Volume 167, No. 34, covering the 1st Session of the 117th Congress (2021 – 2022), was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“Nomination of Thomas J. Vilsack (Executive Session)” mentioning Dan Sullivan was published in the Senate section on pages S799-S800 on Feb. 23.
Of the 100 senators in 117th Congress, 24 percent were women, and 76 percent were men, according to the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
Senators’ salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
Nomination of Thomas J. Vilsack
Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President, I wanted to talk a little bit about the vote I just took here with regard to our Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary Vilsack, who is now the new Secretary or on his way to becoming the new Secretary.
You know, what I have tried to do when looking at nominees is I typically kind of look at three different questions: Do they have experience for the job, the experience necessary for the job, do they have views that I believe will help the country and in particular help my State, and do they care about the people they will be impacting? So that is a bit of a three-part test.
I have tried to work with a lot of the new nominees in the Biden administration. I voted for a number of them, most of them. As a matter of fact, I introduced Secretary Austin at his confirmation hearing. I got to know him many years ago when I was a marine and he was an Army officer, a two-star general.
You know, I will say to my friends, colleagues, constituents back home who say: Hey, Senator, you know, when the Trump administration put forward their nominees, you usually had kind of a party-line vote.
A lot of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, my Democratic friends, would vote no, no, no, no.
Why don’t you do that?
Well, I don’t think it is good for the country; that is why I don’t do that. I am against some but I have been supportive of many, and I am not sure the way in which it worked with the previous administration was best for our Nation.
So certainly Secretary Vilsack passes the first two parts of that test I was talking about. Clearly he has the experience. He was the Secretary of Ag for 8 years under President Obama and Vice President Biden. Certainly he has views particularly with regard to farm country. You saw the strong vote he had there with regard to helping the ag sector. I am sure he is a patriot, of course. He cares about our country. But it was the third question–does he care about the people he will be impacting?–that I have had some serious hesitation on.
Mr. President, I will talk a little bit about, you know, a lot of our different economies throughout the country. Our States have been hit hard by this pandemic. I would say that my State’s economy has been hit really hard. When you look at what drives a lot of the Alaska economy: the energy sector, oil, gas, mining, the tourism sector, the fisheries, commercial fishery sector–I like to call Alaska the superpower of seafood. Over 60 percent of all seafood harvested in America comes from the waters of the great State of Alaska, the most sustainable, best managed fishery probably in the world but a huge driver of our economy.
Also, there is the issue of access to our lands. Sixty-six percent of Alaska is Federal land. We need access to help have a strong economy. It is an issue that the Presiding Officer probably doesn’t have to worry about, being from Connecticut, but in Alaska, access to land is huge.
In the last administration, we made a lot of progress on these issues for our economy, on oil and gas, ANWR, the NPRA, access to those lands, legislation by the Congress. Our tourism sector had been doing great. Our commercial fishing sector had been doing great. We even made progress on other access issues, like the Tongass, something that for 25 years Democrats and Republicans, whether Senators from Alaska, whether Governors from Alaska, were trying to get access to those lands. It is really important, and we were able to do that.
So there was progress, and then the pandemic that has hurt everybody. It certainly hurt the energy sector. It certainly hurt, crushed the tourism sector. Last year, Alaska was going to have 1.5 million people show up in our State with regard to tourism, a new record just on the cruise ships, but none of them showed up because of the pandemic. The commercial fishing sector also has had a really rough time with this pandemic–markets, international markets, markets domestically.
So I am very concerned about my State’s economy, about working families, and about the average Alaskan who is struggling right now. The new policies put forward by this administration have been shockingly negative as it relates to my State. One month in, particularly in the energy sector, every day we are waking up to a new edict saying: Men and women who produce energy in America, who produce energy in Alaska, sorry, you are not favored anymore. You are not viewed in a positive light anymore.
It is a real, real, real concern. Hundreds, if not thousands of jobs in my State during a recession are at risk.
So these are some of the issues that I raised in my discussions with Secretary Vilsack, in particular our commercial fishing sector.
In the previous administration, under the USDA, the Secretary of Agriculture helped implement a new trade relief program for fishermen. Huge progress. Hugely important. Just the way the farmers were getting this kind of relief with regard to trade and markets that have been destroyed by the pandemic, the Secretary of Agriculture undertook a new program for the farmers of the sea, for the fishermen who are being negatively impacted the same way that our farmers on the land were.
This is an issue that I raised with the Secretary on the importance of moving forward, continuing that, and to be honest, there didn’t seem to be a lot of interest. I was kind of shocked, but there didn’t seem to be a lot of interest, and I was concerned. I am concerned.
Similarly, this progress we made with regard to the Tongass, access to the largest national forest in the country that is under USDA management–something Alaskans have been working on in a bipartisan way for 25 years. There didn’t seem to be a lot of interest from the Secretary on that either.
So these are two issues hugely important to my State, hugely important to my constituents, hugely important to try to get Alaska out of a really deep recession where a lot of families are worried. And I got the sense that the Secretary just wasn’t that interested. I really hope I am wrong. I really hope I am wrong.
So I plan on trying to work with him. You know, he had a strong, very strong bipartisan vote, but every now and then, if you really think the people you represent are not going to be given a lot of attention when they need it, it becomes a harder vote. It becomes a harder vote. He obviously has got strong bipartisan support, but I sure hope that when he becomes Secretary of Agriculture, he cares as much about the farmers of the sea, where we have made progress on, as he does about farmers on the land. I didn’t see that in my meeting with him and I hope I am wrong and that is why I voted the way I did.
I also voted the way I did as it relates to this issue of access to the Tongass. Again, it is a huge issue to my State, a very bipartisan issue for my State. And, again, I hope that the Secretary and his team look at it as something that can help the economy of Alaska while protecting our environment, which, of course, we care about.
But these are the reasons that I voted the way I did, and I hope that my concerns are going to be proved to be unfounded. I am going to continue to advocate for my constituents in the way that I think is going to be very important as we try and get through these challenging times, particularly the Alaska Tongass.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
