Eric Schmitt

Mr. SCHMITT

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

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. I rise today with my friends from New Mexico and my colleague who has shown great leadership in this to defend and support the people who have been impacted--who, quite literally, have been poisoned by their own government. As was mentioned, I grew up in Bridgeton, MO. Bridgeton is ground zero, the epicenter of some of the waste that was dumped--the hazardous, the toxic, the radioactive waste that was dumped there. Just to take a step back. After World War II, St. Louis, the city itself, was the main population center. St. Louis County, which lies to the west of St. Louis City, had a lot of open land, a lot of opportunity. And the folks coming back from World War II who wanted to start a better life found that American dream in St. Louis County, where I grew up. As they traveled west to places like Bridgeton and other ZIP Codes that are now included in this bill, something else was following them. Something else was headed west, and it was this radioactive waste that they had no idea was in their water, below their feet, affecting them, poisoning them, and killing them. I just think back--my parents still live there, by the way. I think back to those friends and those neighbors I had, and, as Senator Hawley mentioned, these are folks--these are the waitresses; these are the truck drivers; these are the hairstylists--these are people who go to work every single day, and they just want a better life for their kids. They might teach in that local school. They were creating these communities that were new. But, again, their government had dumped toxic materials that were poisoning them. What they wanted, again, was to live the American dream. By no fault of their own, they happened to live in an area-- whether they were downwind or whether it was in their water--that has impacted, not just their lives but their families and generations of their families. This legislation won't make them whole, but it is some measure of compensation, some measure of justice. I know some people have talked about costs. Look, we do a lot of things here. We spend a lot of money, and we can debate on whether or not that is worth it or not, or whether these are our priorities. But I think, if we took off the red jerseys and took off the blue jerseys and really focused on what we should really be doing here in a government that is supposed to have limited powers, one of the things that we should be doing is protecting our own citizens. That is what this vote is about. It is living up to the promise that we made to the people when we got elected, which was that we were going to fight for them. And this is an opportunity to go do that. It is the ability, in a number of ZIP Codes and in States across this country, for people who worked there who helped--Senator Hawley mentioned--who helped build America back up or were working to save civilization, in many ways, in the middle of the last century. It is for us to make sure we are doing everything we can to see that some measure of justice is served. I would just ask my fellow colleagues to look within their hearts or imagine looking in the eyes of some of the people who are here today who have been impacted, because these folks don't have powerful lobbyists. The people who come to our offices asking about something that is in some bill--the people who have been affected--they don't have those powerful forces in play. This is something that bubbled up in a bipartisan way, again, to support the people we represent who have been impacted. I am proudly a supporter of this and will do everything I can to help get this passed so these folks get the justice that they deserve. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the Kiel Opera House, now known as the Stifel Theatre, for 90 years of professional entertainment and creativity. In 1917, Mayor Henry Kiel, opera impresario Guy Golterman, and Parks Commissioner Nelson Cunliff committed to building a civic opera house in downtown St. Louis that would rival those of Europe. Citizens of St. Louis passed the 1923 bond issue to improve the infrastructure of St. Louis, including the creation of the Municipal Auditorium complex on Market Street with the opera house and large auditorium as the centerpiece. The Municipal Auditorium was inaugurated in April 1934, opening with 61 shows, concerts, operas, and special events. Kiel Opera House served admirably for five decades. In its early years, the theatre was home to the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra and celebrities like Rex Harrison and Jose Ferrer. Between the 1950s and 1980s, stars like Louis Armstrong, Ella Fitzgerald, Johnny Cash, Tony Bennett, Aretha Franklin, Frank Sinatra, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones and others graced the stage. In October 2011, after nearly 20 years vacant, the Kiel Opera House was restored. Its economic strength inspired community leaders and catalyzed 13 years of development and redevelopment across Missouri from Market West to Jefferson and north to Washington. The Kiel Opera House is a historic gemstone that highlights St. Louis's commitment to the arts, and I hope it continues to be a treasured host of the arts for years to come.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Missouri's own Truman State University for its outstanding accomplishments in the development and grand opening of the Greenwood Interprofessional Autism Center. This center is instrumental in preparing emerging professionals for a prosperous career, as well as advancing education for people with developmental disabilities. Before discussing the new center, let me tell you more about my alma mater, Truman State University. Founded in 1867 in Kirksville, MO, Truman State University has been dedicated to offering an exemplary education for the benefit of all. It provides a world-class educational experience in the heartland of the United States. Truman State University enables students with educational prowess and success, and the Greenwood Center is yet another example of that. The Greenwood Interprofessional Autism Center provides a patient- centered, evidence-based approach for those on the autism spectrum and for those with other neuro-developmental disorders. In collaboration with partner organizations, the center is at the forefront of research and provides cutting-edge applied behavior analysis services tailored to assisting individuals who are on the autism spectrum. The curriculum is taught by licensed professionals who are experts in providing unparalleled educational opportunities for families, patients, and students enrolled in health-related academic programs. By breaking down barriers and destigmatizing what it means to have a developmental disorder, this center is empowering their patients, their patients' families, and their students with skills that they will utilize for their entire lives. I understand from my own personal experiences that caring for someone with special needs requires love, patience, and resources. This center is able to assist many in their journey through life and is a shining example of what our educational institutions are intended to represent and achieve. I am looking forward to learning more about their future successes in the field. Once again, I congratulate my alma mater Truman State University on its outstanding efforts in service to Missouri and to its communities. It is truly living its mission to serve its students, and I commend the university for adapting to a rapidly changing educational environment. ``Go Bulldogs.''

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise to talk about the very ill- advised plan that we have before us right now that puts Ukraine first and America last. Now, for the--I am going to say 25 people in the country that may have tuned in to the last time I was on this floor earlier today to now, you might notice one big difference: I have a different tie on. So in between the last time and now, I worked out. As you know, Madam President, you can't skip leg day. So I did that in preparation, of course, for the Congressional Baseball Game, which is just a mere few months away now. So I figured while I was going to do that, I had a little time, a lot of energy, I have 1 hour to give to this that I would switch ties--so breaking news. I will say, though, that standing here in a very sort of contrived effort that the majority leader has put forth--well, I guess I should say, actually, he is not making any effort to make this look like it is a real activity of the world's most deliberative body. There are no amendments being considered for a $95 billion foreign aid package. It is being rushed to get done just before guess who gets to go to Munich. Chuck Schumer. So we want to get this done, without any amendments, so that the majority leader can glad-hand with other global leaders and talk about how he is delivering for Ukraine. All the while, the people that we represent are clamoring for action for something to secure our southern border. And I know the figleaf that was offered last week that lasted about 24 hours before people could pick apart the language and realize it took us backwards on immigration law. That wasn't anything other than trying to get a few more votes for Ukraine. So if you want to understand why there is so much dysfunction about this whole process, all you need to understand is that the Ukraine piece of this has always been the center of gravity. Israel aid is held hostage to it. This 4-month exercise to get some language that was rejected was about getting more support for Ukraine. So here we are--a mere, I guess, hours away from a vote that some of my colleagues have told me this is going to be the most important vote I will ever cast. I cannot help but think, as someone who has run statewide in Missouri three times in 6 years, what an utter disconnect what we are doing right now is to where real America is. When I am back in Missouri--and I go back and forth every week, I live in the St. Louis area--what people want to talk to me about is what is going on in their family; the fact that when they go to the grocery store every week, they are hit with that sticker shock that has never really gone away. For a younger person who is trying to buy their first house, it is literally twice as expensive as it was just a few years ago. We have got 9 million people who have come across our southern border. We don't know who they are. We don't know where they are at. Some of the most strenuous objections that we have are from immigrants who have come here legally, who wait in line, who did the right things. The people who don't understand why our energy policy punishes working families who just want affordable, reliable energy, who are lectured by elites like John Kerry who fly on private jets to Davos and then tell working families all the things that they should live without, that is what they care about. Now, as a U.S. Senator, I don't believe that we shouldn't have a debate about Ukraine. But I can honestly say there has not been a person that has come up to me and said, You know what, Eric, what I really want you to do up there is send another $61 billion to Ukraine. That is what I really want you to do. My priority is for you to go up there and do that when our border is not secure, when terrorists are streaming across the border, when fentanyl is streaming across the border, when women and children are being raped and trafficked to the tune of $100 million a week. That is the economic value of the human trafficking alone. The cartels have never had it so good. American families are struggling, but the cartels have become wealthy beyond belief because of policies from this administration that have devastated our border, devastated our immigration laws, and flooded our streets with drugs and crime. Perhaps there could be no more emblematic image of all of this than what we saw just last week when a couple of people who came here illegally beat up cops, got out of jail in a couple of hours, and did the double bird to the camera, telling the American people exactly what they thought of them. I mean, I really can't think of a better symbol of what this administration has wrought on the American people than that. There will be all kinds of disingenuous stuff to shift blame, but people are smart. They know exactly what is happening. I do come from Missouri, and before I was attorney general, I served in the State senate. Like in most States, there actually--for all the issues that every State has in working through things--our constitutional Republic and our democracy can be a messy thing. It is supposed to be that way. It is supposed to be difficult to get things done because our Founders believed that one of the ways you protect individual liberty is to spread out that power so it is not efficiently taking money from people and efficiently taking away their God-given rights. So in Missouri, the one thing they have to do is pass a budget. It is the only thing they are constitutionally required to do. And there is a date. I think it is May 15. They have to do that. So the house--there is a consensus revenue estimate that comes out in December where they-- I am sure this is true in California and other States--where the different parties and branches decide what they think they are going to take in, how much they have to spend, and then they craft the budget. That process begins in Decemberish. They come in January, and the hearings begin in full force, and people come and they advocate and they make their arguments. Subcommittees report to committees, committees then report bills out, and it goes to the house floor. All the while, the senate is having their own hearings anticipating house bills because it has to originate in the house, and it comes over and they work on that. Then they have something, and they report to the senate, and they go to a conference committee. And guess what. They craft a budget. You disagree with it. It might be too much spending or might be not enough spending for your taste. It may not have done all the things you wanted to do. But there is a product that people can have an input on. They can amend things. We don't do that here at all. We don't do it. I talked about it on the floor earlier today. It is a travesty for this constitutional Republic because the very frustration that you see in this instance or in CR debates and the deadline politics that this town has gotten used to is all because there are simply no vehicles. There is no way for people to advocate for the people they represent. We go to lunches. Nobody told me about that, by the way, that we have lunch together every day. I love it. I love getting to know my Republican colleagues. I am sure the Democrats feel the same. But what if, actually, what we have seen here in the last couple of days, where Senators come out here and talk about the things that they believe in and there is more than just a couple of people at a time--what if we did that all the time? Maybe I am just the new guy, but what if we did that, and the Senator from California and the Senator from Missouri--we would offer amendments. Do you know what we might find out? That there are actually some things we could work on together or there are some things we are just going to be on a different team. But guess what happens. There are a few people in charge who keep us very separated. They keep us in those lunches. And we spin around, and a couple of people negotiate a bill. We don't know the details. We are told: You can't offer amendments. We are told that the tree is filled. What if 95 of us said: We are done with that. We are done with it. Instead of this Thunderdome you have created for this limited contact, we are going to disperse the power to individual Members like it was supposed to be, like when this place was created. The U.S. Senate is a unique institution in human history. There has never been anything like it. It was conceived of an idea that we had three branches, but within the bicameral article I branch, there was going to be one branch that had 6-year terms, and they were staggered. You had to be a little bit older to serve. I don't know if they ever thought that the median age would be 68, but it is or I think it is something like that. Whatever. I digress. No matter. We are supposed to sort of deliberate on these things, and then it would take a little more than just a simple majority. In fact, we didn't have cloture being filed for everything, like for some, you know, appointment to the Zoo Commission; there was a little bit of a social contract that happened in this place. I know this is really process-oriented, and I am going to get to other stuff, but I do think it is important because I actually believe that what a couple of people in this place, including the majority leader, are really afraid of is that what if we actually get a taste for what it is like to have an impact on our own? What if we figure out we don't need them to tell us what to do? I don't need that. I don't need somebody telling me how to vote. I would think that the 100 of us who campaigned so hard and got around our States and listened to people--I don't need that. I am open to advice always. I don't think I have everything figured out. But I also think that, in talking to people--listen, I don't pretend to know everything. I think you have to approach this place with some amount of humility. I mean, talk about an honor of a lifetime. But in 100 years--I was the 2,000th Senator. I am not sure many people in 100 years will know that--maybe my grandkids. I hope my kids would tell my grandkids that, but I don't know. The point is, our lives are finite. The roles we play here are very serious and important. But I just think this place can be so much more than what it is, and it is a hollowed-out shell of what was supposed to be the greatest legislative body ever conceived. We don't do those things. I lament that. What I was trying to say was, I talk to plenty of people, and I try to meet and am going to meet with every Senator, Republican or Democrat, individually. It takes a little while with our schedules. We are not on the floor very much voting, but we are all very busy. I just found that there are really some unique conversations that you can have with people about not only what is important to them and how you can work together but a desire to sort of open this place up a little bit. I think that what we are seeing play out here is kind of emblematic of it. Regardless of how you feel about this particular issue, regardless of how you feel about, you know, this is the most important vote you will ever cast or I can't believe that we are sending $61 billion but we won't secure our own southern border--regardless of where you fall on that spectrum, I would hope that we could recognize individually and collectively that this is broken. I mean, look at what is happening with the appropriations process. I don't know what is going to happen in a few weeks. We are going to presumably vote on this stuff and come back and then--guess what. We have another deadline. If you don't support this bill, you want to shut the government down. Meanwhile, the majority leader in this place has spent 8 hours in 13 months on appropriations bills. Something tells me--I don't know; I am a lawyer, I am not a detective--that there is a reason for that. There might be a reason why he doesn't want those on the floor. He doesn't want an open discussion, and he is not alone. There is a very natural sense of desire to sort of aggregate power. The Appropriations Committee voted out every bill. But, Eric, they originate in the House. Well, we have a number of vehicles, not to mention we could just send a message about what our priorities are in the Senate, whether I agree with them or not, on Senate bills. I guess it is too hard, but I don't think that is really the reason. I have heard: Well, Senators don't--they come to us and don't want to take tough votes. We are protecting them. I don't believe that. I don't believe that. I think it is because this is the--who could imagine the power that somebody could have to unveil an omnibus before us, the flashing lights. Wait until I unveil this before you all. You won't have time to read it, and you can't amend it, can't really affect it. But the lobbyists in town know who to go to. I just believe that is the source of some of the disconnect. I think there is a real danger in being insulated in this town, in this bubble here, you know, caring too much about what the New York Times or the Washington Post have to say about you, that somewhere along the way, and I don't care where you are from--whether you are in a deep blue State or a deep red State--you lose a little bit of what people actually at home are connected to, what they care about. This bill here couldn't be more disconnected from American priorities. This bill sends $95 billion to foreign countries. Debate the merits of that as you will without actually--think of the message that sends. We care so much--think about the issues that we are confronting as a country, all of them. This is what we are doing. This is what we have chosen. And I don't care--like I said, I feel good from the workout--I don't care that I have to come out here for my time. That doesn't bother me. I wish I had more time. But this is how we are pressing people. We have to get this done. (Mr. CARDIN assumed the Chair.) I know in the back end of this is a trip to Munich. I am not going. I kind of wish I was. I would love to have some conversations with some of the folks who don't understand, who maybe want to look at people like me as like a zoo animal. Don't you understand? I do understand. And, by the way, if it was such an existential threat, where has your country been? Why aren't you at 2 percent of your GDP? I mean, I had a conversation with some high-level government officials in a European country. They are pulling back from that number because they have to address the flooding that happened in their country this year. Imagine that, putting the interest of their own country ahead of spending money on a foreign war. I am a little surprised, though, by the groupthink that sort of embodies anybody that raises legitimate issues or questions as being referred to as some sort of like Putin lover. To me, that is a very soft defense that reveals deficiencies in an argument. I think we can have a reasonable conversation, like: To what end? What are we seeking to gain? How much will it cost us? Can we be effective? Can there be accountability? All of those amendments are blocked. All of those conversations are blocked. I think that the American people will be shocked to know the amount of time and energy we spend just on this issue. I know it is important to people, but, in my first 13 months, I have been shocked at the amount of time that is spent on this one thing--not on the border, not on energy policy, not on the government's willingness to suppress free speech, not on the fact that we are simply not turning our attention quickly enough to China. I mean, pick it. The Presiding Officer might have 10 things. I might have 10 things. But they are all crowded out by the supernova, which is the Ukraine funding. And, you know, the truth is, it is probably going to get out of the Chamber sometime in the next, whatever, how many hours. It is dead in the House, and I think the stubbornness to accept any kind of rational debate or meaningful amendments ultimately dooms all of this. But here we are. And I will also point out that the insistence on some--and I hear Senator Schumer, in his comments in the mornings, speak glowingly about this and how important it is. Yet he often also, interestingly, casts half of the country, half of Americans, often in the light of radical, extremist, MAGA Republicans--othering half of his countrymen. And do you want to understand why people are skeptical of this kind of politics--the ``deplorables''? I actually think there ought to be a drinking game in Washington. Every time Chuck Schumer says ``extremist'' or ``MAGA'' or ``Republican,'' everybody in this town ought to take a drink. This town would be drunk by 10 a.m. It is insane. It is not helpful. And for somebody who, by the way, talks about the importance of bipartisanship, let me offer this as a refresher. Chuck Schumer, if he had it his way and he had two more votes, would end the filibuster and would pack the Supreme Court and would add States to the Union, and he would federalize our elections. I am not buying it. And so he is ramrodding this thing through without any amendments. That is not what our Republic is supposed to be. It is not what the Senate is supposed to be. So there are a lot of problems with this bill, but I want to point out that a lot has been said about, well, you talk about border, but you had your shot. You got everything you wanted--not what I wanted. And my Republican colleagues who have been at the lunches can testify under oath about what I said all along. I don't believe that this administration is interested in securing our border at all, and I speak with some experience on this because I was attorney general of a State that sued the administration on a few different measures and had to go back in court to get them to abide by court orders. It is not in their DNA. So we are getting exactly what this administration wants, and no language change is going to change that. So let's just be honest. Now, I think that they might see how far gone this has gotten. Like many socialist enterprises, arguably well-meaning people realize they have created a total disaster. And that is what we have now. That is what we have at our southern border, because the open borders crowd is in charge. So to my Democratic colleagues, you have opened up Pandora's box, and the ultimate head fake here about having some, you know, border bill that made things worse isn't going to cut it. Nobody is buying it. Just like nobody is buying that Bidenomics is great. Tell that to the single mom that is paying 40 percent more at the grocery store every week. So for me, I just want the Biden administration to enforce our existing laws and go back to the policies that were working under President Trump. I didn't want some 400-page bill that did a couple of things that I sincerely objected to, the first of which was to empower these asylum officers to effectively grant citizenship at the border-- to grant asylum at the border, and 5 years later they are citizens, outside of the judicial process and at a hurried clip we have never seen before. That is what would have happened--and, by the way, work permits that were immediate. You talk about a magnet for the cartels; that is exactly what that would have created. The second big objection was how in the world could you possibly cut out courts of jurisdiction that have traditionally handled immigration matters forever, like in Texas? Where did they go? To some other border jurisdiction? No, legal challenges went to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, perhaps the most liberal circuit in the whole country. I am sure that was just a coincidence. So there were real problems, and in my view, it took us backward. I am not disparaging any individual about it, but as a Senator, you have the right to analyze the text, which, by the way, was withheld from everyone until Sunday night at 7, with Chuck Schumer saying: Get ready to vote on Wednesday. I don't know. I guess I haven't been here long enough to think that that is OK, regardless of how you feel about it. No State does that. So how did we get to where we are at? Ladies and gentlemen, this was, on day one, an effort by this administration to undo everything that was effective under President Trump. We had gotten to the lowest level of illegal immigration we had seen in a generation, in 40 years, in December of 2020. And I spoke yesterday and used the analogy of, like, if they had the Super Bowl--and the Chiefs won, thank goodness--but it would be like having the best defense in the history of the NFL one year, and then there is a new coach who didn't like the old coach and said: I have got an idea. We are going to play without a defense next year, because of Trump--totally insane. Results totally predictable, although I am not sure anybody could have fully imagined 9 million people here legally. But that is where we are at. And so from day one, Joe Biden was determined to undo all of the things that President Trump had done. Now, there are a couple of reasons for it. One could be total and utter incompetence. I don't know. The President can't remember when he was Vice President. Maybe that is it. Another reason could be just this reflexive desire to undo everything that Trump did. That is possible. Trump derangement syndrome is real. It is treatable, but it takes a lot of time to get over that, certainly not on day one. That could be it. The other rationale could be the people who, even just a decade earlier, were on the fringes of the Democratic Party, who at the time were in think tanks, writing white papers about the benefits of open borders and how unfair it was that these arbitrary lines disconnect people, or that everyone has a right to live wherever they want, and they should receive government benefits, no matter what. Maybe those people graduated. Maybe they didn't just graduate from an Ivy League institution with a gender studies degree. Maybe they graduated to the highest levels of government. Maybe they occupy positions in the Oval Office and have broken through. And if I don't run out of time, there is a very interesting article about this sort of behind-the-scenes debate happening in the Biden administration. Look, I am standing in front of the desk of Harry Truman. Harry Truman was--news flash--a Democrat. There is no way under God's green Earth that the party of Harry Truman would be OK with this, but a lot can happen between here and the wedding. So here we are. So, what happened? I don't know the motive. I can make a guess. Only God knows. But what I do know are the actions that took place. In the myriad of Executive actions, reversals that have caused this historic crisis at our southern border--on January 20, 2021, ``I, Joe Biden''--he gives the oath. First thing, first day, he terminates the national emergency at the southwestern border, halting the construction of the border wall. Of course, we need to do that, right? That was Trump's idea. On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden reversed the Trump-era Executive order and several proclamations that put restrictions on immigration from countries associated with terrorism. Who thinks that is a good idea? In what world? What color is the sky in a world where we think that is a good idea? I guess because Trump-- or you are open borders or you are incompetent. On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden announced a 100-day moratorium on deportations and immigration enforcement. What? Why? Why would we do that? Forever, including administrations--Democratic administrations, I may have disagreed with on a bunch of policy positions. It has been the position of Republican and Democratic administrations that our immigration policy is that if you come here illegally, you are detained and then you are deported, unless there is some exception to the law like, let's say, asylum that is legit--9 out of 10 are not legit. So what did he do? We are not doing that anymore. We thought a lot about this, America. And we actually think that we shouldn't deport anyone anymore. On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden revoked a Trump-era Executive order that directed the Federal Government to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States, Trump Executive Order 13768. Let me repeat that. The position of the Biden administration was to not enforce the immigration laws of the United States. I would love to hear one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle try to defend that to their voters in a town hall or something. But because Trump. Or because open borders. Or because incompetence. I don't know. And that was just the first day, so get ready. On February 2, 2021, couple weeks later--so they took a break. The Biden administration, after on day 1 undoing all the things that kind of work or some of the things, had a little meeting, I guess, and said, Well, we have more to do. We can't just not enforce immigration laws, and we can't just prevent people from terrorist countries from coming here, and we can't build the border wall. What else should we do? Issue Executive order that began processing asylum claims at the border. OK. Here comes the fast pass; here comes the express lane. Also in that same month of February 2021, the Biden administration stopped applying title 42 expulsions to children at the border. Title 42 was a very effective means of providing our Border Patrol Agents of turning people around. That is gone. OK? Still more to do. Before President Trump implemented title 42, migrants could cross illegally, ask for asylum, and allowed to be in the United States, and they will be processed. So title 42 changed that. Now we are back to the future. All of a sudden now, what do we have? Catch-and-release. February 17--so the same month; we are not done yet--2021, the CDC exempted unaccompanied alien children from title 42 expulsion requirements--more of the whittling away of one of the more effective means of actually turning people away, because to this administration, everyone deserves to be here. You don't have to wait in line. Here are your government benefits. Can we give you Medicaid and Medicare? How about food stamps? Of course, this is the humane thing to do, right, they would tell us. Hold on. It ain't. On March 10, 2021, the Biden administration announced the reinstatement of the Central American Minors Program and expanded on it to June 15, 2021. In April and again in October 2021, DHS canceled contracts to build the border wall. Well, it was Trump's wall. We have to end the border wall. What does that mean for taxpayers? Well, I will tell you what it means: $140,000 a day--a day--to contractors to not build the wall. Think about that for a minute. Materials have been bought. Contractors are paid $140,000 a day to not build a wall. Now, in a town that spends trillions, $140,000 a day--well, where I come from, people still count their money. That is about three times the median family income in Missouri for a year. So don't tell me it isn't anything. It is an insult to taxpayers who literally--my dad worked 7 days a week and the midnight shift. He got a week off for vacation. All that money taken out by the government that he, if he had more of it, would have spent on us and our family. It is taken out. And to tell taxpayers that you are on the hook to pay a contractor $140,000 a day is insulting. And, by the way, if that wasn't enough, they auctioned off the materials that were already bought that could have been built to have a wall. And in one instance, over 4 million dollars' worth of materials were auctioned off for just over $100,000. On October 29, 2021, the Biden administration canceled the migrant protection protocols. What is that? That is ``Remain in Mexico.'' So when I was attorney general of Missouri, we filed suit, along with Texas, because my contention was every State was a border state. This was a very, very effective way of processing but also sending a very important signal to people who wanted to come here illegally by way of the cartels. Listen, if you have any knowledge of what goes on at the southern border, the cartels are meeting these people as they traverse, threatening them, extorting them, sexually assaulting them, abusing them. It is a nasty business. So don't tell me that this is humane; that, you know, A.O.C. crying, you know, in front of the cameras in 2019, you know, was the--was what your focus was. NBC Nightly News, if President Trump were still in office and what was happening right now at the border--people are drowning and trafficked like they are--they would be camped out. They would be camped out at the southern border. But meanwhile, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can't be bothered to go down there. You know what I wish? I wish Chuck Schumer would cancel his trip to Munich and go to the southern border. He won't do that. He is going to be a god over there, which is why we are in at 1:15 a.m. Again, it doesn't bother me. Doesn't bother me. So, anyway, with ``Remain in Mexico,'' we file a lawsuit. We win. They had done it the wrong way, rushed it through. In fact, it goes all the way to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court says: Yeah, your preliminary and temporary injunction, it is in effect. We send it to the lower court to keep this enforced and for a trial on the merits. Biden administration totally ignored it. So when you ask me: Should we be negotiating with them about some new border provisions? I don't trust them. So don't tell me: You got everything you wanted. It is not what I wanted. It is a bad bill, as far as I am concerned. But more importantly than that, we are dealing with an administration that is not interested in enforcing border laws. I lived it. Now, eventually, the temporary wins on title 42 and ``Remain in Mexico'' went away, and the Biden administration got their way. So we fought as long as we could, but, ultimately, under our immigration laws, the President has immense discretion. And so that is why we have the problems that we have. So it was a very effective deterrent. Having Mexico essentially as the waiting room did a couple of things: It deterred the cartels, but it also prevented the catch-and-release problem. And I really hope--I don't know. I mean, it is hard to know because we are not on this floor debating things together, as much as we have these conversations amongst one another. I am on the Armed Services Committee. We try to work well together in a bipartisan fashion. That Committee actually functions, and we have amendments, and we had a bill; came on the floor; you disagreed; it went to the House; and we passed it. I am grateful for my opportunity to serve on that Committee. And we got a lot of issues that we need to address as a country, including, you know, China that has a bigger navy--not a better navy but a bigger navy than we have. And one of the reasons why I would like to see these things broken up is so we actually have real debate on these things individually, but that ship has sailed for now. My hope is that we win the war, ultimately, on that, that people see the wisdom in that. I am going to keep fighting for that. I think it is the right thing to do. I see the chair of the Appropriations Committee. I appreciate her work and the work of Senator Collins on the Appropriations Committee. I long for the day that individual appropriations bills can come out there, whether I agree with them or not. And I know they are working on that. And I hear tales of a Senate of long ago like it is folklore, of a time where you could come out here and offer an amendment and have a vote and it was pending. And you would figure it out. You know, there would be some social pressure. If Senator Lee or something had 80 amendments--I mean, maybe that--you know, people would say, Senator Lee, how about 8 instead or something? He might agree to that, whatever. But the point is we would figure it out. We would figure it out. We don't have to have one person as the gatekeeper for everything. Who comes from on high with tablets carved in stone. That is not what this place is supposed to be. So ``Remain in Mexico,'' as much as I fought it personally as an attorney general and had some temporary victories, went away. On September 9, 2022, the Biden administration reversed the Trump-era public charge rule. On December 13, 2022, the Biden administration sued the State of Arizona to force them to remove the shipping containers they placed to close the gaps at the border--the border wall that existed there. Sound familiar? Texas tried to do the same thing. So when you have a situation where the Federal Government, who does a ton of things it is not supposed to do--one of the things it is supposed to do is secure the southern border. But what happens when they don't do that? States like Arizona and Texas are going to say: We have a population to protect. We have citizens who are at risk. We have fentanyl in our communities. We have high crime. We have human trafficking. The Biden administration has shown their true colors. They will sue you. They will take you to court. If you do that, there will be hell to pay. Meanwhile, they don't do anything to stop it. And there is a lot more, and I can go on. But these are the results of Joe Biden's actions, not because of some deficiency in the law. There isn't. We could improve the law. I am more than willing to have that kind of debate, but that is not the bill that we have in front of us. It wasn't. And so it will be used as a way to sort of acolyte Republicans--but give me a break. No one in their right mind in this country believes that anybody other than Joe Biden is responsible for 9 million people being here illegally. Just like nobody believes in this country that our economy is in better shape for working people because of Joe Biden. It is amazing how fast an hour can go. There is so much to talk about. But I do want to talk a little bit about--before my time is up-- the foreign aid here. I just want to again point out the real disconnect that the people of this country, regardless of who they vote for in a Presidential election or Senate races, feel with the amount of conversation we have here about foreign aid and borders of other countries and our unwillingness, again, to force the Biden administration to secure our own. There were a lot of ideas to do that. None of them were given an opportunity to really have a full airing. And in many instances, we are funding both sides of these things. We are about to send--well, this Chamber--it is not going to happen, by the way, because it is DOA in the House. So like a bunch of hamsters on a wheel, alienating Members along the way who would like to work together, we are funding both sides of this because, on the one hand, $61 billion could be going to Ukraine, but we are actually helping Russia by our ridiculous energy policy. Joe Biden's war on domestic energy production is real. The restrictions he just put on LNG and the export opportunities we have as a country are real. If your mission is to disempower Russia and Putin, you have essentially sided with climate alarmists instead. No country in the history of the world has done either one of these things. No country has ever willingly opened up their border to the level that we see right now. And no country has ever willingly ceded their energy. Since the beginning of time, tribes and nations have gone to war for natural resources. Conquest and war were predicated on the idea of gaining more. We have everything we will ever need right under our feet. We don't need to go anywhere. We don't need to be an imperial nation. We got it. But here is the problem. You can't check the box anymore if you are on the Democrats' side about being virtuous. It is insane. Let's be all of the above. Let's be dominant. Let's be independent. It is in our national security interest. Let's send it to our friends and allies around the world. We are not doing that. We are on both sides of that equation. And as it relates to Israel, in my final couple minutes here, I do want to say, I had an amendment to pull Israel out of here, to have a separate vote on it. But they are being held hostage to Ukraine-- cynical, but it is true. I have been to Israel. Anyone who has understands the dangers, the proximity of the threats. All of us have had moving personal experiences there, including a mass I attended at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and a moving experience at the Western Wall with Jewish friends. And to think about what happened there October 7, and to see--I don't think a lot of Senators had reservations about going to the private viewing of that video, but I thought it was incumbent on me to go as a Senator. And some of the things I saw in that private viewing for 55 minutes, you can never unsee. So my contention and my argument here all along has been that I have never been in the category of lumping this together, just like I have never been in the category of lumping all the categories together in an omnibus or minibuses, quite frankly. I understand the constraints, but if we plan a little better or make some reforms, I hope we can do them individually, regardless of how it plays out in wins. I think that is important. But in that same bill, helping the people who support terrorism in Gaza isn't solving any problems. We can't have it both ways here. The ``pay for slay'' program by the Palestinian Authority is real. They use government money to pay terrorist families for killing Jews and Christians. And the pivot by the Biden administration now for political reasons away from Israel is not unnoticed, but that is where we are at. So, Mr. President, I would just say that the idea that we would be moving a bill that has America last, for all this debate over 4 months--more than that, quite frankly; for a year because this was involved in the CR debates--for all the debate we have had, this Chamber is about ready to pass a bill that sends billions and billions and billions, and billions and billions and billions of dollars to Ukraine to secure their border but does nothing to secure America's border. And the working folks back home that feel left behind by this town and their ridiculous priorities and being $34 trillion in debt and shipping jobs overseas--they see it. It is a total disconnect. And I for one am going to stand with them. I am going to stand with those people--my people--the folks back home, and against permanent Washington that, come hell or high water, wants to send a disconnected package with billions to Ukraine, and nothing--nothing--for the American people. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise to bring attention to the process which this body is considering, not just this massive spending bill but the way in which we have handled all the very limited business that has come before this Chamber this entire year. Before I do that, I would like to say we have some folks in the Gallery, and we have people tuning in. And I am sure everyone watched the Super Bowl last night, where the Kansas City Chiefs won in overtime. I think it is only the second overtime win. Patrick Mahomes, anytime he has the ball--the last guy to have the ball usually wins, and in big games this is becoming a thing. And the Chiefs essentially now are in a dynasty. So Patrick Mahomes has been in the league for 6 years. He has won three Super Bowls, three out of four trips--three in the last 5 years. So it was a great game, and I am certainly glad our Kansas City Chiefs won, with my not sincerest apologies to the California Senators. I would probably be disingenuous if I said that. But it was a good game, and congratulations to the Chiefs on another well-deserved championship. Right before that game, yesterday--and I finished just in the nick of time, essentially, for the kickoff--I rose on this floor to talk about what has happened at our southern border. Now, in this bill that we are considering now, there is nothing in there for our southern border. It is gone. To the extent there ever was anything, this is now an exclusively foreign aid package. And I can't probably make the case strong enough of what a disconnect that really is from what the American people care about. And I know that there will be some people in this Chamber who will say: As much as we tell them, they just don't understand. Now, I think they do understand. I think they do understand. They see a Federal Government that is $34 trillion in debt, with a President who wants to spend trillions and trillions more this year than we take in. No real sanity in sight and no real process for Senators to actually weigh in on these important matters. I went through the laundry list of how we got here. The punch line is--not to recap that, and maybe I will tomorrow--but the punch line is: Joe Biden has every authority he needs right now under existing law to secure our southern border. He just doesn't do it; he doesn't want to, because on day one, the executive orders that were in place that were effective under President Trump, he got rid of, whether it was ``Remain in Mexico'' or title 42. A number of them we rolled through last night. Even right now, as we stand here, talk here, Joe Biden could do all those things; and he actually could stop abusing the parole process, where those are supposed to be individualized adjudications. But instead, millions of people--millions--are being released en masse because they are from a particular country or category. That is illegal. So if you wonder how we got here, that is how we got here, and you don't need another bill to fix that. You need a President who wants to fix it. Now, we could have a real debate on the Senate floor with all of us about how we go about improving existing law, but we don't do that either. We have secret negotiations with a couple of Senators. Some people liked the product; some people didn't. But the process--there is no doubt about it--is totally broken, and that played out last week. So that is what I want to talk about. It turns out that there are a few other Senators--I know Senator Lee, Senator Blackburn; I think, probably, Senator Vance touched on this, and there are a lot of other people, and not just Republicans, by the way--who feel that this process that is in place now is broken and people don't have an opportunity to weigh in. Before I leave the border, though, I do want to mention one thing. If there is one thing that could crystallize the lunacy of this administration's policy, there was something under President Trump called Operation Talon. You didn't hear much about it because it was canceled very early on. What is Operation Talon? Operation Talon was an effort to deport previously convicted sex offenders from other countries. There is a lot that divides us. I don't know. I would think that is something we could come together on. Maybe we want to deport people who have been previously convicted of sex offenses--evidently not. That was too difficult for the Biden administration to accept, probably because Trump did it. That reflexive desire to undo success to appease the group clamoring for more compassion at the border has completely backfired. Women and children are being raped on their way to the southern border. The cartels are in control. Fentanyl is streaming across. Human trafficking that, when I went down to the border when I was attorney general of Missouri, was valued then at the time--you probably saw two-thirds of the level of illegal immigration that we see right now--was valued at $100 million a week-- $100 million a week--for the human trafficking alone. Some of that is the worst stuff that you could possibly imagine. But some of it also was people being trafficked across, being placed in employment in cities across this country, being taken advantage of. And if they ever expressed any concern, their family might get killed back home. There is nothing compassionate about what is happening at our border. The media won't cover it. My suspicion is if it was happening under the previous administration, NBC ``Nightly News'' would be camped out for a year at the southern border. But that is not what we see. What do we see here? We see 98 Senators--96 Senators--locked out. And I mean this as a call to any colleagues who are listening, and I have had many of these conversations already: There is a better way. We can strike some real reform in the way that we handle things. Regular order is talked about. An open amendment process is talked about. There are a couple of people who don't want to see that happen. Senator Schumer certainly doesn't want to see that happen. Think about the power he gets to wield: Come to me. I am the one that gets to come down from the mountain and unveil the tablets. You will be cast aside if you dare try to change what has been carved into stone. That is not what our Republic is supposed to be like. Each one of us is from different States. Madam President, our States share a border along the Mississippi River. There are a lot of things we have in common as Missourians and Illinoisans. My wife is from Illinois. She has family there we get to visit. There are a lot of things we get to agree on, but there are also things that are different. We have a system of federalism. And the Founders had a really unique opportunity at the time, 240-some-odd years ago. They decreed a government from whole cloth. They got the unique opportunity to create structural safeguards to protect individual liberty. They were students of human history. They understood the dangers of consolidation of power, of what it meant to have a single person in charge of too many things. They had seen it play out, and it plays out in the world today. So a system of government was created to spread out that power, vertically and horizontally. The States came together and unanimously agreed on the very limited powers they wanted the Federal Government to have, and the States retained the rest. The States were sovereign. They made this compact. The first one didn't work with the Articles of Confederation, but the Constitution stuck. Thank God. In that Constitution, the Article I branch is the first one mentioned, of course, because what we do here has enormous impact on people. We are supposed to be connected to the people, not cloaked away, telling everyone we know better than them. The idea that as a U.S. Senator, you cannot come to this floor and say, I have an idea, I have a way that I think would improve this bill, and then offer it and have people vote on it is totally insane to me. Maybe I have not been here long enough to have that idealism beaten out of me, but I will never lose that. I will never lose that desire-- sincere desire, no matter your political party--to have the ability to come out here and try to persuade--or your willingness to be persuaded. Unique coalitions can be formed from that. All of that is taken out. So for me, I want some diagnosis of why this place is so dysfunctional. There are zero vehicles--or there are very limited vehicles. To the folks in the Gallery who are coming here today or the people listening, what you think happens here doesn't happen here. I mean, I think back a little over a year ago when I was sworn in or before I got sworn in. There is an orientation we go through, and you meet the people that are going to have this shared experience with you as a freshman Member of the U.S. Senate. I mean, it is humbling. I speak for myself and I think all the freshmen Members--Republicans or Democrats--understand what a unique privilege this is to serve in this Chamber. When I signed my name in that book, I was No. 2,000, which is kind of cool. And you learn a lot. You are actually given some reading materials. I have always kind of had an interest, particularly in this Chamber, in the unique role that it plays in our Republic. There is a reason why they take 60 votes to get to move. It is not supposed to be a place where simple majority rules. That is for the House of Representatives which, of course, every 2 years has elections. It is supposed to be more rooted in the kind of changes that could happen every couple of years. The Senate--with staggered terms, every 6 years--is supposed to be more deliberative. This body is not deliberative. It is deliberately exclusionary. Anyway, you read about how the Senate used to operate. I am not talking about ancient history. I am talking about a couple of decades ago. I mean, in the course of a republic, it is certainly not that big of a reach in time. A Senator would have an amendment, and it would get voted on. There is something that happens in that process. If a Senator has 80 amendments, the colleagues are going to come up and say: You know, Senator from Nebraska, or whoever it would be, we get it. Are you sure all of them are necessary? Maybe they are; maybe they are not. There is sort of a social pressure that comes into play, and you start figuring out what are the most important things. You start to see where the body might be, if you have similar issues that have come up on amendments. There is a flow to it. Right now, there is no flow. We come in here a couple of times a week in a 45-minute window to say yes or no to some judicial nominations because Chuck Schumer--you better go to his office. If you want anything to happen, if you want some glorious omnibus monstrosity, that is where you head. It is worth pointing out that we have already done a couple of these CRs. We are headed to another. And guess how much time we dedicated to appropriations bills? In almost 14 months since I have been here, we have spent a grand total of 8 hours on one piece of legislation that combined three appropriation bills. That is it. So for a government that is bankrupt, borrowing money to spend, that is the kind of respect that the majority leader has given to the American people on perhaps the most important thing we are supposed to do every day or every year, which is to kind of sift through our priorities. That has been robbed from this place. It is my sincere hope that in this place, a group of us can come together, a bipartisan group together, and demand real reforms. This idea of filling a tree is totally antithetical. I mentioned the Founders created a system. They were weary of and concerned of aggregations of power. I can't think of a greater aggregation of power in what is supposed to be a place where power is diffused among the 100 of us than one person getting to decide that amendments don't--look, by the way, this is a point made from my Republican colleagues and Democrat colleagues about objecting and withholding consent. I think there is a lot of muscle memory that needs to get back into this place where we are allowed to vote. You see the frustration. You don't need to be a social scientist to figure out where the frustration comes from. There are not that many vehicles. Something gets bounced of yours--human nature--they maybe want to bounce something from somebody else. I guess my plea here is that we use this--regardless of how you feel about this particular bill--this slow-moving train wreck of how we do business here, where everybody privately looks at this and says, This is not the way, this can't be the way. And then you have a bubbling up among Members, rank-and-file Members, to demand something different. But we can't get there if we just go along with this stuff every time because somebody says this is how you are supposed to vote. You will get out of here in 3 hours. Every time that happens, individual Senators cede really important autonomy to help shape legislation that will affect people's lives or refuse, in this instance, to get serious about potentially demanding our southern border is secured before we send another $61 billion to another country. The appropriations process. I know there has been some progress made in that committee, and I commend Senator Collins and Senator Murray for the work they put in it. It doesn't necessarily mean I agree with all of the work product, necessarily, but that process that they went through is very important. Then what is supposed to happen is--it is like the old ``how a bill becomes a law.'' Those bills, each one of them, are supposed to come out on their own. Senators would have an idea, amend it or not. We send it over to the House--or, more appropriately, those bills come over from the House, and we have a vehicle to do something on it in the Senate. Something happens in that process, too. There are going to be disagreements. I don't care who is in charge or if different parties are involved in the two Chambers. There are going to be different priorities; there are going to be different ideas. That is healthy. Then you work it out in a conference committee. And then it goes back to each Chamber for an up-or-down vote. That is how it is supposed to work. That is not how it works, not even close. I mean, we are already sort of creeping towards--again, talk about an embarrassment of riches for Chuck Schumer. He has another couple of CRs coming his way. Then what you get to is a couple days before or a day before or 5 hours before: Here it is. You need to support this, Senator Schmitt or Senator Scott or whoever, or you are in favor of shutting down the government. And let me read off the parade of terribles of the things that will happen that you will be responsible for if you don't vote for this thing that I came up with in my basement 4 hours ago. It is crazy. And I know that many of my Senator friends agree. I have had these conversations. If you are in your office and agree with me, blink twice. We are all being held hostage here. I guess in the limited time that I have here--and if we have more time later, I will continue to talk about this--but I just think there is real opportunity for reform. I mean that sincerely. I mean that as a gesture of good will. It doesn't need to be the stuff--it doesn't even need to be my amendment. I am prepared to win. I am prepared to lose. I just think it is healthy for this place to have vehicles where people can offer these sorts of amendments, where they can have regular order. But I want to talk specifically about sort of where we are at with this one. We had a negotiation among a few people who produced a product that a lot of people didn't support. And that is not a personal attack on anyone--quite the contrary. I appreciate the effort. Senator Lankford worked very hard. There were a lot of things that were very problematic, from my perspective--not to relitigate that but only to say that I think part of that, the lesson from it is that there has to be more buy in, there has to be more input, and that all shouldn't happen, you know, where nobody can see it or there are broad strokes because, you know--I am a little biased here as a lawyer--language actually does matter. I think from the get-go--by the way, my position on this has been, I think, consistent. You could roll the tape from when I was on this floor talking about it. I think these issues should be spread out separately. I don't think Ukraine money should be tied to Israel money should be tied to Taiwan money. I think it is a mistake. Again, I think it robs the ability of individual Senators to say: You know, that situation is different. Take the difference between Ukraine money and Israel money. There are different levels of support in this place. There are different likelihoods of success. There are different needs. There are different coalitions of allies around the world that can step up or haven't stepped up. But to continually come back to the American people without an articulated plan here or what victory looks like as it relates to Ukraine, you are denying the reality of the justified skepticism. I will just speak for my State. Missouri is the ``Show Me'' State. Missouri has always been skeptical, and I don't care if it was Harry Truman or Kit Bond or whoever--who, by the way, stood at this desk-- skeptical of a government a thousand miles away telling them how to live their lives or in this instance the Federal Government saying to Missourians and the American people: Securing the southern border isn't a priority, but sending $60 plus billion to Ukraine is today. It is so important, we were here all weekend--I don't care about that. But all business aside, here we are, and we are going, and we are going to the mat, and you don't get amendments. The American people are smart. They see right through that. And you can try to explain it away, but that is the reality. The truth is, Joe Biden can secure the border with existing law--the same law that existed under President Trump--but refused to do so. Part of what that negotiation was supposed to be about, I guess, was that if you were going to tie this stuff together, you weren't going to have that unless the southern border was secured. Well, we didn't get that, but here we go immediately confirming the worst fears of the American people: that this whole debate, all of it, the center of gravity all along has been about the Ukraine money; the rest of it, window dressing, maybe to get a couple more votes to make it look like it had a broader bipartisan coalition--or not. I think if people were being honest in this place, that is what it was about. So here we are now with the center of gravity at center stage, but instead of Senators having an opportunity to maybe affect that in a particular way--maybe the $8 billion to pay for the Government of Ukraine might be amended out. I know Senator Cotton from Arkansas has an amendment about that. We are not going to have a chance to vote on that, I don't think. I had an amendment to separate out aid for Israel. We are not going to get to vote on that. By the way, I don't think it necessarily changes the result too much on the floor if you separated out Ukraine and Israel and Taiwan. I don't think that it does. But it does certainly harm, again, people's trust and their faith in the process. So the two main points I suppose I wanted to bring up in this 30 minutes before I yield back and reserve the remainder of my time--I think we have to be honest about the disconnect between what we are doing here and what is happening in real America and what people really feel about all this. We can keep bulldozing right through that, but I think it is insulting and disrespectful to the American people. Secondly and more broadly, we have to come together as Senators and decide that no matter who is in charge, people are going to have a say. They get to vote. They get to offer ideas. And all these little tricks and procedural roadblocks that have been set up by both parties over the last 40 years--20 years probably more specifically--are not healthy for our Republic, and it certainly diminishes our power as individual Senators to fight for the people of our States. Madam President, I reserve the remainder of my time. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise today to lay out in somewhat abbreviated terms how exactly Joe Biden is responsible for the border crisis and what Americans would like to see. He alone, right now, can solve this issue. I think there has been a lot of discussion about improving some of the laws that are currently on the books. I think the work that was done to try to do that, in my view, didn't accomplish that, but nevertheless we are here on Super Bowl Sunday to consider something else. I don't mind working on Super Bowl Sunday; I grew up in a blue-collar family. Missourians work hard. Working on a Sunday is no big deal. But you have to ask: What would keep us in today? What would Chuck Schumer push--which, by the way, if he is a poker player, it was like the worst tell of all time. Everybody knew he was going to try to jam us right before a 2-week break. I have only been here a year, and I knew that. It was coming. But what could be so important when we have a $34 trillion debt, a border that is wide open? It is what the center of gravity of this whole thing has been about the whole time, which is sending $61 billion to a foreign country. We should have a robust debate about that. We absolutely should, but we are lying to ourselves if we somehow believe that is more important to Americans than securing our own border. It is not. You know it when you go home and you talk to people, what they are talking--the polling certainly doesn't indicate that. But here we are. It is fine. We are here. Let's have a debate. I am going to reserve some comments for a later time on how we could actually have that debate in the U.S. Senate without another Senator having the opportunity to offer an amendment. I have had so many conversations with Republicans and Democrats who believe that there are 99 other people here--or 98 other people here or 96 other people here, depending on who is getting to draw up the four corners, and our willingness to sort of diminish the power of an individual Senator who is sent here by an entire State is baffling. And I do think that this place is ripe for some sort of bipartisan reform on process. This pent-up energy that exists is partly to blame because there are no vehicles for people to actually offer amendments. You know, Senator Collins and Senator Murray have worked on the appropriations process. We have spent 8 hours in 14 months on that on the floor. I suppose more on that to come. But it is Super Bowl Sunday, so I guess I will give a Super Bowl analogy or football analogy about what has happened at our southern border. I wish I had been smart enough to think about having a John Madden board here with the offense and defensive line lined up about the play that Joe Biden drew up in early 2021, but it goes something like this: We had the best defense that football had seen in 45 years, the lowest level of illegal immigration in 45 years. So what defense does Joe Biden put on the field when he comes into office? He doesn't. He takes the defense off the field. Nine million illegal immigrants later, we are at where we are at. And we are having this discussion again about foreign aid when Joe Biden has failed to secure our own border. It is not by accident. This didn't just happen. From day one, whether it was just simply a reflexive desire to undo everything that was Trump or a true open borders agenda written by a bunch of liberals on a white paper that somehow got into these positions of power, I think everyone can honestly agree that what is happening is not in the best interests of the Americans that we represent. So, I suppose, let's run through the anatomy of this border crisis in kind of a tale of the tape. From day one, all of those effective policies that were working, by the way, under existing law--so we had that 45-year low under current law. There is no legal deficiency right now. There is no deficiency in the law that would prevent Joe Biden from securing the border today. There isn't. Objectively, there isn't. Are there improvements that could be made? Sure. We ought to debate that. But I guess what happened yesterday was if you somehow don't support what this was, you have forfeited, you know, whatever the compromise was that was rejected--that as a Senator you don't have the right to offer an amendment to try to fix a bill. I think that is a dangerous road to go down. But here is a small sampling: On January 20, 2021, Joe Biden terminated--on day one--terminated the national emergency at the southwestern border, halting the construction of the border wall. In fact, we found out in the Armed Services Committee that he was paying contractors $140,000 a day--a day--to not build the wall. And in one instance, with some materials that were put up for auction, over $4 million worth of materials were sold for just over $100,000. I mean, I think if people that we represent actually, you know--if you talked to them and told them this, no one would agree that makes any sense for taxpayers, regardless of what your position is. But, again, because of this reflexive desire to undo everything that was Trump, taxpayers take a bath; our border is wide open. Same day, Joe Biden reversed a 12-year Executive order, an order that in several proclamations put restrictions on immigration from countries associated with terrorism. Same day, January 20, 2021, Joe Biden announced a 100-day moratorium on deportations and immigration enforcement. Forever, among Republican and Democrat administrations, essentially our border policy, our immigration policy, was, if you come here illegally, you are detained or deported. Unless there is some reason like you are claiming asylum, 9 out of 10 of them, roughly, are deemed bogus, but that had been the policy of the United States of America--no longer. Same day, January 20, 2021, Joe Biden revoked a Trump-era Executive order that directed the Federal Government to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States. That was the Executive Order 13768, and that was just the first day. In February 2021, the Biden administration stopped applying title 42 expulsions to children at the border. On February 17, 2021, the CDC exempted unaccompanied alien children from title 42 expulsion requirements. March 10, 2021, the Biden administration announced the reinstatement of the Central American Minors Program and expanded it on June 15, 2021. In April and again in October of 2021, DHS canceled contracts to build the border wall. I mentioned the $140,000 a day, which is, I mean, quite frankly, unbelievable. On October 29, 2021, the Biden administration canceled the migrant protection protocols or the ``Remain in Mexico'' program. When I was Attorney General, we were engaged in Missouri in a number of these related lawsuits or lawsuits related to these issues and were successful for a while. ``Remain in Mexico'' was one of those. We got a temporary and ultimately a preliminary injunction. It went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court kept it in place. We had to go back to the Federal district court and say: Judge, the Supreme Court said this is still in effect. They are not listening. The Biden administration refuses to listen to the Supreme Court, seeking contempt. It is not in their DNA. So we wonder why we are at--this is on purpose. And I think that in a sincere attempt from many of my colleagues, the purpose of what this was supposed to be about by some-- my personal view is to keep all this stuff separate. I try to be consistent about that. But the idea was--obviously, the Ukraine money is very, very important to a lot of people here--that maybe there would be some trigger if numbers were actually at somewhere close to zero the money would be released. That was never on the table, and I think that led to a lot of frustration by some. But, again, for me, I have always maintained Joe Biden has the authority right now. We don't need anything else. April 1, 2022, the Biden administration announced that they intended to end title 42 and stop expulsions under that program and stop the use of title 42 ultimately in May of 2023. Title 42 was perhaps the most effective at sort of turning people away, as far as the numbers go, but they were, very early on, committed to undoing that. September 9, 2022, the Biden administration reversed the Trump-era public charge rule. On December 13, 2022, the Biden administration sued the State of Arizona to force them to remove the shipping containers that were placed to close the gaps in the border wall. January 6, 2023, the Biden administration began abusing statutorily authorized parole authority--again, border wall, ``Remain in Mexico,'' parole authority. If you just did those two things--or three things-- and you didn't actually reinstate all of the Executive orders from President Trump, you could solve this. By and large, these paroles with the paroling authority is supposed to be case by case. It is an individualized adjudication. It is not because you are from a particular country or some category. Enforce current law. That is where the frustration lies. And so that included immigrants from Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras-- millions, millions of people. January 3, 2024, the Biden administration sued the State of Texas for enforcing a recently enacted Texas State law that allowed Texas judges and magistrates to order illegal immigrants to return to the foreign nation from which they came or from where they entered, I should say. That is what you need to know about this debate. Joe Biden literally in his administration was suing Texas for trying to enforce the laws they refused to enforce. And perhaps, I would say, if you wanted to understand, maybe, and encapsulate the most ridiculous or outrageous effort to undo something that existed under President Trump, there was something called Operation Talon. Operation Talon was created to deport previously convicted sex offenders from other countries. Now, I understand we live in a divided age and partisan politics. I would think that we could all agree that we should deport previously convicted sex offenders seeking to come here illegally. That was off the table. That is too much. So we heard a lot about compassion and inhumanity. There is nothing compassionate about what is happening at the border right now. People are drowning. Fentanyl is streaming across. The human trafficking--the cartels, in my experience as AG being down at the border, they have spheres of influence, not just at the border but in the interior of the United States. You go to places like Atlanta, Saint Louis, Kansas City, Denver--people who are essentially in indentured servitude, and if they speak up, bad things happen to folks back home. So this crisis is completely manmade, and that man is Joe Biden. And I know that--look, we put on jerseys a lot of times, but we are all Americans. And I just don't think anybody can look and see what is happening and think it is OK. It is not. I think we have gotten a little more clarity on that, a little more bipartisan voice on that, and my contention to this Chamber is that there is one person, there is an administration that can fix it right now but refuses to do so. Illegal border crossings--I will just sort of close with this. Recently, I think everybody is talking about just shocking numbers, an alltime high in December of 2023: 249,785. That is up 31 percent from November, the previous month, and up 13 percent from the previous December. Signals are being sent. And based on the polling, I don't know if the concern is next year that there might be a change in administration, we better be ready for what that looks like. And, again, the person who can do it--and regardless of what may have happened with this language, if you have an executive branch not interested in executing the law, you are never going to get around that. So we have got the crisis at the southern border. No new authority is needed. It is up to him, and I wish he would. As an American, I really wish he would. But there are forces, evidently, in the White House or on that side of the aisle that just--it is not doable. And so now I guess he is in the blame game, but nobody is buying it. They didn't buy the Bidenomics argument. They are not buying that this is anyone else's fault than the person who reversed everything that was working previously and the person who can enforce the laws on the books right now and secure our border. He could do it. He just simply doesn't want to. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

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

Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise today in recognition of the Kansas City National Security Campus and the important role it plays in strategic deterrence on the occasion of its 75th anniversary. I stand here today at the desk of President Harry S. Truman. In 1946, President Truman established the Atomic Energy Commission, and in 1949, Kansas City was selected as the location to produce nonnuclear components for our nuclear arsenal. For 75 years, the Kansas City National Security Campus has been the primary site within the Nuclear Security Enterprise for procuring and producing--say that a few times-- nonnuclear parts and components for nuclear weapons. As the United States continues to advance nuclear modernization programs, the Kansas City National Security Campus plays an essential role in America's national security, helping to ensure the nuclear stockpile is safe, secure, and reliable. More than 6,000 hard-working Missourians go to work day in and day out, and the importance of their contribution to our country and its defenses cannot be understated. They make 80 percent--80 percent--of the nonnuclear components for the weapons in our national nuclear arsenal. In addition, they support proliferation deterrence, supply chain security, and our overall responsiveness to global threats. Kansas City National Security Campus is not only improving the reliability and modernity of our arsenal, they are making it more efficient too. The U.S. nuclear stockpile remains the bedrock of our strategic deterrence, and the security and stability it provides to our country's defense is paramount. It is not an exaggeration to say that this is the most important moment for our nuclear arsenal in generations, and the Kansas City National Security Campus is at the center of it all. At a time when the People's Republic of China is rapidly growing and modernizing its own arsenal, Kansas City National Security Campus and the critical role it plays in our defense is more important than ever. Never in our history have we faced so dangerous a threat as communist China, founded on the belief that the power to govern comes not from the people but from the barrel of a gun. We must therefore meet their strength with our own, and Kansas City National Security Campus is making our country and its defenses stronger each and every day. I am deeply proud--and there are many of them here today--to represent the State of Missouri and the folks from that campus in the U.S. Senate and to represent the dedicated workforce of the Kansas City National Security Campus. They are central to our Nation's security. I could not be more pleased to recognize the Kansas City National Security Campus and its 75 years of contributions to national security. Some of the facility's leadership is with us today in the Gallery, and I thank them for their service. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise to bring attention to the abject failures of the Biden administration 3 years on. Let's briefly recap the last 3 years from Joe Biden: executed a disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan that led to the death of 13 brave members of our Armed Forces; targeted parents at school board meetings and floated the idea of deeming them as domestic terrorists in an official memo; declared outright war on domestic energy production and then pillaged our Strategic Petroleum Reserve causing gas prices to soar; attempted to force tens of millions of Americans to get a vaccine or lose their jobs; recklessly spent billions and billions of dollars, which led to historic inflation and soaring prices. He refused to enforce the laws in place that we currently have at the southern border and proactively fought those laws in court, leading to recordbreaking numbers of illegal immigration; created the largest censorship enterprise in American history and worked with Big Tech companies to censor Americans' voices; repeatedly vilified half the country as MAGA extremists in speech after speech; attempted to unilaterally cancel a half a trillion dollars' worth of student loan debt; weaponized agencies like the FBI to go after Catholics and, more broadly, American citizens; projected weakness on the world stage; and has emboldened our enemies. I could go on, but I think you get the point. Joe Biden has weaponized Federal Agencies against his fellow Americans; worked with Big Tech companies to censor Americans' speech; poured gasoline on the inflation fire; stifled domestic energy production; refused to secure the border; and has supercharged the growth of the administrative state. Americans can barely afford household items and needs, and they are incurring historic levels of credit card debt. Our national debt is skyrocketing. The so-called Inflation Reduction Act actually caused inflation to skyrocket. Bidenomics is a failure, no matter how this administration tries to spin it. Millions and millions of illegal immigrants are flowing across the border and into the interior of the United States. The Biden administration has fought every reasonable tool they could to stem the crisis at our southern border in court and is illegally--currently illegally abusing the parole system. Fentanyl and other drugs are flowing into our communities as a result. The whole of the Federal Government has been weaponized against the very people it is supposed to serve. Joe Biden was the architect of the largest censorship enterprise our country has ever seen. The FBI has targeted Catholics, and Joe Biden wanted to label parents who wanted to stick up for their kids in school board meetings as domestic terrorists. And our adversaries can clearly see the weakness that is being projected by Joe Biden. China is militarizing islands in the South China Sea, and they are playing for keeps. Iran-backed insurgencies are attacking ships in the Red Sea and are launching attacks against our own military installations. There are still hostages being held by Hamas. The simple fact is, the Biden administration and the Biden Presidency has been a disaster for the American people and for our country as a whole. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on an issue. I spoke about this on the floor, but the issue, once again, came to a head last week with another continuing resolution, another effort to sort of just kick this can down the road, and our inability, as a Senate, unfortunately, to spend the time necessary to pass appropriations bills. Now, whether you want it to be minibuses or individual appropriations bills, my cup of tea is to have individual appropriations bills. But the fact of the matter is, I have been in the Senate now for almost 13 months--a year and a month--and we have spent exactly 8 hours--8 hours--that whole time dealing with appropriations bills. The facts are damning. We have an overall debt of $34 trillion. Before you blink an eye, it will be $40 trillion. This Senate, which is supposed to be the most deliberative body in the world--a unique place where 100 people come together, with unlimited debate--to debate the important issues of our time. But nothing could be more important about setting our priorities than what our annual budget is--how we spend, literally, trillions of tax dollars. And for me, my perspective on this is that I know how hard people work back home. I know many other Senators do. My dad worked 7 days a week on the midnight shift. There are a lot of people out there who work hard, and money is taken out of their paycheck every single week-- or every other week or every month--and sent here. And I think people are of the belief that we spend time here talking about priorities--how that money should be spent, how it should be saved. Can it be sent back to them? What about military spending? What about transportation? We don't do any of that. We don't do any of it. What we do is, a couple of people get in a room and decide how we are going to do that. And then it is unveiled, with no time to read it, and you either vote on this or you are in favor of shutting down the government. I am sorry. That is a false choice. There is a better way to do it. And, I can tell you, I have had conversations, not just among Republicans but among Democrats--rank-and-file Senators--who are begging for reform, thirsty for reform, a process where you can come out here and say, ``I have got an idea; I have got an amendment,'' and have it voted on, Republican or Democrat, and let the chips fall where they may. But we have got to get away from this deadline politics. It is killing us--financially, by way of trust with voters. This is not the way. And, by the way, we haven't debated any of those appropriations bills, really, and we are getting ready to talk about a supplemental request now, which is being negotiated in secret, that will, at some point, be foisted upon us. My guess is--I hope I am wrong--that the Democratic leader isn't going to send it to a committee. All this language that we are told has taken months to parse out because it is complicated, for this Senate--Republican or Democrat--the message to individual Senators is: Yes, vote on it, tomorrow. This is nuts. You know, no legislature does this. But this is where we are at. As I have talked to people, maybe it is a lack of muscle memory of voting on hard things. Maybe it is just an unwillingness. But I think it has to do with control. Senator Schumer wants to control this process and have as little public viewing of all of this as possible, whether it is normal appropriations or supplemental appropriations. And, again, I might win some votes; I might lose some votes. But something is getting lost here, and I think it is time for Senators to come together and demand something better. This can't be the way. When you run for office and getting around Missouri--Missouri is a big State. I like to say that Kennett, MO, in the Bootheel, is closer to the Gulf of Mexico, as the crow flies, than from the northwest of Missouri. It is a big State. You work hard. You want to listen to your constituents. You want to come up here and advocate for the positions that they care about. We don't do any of that. So we have got another test. You know, the CR thing was kicked again to March. We have a supplemental budget request now coming. Let's just try it. Let's give people time to review things, to ask questions, to offer amendments. Maybe we get to a conference committee. I mean, with the NDAA, at least we were able to do that, and I am proud to serve on the Armed Services Committee. But I just wanted to take this opportunity to just point out that it feels like the only time we have these conversations is when we approach a deadline, and then it goes away. And it really disempowers everyone in this Chamber, except for a few people. And I don't think that is the best way to run a railroad, and it certainly isn't the best way to run a country. So, Mr. President, I am just hoping for something better. I have been discouraged, again, the first 13 months. We spent 8 hours on perhaps the most important thing we can do around here every year, and we are in desperate need of reform. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

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

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that William Wallace, an intern in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the Congress.

Mr. SCHMITT. By the way, I want to point out that intern, William Wallace, should not be confused with the William Wallace in ``Braveheart.'' Centuries apart, but same fighting spirit, so we are happy to have him.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the extraordinary life of Ken Luttrell of St. Louis, a true American hero, on the occasion of his 100th birthday. In the dark days that followed the attacks on Pearl Harbor, Mr. Luttrell answered his country's call, enlisting in the Marines and completing boot camp and radio training before shipping out to the Pacific. Sergeant Luttrell saw combat on the Marshall Islands and throughout the Pacific Islands and was part of the initial wave of marines landing on the shores of Iwo Jima. There, shrapnel from a Japanese shell tore through his lower face as he and his detachment set up their radios to coordinate the assault. After numerous reconstructive surgeries, Mr. Luttrell returned to his home and family in St. Louis, and he has been a pillar of the community ever since. His story--one of courage, strength, and resilience--is an example for us all, and I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in expressing our gratitude for his courageous service to our Nation and in celebrating Mr. Luttrell's 100th birthday.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise to bring this body's attention to 13 extraordinary Missourians who truly embody the best that our great State has to offer. They represent the inaugural class of my office's new Champions of Missouri Program, which seeks to identify and honor Missourians who have gone above and beyond the call of duty, selflessly served their community, and achieved great things. These 13 honorees span the State of Missouri--including St. Louis, Hermann, Kansas City, Wentzville, Sedalia, Springfield, Fulton, Memphis, Fredericktown, and the bootheel. All of these honorees represent service, sacrifice, and success and make me proud to be a Missourian. The first Missourian I want to honor today is Detective Sergeant Mason Griffith, who was tragically killed in the line of duty in March of 2023. Sergeant Griffith and Officer Adam Sullentrup of the Hermann Police Department responded to a disturbance call at a local gas station. When a shootout occurred, Sergeant Griffith was shot and sadly killed. Sergeant Griffith served his community with distinction and truly had a servant's heart. In addition to serving the Hermann Police Department for 12 years, he was the chief of police in his hometown of Rosebud and a Reserve Deputy Sheriff in the Gasconade County Sheriff's Department. Many describe Sergeant Griffith as one of the most kind and helpful people you would ever come across. His wife Jennifer and son Carson and friends are up in the Senate Gallery here today, and it was my distinct pleasure to present the Congressional Record honoring Sergeant Griffith to her and him earlier today. While this is merely a small token of mine and Missouri's gratitude for your husband's service and sacrifice, it is my hope that his memory will continue in the hearts and minds of those touched by his life and his service. Thank you, Sergeant Griffith, for your unwavering commitment to safety in your community. You truly are a Champion of Missouri. Another honoree is Officer Adam Sullentrup, who was with Sergeant Mason Griffith on that fateful disturbance call in March of 2023. Officer Sullentrup was shot and critically injured in what ultimately would be a 20-hour standoff with the suspect. After spending 7 months in a Colorado rehab hospital to recover from his injuries, Officer Sullentrup was finally able to come home to his family right before Thanksgiving. His community in Washington, MO, lined the highways to welcome him back home, a true testament to his character and his unwavering service to keeping his fellow Missourians safe. My prayers are with him, his wife Michelle, and their entire family as he continues to recover. Thank you, Officer Sullentrup. You are truly a Champion of Missouri. Next up is Captain Philip Gregory of Fredericktown, MO. Captain Gregory proudly served with the Missouri State Highway Patrol for over three decades, working to keep his community safe. Before joining the Missouri State Highway Patrol, Captain Gregory served as an EMT and a paramedic. In his law enforcement career, Captain Gregory has served as a zone supervisor, a criminal investigator, a corporal, a sergeant, a lieutenant, an assistant division director, and, finally, a captain. After 30 years of service and sacrifice, Captain Gregory retired in August of 2023. I wish him and his wife Tanya all the best in his hard-earned retirement. Thank you for your years of service to our great State, Captain Gregory. You are truly a champion for our great State. Nancy Baumgartner Hanson is a resident of Fulton, MO, and has done truly incredible work for individuals with disabilities. Nancy saw a need in her community when her daughter Shelby, a decorated Special Olympics athlete, graduated high school and needed a safe and supporting place to start her adult life. Nancy is leading the charge to put a WeBUILT in Fulton, which is a self-sustaining community development that provides a safe shelter for individuals with disabilities. It would be the first of its kind in Missouri. Additionally, Nancy has hosted iCan Bike in Fulton for nearly a decade, which teaches individuals with disabilities how to ride a bike, fostering independence and confidence. As the father of a son with disabilities, I know just how important these programs are in giving those living with disabilities more opportunities. Thank you, Nancy, for your great work that you have done to support those who sometimes need it most. You are truly a Champion of Missouri. John Meehan has had a storied career and has been a mainstay in Sedalia, MO, for decades. Throughout his career, John served as vice president of Third National Bank from 1982 to 2009; served as Pettis County presiding commissioner from 2011 to 2014; served on the board of directors for the United Way in Sedalia, Pettis County, from 2008 to 2015; served as president of the board of directors for the Sedalia Area Chamber of Commerce from 2017 to 2018; and has served as council chairman of the Wesley United Methodist Church since 2016. John also is an active member in civic organizations in the area. He spent a majority of his career aiming to make his community a better place. Thank you, John, for your commitment to Sedalia. You are truly a Champion of Missouri. Next up, Kevin Jeffries and Justin Parrack were driving along the highway when they noticed a car veering off the road and into a median. The driver was having an untimely medical emergency. Kevin and Justin sprang into action, entering through the passenger door of the car, stopped the car, administered CPR, and ultimately saved the life of the driver. For their heroic actions, Kevin and Justin were both bestowed with the Honorary Trooper Award, the highest civilian honor bestowed by the State Highway Patrol. While Kevin and Justin both insist they aren't heroes, I think my fellow Missourians would agree with me that they are. Thank you, Kevin and Justin, for your swift thinking and decisive actions that saved a life. You are both truly Champions of Missouri. Adam and Melinda Hendrix lost their 23-year-old son Justin to a heroin overdose in 2017. In his honor, Adam and Melinda started Justin Delivers Hope, a charity that has done unbelievable work to combat opioid abuse and addiction in their hometown of Wentzville and in the broader St. Louis region. JDH has raised money for education efforts, distributed lifesaving Narcan to family members and friends of users, and has worked with local police departments to fund more canine units to fight drug- related crime. Since its founding, JDH has funded 18 canine units to work in local police departments in St. Charles, and those units have helped officers confiscate nearly 300 pounds of illegal drugs in 2022. Thank you, Adam and Melinda, for honoring your son Justin by building a critical resource for those struggling with opioid abuse and addiction. You truly are Champions of Missouri. Hannah Montgomery is an inspiration to her community. Hannah has been in a motorized wheelchair since January of 2020 due to a neurological disorder caused by inflammation of her spinal cord, but she hasn't let that keep her down. Hannah has been involved in her local 4-H program since she was 6 years old and has a passion for showing her pigs. Hannah was recently selected as the Adair County SB40 Spotlight Award recipient for Kids Inclusion. Hannah's positive attitude, love for life, and perseverance in the face of adversity is something we can all learn from. Thank you, Hannah. You are truly a Champion of Missouri. Jim Chappell ran Chappell's Restaurant and Sports Museum from 1986 to 2018, and Chappell's has become a Kansas City legend and so has Jim. For years and years, there was no better place to grab dinner, a beer, watch a Chiefs or Royals game than Chappell's. Jim's eclectic watering hole for the Kansas City sports diehards also featured a unique collection of rare sports memorabilia that Jim himself curated. Outside of the walls of Chappell's, Jim demonstrated a tremendous spirit of service across business, civic, and community organizations. Thank you, Jim, for building a memorable safe haven for Kansas City sports fans and for fostering a stronger, deeper community. You truly are a Champion of Missouri. The city of St. Louis recently welcomed its newest sports team, the St. Louis City Soccer Club. We had an extraordinary inaugural season in front of thousands and thousands of adoring fans. One City player, Miguel Perez, is an exemplary ambassador for St. Louis and the State of Missouri. Just 2 days after graduating from Pattonville High School, Miguel scored his first career MLS goal for St. Louis City. Hailing from St. Louis, Miguel has demonstrated an intense dedication to the sport that he loves and represents that playoff team with a lot of hard work and great work ethic. It is safe to assume we can expect great things from Miguel, and we are certainly happy to have him in St. Louis. Miguel, you are truly a Champion of Missouri. Last but not least, is Sheryl Lynnette Branch-Maxwell, affectionately known as Ms. Sherry. Ms. Sherry has dedicated her time and energy in empowering youth in Missouri's bootheel through education and mentorship. Ms. Sherry's work as a program educator at Lincoln University Cooperative Extension in Charleston, MO, has been pivotal in implemented programs focused on leadership, self-esteem, and anti-drug initiatives. Ms. Sherry has worked to improve the well-being and development of our youth in daycare facilities and Head Start centers. Thank you, Ms. Sherry, for spending your time and investing in the well-being of our State's children and young adults. You truly are a Champion of Missouri. These Missourians have dedicated their time, energy, and efforts to improving the lives of others in their communities, and for that they should be commended and honored. It is critical that we continue to honor ordinary Missourians who do extraordinary things. These 13 individuals represent the best of the ``Show-Me'' State and truly exemplify what it means to be a Champion of Missouri. I yield the floor.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to honor an exceptional individual who has greatly impacted Missouri, Jim Chappell. As founder and long-time owner of the beloved Chappell's Restaurant & Sports Museum, Jim Chappell has made an indelible impact on the culture and community of Kansas City, MO. Jim first captured the hearts of Kansas Citians through his restaurant, a cultural mainstay celebrating sports legends and hometown pride for over three decades. However, he is seen as far more than a successful restaurateur; Jim is a respected leader who has demonstrated a tremendous spirit of service across business, civic, and community organizations over his illustrious career. Under his visionary leadership, Chappell's became far more than a place to grab drinks and watch the game; it emerged as a living museum and community touchstone, drawing praise as a one-of-a-kind local gem. The uniqueness of Chappell's Restaurant & Sports Museum was part of the reason USA Today selected it as ``the number one place in the country to watch the Super Bowl.'' Beyond the restaurant walls, Jim lends his talents to multiple Kansas City institutions as a board member shaping influential business, banking, and civic organizations. His insights helped guide institutions like First Bank of Missouri, Valley View Bank, and the Kansas City Police Employees' Retirement System. Additionally, Jim upholds Kansas City's heritage through his involvement with groups like the Sons of the American Revolution and Native Sons & Daughters of Greater Kansas City. From preserving beloved traditions to promoting sports icons, he connects the community's past glories to its future potential. Jim Chappell is truly a Champion of Missouri. Jim stands as a model Kansas Citian through his leadership, business success, and community spirit. His enduring passion for elevating local culture lays the groundwork for generations to come. Today, we commend this esteemed individual for his impact on Missourians. I wish to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Jim Chappell for his significant contributions to the Missouri community.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to honor Captain Philip E. Gregory of Fredericktown, MO, for his service to the State of Missouri. Captain Philip E. Gregory has been a servant leader, dedicated to keeping Missourians safe throughout his three decades of service with the Missouri State Highway Patrol. Gregory's career began in Southeast Missouri, and each patrol appointment across the State has given him the chance to give back to his community by working closely with local law enforcement and first responders. Gregory's desire to serve his community started as early as high school where he worked in the fire service and then served as an EMT/ paramedic. His career in law enforcement started when he turned 21 and has continued to this day. He credits his parents for instilling in him a strong work ethic, which provided the structure upon which he has built his career. Throughout his career, Gregory has served as a zone supervisor, a criminal investigator, a corporal, a sergeant, a lieutenant, an assistant division director, and a captain for the highway patrol. In each role, Gregory worked to better protect his neighbors. On August 1, 2023, after 30 years of dedicated service to Missouri, Captain Gregory retired. Captain Philip Gregory is truly a Champion of Missouri. I wish Captain Gregory and his wife Tanya all the best in his well-earned retirement. Missourians are safer and better off because of his efforts and his service to his fellow Missourians.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to honor the life and memory of Detective Sergeant Mason Griffith, of Rosebud, MO. Sergeant Griffith served with the Hermann Police Department with distinction for over 12 years, until he was fatally shot on duty while responding to a call on March 12, 2023. Sergeant Griffith made the ultimate sacrifice to protect the Hermann community. He, along with Officer Adam Sullentrup, who was also shot and put in critical condition, were responding to a disturbance at a local gas station when a shootout occurred. This incident led to a nearly 20-hour standoff with the suspect until the suspect was eventually taken into custody by Missouri Highway Patrol SWAT. Sergeant Griffith sadly passed away at only 34 years old and truly had a servant's heart. Along with serving the Hermann Police Department for 12 years, he was also the chief of police in his hometown of Rosebud and a reserve deputy sheriff for the Gasconade County Sherriff's Office. He was a leader in his community and was described by many as one of the most caring and helpful people you could ever meet. Sergeant Griffith touched numerous lives during his life, and now, his memory lives on through his family and in his community. Detective Sergeant Mason Griffith is truly a Champion of Missouri. His selfless service and dedication to his community inspires myself and all Missourians. Our State is safer because of Sergeant Griffith, and he truly is a hero. I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in honoring Sergeant Griffith's life, and I offer my deepest condolences to his wife Jennifer and their two children, who are in attendance today, for their loss.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to recognize and celebrate the extraordinary contributions of an exceptional individual, Ms. Sheryl Lynette Branch-Maxwell of Charleston, MO, affectionately known as Ms. Sherry. Her dedication to service and her tireless efforts in improving the lives of Southeast Missourians exemplifies the spirit of selflessness and community stewardship that inspires us all. For over four decades, Ms. Sherry has been a pillar of support for her community. Her journey began when she dedicated herself to the well-being and development of children in daycare facilities and Head Start Centers. Her commitment to nurturing youth extended beyond the classroom as she coordinated and directed summer food programs, ensuring children had access to essential nutrition during the summer months. Ms. Sherry's leadership and commitment to her community organizations have significantly benefited the Bootheel region of Missouri. Her work as a program educator at Lincoln University Cooperative Extension in Charleston has been pivotal in implementing programs focused on leadership, self-esteem, and anti-drug initiatives. Another commendable accomplishment is the development of the Kids' Beat initiative. This program became a beacon of hope offering guidance and support through more than 30 clubs across all counties of the Missouri Bootheel. Ms. Sherry's dedication to empowering youth through education and mentorship is truly commendable. Sheryl Lynette Branch-Maxwell is truly a champion of Missouri. I ask my esteemed colleagues to join me in applauding Ms. Sherry, an exceptional individual whose dedication and contributions have made an indelible mark on the fabric of our community.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to honor Adam and Melinda Hendrix of Wentzville, MO, for their inspirational work through their nonprofit, Justin Delivers Hope, or JDH. In 2017, Adam and Melinda lost their 23-year-old son Justin to a heroin overdose. With this tragedy, the Hendrixes decided to devote themselves to helping other families who have experienced the loss of a loved one. Motivated by their loss to establish Justin Delivers Hope, this charity has done heroic work. JDH has raised money for the education and prevention of heroin and opiate abuse, distributed Narcan to family members and friends of users, and assisted local police departments by funding more K-9 units to fight drug-related crime. Since its founding, JDH has raised enough money to fund 18 K-9 units to work in local police departments in St. Charles, MO. In 2022, these dogs have helped officers remove nearly 300 pounds of illegal drugs off the streets. Adam and Melinda Hendrix are truly Champions of Missouri. Because of their efforts and compassion, the St. Louis community is safer and better equipped to address the tragic effects of drug abuse. I am proud to recognize both Adam and Melinda for their work on this important issue and wish them all the best as they continue to serve the citizens of Missouri.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to recognize the courageous actions of Kevin Jeffries and Justin Parrack of Springfield, MO, who went above and beyond to rescue a distressed driver in their time of need. While traveling along the highway, Kevin Jeffries and Justin Parrack noticed a driver veering off the road into the median, which was later understood to be due to an untimely medical emergency. These two exemplary men, acting in concert, swiftly entered through the passenger side door, brought the car to a halt, administered CPR, and ultimately saved the life of the driver. In response to their feats of heroism, they have been honored with the prestigious Honorary Trooper Award, the highest civilian honor bestowed by the Missouri State Highway Patrol. When asked about the situation, Kevin Jeffries humbly remarked, ``Thank you, guys, for calling me a hero, but I just feel like I'm just Kevin,'' while Justin Parrack expressed, ``I wouldn't call myself a hero. I'm just a guy doing and trying to do the right thing.'' Both Kevin Jeffries and Justin Parrack are truly Champions of Missouri. The actions of these men are nothing short of heroic. They prevented further potential fatalities, injuries, or damages, and, most importantly, they saved the life of the driver. I ask my colleagues to join me in applauding these two remarkable individuals for their selfless and courageous actions.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to honor John Meehan of Sedalia, MO, for his investment in his community and willingness to serve his fellow Missourians. John Meehan has been a dedicated member of various community chambers and nonprofits boards, applying his knowledge of the region and his desire to cultivate relationships to make the community better. Throughout Meehan's varied career, he has served wherever there was opportunity, including as vice president of Third National Bank from 1982 to 2009, Pettis County Presiding Commissioner from 2011 to 2014, serving on the board of directors for the United Way in Sedalia-Pettis County from 2008 to 2015, as president of the board of directors for the Sedalia Area Chamber of Commerce from 2017 to 2018, and as council chairman of the Wesley United Methodist Church from 2016 to the present. He has even joined as a cohost of a morning talk show called ``Let's Talk,'' to promote local happenings throughout Sedalia. John Meehan is truly a Champion of Missouri. Even in retirement, Meehan continues to be an active member of civic organizations like the Sedalia Noonday Optimist Club, the Lions Club of Sedalia, and the Sedalia Area Chamber of Commerce. I wish him and his wife Mary all the best in his retirement, though I suspect he will continue to remain quite active in his community. Missourians are better off because of his servant leadership and his dedication to his neighbors.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, today I rise in recognition of a great Missourian, Nancy Baumgartner Hanson. She embodies someone who enriches their community as a service to others, loving their fellow neighbors and caring for them like family. A resident of Fulton, MO, Nancy saw a need to create opportunities for adults with disabilities, in part because her daughter Shelby, a decorated Special Olympics athlete, recently graduated high school and was looking for a safe space to start her adult life. Not seeing options for her daughter, Nancy set out to build her own. WeBUILT is the first of its kind in Missouri. It is a self-sustaining community development that provides a safe shelter to adults with disabilities. It is maintained and owned by those living in the development. In reporting on her efforts, a local television station reported, ``Ask any parent what they would do for their child, and most would say they would go to the ends of the Earth for them. We met one mom [Nancy] who is moving the Earth to help her adult daughter find freedom and independence.'' Indeed, the level of effort and dedication to find a solution for her daughter and create a big enough endeavor to share it with her community is a feat every Missourian should be proud of. Further, Nancy's commitment to her family and community extends to empowering individuals with disabilities through programs like the iCan Bike camp. As the current host of iCan Bike in Fulton, Nancy teaches individuals with disabilities how to ride a bicycle. The program fosters independence and confidence. Nearing a decade of teaching, iCan Bike underscores Nancy's enduring commitment to making a positive difference in the lives of those with disabilities. Nancy Baumgartner Hanson is truly a Champion of Missouri. Her accomplishments lie in the lives she has changed, the can-do attitude that she embodies to serve others, and the resulting community she has forged through her efforts. I am proud to represent her and highlight her remarkable contributions to Missouri in the U.S. Senate.

Mr. SCHMITT

Mr. SCHMITT. Madam President, I rise today to honor an impressive soccer player from my home State of Missouri, Miguel Perez. He has achieved athletic excellence and success at a young age. I am proud to highlight this talented soccer player who should be noted for his ability to perform on the pitch, as well as his desire to serve his neighbors. Hailing from St. Louis, this young prodigy recently reached a significant career milestone. Two days after graduating from Pattonville High School, Miguel scored his first career Major League Soccer--MLS--goal as a new striker for the St. Louis City SC professional team. Miguel's ascent from local school sports to the pros proves his exceptional skill and work ethic on the field. Yet his achievement also encapsulates the realization of dreams for Miguel, his family, and the wider St. Louis community. The son of Jackie and Luis Perez, who instilled values of discipline and public service in Miguel from a young age, Miguel grew up embracing soccer as a passion and outlet. During high school and now into his professional soccer career, he maintains academic rigor and community engagement, values modeled by his parents' commitments to Washington University's Orthopedic Department and the St. Louis County Police Department. Miguel Perez is truly a Champion of Missouri. Furthermore, he is a champion of athletics for Missouri. His early successes in soccer mirror the resilience, character, and work ethic that define our community. I look forward to following his continued growth and career in the MLS. I wish to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Mr. Perez for his success and service to Missouri. St. Louis stands proud--``Who are we? S-T-L!''