizing. They put it to good use, but they don't own it. They don't have a license. They have sort of a 30-day, month- to-month lease. That is the way I think of it. And the lease agreement says that the FCC can take it back any time it wants to. Since the satellite companies have been using the spectrum and they have customers, we want to be fair to these companies. Certainly, when we decide how to allocate the proceeds of the public auction in front of God and country, which the FCC is going to conduct, we certainly want to consider the satellite companies' interests. But I am not going to support giving them half of the money this auction generates because this money belongs to the American people. It can be used to extend 5G and other forms of broadband to those of us who don't live in major cities but happen to live in rural areas and are all still very much Americans. So I rise today to say thanks to Senator Wicker, and I mean that from the bottom of my heart. I learned so much from working with him. I thank Senators Cantwell and Schatz. We are going to keep working toward a compromise in a way that will allocate this money to everybody fairly and efficiently. I am going to end as I began--that first and foremost in my mind is the American people because the American people own this spectrum. I don't own this spectrum. The U.S. Senate doesn't own the spectrum. The three foreign satellite companies don't own the spectrum. The FCC doesn't own the spectrum. The telecommunications companies, for which we are grateful, don't own the spectrum. The American people own the spectrum, and the vast majority of the money generated by this public auction should go to them. I yield the floor.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, last week, of course, was Thanksgiving, a day that we all set aside in America to count our blessings. As we do that, we always say to ourselves: Gee, we really ought to be thankful every day of the year for the many blessings that have been bestowed upon us. I know I say that to myself. So I thought today, for a few minutes, I would mention two things that I am especially thankful for, even though this isn't Thanksgiving, but it is another day that the Lord has blessed us with. The first thing--and there are many things that I am thankful for, but the first thing I am thankful for that I want to mention today is the many public servants who care for and protect American taxpayer money. I want to highlight one in particular: the Chairman of our FCC, Mr. Ajit Pai. Let me explain why I am thankful for this public servant--one among many who get up every day and work hard to protect taxpayer money. About 2 weeks ago, the Chairman of the FCC, over many obstacles, announced that he was going to hold a public auction for the C-band. Why is that important? We all have a cell phone now, and many of us have iPads and computers. The internet has changed our world and changed our lives. It has made it more complicated, of course, but on balance, I think the internet has been good for our lives. We are about to move into a new phase of telecommunications called 5G. It stands for fifth generation. It is really an extraordinarily fast internet. It can carry huge amounts of data. The ingenuity of the American people takes my breath away. I am pretty impressed with 4G, and 5G is going to be 100 times faster. It is going to make things possible like telemedicine, where a specialist in a field of surgery through robotics and now an incredibly fast internet can operate on a sick patient 1,000 miles away and save his or her life, thanks to 5G. We will be able to hook up all of our devices through 5G, saving time. It will give us more precious time to spend with our family. There will be driverless cars. Maybe I will not see them in my lifetime, but our assistants and our pages in the Senate will see them in their lifetime. I could go on, but the point is, to make 5G possible, a lot of people have to work together. So 5G is made possible through the airwaves. When internet devices talk to each other, data in the form of radio waves--the scientists call them electromagnetic radiation--these radio waves go through the airwaves from one device to another. We have all sorts of different airwaves. It is called spectrum. We have airwaves for radios and TVs. Well, 5G can be used in a number of different airwaves or different parts of the spectrum. But one part of the spectrum, one part of the airwaves, is just perfect for 5G. It is called the C-band. That part of the airwaves is able to carry these 5G radio waves in a manner that can cover a huge geographical area but also carry lots of data. It is called the C-band, and it is perfect for 5G. It is perfect. It is not too hot, not too cold. It is just right. Some swamp creatures, both in government and out, came that close-- that close--to getting control of the C-band, which is owned by the American people. Led by three foreign satellite companies, they had almost convinced the powers that be to give them the C-band--just give it to them--and let them decide who is going to get to use that C-band for 5G. Oh, and, by the way, in picking the telecommunication companies that would get to use the C-band that was going to be given to them for free by the powers that be, these foreign companies were going to get to keep the money--about $60 billion. That is just the upfront money--$60 billion. That would build 7,000 miles of interstate in this country. Not only would the companies get the $60 billion, they would get to decide who could use the C-band, and they were that close. But the Chairman of the FCC stopped it. He is going to recommend next week--and I hope the rest of the FCC goes along with it. I am going to be there to watch. He recommended and is going to recommend that we have a public auction. Doing a public auction is nothing new for the FCC. The FCC auctions off different airwaves all the time. In fact, the FCC in the last 25 years has held right around 100--I think it is 93--public auctions where anybody who wants to, any company that wants to--competition, moral good--can come in and bid on that part of the airwaves. The good people at the FCC have brought in to the American taxpayer about $123 billion in the last 25 years by auctioning off these airwaves and giving everybody a fair chance in a fully transparent way in front of God and country. That is the way it ought to be. But a lot of swamp creatures were pushing hard for this private sale. The American taxpayer not only would have lost $60 billion, they would have lost control of the C-band, which, according to the Communications Act, doesn't belong to me, doesn't belong to the businesses; it belongs to the American people. We can't let our guard down. I have learned in my short 3 years here that those swamp creatures--if they can't get in the front door, they are going to try the side door, and if they can't make it through the side door, they are going to try the back door. We have a lot of money at stake here, so we have to remain vigilant. I want to thank Ajit Pai for standing up. He made the right people mad. That is easy to talk about, but it is hard to do. It takes courage, and he did it, and I wanted to single him out. The second thing I want to say I am thankful for, among so many things, is this: I am so thankful for our neighbors to the North-- Canada. I have visited Canada so many times. I am so proud to call them friends. There are 37 million people in Canada, some of the finest people that God ever put breath in. We have fought together in wars. We have fought for freedom that we all take for granted. We trade with each other. I mean, the country is just a wonderful country with extraordinarily friendly, decent, and God-fearing people. Our leaders squabble sometimes. That is just the way life is. Sometimes good friends have disagreements. We are having a few little disagreements right now. But on this beautiful Thursday, I just wanted to come and say how thankful I am that Canada is our friend and how honored I am to call them friends and how grateful I am for all 37 million of the fine men, women, and children in that great country. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have 5 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: Dan R. Brouillette, of Texas, to be Secretary of Energy, James P. Danly, of Tennessee, to be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and Katharine MacGregor, of Pennsylvania, to be Deputy Secretary of the Interior. committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a closed briefing. Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, November 19, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to spend a very few minutes today to say thanks. I want to thank Chairman Ajit Pai and his colleagues at the Federal Communications Commission. The Chairman announced yesterday that he was going to put 5G technology and the American taxpayer first by holding a public auction, as opposed to a private auction, of what we call the C-band. It was a courageous decision that he made against a lot of pressure. Allow me, for just a few minutes, to explain why that is important. We have all heard about 5G, which stands for fifth generation. It is a brandnew wireless technology. It means incredibly fast internet and cell phone calls. It means the ability to deliver as much as 100 times more data through wireless technology than we can do today. We will notice it in our iPads; we will notice it in our computers; but we will notice it also in our cell phones. As you know, a cell phone is really a sophisticated walkie-talkie. I will use the cell phone as an example to explain 5G. A cell phone is just a very sophisticated, much more complicated walkie-talkie. How does a walkie-talkie work? How does a cell phone work? Radio waves. The scientific term is ``electromagnetic radiation.'' A radio wave is just what it says, a wave that goes from my cell phone, say, to the President's cell phone through an antenna, a transmitter, and a receiver. A radio wave and the air through which it travels and the right to send a radio wave is a sovereign asset. It belongs to the American people. The American people own that radio wave and the right to send it. Our FCC gets to decide who gets to use those radio waves and who has the right to send those radio waves. There is a particular type of radio wave that is absolutely perfect for 5G. It is between 180 megahertz and 300 megahertz. Why are these radio waves so perfect for 5G? Well, because they strike a balance. First, the radio waves in that spectrum, as it is called, can go a fairly long distance, and they can carry huge amounts of data. That is going to make driverless cars possible. We have heard about those--the internet of things. That is going to make remote surgery possible, where a doctor who is in one place physically and through the internet, using a robot, can perform surgery on someone 1,000 miles away. 5G going through these special radio waves is going to make all that possible. It is going to change our lives. Right now, those radio waves--I will call them the C-band spectrum-- as I said, are owned by the American people. They are being used by three satellite companies--two from Luxembourg and one from Canada--and some other companies. They are satellite companies. They don't own those radio waves. They don't even have a license to use those radio waves. They didn't pay anything to get to use those radio waves. The FCC said they could use them. It is sort of like a month-to-month lease or rental agreement where you don't have to pay any rent. Some time ago, those three companies came to the FCC and said: Even though we don't own those radio waves you allow us to use and even though the American people own those radio waves, which are perfect for 5G, we are willing to give them up to use for 5G, but here is what we want you to do. The three foreign companies said: We want you to give us those radio waves, and then we will auction them off to the telecommunications companies that want to use the radio waves for 5G. This was the kicker: The three foreign corporations said they want to keep the money. Investment bankers estimate that through that auction being conducted by those three foreign corporations, as much as $60 billion would have been generated. That is how much telecommunications companies would pay to get the license to use those radio waves. Some people encouraged the FCC to do that. They said that we ought to do it because these three foreign companies can do an auction faster than the FCC can--even though the three foreign companies had never done an auction of spectrum and even though the FCC has done over 100 public auctions for other radio waves that the FCC has auctioned off. In doing that, the fine men and women at the FCC in charge of these auctions--they have been doing it for 25 years--have brought in $123 billion for the American people. That will build a lot of interstate, it will educate a lot of kids, and it will pay a lot of soldiers. But our three friends--these foreign satellite companies--still said: Even though we have no experience, we can do it faster. If you let the FCC do it, it will take them 7 years. Well, that just wasn't accurate. I have spoken to the people in charge of doing auctions at the FCC. In fact, on Thursday, they are going to appear before a subcommittee that I chair. We are going to talk about it some more. I don't know where this figure of 7 years came from, but it is just not accurate. Nonetheless, the FCC came under--there are swamp creatures in the government; we know that. Some of these swamp creatures in and out of government put an awful lot of pressure on the FCC. These swamp creatures are trying to help some of their friends in the telecommunications business. One of the foreign corporations spent about half a million dollars lobbying. I am not saying there is something wrong with that. We all have the right to petition our government. But that is just the fact. I don't mean it in a pejorative sense. The FCC was under a lot of pressure, but yesterday, the Chairman of the FCC, Ajit Pai, looked at all this. He resisted the pressure, and he announced that we are going to have a public auction. We are going to let every telecommunications company in America that wants to bid on these valuable air waves come forward and bid. We are going to do an auction within a year and probably less, not 7 years, and the money that is going to be generated is going to go to the owner of those radio waves, not the foreign companies that, through our benevolence, are now using those radio waves. The money is going to go to the American people. I know what you are thinking. You are thinking: Gosh, how was this ever even an issue? This should have been a no-brainer. Well, that is part of what is wrong with Washington, DC, in my judgment. Sometimes--not always but sometimes--the American people aren't put first. But yesterday, Ajit Pai, our Chairman at the FCC, put them first, and I just wanted to stand up today and tell him a genuine and heartfelt thank-you. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I will talk for a few minutes today about 5G technology and taxpayer money. We have all heard the term ``5G.'' 5G stands for fifth generation--fifth generation technology. In short, what 5G means is incredibly fast data transmission--data going from my cell phone to the President's cell phone, my internet to your internet, and the ability to connect a lot of different devices at the same time. Through 5G technology, which is wireless technology, we will be able not only to transmit data very quickly, but we will also be able to transmit huge amounts of data--almost breathtaking amounts--and it is going to have a huge impact on American society. It is going to have a huge impact on the world. In some respects, it is going to change the world. If technology has changed the world thus far--and indeed it has; among other things, it has made the world smaller--5G is going to change it even more. For example, you will be able to use your smartphone to open your garage door. You will be able to use your smartphone and be a mile away but turn on your coffee maker. We will be able to do surgery by internet. Surgeons will be able to be in one place 1,000 miles away from a patient, and that surgeon, through robotics and other means, will be able to transmit the data to operate on that patient. Driverless cars are going to change the world dramatically--not only the way we get around. It is going to change our need for roads; it is going to change our tax base; and it is going to change the insurance market. 5G is going to allow farmers to be prewarned about encroaching diseases. Farmers will not have to wait to see their crops attacked by certain diseases; through 5G technology, they will be able to know and predict that those diseases are coming. It is going to help us feed the world. 5G technology is going to allow our young people to have virtual apprenticeships. If you are a young woman or a young man and you are right out of school and you are offered an apprenticeship or an internship, let's say in San Francisco, and you are living in Duluth-- say you are a student and you say ``I don't have the money to move to San Francisco, and I don't have the money to live in San Francisco,'' you will be able to do an internship through technology. It is going to be 100 times faster. In terms of the amount of data, I don't know how to quantify that, but it is going to have an extraordinary impact on wireless technology. What are we talking about here? When my phone calls the President's phone, what are we talking about? Really, we are just talking about radio waves. We are talking about radio waves. A radio wave is nothing more than electromagnetic radiation. I don't want to get off the subject here. When my phone talks to the President's phone, we are just sending radio waves through the air. Sometimes you might have heard that referred to as a spectrum. That is basically how a cell phone and the internet works, except with 5G, the speed with which that data is transmitted and the amount of data will be substantially larger. Who owns those radio waves and the air through which those radio waves travel? According to Federal law--the Federal Communications Act of 1934--we do. We all do. The American people do. The Federal Government, through the Federal Communications Commission and other agencies, including but not limited to Congress, regulates those radio waves going through the air, which we call spectrum, but those radio waves and the air through which they pass are owned by the American people. Just like a national park, just like the oil and gas offshore in Federal waters, just like the Rocky Mountains, they are owned by us, the American people. Now there are certain types of radio waves that are owned by the American people that are perfect for 5G technology. These radio waves and this spectrum, if you will--I will use the term ``spectrum,'' but remember, I am just referring to radio waves moving through the air. This particular spectrum that is perfect for 5G technology is called the C-band. I don't know why they call it that, but that is what they call it. It is between 3.7 gigahertz and 4.2 gigahertz. Don't worry about what that means; just know that this part of the overall spectrum is perfect for 5G. It is perfect because it strikes a balance between coverage and capacity. And this C-band, if you will, is not too hot, not too cold. It is just right for 5G. It is critical to our development of 5G technology. Since the American people own this C-band and since many of our wireless companies want to develop and offer 5G technology to the American people, given those facts, the FCC is going to play an integral part. The FCC licenses spectrum to companies that want to use it. In other words, if you are a wireless company and you want to use a portion of the spectrum--the radio waves going through the air that are owned by the American people--you go to the FCC and say: I want to license that spectrum, and I want to pay for it. By law--not by custom; by law--the FCC says: OK. To be fair, we are going to hold an auction, and everybody who wants to bid on this portion of the spectrum can submit a bid. In the last 25 years, the FCC has done an extraordinary job, by the way, of getting spectrum out to the private sector and getting the American taxpayer paid for its property interest. In the last 25 years, the FCC has conducted over 100 of these auctions. The FCC has brought in $123 billion for the American people--billion. That is nine zeros. I have met with folks at the FCC who handle the public auctions. They are incredibly experienced. They know what they are doing. Let me get back to the C-band. When we left off, we were talking about the C-band being perfect for 5G. We have a lot of wireless companies that want to lease it, if you will--want to license it--and the FCC is there in the middle. You would expect that what we would do in this instance is what we always do--we hold a public auction. It has been estimated that if we hold a public auction, if the FCC holds a public auction and tells all the wireless companies that want to bid to come on down and bid, it will bring in $60 billion for the American people--$60 billion. Do you know what we could do with $60 billion? With $60 billion, we could put 1 million kids through college for all 4 years. With $60 billion, we could hire 1 million new cops for a year. With $60 billion, we could build 7,000 miles of interstate. With $60 billion, we could make sure that broadband reaches every crevice and corner of America because right now it doesn't. If you are in a rural area right now--I don't want to overstate my case, but in many instances, if you are in a rural area, you don't have the same broadband both in terms of reach and coverage and speed that people have in a large city, and that is true even before we get to 5G. We could even give the money back to people. We have 140 million taxpayers in America. If we gave $60 billion back to 140 million taxpayers, that is about $430 for every taxpayer in America. I am not suggesting we do that. That is above my pay grade, making that decision. For a lot of people, $430 isn't that much money, but I have a lot of friends who would say $430 is a lot of money. But in the middle of what I just described, we have a hair on the biscuit. We have three companies--and I am not disparaging them. Two of them are headquartered in Luxembourg, and one is out of Canada. They are foreign satellite companies. They have gone to the FCC and they have said: Look, we are going to make you a deal. We know we need to get this 5G, this C-band spectrum, into the market as quickly as possible. We will do the auction for you. It doesn't matter that the FCC has already done 100 auctions and brought in $123 billion. These three foreign companies have gone to the FCC and said: Let us do the auction for you because we can do it better and quicker even though we have never done a public auction. Then they told the FCC: By the way, we want to keep the money. We can do it faster than you, FCC. Even though you have done 100-plus auctions and we have never done one, just trust us. We can do it faster than you, and we want you to give us the spectrum and let us keep the $60 billion. The FCC is considering doing it. My State has a lot of oil and gas. The Federal Government--the American taxpayer--owns the seabed of much of the Gulf of Mexico. Periodically, on behalf of the American people, the Federal Government leases that seabed to oil and gas companies to explore for oil and gas. When the Federal Government leases the land, the Federal Government takes an upfront cash payment and a portion of any oil and gas that is found. Can you imagine what would happen if I went to the Federal Government and said: Even though I have never done an oil and gas auction, I can do it faster than the Federal Government even though the Federal Government has done thousands of them. So I want you to give me all the minerals in the gulf and let me do the auction and keep the money. Can you imagine the reaction if I approached the Federal Government? The people in charge of those oil and gas leases would do one of two things. I would end up in either handcuffs or a straitjacket. But that is what is being proposed here, and for the life of me, I do not understand why the FCC is taking this seriously. An article just came out a couple of days ago. I will read the first sentence of it. It came out of a periodical called Market Watch on November 11, just a few days ago. It starts: ``A big step in the U.S. deployment of 5G wireless could take place by year's end as the Federal Communications Commission is expected to back a plan from the satellite industry for auctioning off radio spectrum.'' They called a couple of investment bankers. One investment bank group is called Height Capital Markets, and another one is called Beacon Policy Advisors. I don't know where they are getting their information, but they are saying that the FCC has already agreed not to do a public auction but to let these foreign companies have the spectrum and get the $60 billion. The article goes on to explain that these three companies--these three foreign companies, the two Luxembourg companies and the Canadian company--spent $515,000 lobbying regulators and lawmakers on its auction plan. Then I go back and I look at another article that came out not too long ago, and it talks about one FCC Commissioner. It sounds like he is already sold. He was asked about the idea of just giving the spectrum to these foreign companies and letting them keep the money. Here is what he said: ``Most of the criticism of what is known as the CBA proposal''--that is the proposal by the private companies--``shows a lack of understanding of how the Internal Commission works. . . . [D]on't let anyone try to lecture me on the commission's . . . efficiency and timeliness. This Commissioner goes on to say: If someone or some entities make a profit for being at the right place at the right time, I will live with that outcome. In the grand scheme of things, if it is a contest between speed and government trying to extract a significant piece of the transaction through a lengthy process, I'll take the speedy resolution.'' Are you kidding me? What planet did he just parachute in from? This is a current member of the FCC. Somebody needs to tell him about the President's Executive order, right here: ``Buy American and Hire American.'' It doesn't say ``hire Luxembourg companies.'' I have nothing against Luxembourg companies; I just prefer American companies. It doesn't say ``buy Canadian companies and hire Canadian.'' I can tell you what is going to happen if the FCC does this. First of all, the American people are going to lose $60 billion. No. 2, they are going to get sued. They say they can do it faster--I don't believe them--but I know this much: I know a little something about litigation. I used to do it for a living. They are going to be tied up in court for about 10 years--I can tell you that--because the Federal Communications Act requires a public auction. I can tell you what else is going to happen. The people who live in rural communities are going to get the little end of nothing because we won't be able to control who gets this C-band. I will bet you that the companies that end up with it start--and I hope I am wrong--and remain in the cities. So if you live in the country, where I was raised, you won't get the benefit of 5G. Also, if we give it to these three foreign companies and they get to decide who gets the C-band, how do we control who ends up with our spectrum? What if they give it to Huawei? What if they give it to a company that violates our national security and our national intelligence? This is a really bad idea, folks. There is a bill that has been offered. It is a bipartisan bill in the House. I am going to sponsor it in the Senate. It is offered by two Republicans and two Democrats. The bill is very simple. It says: Do the right thing. This spectrum belongs to the American people. This C-band belongs to the American people. That $60 billion belongs to the American people. I am asking my friends at the FCC to do the right thing. Do what you have done 100 times already, and let everybody bid. Let everybody bid. Take the $60 billion that you get from the American people, and let's spend it on something the American people need. I thank you for your time and attention. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I will talk just for a very few minutes today about something that has been on my mind and on my heart. We so easily forget how fortunate we are to live in a country like America. I wish all of our world's neighbors were as fortunate as we are, but they are not. We can't lose sight of that fact. I don't know why bad things happen to good people, and I am not suggesting that I have a complete solution to it, but trying to understand it is at least a good first step. I am talking about the ongoing crisis in South Sudan. As you know, South Sudan is a landlocked country in East-Central Africa, and it is a fairly new country. In the 7 years since South Sudan was plunged into a very bloody civil war, not only have millions of people been displaced from their homes, but over 400,000--think about that--men, women, and children have been killed in the crossfire--400,000. I would like nothing more than for the recent negotiated ceasefire between the government and the rebels to hold. We all would. But if we are being honest, we have to express our sincere doubts. I don't have any doubt that the people of South Sudan yearn for peace. Unfortunately, there are some who are taking advantage of the sad situation in South Sudan. They are taking advantage of South Sudan's conflicts and widespread corruption within its government in order to steal the nation's and the people's natural resources. I am talking about kleptocrats. I am talking about war criminals. I am talking about corrupt multinational corporations that are pilfering South Sudan's natural resources, regardless of the chaos that they are causing and the extraordinary human cost. Until good people in this world take a stand and say enough is enough, the people in South Sudan will continue to be at the mercy of the corrupt. The predatory extraction of South Sudan's resources not only directs vital capital outside of the war-torn nation, where it is desperately needed inside, but it makes meaningful investment in sustained peace simply impossible. That is why I am respectfully calling on the U.S. Senate to stand with peace, to stand with right--not with might, with right--and to stand with the people of South Sudan. The people of South Sudan are a proud people. They are a resilient people. They are tired of being ruled by a government that is ripe with corruption. They are tired of seeing their nation torn apart by war. The U.S. Senate ought to condemn the marauding, the stealing of resources, and the widespread corruption within the South Sudanese Government. Furthermore, I also call on the United States to support sanctions against those companies and those individuals outside of South Sudan that continue to profit off of the ongoing conflicts and instability in the region. Now, we are a powerful nation. I just listened to your very eloquent talk about the men and women in our military who protect our country. Not only do we have the world's most powerful military, but let me put it another way. We have the most powerful military in all of human history. We also have the strongest economy the world has ever seen, and for that, we were blessed. It is the latter that we have to wield against the internal and the external bad actors taking advantage of the people of South Sudan. Much like our sanctions against the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world--I am, of course, talking about Iran--and much like those sanctions have resulted in a successful economic pressure campaign, I hope the same can be done, targeting crooked government officials and the unethical multinational corporations that target vulnerable nations like South Sudan. It has been well documented that there are a number of multinational corporations with ties to nations like China and nations like Malaysia that have taken advantage of widespread corruption in the region, in South Sudan and the surrounding region, to spur their own economic and political gain. It has been reported and it has been independently verified that one of South Sudan's largest multinational petroleum consortiums from outside the country operating in the country, a company called Dar Petroleum Operating Company, has actively funded militia and paramilitary groups within the region. In fact, when Dar Petroleum isn't funding militia or brokering weapons deals, it keeps busy polluting local communities in South Sudan and water supplies with its industrial waste. The petroleum company has dumped ``high levels of heavy metals and dangerous chemical compounds'' into the surrounding countryside with no regard--none, zero, no regard--for local populations. In fact, the contamination from the joint Chinese-Malaysian-owned corporation has extended well beyond merely the soil surrounding Dar Petroleum's production and processing plants. The soil contamination is found to be so widespread and so extensive that over 600,000 of the good people in South Sudan are expected to be affected by it. From bribery to pollution and even murder, these unsavory actors have found a home in South Sudan, ruining the environment and raping the natural resources of the country, and they are going to continue to find a safe haven and continue business unless we act. Unless sanctions against countries and individuals that are known to have long taken advantage of South Sudan's weak or almost nonexistent rule of law are implemented, stability in the region is going to be nothing but a dream and nothing but happy talk. The United States should not remain silent as untold billions are stolen. The monies are being stolen, and the natural resources are being stolen from the people in South Sudan. The people of South Sudan are also being murdered in the process. We should not stand by. By empowering the U.S. Government to target the illicit financial activity that serves as the root cause for many of the atrocities that I have talked about, the South Sudanese can begin rebuilding their nation without fear of violence and without fear of corruption. The United States is far from the only government on the world stage that has the ability to do this. Now, we both know that, but as is so often the case, we might be the only government with the will and the moral conviction to do what is right. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I want to talk for a few minutes about money, 5G, and radio waves. A radio wave is nothing more than electromagnetic radiation that moves through the air. That is all a radio wave is. Imagine a pond, and think of a radio wave as a ripple, or wave, in that pond. The wave kind of goes like this. It has a peak and a valley and then a peak and a valley. Eventually, it gets shorter and shorter. That is what a radio wave is. There are different kinds of radio waves. I don't know how many, but there are a bunch, and they are differentiated by the lengths of the peaks and the valleys. Remember? The radio wave is doing this. As it goes to the top and comes to the bottom, that is called a cycle. Frequency--you have heard that term before--is nothing more than how many cycles a radio wave goes through in one second. So we have out there--we can't see them, for they are invisible--thousands, millions of these radio waves that are, once again, going like this. Now, what does that have to do with 5G? So 5G is nothing more than a certain type of radio wave. I will come back and talk a little bit about the 5G in a second. When I make a cell phone call to the Presiding Officer, my voice is being converted into an electrical signal, as she knows. It is being sent to her phone through a radio wave. Once it gets my signal carried by the radio wave, her telephone converts it back into my voice. That is all a cell phone is. I say: Hello, Madam President. My voice is then converted into an electrical signal that is sent by a radio wave to her telephone. That is how a cell phone works. What is 5G? ``5G'' stands for ``fifth-generation wireless technology.'' The very simple answer to ``What is 5G?'' is that it is an incredibly fast radio wave that can carry a huge amount of data. I mean, it is lightning fast. Even if you have fourth generation, it is 10-times faster than anything we have right now. Fifth generation's waves are going to be 10-times faster and will carry way more data, way more information. It is going to change the world, not just the United States of America. It is going to change the world. It is going to change space. You have heard about the Internet of Things. 5G is going to be able to hook up all kinds of devices that will be able to talk to each other simultaneously. Once we get 5G in America, I will be able to open my garage door from a half a mile away. The Presiding Officer will be able to set the timer on her coffee pot from here in the Senate if she wants to. Surgeons will be able to conduct surgery thousands of miles away from each other through the internet. We will have driverless cars. Do any of you ever get money out of an ATM? They are going to be gone. We will not need ATMs anymore. You will be able to get the money through a smartphone. Through 5G technology, farmers will be informed well in advance of when there are diseases encroaching upon their crops. We will not have to sign our names anymore. 5G will make possible what are called personal heat signatures. It is going to change the world. Remember, 5G is just a radio wave. Who owns that radio wave and the air that it goes through? The people of America do. Every country owns its own radio waves. If there is any doubt, the Communications Act of 1934 says that the United States of America--you and I--own that radio wave and the ability to send that radio wave from my cell phone to the Presiding Officer's cell phone. You will not be surprised to learn that not all radio waves--I told you there were millions of them, billions of them--are made in the same way. There is a special kind of radio wave that is just perfect for fifth-generation wireless technology. This is called the C band. The C band is between 3.7 gigahertz and 4.2 gigahertz. That is the frequency. I think of it as being a certain type of radio wave that is perfect for C band that can be sent through the air to effectuate 5G. That certain radio wave and the air and the right to execute that service belongs to the American people, and the FCC is in charge of it. The FCC auctions these radio waves all the time. When those at a radio company or a television company or an internet company say, ``I need to use some of those radio waves,'' they go to the FCC. The FCC says: OK, we are going to auction that radio wave off because we believe in competition and because these radio waves belong to the American people, and so we want to get the best price. In the last 25 years, the FCC has conducted over 100 auctions of radio waves. The FCC doesn't call them radio waves. It calls them spectrum. You have heard the term ``spectrum auction.'' The FCC has done a public auction--over 100 of them--of these various radio waves, or bands of spectrum, and has brought in $123 billion for the American people. It has done an incredible job. Now we are about to assign the special radio waves for 5G. I don't blame them for trying. Yet there are three foreign-owned satellite companies, two foreign companies from Luxembourg--I love Luxembourg; it is a great country--and one foreign corporation from Canada--I love Canada--that have gone to the FCC and said they can do an auction faster than the FCC can. We need to get these 5G radio waves out to the wireless companies really fast. These three foreign satellite companies have said: If you will just give us those radio waves, we will auction them off for you, and we will do it a lot faster than you can. When I first read about this, I said: Am I reading this right? The FCC has held over 100 auctions. They have brought in $123 billion. We have these radio waves for 5G that the experts say are worth $60 billion, and instead of auctioning them off and letting everybody fairly compete, these three foreign corporations want the FCC to give them the airwaves and let them auction them off, and the foreign companies get to keep the money. I am astounded. I said: Gosh, I couldn't ask for something like that with a straight face. But do you know what is even more incredible? The FCC is thinking about doing it. They are thinking about doing it. They are thinking about taking $60 billion that belongs to the American people and just giving it to this alliance of companies--two from Luxembourg and one from Canada--and saying ``Here. It is yours. Go auction it off'' even though they have never conducted a spectrum auction in their lives. Do you know how much $60 billion is? I did the math. And our FCC is thinking about doing it. What I find really incredible is that the President just issued this Executive order--well, he did it a little while ago--buy American and hire American. I was so proud when I saw this Executive order--buy American and hire American. It doesn't mean we don't love our world's neighbors, but America first. And what is our FCC thinking about doing? They are thinking about giving our spectrum to three foreign companies and letting them keep the $60 billion. Talk about swampy. These are also foreign companies. Now, I don't mean that in a pejorative sense, and I love Luxembourg, and I love Canada. They had a French company in here too. The French company has bowed out, at least for a while. But our job is not to maximize profits for foreign corporations; our job is to help our people. This 5G has national security implications. Before we give away these 5G airwaves to a foreign corporation, we need to know whom they are going to give it to. What if they give it to China? What if they say ``Well, we will conduct our own auction'' and they give it to Huawei? There is another reason that this whole approach is foolhardy. 5G is going to be great for the cities. That is where it is going first. But what about the people who don't live in the city? What I would like to see us do and I am encouraging the FCC to do is to hold a public auction, take some of that $60 billion they are going to get, and use it for rural broadband to make sure the people who live in rural areas get taken care of as well as the people who live in the cities because our wireless technology companies are going to have to be encouraged. They make a whole lot more money selling in a city than they do out in the rural areas. Remember, this foreign corporation group says they can do an auction faster, even though they have never done an auction in their lives. They say: We can do it faster, and we have to beat China. So give us the radio waves. We will do a quick auction. We get to keep the $60 billion, but we will get it out there. There is just one problem: All those wireless technology companies that didn't get to bid--every single one of them is going to file suit if we don't do a public auction. So we are going to have this tied up in court for 20 years. We are going to be so far behind China. China is going to have lapped us several times. We are going to think we are in first place, but we are really going to be in last place. I have held hearings--not because of anything that I did or any competence on my part. I am chairman of the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, and the only reason I got the job is seniority, OK? Nonetheless, I got it, and the FCC is under my jurisdiction. I have been holding hearings, and I am going to hold more hearings. So far, the only reason that anybody can give me to take these 5G airwaves and give them to a foreign corporation is that they think they can do it faster, despite the fact that we will have litigation and despite the fact that they have never done an auction before. The best way to resist temptation, in my opinion, is a proper upbringing, a strong set of values, and witnesses. We need to have a public auction of this internet, of the 5G radio waves. Everybody needs to compete. If we don't want a foreign company to get control of it-- and I don't--we can put it in the bid specs. Huawei need not apply. Not personal, but as long as you spy for China, you can't work here. We need a level playing field. We need to have competition. Competition is a moral good. Everybody needs to get an equal bite at the apple. This doesn't need to be done in a backroom, swampy deal. I am not saying that anybody's brother-in-law is going to get taken care of here. I am not saying that, but it sure looks swampy. And we need to do it exactly like we have done for the 100 past broadband spectrum auctions. I am saying that not only to our Senate colleagues here, but I hope I am speaking clearly enough to the FCC. Do the right thing. Don't give away $60 billion that belongs to the people of America to two companies in Luxembourg and one other one in Canada. It is wrong. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. I am getting to that. For the reasons I described and with great respect for the senior Senator from Illinois, I object.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I agree so much with what the Senator from Illinois has said, but we are on top of this. Let me say it again. We gave the States $380 million to address the problems in 2018. They haven't spent all of it. It is 3 gallons of crazy to give them another billion dollars. We have been assured by all of the relevant Federal officials that we are ready for 2020. I am going to repeat once again: We had no problems in 2018. If I thought for a second that our voting system was in jeopardy, I would be joining with my good friend the Senator, but I am not much for just spending taxpayer money, with a $22 trillion deficit, just to be spending it.