Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I certainly agree with the proposition that was advanced by my colleague to improve service at the Internal Revenue Service. The fact, however, is the effect of this proposal is to demean IRS workers and distract from the real challenges facing the IRS. And the real challenge can be embodied by the fact that, for years and years, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been squeezing and downsizing critical enforcement services at the IRS to the point where the wealthy cheats basically can get a free ride. They can get a free ride. About the other day, in the context of talking about tax cheats and wealthy partnerships that aren't getting audited, I said the chance that they are going to be subject to real enforcement, when they are a wealthy tax cheat, is about the same likelihood of being hit by a meteor, and it is because of these policies that have been downsizing resources at the IRS to deal with these wealthy tax cheats for years. Now, Commissioner Rettig, who is a Trump appointee--an appointee of former President Trump--recently said there are fewer auditors to deal with these wealthy tax cheats today than at any point since World War II. So they have got that challenge, and then they have an enormous IT challenge because the IRS, by their admission, is still using some systems that are practically dated back to the Dark Ages. According to the National Taxpayer Advocate, during the last fiscal year, the IRS received a record 282 million customer service phone calls and, with limited staff, was only able to answer 11 percent of them. Commissioner Rettig told the Finance Committee, in a remarkable statement, that it was his opinion that the amount of taxes that go unpaid each year could now be as high as a trillion dollars. To just wrap up, I want to describe how this all is connected. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have repeatedly attacked the IRS. They cut, they squeeze, and they have constantly reduced the IRS budget. Wealthy tax cheats are out basically celebrating the decline of real tax enforcement. Law-abiding Americans--the vast majority of Americans--are, of course, frustrated by the declining customer service. So then we have our colleagues on the other side of the aisle attack the IRS, and the cycle just repeats: more cuts, less enforcement targeted to wealthy tax cheats, and, unfortunately, inadequate customer service. That has been the pattern now for decades. In my view, this is a gift to tax cheats and an annual headache for just about everyone else. There is no question the pandemic--and this has been true for every aspect of government--has brought new challenges, just like it has for every business, every school, every government agency around the country. And, in my view, instead of misplacing what the target really ought to be, which is inadequate resources so we can't go after the wealthy tax cheats, somehow we are hearing that it is the workers, these union members, who are at fault. That is not my take. For the reasons I have outlined, I object.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. WYDEN. I will offer another proposal shortly as an alternative to Senator Scott's unanimous consent request, and I am going to make a few brief points before I do that. I want to make clear that on this side, nobody--nobody--takes a backseat to anyone else when it comes to standing up to the horrific abuses of the Chinese Government against its people as well as its economic cheating that has ripped off American jobs and our prosperity. That is why I worked with our colleague from Ohio, Senator Brown, to close once and for all an immoral and unjustifiable loophole that allowed some products made with forced labor to enter into the United States. That is why I have also worked with Senator Crapo on a bipartisan effort to build on that progress with respect to forced labor and crack down on the rest of China's playbook of abuses and rip-offs. We wrote a bipartisan amendment that deals with forced labor investigations, with intellectual property protection, and with counterfeiting. It helps level the playing field in the fight against China. It helps strengthen and speed up trade enforcement and increases transparency in trade agreements and trade law. These have been priorities of mine throughout my time in the U.S. Senate. Obviously, I was very pleased when our bipartisan amendment with Senator Crapo was included in the China competition bill. Overall, the bill--and it was bipartisan--is all about creating jobs by building up supply chains within the United States, investing in sensible science, and battling some of the key cost drivers--cost drivers--in inflation. Mr. President, colleagues, Senator Scott voted against that bipartisan bill. The bipartisan bill passed by a vote of 68 to 32, but my colleague from Florida voted no. So I just want--as people reflect on this debate--to note for the record who exactly was working to make progress in the fight against China's worst practices and who is making speeches about them. Second, America needs as much manufacturing capacity as possible as soon as possible here for antigen tests to meet our needs. Unfortunately, we are not there yet. The Biden administration recently launched a free-to-order testing system--free-to-order testing system-- online. Sixty million households have ordered tests. That is nearly half the total number of households in the country, so there is big demand. The President has committed to making a billion tests available through that particular program. That is on top of other programs sending millions of tests each week and month to nursing homes, rural health clinics, schools, and elsewhere. The administration is buying all the American-made COVID tests it can get its hands on, but it is not enough to meet demand. Let's make no mistake--all steps are being taken to make these crucially needed tests available to Americans. The Scott bill would create a shortage of COVID tests. So, in addition to voting against the bipartisan bill that really would have tackled the big issues dealing with China, my colleague has an effort to create a shortage of tests. That would be a mistake. It would prolong an Omicron wave and put lives in danger. That just isn't common sense. The American people want the supply of COVID tests to be large enough that nobody has to camp out in a drugstore parking lot waiting for the next delivery. That doesn't mean they are in league with the Chinese Government's horrible genocide against the Uighur people, but that is essentially what this bill is saying. After we have dealt with the Scott proposal, which doesn't do anything to help America's working families and our children, I am going to propose something that does and does it quickly. The fact is, there are tens of millions of families across the country who need help paying for housing and childcare and the other basic necessities of life. That is what the Senate ought to be focused on. That is what we ought to be zeroing in on because that is going to make life better for families and for kids. So when this legislation is disposed of, I am going to propose that the Senate pass a 1-year extension of the expanded child tax credit, which expired on January 1. That is something, colleagues, which really helps families, and they are hurting right now. The Senate knows they are walking on an economic tightrope, balancing the food bill against the fuel bill, and the reality is, a lot of them had extra expenses due to the variant. I have been trying to get colleagues on the other side of the aisle for well over a month to support the child tax credit. Our colleagues on this side of the aisle have been relentless in their support for it. Child tax credit payments cut child poverty nearly in half; food insecurity among families dropped by 25 percent--story after story from parents across the country talking about how the program helped them put food on the table, how it helped them buy their kids' school clothes and helped them avoid financial ruin when a parent was laid off. The fact is, Social Security was a bond between the government and elders. What the child tax credit has been all about is creating a new bond to try to help families, vulnerable families and their kids--an economic lifeline to them. What I am going to propose, I think, as we move to this debate-- because we will hear from our colleague from Florida--we have a choice. If you want to do something that does absolutely nothing but put Americans in a tougher spot in terms of getting the help they need to deal with COVID, that is what happens under the proposal by my colleague from Florida, or do you want to do something that will put cash into the pockets of parents so they can help their kids? I can tell the Presiding Officer, I am sure he, as a new parent, hears this from his contemporaries: The child tax credit is going for luxuries. I was just home. I had six townhall meetings--by the way, in mostly conservative areas--and families were using those child tax credits for buying shoes and food and essentials. So that is what the choice here is going to be. For the reasons that I describe now, I object to the unanimous consent request from our colleague from Florida.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, at 6:30 p.m. tonight, the Senate vote on the cloture motions with respect to Executive Calendar Nos. 614, 644, 649, 627, 616, 473, and 474; that at 12:30 p.m. tomorrow, Thursday, February 3, the Senate vote on the cloture motions with respect to Executive Calendar Nos. 495, 496, 673, and 654; further, that if cloture is invoked on any of these nominations, the Senate vote on confirmation of the nominations at a time to be determined by the majority leader, or his designee, following consultation with the Republican leader.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. As if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that if the Senate receives a message from the House of Representatives that the House has passed a bill that is identical to the text of the Wyden bill that is at the desk to extend and modify the special rules for the child tax credit and the advanced payments of the child tax credit for 1 year, 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 without intervening action or debate.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, just very briefly, I would like to note that this has been the second time in about 6 weeks when I have tried to get the urgently needed child tax credit extended for another year here on the floor of the U.S. Senate--the second time. We are hearing all over this country about families who are really having trouble making ends meet right now and how valuable to them the child tax credit would be. And twice in the last 6 weeks, here on the floor of the U.S. Senate, I have tried to get the child tax credit extended for 1 year. And I would just like to note that twice--twice-- in the last 6 weeks, Republicans have objected to the idea of extending the child tax credit for 1 year. I don't think that is in the interest of American families and American kids. We will continue this debate. And with that, I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President and colleagues, I am going to talk for just a few minutes about vote-by-mail. I think Senator Klobuchar will probably be joining me. Madam President and colleagues, I am the first U.S. Senator to be elected completely by mail. The second U.S. Senator elected completely by mail was my friend, Republican Gordon Smith, a Senator well known to many here in this body. The country looked up and its first experience, colleagues, with vote-by-mail was thoroughly bipartisan--one Democrat, one Republican, who, as it happened, after running against each other, got along very well and did a lot together. As the country began to get its arms around vote-by-mail, it was bipartisan and the bipartisan efforts to build on it really took off. They took off all across the country until President Donald Trump got elected and began to spew all these lies about vote-by-mail. So then something that was completely bipartisan suddenly became very partisan. What I want to do is rebuild that bipartisanship. My colleagues seem to say that is what they want. And the fact is, vote-by-mail is the gold standard for casting an informed vote, particularly for working people, seniors, and others, who would like the time, the opportunity in their living rooms and their kitchens, to look at the ballot and consider the various alternatives. And in that effort now to undo the damage done by Donald Trump to vote-by-mail and in the name of restoring bipartisanship, which is what it is all about--and I can just tell my colleagues, our late secretary of state, Dennis Richardson, used to say he was about the most conservative person who ever lived. He basically told Donald Trump to go fly a kite when it came to vote-by-mail. Dennis Richardson, our late secretary of state, a staunch conservative, said the reality is there hadn't been fraud; it worked very effectively. You are off base. So in the hope of being able to restore that bipartisanship, I want to ask a question of the distinguished chair of the Rules Committee. Then, I will wrap up very quickly, and we can move on. But we have had an awful lot of revisionist history with respect to vote-by-mail. Senator Klobuchar, I know the Rules Committee, under your leadership, has dug into the history. Utah--bright red Utah--votes by mail. Senator Klobuchar, take us through that history and then I will close.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, let me close very quickly. The fact is, we can bring about the bipartisanship that many of my Republican colleagues have been talking about over the last 4\1/2\ hours. It is doable. It is possible to do it in a way that builds on a practical gold standard for informed voting used in Oregon, used in bright-red Utah, and it is what we had until 2020, when Donald Trump tried to preempt the progress we were making because, in every rally, he would talk about all this fraud, for example. Fraud, Madam President--the last analysis of fraud in Oregon is 0.00001 percent of all votes cast. So we can get back to what the Republicans have been talking about over the last 4\1/2\ hours, but the way you are going to have to do it is they are going to have to go to Donald Trump and tell him: Look, we just don't agree with you on this. And that is the kind of leadership that we need. We saw it in Oregon. We saw it in Utah. We have seen it now from sea to shining sea. That is what it is going to take. I want my Republican colleagues to know that we will meet them more than half way, but they are going to have to start taking on Donald Trump's lies on these issues if we are going to have that bipartisanship that my colleagues have been talking about this morning.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I wish to honor a dedicated and creative organization serving communities throughout Oregon and the Nation, celebrating 20 years of allowing senior citizens to stay in their homes while providing access to affordable care and community. The Village Movement is founded on the principle of neighborliness and provides comfort, care, and affordability while maintaining dignity. This wonderful movement started in 2002 with a group of community- dedicated friends who did not want to leave their community in retirement. Intent upon staying, the friends launched the Beacon Hill Village in Massachusetts to provide residents who were 50 and older practical support and confidence to stay in their homes and live their lives independently. This idea soon caught on, with similar villages springing up all over the country, including in Oregon. There are now 14 villages throughout Oregon bringing services to senior citizens in the comfort of their own homes. The Movement supports what is often called ``aging in place'' by developing a nurturing network of volunteers and access to services and social opportunities that are both sustainable and community-based. Every village is member-driven and self-governing, allowing them to respond to the needs of each community. The Movement has also expanded to include adults of all ages living with disabilities, preserving the humanity and dignity that is so important in every stage of life. I have long viewed aging in place as a bedrock principle for improving quality of life for seniors and those with disabilities. Years ago, I started the Independence at Home Program, which helped primary care providers visit frail seniors in their homes. This helped them avoid unnecessary and potentially dangerous travel and remain in their homes longer than they would have otherwise. I have also been proud to lead legislation as a part of the Build Back Better agenda that would put home care on a more even playing field with institutional care. These important efforts can build on one another, alongside organizations like the Village Movement, to create a rich tapestry of health and social supports for Americans as they age. Without a doubt, the Village Movement has set a fine example of how communities can help support their neighbors. It is an honor to recognize the Village Movement for its service to the United States-- and Oregon in particular.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, before he leaves, I want to thank my colleague from Massachusetts. We have worked often together on these democracy issues, and I look forward to doing that in the days ahead. I also want to commend Senator Klobuchar from Minnesota because she has been our point person on the Rules Committee, which is central to this whole debate. I think we all understand what is at stake. That is what my colleagues have been outlining. And I think we have been very fortunate to have Senator Klobuchar at the helm. She and I have worked together on one of the issues I am going to talk about, vote by mail, but I just want people to understand how valuable she has been. Mr. President and colleagues, a year ago today, not far from where we stand this afternoon, domestic terrorists tried to beat our democracy to the ground. They might have been successful were it not for the police officers who defended our democracy as they were viciously attacked and beaten. Before anything else is said, in my view, by an elected official, we need to salute these officers and all those who work day in and day out alongside them here in the Capitol. For their courage, we ought to be internally grateful. The insurrection on January 6 was instigated by the former President, who wanted to undo the results of a democratic election. Let's also understand that, unfortunately, inciting the mob wasn't the end of it. Donald Trump didn't exactly walk quietly off into the sunset after the Biden inauguration. The effort to undermine our democracy, to end free and fair elections in America, goes on as we speak. Support for the Big Lie is essentially unchanged from where it was a year ago. An awful lot of Republicans who said after January 6 that they were done with the former President have cozied back up to him just 12 months later. The only reason the mob is not here today is Donald Trump didn't summon them back. Now, in my view, it is our job to ensure that another attack like this, or by any other means, never succeeds. We will have more to say about those issues in the days ahead. In my view, protecting the vote has got to be step one in protecting democracy. A guiding principle for the Senate must be that while politics may guide a citizen's vote, it should never determine whether they are allowed to vote. To act otherwise would undermine the very foundations of a representative democracy, empowering voters with a system built on integrity and accountability, a system that promotes participation rather than discourages it, a system with a real history of bipartisanship. I say to the Presiding Officer and colleagues, that is the kind we have in my home State of Oregon. Oregon believes so strongly in the right to vote that everybody gets a ballot sent straight to their home. I am honored to say that I was the first U.S. Senator elected in an all vote-by-mail election. Back then, it was Oregon Republicans who were pushing to expand vote-by-mail. A Democratic Governor even vetoed a vote-by-mail bill in 1995. Right after my election, the Oregon Republicans flipped back, and vote-by-mail was suddenly, oh, so bad. Everything flipped a few months later, when my friend, Gordon Smith, a Republican from eastern Oregon, became the second U.S. Senator to be elected by mail. At this point, Oregon voters said: We have just had it with everybody looking for some kind of partisan slant here. We just think vote-by-mail is a really terrific idea. They went out to vote on a ballot measure, and they chose to make Oregon's elections all vote- by-mail, passing it with 70 percent of the vote in 1998. This, in my view, was the culmination of a process that started 40 years ago with some local elections in Linn County, a small county in the western part of our State. It grew and grew from there. Election officials learned that when you let people vote at home, participation goes up, and the costs go down. One of the biggest defenders of Oregon's vote-at-home system was the late Dennis Richardson. He was our secretary of state. And by his characterization, he was about as conservative--a Republican as you could get. But when the Trump era came along and people criticized our elections and said, ``Oh, there is all this fraud,'' spouting lies about it, the late Dennis Richardson stood up and said: I am a conservative Republican. They are wrong. They are wrong in what they are saying about Oregon. He even wrote to Donald Trump in 2017: ``We are confident that voter fraud in last November's election did not occur in Oregon.'' Every election now, young Oregonians watch their parents voting around their kitchen table, and it is a real inspiration to the next generation to make sure they are committed voters. Voting at home gives you the opportunity to be more informed. If there is a particular measure, initiative, or a race that you haven't researched, you get time to look into the options. When you are done, your ballot goes into a security envelope, you sign the outside, and off it goes. For me, that is when I head from our home in Southeast Portland to the Sellwood branch of the Multnomah County Public Library, drop my ballot in the collection box, and head home--no long lines, no glitchy touchscreen systems, just hassle-free voting. A recent analysis in the Election Law Journal said that of all 50 States, voting is easiest in Oregon. And Senator Klobuchar, I have heard colleagues go back and forth to say who is No. 1 in participation and who is No. 1 in all of these aspects. And I think, like a number of other States, we are all kind of competing for the highest turnout rates. We get some of the highest in the country. We have been a leader in terms of increasing turnout among Black and Latino voters. Voter registration is automatic. It is as easy as a trip to the Department of Motor Vehicles. For myself--and Senator Klobuchar and I have talked about this so often over the years--I have been proposing legislation to have universal at-home voting since 2002. That is what my Vote at Home Act would do. It would give every American the right to vote the Oregon way, the vote that my neighbors and I can do. I will say here on the Senate floor that I guarantee that, if you do it the Oregon way, it will be a nationwide hit immediately. Letting people vote at home is also the best defense against some of the really horrendous methods of suppressing the vote; for example, what we have seen over the last few years with State and local governments shutting polling places, particularly ones that serve Black and Latino voters--what unforgivable actions. These days, in some areas, Republicans are making it illegal to give food and water to people standing in line to vote. It shouldn't be a test of physical stamina to be able to vote. Nobody should have to wonder if they will be able to vote if they step out of line to go to a bathroom. Nobody should have to sacrifice an entire day to participate in this incredible, incredible democratic system that is America. That is why I proposed the People Over Long Lines Act, called the POLL Act. The bill says State governments have to guarantee that everybody who votes in person can do so within 30 minutes. Anybody who is forced to wait longer has a legal action they can bring. If they sue and win, it is 50 bucks for waiting longer than 30 minutes and 50 bucks more for every hour after that. A free bit of advice to States: Get ready. Make sure people don't have to wait in lines. One of the best ways to make sure they don't have to wait in lines is to let them vote at home. It is not just Oregon, by the way, that votes by mail. And I think, Senator Klobuchar, we heard some of our colleagues talk about their States and voting by mail. If you need another example, let's think about the U.S. Armed Forces. Most servicemembers and their families vote by mail in every election. All of the people who wear the uniform of the United States can vote by mail in every Federal election. It has been that way for decades. So the bottom line is that we think it is time to get the Oregon system into every nook and cranny in America. We feel that way because it works. It raises voter participation, it lowers the cost of running elections, it helps voters be more informed, and it is safe and secure. And if you are resisting safe and efficient elections with higher voter turnout, then you are suppressing democracy in America. My home State of Oregon shows the way to preserve America. I am going to close my remarks, but I think we will have Senator Klobuchar speak for all of us here in a moment. But, in my closing, I want to touch just for a moment on my family that I am so proud of. My German family fled their homeland, a place where they were deeply rooted in that nation's society, as my grandfather was a Member of Parliament and served on the Berlin city council. My family was forced, as Jews, to flee the fascists who had taken over their democracy. They fled to America as the last remaining beacon of freedom. With that freedom, my dad chose to serve in our Army, which fought against German fascism, and my dad has been recognized for his unique contributions. We were so thrilled, for example, to have the Senators from Maryland talk about the Ritchie Boys. My dad was one of the Ritchie Boys, a German kid who taught himself English so he could be out there fighting the Nazis. And I remember the good work of the Senators from Maryland and how thrilled our family was about that. My dad was about the greatest patriot around. He felt he was so lucky to be an American, to be in our Army, to stand up for American values. And my final remark here today is about my dad. If my dad were alive today, he would tell us: Senators, make sure that the light in America's beacon of freedom never goes out. With that, I yield the floor.

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 few minutes, I will be putting forward a unanimous consent request asking the Senate to take up and approve a highly qualified and noncontroversial nominee. I will just take a couple of minutes to talk about Maria Pagan, nominated to be the next Deputy U.S. Trade Representative in Geneva. There are a few key points to make about the nominee, as well as the critical role she will serve representing the United States at the World Trade Organization to get a better deal for American workers, farmers, and businesses. To start, Ms. Pagan isn't new to high-pressure, high-profile negotiations. She is currently deputy general counsel at the U.S. Trade Representative's Office, the person called in when issues are particularly challenging. She has taken on these difficult issues during numerous trade agreement negotiations, including the U.S.- Mexico-Canada Agreement. She was in lockstep with Members of Congress who pushed hard to guarantee that the commitments laid out in the USMCA were fully and quickly enforceable, a key priority for protecting American jobs. She has been a longtime public servant, spending 30 years in government. She has served both Republican and Democratic administrations at the Department of Commerce and at USTR. She is an expert on a host of issues from trade in services to government procurement, and she has litigated several disputes before the WTO. She is highly qualified. She is a nominee who brings the two sides of the Senate together. The Finance Committee vote on her nomination was 27 to 1. I would just say, at this point in time, that is about as good as it gets. Colleagues, I have said before that it is crucial to get qualified people to the office representing the United States around the world. It is important to have these skilled individuals working on behalf of our workers, our businesses, and our interests. This nomination is particularly important to me. It is no secret that the World Trade Organization, which can be a valuable institution, is not today functioning as it needs to. The rules that underpin the WTO were crafted more than two decades ago. These 20th century rules have simply not kept up with 21st century technology. Meanwhile, the Chinese Government has learned to game the system. It does so routinely at the expense of hard-working American families. As a result, the process of leveling the playing field with trade rules based on fairness have been overtaken by the exploitation of loopholes and rip-offs. In many cases, that comes at the direct expense of American workers and American businesses. With her decades of experience, Ms. Pagan understands these challenges as well as anyone. From day one after her confirmation, she will hit the ground running to lead our allies in fighting back. For example, one area that I feel particularly strongly about is that new rules are desperately needed to deal with subsidized fisheries. Harmful subsidies are allowing fleets to reach distant shores of less developed countries like Ecuador and Ghana. They are stripping the ocean of fish without regard to species or regulations or basic decency. These highly subsidized, poorly regulated fleets rely on abhorrent labor practices--including forced labor. Worst of all, their catch ends up in American supermarkets and on American tables. Oregon fishing families who trade in fairly and sustainably caught U.S. salmon, pollack, and other fish simply should not be asked to compete against that kind of horrendous cheating. Negotiations on this issue have been dragging on for over 20 years, and I can tell you, the 20 years have not improved the situation for our oceans and for our families. The 12th Ministerial Conference, which was delayed last week due to the new COVID variant, is another really important chance to get these negotiations finally done. The outcome has to be strong. It can't open, once again, harmful new loopholes. These meetings have been rescheduled to the spring. The United States needs tough, smart leadership at the table. Ms. Pagan, with her years of negotiation, is just the closer, just the kind of person the United States needs. There are no shortages of other issues that Ms. Pagan will have to tackle at the World Trade Organization, from institutional reform to dispute settlement, to e-commerce. The United States needs a leader who can work with our allies to get it all done. She is the right woman for the job. Maria Pagan is a highly qualified, experienced nominee. She is a proven negotiator, a strong advocate for workers, farmers, and businesses. She comes, as I have indicated, with strong, 27-to-1, bipartisan support in the Senate Finance Committee. There is just no justification for any delay in moving this nomination forward. I will have more to say when I ask unanimous consent, briefly, in a bit. And, at this moment, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WYDEN

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

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, let me just say at the outset, I strongly, strongly, strongly agree with my colleagues--Senator Rubio and my friend from Oregon Senator Merkley--that the United States has to fight genocide and the scourge of forced labor taking place in Western China and elsewhere around the world. As the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, one of my special priorities--one that we worked on for quite some time--has been to tackle this issue of forced labor. It goes back to work that Senator Brown and I did in 2015 to close an unjustifiable loophole that allowed an exception to the ban on products made with forced labor. Not only is it morally abhorrent, it is also a major trade rip-off that undermines American workers. On the Finance Committee, we believe that the Senate needs to look at every opportunity to protect good-paying American jobs and help workers and their families get ahead. That means that the Senate has got to be prepared to tackle multiple challenges at once. Right now, the urgent issue for so many American families is the potential expiration of child tax credit payments on January 1. Families received their sixth child tax credit payment today. It could be the last if this body does not act. Families have come to depend on these payments to cover the essentials like rent, groceries, heat, and clothing for their kids. Just recently, I was home in Oregon, and I asked people what they spend the child tax credit on, and they said: ``Ron, we spend it on things like shoes.'' And in our part of the world, it gets cold; it gets wet. We are not talking about luxury; we are talking about shoes for children. Food insecurity among families dropped by about 25 percent since these child tax credit payments began. Child poverty has been cut nearly in half. This program, in my view, is like Social Security for kids and vulnerable families. We never let Social Security checks for vulnerable seniors lapse. For anybody who questions how valuable this program has been to American families, I want to just very briefly touch on a few messages that we have gotten from parents in a cross-section of communities across the country about how the child tax credit has helped them: A parent in Kentucky: ``It helped me with fuel for my car and provided me enough to buy my daughter a few things she needed.'' A parent in New York: ``It's helped take the burden off our family. My husband lost his job during COVID but since found another job, but the gap of the job loss was heavy.'' A parent in Alabama: ``I was able to buy my daughter her school clothes.'' A parent in New Hampshire: ``It has helped me tremendously especially when school was starting.'' So the message from American parents, from sea to shining sea, is the child tax credit has been vital to so many American families and lowering the cost of raising a family, ensuring they can provide that basic level of security all children deserve. So at this point, I would ask, would the Senator from Florida modify his request to include the adoption of my amendment that is at the desk to extend the child tax credit for 1 year and pass the bill as amended?

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

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I listened carefully to my colleague from Florida, and because of his objection, there isn't going to be an opportunity for the Senate to take two bold steps tonight. I already indicated--made it very clear--that I am completely sympathetic to my colleague from Florida, my colleague from Oregon, to the fight against genocide and forced labor. They got me at ``hello'' on their proposition. I also feel incredibly strongly--incredibly strongly--about our vulnerable children and our vulnerable families who are going to be cut off from an essential lifeline unless the U.S. Senate acts. And, unfortunately, because of the objection from my colleague from Florida, we are not going to have a chance to take two bold steps tonight. That is what I am for. That is what I believe the American people are for. You bet we are against forced labor. You bet we are against genocide. But we also have had a long tradition of standing up for vulnerable kids, vulnerable families, and tonight we could have obtained two bold objectives here in the U.S. Senate. I think it is unfortunate that my colleague from Florida is unwilling to do that. Vulnerable families are going to be hurt as a result of the objection. I just want the Senate to know there was another way. There was another way we could have stood with the effort to deal with genocide and forced labor and protected families. They weren't mutually exclusive. We could have done both. I think it is unfortunate the Senate is not doing it. I object.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent, notwithstanding rule XXII, if applicable, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Republican leader, that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Executive Calendar No. 547, Maria L. Pagan, of Puerto Rico, to be a Deputy United States Trade Representative (Geneva Office), with the rank of Ambassador; that there be 10 minutes of debate, equally divided in the usual form on the nomination; that upon the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nomination; that if the nomination is confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with to intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, there has been an objection. Let me be very brief. We have a lot to do still tonight. As the new COVID variant surges around the globe and threatens Americans here at home and millions around the world, the United States needs to do everything possible to get shots in arms, including having the right people in Geneva to find solutions to the availability and distribution of vaccines. COVID continues to be a deadly crisis, and we should be working in every way possible to make sure that the Biden team has a group that can reach agreement on a TRIPS waiver and any other trade-based solutions. I look forward to continuing efforts to talk with my colleague from Utah. This is urgent business. We have to get it worked out. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, the Senate will soon vote on President Biden's nomination of my neighbor and fellow Oregonian, Jennifer Sung, to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. I guess I ought to save everybody some suspense. I am proud to support her nomination, and I just want to take a few minutes to talk about why she deserves the support of all Senators. First, with respect to her qualifications, Ms. Sung is a graduate of Oberlin College and Yale Law School. As a student, she volunteered to represent low-income patients at a local hospital. As a legal fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, she fought on behalf of workers who toiled in poor conditions for little pay. In private practice, she defended the rights of all people in our country to work in safe and fair conditions, to get the healthcare they need, and to freely exercise their constitutional rights. Currently, Ms. Sung serves as a member of Oregon's Employment Relations Board. That is the board that adjudicates disputes over labor practices and employment law. She has decided more than 200 cases in that role. She has proven her impartiality, which I think we all understand is fundamental to what we need in a justice. And she has certainly shown her diligence and her commitment to justice. Her qualifications, in my view, simply cannot be questioned. Second, I have had the chance to get to know Ms. Sung personally since her nomination, and what struck me is we both have a family story that is only possible here in our great country. Members of her family fled political persecution and violence in China in the 1940s--the Wydens fled the terror or Nazis just a few years earlier--and they barely spoke any English when they arrived here in their new home. Our country provided safety and opportunity for my family and for Ms. Sung's family. And I have always found that so many who have that family story take a special interest in protecting the rights and the freedoms Americans enjoy. That has been a hallmark of Ms. Sung's legal career, and it is something, in my view, that all Senators ought to support. So I am proud to describe my Southeast Portland neighbor, Jennifer Sung, as a talented, committed individual who will be a great asset on the bench. She is going to be a superb judge. I urge all my colleagues to support Jennifer Sung when we vote soon on President Biden's nomination, Oregonian Jennifer Sung, to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object, Madam President.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President and colleagues, I yield to no Senator in my support of this country's senior citizens. My background, colleagues, I was codirector of the Oregon Gray Panthers, the senior citizens group, for almost 7 years before I went into public life. And I know that there is no Senator here who doesn't support senior citizens, farmers, the extraordinarily important Americans that my colleagues have been talking about. But what really has not been explained here--because we all kind of talk this special lingo around here--is what my colleagues really seek to do in the Kennedy amendment. What my colleague from Louisiana wishes to do is rip up an agreement reached between Democrats and Republicans. Specifically, colleagues, Senators Schumer and McConnell. So what they did is reach a bipartisan agreement to defuse an economic timebomb by creating a process to avoid default. Senator Kennedy's proposal sticks a flame right back under that fuse. Now, the two parties obviously have different approaches when it comes to gamesmanship around this country's financial commitments. Setting all of that aside, the fact is our country is now way too close to default for the Senate to be playing games. This debate is almost entirely about financial commitments made under past Presidents. It doesn't have anything to do with legislation that is still in the works. That is a fact. The reality is my colleague from Louisiana seeks to bring the country closer to default. The Senate ought to be clear on the consequences if that were to come to pass. Default would be an economic disaster for our country as well as for individual families and businesses. And, again, colleagues, since senior citizens came up so frequently, this has been my particular passion. It is why I went into public service. Social Security stops going out. Military could stop getting paid. Interest rates go into the stratosphere, making existing Federal debt even more expensive, if you go forward with this proposal. Costs go up for families who want to buy homes or buy cars. Getting a small business loan becomes more expensive. Jobs across the country are wiped out amid this turmoil. And all of that would happen right in the middle of the holidays, when Americans are simply trying to enjoy their time with families, go out and shop for presents, and enjoy their time together. My view is, after almost 2 years of pandemic and economic chaos, people have had it hard enough. And two leaders--a Democrat and a Republican--have come together because they understand the Senate doesn't need to add another catastrophe to their financial challenges, the challenges I just described--one, by the way, that would be entirely self-made. There is an agreement before the Senate, colleagues; an agreement between the Republican leader and the Democratic leader. That agreement brought the two sides together. My colleagues must not throw that agreement away. And I respect all my colleagues--all of them--but I just believe that this proposal from the Senator from Louisiana is misguided. It brings our country closer to default. Therefore, I object.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object.