Cynthia Lummis

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Will the gentleman from Louisiana yield for an adjunct question to his question?

Ms. LUMMIS. So the law says that lying to Congress is a felony. Since we are no longer using impeachment as a means to address someone who is lying to Congress, how does Congress prosecute or address someone who deliberately lies to Congress now that the Senate has swept away, through this precedential action today, the opportunity to use impeachment for that purpose? Thank you.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, today, I rise also to pay tribute to a Cowboy State giant, colleague, and friend, Pat O'Toole. Pat was not born in Wyoming, but you never would have guessed that. There was no one more dedicated to Carbon County or the Cowboy State than Pat. When Pat met his wife Sharon, he fell in love not just with her but, as Senator Barrasso said, his adopted home of Wyoming. Together, they raised cattle, sheep, horses, dogs, and children. My own daughter, Annaliese, was born the same month that Eamon O'Toole was born. Sharon and I enjoyed the fact that our children would get to grow up together. He often joked that he was raising a menagerie with Sharon. His commitment to ranching stretched far beyond his property, as he would ultimately dedicate his life to serving the agriculture and conservation communities. I had the privilege of meeting Pat when we served together in the Wyoming Legislature. His stories and infectious smile loomed large. He quickly earned a reputation for finding common ground with anyone. We always looked forward to hearing his stories about nearly getting arrested in Tierra del Fuego, being accosted by a machine-gun-wielding police officer in Argentina during a revolution, or hitchhiking from Maine to Florida with a buddy in college. Pat O'Toole lived a very interesting and large life. He was also larger than life in the best way, and he cared deeply for the people he served. Following his service in the Wyoming Legislature, Pat was appointed by President Clinton to the Western Water Policy Commission, and he focused on the future of water in the West. He was instrumental in providing very carefully thought-out testimony regarding the future of the Colorado River. We all benefit now, as Senator Hickenlooper, Senator Bennet, and I continue to work on Colorado River issues together. The position he held on the Western Water Policy Commission deepened his love for conservation efforts and led him to serve on many advocacy groups to fight for farmers, ranchers, and rural communities until he died. As much as Pat dedicated his life to protecting western landscapes, he would be the first to tell you that his family was his greatest achievement. Please join me in keeping his family in your prayers as we come together to celebrate his life and the indelible impact he had on his beloved Wyoming. I yield the floor.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. Chairman, I call up my motion to instruct the conferees. The clerk will report the motion.

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, this motion to instruct conferees would combat bad actors using crypto assets in financial transactions by preserving in the NDAA my amendment introduced alongside my colleagues from both sides of the aisle including Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, and Roger Marshall. This amendment would not only combat money laundering, it would crack down on countries evading sanctions and funding terrorism through crypto assets. It does this by requiring the Treasury Department to establish comprehensive exam standards for financial institutions engaged in crypto asset activities and requires a study on the use of crypto asset mixers, tumblers, and other anonymity-enhancing technologies. Preventing illicit finance in the crypto asset industry is integral as we work to provide comprehensive regulation to the industry--and passing these provisions into law will protect our national security and ensure our adversaries are not using crypto assets to finance those who would do harm to the United States. I strongly urge my colleagues in joining me in support of my motion to instruct.

Ms. LUMMIS. I know of no further debate on the motion. Vote on Motion to Instruct

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, on March 31, 2022, the Securities and Exchange Commission--SEC--issued Staff Accounting Bulletin 121--SAB 121--which purported to address the accounting treatment of crypto assets. The bulletin was not issued as a rule under the Administrative Procedure Act--APA--and was not submitted to Congress as required by the Congressional Review Act. On August 2, 2022, I sent a letter to the Comptroller General requesting a GAO legal decision regarding the applicability of the Congressional Review Act to SAB 121. On October 31, 2023, GAO issued a legal decision finding that SAB 121 was a rule under both the Administrative Procedure Act and the Congressional Review Act and that no exception applied. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the GAO legal decision regarding SAB 121 be printed in the Congressional Record.

Ms. LUMMIS

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

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, I am honored to have had my first term in the U.S. Senate coincide with Dianne Feinstein's time here in this Senate. When I learned this morning that she had passed away--the longest serving woman in the U.S. Senate--two words came to my mind: patience and kindness. The Bible says that love is patient and kind. Senator Feinstein and I disagreed on policy much of the time, but never regarding patience and kindness. Dianne Feinstein was unfailingly kind. She was particularly kind to other women Senators. She was the first to invite other women Senators to dinner, to lead our gatherings, and to focus our attention on things that are good for all Americans, without regard to political ideology. As someone who arrived in the Senate the same week as January 6, that day set the tone for many of my first months in the U.S. Senate. But that day never set the tone for my relationship with Senator Dianne Feinstein. My conversations with her, from beginning to end, were unfailingly cordial and kind. Particularly poignant were my observations of the relationship between Senator Feinstein and her colleague from California, Senator Alex Padilla. The conversations I enjoyed with Senator Feinstein and Senator Padilla displayed his admiration and respect for his senior Senate colleague, based on a yearslong working relationship going back to his internship for her. And his importance to her is on display in the beautiful artwork she created for him. That was a beautiful California duo. I know that Senator Padilla will do her honor in becoming California's senior Senator. So I conclude with positive memories of Dianne Feinstein--Senator, colleague, and hopefully for both of us, friend. That is a lovely way to set the tone for political opposites going forward. If patience and kindness is what love is, then that is also what Senator Dianne Feinstein is. Senator Dianne Feinstein is love. I salute her service. I yield the floor.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, I begin my remarks today with the words from a song: There's this one particular Harbor, so far but yet so near, where I see the days as they fade away and finally disappear. When a timeless, iconic American passes away, reflection sets in, perhaps more so for those of us who are contemporaries, to that timeless American's gift to our culture, to America as we know it, live it, and find joy in it. Today, I rise to pay tribute to Jimmy Buffett, a legendary singer- songwriter, author, and iconic American who created an incredible and uniquely American musical genre that inspired us to celebrate life with joy, to celebrate everything from a ``Cheeseburger in Paradise'' to a ``Pencil Thin Mustache,'' to this ``One Particular Harbor.'' Jimmy Buffett's unique contribution to American culture spans his early career, Bourbon Street performances in New Orleans, to sold-out Red Rocks Amphitheatre, inspiring generations of Parrot Heads that were drawn in by his extraordinary American perspective. From remarkable creations like ``One Particular Harbor,'' ``Fins,'' ``We Are the People Our Parents Warned Us About,'' ``Son of a Son of a Sailor,'' ``Jolly Mon,'' ``Cowboy in the Jungle,'' ``Stars on the Water,'' ``Livingston Saturday Night,'' and, of course, ``Come Monday,'' and ``Margaritaville,'' Jimmy Buffett chronicled an American life of sunny gulf coast days, the sound of steel drums, extended happy hours, and all the joys of the seas and the islands. Commuting from Cheyenne to Laramie during law school and in need of a break from law school lectures on cassette, I would pop in Jimmy Buffett, roll down the windows, and be lost in lyrics like ``forget your blind ambition and learn to trust your intuition, plowing straight ahead, come what may.'' In an instant, Jimmy Buffett could transport a ranch girl in Wyoming to a sandy beach in a wave-licked paradise, surrounded by friends, sporting a tan earned over countless days of deep-sea fishing. He invites us to escape the weight of the world, reminding us that it is always ``5 o'clock somewhere.'' When you are by yourself and you cannot wipe the smile off your face because of a song, that is pure Jimmy Buffett. What is so remarkable about Jimmy Buffett's music is its ability to reach and relate to generations of people from all different times of life. To be with Jimmy Buffett and the Coral Reefer Band in concert, the sound of steel drums floating on a breezy summer night sky, watching giant beach balls bouncing among Parrot Heads wearing Hawaiian shirts and shorts, parents and grandparents with children on their shoulders, all of whom are singing every word to every song--that was also pure Jimmy. When so many voices are driving Americans apart, Jimmy's voice called Americans back together. So here is to Jimmy Buffett and his enduring legacy, sailing in the sky alongside dolphins and the many manatees he saved through his charities. I conclude with Jimmy's own words from ``Jolly Mon'': The night was filled with magic. They bid the sea goodbye. They swam into the heavens. They stayed up in the sky. And all the island people, when they wished upon a star, see the dolphins and the Jolly Mon who tell them where they are. Oh, Jolly Mon sing. Oh, make the heavens ring. I thank Jimmy's friends Eric and Lisa Eisner and my brother Del Lummis for helping with this tribute to Jimmy Buffett. I yield the floor.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that my intern, Aidan Jacketta, be granted floor privileges until September 24, 2023.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, it is my privilege to welcome Ron Cunningham of Lander, WY, to the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame. This induction is held during the week of the Wyoming State Fair in Douglas, and it is truly one of the highest honors to receive during one of the best annual events Wyoming has to offer. To be inducted into the Hall of Fame is truly an honor, no matter what profession you are in. When it comes to sports, the Hall of Fame is traditionally reserved for those who were among the best at their positions, were an exemplary teammate, treated the game with respect, and created a lasting legacy for future generations of fans to admire. While the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame does not take into account how well an individual may run, hit, throw, catch, or tackle, it instead considers an individual's commitment and dedication to agriculture in Wyoming and what they have done to help improve and grow this essential industry in our State. Needless to say, Ron Cunningham checks all of those boxes and then some. Ron has spent his entire lifetime in the industry, beginning with his early years growing up on a farm in Fremont County. This exposure to agriculture led Ron to pursue further academic endeavors at Casper College and ultimately the University of Wyoming. He then discovered that he had a passion for sharing his knowledge and experience with others and moved to Nebraska to teach agriculture at a high school. Fortunately for all of us in Wyoming, Ron decided he wanted to come home and took a position on a ranch in Ten Sleep. He later accepted a supervisor position with Weed and Pest. After a couple of years, Ron took a job with the University of Wyoming Extension in Fremont County, a position he held for 38 years. Once Ron was back in Wyoming, he became even more involved in so many ag-related activities that it really would be impossible to name them all. He left his impression on just about every person he came across, whether it was with 4-H and FFA, planning and organizing Fremont County Farm and Ranch Days, or serving on numerous State boards and local civic organizations. He takes such pride in his work and his efforts will help ensure Wyoming agriculture continues to thrive for years to come. With his decades of service to our State, as well as the numerous accolades and accomplishments that he has received, it goes without saying that he is absolutely worthy of the honor of being inducted into the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame. I am so pleased that Ron will be joining the likes of so many others who have done so much for agriculture in our state. His legacy is something to behold and appreciate. I tip my hat to him.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, it is my real honor today to join Senator Barrasso of Wyoming and Senator Carper of Delaware in support of legislation to rename the Shoshoni, WY, Post Office the Dessie A. Bebout Post Office. Wyoming is full of exceptional women, and Dessie was surely one of them. In the years following the Pearl Harbor attack, Dessie was one of the first women to enlist in the WAVES, the Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Services. Dessie traveled by train across the country to New York City for basic training. She was later stationed in Seattle for 2\1/2\ years, where she was responsible for recording the arrival and departure of sailors to and from the Pacific Fleet. Dessie then married Herbert ``Hugh'' Bebout, also a Wyoming native, and, in 1945, they moved back to Wyoming to start their life together. They raised five children, and today their family has grown to 13 grandchildren and 19 great-grandchildren. In 1962, Dessie became the postmaster of the Shoshoni post office. Her exemplary service was recognized when she was awarded the Order of the Vest, which is the highest honor given to postmasters. Dessie Bebout passed away in May of this year at the age of 102 years. She lived up to what it means to be part of the Greatest Generation. It is very fitting that we rename the Shoshoni Post Office after Dessie Bebout. It serves as a small token of our appreciation for her service to Wyoming and our country. Now I would like to yield the floor to the senior Senator from Wyoming, John Barrasso, whose inspired idea to name the post office in Shoshoni after Dessie Bebout brings us here today.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, it is my real honor today to join Senator Barrasso of Wyoming and Senator Carper of Delaware in support of legislation to rename the Shoshoni, WY, Post Office the Dessie A. Bebout Post Office. Wyoming is full of exceptional women, and Dessie was surely one of them. In the years following the Pearl Harbor attack, Dessie was one of the first women to enlist in the WAVES, the Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Services. Dessie traveled by train across the country to New York City for basic training. She was later stationed in Seattle for 2\1/2\ years, where she was responsible for recording the arrival and departure of sailors to and from the Pacific Fleet. Dessie then married Herbert ``Hugh'' Bebout, also a Wyoming native, and, in 1945, they moved back to Wyoming to start their life together. They raised five children, and today their family has grown to 13 grandchildren and 19 great-grandchildren. In 1962, Dessie became the postmaster of the Shoshoni post office. Her exemplary service was recognized when she was awarded the Order of the Vest, which is the highest honor given to postmasters. Dessie Bebout passed away in May of this year at the age of 102 years. She lived up to what it means to be part of the Greatest Generation. It is very fitting that we rename the Shoshoni Post Office after Dessie Bebout. It serves as a small token of our appreciation for her service to Wyoming and our country. Now I would like to yield the floor to the senior Senator from Wyoming, John Barrasso, whose inspired idea to name the post office in Shoshoni after Dessie Bebout brings us here today.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following interns in my office be granted floor privileges until July 13, 2023: Michael Newman, Jennifer Campos, and Ianna Harrison.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, later today, we will be voting on legislation I introduced with 20 of our colleagues, S.J. Res. 23. This resolution rescinds the Biden administration's 2022 rule that rolled back a commonsense and necessary definition of ``habitat'' under the Endangered Species Act from the previous administration. When Congress passed the Endangered Species Act, it granted the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce, through the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, respectively, the authority to designate areas as ``critical habitat.'' Section 7 of the Act prohibits the ``destruction or adverse modification'' of these critical habitat designations. There is no doubt that habitat loss is a contributing factor to species' declines, so protecting habitat that is necessary to the survival of species is appropriate. The problem that has arisen, however, is that these designations have, on occasion, been weaponized to the detriment of landowners, the American public, and the very species we are trying to protect. Two-thirds of all endangered species are located on private lands. For these species to be recovered, private landowners must be part of the solution and not treated as the enemy. Unfortunately, through aggressive critical habitat designations, as well-intentioned as they might be, private landowners are penalized and harmed instead of incentivized to help with species recovery. A recent study that examined more than 13,000 real estate transactions for land within or near critical habitat for two listed species in California found that a designation ``resulted in a large and statistically significant decrease in land value,'' specifically 48 percent for the red-legged frog and at least 78 percent for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. This is true across the country. Let me tell you a story from Louisiana. In 2001, the Fish and Wildlife Service listed the dusky gopher frog as an endangered species. After litigation by the Center for Biological Diversity, in 2010, the Service proposed to designate critical habitat for the species and included 1,544 acres on a Louisiana site owned by Weyerhaeuser Company and a group of family landowners. The Service included the site even though the frog was last seen there in 1965. Additionally, the site would require substantial modification to support a sustainable population. According to the Service's own report, designation of the site could cost the landowners nearly $34 million in lost development value. Weyerhaeuser sued the Fish and Wildlife Service over the designation, arguing, among other things, that the site could not be critical habitat because the frog, which did not exist at the site, could not survive there without the site's being transformed from a closed canopy timber plantation to an open canopy, longleaf pine forest. In other words, their land could not be critical habitat for the frog because it was not habitat at all. In a unanimous 8 to 0 decision in 2018, the Supreme Court agreed. It said the ESA ``does not authorize the Secretary to designate an area as critical habitat unless it is also habitat for the species.'' Now, the problem is that the term ``habitat'' itself is not defined within the Endangered Species Act. Prompted by that unanimous Weyerhaeuser Supreme Court case, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finalized a rule in 2020 that defined the word ``habitat'' for the purposes of designating ``critical habitat'' under the ESA. The definition is simple: Habitat is an area that ``currently or periodically contains the resources and conditions necessary to support one or more life process of a species.'' It seems pretty reasonable. In 2022, the Biden administration caved to radical groups that wanted to return to free-for-all designations and finalized a rule to rescind this very reasonable, commonsense definition. So we are now operating under an ad hoc system that creates decreased property values and predatory legal challenges for American families and businesses. In fact, it incentivizes landowners to make sure that their land could never be habitat for threatened or endangered species. With the Trump-era rule rescinded, there is no regulation to bind Federal Agencies in determining the habitat of an endangered species from which critical habitat can be designated. Without the certainty of what ``habitat'' actually means, the development of any type can be blocked, including necessary infrastructure projects that the majority of this body recently spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to support. It is for this reason that a huge group of outside groups endorsed this resolution, including the American Road & Transportation Builders Association, the American Farm Bureau, the National Water Resources Association, the National Association of Counties, the Public Lands Council, the National Association of Home Builders, and many others. In closing, the only way to recover endangered species is to enlist the help of private landowners in our efforts. Overly broad critical habitat designations do just the opposite. My friends across the aisle have argued these designations are necessary for species recovery. The facts simply don't back this up. Among the 60 species still listed from the ESA because of recovery as of July 2020, 51 of them never even had critical habitat designations. By lowering private landowner opposition to conservation efforts, which will happen if we pass this rule, our Nation can help recover threatened and endangered species while simultaneously supporting our private landowners and public land users in their worthy goals of providing food, energy, jobs, and homes necessary for the survival of our own species. I urge my colleagues to vote yes in support of this resolution. I yield the floor. Vote on S.J. Res. 23

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, our Federal permitting process is broken. Back home in Wyoming, important infrastructure and energy projects are oftentimes delayed years due to mountains of regulation, redtape, bureaucracy, and even lawsuits. This is absolutely unacceptable. It is impossible for small businesses to even get off the ground thanks to these hurdles. It is time to reform our Federal permitting process, and I am glad some of my colleagues from across the aisle are coming around to the idea of permitting reform. Some on the left are finally warming up to reform to try to push renewable energy projects. Permitting reform needs to address all types of energy technologies, fuel, and projects. For that reason, any bipartisan effort needs to actually address the underlying statutes, including the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA; the Endangered Species Act; the Clean Water Act; and the Clean Air Act. Window dressing will no longer do. Since NEPA is the single most litigated environmental statute, litigation reform needs to be part of the final product. Litigation reflects something is broken; that it is not working well. Some would have you believe otherwise. Litigation is the result of something is not working well. The average time for NEPA processes is 4\1/2\ years-- nearly half a decade. We also need to think about the processes and projects that have never been started because of these challenges. The costs of getting NEPA and getting an environmental impact statement are so high and take so long that some projects are never undertaken. I have a friend in Wyoming who has been trying for over 10 years to get through the NEPA process to open a rare earth minerals mine so as to mine rare earth minerals we desperately need in this country so that we don't have to rely on places like China and the Republic of the Congo. But this man is going to retire because he is ready to retire, and this process is still ongoing. All that time, all that money, all that energy is being reduced to nothing because a process has taken the place of mining the rare earth minerals we desperately need in this country. I applaud Senator Shelley Moore Capito's leadership in addressing meaningful permitting reform. Her legislation will provide regulatory certainty to States and stakeholders, codify environmental regulatory reforms, and expedite permitting and review processes. I am especially excited about the idea of allowing States to take on more of the shared workload when it comes to permitting, particularly under the Endangered Species Act. I look forward to the Senate taking up this bill and providing much- needed permitting reform. I yield the floor.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Jake Newton and Casey Foss--interns in my office--be granted floor privileges until May 4, 2023.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Madam President, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today to share with you that Wyoming lost one of its finest residents on September 21. At the age of 89, God called up one of his most faithful servants, Clarene Law, up to heaven. I join with the rest of Wyoming in mourning this tremendous loss. While she was born in neighboring Idaho, Clarene's journey to Wyoming began in 1959 when her husband at the time was hired to be a guidance counselor at Jackson/Wilson High School, which brought the family to Jackson, WY. In the early 1960s, Jackson presumably looked a whole lot different than it looks today. Of course, Grand Teton National Park and Yellowstone were a short drive away, and the entire area is surrounded by so much natural beauty, but it was not the major tourist destination that it is today. Once settled in Jackson, Clarene took what may be considered her first step in the hospitality business by working as a bookkeeper and auditor at the Wort Hotel in Jackson. In 1962, while working at the Wort, she overheard a conversation about the owner of the Antler Motel telling another person they wanted to sell it. After hearing this conversation, Clarene chimed in to say that she was interested. Clarene and her husband got together, scrounged up their money, were able to receive assistance from both sets of parents to make the necessary down payment to become owners of the Antler Motel. The work at the Antler was tough, but it also gave her the chance to be a working mother and watch her kids while doing all the remaining tasks necessary for running a hotel. She worked the front desk, cleaned the sheets, made the beds, did the books, and eventually even pumped gas at the station they later added. Business was certainly picking up, and it allowed them to start expanding the Antler. They were able to purchase several nearby properties which were rolled into the Antler itself and a location that once was a series of different restaurants to what is known today as the Pearl Street Market. In 1973, Clarene remarried Creed Law who was a hard-working man who could do just about anything with his hands. Creed was also instrumental in the upkeep and expansion of the hotel operations. There were few things he couldn't fix and coincidentally put together. Case in point, they actually purchased what was the Settlers Best Western in Worland and took it apart only to put it back together in Jackson, some 250 miles away. Clarene certainly knew what she was doing, and she was doing it extremely well. Over the years, they continued to expand, purchase new properties, update some of the old ones, and at the time of her passing, Clarene and Creed owned 6 lodges with 477 hotel units and employed numerous people to help manage and maintain them. One of the true special parts about that is that, over the nearly 60 years that Clarene was responsible for the hotels, you could regularly still find her sitting behind the front desk at the Antler, greeting people, and getting them situation and settled into their rooms. For anyone to have worked nearly 60 years setting up a major family business and helping to transform Jackson into the destination that it is today would be remarkable enough and incredibly noteworthy, it still does not even tell the full story of how Clarene impacted Wyoming. Having been recognized by so many in the community for her hard work and dedication to Jackson and seeing the town grow and develop, she was frequently asked to serve in numerous civic organizations. She was able to make time to serve as a board member for the Jackson Hole Chamber of Commerce and the Jackson Planning Commission. The list goes on. She was a founder and president of the Jackson Hole Resort Association, president of the Wyoming Lodging and Restaurant Association, director of the Jackson State Bank, a member of the school board, and still found a way to teach Sunday school. Much of this work led to her receiving the Big WYO award in 1987, which is an incredible honor put forth by the Wyoming Hospitality and Travel Coalition. The desire to work with her community and to find solutions to improve and make things better led to her decision to run for the Wyoming House of Representatives. Her neighbors agreed and voted her to be their State representative in house district 23, where she served the people of Teton County for seven 2-year terms from 1991-2005. During her time in the legislature, she became the chair of the house minerals, business, and economic development committee, which is quite fitting since she was responsible for so much growth in the tourism industry in Teton County. She was a strong supporter of the Cultural Trust, supported learning centers and access to healthcare, especially working for a Medicaid match for traumatic brain injuries for adults. She was also one that had a way about her that seemed to ease the tension in the room. Her collegial way amongst her fellow representatives was such that she was able to bring people together and find something that they can agree on. Having served in the State legislature with former Senator Mike Enzi, maybe she was familiar with his 80/20 tool, which emphasizes focusing on 80 percent of an issue people can agree on and leaving out or finding another way to work on the 20 percent which typically is the part which many tend to disagree on. Regardless, she had a very successful second career for herself and influenced so many by serving Wyoming in the State house. Before her passing, Clarene wrote a memoir about her life. It is titled, ``And I Had Fun! The Life and Legacy of Clarene Law.'' That is a perfectly fitting title as that is how she ended many of her letters. After having known her for as long as I have, I am sure that, yes, she had fun. Clarene was a legend, truly one of a kind. She was the best of the best. She was kind, but firm, smart and generous, and devoted to serving her Teton County community. Her family and husband Creed were her greatest joy. Above all else, she was a woman of great faith. Clarene was the type of leader and person we should all aspire to be. She was a dear friend and a woman I admired greatly. I will miss everything about her, but her legacy lives across her beloved State of Wyoming.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. My days since the first cloture vote on the Respect for Marriage Act, as amended, have involved a painful exercise in accepting admonishment and fairly brutal self-soul-searching--entirely avoidable, I might add, had I simply chosen to vote no. The Bible teaches that marriage is between one man and one woman. I accept God's Word, including God's Word as to the definition of marriage. I support my church's adherence to that Biblical pronouncement. I support Wyoming statute which codifies that definition. I find solace in people and organizations that share my beliefs. I, and many like me, have been vilified and despised by some who disagree with our beliefs. They do not withhold bitter invective. They use their own hateful speech to make sure that I and others who believe as I do know that we are hated and despised by them. Americans on the other side of this issue can relate to ill treatment as well. So why have I strayed with such anguish from a path that conforms to my beliefs, my instruction, my faith, to vote for the Respect for Marriage Act? The answer to that question lies in our history, in how we got here as a nation and as a people, and in where we are as a nation and as a people today. In the 1600s, colonizers Roger Williams of Rhode Island and William Penn of Pennsylvania cited Scripture and the Protestant reformers to defer to God as the judge of conscience. Williams referred to religious liberty as ``liberty of the soul.'' The charter of the Colony of Rhode Island required religious tolerance, ``that all may . . . freely and fully have and enjoy his and their own judgments and consciences, in matters of religious concernments.'' George Whitefield's groundbreaking message, without which these United States never would have come into being, emphasized an individual's personal relationship with God, where previously the individual deferred to the church. These became foundational for our current American approach to the relationship between church and state. In 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court, in its Obergefell decision, established a constitutional right to same-sex unions, using the term ``marriage.'' Tens of thousands of same-sex American couples have married in reliance on that Supreme Court decision. The term ``marriage'' now has two meanings: the Biblical and the secular. The Respect for Marriage Act, by design, references neither definition. It uses the term ``individuals.'' The act recognizes that both definitions exist and codifies that a marriage legally entered in one State will be legally accepted by the others. Further, the act provides protection from persecution by a government authority toward a church and its organizations of religious instruction that adhere only to the Biblical definition. These are turbulent times for our Nation. Americans address each other in more crude and cruel terms than ever in my lifetime. It is jarring and unbecoming of us as human beings. It is highly intolerant, and, frequently, the most so when expressed by those who advocate for tolerance. Many of us ask ourselves: Our Nation is so divided. When will this end, and how will it end? Just as when our Nation was founded, when the New World tore itself from the old, people of diverse faiths, beliefs, and backgrounds had to come to terms with each other, had to tolerate the seemingly intolerable about each other's views, and had to respect each other's rights, even before the Constitution enumerated those rights. They had to tolerate each other in order to survive as a nation. Somehow, most certainly with divine guidance, they did. For the sake of our Nation today and its survival, we do well by taking this step, not embracing or validating each other's devoutly held views but by the simple act of tolerating them. And that explains my vote. I yield the floor.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, I rise today to underscore the crucial importance of the religious liberty provisions in the Respect for Marriage Act, which was just passed by the Senate, and to ensure the legislative intent behind these provisions is crystal clear. As you know, the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges from 2015 established a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. When Obergefell was argued, then-Solicitor General Verrilli was asked whether recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage would lead to churches, religious organizations, and other not-for-profits potentially having their tax-exempt status reconsidered in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Bob Jones University v. United States. Solicitor General Verrilli responded that ``it's certainly going to be an issue.'' In recognizing a constitutional right to same-sex marriage in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court did not reconsider the Bob Jones University precedent, leaving this issue unresolved. The Respect for Marriage Act, with the substitute amendment that I cosponsored with Senators Sinema, Collins, Baldwin, Portman, and Tillis, answers this question and a number of others, providing strong protections for religious liberty, especially when combined with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. I want to thank my friend, the Senator from Arizona, for her hard work on this bill and her willingness to address key questions around religious liberty in a thoughtful and bipartisan way. It is my understanding that section 2 of the Respect for Marriage Act, in light of the Supreme Court's Bob Jones v. United States decision in 1983, would prevent the Internal Revenue Service from successfully arguing that the United States now has a ``national policy'' favoring same-sex marriage and would prevent the IRS from using this national policy argument to deny tax-exempt status to religious organizations. I want to ask my friend, the Senator from Arizona, is this your understanding, as well?

Ms. LUMMIS. Yes, it is my understanding that use of this phrase in section 4 of the bill is intended to incorporate the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of this term, including, but not limited to, the case Rendell-Baker v. Kohn and NCAA v. Tarkanian cases. I would like to now turn to section 6 of the bill, which provides that no church or religious nonprofit will be forced to solemnize or conduct a marriage ceremony under this bill. Is it your understanding that section 6(b) bars ``any civil claim or cause of action,'' without exception, relating to a church or religious organization's refusal to solemnize or celebrate a marriage under this section, and the text does not state that it can be overruled by a court in finding a ``compelling governmental interest''?

Ms. LUMMIS. Yes, that is my understanding, as well, regarding the scope of section 7. This bill is intended to enshrine a national policy of respect for all views surrounding marriage and to enact some of the strongest religious liberty protections since the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993. This legislation also ensures that religious liberty will have more of a central role in future debates in our courts and in the Halls of Congress. I would like to thank my friend from Arizona for her tireless work on these issues and her willingness to work together, as always.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, today I have the distinct honor of welcoming Scott Keith to the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame in the class of 2022. While Scott sadly passed away in 2020, I know he would be pleased that so many people he worked with over the years have honored him with this remarkable posthumous recognition. Being inducted into the hall of fame is truly one of the highest achievements anyone can meet. It means your peers and colleagues believe you are among the best of the best, you have made the industry better, and during your lifetime, you have set an example for those who wish to follow in your footsteps. Scott was introduced to the world of agriculture at an early age, having been born in Buffalo and raised on a ranch near Kaycee. It did not take long for him to learn to love and appreciate agriculture in Wyoming and realize that, when he grew up, that is what he wanted to do with his life. In order to help facilitate that dream, Scott enrolled at Casper College and eventually the University of Wyoming, where he earned a bachelor's degree in agriculture business. Eventually, Scott and his new bride, Brenda, decided to move to Casper to settle down and raise a family. While in Casper, not only did Scott spend time fostering further relationships in the agriculture industry through his work as a loan officer with the Production Credit Association and First Interstate Bank in Casper, he also made sure to leave his mark on the community through numerous volunteer projects in Casper. Scott had served on the Casper Chamber of Commerce Ag Committee, as well as on the Natrona County Conservation District. He was also a very passionate supporter of the Kelly Walsh High School football team and the Casper Swim Club, where he could be found behind the grill at football games and on the pool deck during swim meets. Needless to say, he loved his family and enjoyed supporting his local community any way he could. In 2002, Scott joined the Wyoming Business Council Agribusiness Division as the forage and co-op development program specialist, which eventually led to a promotion to be the livestock and forage program manager. In that role, Scott was instrumental in promoting the Wyoming hay and forage industry across the United States and abroad. Scott also played a significant role in creating numerous associations related to the promotion of Wyoming Agriculture through the Wyoming Hay and Forage Association and the Future Cattle Producers of Wyoming. His work with the Wyoming Hay and Forage Association led Wyoming hay producers to victory at the World Forage Analysis Superbowl in Madison, WI--twice. I know there are many members of the Pro Football Hall of Fame who have no Super Bowl wins, but Scott was able to claim being a two-time winner of the World Forage Analysis Superbowl. Scott also took an interest in teaching and promoting agriculture to youth in Wyoming. Being an expert in judging cattle, among other talents, through the Future Cattle Producers of Wyoming program, Scott would encourage high school students to learn how to raise cattle by working with local producers and a donated heifer. This not only gave high school students firsthand experience in learning how to raise cattle, but it also played a vital role in making sure that Wyoming continues to be a worldwide leader in quality beef. After the passing of his wife Brenda, Scott met Tracy Smith in Casper, and in 2016, he began working as a contractor for Big Iron Auctions. He was quickly promoted to district manager and was able to help those involved in Wyoming agriculture buy and sell their equipment. In addition to all of his work throughout his career, he still found time to be a part of the Wyoming Wool Growers Association, the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, and even was able to serve as the chairman of Wyoming AgXpo. He truly was an amazing person and a role model to all of us in Wyoming. I wish that Scott had been able to receive this recognition in person. He dedicated his life to the promotion of Wyoming agriculture, and many are benefiting from his hard work. But, I am glad that his legacy will continue to live on through his membership in the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame.

Ms. LUMMIS

Ms. LUMMIS. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, the PUMP Act is noble in nature, but it is an economy-sized approach without flexibilities for some nonstationary workplaces. This legislation would require that all modes of transportation that have employees, including railcars, be retrofitted with private, non- bathroom enclosures to allow for breastfeeding. It would also require employees reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk. To be clear, I recognize the need for breastfeeding women to do just that. However, many women in this industry are quite literally keeping the trains running on time. Entire supply chains could be disrupted because of an overly broad and burdensome regulation that is not crafted to fit this industry. I can't believe I am the only one who sees the pitfalls in this. Regulations like this risk inadvertently doing more harm to working women than helping them. I understand what it is like to juggle the need to feed your child while also working to provide for them. My daughter is working while raising two little boys. This whole thing just makes no sense. That is why I am working on an amendment that would recognize the unique situation that working moms in the transportation sector face. It is my hope we can work with the bill's sponsors to solve this small issue. Until that time, we don't need to exacerbate our supply chain crisis by implementing regulations that do not actually protect or aid women in this industry. For that reason, I object.