Alex Padilla

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act. This legislation addresses a critical need to ensure that Federal resources do not inadvertently support gun dealers whose business practices may contribute to the proliferation of firearms used in criminal activities. The Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act would withhold Federal contracts from Federal firearm, licensees, FFLs, who have been listed in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' AFT Demand 2 Program twice in the preceding 3 calendar years. The Demand 2 Program targets gun dealers who have sold 25 or more firearms within a year that are subsequently traced to crimes within 3 years of their sale. Under this act, dealers identified under the Demand 2 Program will be prohibited from entering into Federal contracts for a period of 3 years following their last appearance on the list. However, the Attorney General would have the discretion to waive this prohibition for the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security if it is deemed necessary to protect national security. Over the past two decades, the ATF's Demand 2 Program has been instrumental in identifying gun dealers whose sales practices may be contributing to the diversion of firearms to criminal activities. While the vast majority of an FFLs operate responsibly, a small fraction-- about 2 percent--of these dealers have been shown to be a significant source of crime guns. Between 202l and 2023, only approximately 1,500 of the Nation's 75,000-plus FFLs were subject to the Demand 2 Program. This small group of dealers has a disproportionate impact on gun violence in our communities. It is deeply troubling that some of these dealers have continued to receive lucrative Federal contracts despite their track record. The Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act aims to incentivize better business practices among gun dealers by ensuring that those with a history of contributing to gun violence through irresponsible sales are not rewarded with Federal contracts. This bill is a critical step towards reducing gun violence and ensuring that Federal procurement practices do not inadvertently support the diversion of firearms to criminal activities. Americans deserve to feel safe in their communities, and our government has a responsibility to ensure that its resources are used to promote public safety, not undermine it. By passing this legislation, we can take meaningful action to address the gun violence epidemic that continues to plague our Nation. Public safety is paramount, and this bill represents an important measure to strengthen our efforts in combating the illegal use of firearms. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act as swiftly as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act. This legislation addresses a critical need to ensure that Federal resources do not inadvertently support gun dealers whose business practices may contribute to the proliferation of firearms used in criminal activities. The Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act would withhold Federal contracts from Federal firearm, licensees, FFLs, who have been listed in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' AFT Demand 2 Program twice in the preceding 3 calendar years. The Demand 2 Program targets gun dealers who have sold 25 or more firearms within a year that are subsequently traced to crimes within 3 years of their sale. Under this act, dealers identified under the Demand 2 Program will be prohibited from entering into Federal contracts for a period of 3 years following their last appearance on the list. However, the Attorney General would have the discretion to waive this prohibition for the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security if it is deemed necessary to protect national security. Over the past two decades, the ATF's Demand 2 Program has been instrumental in identifying gun dealers whose sales practices may be contributing to the diversion of firearms to criminal activities. While the vast majority of an FFLs operate responsibly, a small fraction-- about 2 percent--of these dealers have been shown to be a significant source of crime guns. Between 202l and 2023, only approximately 1,500 of the Nation's 75,000-plus FFLs were subject to the Demand 2 Program. This small group of dealers has a disproportionate impact on gun violence in our communities. It is deeply troubling that some of these dealers have continued to receive lucrative Federal contracts despite their track record. The Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act aims to incentivize better business practices among gun dealers by ensuring that those with a history of contributing to gun violence through irresponsible sales are not rewarded with Federal contracts. This bill is a critical step towards reducing gun violence and ensuring that Federal procurement practices do not inadvertently support the diversion of firearms to criminal activities. Americans deserve to feel safe in their communities, and our government has a responsibility to ensure that its resources are used to promote public safety, not undermine it. By passing this legislation, we can take meaningful action to address the gun violence epidemic that continues to plague our Nation. Public safety is paramount, and this bill represents an important measure to strengthen our efforts in combating the illegal use of firearms. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the Clean Hands Firearm Procurement Act as swiftly as possible.

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge Expansion Act. This legislation would expand the boundary of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge by approximately 5,658 acres to conserve additional land in Solano, Marin, and Sonoma Counties of California. The San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge consists of more than 19,000 acres located along the northern edge of San Pablo Bay in Northern California. It was established in 1974 to support wetland habitat; endangered species, like the salt marsh harvest mouse and the Ridgeway's Rail; and migratory birds, including the largest wintering population of Canvasbacks on the west coast. In addition to providing habitat and wildlife conservation, the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge offers numerous recreation opportunities, including wildlife viewing, wildlife photography, hiking, boating, fishing, and hunting. Regulation of these recreation activities allows for public enjoyment of the refuge while still protecting the wildlife and their habitats. The bill would expand the San Pablo Bay National Refuge by 5,658 acres, which is more than 28 percent of its current size. The bill would also authorize the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to acquire lands within the modified boundary from willing sellers or donors and allow other Federal Agencies to transfer federally owned land within the modified boundary to the Service without administrative hurdles. Finally, the bill would encourage the Service to allocate Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars to acquire any private inholdings within modified National Wildlife Refuge boundary. The Fish and Wildlife Service recently reported that 221 million acres of wetlands were destroyed between 2009 and 2019, representing a 50-percent increase in the rate of loss from the previous decade. The loss of wetlands across the country has reduced the amount of critical habitat for wildlife, endangered species, and migratory birds. Given these trends and its prime location within the Pacific Flyway, expanding the boundaries of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge offers a unique opportunity to protect both critical wetland habitat and priority public uses on Federal lands. Importantly, expanding the refuge would also contribute to the State of California's and the Biden-Harris Administration's goals to conserve 30 percent of our public lands and waters by 2030. I would like to thank my colleagues Representatives John Garamendi, Mike Thompson, and Jared Huffman for championing this bill in the House. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge Expansion Act as quickly as possible.

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Freedom from Intimidation in Elections Act of 2024. This legislation would amend section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act to establish a rebuttable presumption that carrying a visible firearm around election-related activities, such as voting or counting ballots, constitutes intimidation within the meaning of the VRA. This bill empowers voters and election workers to seek an emergency civil injunction against individuals or groups engaged in such intimidating conduct. Importantly, the bill provides an exemption for appropriate law enforcement officials and allows any group or individual facing suit to present evidence that they did not, in fact, intimidate any voters or election workers. Given the increasing political polarization this country faces and the Supreme Court's everchanging interpretation of the Second Amendment, the risk of violence at polling places and election offices has never been higher. This bill is essential to ensure that eligible individuals can continue to exercise their right to vote without fear of retribution or harm. It is imperative to protect our voters and dedicated election workers from threats of political violence by updating the Voting Rights Act's anti-intimidation provisions to address the specific threat posed by firearms around election activities.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise today in opposition to a bill introduced by my colleague from North Carolina. Let me start by saying this: The Senator from North Carolina says the Federal Government should not use official taxpayer resources--no taxpayer dollars--to advance partisan politics. You will be happy to know that I agree 100 percent. And I would venture to say that all of my Democratic colleagues agree 100 percent. But let's also be clear the Executive order referenced isn't that. And my colleague's attempt to attribute some scheme behind informing eligible citizens of their right to vote and facilitating their voter registration and participation is simply without merit. As I mentioned a few minutes ago, when debating the SAVE Act, we are now less than 6 weeks until the November election. And while there may be disagreement on policy with my colleagues, we should certainly agree that it is crucial to make sure every eligible American can participate in the political process--again, without any unnecessary barriers or obstacles and certainly without intimidation. As I referenced a few minutes ago, I once served as California's secretary of state and as the chief elections officer, and I am proud of the reforms that we implemented in making it easier for eligible citizens to register to vote, to stay registered to vote--because that is not easy in some States--and to cast their ballots in the elections. I want to emphasize that these reforms were put in place for all citizens regardless of political party, regardless of political leanings. We wanted to make sure that every eligible Californian could exercise their right to vote, and that is what should be our business here today--to make sure that every eligible American can exercise their right to vote. That is exactly why President Biden first issued this Executive order, which builds on decades of what, once upon a time, was bipartisan efforts to expand voter registration. What could be more patriotic than performing your civic duty? The bipartisan history of Congress in promoting voter participation includes the bipartisan passage of the National Voter Registration Act once upon a time. President Biden issued the Executive order to bring the weight of the Federal Government to help Americans register to vote. It strikes me as perfectly reasonable that when Americans are already interacting with the government, that we should take that opportunity to securely get more eligible Americans registered to vote and ready to participate in the elections. The Executive order that we are debating here is simply fulfilling the mandates that Congress created with the bipartisan passage of the National Voter Registration Act. I couldn't help but notice in the debate--in the presentation, in the arguments--that there has been a failure to point to any partisan language either in statute or in the Executive order. So I am disappointed that these efforts continue. What we should be doing is working together to facilitate civic participation and combating misinformation and disinformation surrounding the 2024 election that only risks confusing or discouraging people to participate. For those and other reasons, I object.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, reserving the right to object, today marks the third time that I have come down to the floor to object to this bill--not the first time, not the second time, three times. Madam President, in this particular case, the third time is not the charm. But I grant my colleague one thing. He says that things have changed since the last time he tried to bring this bill up for a vote or approval on unanimous consent. What has changed, you might ask? Well, this bill actually failed to pass the Republican-controlled House of Representatives just last week. Republicans attached this bill to a must-pass government funding bill, and they still couldn't find the votes, not even with the votes that they have on their side of the aisle. So it does beg the question: What the heck are we doing here? This is not a serious attempt to protect our elections. The only thing that this bill does--and the discussion of it does--is stoking fear that our elections may not be secure, and it creates mistrust in the outcome of elections. So I feel compelled to take a moment to, once again, reassure all Americans that are listening today: There is no credible evidence of massive voter fraud or a massive number of noncitizens voting in our elections--no evidence, none. Let me be clear: no evidence, none. In fact, it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote in Federal elections, no matter what State they live in. In some of the conversation from some of the Senators, over the last several minutes, there has been reference to what the Federal Government may be doing to federalize elections. I will make specific reference to the motor voter law that was approved by Congress on a bipartisan basis; that, yes, directs States to do what they can to encourage civic participation and to utilize their department of motor vehicles to engage eligible voters. Since they are already interfacing with government, let's take that moment of their time--as they are already sharing name, address, date of birth, other personal information--and in addition to applying for a driver's license or a State ID, if they are eligible, to register them to vote in the process or update their registration. And, yes, there are States in the country that do allow a noncitizen or undocumented immigrant, even, to obtain a driver's license. But I can tell you, as a former chief elections officer for the State of California--not just on behalf of California but of my colleagues across the country that I have worked with--protocols are in place. If you are a noncitizen applying for a special type of driver's license or an undocumented immigrant applying for a special type of driver's license, you go through one process. If you are a citizen, you go through another that includes that opportunity to register to vote. Let me come back to the bottom line here again: no evidence of massive voter fraud--no evidence the last time this bill came up, no evidence today. And I doubt there will be any evidence between now and November 5--or even after November 5--because of the integrity of elections administration in the country. Now, I have to speak to the timing. We stand here today, 41 days before this November's election. The election is already happening. For those who are familiar, ballots have already been mailed out to members of the military and other overseas voters. In many States, the vote-by-mail ballot process has already begun. In some States, early voting is beginning. The election is happening. But again, I sense the real motive for bringing this bill up today is an attempt to continue to inject fear and uncertainty in the minds of voters at a time where, frankly, we need calm; we need understanding; we need truth. So, as I have in the previous objections, I will extend my invitation again today: Let's work together in a thoughtful, responsible, bipartisan manner to ensure more eligible Americans can easily register to vote, stay registered to vote, and cast their ballots. But until I am taken up on that offer, I object.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Freedom from Intimidation in Elections Act of 2024. This legislation would amend section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act to establish a rebuttable presumption that carrying a visible firearm around election-related activities, such as voting or counting ballots, constitutes intimidation within the meaning of the VRA. This bill empowers voters and election workers to seek an emergency civil injunction against individuals or groups engaged in such intimidating conduct. Importantly, the bill provides an exemption for appropriate law enforcement officials and allows any group or individual facing suit to present evidence that they did not, in fact, intimidate any voters or election workers. Given the increasing political polarization this country faces and the Supreme Court's everchanging interpretation of the Second Amendment, the risk of violence at polling places and election offices has never been higher. This bill is essential to ensure that eligible individuals can continue to exercise their right to vote without fear of retribution or harm. It is imperative to protect our voters and dedicated election workers from threats of political violence by updating the Voting Rights Act's anti-intimidation provisions to address the specific threat posed by firearms around election activities.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise today to recognize the students and faculty of California State University, Sacramento--or ``Sacramento State''--as they embark on their first year as California's first-ever ``Black-Serving Institution,'' as well as the inaugural class of their ``Black Honors College.'' Reflective of the most diverse State in the Nation, Sacramento State has long been a leader in providing quality, higher education to students of all backgrounds. Already, they are recognized by the U.S. Department of Education as both a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) and an Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institution (AANAPISI). But as the home to the largest enrollment of Black and African- American students in the California State University (CSU) system, this past summer, the California State Assembly recognized Sacramento State as the first ``Black-Serving Institution'' in the State of California, a testament to the university's support of Black students who come from around the world to enroll. Sacramento State is always looking for more ways to attract, support, and help graduate more Black students. That is why earlier this year, they created and launched the Nation's first Black Honors College, an enhanced cocurricular college providing specialized coursework for students interested in Black history, life, culture, and contributions. Thanks to the vision and leadership of Sacramento State president Dr. Luke Wood, inaugural dean of the Black Honors College Dr. Boatamo Mosupyoe, and CSU chancellor Dr. Mildred Garcia, Sacramento State is building a world-class academic environment for Black students to follow their passions and to thrive. Today, I want to congratulate Sacramento State on their official State recognition and to wish the inaugural class of the Black Honors College enormous success in the years ahead.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise today to recognize the 32-year career of Ken McNeely, AT&T western region president, ahead of his retirement at the end of this month. Ken joined AT&T in 1991 as a senior attorney specializing in corporate litigation and has held several key positions for the company since. As vice president of law and government affairs, the longest serving president of AT&T California, and now as president of the western region, Ken has been an exceptional leader and a trusted partner to colleagues in the public and private sectors. As president of the western region, Ken has led AT&T's activity in 19 States and overseen a workforce of over 50,000 employees, working tirelessly to deliver greater reliability for communities throughout California. Ken is also a dedicated member of his community, serving on several boards, and supporting numerous philanthropic organizations over the years. He has also been recognized by others for his outstanding leadership, including by the Black Business Association with their Top 100 African Americans in Technology Award, Equality California with their Vanguard Award, and Our Family Coalition with their Luminary Award. Ken has always represented our State and its values, and thanks to his work, we have made great strides in bridging the digital divide, ensuring first responders can stay connected to their communities, and preparing our students for future careers in the STEM field. Today, I want to congratulate Ken on his many accomplishments and to thank him for his work over the past three decades. I wish him, his husband Inder, and their children Kabir and Meera well in the years ahead.

Mr. PADILLA

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

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise in support of the BASIC Act, which I introduced today. I know how important it is to help students cover the full cost of attending college, including tuition and fees, housing, food, transportation, books, childcare, healthcare, supplies, and more. In California, even though State and institutional aid programs cover full tuition and fees for about half of the students attending California State University, University of California, and California Community College, students struggle to pay for the remaining cost of attendance. This bill will help accelerate California's work to make college affordable and provide funding to reach more schools across California and our nation. Last year, the first-ever nationally representative data on student basic needs was released by the National Center for Education Statistics, which indicated that nearly one in four undergraduate students across the country experiences food insecurity. We also know that rates of basic needs insecurity are much higher for historically marginalized students, including Black, Latino, and Indigenous students; parenting students; LGBTQIA+students; first-generation students; Pell Grant recipients; former foster youth; and justice- involved students. The evidence is clear that addressing student basic needs prevents students from sacrificing their health and well-being to succeed in higher education. That is why I am proud to introduce this bill to authorize $1 billion for a new grant program to help institutions of higher education meet students' basic needs. This funding represents an essential aspect of building more equitable paths to higher education, and it represents an investment in our students, our institutions, and our future. The legislation also helps coordinate assistance across Federal Agency lines. I want to thank Senator Warren and Representative Torres for introducing this bill with me, and I hope our colleagues will join us in ensuring that no student is forced to choose between their education and their basic needs.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise in support of the BASIC Act, which I introduced today. I know how important it is to help students cover the full cost of attending college, including tuition and fees, housing, food, transportation, books, childcare, healthcare, supplies, and more. In California, even though State and institutional aid programs cover full tuition and fees for about half of the students attending California State University, University of California, and California Community College, students struggle to pay for the remaining cost of attendance. This bill will help accelerate California's work to make college affordable and provide funding to reach more schools across California and our nation. Last year, the first-ever nationally representative data on student basic needs was released by the National Center for Education Statistics, which indicated that nearly one in four undergraduate students across the country experiences food insecurity. We also know that rates of basic needs insecurity are much higher for historically marginalized students, including Black, Latino, and Indigenous students; parenting students; LGBTQIA+students; first-generation students; Pell Grant recipients; former foster youth; and justice- involved students. The evidence is clear that addressing student basic needs prevents students from sacrificing their health and well-being to succeed in higher education. That is why I am proud to introduce this bill to authorize $1 billion for a new grant program to help institutions of higher education meet students' basic needs. This funding represents an essential aspect of building more equitable paths to higher education, and it represents an investment in our students, our institutions, and our future. The legislation also helps coordinate assistance across Federal Agency lines. I want to thank Senator Warren and Representative Torres for introducing this bill with me, and I hope our colleagues will join us in ensuring that no student is forced to choose between their education and their basic needs.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, this week, as they are honored with the 2024 Medallion of Excellence Award, the highest accolade awarded by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute, I rise to celebrate the over five-decade career of California-based norteno band, Los Tigres del Norte. While they would eventually go on to become one of the most successful Latin music groups of all time, few people would have guessed it when they booked their first trip north to the United States to perform at a State prison in northern California--without even having a band name. Raised in the town of Rosa Morada, Mocorito, in the Mexican state of Sinaloa, 3 of the 11 Hernandez children grew up playing music together in local parades. In 1965, when their father, a rancher, injured his legs and couldn't work, Jorge, Raul, and Hernan recruited their cousin Oscar and began traveling the region as a band, earning money at local clubs to support their family. In 1968, just teenagers at the time, they traveled north of the border to perform alongside mariachis, dancers, and even mimes for the inmates of a State prison south of San Jose, CA. It was then that an immigration official first labeled them the ``Little Tigers.'' What came after was five decades of norteno-style music that resonated with people across the continent, tens of millions of albums sold, multiple Grammy and Latin Grammy awards, and the Latin Recording Academy's Lifetime Achievement Award. Los Tigres del Norte, who would later add Eduardo and Luis Hernandez, have helped popularize norteno music in the United States, a genre that combined the music of Mexican laborers with the accordion-laced polka music of Czech and German immigrants. True to their genre, Los Tigres embraced storytelling, sharing stories of hardship back in Mexico; of immigrants' long, difficult journeys; and of life in America. At first, they gave a voice to Mexican day laborers living in America. But soon enough, they began growing alongside a blossoming Latino population throughout the United States to become titans of the music industry. They have filled theaters and stadiums, even released their own Netflix documentary as a 50th anniversary tribute to Johnny Cash's historic concert at Folsom Prison in California. From ``America'' to ``La Jaula de Oro,'' Los Tigres' music continues to tell the story of the Latino experience in America today. On a personal note, as the proud son of Mexican immigrants and as a child who grew up in the working-class community of Pacoima, CA, I remember their music filling our home and blasting out of speakers at neighborhood parties growing up. And in the mid-1990s, when immigrants and the children of immigrants in California rose up against the hateful, anti-immigrant proposition 187, Los Tigres' music was integrated into the soundtrack of our struggle. Today, as a lifelong fan, I am proud to say their music now echoes in the Halls of Congress.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act. This bill aims to reduce pollution along the U.S.-Mexico border and improve water quality of the Tijuana River and New River. The bill would designate the Environmental Protection Agency as the lead Agency to coordinate all Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies to build and maintain needed infrastructure projects to decrease pollution along the border. The Tijuana River watershed is in the midst of an environmental crisis, as stormwater flows from the upper watershed, originating in Tijuana, Mexico, and carries pollutants such as bacteria, trash, and sediment that severely affect water quality. In just the last 5 years, more than 100 billion gallons of toxic sewage, trash, and unmanaged stormwater has flowed across the United States-Mexico border into the Tijuana River Valley and neighboring communities, forcing long-lasting beach closures and creating significant negative impacts on water quality, public health, and the environment. This transboundary pollution crisis has disproportionately harmed underserved communities along San Diego's southern border for decades. U.S. military personnel, Border Patrol agents, and the local environment and economy have also suffered harmful impacts from waterborne and airborne transboundary sewage flows. This bill will build upon the past several years of work I have undertaken alongside the late Senator Feinstein to bolster the resources of the Environmental Protection Agency and the International Boundary and Water Commission to repair, rehabilitate, and expand the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant, including securing $300 million in the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement and more than $100 million through fiscal year 2024 appropriations legislation. Establishing a program for the Tijuana and New Rivers is critical for the EPA to integrate and coordinate water quality restoration and protection activities by stakeholders across the region and will facilitate better coordination by Federal, State, Tribal, local, public, nonprofit, and other relevant stakeholders. California communities have suffered the impacts of transboundary sewage for too long, and this legislation will facilitate long-awaited solutions to manage stormwater flows to reduce negative impacts to nearby communities and the regional economy and restore water quality and ecosystems throughout these watersheds. I want to thank my colleagues, especially Congressman Juan Vargas, for introducing this bill with me. I hope my colleagues will join me to pass the Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act to address this public health and environmental crisis.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act. This bill aims to reduce pollution along the U.S.-Mexico border and improve water quality of the Tijuana River and New River. The bill would designate the Environmental Protection Agency as the lead Agency to coordinate all Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies to build and maintain needed infrastructure projects to decrease pollution along the border. The Tijuana River watershed is in the midst of an environmental crisis, as stormwater flows from the upper watershed, originating in Tijuana, Mexico, and carries pollutants such as bacteria, trash, and sediment that severely affect water quality. In just the last 5 years, more than 100 billion gallons of toxic sewage, trash, and unmanaged stormwater has flowed across the United States-Mexico border into the Tijuana River Valley and neighboring communities, forcing long-lasting beach closures and creating significant negative impacts on water quality, public health, and the environment. This transboundary pollution crisis has disproportionately harmed underserved communities along San Diego's southern border for decades. U.S. military personnel, Border Patrol agents, and the local environment and economy have also suffered harmful impacts from waterborne and airborne transboundary sewage flows. This bill will build upon the past several years of work I have undertaken alongside the late Senator Feinstein to bolster the resources of the Environmental Protection Agency and the International Boundary and Water Commission to repair, rehabilitate, and expand the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant, including securing $300 million in the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement and more than $100 million through fiscal year 2024 appropriations legislation. Establishing a program for the Tijuana and New Rivers is critical for the EPA to integrate and coordinate water quality restoration and protection activities by stakeholders across the region and will facilitate better coordination by Federal, State, Tribal, local, public, nonprofit, and other relevant stakeholders. California communities have suffered the impacts of transboundary sewage for too long, and this legislation will facilitate long-awaited solutions to manage stormwater flows to reduce negative impacts to nearby communities and the regional economy and restore water quality and ecosystems throughout these watersheds. I want to thank my colleagues, especially Congressman Juan Vargas, for introducing this bill with me. I hope my colleagues will join me to pass the Border Water Quality Restoration and Protection Act to address this public health and environmental crisis.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Wildlife Movement Through Partnerships Act. This bipartisan legislation will improve collaboration across jurisdictions and support State, Tribal, and local efforts to improve wildlife habitat connectivity and migration corridors. As our country grows, both in population and development, so do the interactions between wildlife and humans. Every day in America, animals across the country cross roads and highways, hop fences and barriers, and navigate new human-made obstacles in order to survive. All too often, this means traditional wildlife corridors for migration are being cut off by human-made barriers, and that the biodiversity around us is coming under threat. In November 2023, I chaired a hearing in the Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Water, and Wildlife to hear testimony from stakeholders on the challenges and solutions to facilitating wildlife migration and movement corridors across public, Tribal, and private lands, and I am proud that the legislation I am introducing today is the bipartisan product of that hearing. The Wildlife Movement Through Partnerships Act would provide financial and technical assistance to support the movement and migration of wildlife. Specifically, the bill would formally establish several programs at the Department of the Interior to conserve, restore, or enhance habitat, migration routes, and connectivity; improve mapping efforts to better understand how and where wildlife move; and allow funds from the existing Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program to be used for wildlife movement. The bill would also direct the Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, and Transportation to coordinate actions and funding for programs established by the bill and to improve coordination with States, Tribes, and non-governmental partners. Finally, the bill would ensure that the legislation is only applied in a voluntary manner while protecting valid existing and private rights, military readiness, private property, public access, and the authority or jurisdiction of States and Tribes. In 2018, the Interior Secretary signed secretarial order 3362, ``Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors,'' in 11 Western States. To implement the secretarial order, Federal Agencies have used funding from relevant existing appropriations to support habitat improvement projects and research in areas identified by States for a limited set of big game species. While implementation of the secretarial order has been successful, Congress should create formal and dedicated programs in order to maintain this important work while expanding implementation to species beyond just big game and across the entire United States. This bill would also build on the success of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which made an unprecedented $350 million investment in the Department of Transportation to implement a first-of-its-kind pilot program to make roads safer, prevent wildlife-vehicle collisions, and improve habitat connectivity. While this funding is critical, we must think bigger than individual wildlife crossings to boost wildlife connectivity at the landscape scale across the country. I want to thank Representative Zinke for leading this bill in the House, and I hope all of our colleagues will join us in supporting this bipartisan bill to improve habitat connectivity and maintain intact wildlife corridors for species--big and small.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Wildlife Movement Through Partnerships Act. This bipartisan legislation will improve collaboration across jurisdictions and support State, Tribal, and local efforts to improve wildlife habitat connectivity and migration corridors. As our country grows, both in population and development, so do the interactions between wildlife and humans. Every day in America, animals across the country cross roads and highways, hop fences and barriers, and navigate new human-made obstacles in order to survive. All too often, this means traditional wildlife corridors for migration are being cut off by human-made barriers, and that the biodiversity around us is coming under threat. In November 2023, I chaired a hearing in the Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Water, and Wildlife to hear testimony from stakeholders on the challenges and solutions to facilitating wildlife migration and movement corridors across public, Tribal, and private lands, and I am proud that the legislation I am introducing today is the bipartisan product of that hearing. The Wildlife Movement Through Partnerships Act would provide financial and technical assistance to support the movement and migration of wildlife. Specifically, the bill would formally establish several programs at the Department of the Interior to conserve, restore, or enhance habitat, migration routes, and connectivity; improve mapping efforts to better understand how and where wildlife move; and allow funds from the existing Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program to be used for wildlife movement. The bill would also direct the Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, and Transportation to coordinate actions and funding for programs established by the bill and to improve coordination with States, Tribes, and non-governmental partners. Finally, the bill would ensure that the legislation is only applied in a voluntary manner while protecting valid existing and private rights, military readiness, private property, public access, and the authority or jurisdiction of States and Tribes. In 2018, the Interior Secretary signed secretarial order 3362, ``Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors,'' in 11 Western States. To implement the secretarial order, Federal Agencies have used funding from relevant existing appropriations to support habitat improvement projects and research in areas identified by States for a limited set of big game species. While implementation of the secretarial order has been successful, Congress should create formal and dedicated programs in order to maintain this important work while expanding implementation to species beyond just big game and across the entire United States. This bill would also build on the success of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which made an unprecedented $350 million investment in the Department of Transportation to implement a first-of-its-kind pilot program to make roads safer, prevent wildlife-vehicle collisions, and improve habitat connectivity. While this funding is critical, we must think bigger than individual wildlife crossings to boost wildlife connectivity at the landscape scale across the country. I want to thank Representative Zinke for leading this bill in the House, and I hope all of our colleagues will join us in supporting this bipartisan bill to improve habitat connectivity and maintain intact wildlife corridors for species--big and small.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, after nearly a quarter century of leadership, Chris Harris will retire this August from his position as the executive director of the Colorado River Board of California. I rise today to honor his legacy of consensus-building and conservation of one of the West's most vital waterways. Chris got his start in water management in the mid-1980s, investigating water rights and uses as part of the stream adjudication process in Arizona. By 2000, Chris moved to southern California to join the Colorado River Board of California, where he would go on to serve for nearly a decade as executive director. During his time with the Colorado River Board of California, Chris distinguished himself with his natural ability to find common ground on the thorniest of issues around managing the Colorado River. Chris consistently found ways to bring States, international partners, Tribal governments, and the Federal Government together to protect the Colorado River. Among his most impressive accomplishments were his successes in forging binational agreements with Mexico, bringing parties together to form California's historic Quantification Settlement Agreement in 2003, establishing the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program in 2005, and bringing all the Lower Basin States to commit to conserving an additional 3-million-acre feet of water during the period of 2023-2026. His work with the Colorado River Board has protected a vital resource for the millions of Californians and Americans who depend on it. His leadership demonstrated the qualities we need in environmental management, and his career set a national example for drought mitigation, species preservation, water use, and Tribal engagement. On a personal note, Chris has been an invaluable partner to me as we have navigated complex negotiations over the future of the Colorado River during my time as a U.S. Senator. But more than that, he has been a selfless teacher and mentor for the next generation of water managers, who now have a blueprint for our State's future thanks to Chris' dedication. Beyond his role protecting California's water supply, Chris is a Coast Guard veteran, a loving husband to Susan, and a caring father to Doug, Amber, Chelsey, and Jacob. And while we were never quite able to convert him to become a Dodgers fan or convince him to wear a Lakers jersey, today there is no doubt in my mind that he is as appreciated and as much a Californian as anyone, and California is grateful for his service. As Chris embarks on this new chapter in his life, his absence will undoubtedly be felt by all those fortunate enough to have collaborated with him. I extend my heartfelt wishes to Chris and his family for a joyful retirement.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I, too, rise today in support of every parent across the country working multiple jobs to help put food on the table, parents who are now buying school supplies and clothes as their kids are preparing to go back to school, parents who are working hard just to afford basic childcare. I rise in support of every American, including many in my home State of California, who are struggling to find housing that they can afford. And I rise today for every constituent of mine wondering why Senate Republicans continue to block a bill that passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in the House of Representatives, because we know that the policies included in this measure are, indeed, bipartisan. In the bipartisan Wyden-Smith tax proposal, these measures are not controversial. We know that they are actually effective because we have seen them work. In 2021, we saw an expanded child tax credit cut the rate of child poverty in our Nation in half to historic lows. We also saw a 12\1/2\-percent increase in the low-income housing tax credit allocation help finance the construction of affordable housing-- affordable housing that in communities across California and across the country are so desperately needed. So let's just kind of simplify this conversation here. We know these policies can work. We know these policies have worked. We know that letting them expire has been detrimental to so many parents, so many children, and so many communities across the country. And we have, today, an opportunity to do right by them once again. This past week, the Park fire and other wildfires continuing to burn in California have burned hundreds of thousands of acres. But in addition to that, they have reawakened painful memories of some of the worst wildfires in California history, many just in the last decade. So I also want to spend a moment to highlight what the disaster assistance provisions of this bill would mean for many, many families in my State. Now, earlier this month, the Los Angeles Times told a story of Ria Abernathy, a 55-year-old woman living in Butte County in Northern California. Six years ago, Ria experienced devastation that most Americans couldn't even dream of but to which many Californians have grown all too familiar. On one morning in November of 2018, Ria woke up to see black smoke engulfing the land around her, flames moving so fast that, within hours, the entire town of Paradise, CA, would be nothing but embers. Fortunately, Ria acted quickly, and she was able to flee safely. But in order to save her life, she had to sacrifice all of her possessions. In what would become the deadliest wildfire in California history, the Camp fire went on to burn everything that Ria owned, and it leveled the town around her, and it claimed 85 lives--all because of a failed piece of equipment from a transmission tower that ignited the fire. So for 8 months, Ria was forced to find shelter in a trailer, alongside others, along with a lot of her neighbors displaced by this same fire, living in the parking lot of a local church as they began the long, emotional path to rebuilding. And while she was eventually awarded an $80,000 legal settlement, her troubles were far from over. It turned out that Ria would owe taxes on the settlement that she recovered. And that year, Ria says--she shares in the Times: I lost my whole history . . . and it's not coming back. But as devastating as Ria's story is, she is not alone. Over 70,000 Californians have been impacted by the destruction of the Butte fire, the North Bay fire, and the Camp fire. Now, when a fire victim is wading through the ashes of their former home and thinking about how to rebuild--not just their homes but their lives--the last thing that wildfire victims should have to worry about is how they are going to pay taxes on any settlement they receive. Disaster settlement funds are not income. Disaster settlement funds are not assets. It is compensation for what they have lost--and insufficient most of the time at that. But disaster settlement funds are also meant to be an opportunity to begin to rebuild your life, an opportunity that should not be diminished because our government tax codes are outdated. So I was proud to see that the Wyden-Smith tax package includes my bill, the Protect Innocent Victims of Taxation After Fire Act. It would make sure that people who have suffered from a heartbreaking wildfire can receive full compensation for their losses, without the fear that their settlements will be subject to taxes. And it is not just for my constituents in California looking to rebuild. This bill would make sure that all recent and future wildfire victims throughout the country have access to their full settlements. It is a commonsense, bipartisan solution to protect Americans at, arguably, the most difficult point in their lives. And for that reason, along with the historic provisions included in the package to make life more affordable for working families, I urge my Republican colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. I yield the floor.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Scarper Ridge Golden Gate National Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment Act, straightforward, uncontroversial bill to adjust the boundary of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. This bill would modify the boundary of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, GGNRA, to include the approximately 896-acre Scarper Ridge property. This land is currently owned by the Peninsula Open Space Trust, who would like to sell this land to the National Park Service to include within the GGNRA. The GGNRA is one of the world's largest urban national parks, spanning three counties and more than 82,000 acres of coastal and urban lands. According to the National Park Service, the GGNRA is an assemblage of military, private, and public lands which altogether offer vast skylines, natural beauty, and diverse histories to locals and visitors alike. The GGNRA welcomes over 15 million visitors each year, and strives to be an accessible recreational area for all people. Thanks to continuing efforts by the Peninsula Open Space Trust, local partners, Congresswoman Eshoo, and my predecessors in the Senate, Congress has previously awarded funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to purchase additional land to be included within the GGNRA. However, the lands included in my bill--known as the Scarper Ridge property--require a minor legislative boundary adjustment in order for the National Park Service to use future Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars to purchase this property and include it within the park. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this commonsense, straightforward boundary adjustment bill as soon as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise to introduce the Scarper Ridge Golden Gate National Recreation Area Boundary Adjustment Act, straightforward, uncontroversial bill to adjust the boundary of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. This bill would modify the boundary of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, GGNRA, to include the approximately 896-acre Scarper Ridge property. This land is currently owned by the Peninsula Open Space Trust, who would like to sell this land to the National Park Service to include within the GGNRA. The GGNRA is one of the world's largest urban national parks, spanning three counties and more than 82,000 acres of coastal and urban lands. According to the National Park Service, the GGNRA is an assemblage of military, private, and public lands which altogether offer vast skylines, natural beauty, and diverse histories to locals and visitors alike. The GGNRA welcomes over 15 million visitors each year, and strives to be an accessible recreational area for all people. Thanks to continuing efforts by the Peninsula Open Space Trust, local partners, Congresswoman Eshoo, and my predecessors in the Senate, Congress has previously awarded funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to purchase additional land to be included within the GGNRA. However, the lands included in my bill--known as the Scarper Ridge property--require a minor legislative boundary adjustment in order for the National Park Service to use future Land and Water Conservation Fund dollars to purchase this property and include it within the park. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this commonsense, straightforward boundary adjustment bill as soon as possible.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, in reserving the right to object, I ask you this: How many times do we have to go through this? Less than 2 months ago, I came down to the floor of the Senate to object to this very same bill--expressing concerns, answering questions--and here we are again, and nothing has changed. So it doesn't matter how many times this bill comes to the floor. It doesn't matter how many times our Republican colleagues feign outrage over noncitizens unlawfully voting--without a shred of evidence--it doesn't change the fact that, as good as the proponents may make this bill sound or try to make this bill sound, it is nothing other than a solution in search of a problem. Now, I speak both as a Senator representing California but also as a former chief elections officer of California, where I--as the secretaries of State across the country, by the way--worked alongside tireless election clerks and administrators across the political spectrum at the State and local levels. Given that experience, I can tell you this: There is no credible evidence of a meaningful number of noncitizens voting in our elections. In 2016, audits showed that noncitizens accounted for 0.0001 percent of the vote. Even the conservative Cato Institute has said: Noncitizens don't illegally vote in detectable numbers. Now, I am glad Senator Lee mentions the National Voter Registration Act because, as he pointed out, it was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in terms of its guidance of what States can and should do and what they cannot do. He also didn't mention that the National Voter Registration Act was adopted on an overwhelming bipartisan vote of Congress. But, rather than propose legislation based on facts, this bill would respond to the alarming allegations that Republicans themselves have fabricated. It would create more barriers to exercising the right to vote and would restrict ballot access for even more Americans than is currently the case. It would make voting harder for the more than 21 million eligible voters in America who can't easily access their proof of citizenship. I don't know about you. I am not in the habit of carrying around my birth certificate or even my passport. Not everybody has a passport. It doesn't mean you are not a citizen if you don't carry a passport. And I am not just talking about Democrats or Republicans; I am talking about Americans of both political parties. The bill would clearly, also, disproportionately impact voters in communities of color. In addition, this bill seeks to undermine faith in our elections by injecting fear and uncertainty, particularly in an election cycle, at a time when our democracy demands more calm and understanding of the integrity of the process. But Senator Lee and I agree on one thing, believe it or not. That is that voting is a sacred responsibility and that the right to vote, in and of itself, is fundamentally sacred. So to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, if you are truly worried about the election and our democracy, then I will ask you this: Join me. Join me in passing the Freedom to Vote Act and making sure that all eligible Americans--yes, only U.S. citizens--can make their voices heard at the ballot box without any unnecessary barriers or obstacles. It is the most American and the most bipartisan thing that we could do. But until then, let's be honest with the American people. So, yes, Mr. President, I object.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the more than 45-year career of Bruce ``DD'' MacRae, vice president of U.S. Government affairs for the West Region of UPS, ahead of his September retirement. Bruce grew up and attended school in Long Beach, CA, and is a second generation Long Beach native. In 1978, he began his UPS career unloading trucks in the Anaheim package facility. By 1983, he became a full-time driver and Teamster Union shop steward. And in 1987, Bruce entered management when he was promoted to preload supervisor. Bruce has risen through the ranks, acquiring skills in operations, industrial engineering, customer relations, community and public relations, security investigations, and U.S. Government affairs. In addition to his regional government affairs responsibilities, Bruce has played an active role in his community. He serves as the chairman of both the Los Angeles Sheriff's Youth Foundation and the board of trustees of the Battleship USS Iowa. He also serves on the boards of California State University Long Beach Athletics, the Orange County Sheriff's Advisory Council, the California Renewable Transportation Alliance, Truckers Against Trafficking, and numerous other civic and educational organizations. Bruce is a past president of the California Trucking Association and has held leadership roles in the Arizona, Nevada, and Hawaii trucking associations. Bruce's contributions have left an indelible mark on his community, on his State, and on the tens of thousands of employees who work for UPS in California. As Bruce embarks on this new chapter in his life, his absence will undoubtedly be felt by all those fortunate enough to have collaborated--or enjoyed a cigar--with him. I extend my heartfelt wishes to Bruce and his family for a joyful retirement.

Mr. PADILLA

Mr. PADILLA. Madam President, I rise today to celebrate the life of Raul Porto Sr., a loving husband, father, and grandfather and the name behind the beloved Southern California institution, Porto's Bakery. While today, Porto's is synonymous with southern California, Raul Porto Sr. was raised over 2,000 miles away in Cuba. But after Raul met and married the love of his life Rosa, hardship hit the Porto family. Rosa lost her job, and Raul was forced to work at a labor camp during the early years of Fidel Castro's rule. It was during that time that Rosa first began baking, making local Cuban favorites and selling them to support the family. But like so many others in Cuba at that time, they dreamed of a better life--a dream that often started on a long waiting list, but ended with a ``Freedom Flight'' that brought them to the United States. For the Portos in 1971, that meant packing up and flying west to make Los Angeles their home. Even in America, while Raul worked shifts as a janitor, Rosa continued to sell baked goods from their new home. Soon enough, after baking through late nights and even co-opting the kids' beds for extra counter space, their business grew enough to support their first official storefront property at a local strip mall in 1976, the first of what would become six shops across Southern California, with a seventh on the way. For anyone who has ever been lucky enough to have walked into Porto's, to have met Raul or Rosa, or to have tasted one of their famous potato balls or guava and cheese strudels, it is easy to see why they became so successful. In California, the Porto family didn't just bring an affordable slice of home to a growing Cuban American community. They expanded to both add to and reflect the diversity of the region, eventually serving fruit tarts, croquetas, tres leches, and more. Today, at any Porto's location, you will likely find a line out the door of customers eagerly waiting to pick up one the iconic pastry boxes that bear Rosa's face. You might find one of Raul and Rosa's three children--and now co-owners--Beatriz; Raul, Jr.; or Margarita working. And if you talk to any Californian lucky enough to have a Porto's nearby or the countless others thousands of miles away who order Porto's shipped across the country, they will tell you the same thing: to them, Porto's is home. On a personal note, Porto's has filled the tables of Padilla family gatherings for years. My wife Angela and I were even proud to celebrate our wedding with a cake from Porto's in April of 2012. Raul and Rosa's story is one of family, of struggle, and of perseverance. But most of all, it is a story of immigrants bold enough and brave enough to still chase the American dream. Because of it, Californians will always remember Raul Porto, Sr. Today, our hearts go out to his three children, his grandchildren, and the entire Porto family.