Thom Tillis

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I rise today--in a few minutes, I am going to make a unanimous consent request for a bill that we refer to in our office as the American Deficit Relief Act; but before I do, I want to talk about why I am here. We have a program--if you all remember, during the COVID era, we came to this floor multiple times on a bipartisan basis to do everything we could to try to keep the economy afloat while we were dealing with something that hadn't happened in this country in 100 years called a pandemic. We did some things that were good; we did a few things that were proven to be not so good. One of those things is referred to as the employer retention credit, also known as the employer retention tax credit or ERC. It was under the CARES Act that we first implemented this bill, and at that time, we thought it was going to be about $55 billion reduced revenue to the government. I guess a different way of saying that is $55 billion remaining in the private sector. That was the concept behind so many of the things that we did in the COVID relief measures. But then we had--in the Appropriations Act of 2021 and the American Rescue Plan, we have added even additional reductions, extensions, that resulted in $86 billion in revenue not coming back to the Federal Government. Now the challenge that we have out there, like we have in a few of these programs, is we have had fraudsters run rampant--and probably none more than the employer retention tax credit. They have cottage industries that are set up, calling businesses and saying: Hey, did you know that you are eligible for this? Now, keep in mind when we were doing this program, these were businesses that were saying: My gosh, my business is about to go under. I don't know how to pay for my employees. We were trying to create programs to get the employers to hang on a little bit more. Folks, I don't know if you have noticed, but we are past the pandemic. We are back open for business, and you have got companies that I think, arguably, are going to be proven guilty of fraud going out and asking people to take the tax credit now to the tunes of billions and billions of dollars. So what do we do? Well, we have got the employer retention tax credit where people are calling the IRS and making claims every single day. In the middle of the tax-filing season, they are dealing with a program that the IRS has said they want to get rid of. Fraud is out of control. We need to give them help. They have been asking for help. Now why would this require a unanimous consent request, and why would I anticipate an objection today? Just in fairness to Senator Wyden, my colleague on the Finance Committee--he is the chair; I am a relatively new member--there are some that want to use this program as a pay-for for a tax measure that we may talk about briefly later on. I am OK with some of the tax discussion going on, but I am really worried about this being used as a pay-for. Here's why: We implemented the program in the 2019 timeframe--or I should say 2020 timeframe. We don't have a pay-for for this program. It sits on the books for a while. Now, it is costing three times as much, and we are using some of what we hope to claw back through fraud and abuse as a pay-for. It just seems to me it is kind of pay-for laundering. It doesn't make sense when you are looking at some $34 trillion in debt. With the discussion about the tax extenders that are up now, the R&D tax credit, the low-income housing tax credit, all those things I support--and I even support some modernization of the child tax credit; but I got a real problem with using the $78 billion, roughly, that we think we can get out of the Employee Retention Tax Credit to pay-for. So, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of my bill at the desk. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, just one technical point, and then I will yield the floor. I should mention that I did live in the same trailer park as Jelly Roll but 20 years apart. I don't want anybody to think we were contemporary neighbors. I am a bit older.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from New York for making those statements, and I am glad that I was able to yield time to hear them here on the floor myself. Supplemental Funding Mr. President, today is one of those days where I wonder if people know--who are watching C-SPAN or watch reports or are in the Gallery-- what the heck is happening. So I thought I would come down here and maybe tell you what is happening. For about 4 months, Senator Lankford, Senator Sinema, and Senator Murphy got together with the charge of trying to come up with a bipartisan approach to the situation at the border. I think, by most objective measures, everyone I know--because now it even shows up in polls--recognizes that we have got an out-of-control situation at the border. We clearly have people who should come to this country and should be able to ask for asylum, but it has been abused. The cartels are making about $1 billion a year charging tolls to come across the border. And if you don't pay the toll, you are probably going to get killed. You get about one chance to cross the border without paying a toll--$5,000 if you are from Central America, $50,000 if you are from China. But if you try crossing that border--I have been there. They have got a line of sight, and if you try to cross that border without paying that toll, paying a transnational criminal organization, they are going to kill you. Now, they do let some people come across the border without having paid a toll, but they have got to work it off once they get here. They are effectively indentured servants who are doing the work of cartels. This is not hyperbole. This is a briefing that I have gotten from law enforcement officials--Democrats, Republicans, Independents--in the Biden administration. This is real. This is not politics, not from me anyway. So James Lankford, representing the Republican Party, went down, tried to negotiate a deal. And he worked hard at it. James Lankford is from Oklahoma, a ruby-red State. James Lankford is considered to be one of the most conservative Members of the U.S. Senate. To see Members of my conference and people out in the country criticizing James Lankford as some sort of a ``squish'' or some sort of a sellout really tells me that the people here have to know, so they must be misinforming people, and the people out there are believing it because they are hearing people here say that James Lankford sold out. It couldn't be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is, the bill that they negotiated, it still needed a little bit of work, but it is a dramatic improvement over the status quo. Why did we think we even had to go down this path? Because President Biden has apparently forgotten, over the last 3 years, all of the Executive orders that he has rescinded that have caused the border situation to get worse. President Biden needs to be told by his advisers that he, in fact, has tools, without a single bill being passed here, that could bring the situation at the border under some semblance of control, but he has chosen not to. So now we have some of our Members--my Members--who think that we have lost the argument; that for some reason, because we weren't able to get this border bill passed, that somehow Republicans own the responsibility for an out-of-control border situation that started after President Biden got sworn in. Ladies and gentlemen, we did not have this problem. You could have whatever arguments you want to have about President Trump, but the one thing I will tell you about the border, it was under control under President Trump, and it is out of control under President Biden. No law has changed. No authorities have expired. President Biden has chosen not to use authorities he has today. So I wanted to come down here and set the record straight, first, on Senator Lankford. I don't know if any other Member has come down and talked about him. I voted yesterday not to move forward on the border package because I have always said, unless we can convince more than half of our Republican majority that they would support this bill, it didn't make sense to send a bill to a Republican-led House that didn't have a majority of the Republicans here in the Senate. That is just knowing how a bill becomes law and knowing that we needed the strength of that message in order to have any prayer of getting the bill passed when it goes over to the House. So the border bill is where it is, and it is a shame. It is an opportunity lost that I will guarantee you, if we are in power in the White House, if Republicans are in power, we are going to regret that some aspects of this bill weren't passed. The bill was also endorsed by the Border Patrol Council. The Border Patrol Council is the law enforcement Agency on the border. When I hear the Border Patrol Council say they have endorsed something, they have their necks on the line. Their lives--Border Patrol agents have lost their lives over the past several years because of dangerous encounters at the border. So when I see the Border Patrol Council endorse something--ladies and gentlemen, even if you oppose the bill, understand that law enforcement, those people on the line at the border, endorsed this bill. Clearly, they want more. They have communicated to us that they want more, but they have said that this was positive progress. But that is an opportunity lost, and I am OK with that, and I am at peace with having voted against moving forward on it because I knew we wouldn't have a majority of our conference. But now what do we have before us? We have a bill that is primarily focused on providing aid to Ukraine, to Israel, and to Taiwan. So it is called a supplemental bill. It is an appropriation. It is us having to authorize the use of these funds. Now, we were supposed to leave today for 2 weeks. We were supposed to go on recess. And Senator Schumer made a decision that I happen to agree with. He has decided that we are not going to leave here until we settle this issue. We have some people say: Well, we need time to think about it. You know, this is a planned recess. We need to move on and step back and reflect, maybe negotiate another border bill. That is not going to happen. Now let's talk about what is before us. Do we care about this page or this chapter in history? I do. I mean, some people want to go away or think about it, but I think about right now and 24 hours a day since February of 2022, Ukrainian soldiers in trenches trying to defend their homeland. I know on TV and I know to everybody else this is just something that is happening over in Europe. Think about these people who are fighting for their existence, and we are sitting here saying maybe we can take a couple of weeks before we decide on it? Putin would love nothing more than that. Ladies and gentlemen, if we withdraw from Ukraine, if the United States, the leader of the free world, says that we are no longer interested in defending freedom and countering Russia, Russia will win, and at some point forward, we will regret the day that we avoided helping the Ukrainians fight their war because we are most likely-- those who would make that decision are making a decision to someday put American lives at risk in a war somewhere, maybe in Russia--or maybe in Europe but maybe in China. The people who are watching the decisions that this body is going to make over the next few days--Xi Jinping is probably more interested and more hopeful that we fail to make a decision to support Ukraine than Vladimir Putin. This world is small today. We don't have, as the leader of the free world, the luxury of only being focused on one place at a time. We have to focus on Ukraine and defend freedom there. We have to focus on the South China Sea, Taiwan, and the risk there. We have to focus on our friend and ally Israel in the Middle East. We have to make the tough decision and sometimes cut through the noise and go back home and explain to the American people how critical this decision is. Don't make the mistake of thinking it is just a channel change away from watching something else that is going on in the world, ladies and gentlemen. People's lives are on the line. Tens of thousands of people have died. Women have been raped. Children have been kidnapped. And Putin is OK with that. Does this United States stand down when you are talking about that kind of a dictator, that murderer and thug? God, I hope not. And I don't care how painful it is politically for somebody to go back home and explain this. It bears no resemblance to what people in Israel felt on October 7 and to what people in Ukraine have felt for the last 2 years. And it will be the same in Taiwan if we don't act. So over the next couple of days, if you are wondering why nothing is happening here, why there are no votes--well, Leader Schumer laid down--they call it a motion to proceed, and at least 60 people needed to vote on it in order for us to proceed to considering the bill. So now we have a bill here on the floor, and that bill has funding for Ukraine, it has funding for Israel, and it has funding for Taiwan. Now, you are wondering why are we not here voting and doing other things. Because right now, we are doing what they call hotlining votes. We are communicating to all the offices certain amendments that we want to pass. But then, because the Senate--any individual Member--I am Thom Tillis from North Carolina. I am not supposed to be talking to you all, by the way, because I think it is a violation of the rules. So I am not really talking to you all; I am just looking in that direction. But anyway, you have to get consent in this body to get anything done, and any one Member can gum up the works. So right now, we have people saying: We must have amendments on the bill. We must have amendments on the bill. Then they are privately saying: But I am not going to give up a second of time between now and Monday to let those amendments occur. So we can't have it both ways, guys. It is fine. If on Monday you get angry because no amendments were actually passed, it is because you haven't been able to cooperate. This is a give-and-take organization. If you don't show some flexibility--yielding back time--then we are just going to sit here until the mandatory time occurs, and then we are going to have a vote, and then people are going to be mad because they are going to say either the minority leader or the majority leader had this baked in all along and they were never going to allow a vote. That couldn't be further from the truth. If you as a Member of the Senate want to cooperate, we can get a slate of amendments done here. We can get an agreement that they can be heard. We can vote on them. And that is not going to happen, likely. So I just feel like we have to be honest with ourselves and recognize that if we don't come up with agreements, it is not because it was baked in; it is not because any leader already had it planned and is the puppet master to everything going on here; it is because Members are making a conscious decision to grind cooperation to a halt. Now, let me just go back to where I started. The stakes are high here. Temperatures are high. But come on, guys. We are U.S. Senators. Get over it and do your job. Temperatures are high here, but the reality is, you should kind of cast aside the inconvenience that working this weekend may represent to you and think about the inconvenience that Hamas has put on the Israelis, that Putin has put on the Ukrainians. That is a real inconvenience. What we are doing here is living out the privilege and the honor of being U.S. Senators, and I expect my colleagues to grow a spine, do the work of the Senate, and go back home and explain what it is we are doing and why it is we are doing it.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor a great North Carolinian, Deborah Womble Johnson. Born in Nash County, NC, on December 8, 1952, Deborah had a highly successful 37-year career as a healthcare executive, advising some of the top companies in the world, including Abbott Laboratories based in Rocky Mount, NC. Deborah was a loving wife and mother, a devout Christian, and a pillar in her community. She was an active and lifelong member of the Temperance Hall Methodist Church, founded by Dr. John Mercer, who built her family's historic home. She was an outdoor enthusiast who made countless friends as the president of the Englewood Garden Club, a Nash County certified Master Gardener, and a member of the Wilson County Beekeeper Association. Deborah is survived by her husband of 28 years, John M. Johnson, Jr.; his son and Deborah's stepson Brian Marshall Johnson of Alexandria, VA; her sister-in-law Laurie Womble and her sons Van and Billy Womble, of Spring Lake, NC; nieces Toni Rouse, Yvonne Harrell, Roberta Weaver, of Pinetops, NC; niece Renee Womble and nephews Dave Womble, Curtis Womble, of Lunenburg, MA; and Bobby Womble of Lexington, NC. I would like to offer my deepest condolences to Deborah's loving family and the many friends she made throughout her life in North Carolina. May her memory be a blessing to them.

Mr. TILLIS

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

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, before the Senator from Oklahoma leaves, I was wondering if he would yield for a question.

Mr. TILLIS. Senator Lankford, you have done an extraordinary job of negotiating what I think is going to be a successful compromise that is going to get support from Republicans and Democrats. But as you were going through this work, in the years that you spent studying this issue as a ranking member and chair in a committee of jurisdiction, I have got to believe you have looked at, let's say, Canada, for example. There are a lot of people who think that Senator Lankford and those of us who are trying to support Senator Lankford are being draconian and being out of step with the Western World. But, Senator Lankford, could you just briefly describe how what we are trying do compares to, say, our partner to the north, Canada, their laws?

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, may I ask one followup?

Mr. TILLIS. Senator Lankford, isn't it true that tens of thousands of people who cross our borders today--and who may, ultimately, request asylum--have looked past an opportunity to safely relocate in the country they are seeking asylum from, likely transited to another country where they could have declared asylum, and, in some cases, passed through four or five or six different safe jurisdictions before they made the dangerous trip through Mexico, across the Rio Grande border, and present themselves at the border? Is that an accurate assessment of what hundreds of thousands of people have done during the Trump administration?

Mr. TILLIS. I thank Senator Lankford through the Chair. Madam President, I want to spend a few minutes on this subject as well. We are reaching a milestone that I think is critically important. Since President Biden has entered office, the number of encounters at the border, 8 million--8 million--since President Biden entered office--that population exceeds the population of 30 U.S. States--the population of 30 individual U.S. States. That is the number we are talking about here. And, ladies and gentlemen, a lot of them are the people who we just described. Of course, the United States wants to be a haven for people who are fearing for their lives, suffering from oppression. But the goal of asylum is to get them immediately out of that dangerous situation--not to suddenly decide that I want to go through two or three or four other jurisdictions because what, ultimately, I want to do is get to the United States. They are demeaning and devaluing the concept of asylum. And the problem is, they are getting those who want to come here--and we should take it as a compliment that they want to come to the United States-- but they are elbowing out and sapping the capacity for the United States to make absolutely certain that people who have a legitimate case for asylum are even being heard. I wonder about how many thousands of people who desperately need to get to the United States--it is their only option--are not getting there because we are focused on this population. Ladies and gentlemen, we have to do something. This is dangerous. You know, for a time, conservatives were really in the wilderness, being viewed as inhumane, insensitive, saying we have to have an orderly border process. I have been saying that. I am also somebody who thinks we should probably legally immigrate another 250,000 to a half million more than we do already. We immigrate about a million. Let me tell you the other problem we have here that is inherently unfair. I already talked about people who legitimately should be given asylum--probably not, because we don't know who they are. We are dealing with a flood of 300,000 in the month of December alone. Of course, they are going to be collateral damage in the form of people who want asylum. But now the American people are waking up to it. There was a time when it was purely a shirts and skins--blue jersey Democrat, red jersey Republican--argument. It is not the case anymore. The American people expect this administration to do something. And I am glad. I am also glad we have James Lankford at the tip of the spear negotiating on behalf of Republicans. He has negotiated--I am part of the working group; I have seen progress. He has negotiated something that I think is important. We cannot miss this opportunity. The stakes are too high, and the American people agree. Nearly half of those who responded to this poll--which was an even distribution, ideologically speaking--nearly half of them think we have an emergency at the border. They are right. I have been there several times. They are right. People are dying. Cartels are making nearly $1 billion a year charging tolls to come across the border. If you try to cross the border without an armband or recognition you paid a cartel, you are likely going to die or you are going to get one more chance before you get beaten up. That happens every day at the border, ladies and gentlemen. I am not exaggerating. I have been there. I have seen it. I have heard the stories. Fortunately, now we have a majority of Americans that expect this administration to come to the table and negotiate in good faith with conservatives and people like me who have negotiated several bipartisan deals to solve this problem. If any Democrats are concerned with how far the negotiations are going, I don't think that they need to. This is not a political loser for people who are concerned with voting on a bipartisan compromise. In fact, it is politically smart. At the end of the day, I hope political advisers and everybody that is up for election next year know: You know what, you don't even need political courage to do the right thing here, because the good policy of border security is also good politics for the overwhelming majority of people that need a vote for this bill. We are going to have 30 or 40 people on this side--not 30 or 40--I think we will probably have 25 or 30 Members in this body that won't vote for it. Some will be because it didn't go too far; the others will be, it didn't go far enough; some of them are closer in cycle. It is very difficult to explain; I get that. But we need about 70 votes coming out of this Chamber to create a momentum to get it done in the House. I am going to be one of those 70 votes. I also want the American people to not only wake up to the reality that people are abusing our system--they are taking our attention away from people we should desperately find a path to getting to the United States--and they are also jumping line. That is what I will leave with you. How angry do you all get--I love going to a good sporting event or a good comedy show. You get there early sometimes because you want to get a good seat if there is general admission. How angry do you get if you are standing in line for hours and, all of a sudden, somebody jumps in front of you? Well, imagine if you have been waiting years--more than a decade--to legally follow the process to be one of those million people a year that gets citizenship, when you see millions of them coming across the border every year breaking line. These people that are working hard, obeying our laws, respecting it, doing it by the book--they are breaking line, and it is actually elongating the time for them to get into this country. It is unfair at every level, and it is unsafe. The only people who are loving the stalemate that we have in this Nation today are the cartels who are charging from $5,000 to $50,000 a person to get you across the border. Not everybody has $5,000, though. So you know what they do? They say, well, you don't have to pay. But once you get across the border, you are going to participate in criminal enterprises until we think your debt is done. That is not an exaggeration either. Talk to law enforcement. Talk to people in these communities. These cartels are like a cancer metastasizing through illegally present communities, exploiting them, and causing some people who may not have had a criminal record in the country of their origin to become criminals here. There are a million different reasons why we need to get this border compromise done. I hope this Congress is the Congress where people set aside politics, do the right thing, make this country safer, and show respect for people trying to come to this country legally by making sure that their place in line is reserved.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I am going to be brief. I decided this morning that I wanted to come and talk about the events involving Secretary Austin and what we now know are his challenges with prostate cancer. I want to look at it from two different perspectives. One, I want to be very brief. I think that Secretary Austin made a mistake by not notifying Members of Congress and by not notifying the administration--in other words, moving through the transition. I think that was a mistake, and I hope Secretary Austin has learned from that. But I am not here to talk about that. That was just a mistake. It shouldn't have been made, particularly in the circumstances we are in now with conflicts in Israel, conflicts in Ukraine, threats across the world, and threats to this country. I am here to talk about this because it was 2 years ago this month that I was diagnosed with prostate cancer. I made a decision very quickly after I learned about it. It took me about a month. I had gone to my doctor for my annual checkup. You always check your PSA. I found out in probably the September-October timeframe that my PSA was up. I went back for a followup exam through the Christmas holiday. Then, in the first or second week of January 2021, my doctor said: You have prostate cancer, and you need to take some course of action. And there are several different courses of action, but I made the immediate decision to be public with the fact that I was going through prostate cancer. Secretary Austin chose not to. For any individual person, that is your right. I hope you are not embarrassed by the fact that you have cancer any more than a woman would be embarrassed for having breast cancer, because back in the day, when breast cancer was stigmatized, a lot of women died because they were ashamed of something they had no control over. So my point is that Secretary Austin is a global figure. Secretary Austin is somebody whom people around the world know. Secretary Austin, as personal as it is to have to deal with a cancer diagnosis, needs to know, as a public figure--I, as a U.S. Senator; he, as the Secretary of Defense--has an obligation to save lives. And one of the ways you save lives, when you get prostate cancer as a male, is to not be ashamed of it and to tell other males. Any male who has a history of prostate cancer--and their family--needs to tell those young men, you don't get to wait until you are 40 to get a PSA test; you should start getting it when you are 30. And every man over 40 should be getting a PSA test every year. And then do your homework. Study the courses of therapy, whether it was, in my case, a procedure similar to what Secretary Austin got--removal of the prostate; it could be hormone therapy; it could be radiation therapy. Cancer--and prostate cancer in particular--is one of the most treatable cancers there is. It is highly likely I still have cancer. The goal with prostate cancer is to die with it, not from it, right? Die with it, not from it. You can manage this cancer, but you can only manage it if public officials like Secretary Austin and U.S. Senators step up and are not ashamed of it but try to make sure everybody else understands it is something that is out of your control. You confront it, and you beat it. So the reason for my comments today was to use this opportunity to remind men across this country and across this world: Don't be ashamed of prostate cancer. Don't be ashamed of some of the side effects that may or may not occur. Have the courage to tell everybody that you are going to take it on and you are going to win. By mentioning it and sharing this conversation, like I am today, hopefully you are going to save a few more lives.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the service and sacrifice of Greensboro Police Officer Sergeant Philip Dale Nix. Before the start of the new year, Sergeant Nix was off duty at a local gas station when he witnessed three individuals stealing alcohol. Of course, we know there is really no such thing as being off duty for a brave law enforcement officer who took the oath to protect and serve. So Sergeant Nix's instincts kicked in immediately. He approached the suspects as the crime was taking place, and they responded by shooting him. Another off-duty officer, a Guilford County paramedic, tried to render him aid. His wounds were fatal, though; and he passed away shortly thereafter at the hospital. Sergeant Nix embodied the very best of law enforcement. He was a consummate professional, a good and decent person, and was beloved by the community of Greensboro. It should come as no surprise that Sergeant Nix, like so many other officers, comes from a family with a long legacy of public service. In this case, it included public service at the Greensboro Fire Department, where his father was a captain, his uncle was an assistant chief, and his brother currently serves as a firefighter. Sergeant Nix worked for the Greensboro Police Department for 22 years and had a distinguished record of service. He worked as a criminal investigations division detective; a patrol corporal; a patrol sergeant; a police training officer; a financial crimes detective; and, most recently, as a supervisor of the family victims unit. As one detective of the Greensboro Police Department noted: Sergeant Nix was the Family Victims Unit. The amount of work, and dedication that he put into his career and into the community to protect vulnerable communities, and protect innocent people [was] unmatched. For as impressive as Sergeant Nix was for his exemplary work in uniform, it was his job as a family man--a loving husband, a father, and son--that made him the man he was. As the Greensboro city council member Zack Matheny put it: [Sergeant Nix] cared about this community . . . and he loved his family 10 times more than he [even] loved this community. So I hope that they can feel his arms wrapped around them. Sergeant Nix upheld his oath to protect and serve even when he wasn't in uniform. He exemplified what it means to be an exceptional law enforcement officer, and he made the ultimate sacrifice. My deepest condolences go out to Sergeant Nix's family for their tremendous loss, and my condolences go out to the community of Greensboro, which lost one of their finest and most decent public servants. We should never--and I will never--forget his service.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Adam Caldwell in my office be granted floor privileges until December 31, 2023.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I appreciate the words of my colleague from South Carolina. I fully support everything he said. And I want to come up and speak again to the challenge that we have at the border and why we need to take action now and why that action needs to be taken as part of a supplemental that includes funding for Israel and Ukraine. The situation at the border simply has gotten out of control. But I think it bears repeating; it has been said by some of the folks who spoke before: We are talking about a fourfold increase. Donald Trump was President for 4 years. President Biden has been President for 3 years. And in 3 years, we have nearly four times the crossings that we did in the Trump administration. Now, let's say some of that is because we had title 42 and COVID. That is fine. We can argue that. But we can still recognize this is a two- or three-time increase in illegal crossings. Now, we have lost operational control of the border. We don't have situational awareness at the border. Let me explain what that means. When you have 1.5 million people who we know came into this country illegally--they paid money to a cartel-- $5 to $50,000, depending upon what country they came from--to get into this country illegally. But some of them specifically want to go through a sector that the cartels specialize in making sure that you never have to encounter a border agent. They are called ``got-aways.'' Over the last 3 years, 1.5 million ``got-aways'' have entered this country. Now, I have been to the border several times. Once you cross the Rio Grande River, most people are going to go present themselves to a Border Patrol agent, and then you are going to be processed. You are either going to get screened for asylum or you are going to get paroled. But from the time you cross the border until the time you are released into the United States, it is a matter of days or a week. So why would somebody spend money--why would 1.5 million people spend money to expressly avoid being detained, unless they have a bad record, unless they have criminal intent or malign intent? Ladies and gentlemen, we have apprehended people at the border who are on the Terrorist Watchlist. So we have lost operational control of the border by a fourfold increase in crossings. We have lost situational awareness because we don't know where these 1.5 million people are. We only know that they set foot on American soil, and it is highly unlikely that they went back. Now, I hate to almost draw this parallel, but I think it is important. One of the things when Israel is able to be successful in their response to Hamas, Israel is going to have to go back and say: How did this even happen on October 7? Well, we know. And I think a part of that analysis is going to be that they had lost situational awareness on the threat coming from Gaza. Now, people may say it is an unfair comparison. I don't think it is. When we have almost 8 million people by the end of this administration here illegally, is it fair to say that a few of them hate America, that they could be terrorists, and they are on the Terrorist Watchlist? There is a compelling Homeland Security reason for securing the border. And the American people are great. I want to get quickly to the negotiations that are being led by James Lankford. The American people now, a majority--we are not talking a plurality; we are talking about a majority of American people--Democrats, Independents, Republicans-- agree that we have a major problem or crisis at the border. Biden needs to fix this problem. Biden needs to fix this problem for Senators that are running up. This is not a situation where it is just Republicans saying we want a secure border. We always do; we always will. This is now the American people in the electorate saying that we need to fix it. So when we get into negotiations, of course, we have to change asylum policy and, of course, we have to change parole policy. And, of course, that is going to make some Democrats get out of their comfort zone. The last thing I will leave you with, in the last Congress, ladies and gentlemen, I participated in every single bipartisan bill that was passed out of the Congress in the last Congress. I took a lot of heat from the right for doing that. And I did it for good reason. Now, the Democrats can say that they had a bipartisan vote in the last Congress, but they didn't. All 51 of them voted for something I worked hard to get 11 or 12 or 15 Republicans to vote on. So now it is time for Democrats to demonstrate their commitment to bipartisanship. It is time to let some of their Members get out of their comfort zone or vote no on the supplemental, while the other ones who recognize this is a problem and that the American people have disapproved of this administration's handling of it, now it is their time to be bipartisan. Now it is their time to recognize that parole reform and asylum reform is critical to reducing the future flows. And I hope that my colleagues will, because as someone who has tried to be bipartisan and respectful of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I have no intention of supporting a supplemental bill that doesn't have meaningful bipartisan border security that we can measure on an almost immediate basis in terms of reducing the future flows. I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who I thoroughly enjoyed working with on bipartisan efforts in the last Congress, will see that this is an opportunity, this is their time to demonstrate the same courage, to get out of their comfort zone and do what is right for the American people. I yield floor.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Chowan University, a North Carolina institution of higher education that has long served our great State and this Nation. This year, Chowan University, located in Murfreesboro, NC, is celebrating the 175th anniversary of its founding, which occurred on October 11, 1848. Chowan's demisemiseptcenten nial is a time to commemorate the institution, honor the heritage, and applaud the people who accomplished and are accomplishing extraordinary things by creating positive change in the lives of others. Chowan is a Christian educational institution founded by Baptist families and named Chowan ``people of the south,'' to honor the Native American Algonquin Chowanoke Tribe. In the spring of 1848, a group of fathers gathered at the home of Dr. Godwin Cotton Moore, moderator of the Chowan Baptist Association. These men were determined to have an institution that would give their daughters a well-rounded education, and they presented a resolution to the association. The association appointed the first trustees for the ``female high school,'' to be called Chowan Female Institute. Dr. Archibald McDowell of South Carolina was elected first principal, and the institute opened on October 11, 1848, with 11 students--thus began the institution, which now boasts over 15,000 alumni who live around the world. These alumni, friends, students, families, faculty, and staff are held in high regard. They are transforming the world by solving problems, sharing talents, and spreading Chowan University's rich story. Today, we honor Chowan University's commitment to the education of past, present, and future generations. I ask my fellow Senators to join me in honoring Chowan University for its service.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I come here to join my colleagues to talk about the events of the past 10 or so days in Israel and the horrible attacks. I want to talk a little bit about two visits that I have made there over the past year or so, the most recent one back in February. But I want to start with holding our Members accountable here on Capitol Hill. This was posted on social media, and it reads like false statements that we have seen from Hamas and other groups that want to foment hate and death in the region. It reads like this: Israel just bombed the Baptist Hospital building, killing 500 Palestinians--doctors, children, patients--just like that. That was within an hour or two of the bombing. Before we knew anything, before any of us could have possibly had a secured briefing, before we had gotten an assessment from the President of the United States or any of our intelligence sources here, before we could go down to the SCIF and actually understand the details, that statement was made. You would think that would come from a member of Hamas, but it came from a Member of our Congress. If that Member of Congress wants to take responsibility for the protest that we now see in Beirut--good on you, in Jordan, in Amman, and in Egypt. This sort of leadership or failure of leadership has no place on Capitol Hill. Now I want to talk about why I think Hamas is evil and why Iran is a part of this and why this is not surprising that the very details of this attack took place. Earlier this year, in February, I was in--well, let me back up. A couple of years ago, I was in Israel, and we went down to the Gaza Strip. We saw a tunnel head. We actually walked into a tunnel that was discovered by the Israelis. We went to a Patriot battery or an armed dome battery that every day is prepared to shoot down missiles because that always happens. Before this attack, it happened almost on a daily basis. I have literally been in Israel when I am having lunch, in northern Israel--this was near the Golan Heights--and I am asking somebody to pass a plate of food, and a bomb goes off. And the people living in this kibbutz did not even miss a beat. Every day they have to live with this stuff. So now, down in Gaza, we see the tunnel system that is in Gaza. If you go north to the Lebanese border, you will see an entire network of tunnels that the Israelis identified just in time. It had been a project, it was estimated to be, 10 years in the making, funded by Iran. Hezbollah is in Lebanon. Hamas is down in the Gaza Strip. They had developed these tunnel networks, and they were prepared to do the same thing in northern Israel that we saw in southern Israel over the past week and a half. They even want to design this to strike fear and terror in the Israeli people. They want them to think--they want their children to think that they are going to pop out of the ground and kidnap them and kill their parents. This is a part of the terror that they want the Israeli people to live with every single day. The Iranians were absolutely responsible for funding Hamas to build that tunnel network in northern Israel, and they do the same thing with Hamas in southern Israel. Ladies and gentlemen, first off, this has to end. Let us work with facts. If Israel doesn't abide by the rules of war, then we should hold them accountable. But what we are finding out now from additional intelligence sources is that it does appear as though this was not an Israeli strike; that it was probably a failed missile launch from Hamas. Well, let the facts lead where they may, but here is what I do know: This congressional Member and others, before they can actually stand up to the Palestinian people--who I believe the majority of whom are good people who want to live free and live in democracy--they have to recognize that Hamas is evil, every single one of them. From their leadership down to their rank and files to the ones who flew the ultralights in to the people who came out of the tunnels and murdered over 1,200 people, they have to be held accountable. Their funder has to be held accountable. Their strategists in Iran have to be held accountable. We in the United States have to stand by Israel and by freedom-loving Palestinians and freedom-loving members of the Middle East, but we cannot let this go. We cannot let this evil go unchecked. We have to stand by Israel, and we have to make sure that we do everything we can to educate the American people on the facts and disabuse them of any notion that this congressional Member or anyone else has any place in communicating that misinformation to the American people and across the world. And the violence that can come from making people believe that, they have to own.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I want to thank my colleagues from Arizona and Texas for, really, the first historic activity. It was a historic month last year. In the wake of the Uvalde shootings, we came together in one meeting--and this is a very diverse group of people, Senator Murphy from Connecticut being one of them. We came together in one meeting, and we developed enough trust to say that we thought we could do something that hadn't been done in a generation: trying to come up with a bipartisan bill that addresses what we considered to be some of the root causes of community safety. We did it in 30 days with bipartisan support, and we sent it to the President's desk. I am sure Senator Cornyn and Senator Sinema are doing the same thing, but I watch it virtually every day. I watch what is happening on the ground. I look at funding for school safety, funding for school hardening, funding for veterans courts, funding for VA courts, funding for family courts, more funding to make sure that background checks are done quickly, and identifying young people who, yes, a couple of hundred should not have a gun out of about 150,000 who have actually tried to purchase a gun over the last year. The short story is it was a very successful bill. I have been involved, in the last Congress, in every bipartisan bill that went to the floor. I took the heat back home, and Senator Cornyn took the heat back home, but we worked on it, and we had trusted partners who understood the intent. It goes to the President's desk, and what does somebody in his administration do? Get in our heads. All they needed to do was call us. They knew this wasn't our intent. Hunter safety? Archery training? Teaching a young person how to respect and handle a gun safely? They really thought that we did not want to train them on that; that we didn't want to train them about conservation and wildlife stewardship? That is what you also learn when you go to hunter safety. As a matter of fact, even if you never want to own a gun, I encourage you to go to a hunter safety course. You are going to learn a lot of stuff. You are going to learn a lot of stuff about conservation, wildlife stewardship, and also the safe handling of a gun. It is the same thing for archery. So I can only assume that the reason we are here today and the reason the House had to cast a vote is that somebody in the administration wanted to play politics--``gotcha.'' Well, let me tell you why that is dangerous. It is because it makes people like me question whether or not I should trust the administration to implement a bill in the manner that we intended to implement it. If I am going to get a ``gotcha'' at the end for something like this, what encourages me to do it again? So, today, I think we are going to right this wrong, but I really hope the administration recognizes that some of us are sick of the polarizing environment in Washington. Some of us are willing to work on a bipartisan basis to make things different, but we have to have a willing and trusted partner down the street. This rights a wrong now, but I hope the administration recognizes, in the future, if you want to see more people like me stick our necks out for things that need to be done, you had better behave differently.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the Trinity School of Durham and Chapel Hill 6th grade history bowl team consisting of Devlin Smith, Chloe Blumhofer, Shya Khosla, and Joshua Glass. This team proudly represented the great State of North Carolina at the 2023 National History Bowl Championships, which is one of the largest quiz bowl tournaments in the world. Qualifying for the national championships is a great achievement in itself. The young scholars were required to pass a rigorous qualifying test of 50 questions that needed to be completed within 20 minutes. Exceptional performers were then invited to compete in the regional finals, and the most highly qualified participants at the regional finals were invited to the national championships. North Carolina is proud of the accomplishments of these young scholars and their representation of our State at the national championships, where they finished in the top 20 and came so very close to qualifying for the world championship in Rome, Italy. It was an incredible performance and a testament to their skills and dedication to expanding their knowledge. I wish them all the best as they continue to pursue their academic endeavors in the next school year. We all can't wait to see what you do next.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent my staff, Isabella Vesely, an intern in my office, be granted floor privileges until May 19, 2023.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the brave men and women in North Carolina and across the Nation who serve in law enforcement. This is a particularly emotional week for law enforcement. The law enforcement community has thousands of officers, and their families are in the Nation's Capital for National Police Week. They are paying a tribute to the brave officers who were killed in the line of duty while protecting our communities. I want to welcome all North Carolinians who are in Washington right now. Unfortunately, our State is all too familiar with law enforcement officers having to make the ultimate sacrifice, losing their lives in the line of duty. Over the past year, North Carolina has lost three law enforcement officers who were killed by others in the line of duty, in addition to a number of other officers who died from other causes. I would like to take a moment to honor the service of those North Carolina law enforcement officers who were killed in the line of duty. In late August, we lost Sergeant Matthew Ryan Fishman--he was 38 years old--of Wayne County Sheriff's Office. He was one of three deputies shot after attempting to serve a warrant. They were met with gunfire, and the incident caused a 10-hour standoff. Sergeant Fishman died a day later. He had been a deputy since 2010. Before that, he was an officer in the Mount Olive Police Department. Officer Fishman is survived by his wife Sarah, two children, his parents, and two brothers. That same August, we also saw the death of Deputy Sheriff Ned Byrd of Wake County. Deputy Byrd was with his K-9 when he heard six gunshots and drove past a vehicle on the side of the road. Deputy Byrd stopped and backed up his vehicle. He was shot several times by two criminals. Unfortunately, the killing of Deputy Byrd revealed numerous failures. The criminals who killed him were not in the United States legally. One of them had been previously deported but was able to illegally reenter the country. When we talk about ``got-aways,'' this is a very important point because it happened just a couple of weeks ago in Texas. Someone who was illegally present in this country--was deported four times--got back into this country a fifth time and murdered a family in Texas, including an 8-year-old child. That is another face of a ``got-away.'' And it was a ``got-away'' who killed this officer. Following their arrest for the murder of Deputy Byrd, one of these criminals managed to escape prison for several days, and we had to apprehend him again in Mexico. Part of seeking justice must be looking at these failures and making sure they don't happen again. Deputy Byrd was an Air Force veteran and served Wake County Sheriff's Department for 13 years. He is survived by his sister, brother-in-law, four nephews, as well as his beloved K-9 Sasha. Last December, less than 2 weeks before Christmas, we lost Deputy Sheriff Bolanos-Anavisca of the Cumberland County Sheriff's Office. He was 23 years old and served the office for 2 years. He was struck and killed by a car while investigating a robbery at 3 a.m. The driver ran through a red light and struck him and then fled the scene. They eventually located the driver, and he was highly intoxicated. In the wake of these tragic losses in North Carolina, I am proud to say that we saw the very best of our local communities. While we have some communities calling for defunding the police and making contributions to a website supported by ActBlue--I looked it up today, Mr. President. I am shocked that it is still there. During Police Week, there is a website out there called ACAB. Send your money. What does ``ACAB'' stand for? ``All Cops Are Bastards.'' You would think that at least in a week when we are looking at the sacrifice these officers made, they could take the website down, but they are still proudly raising money. If you don't believe me, just Google ``ActBlue,'' ``All Cops Are Bastards.'' Donate today. Harass the police. Look past the sacrifice they are making every single day. On the other hand, our communities had an outpouring of love and support for the families and colleagues of those fallen officers. Most Americans proudly support men and women in blue. But there are some who feel emboldened by the disgusting anti-police rhetoric. Disrespect and denigration of law enforcement officers only contribute to an environment that makes our officers and communities less safe and far fewer people willing to even sign up to do the job. If you don't believe me, ask local law enforcement. We have historic lows for people signing up to go to academies and historic highs for people retiring early, as soon as they are eligible. This is happening across the Nation. In 2021, the intentional killings of law enforcement officers reached a 20-year high. While the number went down in 2022, it is still well above what we have seen in years past. We need to take threats and acts of violence against law enforcement seriously. That is why I will reintroduce the Protect and Serve Act in this Congress. This legislation will make it a Federal crime to intentionally assault a law enforcement officer. It is amazing that it is not on the books already today. It sends a strong message to criminals that targeting and assaulting law enforcement officers is inexcusable, and you will be punished. I will continue to work across the aisle to get this legislation enacted into law. And I am committed to supporting our brave men and women in blue. This bill has earned broad support and has the full support of the Fraternal Order of Police and many of the Nation's leading law enforcement groups. Each year, we take this week to celebrate those who serve us and protect us in public safety. This would be a great year to come back next year's Police Week and say that we got this bill passed. Law enforcement has our backs every time and every day they put on a uniform. The least Congress can do is to support the Protect and Serve Act. They need your support more than ever, and you need their support more than ever. To the men and women in blue in North Carolina and across the country, I want to say thank you for what you do and the sacrifice you make. I yield the floor.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I want to just speak briefly on Senator Budd and how thrilled I am to have him as a colleague in the U.S. Senate. I think, if you heard his speech, he mentioned our State motto, ``esse quam videri'': ``to be rather than to seem.'' What you saw here was a rational, reasonable, respectful Member of the Senate. I observed that for years when he was in Congress. Ted Budd and I met back in 2013. I watched him serve the State of North Carolina before he was elected to Congress. I admired the way he carried himself when he was in the House. I have been thrilled to see how well he has hit the ground running here in the Senate. But I will tell you, much like my campaigns--they are not necessarily easy in North Carolina, and, truthfully, Ted was running in a primary. I had two friends running in a primary. The way he conducted himself there was also very rational, very reasonable, very respectful. That is why I think he is a U.S. Senator today. That is the second reason. The primary reason he is a U.S. Senator today relates to a lady named Amy Kate, her son, and two daughters. Now, if it wasn't in violation of the rules, I would look up in the Gallery and thank Amy Kate and her family directly, but that is a violation of the rules, Amy Kate, so I won't do that. But I just want to let everybody know in North Carolina, you have picked a great partner for me to have in the U.S. Senate.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, North Carolina Baptist Hospital opened on May 28, 1923, as an 88-bed hospital in Winston-Salem, with a simple commitment: to be a place of healing and teaching. Since 1923, North Carolina Baptist Hospital has served the community and the region through educational programs. The School of Nursing educated nurses from 1923 to 1974, and the Bowman Gray School of Medicine graduated its first class in 1943. Today, the hospital plays a pivotal role in research and education for Wake Forest University School of Medicine, a nationally known leader in groundbreaking research and experiential medical education, and the academic core of Advocate Health. North Carolina Baptist Hospital has grown over the years. Now known as Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, the hospital continues to grow to meet the needs of those it serves. Today, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, has grown to become an 885-bed tertiary care hospital that includes Brenner Children's Hospital, and the health system includes five community hospitals, more than 300 primary and specialty care locations, and more than 2,700 physicians. It has over 20,000 employees and is Winston-Salem and Forsyth County's largest employer. In 2022, construction began for a new critical care tower at the medical center. The investment in this world-class facility will transform emergency and critical care throughout the region. The hospital and the health system continues to expand services, make research discoveries to bring medical innovations to patients more quickly, and educate the next generation of healthcare professionals-- to meet the growing needs of the communities it serves and to improve health, elevate hope, and advance healing--for all.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I will continue: You may well ask: ``Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?'' You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word ``tension.'' I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue. One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: ``Why didn't you give the new city administration time to act?'' The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals. We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was ``well timed'' in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word ``Wait!'' It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This ``Wait'' has almost always meant ``Never.'' We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that ``justice too long delayed is justice denied.'' We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, ``Wait.'' But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: ``Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?''; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading ``white'' and ``colored''; when your first name becomes ``nigger,'' your middle name becomes ``boy'' (however old you are) and your last name becomes ``John,'' and your wife and mother are never given the respected title ``Mrs.''; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of ``nobodiness''--then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair.

Mr. TILLIS

Mr. TILLIS. Madam President, over the years, I have taken a moment to recognize the hard work and dedication of my staff as they depart and advance their professional development. One of the most capable staffers I have had the honor of working with is Brad Watts, who served as my chief counsel for more than 4 years. Brad is truly one of a kind. He is tenacious, tireless, and objectively brilliant. He has earned a reputation for being someone you want on your team advocating on your behalf because he will fight for you tooth and nail and leave nothing on the table. And he has earned a reputation for being someone you don't want to see on your opposing team because he is one tough negotiator who can take you to hell and back. Brad became my chief counsel shortly before the 116th Congress, which is when I first became chairman of the Intellectual Property Subcommittee. I don't think Brad came in knowing much or anything about intellectual property, which is regarded as one of the most difficult areas of law for even the most intelligent lawyers to pick up. Not only did Brad pick it up, he excelled at it. Our subcommittee was the most active one on the Senate Judiciary Committee during the 116th Congress as we explored ways to improve and modernize our intellectual property system. Perhaps most notably, we held a historic 3-day sprint of hearings during which we heard from 45 different witnesses about the broken state of patent eligibility. Only someone as hard-working as Brad could have made that happen. Brad was also instrumental in negotiating, writing, and passing some of the most consequential bipartisan legislation in generations during the 117th Congress, addressing issues long considered to be ``third rails'' in American politics. One example was the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Brad was masterful throughout the negotiation process as Senators and their staff worked nonstop to forge a compromise. The end result was passing the first law in more than three decades aimed at reducing violence, expanding access to mental health services, and improving community safety. And we did it in a way that protected the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans. Later that year, Brad was assigned another important task: making major modifications to the Respect for Marriage Act and winning enough votes to pass it through Congress. It is a sensitive issue for both sides of the political spectrum that required a well-thought-out approach, and Brad played a key role in reaching that compromise that included a number of new legal protections for religious institutions and nonprofits. These new protections struck the right balance, and the bill earned the bipartisan support it needed to pass both Chambers and be signed into law. Neither of those bills would have even gotten a vote had Brad not been at the negotiating table and burning the midnight oil every single day. I take pride in playing an active role in the professional development of my staff, and it was no surprise that the private sector also took notice of Brad's personal dedication and policy expertise. The Chamber of Commerce hired him to serve as their vice president of innovation policy. It is a testament to the work he put in to quickly become of the Nation's top policy experts on intellectual property. While I am sad to see him go, I am also very proud of the work he has done through his service to the State of North Carolina and the U.S. Senate. And I am excited to see the great things he will accomplish in the coming years. To borrow a line from one of Brad's favorites, the legendary Dolly Parton, ``You'll never do a whole lot unless you're brave enough to try.''