Jerry Moran

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, on Sunday, our Border Patrol reported more than 7,500 migrants illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border--7,500 migrants crossed the border on Sunday. Then on Monday, there were more than 8,000 arrests along the southern border as a new surge of migrants tried crossing on that day. These numbers still haven't provoked any significant, meaningful response from the Biden administration, even though they are just shy of that single-day record for the year that was recorded in May after the end of title 42. Every day, I think that there is going to be a response, a reply, a significant effort. It isn't necessarily a partisan issue. Democratic Mayor Eric Adams stated last week that New York City is being destroyed, and it will cost $12 billion after an influx of 110,000 migrants from the southern border have landed in the city. And while 110,000 migrants clearly are a massive number for any city to absorb, it is only a tiny fraction--a very tiny fraction--of the 2.76--2.76 million migrants who crossed the border in fiscal year 2022. The unending catastrophic situation on the border has continued for so long that it seems like the Biden administration has grown numb to what, in any circumstance, would be considered a crisis--a crisis for the people who are crossing, a crisis for the people in the United States, a crisis for the people in New York City. Gone are the days when the migrants showing up at our borders were from our neighboring country to the south. Now migrants are flooding in on trains from El Salvador, Haiti, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and most significant to me, China. We have a gaping hole in our national security that stretches from California to Texas and, I assume, our other borders as well, and our adversaries are already using that circumstance to their advantage. I visited the border with a bipartisan group of Senators earlier this year and witnessed Chinese nationals being apprehended--apprehended--by our border agents. This week, it was reported that approximately 18,000 Chinese nationals had been encountered at the southern border. This is compared to 2,000 in 2022 and only 450--still a big number--in 2021. It was also reported that some of these individuals potentially had ties to the Chinese Communist Party and that not one of them was detained for any length of time. This failure to respond to the arrival of the Chinese succeeded the FBI report that I had read, with great concern, about migrants with ties to ISIS who had been permitted to enter the country. The Customs and Border Patrol, which is overworked and understaffed, released an individual on the terrorist watch list into the country. The American people deserve answers from Secretary Mayorkas and from the Biden administration. I have been on this floor previously, numerous times, like many of my colleagues, to make the case that the crisis at the southern border is causing an influx of illegal, deadly drugs--like fentanyl from China-- to enter the United States and is leading to the overdose deaths of thousands of Americans. I made the case that this is a humanitarian crisis as mothers and children attempt to make the long, dangerous trek across Mexico. Along the way, they face hunger, heat waves, human trafficking, and drug cartels. Caravans with thousands of migrants continue to march on our southern border. Border agents have been pulled away to deal with the record number of migrants and are left without the manpower to try and stop drug and human traffickers, spies, and potential terrorists. For a long time, we have worried about people just coming across our border who are violating our sovereignty and taking our jobs; but it is even more significant and more critical that we respond now as our law enforcement deals with drug cartels, human trafficking, and now our national security--harmed significantly by those who enter our country illegally to do us harm. President Biden must act to ensure the stricter enforcement of our immigration laws, reinstate the construction of a wall or fencing in areas that are largely unprotected, and the administration must send a message, loud and clear, that our border is closed to unlawful entrants. It is way past time--way past time--we finished the wall and gave our law enforcement agents the tools they need to better protect our border. Instead, this administration is sitting on resources and paying storage fees for the unused border wall panels. With the President's lack of action, it is just an amazing circumstance we find ourselves in. Our national security is at stake, and we have failed to respond. I would say that we can do more than one thing at one time. I also believe that the Senate should act to deliver lasting solutions to keep our border secure, to keep our communities safe, and to ensure the humane treatment of migrants. We could start by taking a vote on the Secure the Border Act. Securing our southern border shouldn't be--and I hope isn't--a Republican or a Democratic issue. It is not a Texas or a New Mexico or an Arizona issue. It is a national security issue. Speaking of national security, I would be remiss if I didn't raise the importance of passing a supplemental appropriation that includes not only support for our efforts to contain the influx of people on our southern border and on our borders generally but that also includes money to support the efforts by the Ukrainian people to have a free country. While Ukrainian forces have not made a decisive breakthrough in their counteroffensive, they are making incremental progress that deserves our ongoing support. The commitments made by our European allies now surpass America's, and the assistance that the United States has sent to Ukraine has been accounted for by multiple inspectors general. A failure on our part to remain committed would shake the confidence in the United States of allied capitals around the world. This, in turn, could lead to more aggression by more adversaries. Now is not the time to give up on Ukraine. Vladimir Putin is counting on our doing so. His only way to win--his only way to win--is to hang in long enough until the West-- until the United States--and our allies grow tired or otherwise become distracted. America's resolve against Russia's aggression should be unwavering. The world is watching and judging American dependability. If we are found unreliable, the world will become an even more dangerous place. If we fail, the world becomes a more dangerous place. This is certainly about Ukraine, but it is about the security and safety of the people of the United States. Looking the other way is not an option. What is happening at our southern border and, in fact, what is happening well beyond our borders in Europe needs a serious response. The security of our country, the security of American citizens, the security of Kansans depends upon it. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, the Chase County Courthouse is a striking monument situated in Cottonwood Falls and visible across much of the surrounding prairie. Built in 1873, the courthouse's limestone exterior, walnut staircase, and distinctive red roof have made it a landmark on the plains. Designed in French Renaissance style by John G. Haskell of Leavenworth, the courthouse is the oldest Kansas courthouse still in use. This year marks the courthouse's 150th anniversary of service to the community. In 1856, several families moved to the south side of Cottonwood River, and soon after, the Chase County boundaries were drawn. The pioneers who established Cottonwood Falls decided to build a local courthouse and workers began construction on the courthouse. The community chose a courthouse that would stand 113-feet tall, containing a three-story spiral staircase made from trees near the Cottonwood River. The limestone used to construct the courthouse came from Chase County and is known as Cottonwood limestone. This same limestone was used in the Kansas State Capitol, Kansas State University, and can be found in the U.S. Capitol forming the base for the statue of Amelia Earhart. In 1917, the courthouse was entered in the National Registry of Historic Places and the Kansas Historical Site Register and serves as a tribute to the pioneers who made the Flint Hill their home and the builders who constructed the courthouse. I have visited downtown Cottonwood Falls many times and have seen the community grow over the years. Rural county courthouses play an important role in preserving these communities. The courthouse is a place where justice is administered, wedding vows are made, election votes are tallied, wills are signed, and disputes are resolved. On the 150th anniversary of the Chase County Courthouse, I am honored to recognize and commemorate this courthouse which is the pride of Cottonwood Falls and a monument on the plains.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Madam President, it was a few weeks back that I was on the Senate floor visiting with my colleagues about the Federal Reserve's response to the failure of Silicon Valley Bank, and I again am here today, this time to, in more specific terms, indicate there needs to be a pause in any new banking regulations until an independent investigation of the Fed's response to the failure at Silicon Valley Bank. I asked for and would again reiterate the importance of an independent review and indicate that that review should be done prior to the enactment of new capital requirements in order to ensure that these new regulations are properly tailored. Led by a nonpartisan financial expert uninvolved in the Federal response, an independent investigation would allow a clear picture of what reforms are truly necessary. Instead, new capital requirements are largely based upon the Fed's ``holistic review,'' the origins of which are vague at best. Regulators have now proposed a host of new requirements and rules for midsized banks to conform to the same capital standards of the country's largest lenders. Lumping regional lenders in with global, systemically important banks ignores the congressional intent laid out in the bipartisan piece of legislation S. 2155. Independent oversight might reveal these regulations to be an overprescribed or plainly unnecessary response to SVB's failure. While some measured regulations may be in order, implementing new capital requirements on healthy, well-run financial institutions will do little to prevent a similar crisis. Healthy levels of capital are necessary for strong banks and their ability to lend, but the lack of attention paid to downstream effects of higher capital requirements in the proposal is concerning. This is a sentiment that is shared--my sentiment, and it is shared by multiple Federal Reserve Board Governors. Meaningful oversight from regulators requires objectivity and must be done without having a predetermined outcome in mind. It should come as no surprise that the Fed's remedy does virtually nothing to address the root cause of recent bank failures, poor bank management, and lacks supervision. Instead, I worry that the regulations set in motion will serve as an opportunity for regulators to push a preestablished regulatory agenda that will dry up lending. It is widely acknowledged that the increase in capital requirements go hand in hand with a reduction in credit availability, and with interest rates near a 20-year peak, access to credit for families and businesses is already shrinking. The draft proposal from the Federal Reserve would drive up the cost of home ownership for low-income households, underserved borrowers, and those unable to afford large downpayments. Affordable housing is in short supply, and with midsized lenders forced to pull back on home loans, mortgage lending will continue to be pushed outside the highly regulated banking system. With continued labor shortages, elevated input costs, and supply backlogs, less credit availability is the last thing--the last thing--our housing market needs. To put it simply, there should be no new regulations until an independent review of Silicon Valley Bank's failure is completed. We need to know what we are doing before we attempt to do it. Regulation this significant warrants increased transparency from the Fed. We need that transparency. An additional review would alleviate concerns about impartiality of the ``holistic review'' and ensuing capital requirements. The Federal Reserve itself recognized in its recent ``Financial Stability Report'' that American banks as a whole were already well-capitalized. Tightening capital requirements at the expense of lending will not prevent another SVB-type failure. A comprehensive response from policymakers and regulators would address the glaring supervisory shortfalls that preceded Silicon Valley Bank's collapse. I yield the floor. Recognition of the Minority Leader

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. MORAN

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

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life and to mourn the passing of a Kansan whom I was privileged to know for many years and to work with for many years--Bill R. Fuller. Mr. Fuller touched lives, the lives of everyone who knew him, and he left the world and our State a better place. He is, in many ways, a traditional, typical Kansan. He was raised on a family farm in rural Ottawa County. Bill knew--as farmers do, as kids growing up on farms know--he knew the value of hard work, he knew the value of service, and he practiced that and he preached that. He attended Miltonvale Rural High School and graduated in 1956. He was the chapter president of his FFA chapter. He participated in band and choir, was a member of the National Honor Society, and was a member of the mile relay team that set a new record at the K-State indoor meet. Wheat harvest, like to many Kansans, was an important part of Bill's life, an important part of his early life. And during his childhood years, his family was selected to be part of the Harvest Brigade during World War II, agreeing to follow harvest across the country with Massey-Harris Model 21 new-technology harvesting machines--something we now call the combine. After graduating from Kansas State University with a degree in agriculture, Bill moved his young family to Miltonvale to continue working on the family farm and to be a teacher. Years later, he was elected in 1979 to serve in the Kansas House of Representatives, the Kansas Legislature. It is here that I first met him. He had a really close working relationship with a Senator that I served with in the State senate--Senator Ross Doyen of Concordia. They served and worked together on issues and committees related to agriculture and livestock and where he--Bill Fuller--would later become its chairman. After leaving the legislature, he took a position as assistant director of public affairs for the Kansas Farm Bureau. Bill was known and respected as a champion of agriculture in the halls of the Kansas statehouse and here in Congress. He was later appointed by President George W. Bush as the executive director of USDA Kansas Farm Service Agency, FSA, and there he supervised more than 500 employees, managed a $41 million budget, and administered 30 programs for conservation, farm loans, and disaster relief and benefits to Kansas farmers and ranchers. In 2007, he was selected to receive the Administrator's Honor Award. He served from March 12, 2001, and retired January 29--birth date of our State--in 2009. He served two full terms as FSA director. Bill worked tirelessly to make government work better for farmers and ranchers across Kansas. And we felt it; we saw it; we enjoyed working with him on behalf of agriculture in Kansas. Bill also took the time to mentor and inspire many young people to be involved in agriculture, both as a teacher and, later, with the Kansas Farm Bureau. Members of my staff have been students of Bill's, and I am grateful for his willingness to mentor and teach the next generation of farmers and those creating farm policy. I know I will speak for many others when I say we will all miss his wisdom, his knowledge, but also his kindness and his caring. It is just a joy to be with him. In Kansas, we know the value of community, and we rely upon our neighbors in time of need. Bill demonstrated his connection with his neighborhood, with his community, as a member of the Lions Club, as a leader of his Lions Club, and his work as a volunteer in the rural fire department. Rural fire districts are very important in our State, and Bill understood the value and spent much of his free time repairing and constructing firefighting equipment. Bill's life is an example of the difference that a person can make. I am glad he lived the life he lived. I am glad he made the difference that he made. And I know his legacy will live on in the agriculture community in the State that he loved. My prayers are with his wife Janice, his three children, and the entire Fuller family and all in Kansas who knew and loved him. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, this weekend, in the town of Nicodemus in western Kansas, folks from all over will gather to celebrate and commemorate the history of this town. This year they will celebrate the 145th Homecoming Emancipation Celebration. Nicodemus holds a unique place in American history. In 1877, newly freed slaves migrated West determined to create a community where freedom and equality could flourish. Out of the resolve of those early settlers emerged Nicodemus. Nicodemus was the first Black community west of the Mississippi River and is the only predominantly Black community west of the Mississippi that remains a living community today. Far from other towns or the railroad, life in Nicodemus wasn't easy, but the early settlers were determined to build a life for themselves--farms, homes, and a community that was their own. The Homecoming Emancipation Celebration serves as a poignant reminder of the significance of the Emancipation Proclamation, a proclamation that shattered the shackles of slavery and ignited the spark of hope and liberty across the Nation. Throughout the years, the Homecoming Emancipation Celebration has been a time of reflection, remembrance, and unity. Families gather to pay homage to their ancestors and cherish the sacrifices made by those who sought a new life and new opportunities. The celebration this weekend is a time for grandparents to pass down stories and memories to the younger generations, ensuring that the legacy of Nicodemus lives on in the hearts and minds of all. I hope that this celebration is a chance to remember the history of Nicodemus and celebrate the men and women who bravely made the journey west to find a place of their own. I hope anyone passing through western Kansas will take time to visit Nicodemus to learn the history of this brave little town on the plains of Kansas.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, today I come to the Senate floor to pay tribute to the Stockton Lions Club and recognize their contributions to the community. This organization has been a part of the community since the 1950s, and its presence will be missed. Lions Club International is the world's largest service organization, with more than 1.42 million members and 47,000 clubs in over 200 countries. In Kansas, 216 clubs serve various community needs. The international focus of the Lions Club is helping the visually impaired or blind. This cause came from Helen Keller at the International Convention at Cedar Point, OH, in June of 1925. She challenged the Lions to be the ``Knights of the Blind.'' From holding eyeglass drop- offs in the community, to paying for eye appointments and glasses, the Stockton Lions Club answered this challenge. As a member of the Kansas Lions Club for almost 40 years, I have witnessed the hard work and dedication these members put forward to serve others. At its core, the Lions Club's mission is to empower communities through acts of service, and it has touched countless lives. Their willingness to devote their time, talents, and treasure to helping others is inspiring. Over the years, I have enjoyed attending Lions Clubs meetings in Stockton to visit with folks about the issues important to them. I will miss attending the Stockton Lions Club but want to take time to remember this community organization. The dedicated members of the club demonstrated that, together, they could make a difference in their community. Whether by sponsoring the annual Free Watermelon Feed during the Rooks County Fair or taking students to the Cosmosphere in Hutchinson, the Stockton Lions Club made an incredible impact. Thank you to the Stockton Lions Club members for bettering Kansas.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments that I heard this morning from Senator Klobuchar and appreciate her leadership and efforts to see that the Afghan Adjustment Act becomes law. I think I am followed by my colleague on the Veterans Committee, Senator Blumenthal from Connecticut. This has been a bipartisan effort to make certain that legislation was drafted, introduced, and that lives were protected and changed. From my perspective, one of the saddest days--or few days--of my time as a U.S. Senator was when the United States withdrew from Afghanistan--not necessarily the withdrawal but the manner in which it occurred and the number of people--some Americans, many of them Afghans who helped Americans during our time in Afghanistan--who were left behind and the manner in which those who were able to escape, what they had to endure in many instances to do so. As we approach the second anniversary of this disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, many of those Afghans who escaped to the United States now face--continue to face--uncertainty in their lives-- uncertainty as their original parole status is set to expire soon. Most of that status for their legal presence in the United States expires 2 years from their arrival to the United States. And in many instances, that is now the month of August 2023. I joined my colleague Senator Klobuchar in introducing the Afghan Adjustment Act to make certain that Afghans who sought refuge in the United States are able to apply for a permanent legal residency after undergoing additional vetting. This amendment, this legislation, is now an amendment pending on the National Defense Authorization Act. I hope we are able to have a vote on this amendment--that it is included, the vote occurs, and I hope that vote is successful. This amendment establishes a pathway for Afghan partners to begin a more certain and, perhaps, new life. The rushed and chaotic withdrawal created a potential loophole for bad actors to be admitted to the United States. So if you are interested in our national security--which I know we all are--this amendment establishes a critical vetting process to reduce the threats to that national security. Failing to pass this amendment, failing for this bill to become law, means that none of the refugees will undergo the necessary additional vetting. Undergoing that vetting then can create the opportunity for certainty in the lives of those Afghan refugees who are here. For two decades, countless Afghans stood by our servicemembers and risked their lives and their families' lives to support our troops in Afghanistan. This withdrawal and the current circumstance resulted in more than 1,000 contacts with my office asking for help in getting someone out of Afghanistan, someone who served side by side with a soldier from Fort Riley--our hometown pastor's daughter and husband-- missionaries, Christian missionaries in Afghanistan--looking for help to get out of Afghanistan--those people who are Christians in that country. The vast majority of people who are in this uncertain stage were people who, either through our domestic operations, our opportunity to try to stabilize Afghanistan, or our military--they are the ones who are now living a life of uncertainty and potential return or removal from the United States. Under the present regulations, our Afghan allies admitted under temporary humanitarian status can only attain permanent legal status through our overburdened, nonworking, dysfunctional, asylum system or the long-winded special immigrant visa process. As a result, thousands face this troubling uncertainty as they strive to create a new life here. Recently, in the town we live in, Manhattan, KS, a block party was created to host Afghan residents of our community. It was pleasing to see the Afghan culture celebrated, and it was pleasing to see the community support their new neighbors. It is always a good thing to see when people come together. The practical help offered to our Afghans is priceless, but all that community support and assistance will do little good if we don't pass the opportunities that the Afghan Adjustment Act provides these individuals. The amendment before us today will help provide certainty to many of our Afghan partners and work to help other Afghan partners who are stranded in other countries. So we have the challenge of Afghans in the United States who soon will have no legal status, and we have those who are still trying to get out of Afghanistan. And, finally, we have those who have escaped Afghanistan to another country but can't yet migrate any further. Those people are stranded. They need our assistance. We also need to make sure that our vetting requirements protect our national security. This legislation does both. It protects our national security and increases our opportunity to treat individuals--human beings--in a humanitarian way. I thank Senator Klobuchar for her invitation for me to join her here today in this bipartisan effort. Senator Klobuchar mentioned a number of veterans organizations and veterans who endorsed this legislation and, thus, this amendment. This issue was brought to me most directly by the Iraqi and Afghan veterans of America who support this legislation and who brought information and encouragement to me to help see that this legislation is passed. But it is also supported by Blue Star Families, by the American Legion, the VFW, and many other veterans and veterans organizations. Those who served our country--those Americans who served our country--care about those who helped save their lives in Afghanistan, and they would like to see the U.S. Senate take the steps that we are asking be taken today. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

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

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, earlier this year, the public confidence in the banking system was shaken by a series of significant bank failures. To put it simply, these banks failed to account for interest rate increases while leaning on a deposit base that was almost entirely uninsured. That is a textbook case of mismanagement. It is critical that faith be restored in our Nation's banks and their regulators. But before policymakers clamor to write stricter banking regulations, an independent review board should be appointed to thoroughly probe the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and the response of the Federal Reserve Bank. Many questions still remain unanswered. Silicon Valley Bank was quickly deemed systemically important because of its size, but the ensuing failure of a larger bank was not. The sale was dragged out for weeks out of fear that certain banks would grow too large, only for the largest bank in the country to turn around and purchase the next bank failure. In my opinion, all parties involved had a role in this failure: bank executives, examiners, and regulators. The bank failed to both accurately leverage their position and react to rising interest rates. Examiners failed to require changes in either the bank's policy or subsequent actions. Regulators failed by arbitrarily guaranteeing all funds against loss, creating an unlimited market insecurity by forcing taxpayers and customers to now question the safety of their deposits. The administration failed by furthering a culture of government intervention that props up certain too-big-to-fail institutions. Meaningful oversight requires objectivity and must hold all parties accountable without having a predetermined regulatory agenda in mind. To restore public confidence, the next step, in my view, would be to hire an outside investigative group to conduct a review of the Federal Reserve Bank's response. Conflicts of interest inherently arise when a singular member of the Board prepares a self-investigation. This comprehensive review must be done by a party uninvolved in the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and/or uninvolved in the Federal response. This would better ensure that the outcome of this investigation would be impartial, helping put to bed doubts that the Fed's review only served as a stamp of approval on the Fed's policies. The Fed's own internal review found significant negligence by both management and regulators. The public needs insight into the reasoning and conversations of regulators, the White House, and bank management involved in the response. Silicon Valley Bank and the banks that subsequently failed were specialized to do business with a unique financial sector. Any reform regulators push now must be narrowly tailored to those circumstances to avoid collateral damage to small and midsized banks that consistently operate responsibly. Stricter capital requirements will push lending out of the regulated banking sector and into the nonbanks and money market funds, none of which are subject to the regulations of the Fed for banks, as the Fed regulates banks. The banking turmoil was a result of a rapidly changing interest rate environment, the speed at which money can move, and the limitations of banks to adjust as quickly as the market can. Understanding the context and reason behind the response is absolutely necessary for ensuring future bank failures have a smooth and fair resolution with a minimal impact upon American taxpayers. An independent review of the Silicon Valley Bank collapse is necessary to get a nonpartisan, less biased assessment that gives Americans confidence in our banking system and policymakers better ability to ensure our financial system remains the strongest in the world. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

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

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, America's attention is rightfully drawn to supporting Ukraine's defense against Russia's illegal and unjustified war. At the same time, we are contending with China, which is undergoing the largest peacetime expansion of military power in history. This morning, Congress and the American people heard from Israeli President Isaac Herzog, and I rise today to remind my colleagues of the ongoing threat posed by Iran to peace in the Middle East and beyond. Iran is exporting more oil today than it has since 2019 despite the sanctions that were overwhelmingly passed by this Congress and that remain as current law. Recently, the Navy's Fifth Fleet intervened to prevent two commercial oil tankers from being seized by Iran in the Gulf of Oman. Iran was recently granted membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which fosters deeper political and economic cooperation with Russia, China, India, and other members. All of this has taken place while Iran continues to enhance its nuclear program, provides Russia with weaponry to use in Ukraine, funds proxy fighters throughout the Middle East, holds U.S. citizens hostage, and vows to kill former American officials in revenge for the death of Soleimani. Despite Tehran's reestablishment of diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia and holding indirect talks with the United States, it appears that we are far from the ``deescalation'' that the Biden administration says it seeks. Instead, all evidence points to an Iranian regime intent on aggressively pursuing its aggressive objectives. I agree that we should avoid a crisis that would be triggered by Iran enriching uranium weapons beyond a 90-percent grade or by Iran-backed militias killing U.S. servicemembers in an attack, but my concern is what behavior the President is willing to accept short of these redlines. While I can only speculate on the content of the Biden administration's reported talks with Iran, press reports suggest a possible agreement would permit Iran to maintain nuclear enrichment at 60 percent. This level cannot be justified for peaceable purposes, and agreeing to it can have serious consequences. In addition, the Biden administration's persistent outreach to Iran undermines its stated goal to degrade the Russian military. Henry Rome and Eric Brewer, two scholars who follow Iran's nuclear program closely, recently wrote: Instead of laying the groundwork for a deal that reverses Tehran's nuclear program, this strategy risks cementing Iran's status as a nuclear threshold state [all] while shaking off its economic and political isolation. In other words, it gets a lot of what it wants without any price to pay. Normalizing the 60 percent enrichment level may threaten more nuclear proliferation, particularly in the Middle East. Other countries contemplating nuclear programs will take note and demand the same treatment. Another element of a reported deal is Iran's pledging not to harm American servicemembers in the region. Ensuring the protection of Americans abroad is the President's first responsibility, and it is to be commended; however, turning a blind eye to havoc wrought against our partners in the region only sows greater instability. At the same time Iran's oil exports were revealed earlier this month, Israel was waging a military operation against Iranian-backed Palestinian militia groups--Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. In Iraq, in addition to Tehran-backed militias that remain beyond government control, Iran is gaining ground in the Iraqi Government. Scholar Michael Knights observed last month: Iran's allies have achieved unprecedented control of Iraq's parliament, judiciary, and executive branch. . . . Washington's complacent attitude toward these events is only setting it up for costly involvement later. The regime's ability, through the IRGC, to fund such efforts comes directly from the failure to enforce sanctions. The Wall Street Journal reports that oil exports are double what they were a year ago--the highest, as I said, since 2018. Oil revenue is the regime's lifeblood, and reducing its cash stream is a critical component to getting Iran to negotiate. I call on this administration to strictly enforce sanctions on Iran's oil exports and pressure countries that help to facilitate the sale of Iranian oil. In a bipartisan letter I joined with 25 of my colleagues just recently, we wrote the President last month: It is crucial for your administration to remain aligned with Congressional efforts related to Iran's nuclear program and not agree to a pact that fails to achieve our nation's critical interests. In the face of a regime in which hardliners have solidified power, President Biden's narrowly focused approach merely kicks the can down the road. But this may be to Iran's advantage. In fact, it most likely is. Current trends indicate that Iran will use the time to refill its coffers and deepen its diplomatic ties, better positioning itself to withstand pressure to make any significant concessions. The administration must pursue more than the bare minimum in its diplomacy. Keeping a problem from developing into a crisis is good, but solving the problem is much better. I recognize the obstacles that must be overcome and that we will have to provide some concessions. To believe otherwise would ignore the history of diplomacy. But in accord with the will of Congress, an acceptable agreement can be reached. President Biden has the tools we have provided through that legislation, and he must use them. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Madam President, I was sitting home reading the newspaper, something I still do, and last month I read an article that captured my attention. National test scores of American students showed an alarming decline in the education of our children. Reading scores in America have continued to worsen since the height of COVID-19 pandemic, dropping to the lowest scores in decades. The troubling deterioration in American education was demonstrated by average scores on the 2023 National Assessment of Educational Progress known as the Nation's Report Card. The report showed that 13-year-olds declined nine points in math compared to 2020. This was the largest drop for 13-year-olds seen in 50 years. When 13-year-olds are struggling, it portends even worse problems ahead, because mastery in seventh and eighth grade is necessary to progress to more complex knowledge and analytical abilities required in high school and beyond. We know that failures in early childhood education, in early education have a long-lasting consequence. We must turn these test scores around and accelerate the education of America's young as though our future depends on it, because it absolutely does. America's strength as a global power--let me say that the education of our children is hugely important to our students and their families. But, also, America's strength as a global power doesn't just depend upon a strong military or possessing the latest weapons. Those things are important, but it also depends upon our economy and our ability to maintain a technological edge over our adversaries. And that all begins in the classroom, equipping our students to read, multiply, divide, and succeed. The mental health, confidence, and contributions of young Americans cannot be thought of as a secondary issue. It is not a secondary issue to other national security imperatives. What that means is that the well-being, health, confidence, contribution, the capabilities, knowledge, intellect, and intelligence of our children have consequences to our security--our national security. One of those greatest threats in our national security is China. China understands that to force their way into being a global superpower, they must be able to challenge the U.S. militarily and economically. This can be done by dislodging the United States as a leader in key technology areas that will dictate the success of nations in the coming decades. Those technologies include semiconductor design and manufacture, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, aerospace engineering, advanced manufacturing, and biotechnology. If China were to overtake the United States in any of these areas--in any of these areas--the United States would lose out on trillions of dollars in economic value, our military edge would erode, and the Chinese global influence would increase dramatically. As we grapple with the implications of a new Cold War with China and as we take stock of many of the associated challenges more complex than the old Cold War, the fact that our youth remain grades behind in math poses a concerning obstacle to future competitiveness. Advances in science and technology will build on basic math. Right now, our children are unprepared; and, therefore, we are unprepared to meet this challenge. While we work to regain this ground in education, particularly in these STEM fields, we also need to create more opportunities for others that have gained a STEM education here in the United States to practice their profession in this country and contribute to the U.S. economy. Educating people, only to send them back to strengthen their own home country, at a time in which the U.S. demand for STEM talent is through the roof, defies logic. Only 11 percent of foreign-born recipients of a bachelor's degree and only 23 percent of those who earn a master's degree manage to find a way to stay and work in the United States. The U.S. semiconductor industry alone could face a shortage of 70- to 90,000 workers over the next few years, and there is a projected shortfall of 300,000 engineers and 90,000 skilled technicians by 2030. It would be naive to believe that these positions can be solely filled by our American students. As the Wall Street Journal opinion section recently read, the foreigner working in tech ``isn't taking an American job; they are helping keep that job in the U.S.'' Foreign-born scientists have been integral to our preeminence as a scientific and military power. Most famously, nuclear physicists from Europe were the intellectual forces that propelled the Manhattan Project; and, today, more than half of the Silicon Valley startups are led by foreign-born entrepreneurs. This is why we have worked to pass the Startup Act in each Congress since I arrived in the Senate. This bill would ensure that those with advanced STEM degrees would be able to stay in this country while they are engaged in STEM-related professions. This would fill the immediate and increasing need for STEM-educated professionals, while we work to improve STEM education for America's youth. There is no ``one size fits all'' approach to solving the challenges in the classroom. Regaining ground after schools were closed during the pandemic will take hard work and ingenuity. But the success of our Nation depends--again, the success of our children depends, but because that is the case, the success of our Nation, our country, depends on young minds grappling and mastering the basics of math and reading and writing and science. We must make certain we are taking an ``all of the above,'' long-term approach to national security, and that means making strides in the classroom and investing in our students. Our schools are there to take care of our children and their future, but failure to do so means that we are damaging our Nation's future. For the sake of our country, its national defense, its economy, and for the sake of all American families, we need to make certain that we reverse course in making certain that our students are learning and are achieving at a rate that allows us to be successful. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Madam President, I rise this afternoon to discuss, along with a number of my other colleagues who share the understanding, the importance of broadband access, especially to rural America. A recent study by the University of Kansas found that up to 1 million Kansans live in regions that lack access to high-speed broadband services. Often, rural areas have the worst quality broadband or, as is too often the case, they have no access to broadband. The benefits of access to high-quality broadband are clear. They are known. We have worked hard to be in positions here in the U.S. Senate in which we are fully engaged on the issue of making sure that all Americans have access to this service. Broadband access is correlated with more jobs, greater economic growth, better healthcare outcomes, and increased educational performance. This means our country will be weaker as we confront the economic and security challenges we are facing, including labor shortages, STEM education shortcomings, and the lagging American leadership in key technology areas. When millions are without broadband, we limit our potential as a nation. Lack of access or lack of access to good-quality broadband is certainly a local issue. It is an individual issue. It is a local business, a local family, a local school, a local library issue. But the consequence of those individuals, those families, those schools being absent broadband service is a detriment to our Nation. Recognizing the importance of access to high-quality broadband, Congress has allocated significant resources to help bridge the digital divide, but the first step in appropriately allocating those resources is knowing where the money needs to go. I sponsored the Broadband DATA Act, which was enacted in 2020, to require the FCC to use granular data to create a more accurate and refined broadband map to better target areas so we know where the new investments are needed. Getting these maps right is critical and has not been easy. The first time I saw the maps that were developed, it was like, this doesn't reflect at all what I know about my home State of Kansas. Congress has devoted significant resources. We were involved in the effort to allocate additional dollars so that broadband maps could be updated and the data could be improved and hopefully get the information correct. We have been working on this since 2020. If the FCC maps aren't accurate, a large portion of funding will be poorly used, and areas in need won't get the resources required to increase access to broadband. Millions of dollars in new resources for Kansas rely upon the accuracy of the maps. It would be poor government and a waste of taxpayer dollars if the outcome is that we are only providing money to places that already have broadband service or have quality broadband service and once again forgetting, forgoing those that don't. The FCC is required to allow Americans to challenge the inaccuracies within the maps, making certain the maps improve over time. After receiving feedback from Kansans over the last few weeks and months, a second version of the map was released at the end of May. I understand from talking with Kansans that this map is more accurate than the one before. Continued oversight of the FCC's work will be necessary, and I continue to work with my colleagues on those efforts. Now that we know where the need exists--now that we better know where the need exists, we need to make certain that investments are appropriately targeted to those most in need and not waste it on overbuilding existing networks. We also must ensure that the program requirements encourage broadband providers to participate rather than discourage them with burdensome requirements that do not line up with congressional intent. I also want to make certain that every dollar Congress has allocated to broadband deployment actually goes to broadband deployment, not back to the Treasury. This is why, in a bipartisan way, we have introduced legislation to ensure that broadband grants are not considered taxable income. This is particularly important as critical broadband deployment programs at the Department of Commerce allocate funds at the end of this month, just a few days from now. Every dollar taken back by Treasury represents a community remaining disconnected, and I encourage my colleagues to work with me so this is not the case. As part of my oversight work as the ranking member of the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee, I invited Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo to Kansas to hear directly from Kansans about the challenges they face when deploying broadband across our State. She heard from County Commissioner Randy Leis about the benefits broadband access has brought to Meade County, including education and business opportunities. She also heard from a host of rural telephone and telecom providers about what they need from the Department of Commerce to successfully deploy broadband across Kansas. During this visit, Secretary Raimondo--and I express my appreciation here today on the Senate floor. I appreciate her coming to my State to hear and see what is the circumstance. During this visit, Secretary Raimondo reiterated her commitment to provide every Kansan with access to high-quality broadband services. To preserve the smalltown Kansas way of life that I and many Kansans and Senators here today value, I look forward to working with Federal and State officials to make certain that Kansas and particularly rural Kansans are connected to quality broadband service. Of all the things we do in my world to try to make sure Kansans have a bright future, one of the important ones is to make sure we have access to the technologies of today and tomorrow.

Mr. MORAN

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

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I want to spend a few minutes here on the Senate floor discussing the debt ceiling agreement reached between the Republican majority in the House and the Biden White House, the Fiscal Responsibility Act, the bill that, presumably, we will be further debating, perhaps amending, and voting on yet today or tomorrow. I fully recognize that governing in a divided government is a challenging amount of work. The American people have given us that circumstance. This circumstance requires negotiation and finding common ground; otherwise, we can do nothing. Unfortunately, President Biden, for way too long, refused to negotiate with House Republicans. He refused for months to negotiate with House Republicans--I suppose in an effort to intimidate Republicans and pass an unaltered debt ceiling increase. This would have opened the door for more Democratic majority spending--in fact, spending even more money with perhaps no, but certainly fewer, strings attached. Fortunately, that tactic did not work, and the House Republicans acted to pass their own debt limit legislation. Without a realistic plan, a plan that could pass Congress, the Biden administration finally conceded and negotiated with House Republicans to create a deal, the deal that is before us now. My view: Defaulting on the national debt would send a message that we are a nation that cannot be trusted to pay our bills. Default would be highly dangerous to our national security and to our currency and to our economy. China and other countries, those countries that are on the fence in today's world, are watching. They are watching how the American government operates. They want to diminish our role in the world. China would love for our standing in the world to be damaged due to default, for the United States and its economy to be in chaos. It is vital to our economy and to our national security that we do not default and that we preserve the U.S. dollar as the primary currency, the ``reserve currency''--not the yen or any other country's currency. The implications of what happens here today in regard to a default has a consequence upon our national well-being vis-a-vis the rest of the world and, most importantly, determines the relationship we have with other countries and the role that China is able to further play in the world order. China and these countries that are on the fence are watching. It is time--it is vital to our economy and national security that we do not default and that we preserve that dollar. The Fiscal Responsibility Act isn't the legislation that I personally would introduce. It does not sufficiently cap long-term discretionary spending; it continues to tie our defense budget to spending less than the rate of inflation; and it fails to address reforms needed to mandatory programs. But it does accomplish key conservative priorities that will benefit America and help put our Nation on a better path toward fiscal responsibility. In addition to the debt ceiling issue, reckless spending can also be the demise of our country's well-being, and endless deficit spending will eliminate the American dream for many Americans and the American dream as seen by the rest of the world. As a fiscal conservative, the Federal Government must spend less, must grow its spending less rapidly, must set limits on our appetite, and must stop wasteful spending. Our Nation has had a spending problem for the last several decades--probably even longer than that. It used to be that everyone understood that deficit spending was a damaging thing to the economy. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, perhaps the first progressive President, understood that World War II had to be paid for. It was a given that we paid our bills with nearly current revenue. It seems, over time, that many--particularly, in my view, in the Democratic Party--decided that deficit spending was not that much of a problem. And I worry that, too often, Republicans want to look the other way as well. We accelerated that spending during COVID. Perhaps with the uncertainty of what COVID meant to us, government spending rose rapidly, and we spent too much money. But Congress was slow--even as COVID began returning to the rearview mirror, we were too slow to turn off that COVID spending spigot. Coupled with reckless tax-and-spending sprees driven by the Biden administration, out-of-control spending has led to record-high inflation. Inflation is like a tax on every American and is damaging to the poorest among us. Here in Congress, we talk about spending in terms of millions and billions--sometimes even trillions. But folks back home in Kansas talk about spending in dollars and cents. And for everyday Americans, those dollars add up, make it harder to buy the groceries, to pay the rent, or to put gas in their vehicles. We see it every day in our family, and I hear about it from everyday Kansans all the time. Reducing inflation requires reductions to spending. The cause of inflation is when we spend more than we have to spend and we borrow money, pumping more Federal spending, government spending, into the economy. However, we need to fulfill the most important responsibility to the Federal Government, and that is to protect and defend our Nation and to keep our promises to those who served in the military that defends us. My colleagues and I on the Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs have consistently said we would provide the VA with the funding it needs to provide care and services to the men and women who have served our Nation. I have heard it said many times here in the Senate and elsewhere that it is too easy for us to go to war and never easy enough for us to pay for the bills for those who sacrificed so much during war. The debt ceiling deal delivers on our commitment to support veterans. The deal also secures the full funding of the toxic-exposed veterans that was authorized by the just recently passed PACT Act. In regard to government waste, this legislation will slow the rate of spending and recoup unspent funding, starting with COVID funds, to the tune of billions of dollars. The pandemic is basically behind us, and there is no reason for us to keep spending under the rubric--under the title--of COVID relief funding. Additionally, this legislation will cut significant funding to the Biden administration's plan to hire thousands of additional IRS agents. I am an appropriator, and I have long been an advocate for what we around here call regular order, what folks back home would just call doing your job. The way this process is supposed to work is we have a budget that outlines how much money we can spend, what the revenues are to pay for it; and then we divide up that money that we are going to spend in discretionary spending among 12 bills that the Appropriations Committee and, ultimately, the Senate and the House and the President then have something to say about. I have been an advocate for passing those separate 12 bills. We haven't done that very well many times. For far too long, we have relied on continuing resolutions and massive omnibus packages to fund our government. Those omnibus packages allow for a small group of Members of Congress to make major decisions for the rest of us. It adds to the uncertainty of what is in a bill when it is such a massive piece of legislation, and it creates--rightfully so--cynicism among my constituents about ``What is in there?'' and ``Did you read the bill?'' These measures, the way we do it--the way we have done it in the past--are not good government, and they lead to the ease of additional spending. It becomes too easy to add something to such a massive bill. This legislation would encourage Congress to do its job by passing 12 separate appropriation bills or face automatic caps on spending. Whatever happens on this piece of legislation, I hope the outcome, with the leadership of the Appropriations Committee that we have today, means that we are going to do 12 separate bills, each with the scrutiny of an appropriations subcommittee and the opportunity for amendments by all Senators on the Senate floor. Working to spend less will help stop this runaway inflation. But this legislation goes a step further by stimulating the economy and protecting Americans from new taxes. Unleashing American energy is a key to reducing energy prices, stimulating our economy, and strengthening our national security. The permitting reforms included in this bill will help get energy projects approved more quickly rather than being bogged down in a set of bureaucratic regulations. Things that should take months or a few years--hopefully, it will be the case and not take years or decades. Raising the debt limit is not something I or any of my colleagues should take lightly. Why have a debt ceiling if it is just automatically increased every time it is met? Don't we wish that would work in our credit card bills that we receive? We have a limit on what we can spend because sometimes people, and always government, need to be told no. We are seeing firsthand the consequence for spending outside our means. And there will continue to be more consequences. But no deal is not a solution either. This is really the clash of a bad outcome of a default and the bad outcome of more spending, more inflation, and a greater challenge to our country and its economy. No deal is not a solution. And defaulting--I can't see any way that is helpful to Kansans or Americans. The American people elected a divided government. That is what we work in every day here. Democrats hold the White House and the Senate. The House Republicans deserve credit for negotiating a deal with a reluctant President and passing an agreement with reasonable caps on Federal spending. This bill represents progress and is that proverbial step in the right direction. We cannot continue to borrow money we don't have and saddle future generations with the consequences. The debate cannot end here, however, with this vote. However the outcome of this legislation in Congress, we should never have to wait for a crisis--an economic crisis, the debt ceiling--to take fiscally responsible measures. It should be part of a way of life here. Those responsible measures need to become the norm for every Member of Congress and for this and every other President. Without a serious long-term plan and subsequent action to reduce spending, we will be back in this position way too soon, and we will jeopardize the American dream. It threatens our children and our grandchildren's futures as well as our Nation's ability to defend itself against global threats. I always tell myself that my responsibility as a citizen of this country--not as a Senator necessarily but just as a citizen--is to do what we can do to make sure that the American dream is alive and well and liberties and freedoms that we enjoy as Americans through the sacrifice and service of many and the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in the Constitution of the United States--our job is to make certain those liberties and freedoms are protected for people we will never meet and that the American dream is alive and well for people today and their children and grandchildren. America still stands as a beacon for others around the world, and there are others in other countries who are trying to live the American dream. They are envious of what we have. But it is fragile, and it can go away. It is our responsibility to make sure that is not the case. We can't let this happen. We have to confront our threats head-on. And, yes, it is easy to take a side and defend that side and advocate for that side. It is what we do here. There are times in which it is necessary for us, for the well-being not of us as individuals or us as elected officials but for the well-being of the country, to find a path forward. And in today's environment, in today's world, it requires bipartisan cooperation. And bipartisan agreement is a blueprint to develop more fiscally responsible legislative agenda. We will debate this bill. We will, potentially and perhaps hopefully, amend this bill, but our work is cut out for us. The American people deserve for us to make the decisions that protect us from our adversaries, keep the American dream alive, and make certain that our children and grandchildren and those we have never met have a brighter future. The issue before us is one of those that has a consequence in all those arenas. I will work with my colleagues today as we move forward on this legislation to make sure that the outcome is something that advances a cause that is important to me and to the people I represent. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes prior to the scheduled rollcall vote.

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I, too, rise to make known my concerns with the administration's decision to terminate the use of title 42 authority to protect our borders. I particularly make this point at a time at which it is clear that what was to follow the use of title 42 is not in place. I visited the southern border with the Senator from Texas, who was just speaking, in January. I had several additional visits to that border while title 42 was in place. It was useful and valuable for me to see the nature of the problem and the challenges over the last several years. But it is also true that I can see the consequences of what is taking place on our borders in my own home State of Kansas. When I was at the border, I talked with Federal law enforcement officials. They have risen to the challenge of apprehending and vetting and documenting hundreds of thousands of migrants. However, the situation at the southern border has been made more difficult for the DEA to interdict the cartels and drug smugglers and for the FBI to vet national security threats. Repealing title 42 without having a robust plan of action has left our law enforcement agents with a disastrous situation at the border. Our Border Patrol agents and officers are being asked to be caretakers, law enforcement, medical professionals, and so much more. The fact of the matter is that our country does not have operational control of the border, and it will continue to fail to do so if we continue down the current path. The U.S. Border Patrol apprehended more than 1 million migrants who crossed illegally between just October and March, and it detained more than 2.2 million migrants during all of fiscal year 2022. Agents have been averaging about 1,100 arrests a day this month at the El Paso sector, and on Wednesday of last week, more than 2,000 migrants were arrested in the one section alone. Often, we think of border challenges as being someone coming to take our jobs. Perhaps there is a component of that, but we ought to be focused on terrorism, national security, drugs, law enforcement, and human trafficking. Fentanyl seizures at the southern border increased 48 percent in April of 2022 compared to April of 2021. The situation at our southern border is a danger to our national security as border agents are pulled away to deal with the record number of migrants and are left without the manpower to try and stop drug trafficking and human trafficking. President Biden must act to ensure a stricter enforcement of our immigration laws, reinstate the construction of a wall or fencing in areas that are largely unprotected, and the administration must send a message loud and clear that our border is closed to unlawful entrants. The United States is a nation of migrants, and we are a nation of refugees, but we are also a nation of law and order. Migrants who are camping on the streets of El Paso, in scorching heat; mothers wading across rushing rivers, clinging to their infants; and girls caught by traffickers and cartels out in the desert are consequences of a disastrous border policy. The President's and his Secretary's handling of this crisis at the southern border is unacceptable. Congress must work together to deliver lasting solutions that secure our border, keep our communities safe, and ensure the humane treatment of people. Securing our southern border isn't a Republican or a Democratic issue. It isn't a Texas or an Arizona issue. It isn't just a U.S. or a Mexico issue. Every State is a border State, including my own of Kansas. If we truly want to help migrants, then we need to create a fair and humane asylum process, and we need to stop the illegal crossings at the southern border that undermine our laws and jeopardize our national security. Americans--Kansans--are tired of paying the cost of inaction to make any serious policy changes at the southern border. The administration has made it clear that it is unwilling to take the meaningful action necessary. While it is easy to criticize the administration, let me also say that it also means that it is up to this Congress, this legislative body, to work together to find solutions in this regard--solutions that ensure our national safety, establish a humane asylum process, and end the crisis at the southern border. I yield the floor.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Brian Hutchison, a fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, this week our Nation observes National Police Week. That observation began in 1962, when President Kennedy claimed the first Police Week as a time dedicated to pay tribute to our law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty. President Kennedy's proclamation stated that, during this week, ``all of our people may join in commemorating police officers, past and present, who by their faithful and loyal devotion to their responsibilities have rendered a dedicated service to their communities and, in so doing, have established for themselves an enviable and enduring reputation for preserving the rights and security of all citizens.'' This afternoon I rise with my colleagues to honor the dedication and sacrifice of our law enforcement officers. Over the course of this week, we pay tribute to 443 officers who gave their lives in the line of duty in 2022. Saturday night, just a few days ago, hundreds of police officers, family members, and others, gathered for the annual candlelight vigil honoring our fallen officers. Among those memorialized this week are four brave Kansas officers. Deputy Sheriff Sidnee Carter, with the Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office, was tragically killed in an automobile crash while responding to a night disturbance call. We also lost Sheriff Robert Craft from Marion County, Officer David Ingle from the Iola Police Department, and Sergeant Stacy Murrow from the Linn County Sheriff's Department--all Kansans. In fact, all Americans are grateful to those officers for their service and honor them in making the ultimate sacrifice for the benefit of others, for the benefit of the people they knew in their community, but also for the benefit of people they never met. While the purpose of Police Week is to honor the men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty, we also should remember how those police officers' lives as husbands and wives and mothers and fathers--as members of their communities--they were people who happened to wear a uniform, who happened to take up a career to serve others, to protect and defend. From educating kids in school about the dangers of substance abuse or providing driver safety education, coordinating neighborhood watch associations, and speaking at business luncheons, schools and community townhall meetings, law enforcement strive to make our community a safe place to live and raise a family and to work to foster a more safe and secure environment; in a sense, to provide justice. During this National Police Week and throughout the year, we should remember that law enforcement needs our support. We should provide them the resources they need to do their jobs. We must also give them the tools they need to build and strengthen the bonds of trust with those they serve and our best efforts to address the underlying challenges that face our communities and individuals in their lives. I serve as the lead Republican on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee with appropriations jurisdiction over the Department of Justice. I am committed to making certain our law enforcement officers have the resources and support they need to do their job effectively and safely. We honor the service and sacrifice of our Nation's fallen law enforcement officers, remember those who departed, and acknowledge and express our gratitude for the sacrifices all law enforcement officers make every day they wear the badge. During this week--and, really, every other week of the year--we should, and we do, honor those we have lost and remember the families they left behind. We ask God to comfort them in their time of grief and be a source of strength for them in their lives. May God bless our police and our local law enforcement officers. May God bless them as they do their duties, and may God hold in His arms those we have lost this past year.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now stand in recess until 5:30 p.m.

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to have the opportunity to give some thoughts today on what is going on in the United States and around the globe. Here in these early months of this new Congress, there clearly is broad bipartisan agreement on the importance of the Indo-Pacific region for our country's future. We are strengthening our military posture in that region, and last Congress, we passed legislation to strengthen our strategic industries. What is being ignored, however, is a third component essential to our success in the region: expanding trade. At a State and Foreign Ops hearing in March, I noted the importance of our economic relationships around the world and asked Secretary of State Blinken about our approach to trade agreements, particularly America's absence from the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership--the CPTPP. He told me the original pact in 2015 had real benefits, economically and strategically, but since then the world has moved on. I agree with him, our allies and our partners have moved on. They have moved on without us. A year ago this month, President Biden made his first trip to Asia and unveiled the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, the administration's initiative to reengage the region on standards involving digital trade, supply chains, climate change, and corruption. This is a small start, but it falls far short of what is needed today to advance American prosperity and security--also, the well-being of our Asian partners. In particular, the President's proposal fails to include greater U.S. market access. The United States is belatedly offering a tepid leadership to a region that remains committed to open trade. We can and must correct this or fall further behind in the most economically dynamic region in the world. I call on President Biden to enter into--and Congress to ratify--the CPTPP. It would be difficult to overstate how important the Indo-Pacific is to American prosperity. The region comprises 40 percent of the global economic output, and that is expected to grow to 50 percent by the end of the decade. The largest economy in the region belongs to China, which is the largest trading partner for the region's countries. This provides Beijing with leverage to bully our allies and partners into making concessions in exchange for access to the Chinese market. It allows Beijing, not the United States, the same opportunity to have that relationship, so necessary. China, for example, used coercion to retaliate against Australia after our allies in Canberra called for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19. Beijing regularly forces American businesses to refrain from criticism of China or conform to communist policies. China's leaders can coerce and intimidate because they have economic strength. It is clear China will exert that tremendous leverage over other nations to achieve its global ambitions. Its attempts to bully countries into its sphere of influence are on full display through the Belt and Road Initiative, which has left trails of debt traps and human rights abuses. Unfortunately, the United States is ceding our economic leadership that we established and maintained for the last 80 years. Having quit the Trans-Pacific Partnership under bipartisan, Republican and Democrat, criticism for that departure, the countries we worked with--treaty allies and partners--moved ahead. They moved ahead without us and in 2018 brought into force a successor agreement, the CPTPP. These countries represent more than 13 percent of global GDP, and in the last few weeks, Great Britain has gained membership. So important is the CPTPP to the Pacific economies that China has applied for membership. They did so last September. It would be a grave mistake for us to assume that in America's absence China would be denied membership indefinitely. China wants in, despite already being the largest member of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Agreement, which also includes our treaty allies, Japan and South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. This trade bloc accounts for nearly one-third of global GDP. These two agreements, comprised of nations with diverse ideologies, underscore the importance of the economics of the Indo-Pacific region. In Asia especially, economics and security are one and the same, and for Washington to ignore that is a miscalculation. Our allies and partners in this region are noticing. They notice our absence. Australia's Foreign Minister said at the end of last year: America's decision not to proceed with the CPTPP is still being felt in the region. . . . We have reached a stage in the evolution of our alliances where they will increasingly require a fully developed economic dimension, as well. In other words, we can't have the same relationship with countries that we don't deal with in trade in economic relationships. At the end of 2022, Singapore's Defense Minister had this to say: The U.S. increasing their military presence in Asia as a stabilizing force is virtuous, it is good and we will support that. But then he made this key point: We think that the U.S. should do more to engage as it did previously, to build an economic framework, which as a tide can lift all boats. Despite our own National Security Strategy which declares that ``we need to win the competition for the 21st century'' and that we will ``shape the rules of the road for . . . trade and economics,'' the document makes clear President Biden believes ``we have to move beyond traditional Free Trade Agreements.'' But given the words of our Pacific friends, it is equally clear they have not moved beyond such agreements. In fact, they are doubling down on them without us. The President and his administration are either oblivious to this fact or indifferent. Given the stakes, whichever one it is, it is a serious mistake. Dating back to the 1980s, the National Security Strategy is a congressionally mandated report issued by the President to convey the administration's national security goals and how to achieve them. In recent decades, one document is published each Presidential term rather than yearly. The 2022 document, President Biden stresses upholding the ``rules- based international order'' but then refuses to engage in shaping one of the significant pillars of that order: trade. The National Security Strategy invokes four principles, two of which are openness and inclusiveness. And as one scholar observed, the President's approach to trade is neither open nor inclusive. This hurts our goals in this region, and it hurts Americans at home, our very national security. Our engagement really is about our own well-being. Our own well-being is often dependent upon the well-being of our friends and allies or those we want to be our friends or allies. Economic partnerships can promote U.S. national security interests by protecting critical access to technology, minerals, and food supplies. We know what happens when we are so dependent upon one particular country for meeting our country's needs in strategic items. It is a mistake for us to have all eggs in a basket. Robust trade agreements safeguard the intellectual property and manufacturing capabilities that underpin our American military dominance. Southeast Asia presents a situation in which our agricultural producers can score significant market access wins, while U.S. soft power can bolster our influence with these critical partners with these countries that are or can be our friends. America's economy is the foundation of our power. Without the creation of wealth, we cannot afford to sustain the world's greatest military, which in turn defends the peace that enables the flow of goods. As a column in the Wall Street Journal just within the last week argued, ``The U.S. must embrace the politics of growth. Our world must be, and must be seen to be, the surest, fastest path to raising living standards all over the world. That's what we did after World War II. We must find a way to do it again today.'' What that is saying is we can't allow China to be seen as the path to economic well-being for people and nations around the world and specifically in the South Pacific. Southeast Asia presents a situation in which our agriculture producers can score significant market access wins while we are making a difference in our own capabilities to influence the world. America's economy is the foundation of our power, and we must utilize it. In competing with China in the coming decades, it is essential that the United States provide a positive vision for the region that attracts countries to what America offers beyond security support. Leadership is more than making clear what we are against. We must offer a compelling case of what we are for and how it will benefit those we wish to lead, those we wish to be partners with. Little in geopolitics is a win-win, but trade is a rare area that advances our interests and those of our partners. According to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, the American people understand this. Three in four Americans think that trade is good for the U.S. economy, but Congress and the President are making a mistake ignoring the old idea of open trade. To best compete with China in Asia and to help Americans at home, joining the CPTPP and providing greater market access is an obvious place to begin. Jobs, economic opportunity for us, and most importantly, the well-being of our Nation, our national security, depend upon trade and that relationship it creates. (Ms. CORTEZ MASTO assumed the Chair.)

Mr. MORAN

Mr. MORAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the scheduled vote occur immediately.