Mark Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. It is my understanding your concern with the nominee is not about the nominee's qualifications.

Mr. WARNER. Thank you. I thank the Senator from Utah. Mr. President, I do hope this matter is resolved. I believe Amanda needs to be installed and doing her job. She has been up for this nomination literally for months. I also feel this is just one more example--I think probably every Member of the Senate, including the Presiding Officer, has a number of individuals he supports. I know many of my colleagues on the Republican side have nominees they support. The kind of blanket holds that are taking place on way too many of our nominees means that this President can't put in place his team. The Presiding Officer was a Governor. He is about to be replaced by another Governor. I was a Governor. I can't imagine running an administration a year into my term if I didn't have two-thirds of my appointees serving in office. The Presiding Officer, I know--I will end very briefly--is an extraordinarily valuable member of the Intelligence Committee. We see America's national security concerns on a daily basis. Those national security concerns will be better met when every major nation in the world has an American Ambassador. It is great that we have State Department personnel, but without that Ambassador in these offices-- Amanda is not up for ambassadorship, but there are a host of Ambassadors in critical nations that need to be confirmed. I hope--as we wind down these last few days of this session before the end of the year, I implore my friends on the Republican side, give these folks who have waited for months and months and months a kind of assurance of their ability to serve, especially when they are noncontroversial. Please remove their objections. Stop objecting. Let's let the government have these people, personnel in place. I hope Amanda Howe will be one of those. I look forward to my friend from Utah resolving this issue. I thank the Presiding Officer for listening to my extra 5 minutes. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 60th anniversary of the National Reconnaissance Office, NRO. Born in September 1961, the present day National Reconnaissance Office was formed by agreement between the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence during the height of the Cold War. In the first decade of the Cold War, American ingenuity and engineering had enabled significant advances to meet the demand for better reconnaissance as new, high-altitude aircraft like the U-2 and its high-speed successors, the A-12 and SR-71, were developed. However, even this new technology had its limitations. This became acutely clear with the shoot-down of CIA pilot Francis Gary Powers' U-2 in 1960. Thankfully, American aerospace engineers were also maturing new rocket and sensor technologies that enabled the United States to meet the increasing national security challenge of how to analyze Soviet forces to avert a nuclear war. Carrying over from the Eisenhower to Kennedy administrations, a group of remarkable Americans brought the foresight of combining a number of government satellite efforts into a single U.S. intelligence organization that would become the modem NRO. These optical experts, chemists, physicists, engineers, military officers, mathematicians, and photography entrepreneurs recognized the value of a national policy of peacetime strategic reconnaissance in addressing the Soviet threat as well as future, unforeseen, national security challenges. Assuming control of the previously initiated Corona photoreconnaissance program and following up with the Gambit, Hexagon, and signals intelligence programs, the NRO was able to supply the essential intelligence information needed to understand Soviet missile capabilities. The intelligence information the NRO provided to analysts and policymakers was critical in keeping nuclear tensions in check at the most tense points of the Cold War. With the arms limitation treaties of the 1970s, the need for the verification of Soviet military capabilities posed a new challenge for policymakers. The scientists and engineers of the NRO would once again rise to the challenge by designing and building the Kennen digital imagery satellite and other unique overhead technological capabilities to respond to these daunting intelligence requirements. In recent times, the capabilities of the NRO have been vital to helping us better understand and react to our Nation's toughest challenges, helping to see the unseen across the globe, from the hunt for Osama bin Laden and supporting counterterrorism operations around the globe, to helping us recover from natural disasters like hurricanes and wildfires here at home. While this 60th anniversary is an appropriate time to celebrate the rich history and innovations of the NRO of the past, I think it is also important to recognize where the NRO is moving today and into the future and for the American people to understand why the NRO is so vital to our security. Our colleagues on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and I have challenged the NRO to move faster in building and acquiring the next generation of space reconnaissance capabilities, including commercial technologies, as the great power competition with Russia and China takes shape. NRO is rising to this challenge. Even as the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted so many parts of our society, economy, and supply chain, the NRO's workforce has stayed on task. In the last 18 months the NRO has not only maintained 100 percent of its mission capability, but the NRO also has had a record series of launches and payload deliveries into orbit, with 8 launches and 16 payloads in 2020 and 2021, including a launch from Wallops Island, in the Commonwealth of Virginia. I am also pleased to point out that the NRO also delivered its 12th consecutive clean financial audit during this pandemic period. The NRO of today and tomorrow is growing its partnerships in both the private and public sectors. Within the Department of Defense, the NRO is partnering with the U.S. Space Force and U.S. Space Command to integrate national space operations with the combatant commander and Federal decision-maker requirements and to protect and defend our Nation's assets in space. Likewise, the NRO is increasing engagement with allies, and particularly the Five Eyes nations, to better leverage capabilities and take advantage of new opportunities, such as the NRO's first satellite launch from an overseas location in 2020 from New Zealand. The NRO works side by side with intelligence community partners such as the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency to support the NGA's imagery analysis mission and the National Security Agency to support the NSA's analysis of signals and radio frequency signatures. In the private sector arena, the NRO is building off a 60-year history of working with U.S. industry by embracing the benefits of the growing U.S. commercial space industry and delivering more capabilities at a lower cost to the taxpayers, taking advantage of a full range of services from commercial imagery and commercial cloud services to commercial launch. Speeding innovation in anticipation of tomorrow's intelligence needs, the NRO is working with universities and research institutions across the Nation, looking for new ways to adapt existing capabilities and to bring online new technologies, The NRO is pushing the boundaries of advanced science and technology for new phenomenology and applications that will improve and enhance the NRO's ability to provide policymakers and warfighters with advanced warning of events and provide critical insights into the capabilities and intentions of our adversaries. None of this work could be done without the women and men of the NRO. The NRO workforce, a blend of military, civilian, and contract employees, is one of the most technical and highly skilled in the government. They are engineers, scientists, IT professionals, space system operators, and acquisition and program managers, with advanced degrees and a diversity of backgrounds and experiences. They are some of the best our Nation has to offer. They are the vital piece that makes the NRO not only a great place to work but makes the NRO the best place to work if you want to build the satellites, rockets, and ground systems that support our national security. From the NRO pioneers to the workforce of today, the women and men of the NRO can always be counted on to stand true to their motto, ``Supra Et Ultra,'' always going Above and Beyond. I offer my congratulations to the NRO on an exceptional 60 years, and I look forward to seeing how the NRO will lead us into the next 60 years of space reconnaissance.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 392 through 399; that the Senate vote on the nominations en bloc, without intervening action or debate; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I now ask for a second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk, and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider Calendar No. 390, and that the Senate vote on the nomination without intervening action or debate.

Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all without intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that any statements related to the nomination be printed in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. 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.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m., Wednesday, October 6; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; that upon conclusion of morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the Merriam nomination; further, that the cloture motion on the Merriam nomination ripen at 11:30 a.m.; that if cloture is invoked on the nomination, all postcloture time expire at 2:15 p.m.; finally, if the nomination is confirmed, that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of Senators Barrasso and Collins.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am going to speak and make a unanimous consent request in a moment, and I am so anxious because a number of my Republican colleagues--I remember being in middle school as well. You don't want to be the first; you don't want to be the last. Unfortunately, that is where we rank right now in terms of comparison to OECD, in terms of raising corporate revenue. I don't think that is fair for hard-working Americans. And the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee is someone that I have huge, huge respect for and have worked with on many, many items. We are going to have a chance to debate part of these components, I think, going forward. But I would say this. When I first got the note: Well, the Senator from Idaho--it was one of my first times I was a gang member. The Senator from Idaho and I were part of something called the ``Gang of Six,'' and we were audacious enough to think that a proposal put forward by the so-called Simpson-Bowles Commission to take on the debt and deficit issues in our country was worthwhile and worth us both, frankly, offending folks in each of our respective parties. We were astonished that in the 2010-2011 timeframe, the country was looking at $15 trillion of debt. We, obviously, were not very successful, since we are now at about $27 trillion in debt; and, I would argue, both sides bear lots of responsibility. I believe we cut revenues way too much. In the last year or so alone, we jointly added $5 trillion-plus in terms of spending around COVID. But the one thing, I think, we both realized was what we shouldn't do is ever mess with the full faith and credit of the United States of America because that is like giving an irresponsible politician a hand grenade and saying: Let that politician pull the pin out at any moment in time. Well, there may be some folks now who are prepared to pull the pin out and put in jeopardy the full faith and credit of United States of America. If that happens over the next 30 days, the one thing that we can be guaranteed is it will rock the bond markets. It will rock how America views--how the rest of the world views America's ability to honor its commitments. I fear, unless somebody--and, again, my friend from Idaho, I know, realizes this as well, is that if we mess with this, if we were to see--pull that hand grenade and have it explode on all of us, the American people aren't going to decide whose fault it was or whose responsibility it was. All they are going to end up seeing, I believe, is that interest rates are going to go up because we have not dealt with the debt and deficit. At $27 trillion, if interest rates go up 100 basis point, 1 percent, that is the equivalent of a--call it a tax or spending obligation--of $200 billion a year of additional interest payments. And those interest payments come before Medicare, come before Social Security, and come before payment to our soldiers. So I know we are rallying against spending, but let's make sure--and we both ought to bear some responsibility on this--we don't mess with the full faith and credit of the United States; because if we do that, in addition to all the things that you are making criticisms of this reconciliation plan, you have just added another $2 trillion of spending--mandatory spending--over the next decade. So we can agree or disagree on the reconciliation pieces and what parts, but let's guarantee one way or the other we don't mess with the full faith and credit of the United States. And I thank my good friend from Idaho and all the good work that we have done together and continue to do together. And I am anxious to come back and--you know, some parts of your critique, I agree with; many I don't. I know I am holding up also my colleague and friend from the Intelligence Committee, the Senator from Texas. Unanimous Consent Request--Calendar No. 347

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to seek unanimous consent to confirm Mr. Matthew G. Olsen, President Biden's nominee to be the next Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division at the Department of Justice. As we all know, America recently marked the 20th anniversary of one of the darkest days in our history: the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. As chairman of the Intelligence Committee, I am privy to the intelligence information being collected from across our IC community, which sets forth the myriad threats our Nation continues to face both at home and abroad. And the Senator from Texas, who is a great member of the Intelligence Committee, is aware of those threats as well. Our ability to counter these threats and ensure our national security is dependent on having qualified individuals nominated by the President in place so they can do their jobs and, importantly, be held accountable through the confirmation process. Prior to the attacks of 9/11--and this was one of the things that were pointed out by the commission afterwards--literally 57 percent of the Federal Government's Senate-confirmed top, top national security jobs remain vacant--57 percent. And one of the key recommendations of the 9/11 Commission was to accelerate the process of national security appointments. Unfortunately, if we fast-forward 20 years, today you would think we would have learned the lesson, but today the situation is actually worse than it was prior to 9/11. Of the 170 confirmable national security-related positions, only 44 have been filled. That is just 26 percent. You know, my math shows that that means we have got about 74 percent that are unfilled. We have got to do better. That is why it is essential for the Senate to swiftly confirm every single qualified national security intelligence professional whose nomination is pending on the Senate floor. That is why I strongly support the swift confirmation of Matt Olsen. The National Security Division, or NSD, at the DOJ has remained without a confirmed senior leader for several months. Created in 2006, the NSD consolidates the Department's primary national security operations and serves as a key link between the Department and the intelligence community. Its mission is to carry out the Department's highest priority: protecting the United States from threats to our national security by pursuing justice through law. Matt Olsen is eminently qualified for this position, given his years of service at the DOJ; as general counsel for the NSA; and a director of the National Counterterrorism Center, or NCTC, in which capacity he regularly briefed our Intelligence Committee. Matt is a consummate intelligence professional and an effective leader of the highest caliber and personal and professional integrity. The NSD needs a confirmed leader in place. So I am urging my colleagues to confirm Matt Olsen immediately. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nomination, Calendar No. 347, Matthew G. Olsen, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Attorney General; that the nomination be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nomination; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I just want to make a couple of quick comments in response to my friend from Texas.

Mr. WARNER. We have worked on a number of--or continue to work on a number of important items. But I think it is--various--he is citing a couple of lawyers at the front end of the legal process that have either been arrested or have not gone through the whole judicial process yet. I don't have the whole list in front of me, but I would be happy to present for the record the list of individuals affiliated with the Trump campaign who have been arrested and convicted and pled guilty because of lying to the FBI or involvement with Russia. I think our investigation, of which I am quite, quite proud--bipartisan, successful--clearly showed Russian interference in the 2016 elections. We have seen the results of the Mueller investigation. I can't recall the exact number of convictions that arose out of that. And I agree with my friend, the Senator from Texas, that we don't want--the last thing I want is any more partisanship between the intelligence community. And that is why I just again want to cite for the record the individuals--yes, Mr. Olsen joined a lot of intelligence professionals in raising concerns about the way the previous administration ran the intelligence community. Frankly, I think they ran it, in many ways, disrespectful to the folks who worked in that community. But, again, talking about Matt Olsen and his career, I have got a letter here that has got literally hundreds of intelligence and DOJ professionals who support Mr. Olsen. Let me just cite a couple of them--all of them individuals, by the way, who have served Republican Presidents: Michael Chertoff, as we all know, Assistant Attorney General, also then subsequently head of DHS; Zach Terwilliger, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, served under President Trump; Kenneth Wainstein, U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, 2004 to 2006, under President Bush; Charles Rosenberg, served under President Bush in the Southern District and the Eastern District; Paul McNulty, again, served under President Bush, Eastern District of Virginia, U.S. attorney; Michael Mukasey, Attorney General under President Bush; Jesse Liu, U.S. attorney under President Trump in the District of Columbia. The list goes on and on.

Mr. WARNER. All I am hoping is that we would get a chance to debate Mr. Olsen's qualifications and bring it to the floor for a vote. Instead, we have a whole clump of individuals who have been put on hold, a process that 99.9 percent of Americans don't understand. I think Mr. Olsen's career and his service to our country deserves a free and fulsome debate. Those individuals who don't want to vote for him, have at it. But we are not getting that opportunity because--and it is not my friend from Texas. Let me be clear. He is not the person who placed holds. That process is taking place, and, unfortunately, I believe Mr. Olsen is not going to have his--not even his day in court but his day on the floor of the Senate, which I think, with his service to our country, he merits and deserves.

Mr. WARNER. Of course.

Mr. WARNER. I would say to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, you know, we all reflected recently where we were 20 years ago on 9/11. But one of the astounding things that came out of the report after 9/11 was that, at that moment, on 9/11 in 2001, 57 percent of the senior officials in the intelligence community had not been confirmed. Those positions weren't filled. The amazing thing is, 20 years later, 74 percent of those top positions are not filled. I think that is a disservice to the memory of those who perished on 9/11, and I think it is unfortunate, to say the least. If Members have, in good faith, concerns with Mr. Olsen, let's debate and have at it. But the idea of a large block of intelligence and law enforcement professionals--and we need this position at the Justice Department--sitting unfilled because of an individual Member, on an issue not related to their qualifications, to put a blanket hold on a series of this President's nominees does not make our Nation safer.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Ohio, who has been such a leader on the underlying bill, and I have been proud to work on this clarification on this critical issue on cryptocurrency. I thank the Senator, who is correct in his understanding. I would also like to add some additional clarifications. The bill ensures that digital asset market players who provide a platform to facilitate digital asset trades by taxpayers will be considered brokers required to report information to the IRS and taxpayers about those transactions. Reporting entities may be digital asset exchanges or hosted wallet providers, often called custodians, or other agents involved in effectuating digital asset transactions. The bill recognizes that digital assets are different from stocks and bonds. For example, some taxpayers regularly transfer digital assets between digital asset exchanges or to an off-exchange wallet and then back to an exchange. Those taxpayers need information returns that link the steps in those chains so they have the complete information they need to prepare their tax returns. This bill treats digital asset businesses that, for consideration--in effect, money--regularly effect transfers of digital assets as brokers and provides for reporting of digital asset transfers to or by a broker, including in cases where transfer is not directly from one broker to another. Senator Portman, do you have anything further to add on this item?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator is entirely correct in his analysis of the application of the bill, and further, I believe, and Treasury has indicated, that this would also be true for individuals engaged in staking their digital assets for the purpose of validating distributed ledger transactions--proof of stake--which we know to be much more environmentally sustainable. It would also be true for other validation methods associated with other consensus mechanisms, some of which are just coming to market, while others are still in the developmental stage. People who solely act to validate transactions will not be treated as brokers for those validation activities.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I think the Senator asked a question that has been queried by a number of folks in the media and elsewhere, and the Senator is entirely correct in his analysis of the application of the bill. Those persons do not effectuate transfers of digital assets and, therefore, would not be treated as brokers. If you are selling hardware or software for which the only function is to permit persons to control private keys which are used for accessing digital assets on a distributed ledger, you will not be considered in the business of being a broker. I also want to say a word about the bipartisan amendment that I worked on with Senators Portman, Sinema, Toomey, and Lummis. I am pleased that we were able to file it today, and I would have hoped that we would have gotten a vote, but I thank them for their diligence and hard work to clarify, in concert with the Treasury Department, this critical section of the bill. We want to ensure that taxes legitimately owed are paid, and full and accurate transaction reporting is a proven way to make that happen. We don't, however, want to place reporting requirements on individuals who shouldn't have them. The amendment memorializes the common understanding that the requirements are to apply only to persons who regularly, and for consideration, effectuate transfers of digital assets. Persons solely engaged in validating distributed ledger transactions will not be covered for those activities, whether they use proof of work, proof of stake or some other new consensus mechanisms. Nor will they apply to persons solely engaged in selling hardware or software with the sole function of permitting someone to control private keys used to access digital assets. Of course, if these entities provide additional services for consideration that would qualify as brokerage, the rules would apply to them as any other broker. This is an exciting new technology that, in theory, could help bring services to the underserved and reduce costs for everyone. We need, however, to strike the appropriate balance between capturing the promised benefits and guarding against the potential for serious abuse and creation of a shadow financial system beyond the reach of established rules to combat illicit finance and tax evasion.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I also want to, first of all, thank all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Senator Sinema and Senator Portman have taken the lead. I want to thank them both--and Senator Portman for taking at least 40 seconds of my time to enumerate all of our colleagues who were part of this effort. I also want to thank the staff and acknowledge, as he did, the incredibly important role the White House played. At some point in this process, the White House realized that they couldn't just support this initiative, but they actually had to own it, and they were intimately involved in all of the details, and it is something that I know they will share with all my Democratic colleagues. I also want to thank the majority leader. He has given us the time we need to get here, to get a 3,000--close to a 3,000-page bill to this floor, this comprehensive. I know it has taken a little more time than, maybe, all of us thought, but the fact is we have been talking about this for 30 years under Democrats, Republicans--both political parties at various times over the last 30 years--because Senator Portman is right. Other nations are now investing at a level much greater than ours. So this record of a $550 billion investment in hard infrastructure over 5 years has never been done before. Senator Manchin often pointed out, as we were sometimes feuding and fighting over some of the details, that no pothole ever decided it was only going to hit a Democrat or a Republican. It hit everybody's cars. We all know we have got thousands of bridges that need to be repaired. We all know that, post-COVID, high-speed broadband is not a ``nice to have''; it is a necessity. We all know too many Americans go without access to clean drinking water. This legislation will be debated and, I hope, passed in a strong bipartisan way. We will show our country, and we will show the world that no country around the world can keep up with us when we make these kind of investments. I thank my colleagues. With that, I yield to my great friend, the Senator from Maine.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I want to thank the majority leader and all of my colleagues. I want to mention two other things briefly. No. 1, Senator Tester, who has been intimately involved in this effort, could not be here with us to tonight, but he was with us all day and has been up with us for weeks and weeks. I do think it is really important--the base bill that we will be negotiating will be the EPW bill. That committee is chaired by Tom Carper from Delaware. He has a lifetime record, from the House to his time as Governor, to his time in the Senate, of always working in a bipartisan fashion. He has spent literally decades on infrastructure. He will be carrying the ball for the majority on this. We support him, and we commend him, and we wouldn't be here if he hadn't put together the kind of base bill that we were then able to build upon. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

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

Mr. WARNER. First of all, Madam President, let me thank you and all of the floor staff and others who are here. I think on a beautiful Saturday at the end of July, we all wish, perhaps, we were somewhere else other than on the floor of the Senate. For the 30 years that I have been involved in political discussions in Virginia and some on an international level, we have had President after President and Congress after Congress talk about the generational unmet needs in infrastructure. We have seen our roads and bridges start to crumble. The estimates are that close to, depending on the survey, 14,000 bridges are in a decaying state, and in my State, over 700 bridges. We know the potholes in many of our roads and highways. We know our airports resemble third world nations, not the United States of America. We know our ports have not kept up with modern technology. We know that many of our shorelines are dealing with the unprecedented effects of sea level rise. We know after COVID that high-speed internet connectivity is not a nice-to-have but essential. It is something the Presiding Officer has taken a legislative lead on. We know that it is time to get past talking about infrastructure and finally doing something. That is why I have been proud to be part of this bipartisan effort, working with the White House, to produce a historic piece of legislation, $550 billion of new spending over 5 years that in every category I just mentioned will make historic investments. I have been a little surprised, to tell you the truth, that some of our colleagues on the other side who were not part of the bipartisan group have suddenly said: No, we can't do infrastructure now. They were all for it when President Trump was in; now they find excuses why not. I have to also say I have been a little bit surprised even with some of my colleagues on my side of the aisle, when the deal that we have structured is literally twice as much as where the earlier negotiations were between President Biden and some of the Republican committee chairs--committee leaders. There has been some sense of, well, you know, infrastructure--that shouldn't be that hard to do. If it wasn't hard to do, why has it taken us 30 years to get to this moment? I hope--and I know we are finalizing the last couple pieces of legislative language--I hope that we will get that finished as soon as possible so we can get this bill on the floor, have amendments, have a debate, but at the end of the day, pass this historic legislation and finally put our money where our mouths have been in terms of talking about the needs of infrastructure in this country. Now, I know, Madam President, that we do not have probably a lot of people rushing to the floor today, so I am going to take an extra minute or two. It doesn't mean you have to stay riveted to each moment. But I want to talk about this for a few moments in terms of what this will do for my State, for the Commonwealth of Virginia. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, investment in infrastructure has been something that has eluded us for years. I have to acknowledge that when I was Governor, I tried to find funding, the funding needs, particularly in Northern Virginia, Hampton Roads, and put forward bipartisan-supported tax referendums in Northern Virginia, Hampton Roads. I was horribly unsuccessful at getting that done. A number of years later, a subsequent Governor, Governor McDonnell, managed to make a downpayment on some of the infrastructure needs in Virginia but not really address in a more comprehensive way the Commonwealth's needs. So I am going to take a couple of moments now and talk about, section by section, in Virginia, what this bipartisan, White House-supported, record infrastructure investment will mean to the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Let me start with Hampton Roads. Hampton Roads, in a southeast Virginia peninsula, is most at risk from concerns about sea level rise and questions about resiliency, more than any other region in the whole country, with the exception of New Orleans. In Hampton Roads, local leaders, our Navy, nonprofits, and businesses have all come together and said: We need to make sure that we grapple with sea level rise. It is ranked, by most in those communities, as the No. 1 issue. Well, if we pass this legislation, $47 billion will go into sea level rise prevention and resiliency. That will mean that a whole host of projects in Norfolk, in Portsmouth, in Virginia Beach, and in Chesapeake will all be finally addressed. We have to make sure that Hampton Roads is not subject to this kind of devastating effect of sea level rise. We also know that Hampton Roads needs more rail. We have opened recently some rail down to the peninsula, but not enough. We have to make sure that the rail that goes from Richmond doesn't leave off, as a cul-de-sac, the peninsula in South Hampton Roads. With a $66 billion investment in rail, we may soon be able to see that become a reality. Hampton Roads is home to the Port of Virginia. The Port of Virginia is one of the biggest ports on the whole east coast. But if we don't continue to upgrade that port, if we don't continue to deepen the channel, if we don't make the investments in the Craney Island expansion, and if we don't stay competitive, that port, which is the economic engine driver not just of Hampton Roads but, in many ways, of most of the Commonwealth, will not stay competitive. This legislation will provide $17 billion, a record amount of investment, in our ports, and I can promise you the Port of Virginia will get a share of those resources. And, finally, on just the plain old issue of roads, Hampton Roads is disconnected from what we call the Peninsula in Virginia, and we have gotten two crosslinks, which oftentimes, during the summer months, can lead to multiple-hour backups to our bridge-tunnels. If we make this $110 billion investment in roads and bridges, we can potentially see that third crossing come into reality. But what we could also make sure is that we could finally finish the widening of Interstate 64 between Norfolk and Richmond. I talked about this when I ran for Governor, and as Governor I said: Wouldn't it be great if in our lifetime we could actually finish this project? Well, if we pass this bipartisan piece of legislation, the I- 64 project widening from Norfolk to Richmond will be finished. This is incredibly important for the people of Hampton Roads, the Eastern Shore peninsula, and the Northern Neck to make these investments. Let's move up the road to our capital, Richmond, and the Richmond area. Last week, as I was looking at the Mayo Bridge--one of the historic bridges, over 100 years old--I saw how decaying it was. I saw the water damage that was taking place. That bridge, without remediation, could be forced to close if we don't make the needed investments. Well, this bipartisan legislation will commit $110 billion for highway and bridge improvements. Mayo Bridge, and a host of the other 700 bridges in Virginia that are decaying, will get fixed. We need to make that happen. Richmond, as well, has got one of the most impressive bus transit systems not only in Virginia but in the whole country. We have made huge investments, close to $40 billion, in transit in this legislation, and some of the Richmond bus transit needs will be addressed. We also know, in the Richmond area and across the Commonwealth, that we have a lot of airports. One of the things we need to continue to do is invest in our airports. The Richmond airport is always in need of additional expansion. There is $25 billion to improve our airports across the country. The Richmond airport, the Norfolk airport, the Newport News airport, and, obviously, the Roanoke airport and others-- Dulles, National--will be improved, as well as a host of smaller regional airports across the Commonwealth, if we make this investment. We come up to our region here, where I live, in Northern Virginia. I am very proud of working with Tim Kaine and the Senators from Maryland. We made sure this legislation included a full 8-year reauthorization of our Metro system. We made sure that we are making record investments in transit so that we can get Metro back up operating again on a full schedule and we can make the needed safety improvements that have been plaguing Metro for a number of years. We also know that we have to continue to build out additional Metro stations in Northern Virginia. The one at Potomac Yard will be extraordinarily important to the Innovation Center and the Amazon 2 headquarters. We have to make sure, as well, because Metro is moving to zero- emission buses--that is good news for our climate and for our community. The question is where are those zero-emission buses going to be built? This legislation, as well, makes record investment in electric and other low-carbon and no-carbon buses, so they can be built here, not in China. Our record investment in transit will also make dramatic improvements to the VRE for the Manassas Line. Let's get more people out of their cars and into VRE, whether it is the Manassas or Fredericksburg Line. Needed investments will be made if we pass this legislation. Another project, if we are going to open up rail in Virginia, we have to make sure that we have another rail bridge across the Potomac. So for the Long Bridge Project, which I have been working with Governor Northam and Senator Kaine on, this kind of investment will make that happen. And as anybody who lives in Northern Virginia knows--where I live, and somebody who lives in Alexandria--traffic is the bane of our existence. There will be a host of improvements that will get done if we pass this legislation. Let me talk about one in particular. Route 1, from Alexandria through Fairfax and into Prince William County, we know how clogged and congested it has been. We have been looking for additional funding, literally, for decades on Route 1. If we pass this legislation, it will get done. Let me move a little bit further west in our State, out toward the Shenandoah Valley and Roanoke and Southwest. For years, we have been talking about the danger on I-81. Literally, there have been prayer groups formed to pray for people who would travel on I-81 because there was so much truck traffic there that it has, frankly, impeded the safety of the traveling public. We have been talking about making improvements and expansions to 81 capacity for 20 years. We have been talking about how do we get the trucks off of I-81, and how do we bring more rail down to Southwest and Southside. Well, if we pass this legislation, we will see those 81 corridor improvements that we have all been waiting for. We will see rail not only going from Lynchburg and Roanoke but extend on down to Blacksburg and Christiansburg and, hopefully, all the way down to Bristol. This is terribly important to make sure that those communities have a multimodal form of transportation opportunities and making sure we get those trucks off of I-81, something we have been talking about for a long time. If we increase the rail capacity, both freight and passenger, we will be able to do that. We also know in Southside and Southwest, post-COVID, that high-speed internet connectivity is not a ``nice to have'' but an absolute necessity. A top priority of mine, as somebody who has spent more years in the telecommunications industry than I have in politics, is to make sure that we make those connections. This legislation--historic legislation--has $65 billion for broadband. That investment, building on Governor Northam's $700 million investment from Virginia and American Rescue Plan funds, will make sure that every household across the Commonwealth has access to high-speed internet connectivity, not 5 years from now or 10 years from now but in the next couple of years. And, finally, across Southwest Virginia--and for that matter, across all of Virginia--we still have families in far Southwest that don't have access to clean drinking water on a regular basis, that still have to sometimes haul their water in the back of a pickup truck up to some cistern, and they don't have access to clean drinking water in 2021. Well, $55 billion will go to water projects in this legislation. And whether they be access to clean drinking water on a regular basis or whether it be taking out the lead pipes that haunt too many of our urban communities, or the storm and sewer systems that are, frankly, in some cases, 60, 70, 80 years old and simply wearing out, we can make that investment as well. Now, there are a series of other areas in this legislation that are equally important, but at the end of the day, I can't think of a bill that I have worked on that will have more direct effect on the lives of every Virginian over the next 5 years in terms of how you get to work, how you get to school, how you manage to take the kids out on the weekends, how our commerce moves, how we get our water, and how we get our internet than this record-setting $550 billion bipartisan investment in infrastructure. It is time for the Senate to take this bill up. I again commend all of my colleagues who have been working on this legislation, not just the so-called G-10 but the G-22. I thank Leader Schumer for his good work, continuing to push this legislation forward. I want to thank the White House for its constant involvement. I even want to commend Leader McConnell for voting with this bipartisan group to move this legislation along. We have talked about this for 30 years. We are literally days away from this passing the U.S. Senate. We have got to finish the job and get it done. With that, I hope I have kept you riveted and now you are fully familiar with all the needs of Virginia. I am sure you can address similar needs in Minnesota. But I thank the Presiding Officer and all of the staffs who are here working on this Saturday, the last day in July, in the summer, to get this job done. With that, I note the absence--I don't yield the floor. I would have been surprised if the Presiding Officer had asked me to speak for another 30 minutes, but I will choose not to do that because I have great respect for the floor staff. So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess subject to the call of the chair.