Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I want to thank the Senator from Utah and the Senator from Maryland for putting forward this critical amendment ending China's developing nation status. The ability of countries to take advantage of ``special and differential treatment'' as it is called in the World Trade Organization--WTO--to skip out on meaningful obligations and upend the trade playing field has long concerned me and other members of the Finance Committee on both sides of the aisle. While I support the goal of the amendment, the language needs to be refined to effectively achieve that objective. I want to work with you in conference to ensure this amendment directs the U.S. Trade Representative to meaningfully address China's status at the WTO. The WTO has a unique and, frankly, antiquated form of governance and is long overdue for significant reform, including its treatment of major economies like China.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2544, which was received at the House and is at the desk; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WYDEN. I thank my colleague for all his leadership, and I am certainly planning to speak on the very strong merits of what you described. And if you would like to continue, we will go through that shortly. Would the gentleman like to yield to me?

Mr. WYDEN. I thank my colleague for being our leader here in the Congress and, frankly, for this Nation because he has consistently made the point that given the demographics of where we are going to have so many more older people, where we have so many young people at risk, we desperately need Chairman Sanders to do what he is talking about, which is to address this massive shortage of healthcare workers in America. Addressing healthcare workforce shortages means we are going to have to have fresh, big league ideas to get these workers all across our country, and it is vitally important that we address several of the biggest ideas Chairman Sanders and I are talking about. For example, expanding funding for the Medicare Graduate Medical Education Program--what is called GME--would grow the number of doctors, especially primary care physicians and psychiatrists. This evening, Chairman Sanders, I want to make it clear that our two committees--yours doing important work, what is known as HELP, and ours on the Finance Committee--we are committed to bipartisan legislation that is going to increase investments in the Medicare Graduate Medical Education Program. We are also going to focus on incentivizing healthcare providers to partner with schools to train and develop healthcare professionals from medical assistants to advanced practice nurses. We are also going to have to address expanding the number of behavioral health providers because we know we have an enormous mental health program challenge in America. We have to increase access to maternal health programs in rural areas and invest in the direct care workforce to ensure the health and safety of older Americans and those with disabilities. What Senator Sanders is talking about is an all-hands-on-deck approach with our two committees, the two lead committees in the healthcare area working together to increase the number of workers. Tonight, Chairman Sanders, as chair of the Finance Committee, I want to make clear that I intend to work very closely with you on these issues. We are going to be partners in the effort in the Finance and HELP Committees to bring forward legislation in the fall to address the healthcare workforce crisis in America. And I want to hear the rest of your remarks and hope then we can have a lifting of the objection and pass the bill.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, in a moment, I will put forward a unanimous consent request to pass the secure the U.S. Oregon procurement and transplant patient network act. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the following members of my personal office and Finance Committee team be granted floor privileges for the remainder of this Congress: Joshua Hauser, Aleksandra Czulak, Phoebe Canagarajah, Dylan Irlbeck, Maya Ward, Shreyas Gandlur.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am announcing my intention to object to any unanimous consent request to proceed to S. 1207, the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act of 2023. The protection of children from exploitation and abuse is an incredibly serious issue. The criminals that create and distribute child sexual abuse material, or CSAM, need to be hunted down and locked up. The victims of their crimes need critical support. However, this bill would limit the availability of encrypted communications, making children and families less safe. Indeed, whistleblowers, human rights activists, journalists, labor organizers, and women seeking reproductive care, as well our children and families, all depend on secure and private communications and would suffer the harms of its unavailability. Given the threat this bill poses to encrypted communications, I will object to any unanimous consent request in relation to this legislation.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am announcing my intention to object to any unanimous consent request to proceed to S. 1080, the Cooper Davis Act. There is no question that there is a fentanyl epidemic in the United States. However, this bill fails to offer serious solutions to this epidemic. Instead, it would mandate that platforms scan their users' communications for anything that could be interpreted as being about selling or using drugs. Given this country's experience with the failed ``War on Drugs'' it is easy to predict that communities of color will disproportionately have their conversations surveilled and referred for prosecutions, which is why it is opposed by civil rights groups, including the ACLU, NAACP and Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Further, forcing a platform to decide what represents a drug transaction means that lots of innocent people will be referred for investigation and prosecution. Finally, the reporting structure of this legislation is likely to produce large numbers of meritless referrals to the Drug Enforcement Administration and do little to address the real causes of the fentanyl epidemic or protect vulnerable communities. Given these concerns, I will object to any unanimous consent request in relation to this legislation.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am announcing my intention to object to any unanimous consent request to proceed to S. 1199, the Strengthening Transparency and Obligations to Protect Children Suffering from Abuse and Mistreatment Act of 2023. The protection of children from exploitation and abuse is an incredibly serious issue. The criminals that create and distribute child sexual abuse material, or CSAM, need to be hunted down and locked up. The victims of their crimes need critical support. However, this bill would limit the availability of encrypted communications, making children and families less safe. Indeed, whistleblowers, human rights activists, journalists, labor organizers, and women seeking reproductive care, as well our children and families, all depend on secure and private communications and would suffer the harms of its unavailability. The portions of this bill that hurt the availability of encrypted communications are extraneous and stray from the ostensible purpose of the bill. Until they are removed, I will object to any unanimous consent request in relation to this legislation.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, in a moment, I am going to put forward a unanimous consent request to pass an important bill exercising Congress's constitutional authority and approving the first modern agreement regulating trade between the United States and Taiwan. The bill was cosponsored by all 48 Democrats and Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee and was ultimately passed in the House of Representatives by a voice vote. It was originally put forward by Ways and Means Committee Chair Smith and Ranking Member Neal, as well as Senator Crapo and myself as chair and ranking member of the Finance Committee. Before I make this unanimous consent request on the bipartisan, bicameral bill called the United States-Taiwan Initiative on 21st- Century Trade First Agreement Implementation Act, I want to highlight, for just a couple of minutes, why this bill is so important. First, the reason behind this proposal, first and foremost, is that the U.S. Congress fully supports deepening our trade relationship with Taiwan and wants to ensure that the recent agreement covering trade facilitation, anti-corruption, and small business is legally sound and durable. Not only is Taiwan a critical market for U.S. exporters, it is a democracy that shares our values and has strong ties with Oregonians and Americans across the land. Next, this body wants to be clear that trade agreements are within the constitutional authority of the Congress. One of the ways the Senate demonstrates that is by approving trade agreements like this one. Finally, the legislation requires greater transparency and consultation, as well as public review for future Taiwan trade agreements. Our workers, our farmers, and our businesses deserve the opportunity to read a trade agreement and understand how it affects them before it is signed by a government official and declared the law of the land. Trade agreements that affect millions of Americans can't be done in the dark. Congress and the American people need to know what is in these agreements and how they benefit American interests. I look forward to working with the USTR, our point person for trade, to negotiate the bigger-ticket items with Taiwan--issues like digital trade, labor, environment, and agriculture, as outlined in the negotiating mandate. Future agreements need to bulldoze barriers to trade for Oregon exporters and American businesses everywhere, including by cutting red tape like labeling rules and making sure that Taiwan's technical standards don't make it tough for exporters to sell their goods. Involving Congress and the public is going to help the administration identify issues and hold them accountable for breaking down barriers. This is a proposal that brings both sides together. The Taiwan trade agreement approval bill, as I indicated, passed unanimously in the other body. This trade agreement legislation is a can't-miss opportunity for the U.S. Senate to support Taiwan, clarify Congress's role in trade, and call for more transparency and consultation in future agreements. Moreover, it needs to be done now. Taiwan is expecting to pass their implementing bill in the next few weeks. It is imperative that we move our bill before the administration moves forward with what is called ``entry into force'' to ensure that the United States gets what it has bargained for. Let me close by saying that we especially look forward in the future to working with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The chairman of the committee, Senator Menendez, and I have been talking about ways to recognize the intersection between foreign relations and global economics. There are a whole host of issues--whether it is supply chains, digital trade, the environment, and the like--where we have an opportunity to really recognize that, in this century, what we have to do is break down barriers. We have to find a way to have a unifying strategy for this country, and that means coming together around foreign relations and global economics. That is what Chairman Menendez and I talked about this evening and in the past, and I look forward to working with all of our colleagues on that. So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 4004, which was received from the House and is at the desk.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent 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 with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WYDEN. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. With that, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Mr. WYDEN

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

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, in a moment I am going to put forward a unanimous consent request to pass a trade bill cosponsored by all the Democrats and Republicans on the relevant committee in the other body-- the Ways and Means Committee--and was ultimately passed by the other body--the House--by voice vote. So there was no opposition in the other body. In fact, it was put forward by the Republican Chair Jason Smith and the Democratic Ranking Member Richard Neal, as well as Senator Crapo and myself over here. I think it would be fair to say that this kind of unanimity over in the House, where sometimes they can't agree to order a 7-Up, is pretty amazing--that they passed a trade bill unanimously. Before I make the UC request on this bipartisan, bicameral bill called the United States-Taiwan Initiative on 21st-Century Trade First Agreement Implementation, I am just going to talk briefly about why the bill is so important. The basic proposition is this: First and foremost, the U.S. Congress fully supports deepening our trading relationship with Taiwan and wants to ensure the recent agreement covering trade facilitation, anti- corruption, and small business is durable and legally sound. Not only is Taiwan a critical market for U.S. exporters, it is also a democracy that shares our values and has strong ties with Oregonians and Americans across the land. Next, this body wants to be clear that trade and trade agreements are within the constitutional authority of the Congress. One of the ways the Senate demonstrates this is by approving trade agreements just like this one. Finally, this bill requires greater transparency and consultation, as well as public review, for future Taiwan trade agreements. These ideas can sound a little abstract, so I will put it in real-world terms. In a few hours, I am heading to rural Oregon to meet with my constituents and hold town hall meetings. Farmers and ranchers in Grant, Harney, and Malheur counties care a lot about trade. They want new markets to sell wheat and potatoes and the like. I am never going to tell a farmer in Ontario or La Grande that they don't deserve the right to read a trade agreement and understand how it affects them before it is signed and wrapped up. Trade agreements that affect millions of Americans can't be done in the dark. Congress and the American people need to know what is in these deals and how they benefit American interests. I look forward to working with the USTR as it negotiates the bigger ticket items with Taiwan--issues like digital trade, labor, environment, and agriculture, as outlined in the negotiating mandate. Future agreements need to bulldoze barriers to trade for Oregon exporters, including red tape like labeling rules and technical standards that make it hard for exporters to sell their goods. Involving Congress and the public is going to help the administration break down these barriers. This is a proposal that brings both sides together. As I said, every Member of the Ways and Means Committee--every Democrat, every Republican--is on board. So the glide path to passage here was no accident. My colleagues, Ranking Member Crapo, as well as Chair Smith and Ranking Member Neal worked with me to hammer out a bill that could receive that kind of attention. My colleagues are eager to get back home, so here's the bottom line: Passing the Taiwan trade agreement bill is a can't-miss opportunity for the Senate to support Taiwan, clarify Congress's role in trade, and call for more transparency and consultation. In a moment, I am going to make a unanimous consent request. In fact, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record my good friend from Idaho Senator Crapo's statement.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, before I make my unanimous consent request, I just want to reiterate that Senator Menendez and I are going to be working together on these issues. He made this point with respect to taxes, and we are going to be able to find common ground, I believe, with Senator Crapo, who can't be here today but who is very, very strongly in support of this effort. Let me repeat that, colleagues. Senator Crapo, the ranking member on the Finance Committee, is very strong for this effort. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 4004, which was received from the House and is 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 with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WYDEN. I am going to yield now to Chairman Menendez, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, because he and I work very closely together on all of these kinds of issues, on the Foreign Relations Committee and the Finance Committee, and I have the good fortune of having Senator Menendez, essentially, sit next to me in the Finance Committee. So we are going to be working together. I am going to make the unanimous consent request in a minute. But I want to yield to Chairman Menendez. Thank you for the fact that we are working together today. We have got lots to do in the future and we are going to work together. I yield to my colleague.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I will be brief because I know my colleagues want to go to the other body. I think this is very unfortunate. This is an extraordinary opportunity for our country, and this is a great opportunity for the world. The fact is that there has been an extensive review of this particular agreement. The administration talked to a number of Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle. This legislation went through the House of Representatives unanimously, and that was after every member of the relevant committee--the House Ways and Means Committee-- cosponsored the legislation. They didn't just vote for it; they cosponsored it. I think it is very unfortunate for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to object. The chair of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman Smith, the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, Congressman Neal, and the ranking Republican on the Finance Committee, Senator Crapo--all of us--have been working for months now on this particular proposal, and I think it is very unfortunate that our colleague from Arkansas has decided to object. It is his right, but I think it is very unfortunate for our country because this could have been a very, very special day with the passage of this. We are going to be back here, working together, as you have heard-- Chairman Menendez from the Foreign Relations Committee and I and Senator Crapo. We are going to work together with every Member of this body to get this very important trade initiative enacted into law.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, one topic there is much agreement on is the benefits of work, and our laws should support those who want to work. The bill I am introducing today will change Social Security so that parents and their children will know that working will never disadvantage them in the future. Let me explain the problem. Under current law, a child with a disability that began before age 22 may receive a Social Security benefit based on the work of a disabled, retired, or deceased parent. Often the child receives this benefit for the rest of their life. Social Security provides the benefit because the child is usually dependent on their parents for financial support. The problem is that the law regards earnings by the child above $1,470 a month as ending that dependency--even if the child is no longer able to maintain that level of work in the future. When that dependency ends, the child ceases to be eligible for the benefit from the parent. Instead, the child would receive a benefit based on their work. The benefit from the parent's work is often significantly larger than the child's own benefit. Because of this policy, parents of children with disabilities may prevent their child from working at their full potential, fearing that the work will cause the child to lose out on the larger benefit. We need to change Social Security to ensure parents and their children that working will not cause them to be worse off in the future. To provide that assurance, I am introducing the Work Without Worry Act. The bill ensures that any individual with a disability that began before age 22 will receive the larger of the benefit from either their parent's work or the benefit from their own work. Any earnings from work--no matter how much--will not prevent the child from receiving a Social Security benefit from their parent's work as long as the child is eligible for disability insurance by the same impairment from before age 22. This legislation would give parents the assurance that their child with a disability can work without having to worry that the child will lose out on the full protections that Social Security provides. I want to thank Kathy Holmquist, president of Pathways to Independence, Inc., in Portland, OR, who has been a leader in my State helping people with disabilities live and work with dignity. Kathy contacted me about the need for this legislation, and I appreciate her advocacy and support. Additional thanks to The Arc for the technical assistance and endorsement of the bill. The bill is also endorsed by the American Network of Community Options and Resources, ANCOR, National Down Syndrome Congress, the Association of University Centers on Disabilities, Justice in Aging, American Association on Health and Disability, Lakeshore Foundation, Autistic Women and Nonbinary Network, National Organization of Social Security Claimant Representatives, Special Needs Alliance, National Association of Disability Representatives, Autism Society of America, Disability Rights Education Fund, and the Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities, CCD, Social Security Task Force. I am grateful that Social Security Subcommittee Ranking Member John Larson is introducing the companion bill in the House of Representatives. The Senate bill is cosponsored by Senators Cassidy, Budd, Sanders, Klobuchar, Markey, Warren, Whitehouse, Merkley, Murray, and Brown. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record following this statement, along with two support letters.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, one topic there is much agreement on is the benefits of work, and our laws should support those who want to work. The bill I am introducing today will change Social Security so that parents and their children will know that working will never disadvantage them in the future. Let me explain the problem. Under current law, a child with a disability that began before age 22 may receive a Social Security benefit based on the work of a disabled, retired, or deceased parent. Often the child receives this benefit for the rest of their life. Social Security provides the benefit because the child is usually dependent on their parents for financial support. The problem is that the law regards earnings by the child above $1,470 a month as ending that dependency--even if the child is no longer able to maintain that level of work in the future. When that dependency ends, the child ceases to be eligible for the benefit from the parent. Instead, the child would receive a benefit based on their work. The benefit from the parent's work is often significantly larger than the child's own benefit. Because of this policy, parents of children with disabilities may prevent their child from working at their full potential, fearing that the work will cause the child to lose out on the larger benefit. We need to change Social Security to ensure parents and their children that working will not cause them to be worse off in the future. To provide that assurance, I am introducing the Work Without Worry Act. The bill ensures that any individual with a disability that began before age 22 will receive the larger of the benefit from either their parent's work or the benefit from their own work. Any earnings from work--no matter how much--will not prevent the child from receiving a Social Security benefit from their parent's work as long as the child is eligible for disability insurance by the same impairment from before age 22. This legislation would give parents the assurance that their child with a disability can work without having to worry that the child will lose out on the full protections that Social Security provides. I want to thank Kathy Holmquist, president of Pathways to Independence, Inc., in Portland, OR, who has been a leader in my State helping people with disabilities live and work with dignity. Kathy contacted me about the need for this legislation, and I appreciate her advocacy and support. Additional thanks to The Arc for the technical assistance and endorsement of the bill. The bill is also endorsed by the American Network of Community Options and Resources, ANCOR, National Down Syndrome Congress, the Association of University Centers on Disabilities, Justice in Aging, American Association on Health and Disability, Lakeshore Foundation, Autistic Women and Nonbinary Network, National Organization of Social Security Claimant Representatives, Special Needs Alliance, National Association of Disability Representatives, Autism Society of America, Disability Rights Education Fund, and the Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities, CCD, Social Security Task Force. I am grateful that Social Security Subcommittee Ranking Member John Larson is introducing the companion bill in the House of Representatives. The Senate bill is cosponsored by Senators Cassidy, Budd, Sanders, Klobuchar, Markey, Warren, Whitehouse, Merkley, Murray, and Brown. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record following this statement, along with two support letters.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, before she leaves the floor, let me say to my seatmate on the Senate Finance Committee how much I appreciate her passion and leadership on this critical issue. I note that the Presiding Officer is also one of the outspoken members on the committee on this issue. This has been a terrific debate coming from our side, and I thank my colleague for her comments. It has been a year since the atrocious decision of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. I remember reading the leaked decision in the press early last May and realizing with dread that the Court was going to strike down Roe v. Wade. My first reaction was that the Court has set in motion a catastrophe for the health, safety, and privacy of American women. To the horror of the 36 million women living in States that have already banned abortion or are likely to ban access to abortion, unfortunately, my prediction was right. The Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs tossed out half a century of legal precedent, curtailed the fundamental rights of women, and jeopardized the health and safety of millions across the country. The Court defied the American people, who are living with the grim reality that some of the Nation's most powerful people are eager to violate their privacy and their basic right to make their own decisions with respect to healthcare. So the last year has been a nightmare for millions of women in America. It has been especially felt by those living in the more than 20 States that have passed laws banning or severely restricting access to abortion. The personal stories that you hear if you spend time listening are gut-wrenching. Women in Texas who desperately wanted to be parents and suffered pregnancy complications nearly died trying to access lifesaving care. Yet they were told they weren't sick enough to get it. Far-right politicians are suing healthcare providers for providing care to a 10-year-old who had been raped--raped--and was pregnant. The cruelty apparently is the point. I am proud to be from Oregon, where abortion remains legal. We have some of the most pro-choice laws in the country for those seeking reproductive health care. That is because, in Oregon, we understand that people can make the best decisions for themselves and their families. But even in Oregon, you can't take freedom for granted. Extreme Republicans won't stop until they pass a national ban on abortion, and they are trying. A national 6-week ban was introduced in Congress right after the Dobbs decision came out. Anti-abortion advocates sought out a lone judge in Amarillo, TX, to ban mifepristone, which is widely and safely used in medication abortions nationwide. The FDA approved the safe and effective medication for dispensation more than 20 years ago. I organized the first congressional hearings about this drug as a Member of the other body in 1990. This effort was never based on some extreme or some political agenda; it was based on one proposition--that science ought to be making the judgments and not politics. I came to the Senate floor in February and called on the administration to do everything it could to keep the lifesaving medication on the market. Thankfully the far-right extremists haven't won yet, but, as a number of my colleagues have said today correctly, we are not home-free as that case moves through the courts. Contrary to what Justice Kavanaugh told us in concurrence of Dobbs, anti-abortion zealots are not leaving these matters up to the States. Several States are trying to restrict freedom of movement, criminalizing women who travel to other States for an abortion or even the person who gives them a ride. Think about that. You can't sugarcoat that. They are talking about enacting laws that reach beyond State borders, and that hearkens back to some very dark days in our history. This has always been about control, and one speaker after another on our side has said that through the course of the day. This is about politicians inserting themselves in exam rooms and in the private decisions about whether and when to start a family. I care about this issue for several reasons. Right at the heart of my concern is Americans' right to privacy. That right to privacy is what makes America, America. As women grapple with the strictest State laws that threaten their health and take away their privacy, they also face a crisis of digital privacy and what we have come to call uterus surveillance. Governments are weaponizing the most personal and private data about women's bodies and healthcare and using it against them. I and a number of colleagues on our side have been sounding this alarm for years that location data leached from phone apps is ripe for abuse. States where extremists have restricted or banned abortion--that goes straight to a five-alarm crisis. We also know that shady data brokers have tracked women to and from Planned Parenthood centers. They have and will sell this information to anybody with a credit card. And in States where abortion is illegal, anything women say or read online can be used against them. Researching birth control online, updating a period tracking app, even just carrying a phone into the doctor's office--you name it--it is potential evidence for the prosecution. The possibilities are endless and frightening. As to our laws governing women's sensitive private health data, as we think about what is ahead, we have to recognize that those laws have been outdated and weak for decades. I commend the administration for drawing attention to this issue and being interested in shoring up loopholes in our laws. More has to be done. We have seen over this past year that Republican State attorneys general and Governors are ready and willing to discard women's privacy in their quest to prohibit access to reproductive health care. This has been a horrific year, but as my colleagues have said on the floor this afternoon, we are going to be resolute. All the bills that the group led by Senator Murray, my colleague, the President of the Senate--they are common sense. They are common sense, the package that my colleagues have offered today for unanimous consent. They go a long way toward protecting women and healthcare providers. I just want my constituents to know and I want my colleagues here in the Senate to know I am on the program. I don't think this is the time when we can even take for granted any of these concerns--not a one. The whole question of access to healthcare, the right to privacy, making sure that States' rights really mean States' rights and not tracking people down across the country--these are all priorities that my colleagues have laid out very, very well. As long as I have the honor to represent Oregon in the U.S. Senate, I am going to be working with all of them. The fact is, as we close--and it seems like we are getting ready to wrap up--I think it is clear that the American people are on the side of my colleagues over here who have spoken today. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I want to recognize and honor KOBI- TV/NBC5 in Medford on its 70th anniversary. KOBI went on the air on August 1, 1953, and is an integral part of its parent company California Oregon Broadcasting, Inc., founded in 1933 by William B. Smullin. In classic KOBI and ``Oregon Way'' fashion, this TV station is celebrating seven decades of public service serving southern Oregon by teaming up with the United Way of Jackson County for a ``United in Kindness'' campaign. This community campaign is gathering stories of kindness, civility, generosity, and charity that will be featured throughout this year on the air and online. What a wonderful example of how KOBI informs and lifts up its community. That has been the case since 1953 when Bill Smullin founded the station--the first VHF TV station in Oregon. Seventy years later, it remains one of the very few locally owned and operated TV stations in the United States. Bill Smullin's daughter Patricia C. ``Patsy'' Smullin has guided KOBI since 1985 as owner and president of California Oregon Broadcasting, Inc., Ms. Smullin has earned numerous honors in that time. Among those honors are the Chuck Sherman Television Leadership Award from the National Association of Broadcasters in recognition of an individual demonstrating leadership, service and commitment to local television in medium and smaller markets; and the Oregon Association of Broadcasters Tom McCall Award for outstanding service to the State and to the nation. When I am in southern Oregon, for townhalls, community meetings and more, I make it a regular practice to come into the KOBI studio. There, I can count on a thorough and fair discussion from well-prepared interviewers about issues affecting southern Oregon. For 70 years, viewers in southern Oregon have been equally able to count on KOBI's steadfast commitment to local journalism. I know I speak for all those viewers when I say thank you for that commitment the past seven decades and here is to many more decades of success.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, June 12; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that following the conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Allen nomination; further, that the cloture motions filed during today's session ripen at 5:30 p.m.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.