Gary Peters

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, I also rise to speak about the need to pass the Women's Health Protection Act. Certainly, the Senator from Maryland outlined a very strong argument as to why this fundamental protection, this fundamental right, needs to be protected. We know right now that we may see the Supreme Court come out with a decision to basically end Roe v. Wade and, in the process, end a fundamental right that women in this country have had available to them for 50 years. We can hear all the arguments--and my colleagues will present an awful lot of arguments tonight and tomorrow--as to why we need to pass this act, but for me, this is personal, a personal experience that I had, and it is an experience that, unfortunately, many, many families have had. The fact is, as I have shared this story, I have been really overwhelmed by people reaching out to me and saying that they, too, have a very similar story and how my talking about it brought out their willingness to share their experience as well. In addition to that, they understand how important it is that we protect Roe v. Wade and we protect the right for women to make critical decisions for themselves, along with their doctor, and not have politics interfere with those decisions. My story involves my first wife. When we were married, she was pregnant with a child whom we very much wanted. We were looking forward to having a second child. In the fourth month, towards the end of the fourth month, her water broke--clearly a very dangerous situation. She went to go see her physician. Her physician examined her and said: With this water breaking, the amniotic fluid has now left the uterus. There is no way a baby can survive in this situation. They examined her. There was a very faint heartbeat. He said: There is a faint heartbeat here, but there is no way this baby can survive. He said: What I think will happen is you are going to have a miscarriage. So go home tonight, and you will have a miscarriage, and come in and see me tomorrow. Well, you can imagine the anguish, the horrible evening, and the despair that she was in and I was in. It was a long, long night. The next morning, nothing happened. She went back to the physician-- we went back to the physician. He examined her again and said: I am really surprised. I don't know why you didn't miscarry because it is clear that there is no way this baby can survive in this situation. The amniotic fluid is gone; the cushion is gone. He said: I don't think I can do anything because there is still a faint heartbeat here. I don't know why there is still a faint heartbeat. So go home again tonight. I think tonight is going to be the night you have a miscarriage. We went back again. It didn't happen--another horrible night-- horrible. The mental anguish is intense, and families who have gone through this know exactly what I am talking about. We went the next day, and, again, he examined her. He said: I can't understand this, but this is going on. I am really worried that there is going to be an infection here. There isn't the protection there. You could go into septic shock. Your health is definitely endangered here. The baby can't survive. Without the amniotic fluid, the cushion, the baby could lose its limbs. There were horrible, horrible, nightmarish kinds of thoughts in our minds. He said: I am going to go to the hospital, and I am going to say, even though there is a faint heartbeat, this is a medical necessity, that we have to do a D&C abortion here to protect your health and potentially your life if we don't take care of this. So I will go to the hospital. Go home, and I will call you and let you know when I can bring you in. Well, he called. I will never forget the voicemail that was left. He said: I am really sorry to say this. I went to the hospital board. I explained the medical necessity here, what you are going through, how we have to take care of this because it could clearly be a serious situation if you go into septic shock. And the board said: No. As long as there is a faint heartbeat, you can't perform the procedure. Then he said: There is no reason for this decision from the hospital board. It is not based on sound medicine. It is not based on medical practice. It is not based on what is best for your health. This is based on politics. Plain and simple, this is politics. He goes: I am ashamed that this happened, and I am embarrassed I have to call you and tell you I can't do it because the hospital will not grant me privileges to do it. He said: My advice to you is find a doctor now, immediately, that can take care of this procedure. Well, you can imagine how scary that is, how frightening that is; and who do we call in that situation? We were fortunate in the fact that we had a friend who was a hospital administrator at another hospital. He got us in to see the gynecologist, OB-GYN at the hospital to examine her. We went there. He examined her and said: Oh, my gosh, I have to do this procedure now. There is no more time. This is getting incredibly dangerous. We have to do the D&C abortion. He said: You are about to go--the infection is starting. It is going to get worse. If I don't do this quickly, you are going to lose your uterus. If we don't deal with it quickly, you could very well lose your life with the infection that could occur here. He immediately performed the procedure. Just think of that. One, if we didn't have the opportunity to see another doctor who was able to perform it and understood the severity of it, my wife at the time, former wife, could have easily lost a uterus, could have had significant health impacts, and could have lost her life. It just kept ringing in my mind what that doctor said: This is about politics. This is not about good medical practice. This is not about caring about someone's health and caring about their life; it was about politics. And that is why we have to protect Roe v. Wade. We have to protect the right for women to control their bodies, to control their reproductive health. It cannot be a decision made by politicians here in this body or other places. This is a real situation that families face. As I mentioned, there was an outpouring of folks who have come to me who had similar situations. I think about Michigan right now. Michigan has a law on the books that was written in 1931 that says all abortion is prohibited in our State. It doesn't matter whether or not it involves the health of the mother, it doesn't matter if it is the life of the mother, it doesn't matter if a woman is the victim of rape or incest--it is just simply not allowed. I think that is unconscionable. That is what will happen. It is a real-life situation that could happen if the Court decides to go forward and reverse Roe v. Wade. Situations like what my former wife went through and families all across America would not be able to have that kind of option. If you think about the no exception for rape or incest, you will have a 17-year-old girl in Michigan who is raped. She will have no options. I know a majority of people in the United States believe that is unacceptable. I know a majority of people in the United States believe that women have the right to make these most personal, these most intimate decisions themselves, with the advice of their physician or whoever else that they want to consult. This is not about politics. This is not about the opinions of folks who think that they know better. Let's preserve the right of women to do what they think is best. That is why we have to pass the Women's Health Protection Act and why I would urge all my colleagues to search their heart and listen to the stories that people will tell them and understand that the right thing to do is to protect reproductive freedoms and rights in America. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, I rise today to recognize the 200th Anniversary of Clay Township, MI. Forming the southernmost portion of St. Clair County, Clay Township is endowed with natural beauty, fertile farmland, and a rich tradition of entrepreneurship dating back to the fur trade between French explorers and the indigenous people, also known as the Anishinaabe. Long before Michigan was incorporated as a U.S. Territory and western expansion encouraged migration to the area we know now as St. Clair County, the region was home to the Anishinaabe peoples. Members of the Odawa, Pattawami, and Ojibwe Tribes and more made their homes alongside the Otisi-Keta, and Otisi-Keta-Sippi waters, now known respectively as Lake St. Clair, and the St. Clair River. The nutrient-dense farmland, abundant natural resources, and easy access to trade routes provided by the many waterways endowed the Anishinaabe with a rich culture and community that would eventually attract the notice of French explorers arriving in the area. In fact, it was these early French explorers who would christen the Otisi-Keta as ``Lac-Sainte-Claire'' after discovering the crystal-clear waters on the day of the Festival of Sainte Claire. In time, the lake, tributary, and surrounding land became known as St. Clair, the modern appellation we see today. Although French explorers began to depart from the territory following the Seven Years War, the legacy of trade and industry established with the Anishinaabe laid the foundation for the development of Clay Township as a hub of local commerce. Among the first settlers of Clay Township were Angus MacDonald and John Martin, who founded the city of Pointe du Chene--now known as Algonac--in 1805. MacDonald and Martin chose to settle the city at the head of the St. Clair flats, which had been the previous site of trade between the Anishinaabe and the French. Algonac quickly developed into the principal settlement in the area and is now recognized as one of the oldest cities in Michigan. Clay Township would be officially organized 17 years later in 1822. With this recognition, Clay Township became one of the four original townships that comprised the entirety of St. Clair County. Today, Clay Township is comprised of 82.3 square miles of land and water. Bounded on three sides by water and divided into several islands by branches of the St. Clair River, it is known as a center for local water recreation and is home to over 9,000 residents. The freshwater delta formed by the St. Clair River and waters of Harsens Island is the only major river delta in the Great Lakes Basin and the largest freshwater delta in North America. Michigan's Department of Natural Resources manages two sites on Harsens Island, supporting pedestrians, cyclists, and other outdoor enthusiasts wanting to admire the wildlife and waters of the region. The Algonac State Park is comprised of 1,550 acres and provides sanctuary to rare habitats and 22 threatened, endangered, or special-concern species of plants, birds, and butterflies. With its rich history and lush natural resources, Clay Township is recognized as one of the best places to live in the State of Michigan. Clay Township has been an integral part of the State of Michigan and our great Nation for over 200 years. As a Michigander and passionate advocate for all of Michigan's waters, I am honored to ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating this significant milestone for the township, as well as its residents, elected officials, and businesses. I wish Clay Township continued growth and prosperity in the years ahead.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 100th anniversary of U.A. Sprinklerfitters Local No. 704 of metro Detroit. Functioning under different names and charters over the past century, the Local has supported the employment of its members, while simultaneously bargaining for higher wages and better benefits. In May of 1907, Sprinklerfitting tradesmen in the Detroit area came together in their first effort to organize. They were rewarded for their efforts with a charter by the United Association of Plumbers, Gasfitters, and Steamfitters of the U.S. and Canada--U.A.--as Local No. 358. Initial optimism quickly dimmed, as the Local faced opposition from surrounding contactors and companies. Disbanding and reorganizing twice, the Local reemerged as Local No. 669 in 1915 and was granted a new charter by the U.A. It would operate under this charter for another 32 years. Within its first 7 years of formation, leaders from Local No. 669 had successfully argued for 2 consecutive years of wage increases and the addition of a local U.A. auxiliary office location to better serve the craftsmen of the region. This sense of unity was in no small part responsible for helping the local weather the economic devastation of America's Great Depression, which stifled progress across the country's economy for nearly a decade. Membership in Local No.669 protected the wages and working conditions of sprinklerfitters in Detroit throughout the economic crisis. Passage of the New Deal legislation by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt provided work opportunities in the form of public projects, supporting the sprinklerfitters of Local No. 669. In 1941, as the United States formally announced their entrance into the Second World War, factories in Detroit quickly pivoted to join the efforts turning the city into the ``biggest war boomtown of them all.'' Among the projects undertaken by Local No. 669 in this time was the outfitting of the Ford Willow Run Bomber Plant in Ypsilanti. In 1947, Local No. 669 once again reorganized, taking on the charter of Local No. 704 with jurisdiction over sprinklerfitting work in Wayne, Macomb, and Oakland Counties, with nearby Washtenaw joining a decade later. Local No. 704 continued to enjoy positive growth throughout the 1950s and 1960s, increasing their number of journeymen and apprentices, along with increased benefits and wages. This progress would begin to falter as the local headed into the 1970s and companies began moving factories to ``right to work states,'' decreasing one of their core contract bases. Despite the auto flight, members of Local No. 704 remained well employed and worked on a variety of local projects, including the Pontiac Silverdome and Detroit's Joe Louis Arena and Renaissance Center. Although they faced low employment in the first half of the decade, by the end of the 1980s, Local No. 704 had helped build, along with many other projects, the Detroit Hamtramck Assembly Plant, the Patrick V. McNamara Federal Building, the Chrysler World Head Quarters and Technological Center, the Palace of Auburn Hills and would close out the decade with a newly negotiated contract with the National Fire and Sprinkler Association, formerly known as the U.A. Demand for work remained strong throughout the 1990s, and Local No. 704 entered the new millennium with a robust membership able to meet the demands of the growth of local automakers and universities. Between 2000 and 2007, Local No. 704 assisted in the construction of the General Motors Assembly Center, the north terminal of the Detroit airport, Detroit's MGM Grand and Greektown Casinos, and the Henry Ford Hospital in West Bloomfield. The Great Recession of 2008 stalled much employment in the area for a number of years, bringing membership in Local No. 704 down by nearly half. However, as work slowly started to resume in 2011 and 2012, Local No. 704 was able to rely on its history of strong organization skills to successfully secure jobs using the Local's targeted fund. In 2012 alone, the Local saw a return of nearly $6 for every $1 spent by the fund. By 2015, Local No. 704 had emerged into a period of success carrying them easily to their 100th year anniversary in 2021. In these 6 years, members of the Local had a hand in many major projects in the area, including the construction of a new Amazon facility and the renovation of the historic David Whitney Building in Detroit. The opening of a new state-of-the-art training center and headquarters for the sprinklerfitters of Local No. 704 helped close out the decade. U.A. Sprinklerfitters Local No. 704 has weathered many obstacles but has remained strong and enters their 101st year well positioned for continued success. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing their longevity, their skilled membership, and the immensely positive impact they have made on the communities of southeast Michigan.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, while returning with Senate colleagues from a delegation trip to Europe to further strengthen the trans- Atlantic alliance in the context of Vladimir Putin's war against the Ukrainian people, our plane was grounded by mechanical failure. As a result, I was unable to attend vote No. 135 on the motion to invoke cloture on Executive Calendar No. 808, Lael Brainard, of the District of Columbia, to be Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. I would have voted yea on the motion to invoke cloture had I been able to attend the vote. While returning with Senate colleagues from a delegation trip to Europe to further strengthen the trans-Atlantic alliance in the context of Vladimir Putin's war against the Ukrainian people, our plane was grounded by mechanical failure. As a result, I was unable to attend today's vote on No. 136 on confirmation of Executive Calendar No. 808, Lael Brainard, of the District of Columbia, to Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. I would have voted yea on the confirmation had I been able to attend the vote.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, I rise in support of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's confirmation to be an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States and look forward to proudly voting for her confirmation. There are few constitutional duties more important in my role as a U.S. Senator than providing the advice and consent on judicial nominations, and this is especially true for the Supreme Court. As we consider Judge Jackson's nomination before this body, we are on the cusp of a historic, barrier-breaking moment and on the verge of confirming the first African-American woman to serve on the Supreme Court. This is not only a significant milestone, but a moment to recognize Judge Jackson, who is one of our Nation's brightest legal minds and an incredibly impressive nominee. Before I talk about Judge Jackson's exceptional experience, her qualifications, and support from all across the legal spectrum, I think it is important to reflect on the critical importance of our Nation's highest Court. Without question, Supreme Court rulings have a direct and a consequential impact on the lives of Michiganders and all Americans. Issues before the Court include healthcare, women's reproductive rights, workers' rights, environmental protections, voting rights, and many life-or-death decisions that shape the law of the land. Simply put, the Supreme Court is often the last line of defense for everyday Americans and an important guardian of the Constitution itself. There is no question that a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is a tremendous responsibility, and we must have qualified, committed Justices who will exercise judicial independence--follow the facts--and apply law and precedent fairly and impartially, without regard for their own personal views, partisanship, or politics. It is clear that on every single measure, Judge Jackson has the credentials, the qualities, the work ethic, and character needed to serve on the Supreme Court. And she will not only bring diversity but a unique life perspective and passion for the law that she developed at a very young age. Judge Jackson's interest in the law actually started as a preschooler, sitting next to her father while he studied cases for law school, while she worked on her coloring book. Despite being ambitious and a star student, growing up, Judge Jackson faced resistance. When Judge Jackson told her high school guidance counselor that she was interested in attending Harvard University, the counselor told her that maybe she should set her sights lower than that. Judge Jackson was not going to be deterred, and she credits her high school debate coach for introducing her to several colleges. And then she went on to graduate magna cum laude from Harvard as an undergraduate and cum laude from Harvard Law School. This was the beginning of Judge Jackson's distinguished legal career. She clerked for three Federal judges, including Supreme Court Justice Breyer, worked in private practice at prestigious law firms, and has served on the Federal bench on both the district court and the court of appeals, a position she was confirmed to just last year by bipartisan support by this very Senate. Judge Jackson's experience has also been shaped by representing everyday Americans and hearing their cases. She will be the first Justice who previously served as a Federal public defender, and the only Justice who has served as a member of the bipartisan U.S. Sentencing Commission. She will also bring considerable criminal law experience to the Court. Her breadth of experience, her record, and temperament were on full display during her Senate judiciary confirmation hearing. Over the course of 24 hours and more than 600 questions, Judge Jackson not only demonstrated why she is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court but also why she was unflappable, even when she faced outrageous-- absolutely outrageous--false attacks on her record during the committee hearings. During this process, Judge Jackson has not only earned bipartisan support for her confirmation but has the backing of diverse voices, including from the American Bar Association, which unanimously gave her its highest rating of ``well qualified.'' Lawyers across the political spectrum, civil rights organization, law enforcement groups, and chambers of commerce have all offered not just support but glowing support for her nomination. Former George H. W. Bush's appointed Fourth Circuit Judge Michael Luttig called Judge Jackson ``eminently qualified'' and ``as highly credentialed and experienced in the law as any nominee in history.'' Two dozen conservative and former Republican-appointed officials said: We are united in our view that she is exceptionally well- qualified, given her breadth of experience, her demonstrated ability, and personal attributes of intellect and character. We think that her confirmation on a consensus basis would strengthen the court and the nation in important ways. And the International Association of Chiefs of Police said: During her time as judge, she has displayed her dedication to ensuring that our communities are safe and that the interest[s] of justice are served. [We believe that] Judge Jackson's years of experience have shown [that] she has the temperament and qualifications to serve as the next Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. After my one-on-one meeting with Judge Jackson last week, I was convinced that she is extraordinarily qualified and prepared to serve on the Supreme Court, particularly at this challenging moment. This is, without question, a challenging time, not only for the Supreme Court but also for our democracy, and it is clear that Judge Jackson has the extensive experience and qualifications and temperament and impartiality and fidelity to the law that will undoubtedly serve our Nation exceptionally well. I am proud to support Judge Jackson as our next Supreme Court Justice, and I urge all of my colleagues to join me in making history. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print the following letter in the Congressional Record.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print the following letter in the Congressional Record.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print the following letter in the Congressional Record.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print the following letter in the Congressional Record.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor an accomplished and highly regarded leader in Michigan's field of public service, Gilda Jacobs who recently retired from serving as president and CEO of the Michigan League for Public Policy. Gilda has made an immeasurable impact on the Detroit metropolitan area and the State of Michigan over the past 30 years, and it is a privilege to recognize her here today and celebrate her retirement. Gilda began her career as an educator, graduating from the University of Michigan in 1971 with a masters in behavioral science in education. Following her graduation, Gilda began working as a special education teacher in the Madison School District in Oakland County, MI. Gilda taught one of the Detroit region's first classes for children with emotional disabilities. It was her role as a leader in the rapidly developing field of special education services that led her to begin engaging in local activism, community organizations, and politics. In 1978, she was asked to work first as the campaign manager and then as a district office manager for newly-elected State Senator Doug Ross. In helping Senator Ross launch his political career, Jacobs set in motion the beginning of her own. In 1981, after a contentious election, Gilda was elected to the Huntington Woods City Commission, the first woman to do so. In 1994, she ran for and was elected to serve her community as an Oakland County Commissioner. Four years after this, she was elected to serve two terms in Michigan's House of Representatives. At this time, I represented a portion of her district in the State senate and had the pleasure of collaborating with her on many initiatives on behalf of our constituents. I knew the senate district was in capable hands when she succeeded me, winning the seat in 2002. Her strong reputation as an effective leader in championing issues and getting things done were immediately recognized by her colleagues who elected her chair of the senate's Democratic caucus, making Gilda the first woman to serve as floor leader in either chamber of Michigan's Legislature. As a State-elected official, Gilda was a tireless advocate for the rights of women, children, and people with disabilities. In the State legislature, she served as the vice chair of the economic development, small business and regulatory reform committee, the families and human services committee, and government operations and health policy committees. Among her many successes were the establishment of a bipartisan bicameral talent caucus to develop strategies to encourage Michigan entrepreneurship and discourage college graduate flight. In 2011, following the conclusion of her leadership and service in the Michigan Senate, Gilda joined the Michigan League for Public Policy as president and CEO. At the Michigan League for Public Policy, Gilda focused on the promotion of racial equality, economic security, and the overall health and well-being of Michiganders. During her tenure she helped the organization move major policy victories, including, among others, successfully defending the Michigan Earned Income Tax Credit; raising the age at which Michigan's juveniles can be tried as adults, and changing the asset test on food and cash assistance in the State, allowing more residents to be eligible for assistance. As a result of her leadership and tireless devotion, the State of Michigan has seen progress in policy for Michigan's youth, women, and families. During a time of great personal loss, Gilda--and her late husband John--worked on developing policy efforts to better ensure railroad safety after their daughter, Rachel, was tragically killed in the Philadelphia Amtrak crash of May 2015. Although confronted with unimaginable grief, they felt it essential to address the issue head on, advocating for enhanced safety measures so no other family would experience what they did during that horrific time. Gilda's contributions go well beyond her professional endeavors. In addition to serving as a public representative and policy maker, she has been a lifelong volunteer for numerous causes and organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, the United Way for Southeastern Michigan and New Detroit, and the JARC--a Michigan-based nonprofit dedicated to enriching the lives of those with disabilities. She was further recognized as one of Crain's Detroit Business 100 most influential women and awarded the Michigan Food Bank Council Hunger-Free Award in 2015. I cannot understate the impact that Gilda Jacobs has had on the people of Michigan. She has spearheaded initiatives to eliminate hunger and support Michigan's families, promoted positive changes in our communities, and created a model for public service that is unmatched. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing Gilda's many years of work on behalf of others, and congratulating her on a well-earned retirement from the Michigan League for Public Policy. Though her leadership there will be sorely missed, her legacy will most certainly endure.

Mr. PETERS

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

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise in support of Nani Coloretti's nomination to be the Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Ms. Coloretti is a dedicated public servant and a proven leader who is well qualified to serve as OMB Deputy Director. She has over 20 years of experience at the Federal, State, and local level executing complex government programs, improving service delivery, and managing large organizations. Ms. Coloretti served with distinction in the Obama administration as the Assistant Secretary for Management at the U.S. Department of the Treasury and then as the Deputy Secretary at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. It is absolutely critical that we have Senate-confirmed leaders in place at OMB, and I have no doubt that Ms. Coloretti's experience will serve the Agency and the American people well. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting Nani Coloretti's nomination to be OMB Deputy Director. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 2 minutes.

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise in support of Shalanda Young's nomination to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Ms. Young has done an exemplary job serving as OMB's Acting Director for the past year. She is a dedicated public servant and a proven leader. She has played a key role in the administration's efforts to help the Nation recover from the pandemic. She has worked closely with Congress to pass the historic bipartisan infrastructure package, and she is truly committed to making the Federal Government work better for the American people. I have absolutely no doubt that Ms. Young is the right choice to lead the OMB going forward. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to confirm Shalanda Young to be the Director of OMB.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. I ask unanimous consent to be recognized for 3 minutes.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I rise in support of Shalanda Young's nomination to be the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Ms. Young has served with distinction as OMB's Acting Director for the past year, leading the administration's efforts to execute the American Rescue Plan, the bipartisan infrastructure bill, and numerous Federal cybersecurity priorities. Over the past year, she has been a true partner to Congress, working closely with Members on both sides of the aisle to find bipartisan paths forward. In addition to her proven leadership at OMB this past year, Ms. Young brings nearly two decades of public service experience to her role, including as a senior staff Member on the House Appropriations Committee where she led challenging bipartisan negotiations around the debt limit, government funding, and budget reform. OMB will continue to be central to the administration's efforts to tackle the Nation's ongoing challenges, and Ms. Young will be instrumental in leading that work. I have every confidence in Ms. Young's ability to continue to rise to the challenges facing OMB, both now and in the future. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the confirmation of Shalanda Young as director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, on Tuesday night, the Senate took a significant and historic vote to strengthen one of our Nation's oldest and most trusted institutions--the U.S. Postal Service. For the past 15 years, this vital service that delivers to every single community in our country, no matter how remote, has faced unfair, burdensome requirements that have jeopardized its financial stability and its ability to provide reliable and timely delivery to Americans all across our country. With 79 votes for the Postal Service Reform Act--one of the strongest bipartisan votes the Senate has delivered during this Congress--we passed significant reforms that will set the Postal Service on a more stable financial footing, preserve mail delivery for 6 days a week, and ensure greater transparency of delivery performance for the people who are counting on the Postal Service to bring them critical mail. When our Nation's Founders enshrined the Postal Service in our Constitution, they could have never envisioned what a vital role this institution would play in the daily lives of Americans. Whether it is families who are receiving critical medications or connecting with loved ones, veterans and seniors who are relying on the mail for benefits and Social Security checks, or small businesses that are sending important financial documents and their products to customers, Americans are counting on the Postal Service to deliver. Over the past few years--especially during COVID-19--we have seen just how essential the Postal Service is to keeping our country connected. The legislation that we passed earlier this week with overwhelming bipartisan support will help ensure that the Postal Service can continue its vital mission, and I am looking forward to seeing President Biden sign it into law. I am proud of our bipartisan efforts to protect this vital public service, and I would like to take just a few moments to thank the many people who made this possible. First, I want to recognize my Senate colleague on this effort, Senator Rob Portman, who is the ranking member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. I am also grateful to Chairwoman Maloney and Ranking Member Comer on the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, who worked with me hand in hand, as well as with Senator Portman, to write and to build key support for this legislation. Senator Carper, who is a former chairman of Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and a stalwart advocate for the Postal Service, was an absolutely indispensable resource, a critical voice, and we worked together to advance this bill. I would also like to recognize each of our Senate cosponsors: Senators Tillis, Sinema, and Burr, Chairman Wyden of the Senate Finance Committee, Senators Collins, Hassan, Daines, Rosen, Capito, Padilla, Sullivan, Manchin, Hawley, Schatz, Blunt, Rounds, Smith, Cramer, Reed, Murkowski, Chairman Sanders of the Budget Committee, and Senators Hoeven, Tester, Moran, and Kaine. Key stakeholders like the Postal Service, our postal employee unions, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, and the countless members of the public who spoke out about what timely service meant to them also played an essential role in providing technical assistance and building support in passing this legislation. But none of these vital reforms to protect this longstanding public service would have been possible without the dedicated and tireless work of congressional staff. First, I would like to recognize my staff on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, who worked tirelessly to ensure this bill received bipartisan and bicameral support, as well as stakeholder support. Thank you to Annika Christensen, Lena Chang, and Victoria Pleasant for your determined efforts to craft and build support for this consensus reform. I would also like to thank Senator Portman's staff, Pam Theissen, Andy Dockham, Amanda Neely, and Renee Sheehy, who all played an important role in crafting and passing these reforms. On the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, Mark Stephenson and Ethan Van Ness on Chairwoman Maloney's staff, as well as Christian Hoehner, Jake Greenberg, Daniel Ashworth, and Bill Womack on Ranking Member Comer's staff, provided valuable counsel and expertise on the legislation. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Wyden's staff, Eva Dugoff and Sam Conchuratt, and Ranking Member Crapo's staff, Erin Dempsey, offered vital assistance to ensure the Medicare integration proposal worked effectively. House Ways and Means Committee staff Kathryn Olson, T.J. Sutcliffe, and Elisa Walker all provided critical technical assistance. Leader Schumer's staff provided vital expertise and guidance throughout the entire process and especially over the past few weeks as we prepared to pass this bill on the floor. Finally, Jackie Maffucci from Senator Carper's office and Erin Bursch and Erin Schulte from Senator Sinema's office spent countless hours helping to craft and secure robust support for the bill. These folks, along with countless others, ensured that the Postal Service would be able to keep delivering for the American people. In recent years, it has been a rare occasion when the Senate comes together to pass this kind of bipartisan, consensus legislation with such overwhelming support to address a very, very real problem. I am grateful to every person who played a role in raising awareness-- working on this legislation--and getting it passed by both the House and the Senate. Once signed into law, this groundbreaking, bipartisan bill will help ensure that the Postal Service can continue its nearly 250-year tradition of providing delivery to every American. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized for 5 minutes of remarks.

Mr. PETERS. Mr. President, in just a few moments, each of our colleagues will have the opportunity to cast a historic vote to pass groundbreaking legislation that will ensure that the U.S. Postal Service can continue its nearly 250-year tradition of delivering service to the American people. The Postal Service is one of our Nation's most trusted and storied institutions. Since the founding of the United States, the Postal Service has become a vital part of the fabric of our Nation for generations. It has served as an indispensable public service that not only delivers critical mail, like medications and financial documents, but also helps families all across the country stay connected with each other. The Postal Service is the only mail carrier that delivers to every community across our Nation and serves more than 160 million households--no matter how remote. However, in recent years, we have seen how burdensome financial requirements drove the Postal Service to use cost-cutting measures that compromised delivery services. And that is why this bipartisan bicameral bill is so vital. It will help the Postal Service overcome unfair policies that threaten its ability to effectively service the American people. Since introducing this bill, I have worked closely with my ranking member, Rob Portman, and our 26 other Senate cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, as well as Chairwoman Maloney and Ranking Member Comer on the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, to craft these consensus reforms and secure the strong bipartisan support we have seen in both the House and, hopefully soon, in the Senate. I am grateful to each of my colleagues for their hard work and for their cooperation and their willingness to compromise during this process. Our legislation, which it has been 15 years in the making, will eliminate the unnecessary requirement for the Postal Service to prefund the cost of retiree health benefits and will integrate postal retirees healthcare with Medicare. Together, these reforms will save the Postal Service more than $49 billion and ensure this essential public service, which is dependent on revenues from products and service fees to fund its operations, is set on a path for long-term financial stability. This historic legislation will also ensure every American knows what is going on with the mail in their community by requiring the Postal Service to post weekly local performance data online. It will also ensure this vital institution continues to deliver mail at least 6 days a week. By passing the Postal Service Reform Act, we can ensure the Postal Service is able to provide reliable service to families and small businesses, veterans, seniors, and rural communities who rely on this essential service each and every day for years to come. By passing this legislation tonight and quickly sending it to President Biden's desk, this body can show the Nation that Congress can indeed build consensus; we can work on a bipartisan basis and get things done for the American people. Together, we can enact historic, meaningful change and improve the lives of our constituents. I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this long-overdue bill so that we can take a historic and significant step to bring the Postal Service into the future and ensure it can continue providing essential services to the American people, as it has done for nearly 250 years. I yield the floor.

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, the Postal Service Reform Act before us here today represents consensus on essential reforms for the U.S. Postal Service, overdue for over a decade. This legislation will ensure the Postal Service can provide long- term, reliable, 6-day-a-week service across the country, and put it on stable financial footing. This amendment changes key service protections in the bill and adds new harmful provisions tailored to special interests of Postal Service competitors. Our bill requires the Postal Service to maintain its current standard of delivery at least 6 days per week. It is absolutely essential to protect 6-day delivery so the Postal Service can continue serving as a critical lifeline for countless communities that rely on the mail for medications, for rent payments, for critical supplies, for Social Security checks, and so much more. This amendment would change how the Postal Service operates today by altering their integrated network that allows mail and packages to be delivered together. This is more efficient for both the Postal Service and for their customers. Instead, this amendment seeks to undermine the Postal Service's ability to compete against private carriers that do not have the same requirements to deliver to every single community in the United States of America. The amendment would also force publication of contract information to Postal Service competitors. This would give away commercially sensitive information to private carriers and provide an unfair advantage, when the Postal Regulatory Commission already reviews every Postal Service contract to ensure both compliance as well as fairness. I appreciated Senator Portman's thoughtful comments against changing the key service protections in this bill. It is time to pass this bipartisan legislation as drafted and getting it signed into law. I object.

Mr. PETERS. Madam President, this bill is limited to absolutely essential, consensus, bipartisan reforms that are necessary to ensure that the Postal Service can survive and can continue delivering for the American people. Everything in this bill has bipartisan agreement. This bill passed the House by a vote of 342 to 92. It has broad support from the public, from the business community, and other stakeholders. In contrast, this amendment is inflammatory and unnecessary to the postal bill. It is meant to be a poison pill. It would add abortion- inducing drugs to the list of nonmailable matter under postal law. Under current law, the list of nonmailable matter includes items ranging from grenades to explosives, to controlled substances and narcotics. However, the Postal Service is free to mail any FDA-approved drugs that are prescribed by healthcare providers and sent by either a pharmacy or a doctor. There are no other FDA-approved medications that are prohibited from being mailed to patients in need. This amendment is an attack on reproductive rights that would make it more difficult for women and families to safely access critical medical care, and it imposes an unnecessary hardship on women and families who are accessing their care using telemedicine, especially during a pandemic. This amendment simply has no place in a bipartisan postal reform bill. Madam President, I object.