Mike Lee

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Madam President, the whole point of American foreign aid is to assist countries in times of need and in support of a common interest between us and them. Yet, for many years, our foreign aid dollars have been used to impose violent, cultural imperialism by promoting and providing for the practice of abortion. Tragically, instead of helping to preserve, strengthen, and sustain the lives of women and children abroad, our taxpayer dollars have been used to harm women's lives and to end the lives of their unborn children, especially baby girls. In some of these countries, girls are disproportionately aborted, precisely because they are female. U.S. aid is used not to affirm the equal dignity of girls and women but to violently deny it. And in some of these countries, abortion has been forced on women who don't even want abortions--women in countries like Vietnam or Peru, for instance, who were forced to endure the coercive abortion and sterilization campaigns of the 1990s, just to name a few examples. What kind of aid does violence to women and girls? What kind of help is it to impose U.S. abortion extremism on countries that culturally and democratically reject it or contribute to international organizations that allow regimes to use abortion as a tool of oppression? And what kind of progress is it to encourage sex-selective abortion and the denigration of human dignity for both the baby and the mother? This cultural imperialism is not pro-woman. It is not pro-child. And it is not pro-healthcare. It is pro-sexism and pro-violence, and we must end it. According to the latest Marist poll, the American people overwhelmingly agree. Nearly 60 percent of Americans oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions, and more than 75 percent of Americans oppose using tax dollars to support abortions in other countries--75 percent. Now, thankfully, President Ronald Reagan first took steps to reverse this kind of support in 1984, instituting what became known as the Mexico City policy to prohibit foreign aid from going to organizations that provide for or promote abortions or that advocate to change abortion laws within a foreign country. Since then, the policy has, unfortunately, been rescinded and reinstated again and again between changing administrations. Between Republicans and Democrats, it has been moved as a sort of political football. But the lives of babies and the dignity of women--these are not political footballs. Women and children everywhere have immeasurable, innate, inherent dignity and worth, regardless of where they are from, and they ought to be entitled to the right to life and protection from harm, regardless of who happens to be in office at any given moment. The Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance Act affirms this very truth. This bill would permanently stop the use of our foreign aid money from funding or promoting abortions overseas. I also defend the women and babies everywhere and value the women and babies everywhere by supporting two other measures introduced by my friends Senator Inhofe and Senator Blackburn. Senator Inhofe's bill, the Protecting Individuals with Down Syndrome Act, would affirm that disability does not determine or demean the dignity and worth of a human life. And Senator Blackburn's bill would ensure that taxpayer funds under the Title X Family Planning Program do not go to any facility that performs or provides referrals for abortions. In our laws and throughout our lives, we ought to uphold the dignity of each and every human person, regardless of the race, sex, appearance, abilities, or age of the person in question. The measures before us today do just that, and we should support them. And now I would like to yield time to my friend and distinguished colleague, the Senator from Montana.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Madam President, I rise today to honor and thank the men and women of the Utah National Guard for their dedication and selfless service in protecting the U.S. Capitol. Each and every one of these guardsmen played an important role in our Nation's Capital these last weeks. I truly respect and admire their commitment to serve not just the people of Utah but wherever they are stationed. 2LT Hyrum Ahlman, CPL Halley Anderson, CPL Joseph Arvig, SGT Ismael Baires, SPC Andrew Bass, PFC Marc Brandt, SSG Trevor Brasfield, SFC Joshua Brewer, SSG David Brizzi, SFC Michael Broadhead, SPC Jose Cabero, SFC Cole Carpenter, SGT Sebastian Castillo, SPC Gregory Caton, MSG Steven Cave, SPC Anthony Cox, SPC Casey Cox, SGT Milo Cox, SPC Joshua Curtis, SGT Douglas Davis, SPC Palesala Faleseu, SGT Marc Flores, SPC Nathanial Forbush, SGT Jose Garita, SSG Jason Gerfen, SPC Austin Hafen, SGT Jesse Hall, 1LT Jordan Hatch, PFC Jaxson Hess, SGT Kasey Hope, SGT James Huntsman, SPC Lance Irons, SPC Matthew Jackson, SSG Jose Jimenez, SGT Tyler Julander, SGT Jacob Kauffman, MAJ Taylor Knight, SPC Ruben Loya, PFC Bryton Lunceford, 1LT Austin Maddox, SPC James Mangrum, PFC Tyler Marshall, CPT Markus Martin, SPC Chance McPhie, SPC Logan Mecham, SPC Craig Meservy, PFC Omar Morales, SPC Caleb Mulder, SGT Tyson Nelson, SPC Kipp Nielson, SSG Brett Nigbur, 2LT Matthew Ouderkirk, SPC Joseph Overson, 1LT Stewart Oviedo, 1LT Henry Palma, SPC Kevin Pareja, SPC Angel Penagamez, SPC Jaden Peterson, 2LT Misty Peterson, lSG Shawn Peterson, SPC Levi Phippen, SPC Andres Pintor, SPC Moses Purcell, SFC Jim Rasmussen, CPT Kyle Rawlinson, SGT Kolby Rohwer, SGT Eric Saunders, SGT Shane Scrivner, SPC Tyler Smith, CPT Leah Son, SGT Miguel Sosa, SPC Skyler Staheli, SSG Dustin Steed, SPC Toriano Taulogo, SPC Toren Terry, SPC Christian Trevino, SPC Brady Tullis, SPC Ethan Walker, SGT Bo Welcker, SPC Thomas Wells, SPC Ashton Wenkel, SPC Brandon Willden, WO1 Scott Wilson, LTC Cody Workman, SGT Jorge Zavala, SSG Stephen Zitting, PFC Chaz Alba, SGT Ben Alder, PFC Taylor Alger, PFC Skyler Allred, SSG R Amidan, SFC Clinton Andersen, SGT Ethan Andersen. SPC Anthony Anderson, LTC Clayton Anderson, SPC McClain Anderson, SGM Rawlin Anderson, PFC Joey Angell, SPC Tyler Ashman, CPT Cory Ashworth, SPC Maxwell Ayeliya, SGT Andrew Baird, SGT Wesley Baker, SSG Matthew Barnes, SGT Trevor Barney, SSG Michael Barrett, SFC Jay Bartholomew, SPC Justin Barton, SPC Jayden Batt, PFC Zakary Baumgartner, CPT Jeffrey Belnap, 2LT Dalan Bennett, SPC Alexander Beraja, SPC Justin Best, SPC Megyn Bettridge, SGT Braxton Bird, SGT Andrew Bissell, SGT Byron Bizardi, SPC Matthew Blair, CPT Benjamin Bowler, SGT Brady Bradford, SSG Michael Bradford, SPC David Bravo, SPC Benjamin Brinkerhoff, SPC Nathaniel Broadhead, SGT Chasen Brown, SPC Jarren Brown, MAJ Michael Burgin, SSG Brandon Burton, SPC Wendell Campbell, 1SG Kevin Chamberlain, PFC Mario Chavez, SSG Brett Cheney, SSG Brett Christensen, SPC Cody Christensen, SSG Jacob Christensen, SFC Jason Christensen, SPC Konnor Christensen, SSG Jeffery Clement, SFC Joshua Cluff, SGT Charles Coleman, SSG Ron Condie, SPC Nicholas Contrys, SPC Clint Coombs, SSG David Covington, SSG Jeffrey Cox, SPC Chad Crosby, 1LT Bryant Curtis, SPC Austin Dalley, PFC Luke Dalling, SGT Jacen Daly, CW2 Jason Davis, PFC Joshua Davis, SSG Randy Davis, SPC Tanner Davis, SGT Esteban Dean, CPT David DeFriez, CPL Michael Deihl, SSG Orlas DeMasters, SPC Ivan Draskovich, SSG Derek Drechsler, SPC Kyle Dudley, SSG Stan Dutton, SGT Jordan Dye, SPC Joseph Eckersley, SGT William Emmett, SSG Steven Esplin, SPC Boe Evans, PV1 Savanna Evans, SPC Tamati Faoasau, SGT Brandon Farr, SPC Kyle Fenn, SSG Jessica Ferre, PFC Manuel Figueroa Ornelas, SPC Robert Fillmore, 2LT Samuel Findley, 1SG David Foisy, SSG Jeremy Foisy, CPL Joshua Folston, PFC Joshua Ford, SPC Cory Freeman. PFC Shaiden Fullerton, SGT Thomas Fullmer, SGT Stetson Gates, SPC Peter George, SPC Alice Giatras, SPC Preston Godfrey, SPC Bret Goodwin, SPC Kimberly Gowans, SGT Elly Granados, 2LT Samuel Grow, PFC Addison Grundy, MSG Charles Gubler, SPC Gabriela Gustafson, SGT Jordan Hack, SPC Tyler Haley, SPC Christopher Hall, PFC Reed Halliday, PFC Ammon Halpin, SGT Dustin Hansen, SPC Jefferey Hanson, SGT Cody Hare, SGT Nathan Harris, SGT Vincent Harris, SGT Derick Hatch, 1LT Eric Heaps, SPC Jaden Heaton, SPC Jeremy Heino, SGT Harvene Hernandez, SGT Justin Hickman, SGT Katie Hinds, SFC David Hinton, SPC Joseph Hollinger, PFC Bronco Hollowell, SPC Alexander Hooper, PFC Kareem Hopkins, SPC Garrett Hough, SFC Whitney Houston, SPC Isaac Howard, SGT Zachry Hunt, SPC Zachary Hutchings, SGT Austin Hutchins, SFC Michael Irons, SSG Matthew Isom, SPC Alan Iverson, SPC Jared Iverson, SPC Garrett Jackson, PFC Sean Jacobsen, 1LT Ethan Janson, SPC Zachary Jarnagin, SGT Samuel Jefferson, 2LT Cabe Jensen, CW3 Lance Jensen, SGT Zachary Joens, SPC Dakota Johnson, SPC Pauline Johnson, SPC Stephen Johnson, SPC Trevor Johnson, SGM Garrad Johnston, SFC Bevin Jones, SSG Jeremy Jones, PFC Jared Jorgensen, SFC Richard Jorgensen, SSG Matthew Kaldor, SGT Ryan Kern, SGT Franklin Kimball, SSG Tyler Kinross, SGT Tyler Knuckles, SPC Landon Koch, SPC Michael Krashowetz, SPC Christian Kunz, SPC Devin Laird, SPC Jeremy Lambson, PFC Colten Lang, SGT Jared Lanier, 1SG David Larsen, SPC Austin Lauritzen, SPC Garrett Leo, SGT Kelby Lihme, SGT Alexander Lilley, PFC Hayden Lloyd, 2LT Alfredo Lopezaquino, SPC Dalton Lowry, SPC Hunter Lunt, SPC Miracle Maae, SPC Vincent MacGuire, SSG Lance Mackelprang, SSG Scott Mackelprang, SPC Ethen Malcolm, PFC Kevin Malles, MAJ William Mangum, SGT Chandler Martineau, SGT Cory Maxfield, SPC Kelly Maynes, SPC Rosten McArthur, 1LT Sky McMahon, 1SG Jason Mellor, SGT Adriana Mendoza, SPC Wesley Mercier, SGT Carter Mitchell, SSG Kaden Mitchell, PFC Tanner Morley, CPT Jedediah Morris, SSG Addison Mull, PFC Migueal Munford, SPC Scott Munford, MAJ Rylee Munns, CPT Kami Muramoto. SPC Andrew Nelson, SPC Cobe Nelson, SPC Samuel Nettleton, SSG Taylor Newman, SPC Nash Nicholson, SPC Dustin Nielson, SPC Joseph Nordin, SGT Nevada Ocull, SPC Riley Ogden, CPL Brandon Orr, PFC Cameron Orr, SGT Quentin Owen, SPC Riley Owens, PFC Oscar Padilla Gonzalez, SPC Mailelaulii Pai, PFC Gino Perez, SPC Noah Peterson, SPC Travis Peterson, SPC Thomas Phillips, SPC John Pitcher, 1LT Nicholas Pope, PFC Braden Poulsen, SGT Hayden Prisbrey, SFC Jimbob Quarnberg, SGT Austin Reber, SGT John Reeder, SPC Antonio Reynolds, MAJ Michael Rhinehart, SPC Chance Richwine, SFC Jan Rigby, SPC Tanner Roberts, SPC Pierce Robertson, SPC Blake Robinson, SGT Christopher Robinson, SPC Jayden Roden, SSG Dustin Rosenberg, PFC Tyson Roundy, SGT Nicholas Rowley, SGT James Ruelle, SFC Zackarie Sampson, PFC Dylan Sawyer, SGT Anna Sewell, PFC Isaiah Sheeran, CSM Michael Sherratt, SSG Curtis Shumway, SFC Dennis Shumway, SGT Drakkar Shumway, SPC Marshall Shumway, SGT Logan Shurtz, SSG Charles Sims, SPC William Smedley, CPT Brian Sorensen, SPC Jorge Soto, SPC Kyle Stewart, SGT Joshua Stocks, SPC Payton Stott, SPC Parke Swapp, SPC Wesley Syrett, SPC Brandon Taylor, SGT Tyler Terry, SPC Bryce Thamert, SSG Anton Thomas, SPC Jeffrey Thomas, CPT Patrick Thompson, SGT Sean Till, SPC Dalton Tippets, CPL Dylan Tisdale, SPC Ethan Torok, PFC Miguel Toscano, SPC Alexandria Trevino, 1LT Kimberlee Trower, PFC Joshua Turner, SPC Daniel Tuttle, SGT David Underwood, SPC Jesus Valdiviezobalderrama, 1LT James Vanotti, PV2 Thomas Veltkamp, SPC Caden Vermillion, SSG Benjamin Virostko, PFC Anthony Visser, SSG Mitchell Vreeland, PFC Briston Walker, SPC Eric Walker, SSG Stephen Wallingford, SGT Jacob Warren, SPC Joseph Washington Florez, SPC Taylor Watts, SPC Curtis Weatherwalk, SPC Nicholas Webster, CSM Garrett Whatcott, CPT Bryan Whitaker, SGT Matthew Whitby, SGT Taylor Whiting, SPC Benjamin Wilcox, SPC Jace Wilcox, SPC Christian Williams, SPC Wyett Williams, SPC Tyler Wilson, SPC Jaxson Womack, SPC Andrew Wood, 1LT Andrew Wood, SGT Haden Wright, SGT Jacob Wright, SSG Zachary Wright, SPC Jared Yamashita, SPC Ty Yardley, PCF Aspen Young-Labella.

Mr. LEE

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

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Now, Mr. President, I would like to discuss another important matter. This past week, we marked the anniversary of a deadly day in American history. It has resulted in the loss of millions of innocent American lives. That is the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Since January 22, 1973, more than 60 million unborn children have been lost to the scourge of abortion. This week, we honor and remember those lives, as well as those who have been hurt by the pains of abortion. In a normal year, tens of thousands of Americans would be marching down Constitution Avenue this Friday to do so. This year, as with so many other things, the March for Life will instead be virtual. But, nonetheless, Americans will continue to march, whether virtually or in person where they can. The theme of this year's march is ``Together Strong: Life Unites!''-- a fitting theme following a year ripe with division, violence, and loss. Now, more than ever, we must unite as a nation, turning with hope toward the future--hope that our Nation will heal, hope that justice will prevail, and hope that the grievous act of abortion will be forsaken. Given our country's history, in which we have stubbornly made mistakes but, thankfully, have come around in the end, there is much reason for hope. But we cannot heal and we cannot unite if we don't honor and respect all of the American people, born and unborn. So many of the deepest injustices in our country's history stem from one dark dangerous thing; that is, when we have rejected the dignity of the human person, when we have denied the humanity of our brothers and sisters, when we have discriminated against others based on the way they look, think, love, or worship, and when, because of that, we have looked at them not as people but as things and as mere objects to be acted upon. As abolitionist William Lord Garrison put it, the worst kind of oppression to be regarded with the greatest degree of indignation and abhorrence is ``that which turns a man into a thing.'' Now, we have discriminated against a whole class of people not based on the color of their skin but on their age and development. But it doesn't change the truth. The truth is that a baby inside the womb can respond to human touch by the age of 8 weeks and feel pain by the age of 20 weeks--who can recognize her mother's voice even before she is born; who has a perfect little nose, fingernails, and a beating, fully functioning heart, her own distinct unique DNA, and her own unique unrepeatable soul. Science and medicine are only confirming what we know deep down, that unborn human beings are in fact little persons. The evidence is only getting plainer by the day. When we deny the humanity of our brothers and sisters, as we have seen throughout our history and over the past year, the inevitable and tragic result is violence. Abortion does undeniable violence to the baby and undeniable violence to the mother. Thankfully, looking back at the past decade, we have made significant strides toward building a culture that respects, values, and even protects all human life, even in its simplest, earliest stages of development. Many States have ensured that public funds are directed toward pregnancy health centers, rather than abortion facilities, providing life-affirming alternatives to families in need. And in just the last decade alone, States have passed more than 400 pro-life laws--more than one-third of all pro-life laws that States have passed since Roe v. Wade was decided. This is indeed reason for hope. Through our laws and with our lives, we ought to affirm the truth that the lives of both the mother and the baby matter and that healthcare should heal, protect, and preserve both of those lives. I have introduced legislation to help our laws affirm that very truth. Through my bill, the Abortion Is Not Healthcare Act, we have a chance to stop the tax deductibility of abortions, which are currently categorized as ``medical care'' by the IRS, because we must be serious: Whatever else it may be, of course, elective abortion is not healthcare. That is why physicians literally take an oath to do no harm. The government should not offer tax benefits for a procedure that kills hundreds of thousands of unborn children each and every year. We also have the chance to prematurely stop the use of American foreign aid--the opportunity permanently to stop the use of American foreign aid--from funding or promoting abortions overseas and perpetuating violence against women and of children abroad, especially baby girls. The Protecting Life in Foreign Assistance Act will save countless lives across the globe, and it affirms the truth that the lives of all unborn children, regardless of where they are from, have dignity and worth. As the lyrics of a children's song in my church--a song that I sang in Sunday school as a child--say about each one of us, I am a child of God. We are all one human family, all children of God--these littlest among us, too, who cannot yet sing for themselves, but they will soon. They will soon. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, some of our Nation's finest answered the call of duty here in our Nation's Capitol over the last 2 weeks to assist with the peaceful transition of power and make sure that it was in fact peaceful. These dedicated men and women in the National Guard have taken an oath to protect that bedrock document, the Constitution of the United States, and, indeed, they have fulfilled that duty. Some of our very finest in the National Guard came here to serve from my home State of Utah; 321 troops that have discharged their duties with distinction and honor came from the Utah National Guard. The majority of Task Force Utah consisted of soldiers from the 2nd Battalion, 222nd Field Artillery, 65th Fires Brigade, also known as Triple Deuce. Additional soldiers came from 204th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade and the 19th Special Forces Group (Airborne). I rise today to honor and thank these really selfless women and men. These past weeks, the Utah guardsmen were stationed at the Madison Building of the Library of Congress, just across the street from the Capitol. For many of these soldiers, it was their first time ever visiting Washington, D.C. Major Brent Mangum of the Utah National Guard remarked that as the soldiers were stationed at buildings, they saw these quotes on the walls--quotes from our Founding Fathers--and as they were working in these buildings, you could see them pausing during the day, reading the quotes, and then stopping to reflect on them. I, myself, had the great privilege, in a couple of different groups, to give some of these men and women a tour of the Capitol Building before they left to go back to Utah. It was a great honor to meet and get to know these dedicated guardsmen and to learn from their stories and to see firsthand their caliber as people and, most importantly perhaps, their visible commitment to the United States of America. This idea, this principle, in this great land of ours--the greatest civilization human history has ever known--was something that they are independently committed to defending and protecting, even at the sacrifice of their own security and their own ease, which they would have otherwise enjoyed over the last couple of weeks. One of the most remarkable things about these citizen soldiers is the way in which they tirelessly serve their communities, and I say that meaning both inside and outside of their Guard duty. My Salt Lake City office was lucky enough to have one of these fine young soldiers, Alfredo Lopez, as an intern a few years ago. Alfredo immigrated with his family from Peru at the age of 10, and they began to build a life here in the United States. In addition to serving the people of Utah in my State office, he also was on Active Duty with the Marine Corps before he joined the National Guard. Alfredo, in all of his endeavors in our country, has sought only to give back. He is grateful for this country and wants to make sure it is a strong, safe, and secure place in which to live. Another guardsman who was here, Jay Bartholomew, is a prison guard at the Gunnison prison in Sanpete County, UT. He is the son of my friend Scott Bartholomew, a county commissioner in Sanpete County. Jay has followed in his family's footsteps to serve his local community. Other guardsmen in Utah are engaged in their communities in all sorts of ways. Some are teachers, some are firefighters, some are policemen, and some are medical professionals. You name it; they have done it. Many have now answered the call of duty on the frontlines of another crisis as our Nation faces the current pandemic. These guardsmen have played a significant role in providing testing, moving and storing personal protective equipment, and other support missions to assist Utah's Department of Health COVID-19 response. Now, Utah Governor Spencer Cox has entrusted them with another critical mission. The Guard will be on the frontlines to help ramp up the delivery of vaccines to our State. The Guard has put together teams that can mobilize throughout Utah to deliver vaccinations and antibody infusions within a matter of hours and save a whole lot of lives and prevent a whole lot of suffering in the process. I have no doubt that they will continue to administer this duty with dedication and with excellence, just as they do with every other assignment with which they are tasked. In everything they do, members of the Utah National Guard seek to serve and strengthen our communities, our country, and our State, and we are all better off for it. It has been such an honor to have these selfless men and women in our Nation's Capitol. I have enjoyed getting to know them and look forward to visiting again with them soon, and I thank them for their service

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. Vice President, from the time I prepared my remarks for today, it seems like a lifetime ago. A lot has changed in the last few hours. So I am going to deliver some of the same remarks, but it has a little bit of a different feel than it would have just a few hours ago. My thoughts and prayers go out to the family members of those who have been injured or killed today. My heartfelt gratitude goes out to the Capitol Hill Police who valiantly defended our building and our lives. While it is true that legitimate concerns have been raised with regard to how some of the key battleground States conducted their Presidential elections, this is not the end of the story. We each have to remember that we swore an oath to uphold, protect, and defend this document, written nearly two and a half centuries ago by wise men raised up by God for that very purpose. That document makes clear what our role is and what it isn't. It makes clear who does what when it comes to deciding Presidential elections. You see, because in our system of government, Presidents are not directly elected. They are chosen by Presidential electors, and the Constitution makes very clear, under article II, section 1, that the States shall appoint Presidential electors according to procedures that their legislatures develop. Then comes the 12th Amendment. It explains what we are doing here today in the Capitol. It explains that the President of the Senate--the Vice President of the United States--shall open the ballots, ``and the votes shall then be counted.'' It is those words that confine, define, and constrain every scrap of authority that we have in this process. Our job is to open and then count. Open, then count--that is it. That is all there is. There are, of course, rare instances--instances in which multiple slates of electors can be submitted by the same State. That doesn't happen very often. It happened in 1960. It happened in 1876. Let's hope it doesn't ever happen again. In those rare moments, Congress has to make a choice. It has to decide which of the electoral votes will be counted and which will not. That did not happen here--thank heavens-- and let's hope that it never does. Many of my colleagues have raised objections or had previously stated their intent to raise objections with regard to these. I have spent an enormous time on this issue over the last few weeks. I have met with lawyers on both sides of the issue, and I have met with lawyers representing the Trump campaign, reading everything I can find about the constitutional provisions in question, and I have spent a lot of time on the phone with legislators and other leaders from the contested States. I didn't initially declare my position because I didn't yet have one. I wanted to get the facts first, and I wanted to understand what was happening. I wanted to give the people serving in government in the contested States the opportunity to do whatever they felt they needed to do to make sure that their election was properly reflected. I spent an enormous amount of time reaching out to State government officials in those States, but in none of the contested States--no, not even one--did I discover any indication that there was any chance that any State legislature or secretary of state or Governor or Lieutenant Governor had any intention to alter the slate of electors. That being the case, our job is a very simple one. This simply isn't how our Federal system is supposed to work. That is to say, if you have concerns with the way that an election in the Presidential race was handled in your State, the appropriate response is to approach your State legislatures, first and foremost. These protests--hearing from those who have raised concerns--should have been focused on their State capitols, not the Nation's Capitol, because our role is narrow, our role is defined, our role is limited. Yes, we are the election judges when it comes to Members elected to our own body. And, yes, the House of Representatives are the judges of their own races there. We also have the authority to prescribe, as a Congress, rules governing the time, place, and manner of elections for Senators and Representatives. There is no corresponding authority with respect to Presidential elections--none whatsoever. It doesn't exist. Our job is to convene, to open the ballots, and to count them. That is it. Thank you. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I stand today to honor my friend Gary Herbert, Governor of the State of Utah for the last 12 years, who, after a long career in public service, is now embarking on a really well-deserved, hard-earned retirement. He served the State of Utah and has done so with great enthusiasm and dedication and spirit, and I am grateful to have worked alongside him throughout his tenure serving our great State. Gary Herbert was born in American Fork, UT, and grew up in Orem. He served a 2-year mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on the east coast and later attended Brigham Young University, my alma mater. He first began his public service in college, serving in the Utah Army National Guard for 6 years and eventually becoming a staff sergeant. After his time in the National Guard, he set up a real estate firm and was very successful, eventually becoming the president of the Utah Association of Realtors. He also served as president of the Utah Association of Counties, by the way. Starting in 1990, he served as a commissioner on the Utah County Commission. He served there for 14 years, and it was at that point that he began his statewide service within Utah. You see, in 2004, when Jon Huntsman ran for the Governor's seat, Gary became his running mate, running alongside Huntsman as his Lieutenant Governor, with the pair going on to win the race in November. It was then that I first got to know Gary Herbert personally, when I was hired to be Governor Huntsman's general counsel. One of my first memories of Gary Herbert--which, to me, seems like it was just the day before yesterday--occurred when we all began moving into the Governor's office suite, just the day before Herbert and Huntsman were sworn into office. Gary came in and provided us all with a warm welcome, but he didn't stop at the welcome. He offered really sound and heartfelt advice about the importance of staying grounded as we were entering the political fray. He explained that long after our service and the Huntsman-Herbert administration expired, we want to be able to look back and be pleased about the relationships that we had formed with each other, but especially the relationships that we had maintained with our families, our children, and God. I soon learned that Governor Herbert, in addition to being wise and in addition to being a skilled and valuable statesman, was also a formidable athlete. Right after he and Governor Huntsman were sworn in, the staff got together as a team several times in the Governor's mansion, where we soon discovered there was a ping-pong table in the basement. I then learned the hard way that Governor Herbert's athletic skills, including his ping-pong skills, are off the charts. While severing Governor Huntsman, I always found Gary to be friendly, approachable, and always willing to tackle every single assignment with eagerness and poise. Whenever Governor Huntsman's schedule became chaotic or changed unexpectedly, which happens in any Governor's office or any Senator's office, for that matter, particularly at certain times of the year, Lieutenant Governor Herbert would routinely be dispatched to speak on Huntsman's behalf, often sending him to remote corners of the State and often at really inconvenient times. He never once complained. And he was not only willing, but he was always eager and happy. He felt fortunate for the opportunity to help. That is the kind of enthusiasm that the people of the State of Utah have benefitted from for so long as a result of Gary Herbert's service. You see, he has never lost that--not during his entire time as Lieutenant Governor and not during his entire time as Governor. You can tell that he is exactly where he wants to be and that he feels privileged and he has been blessed to be able to serve the people of Utah. Likewise, whenever there was an issue that needed to be addressed by the Governor, even within the office or around the capitol compound, but where the Governor was unable to meet with the particular group in question, Gary was always assigned to the case. He would meet with, as he described it, all the different stakeholders. He would get together the legislators, county commissioners, citizens from this or that part of the State, lobbyists, lawyers who may have been involved, in addition to other members of Governor Huntsman's administration. He would bring them all in together, and he would wade through all the intricate and often pedestrian details of the matter. You see, he wanted to get to the bottom of the issue. He wanted to understand it. What is more, he had the skill of figuring out the best path forward for all parties involved and for making everyone feel heard and understood. If ever, whenever, there was a way to achieve a win-win, Gary found it, and he brought people to it, and they were always grateful as a result. The same traits that I saw in him as Lieutenant Governor would go on to make him an effective and beloved Governor himself. In office now as Governor since 2009, Gary Herbert is currently the Nation's longest serving Governor, and our State has seen exciting achievement and tremendous prosperity with Governor Herbert at the helm. In the last 8 years, Utah has seen continued, steady growth in our economy, with improvements in our GDP, number of jobs, and unemployment rate. We have seen the boom of Silicon Slopes. We celebrated the sesquicentennial of the driving of the Golden Spike, when it was an honor to stand alongside Governor and Mrs. Herbert at that celebratory reenactment. On that particular occasion, Governor Herbert and his wife Jeanette showed their characteristic enthusiasm by arriving in their finest 1869 apparel just to commemorate the moment, and it made all the difference. It made it all feel much more authentic. So, too, was it an honor to join Gary when President Trump came to Utah to announce his decision to shrink the Bears Ears National Monument, when we could all stand together and celebrate the fact that someone in Washington had heard our concerns within the State and saw fit to redraw the boundaries in a manner more compatible with local interests and concerns. Through his enthusiasm and his zeal, Gary Herbert has championed our State and the things that we stand for. He has done so very consistently and very enthusiastically. He can rattle off figures and metrics about Utah at the drop of a hat. I am convinced this man can do it in his sleep and do so infectiously and persuasively. And he is a compelling spokesman for our State's values. His spirit has helped Utah to attract talent and investment not only from throughout the United States but from throughout the world and to make it the good place that it is to live. Not only that, but Gary has been an instrumental partner in supporting initiatives that reflect and strengthen the values of our State. To champion the reclamation of our lands, he signed into law the Utah Transfer of Public Lands Act. He also signed into law innovative criminal justice reforms in Utah. He was at the cutting edge of that movement, making a far-reaching impact across our State and that ended up having impacts elsewhere. In fact, his work in Utah in criminal justice reform helped pave the way for the work that Congress and President Trump were able to achieve at the Federal level through the passage of the First Step Act. He has been a strong supporter of Utah's family culture and was helpful in the Senate's work promoting the child tax credit during our tax reform discussions just 3 years ago. On a more personal note, Gary Herbert also had the wisdom to put my brother Tom on the Utah Supreme Court. In so doing, he has been a champion for textualism, the notion that judges are there to interpret the law based on what the law says, rather than on the basis of what it might have said. For all of his public achievements, Gary is perhaps most proud and always most conscious of and most aware of and most concerned about his own role as a husband, as a father, and as a grandfather. Gary and his wife Jeanette have 6 children together, as well as 16 grandchildren, and he is known to encourage them to ``follow in his footsteps and marry up.'' In a myriad of ways, Governor Herbert has been a champion and a spokesman for all that is good about our State. It has been an honor to serve the people of Utah with him, and I wish Governor Herbert and his wife Jeanette all the best as they embark on the next chapter of their lives together. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I have profound respect and admiration for both the Senator from Alabama and the Senator from Vermont. As you can tell from their remarks, they are congenial, collegial, and delightful people. They also have many decades of legislative experience between the two of them, and the country has been blessed by their gifts, their talents, and their willingness to work hard. I want to respond to a couple of points made a moment ago, one suggesting, perhaps, that the answer to all of this is simply a desire to work together, as if that were somehow not what we have in mind. We were also told a moment ago that they are almost finished with the appropriations process, that it is almost complete. Now, if that is the case, then I would ask the question, why haven't we been permitted to see it? Why haven't the other Members of the U.S. Senate been able to see that? It is a little bit hard for some of us to hear that if we all work together, we can get this done, when that is literally all we are asking. I don't think any one of us supporting Senator Johnson's legislation is here saying that it is perfect or here saying that it would magically solve every problem in the world or even every problem in the U.S. Senate having to do with the spending process. We are not saying that. But what we are saying is that without it, we will stay stuck in the same closed-loop system. So to suggest that there is somehow a lack of desire on our part or on the part of anyone who is not an appropriator or anyone who is not the chairman and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, that this is somehow a product of a lack of desire and willingness to work together, that is not fair. That is not accurate. That is quite the opposite of the truth. What we are asking for is a seat at the table. Article V of the Constitution outlines the procedure for amending the Constitution, for making changes to the structure of government that we have, what it may and may not do. Article VI of the Constitution preemptively disposes of any proposed constitutional amendment that would alter the principle of equal representation in the Senate. It is the one rule that cannot be changed. It is so fundamental to our system of government, to this system of government that has helped foster the development of the greatest civilization the world has ever known, that in this Chamber, every State has to be represented equally. That doesn't happen and, indeed, it can't happen when you have some of the most significant measures that will ever come before this body commandeered by one committee, the Committee on Appropriations. Now, granted, as has been suggested in the last couple of speeches we have heard, we have some great talent among our members on the Appropriations Committee. We have great talent among the staffers on the Appropriations Committee. They work really hard. They are really smart. They are really determined, and they are highly specialized. That isn't the problem. The problem is that in most circumstances, because of the way we bring things up, most of us are completely disenfranchised from the process. This doesn't mean that it is the fault of the Appropriations Committee. I don't believe that it is. It is, instead, a fault of the way in which we schedule votes and the fact that these things aren't brought up until the last possible minute, and then we are given this awful choice of, vote for a whole bunch of things that you don't necessarily support and can't even completely know about or vote against it and be blamed for a government shutdown. That is all this bill is trying to do, is to get us out of that toxic loop--a loop that is the opposite of collegial, the opposite of respectful, and that is utterly incompatible with the principle of equal representation in the Senate--a principle that cannot be undone even by a constitutional amendment.

Mr. LEE. Yes, I will.

Mr. LEE. I object.

Mr. LEE. Madam President, if the Smithsonian Institution in its report in 1994 in fact acknowledged that it systematically excluded the stories of any one segment in American society, I struggle to understand why the only response to that has to be a separate, siloed museum. Why not direct them, when telling our national story at the National Museum of American History, to tell that story there. If we have to expand it, we will do that. If we have to add more floor space and more staff and more research, let's do that. But the fact that they have identified their own failure over time doesn't mean that they themselves should then get to decide that we have a separate, siloed museum.

Mr. LEE. In response to the question, the answer is yes. Absolutely yes. That is exactly what we want. That is exactly what we deserve. And this is one of many manifestations of the fact that my friend, my distinguished colleague, the senior Senator from Vermont, has the benefit of many decades of experience in this body. He has been here at times when the Senate has functioned precisely like that, as it should. That is exactly what we want. That is how the Senate is supposed to function, and that is how it has functioned for most of the existence of our great Republic. So that in and of itself would not only help address the problem, it would be the solution to the problem. That is why I insist this is not a problem that can be fairly laid at the feet of the individual members of the Appropriations Committee or even necessarily the chairman and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee. It is a problem with the way we schedule votes, and it is also a problem related to the first, with a lack of willingness to allow amendments to be brought. The filibuster is itself maligned and often misunderstood, but the purpose of a filibuster from the very origins of this institution was to allow for theoretically unlimited debate, discussion, and opportunities for amendments to legislation. Nowhere would that be more important than in the case of where we are spending the public's money. That is what we are supposed to be doing. That is how it always did work in the past. The very reason why we have the filibuster rule to begin with is to allow for, to facilitate, to encourage unlimited debate, discussion, and amendments. So, yes, I wish this legislation weren't necessary, but it is with precisely that objective in mind that we push this legislation. Why? Well, some of us have been here for many years, and in the case of Senator Johnson and myself, we have been here now for a decade. We have hoped for that exact type of scenario that Senator Leahy just described to come about, and I don't doubt Senator Leahy's sincerity one bit in raising that point. That is exactly what we need. The incentives aren't there. The incentives on the part of those making these decisions to bring these things up with too little time for debate, amendment, or even reading the bill and discussing it with our constituents--those making that decision have forestalled the kind of debate and discussion that needs to occur. The incentive structure is such that those making that very decision are not going to want to relinquish that immense power, particularly if they can be a part of and even control what goes into that bill, who knows about it when, and then virtually guarantee passage on the Senate floor. Something has to change in order to alter that incentive structure to bring about exactly the kind of dynamic Senator Leahy has described. Look, we can do this. It is not that hard. But we are going to have to adopt some changes to our procedures, and ultimately we owe it to our constituents not to bend unflinchingly and reflexively every single time somebody brings forward a spending bill at the very last minute. I remember one of many moments in which this has occurred arose in March of 2018. We had been anticipating for many months a spending bill. We had a lot of conversations among and between Members about the need to debate, discuss, and amend spending legislation before it was brought to the floor. We had been assured that we would have more of an opportunity than we had in previous Congresses. Then one Wednesday evening in March of 2018, we received an email. The email arrived at I believe about 8:30 or 8:45 in the evening. It told us that attached is a copy of a spending bill. We will be voting on this sometime in the Senate. We weren't told when. I opened the attachment. The attachment contained a 2,232-page spending bill spending well over $1 trillion. We immediately started reviewing that. I divided up that legislation by section among my staff and then spent the entire night and the entire following day reviewing that legislation. We got a basic understanding of what it did but only rudimentary. A 2,232-page omnibus spending bill does not exactly read like a fast-paced novel. To my great astonishment, before we were even finished reading that bill, much less before we had the opportunity to even conceive of or draft amendments, much less propose them, the House of Representatives passed that bill without amendment before lunch the next day. The Senate passed the same legislation about 12 or 13 hours later. This process has repeated itself over and over again. We can't fool ourselves into believing that it is going to change without some alteration to procedure and to the set of incentives that perpetuate that vicious cycle--one that is no respecter of persons, no respecter of Republicans versus Democrats, liberals versus conservatives, or even Senators versus Representatives. It is just a fundamentally anti- American and undemocratic way of doing things. We can do better, and we must.

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, article I, section 9, clause 7 of the Constitution makes clear that no money will be drawn from the Treasury except by an appropriation passed by Congress. Article I, section 7 of the Constitution likewise makes clear that you can't pass an appropriation or any other form of legislation without the same document, the same bill, the same proposal passing the House of Representatives and passing the Senate and then being submitted to the President for signature, veto, or acquiescence. Over time, particularly in the last decade, it has become increasingly common for Congress to recognize the cumbersome nature of that process, which is cumbersome by design. It is sometimes easier to just circumvent the process, technically complying with its commands but doing so in a way that doesn't really invite or even allow for individual Members or their constituents to know what they are voting for when they vote on a spending bill. This is what we have come to refer to as governing by cliff in the spending context, and it has, sadly, become the status quo in Washington. It often provides Members with a simple binary choice when they are facing a spending bill. When you come up against a spending cliff, it means a deadline, almost always one arbitrarily imposed by the previous spending bill. It is when you come up close to that and there is no spending bill on the floor until, maybe, a day or two or sometimes an hour or two or sometimes more like a minute or two. It is something that has been negotiated behind closed doors by only a small handful of Members of Congress, excluding everyone else in the House, everyone else in the Senate, and the hundreds of millions of people they collectively represent. Sometimes that kind of legislation is brought forward--not just sometimes. Basically, it is every time. As my friend and colleague the Senator from Wisconsin noted a minute ago, I think this will mark the 37th consecutive time that Congress has passed something like this or it is, at least, the 37th time that Congress has passed something like this since Senator Johnson and I came to the Senate and were sworn into office in 2011. The problem with this is that Members can't reasonably know what they are voting on in advance, and then they are given the simple binary choice to take it or leave it. You won't have any opportunity to amend it. You really won't even have the opportunity to read it or understand it, much less communicate its contents to your constituents, who will have to pay for it. You can vote for that in its entirety or you can vote against it, but if you vote against it and it doesn't pass, you will be blamed singlehandedly for shutting down the government regardless of whether you would have preferred to have brought up and, in fact, had tried for a long period of time to bring up spending bills prior to that last possible moment. This puts the American people and their elected lawmakers in the House and the Senate in an untenable position, one that I would analogize to a circumstance of an individual who lives in an outlying area. Let's suppose that you move to an outlying area, one that is distant from any other town. Let's suppose that, on your first day of work after moving to that town, you are about to leave home, and you speak to your significant other on the phone, who informs you: Bring home bread, milk, and eggs when you stop by the store. Make sure you get those on your way home. Don't come home without them. So you go to this grocery store in this outlying area that is distant from any other town. It is the only store in town. It is the only store, in fact, for hours in any direction. You go to the store, and you get your cart. You put in your bread. You get the milk, and you put in the eggs. Then you get to the checkout counter. The checkout person says: OK. This is how much the eggs cost, the bread, and the milk, but there is a problem What is the problem? Well, you can't buy just these items. Why can't I buy just these items? I am not going to let you buy the bread or the milk or the eggs unless you also buy a half a ton of iron ore and a bucket of nails and a book about cowboy poetry. In fact, now that I think about it, you are going to have to buy one of every item in the store. Nobody would want to live that way, and nobody would want to shop that way. Of course, that is never the way we would want to do business in our government; yet, in some ways, it kind of is because a small handful of people put together that shopping list, so to speak, and put it together in one bill. Those bills are often hundreds and, in some cases, thousands of pages long, and we usually have no more than a few hours to read them before they are passed into law. That is where this legislation comes about. The End Government Shutdowns Act would force Congress to abandon this barbaric, binary form of appropriations. Perhaps more importantly, it would end the threat of the shutdown, which is very often the propellant, the fuel, for perpetuating this barbaric form of alienation--this barbaric form of the disenfranchisement of most of the people represented by most Democrats and most Republicans in the Senate and in the House of Representatives. Look, I understand that none of this is easy, and I have nothing but profound respect and affection for my colleagues who are involved in writing these bills. That respect and affection should cut both ways, and it should mean that we have the opportunity to vote on spending bills before they hit us so that we are not left with this awful, untenable, binary choice between funding everything that a small handful of Members has foreordained or voting for nothing and being blamed for a shutdown. We have to end the process of spending by cliff. This and only this, I believe, is something that could bring certainty to Americans and will allow for more time to bring these bills to the floor and will allow for the kind of transparency that the American people need, expect, and deserve but, for the last decade or two, have not received. Mr. President, I yield my time back to my friend and colleague, Senator Johnson from Wisconsin.

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I want to thank my friend and colleague, the Senator from New Jersey, for bringing this issue to the floor today. Cultural programs may represent and do, in fact, represent a tiny fraction of all Federal spending, but they are magnified many times over by virtue of their symbolic and their substantive impact. Culture is, of course, upstream from politics. It is more important, and it is more deserving of more of our attention. For that reason, the Smithsonian Institution is more than just another line item in our Federal budget. It is one of the great cultural triumphs of our Republic. From the moment of our founding, the United States has faced an almost unique problem in history. How do we turn our huge Nation's cultural, religious, ethnic, and regional differences from a potential weakness into a real strength? The way our Nation has always achieved this is by creating institutions that unite Americans around shared interests and the mystic chords of collective memory. The Constitution, the Senate itself, our free enterprise economy, our Armed Forces and public schools, Federalism, localism, the First Amendment, and even March Madness all fit this bill. They have the power to harness our individual and community differences to the common good of the whole Nation. Now, the Smithsonian Institution does the exact same thing. It winds all the myriad strands of America's triumphant history into one imperfect but heroic story. Americans of every age, race, creed, and background come to Washington from all over the country to visit the Smithsonian museums--Natural History, American History, Air and Space, American Art, the National Zoo. Within the walls of the Smithsonian museum, just like at the National Gallery of Art or the great memorials that dot this city, there is no us and them. There is only us. So my objection to the creation of a new Smithsonian museum or series of museums based on group identity--what Theodore Roosevelt called ``hyphenated Americanism''--is not a matter of budgetary or legislative technicalities. It is a matter of national unity and cultural inclusion. Now, we have seen in recent years what happens when we indulge the cultural and identity balkanization of our national community. The so- called critical theory undergirding this movement does not celebrate diversity. It weaponizes diversity. It sharpens all those hyphens into so many knives and daggers. It has turned our college campuses into grievance pageants and loosed Orwellian mobs to cancel anyone daring to express an original thought. Especially at the end of such a fraying, fracturing year, Congress should not splinter one of the national institutional cornerstones of our distinct national identity. The Smithsonian Institution should not have an exclusive Museum of American Latino History or a Museum of Women's History or a Museum of Americans Men's History or Mormon History or Asian American History or Catholic History. American history is an inclusive story that should unite us--us. The Senator from New Jersey is absolutely right that the history of American Latinos is a vital part of America's history. So, of course, is the history of American women, who have written more than half of the American story, going all the way back to Plymouth Rock. Their stories are our stories, and they are stories that emphatically should be told by the Smithsonian Institution at the Museum of American History, period. No hyphen. Now, the Senator from New Jersey is well aware of my stingy views on Federal spending, but if American Latino or American women's history are being underrepresented at the Museum of American History, that is a problem, and that is the problem that we should address here. I will happily work with him or anyone else to correct those problems, even if it means more money, more exhibits, new floors or wings. I understand what my colleagues are trying to do and why, and I respect what they are trying to do, and I even share their interest in ensuring that these stories are told. But the last thing we need is to further divide an already divided Nation with an array of segregated, separate-but-equal museums for hyphenated identity groups. At this moment in the history of our diverse Nation, we need our Federal Government and the Smithsonian Institution itself to pull us closer together and not further apart. On that basis, I object.

Mr. LEE. Madam President, I want to be clear about something. All racial, ethnic, religious groups in America are worthy of celebration, even to the extent of having their own museums. Indeed, many of them already do--in many instances, institutions and museums that are not part of or funded by the Federal Government in whole or in part. If we had more museums and fewer tweets, America would certainly be better off. This isn't about whether such museums should exist or not. This is about the Smithsonian Institution, which is itself federally funded. I understand that they also raise a significant portion of their money, but there is a brand that comes along with the Smithsonian Institution and a lot of money that is taken from the American people in the form of tax revenue. So, as a result of that, the Smithsonian Institution has a unique role and responsibility in our culture and as a repository and teller of America's national story. Now, it is absolutely true that African Americans and American Indians have a unique place in that story in that they were rather uniquely, deliberately, and systemically excluded from it. Unlike many other groups, they were persecuted and they were essentially written out of our national story and even had their own stories virtually erased--not simply by our culture or evolving values, but by that very same government, this same Federal Government. It is, therefore, uniquely appropriate that the Federal Government provide the funding to recover and tell those communities' specific stories today at dedicated museums in the specific context of having been so long excluded from our national community and our national story.

Mr. LEE

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

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Judge Dee Benson, who passed away this week after a heroic battle with cancer. Dee had a remarkable and far-reaching legal career, making an impact throughout Utah and the country. But even more than that, he has made an indelible mark as a beloved teacher, mentor, role model, and friend. Dee grew up on small farm in Jordan, UT, across from the old Jordan High School. He served a 2-year mission in Sweden for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and afterwards attended BYU, graduating in 1973 with a degree in physical education. After a brief stint as a student teacher and soccer coach at Hillcrest High, he decided to change career paths and on a whim applied to law school. Dee stumbled onto what would become a brilliant vocation in law. He was one of the very first law students at Brigham Young University, when my late father, Rex Lee, was founding BYU's J. Reuben Clark Law School. Dee quickly took to law, grasping legal concepts with speed and ease, and soon became a star of his class, even without spending all his time in the libary. He was an equally affable student, loved by all of his classmates. A gifted athlete, he still managed to participate in school activities and sports while in law school, even playing for the soccer team during his final year and finishing near the top of his class. After graduating in 1976, Dee spent a few months playing professional soccer with the Utah Golden Spikers of the American Soccer League, and then turned to his law career. He started out in private practice, first at Marineau and Mack and then at Christensen and Martineau. He would later be appointed to positions at the highest levels of law by Presidents, Chief Justices, and Senators. He came to Washington first to work as counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee. Dee was then-Senator Orrin Hatch's chief of staff for 2 years and while there served as counsel on the Iran-Contra Congressional Investigating Committee. He worked as U.S. attorney from 1989 until 1991, when he was appointed by President George H.W. Bush to serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, where he served for nearly three decades. As Federal judge, he was appointed as one of the seven judges to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, frequently flying to Washington to review requests for warrants and wiretaps against suspected spies and terrorists. He was also appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts to serve on the Judicial Conference of the United States, a policy-making body within the Federal judicial system. Dee had a deep love of the law and true impartiality as a jurist. In all of his duties, he never sought to impose his own agenda but simply to get the law right--not according to his own personal beliefs or feelings but as he understood it. And as much as Dee loved the law, he was loved by those around him. He brought kindness, humor, and fun to every environment. He was known to keep a bicycle in his chambers and a dart board for his clerks. I myself was lucky enough to have him as my first boss when I clerked for him the year after I graduated from law school. I learned more about the practice of law during that clerkship than I did during all 3 years of law school combined. I will never forget our countless conversations about the law--deep dives on everything from compelled- speech doctrine , the coconspirator hearsay rule, and the requirements for authenticating so-called ``ancient documents'' under the Federal Rules of Evidence--in the courtroom and in his chambers and sometimes even while mountain biking or during a game of ping pong or darts. Everyone at the courthouse--from the prosecutors to the defense counsel, from civil litigants to criminal defendants, from probation officers to support staff--loved and learned daily from Judge Benson. Despite his keen intellect and prominence, he was one of the most humble, genuine people I have ever known. He cared deeply about the happiness of those around them and left everyone more happy and encouraged than when he found them. He treated each person who came into his courtoom with dignity and respect, no matter who you were. Throughout the years, Dee retained his passion for sports and zest for life. He ran marathons, was an avid mountain biker, and mastered every sport that caught his interest. He was a devoted father who, despite the many demands on his time, seemed to maintain constant contact with each of his four children, taking delight in every word they uttered and every activity they pursued. Even his cancer diagnosis would not dampen his spirit or slow him down. After being partially paralyzed and bedridden this past May, by the end of the month he had returned to his chambers in Salt Lake City and had come into work as recently as last week--steadfast and strong until the end. Judge Dee Benson was a true public servant, a gift to Utah and to everyone who had the good fortune to meet him. For those of us who knew and loved Dee, the world will now seem incomplete; but it has been an honor and a blessing to call him a mentor and a friend.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Madam President, I stand today to give tribute to my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from New Mexico, Tom Udall, who was assigned to be my mentor when I first arrived in the Senate nearly 10 years ago. Over a series of meetings we had over breakfast, lunch, and in our offices, Tom mentored me and tutored me on the rules of the Senate. He took the time to explain the nuances of the filibuster and how the Senate has deviated from the rule as it was originally designed. The concept is not a familiar one, nor is it intuitive, and yet Tom was able to explain it to me in a way that was simple and easy to understand and helped me grasp the passion that he has for addressing that issue and for reforming the Senate for the better ever since then. He had a way of doing it that didn't make anyone feel demeaned but made them, rather, more enthusiastic about making the Senate a better place in which to work, operate, and legislate. I have no idea whether the person who assigned Tom as my mentor knew that Tom and I were related, that we are second cousins, that his grandmother and my grandfather were brother and sister, or that my grandmother on the other side of the family was his U.S. history teacher at James Fenimore Cooper Intermediate and Junior High, but our paths seemed destined to cross. I didn't know Tom well growing up, although I knew his father Stewart, and I knew his Uncle Morris. Tom was already off to fame and stardom by the time I came along, but I knew his family long before I got to know him. In many ways, they saved the best for last. Even though I got to know your dad and your Uncle Morris before I got to know you, I tremendously enjoyed getting to work with you. You and I come from similar parts of the country, from some of the same ancestral pioneer stock, and we have very different ideas. Yet Tom Udall has always been someone with whom I have been able to communicate freely and frankly and from whom I have always heard positive, uplifting communication, even when we disagree, which happens from time to time. Thank you so much for your service. It has been a pleasure getting to work with you as a colleague. I wish you and Jill the very best success and happiness in your future endeavors.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I rise today to honor my friend and colleague, Congressman Rob Bishop. After 18 years of service in the U.S. House of Representatives, he has decided to hang up his gloves and embark on his well-deserved retirement. Rob Bishop has served Utah's First Congressional District with integrity, tenacity, humility, and humor, and it is my high privilege to have worked with him over the last 10 years and, in the process, to have become his friend. Born and raised in Kaysville, UT, Rob has been a lifelong resident of Utah's First Congressional District, with the exception of the 2-year mission where he lived in Germany while representing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He graduated from Davis High School with high honors and later graduated magna cum laude from the University of Utah with a degree in political science. The embodiment of a public servant, Rob began his career as a high school teacher at Ben Lomond High School and Box Elder High School, teaching courses in German, AP U.S. history and government, and coaching debate. He notoriously had one rule in the classroom: I am never wrong. That might tell you something about Rob Bishop. An avid lover of musicals, he was active in community theater, where he happened to have met his wife Jeralynn. They first met on the production of ``South Pacific'' at the Palace Playhouse, and they later starred together as the prince and princess in a production of ``Once Upon a Mattress.'' In their real-life love story, they have five children--Shule, Jarom, Zenock, Maren, and Jashon, with spouses Melissa, Kristin, Shalise, and Courtney, as well as nine grandchildren. Inspired in his public service by Barry Goldwater, he was also involved in local politics from a young age, working at various levels of government and of the Republican Party. He has gone from being a precinct chair to a member of the Republican National Committee and from being vice chair of the Davis County Teenage Republican Club to the adviser to the Utah Teenage Republicans in 1996. Starting in 1997, he served two terms as chairman of the Utah Republican Party. At just 25, he was elected to the Utah House of Representatives when he was known for always wearing sweaters and no socks. He served in the State legislature for 16 years and, during the last 2 years, having been unanimously elected, served as speaker of the house of representatives. In 2002, after serving in the State legislature and having spent 28 years of teaching, he decided to serve at the national level. As Rob Bishop said in one of his most popular campaign slogans: ``Utah has plenty of Bishops--send this one to Washington!'' Rob has faithfully devoted his life to representing Utah's First Congressional District, and he has been doing that ever since making that critical decision to run for Congress. I remember one of the first times I worked with him when Rob was a relatively new Member of Congress and I was serving at the time as general counsel to then-Governor Jon Huntsman. At the time, a private fuel storage organization was trying to store spent nuclear fuel rods in above-ground storage casks along the Wasatch Front corridor, just miles from Utah's major metropolitan area and just under the low- altitude flight path of fighter jets flying between Hill Air Force Base to the Utah Test and Training Range. Out of all of the Members of Utah's congressional delegation at the time, all of whom, I would adhere, were similarly opposed to this proposal to store spent nuclear fuel in this particular place in this particular way--our congressional delegation was united in that regard--but Rob Bishop stood out as one who was particularly concerned about it and was particularly determined to prevent such a dangerous idea from taking place. Congressman Bishop had a full understanding of the problem, and he had a complete mastery of the scientific facts of the issue, and he had detailed, helpful ideas about how to address it. He also understood the significant and long-lasting potential ramifications that this plan could have had for Hill Air Force Base and the Utah Test and Training Range. Thanks to Rob Bishop's vision, direction, and determination, he developed a strategy and worked hard to implement that strategy and eventually worked to pass a bill designating the area in question as wilderness--creating a wilderness curtain around the designated storage area--making it impossible for the storage plant to be completed. Rob Bishop thus successfully prevented spent nuclear fuel rods from coming to Utah and being stored in a particularly unsafe way and in an unsafe place close to Utah's major population center. Though relatively new to Congress at the time, Rob was punching way above his weight. Why? Well, because he is awesome and because he was willing to dive into the nitty-gritty details of an issue and put in the hard work, not knowing and, frankly, not even caring who got the credit. Rob Bishop just wanted to get it done. That is who Rob Bishop is, that is how he serves, and that is why we love him. That has characterized Rob Bishop's entire time in Congress: doggedly, thoughtfully, and honestly working for Utahns' best interests, and never really caring much who got the attention. He served on the Armed Services Committee, the powerful House Rules Committee, and the Science Committee. As both chair and ranking member of the Natural Resources Committee, he chaired hearings with his characteristically witty quips and wry jokes. He has also chaired the Congressional Western Caucus, served on the House German Caucus for his whole tenure, including for 2 years as chair, and he helped found the 10th Amendment Task Force. When Speaker of the House John Boehner created committees for congressional reform, Rob Bishop was named chairman of the Committee for Procedural Reform and, later on, leader of the Rules group. Under Speaker Paul Ryan, he was named chair of the Federalism Committee. Rob did all this in addition to being a staunch advocate for the military and, in particular, for Hill Air Force Base. One of his proudest achievements was getting an extension of the Michaels airstrip at the Dugway Proving Ground in Tooele County. When he was told that there was no funding for it to be attained at the Federal level, he successfully got the Utah State Legislature to appropriate the funding to make it happen. He was instrumental in establishing Falcon Hill, an aerospace research park just outside of Hill Air Force Base and a public-private partnership between the Air Force, the State of Utah, and private developers that was the first of its kind anywhere in the country and a model of many more like it to come. Rob has also brought his love of baseball with him to Washington. A huge admirer of Mickey Mantle and Ernie Banks, Rob is known to have actual dirt from the pitcher's mound at Yankee Stadium in his Washington, DC, office. He has been a long-time supporter of the Salt Lake Bees, even championing the construction of their stadium while he was in the State legislature, and he is a diehard Cubs fan. Every year, he dons a uniform himself, leading his office in the intramural baseball league on Capitol Hill, with their team name known as the ``Raucus Caucus.'' Rob has brought the same passion he has for baseball to serving his constituents. He has, for years, worked with the Close Up Foundation to bring high school students to Washington, and he has partnered with teachers and students to put on an AP government conference every year. He has famously led constituent and student groups on long, expert nighttime tours of the Capitol Building. In fact, he is known as the guy who gives the very best Capitol tours in all of Washington, and he has consistently spent hours upon hours late into the night making personal phone calls to each constituent who writes in to his office. One of my favorite things about Rob Bishop is precisely how understated and down to Earth and often self-deprecating he is. It is a true feat when you have been in Congress as long as he has and accomplished as many things as he has. While he is known for his sharp three-piece suits here in Washington, I can't count the number of plane rides I have taken with Rob Bishop where he shows up on the plane actually wearing gym shorts, sandals, and a hoodie. In fact, basically every time, he has given me the sage advice not to torture myself wearing a suit while on a 4-hour plane ride. In fact, just the other day--just this week, as we were flying from Salt Lake City to Washington, DC, he commended me for finally having gotten the memo. At least this time, as he noted, I wasn't wearing a suit, although he derided me a little bit for not wearing shorts. But when you have a conversation with Rob Bishop, you never feel that he is trying to advance his own agenda or gain attention or fanfare. As a matter of fact, it is quite the opposite. It feels like a real conversation with a real goal to fix a problem. He simply tells it like it is--an altogether rare, refreshing, and much needed quality on Capitol Hill. When Rob ran for Congress, he said it was his goal to make Congress less powerful when he left than it was when he came. In all of his time here, he sought to put power in Washington back in the hands of Utahns and back in the hands of people across the country in their respective States. Just so, in all his time here, he slept on either an air mattress or on a futon so that he wouldn't get too comfortable, so that he would never feel too ``at home'' in Congress. Rare is the person who can come to change Washington but not ever be changed by Washington. Rob Bishop has managed to do just that. He has made a real difference for the people of Utah and the people of the United States of America. It has been a distinct pleasure to call him a friend and a colleague, and I have to say I am going to miss Rob Bishop's service here in Washington. Just the same, we have all benefited and we will all continue to benefit for many decades to come from what he has done here, who he has been here, and what he has stood for here so valiantly and consistently and faithfully and with such great decency and humility. Thank you. I yield the floor.

Mr. LEE. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. LEE. I know of no further debate on the bill.

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Lee substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to; and the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time.

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1044 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, it is nothing short of a tragedy when anyone suffers from ALS. This is a progressive neurodegenerative disease, one that attacks the nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord of its victims and eventually affects control of the muscles, even the muscles that are needed to move, to speak, eat, breathe, and otherwise live. Sadly, this is a disease that is always fatal. The average life expectancy is only 2 to 5 years following diagnosis. Not only are the people who suffer from ALS robbed of time but also their ability to work, imposing great hardships on them and on their families. The bill that we had before us today to help these victims by reforming our Social Security Disability Insurance Program is a good cause, and it is one that I think we all support, but I think it goes about the job in the wrong way. It sets bad precedent, and it fails to include other needed reform. We must remember that ALS, Lou Gehrig's disease, is one of many similarly debilitating and deadly diseases that Americans are suffering from today. While not as well known, all of these victims are also deserving of the same kind of special attention and accommodation in Federal policy. Let's review some of the background of the program. The Social Security Disability Insurance Program, or SSDI, was created, in part, to help people who suffer from conditions like ALS, providing monthly cash benefits to those who become disabled and therefore unable to work. One challenge with a program like this is that the agency administering the program, that is, the Social Security Administration, has to verify an applicant's eligibility for benefits before they can start sending out the checks. Today, eligibility determination takes an average of 3\1/2\ months. For some people and for some diseases, including ALS, 3\1/2\ months can be a dangerously long time. So, in 2018, the SSA established a new policy to fast track the application process for those with serious and urgent medical conditions. Under this Compassionate Allowance Initiative, more than 200 diseases now automatically make applicants eligible for expedited review. But while the Compassionate Allowance Initiative shortens the determination process from an average of several months to an average of 39 days, there is still a lengthy 5-month waiting period to actually start receiving the benefits, and in the case of urgent, fatal diseases, that is still too long of a wait. The bill that we have before us today seeks to address this problem but only for the victims of ALS. Now, obviously, we should try and help the victims of this tragic disease to the very best of our ability. They are not, however, the only ones who need to be helped. Of the list of compassionate allowance conditions, some are just as urgent as ALS and some are even worse. There are, sadly, several for which there is no known cure and that have life expectancies that are terribly short. I want to cite some examples. For instance, Creutfeldt-Jakob disease, a degenerative brain disorder, is among these. This particular disease leads to dementia and most often results in death within 6 to 12 months. Tragically, there is no cure, and around 1,000 Americans are diagnosed with it every single year, including a dear friend of mine in Utah who a couple of years ago passed away from this ailment. Another is cardiac amyloidosis, also known as stiff heart syndrome. This disease affects the way electrical signals move through the heart, leading to abnormal heartbeats and faulty heart signals. For those diagnosed, there is no known cure, and they typically face a life expectancy of only about 6 months after the onset of congestive heart failure. About 4,000 people develop this condition each year. Take peritoneal mesothelioma, this disease is a cancer that develops in the lining of the abdomen, usually leading to death within 12 months of the first signs of illness. Around 600 cases are diagnosed every year in the United States. That is why I have been working for the past year with my colleagues to broaden the scope of this legislation, so that Congress doesn't waive the SSDI waiting period one disease at a time. It should not matter which fatal, rapidly progressing and debilitating disease an American is suffering from--all fatal diseases with no known cure should have access to disability benefits after their Social Security Administration determination. The men and women who suffer from those conditions and the family members affected by their ailments have precious little time left, and they are just as worthy of help. They are certainly no less worthy of help than those with ALS. There is always hope that a cure can be found for them or that, at the very least, a new treatment can further extend the life of these men and women. Rather than removing the waiting period for those with one specific disease, we should remove the waiting period for those who suffer from any of a small select group of conditions that have no cure and have the shortest life expectancies. There is no reason we cannot help those who suffer from ALS and these other conditions. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can protect victims of ALS and these other conditions as well. The bill, as written, sets the stage for only those diseases that have the most recognition and, to put it bluntly, the most fundraising backing to fund bill sponsors, and it would set at a disadvantage the conditions that are far more rare and underfunded. Who will be the voice for the men and women who suffer from those diseases? Who will fight for them? Adding similarly cruel maladies to this list takes nothing away from ALS, and it can make all the difference in the world for Americans suffering from similar disabilities. I had hoped to offer my broader approach as an amendment, but after months and months of working with the Social Security Administration and with the Congressional Budget Office, I was, unfortunately, given incomplete information at the time an agreement was reached on scheduling a vote on this bill. I appreciate Senator Cotton's and Senator Braun's patience in allowing me to work towards a fix while they remain committed to advancing their legislation, for which I commend them. Additionally, while I would have hoped that my work with the Social Security Administration and the Congressional Budget Office could have gone more quickly, I do appreciate their efforts to address my questions and compile the necessary information and tools to estimate my amendment's fiscal impact. While I was pleased to see Senator Grassley's amendment, which at least would have paid for the removal of the waiting period for ALS, I will continue to work on legislation that will remove the waiting period for diseases that meet a set of criteria--no known cure with a life expectancy of less than 5 years--while not further jeopardizing the solvency of the disability insurance program. It will be ready for introduction soon. My concerns and efforts have not been about waiving the SSDI waiting period for those who tragically suffer from ALS. I certainly agree that we ought to improve the time that they have left. But picking and choosing favorites among those with comparable conditions is not the right way to go about it. The lives of the men and women who suffer from other very similar conditions are just as valuable, and we should be a voice for them, too.

Mr. LEE

Mr. LEE. Madam President, in a city divided by politics, a nation riven by disease, and an era defined by partisan opportunism, it is vital to remember that there are among us, mercifully, on Capitol Hill, a few men and women who embody the very highest ideals of honesty, charity, public service, and personal integrity. As chairman of the Joint Economic Committee for the past 2 years, I have had the privilege of knowing one of these indispensable patriots. I rise today, before the end of my term as chairman of the Joint Economic Committee and at the end of her 40th year of service on the Joint Economic Committee, to commend to all of my colleagues the personal and professional merits of Ms. Colleen Healy. Colleen was born in Port Allegany, PA, to Bob and Theresa Healy and is a sister to Bob, Barry, Brian, and Bret. She attended Port Allegany Union High School, where she participated in the school band, chorus, student government, and the Spanish club. As a senior, she was selected by her classmates to compete for the title of Pennsylvania State Laurel Queen of 1969. Colleen next attended Penn State, where she earned her B.A. in Spanish and Latin American Studies. After graduating and teaching Spanish for several years in Florida, she came to Washington in 1977, first working for Representative Joseph Ammerman of Pennsylvania as his executive secretary. Colleen then found her calling in the Joint Economic Committee, where she has made an indelible mark on generations of Representatives, Senators, and staff ever since. Colleen has now served on the JEC staff for more than half the time the committee has even been in existence. All great institutions, of course, depend on institutional memory. The Joint Economic Committee depends on Colleen Healy. That is why for decades the first decision every incoming JEC chair has made, whether the chair happens to be from the House or the Senate, happens to be a Democrat or a Republican, the first decision made over and over again is retaining Colleen's invaluable services as financial director. Colleen is the reason the JEC is known across Capitol Hill for being one of the most cooperative and congenial committees to work for, to work with, or to serve on because both sides trust Colleen. They also know they can trust each other. That has a ripple effect that is undeniably positive. Staffers trust that they can always go to Colleen with their questions and their problems, whether it is about the committee process or procedure, and receive gracious, knowledgeable, consistent, honest answers. But even more impressive than her acumen is her essential kindness and grace. Colleen is known to get a flag flown over the Capitol for each new baby born to a coworker. Staffers past and present joke that you can't walk 10 minutes with Colleen from her office in the Dirksen Building and get very far because she has befriended literally everyone across the Capitol complex, remembering personal details about their lives and their families and stopping to talk with each person along the way. From Members to staffers, to interns and custodians, Colleen never misses an opportunity to make every single person feel important and valued and necessary. That, again, has ripple effects that are always positive in any organization and certainly are on the JEC. As one former coworker put it, when you talk to Colleen, you are instantly made to feel like the most special, loved, and cared-for person on Earth. When you step into her office, you know she is ready to laugh, listen, or cry with you. As another has said, despite the length of time she has worked in Washington, DC, Colleen still exudes warmth and joy--a spirit that permeates the committee and touches everyone she meets. This in a city not necessarily known for those traits. And though she lives it out quietly, she gives witness to her Catholic faith each and every day. Mother Teresa once advised: ``Let no one ever come to you without leaving better and happier.'' I can think of no better way to describe how Colleen Healy lives her life. In the words of the JEC vice chair, Representative Don Beyer, ``Colleen is the JEC's administrator, historian, sage, and most important, the heart and soul of the committee. She is respected and beloved by decades of JEC Senate and House Members of both parties, as well as generations of staff. Her decades of service have been invaluable.'' We are all better and happier for it. I thank Colleen for her service to the committee, and I hope we are lucky enough to get another 40 years with her serving on the Joint Economic Committee I yield the floor.