We use analytics tools to understand how people use the site. They're optional: if you decline, the site works the same, no analytics cookies are set and Google gets only a cookieless, anonymous count signal. Your votes are saved either way; the details are in the privacy policy.
03Recognizing American Postal Workers Chicago Local 0001
1 member spoke
04Honoring Corporal Grade One Matthew "Ty" Snook
1 member spoke
2 members spoke
Routine Business (55)
01Senate
3 members spoke
03Morning Business
1 member spoke
04Messages From the President
05Executive Messages Referred
06Presidential Message
07Report of the Continuation of the National Emergencies Originally Declared or Expanded in Proclamation 10886 of January 20, 2025, Executive Order 14157 of January 20, 2025, Executive Order 14193 Of...
08Messages From the House
09Submission of Concurrent and Senate Resolutions
10Senate Resolution 581: Honoring the Life of Corporal Grade One Matthew T. "Ty" Snook of the Delaware State Police
Fourteen bills and two resolutions were introduced, as follows: S. 3616-3629, and S. Res. 581-582.
Pages S161-62
Measures Passed
Disrupt Explicit Forged Images And Non-Consensual Edits Act: Committee on the Judiciary was discharged from further consideration of S. 1837, to improve rights to relief for individuals affected by non- consensual activities involving intimate digital forgeries, and the bill was then passed.
Pages S143-47
Measures Considered
Commerce, Justice, Science; Energy and Water Development; and Interior and Environment Appropriations Act--Agreement: Senate began consideration of H.R. 6938, making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, after agreeing to the motion to proceed, and taking action on the following amendments and motions proposed thereto:
Pages S141-43, S157
Pending
Thune Amendment No. 4208, to change the enactment date.
Page S157
Thune Amendment No. 4209 (to Amendment No. 4208), of a perfecting nature.
Page S157
Thune motion to commit the bill to the Committee on Appropriations, with instructions, Amendment No. 4210, to change the enactment date.
Page S157
Thune Amendment No. 4211 (to the instructions (Amendment No. 4210)), of a perfecting nature.
Page S157
Thune Amendment No. 4212 (to Amendment No. 4211), of a perfecting nature.
Page S157
A motion was entered to close further debate on the bill, and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, a vote on cloture will occur on Thursday, January 15, 2026.
Page S157
A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing for further consideration of the bill, at approximately 10 a.m., on Wednesday, January 14, 2026. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act;
Page S176
Market Integrity and Affordability
Senate began consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of S.J. Res. 84, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services relating to ``Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Market Integrity and Affordability''.
Pages S147-57
During consideration of this measure today, Senate also took the following action
By 47 yeas to 52 nays (Vote No. 8), Senate did not agree to the motion to proceed to consideration of the joint resolution.
Page S152
Message from the President
Senate received the following messages from the President of the United States: Transmitting, pursuant to law, a report of the continuation of the national emergency that was originally declared in Executive Order 14156 of January 20, 2025, with respect to energy; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (PM-46)
Page S159
Transmitting, pursuant to law, a report of the continuation of the national emergencies originally declared or expanded in Proclamation 10886 of January 20, 2025, Executive Order 14157 of January 20, 2025, Executive Order 14193 of February 1, 2025, Executive Order 14194 of February 1, 2025, and Executive Order 14195 of February 1, 2025, with respect to the southern border of the United States and cartels and other transnational organizations; which was referred to the Committee on Finance. (PM-47)
Page S159
Nominations Received
Senate received the following nominations: Ademola Adewale-Sadik, of New York, to be United States Director of the African Development Bank for a term of five years. Charlton Allen, of North Carolina, to be General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority for a term of five years. Matthew Anderson, of Colorado, to be Deputy Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Jeffrey Anderson, of Georgia, to be Representative of the United States of America on the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization, with the rank of Ambassador. Brian Barber, of Louisiana, to be United States Marshal for the Western District of Louisiana for the term of four years. Lee Beaman, of Tennessee, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority for a term expiring May 18, 2030. Scott Bessent, of South Carolina, to be United States Governor of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; United States Governor of the Inter-American Development Bank for a term of five years; United States Governor of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for a term of five years; and United States Governor of the International Monetary Fund for a term of five years. Brian Birdwell, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense. James Bishop, of North Carolina, to be United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina for the term of four years. Daniel Bonham, of Oregon, to be an Assistant Secretary of Labor. John Breslow, of Arizona, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Cyprus. Wesley Brooks, of Florida, to be Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs. Jeremy Carl, of Montana, to be an Assistant Secretary of State (International Organizations). Robert Cekada, of Florida, to be Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Walter Clayton, of New York, to be United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York for the term of four years. Carter Crow, of Texas, to be General Counsel of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for a term of four years. Austin Dahmer, of Arizona, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense. Christopher Michael De Bono, of the District of Columbia, to be an Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of fifteen years. John DeLeeuw, of Texas, to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board for the remainder of the term expiring December 31, 2026. Irving Dennis, of Ohio, to be Chief Financial Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development. Mark Ditlevson, of Minnesota, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense. Daniel Edwards, of North Carolina, to be an Assistant Secretary of Transportation. Edward Eppler, of Connecticut, to be Chief Financial Officer, Department of Transportation. Paul Ferguson, of West Virginia, to be United States Marshal for the Northern District of West Virginia for the term of four years. Gregory Gilmore, of Illinois, to be United States Attorney for the Central District of Illinois for the term of four years. Brian Gootkin, of Montana, to be United States Marshal for the District of Montana for the term of four years. Thomas Govan, Jr., of Alabama, to be United States Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama for the term of four years. Michael Graham, of Virginia, to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term expiring December 31, 2030. Steven Haines, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce. Lindsey Robyn-Michelle Halligan, of Colorado, to be United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia for the term of four years. Robert Harvey, of Florida, to be a Federal Maritime Commissioner for a term expiring June 30, 2029. William Hewes III, of Mississippi, to be a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission for a term of seven years from October 27, 2024. George Holding, of North Carolina, to be United States Director of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Kenneth Jackson, of Texas, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring September 20, 2028. Jeffrey Kaufmann, of Iowa, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation. Michael Kavoukjian, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Norway. Richard Kloster, of West Virginia, to be a Member of the Surface Transportation Board for a term expiring December 31, 2028. Sriprakash Kothari, of Massachusetts, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. Benjamin Landa, of New York, to be Ambassador to Hungary. Lee Lipton, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of the Philippines. Gregory LoGerfo, of Massachusetts, to be Coordinator for Counterterrorism, with the rank and status of Ambassador at Large. Anthony Lomangino, of Florida, to be a Governor of the United States Postal Service for a term expiring December 8, 2031. William Long, of Missouri, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Iceland. Priscilla Lopez, of Florida, to be United States Marshal for the Southern District of Florida for the term of four years. David MacNeil, of Florida, to be a Federal Trade Commissioner for the term of seven years from September 26, 2025. Ryan McCormack, of Virginia, to be Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy. Casey Means, of California, to be Medical Director in the Regular Corps of the Public Health Service, subject to qualifications therefor as provided by law and regulations, and to be Surgeon General of the Public Health Service for a term of four years. Eric Meyer, of California, to be Ambassador to the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. Joseph Nocella, of New York, to be United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York for the term of four years. Jared Novelly, of Missouri, to be Ambassador to New Zealand, and to serve concurrently and without additional compensation as Ambassador to the Independent State of Samoa, the Cook Islands, and Niue. Seval Oz, of California, to be an Assistant Secretary of Transportation. Stevan Pearce, of New Mexico, to be Director of the Bureau of Land Management. Sean Plankey, of Pennsylvania, to be Director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Department of Homeland Security. Arvind Raman, of Indiana, to be Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology. Laken Rapier, of Texas, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the African Development Foundation for a term expiring September 27, 2027. Ryan Raybould, of Texas, to be United States Attorney for the Northern District of Texas for the term of four years. Robert Rotter, of Iowa, to be United States Marshal for the Northern District of Iowa for the term of four years. Daniel Satterlee, of South Dakota, to be United States Marshal for the District of South Dakota for the term of four years. Glen Smith, of Iowa, to be Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural Development. David St. Pierre, of Maine, to be United States Marshal for the District of Maine for the term of four years. James Stuart, of Minnesota, to be United States Marshal for the District of Minnesota for the term of four years. Robert Sweeney, of Texas, to be United States Director of the Asian Development Bank, with the rank of Ambassador. Alexander Velez-Green, of Virginia, to be a Deputy Under Secretary of Defense. Russell Vought, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the African Development Foundation for a term expiring September 22, 2027. Russell Vought, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring September 20, 2030. Frank Weiland, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant Secretary of State (International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs). Jennifer Wicks McNamara, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Phillip Williams, Jr., of Alabama, to be United States Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama for the term of four years. Routine lists in the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine Corps, and Navy.
Pages S179-83
Statements on Introduced Bills/Resolutions:
Pages S163-64
Record Votes
One record vote was taken today. (Total--8)
Page S152
Adjournment
Senate convened at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 6:56 p.m., until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, January 14, 2026. (For Senate's program, see the remarks of the Majority Leader in today's Record on page S176.)
Every speech and line is the Congressional Record's own text, read from GovInfo. Speakers are matched to members by GPO's own metadata. Referandom places each turn on the Clerk's video by matching its words: 52 of 115 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Legislative Session
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 6938, which the clerk will report.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
Mr. President, I am here to honor a young Iowan. I do it during this month of January because January is National Blood Donor Month.
It seems hard to believe, but every 2 seconds someone in the United States needs blood. Yet less than 10 percent of those who can donate blood actually donate blood. Regular blood donations can help a family member, a neighbor, and perhaps in most cases, a stranger.
An Iowan who can inspire us all to donate blood is Brenna Teerlinck. Last fall, Brenna, a St. Ambrose University student in Davenport, IA, was inducted into the National Blood Donation Hall of Fame. She is the youngest person ever to receive this honor.
At age 16, Brenna was inspired to donate blood for her cousin, who was battling a rare immune disorder. She is now a freshman in college. Even though she is in college, Brenna continues to donate blood regularly. Her bravery and dedication ought to inspire us all to donate blood.
Congratulations, Brenna.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
Mr. President, recent reports suggest that widespread fraud has taken root in the State of Minnesota. Prosecutors say that industrial-scale fraud has affected at least 14 federally funded programs in the State and that, since 2018, $9 billion or more may have been stolen from these programs--stolen from taxpayers and from the people in need that these programs are meant to help.
There have been nearly eight indictments related to just one organization that received $250 million by claiming to have served meals to needy people during the pandemic. In another case, prosecutors say that a program designed to help people at risk of homelessness was subject to widespread fraud, with its costs ballooning to more than $100 million in just 4 years. In yet another case, prosecutors state that a fraudulent provider stole $14 million from a program to provide therapy to children with autism, and I could go on.
One has to wonder how this could happen, and I hope we will soon find out.
Last week, every Republican Senator joined Senator Cassidy's letter to the Governor of Minnesota, demanding answers about the large-scale fraud that appears to have happened on his watch. The Department of Justice has surged resources to Minnesota to assist in prosecuting these crimes, and the Trump administration recently announced it is creating a new position in the Department of Justice focused on investigating instances of fraud across the country because, unfortunately, cases of waste, fraud, and abuse are not confined to one State. The Government Accountability Office estimates that as much as $500 billion in Federal funds is lost each year to fraud--not an inconsequential sum--and every one of those
Republicans have been working to root out waste, fraud, and abuse in Federal programs--the same type of abuses now coming to light in Minnesota. Our landmark legislation, the Working Families Tax Cuts, included a number of reforms to focus Federal dollars on those most in need, guard against abuses of taxpayer funds, and hold States accountable for the Federal funding that they receive.
New measures in the law prevent noncitizens from receiving Federal healthcare and nutrition benefits and refocus those programs to serving American citizens. The law also strengthens work requirements for able- bodied, working-age adults without young children, and it increases accountability.
The new law requires States to check eligibility for certain Medicaid enrollees twice per year and to remove ineligible people from their Medicaid rolls more quickly. It takes aim at duplicative enrollment in Federal healthcare programs, which CMS estimates is costing taxpayers as much as $14 billion per year; and it ensures deceased individuals don't continue receiving payments, as happened in Colorado a few years ago, costing taxpayers more than $7 million.
We also took steps to hold States accountable for being good stewards of Federal funding. We are incentivizing States to reduce their error rates when making SNAP payments. Significantly, we took aim at rampant abuse of the provider tax loophole. Use of this loophole, which sees States inflate the price of healthcare services provided through Medicaid in order to garner larger reimbursement from the Federal Government, has been a problem for quite a while now. And thanks to waivers that the Biden administration issued to California and other blue States that allows them to further exploit a similar loophole, taxpayers were on the hook for tens of billions of dollars in new spending. So Republicans took action to rein in this abuse and reduce the bills that States are running up for taxpayers.
Ensuring that Federal taxpayer dollars are being spent responsibly and effectively on the people they are supposed to help ought to be a no-brainer, and it should not--not--be a partisan issue, but apparently it is. While Republicans were working to restore integrity to Federal programs, Democrats were panning our commonsense measures as ``cruel'' and then voted again and again to repeal them.
We have heard little from Democrats condemning the fraud scandal currently engulfing the State of Minnesota, and Democrats have shown that they are perfectly willing to allow waste, fraud, and abuse to continue in the Affordable Care Act exchanges. That is right. Despite evidence of fraud in the ACA exchanges, Democrats have voted time and again to do nothing about it and have actually tried to repeal Republican-led reforms.
There is waste, fraud, and abuse in ObamaCare, and it seems that the Biden COVID subsidies were especially susceptible to fraud. A recent report from the Government Accountability Office revealed that the ACA exchanges continue to enroll fake individuals, improperly pay out taxpayer-subsidized health insurance, and fail to ensure payment accuracy. The GAO tested 24 fake accounts on the ACA exchanges, and 23 of them were enrolled with false or no documentation to verify Social Security numbers, citizenship, or reported income.
Then there is the growing number of enrollees in the exchanges who filed zero claims. In 2024, 40 percent of people who got fully subsidized insurance coverage through the exchanges never filed a claim--40 percent. Now, there might be some good reasons for that, but it might also be because insurance companies are incentivized to sign people up, and these individuals may be signed up and not even know they have coverage. But Democrats have shown they are perfectly fine with the status quo. They voted numerous times to extend the enhanced subsidies without a single reform. They even shut down the government to try and extend them. These are just the beginning of the issues with ObamaCare.
Work continues to investigate and prosecute criminals engaged in fraud and to, hopefully, recover the tax dollars that have been stolen. I certainly hope the individuals of Minnesota and other criminals around the country are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But we can't just hope to prosecute fraud; we need to prevent it. We need to be responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars and place guardrails on Federal programs to protect against nefarious schemes and bad actors. We need to ensure, when we commit taxpayer dollars to a particular program, that the money actually goes to the people that program is designed to help.
Republicans have made progress on restoring integrity to Federal programs this past year, but we have more work to do, and we will continue our efforts to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and ensure that Federal programs are serving the American people as intended.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, when government wastes taxpayer money, taxpayers have a right to know what happened. And when emboldened criminals steal money intended to help single moms and children in need, taxpayers have a right to be angry.
Americans--and I am hearing it in Wyoming, and I am sure you are hearing it, Mr. President, in your home State of Ohio--Americans are infuriated with the staggering amount of fraud unfolding today in the State of Minnesota. The past few weeks have shown just how deep the corruption in Minnesota has turned out to be.
Investigators have now uncovered fraud schemes across 14 different Minnesota Medicaid Programs. Most people don't even know there are 14 different Medicaid Programs. There is fraud in all of them in Minnesota.
Joe Thompson, U.S. attorney in Minnesota, has spent his career prosecuting fraud, and based on his extensive investigation, he believes criminals have now stolen at least $9 billion--billion with a ``b''--from those Minnesota Medicaid Programs. That is half of the total amount of money Minnesota spends for Medicaid Programs in the State. Today, the fraud is so prevalent that Thompson says the State has ``developed a fraud tourism''--tourism--``industry.'' Can you imagine that--``a fraud tourism industry.''
Here is how these schemes work. Criminals, fraudsters, set up fake businesses for nonprofit organizations. The criminals then claim to provide services--services such as housing, food, and healthcare assistance. Then they bill Medicaid. They bill them for services never provided. They use the names of children and enroll them into the programs. Sometimes the children don't exist. Sometimes the children exist, and they are signed up by parents who are getting paid fraudulently to let them use their children's names.
In 2021, taxpayers paid $4.6 million for something called Minnesota's Integrated Community Support Medicaid Program. It is a mouthful. In 2021, $4.6 million. Then the fraudsters hit. Three years later, due to criminal fraud, spending for that program ballooned to more than $170 million. From $4 million to $170 million--that is 37 times as much in just 3 years. Money completely stolen as the Governor and others in Minnesota, the Democrat elected officials, looked the other way.
Taxpayers similarly paid $21 million in 2021 for something called Minnesota's Housing Stabilization Services. In the first 6 months of last year, due to criminal fraud, Democrats looking the other way, taxpayers paid nearly three times that amount.
A Medicaid Program claiming to help Minnesota children with autism cost $6 million in 2018. By 2023, due to criminal fraud, it went from $6 million to $192 million.
Daycare fraud is just one of these brazen schemes where the Democrats in Minnesota look the other way. Last month, an independent journalist visited 10 State-funded daycare sites in the Twin Cities, Minneapolis- Saint Paul. He found no children at the
One year ago, a local reporter visited several of those same sites. The reporter found no children at the daycare centers. They are supposed to be daycare centers, and getting paid to take care of children.
Here is one of those sites. This is a sign from one of the sites. It is called--you can't make this stuff up--Quality ``Learing'' Center. It is supposed to be a learning center. They can't even spell ``learning'' right. But that doesn't stop the Democrats in Minnesota who keep shoveling money right to these programs, stealing money from the taxpayers--from the Democrats, going to Democrats who are running these things.
It is appalling. The people of the United States are appalled and are furious. This ought to be a red flag for fraud. Why aren't the Democrats who run the place doing anything about it?
There were 95 violations for this ``learing'' center alone between 2019 and 2023. Violations occurred. No records on the children. But Minnesota's--run by the Democrats--taxpayer money continued to flow. It is disgraceful.
These aren't just one-off abuses. We now know that the fraud schemes used in the State's childcare programs have been used to defraud other social programs as well.
Even the New York Times has pointed to this. They say the fraud in Minnesota, run by the Democrats, is ``staggering in its scale and brazenness.''
I don't see any Democrats coming to the floor here today to point out the fraud, talk about what is happening there, how the money has been stolen from people that need it, the services that are needed by people. That means they are not getting it.
The Department of Justice has charged 98 defendants in Minnesota Medicaid fraud-related cases. So far, 64 of these have been convicted.
Last month, one defendant was found guilty of stealing $14 million from Medicaid. Yes, she did. She stole $14 million from Medicaid. You don't hear a word from the Minnesota Democrats coming to the floor here to talk about it. Nope.
She also stole nearly half a million dollars from child nutrition programs.
The Democrats come to the floor and say: Oh, we need more money for child nutrition and more money for child healthcare. Why aren't they looking at where the money is being taken from the mouths of the children?
For fraudsters, how much money was taken? Let's put this into perspective. The stolen money was supposed to be used to provide 200,000 meals for hungry children who did not get fed. Democrats must think that is fine. The defendant instead sent the hundreds of thousands of dollars overseas, and she bought real estate in Kenya, in Africa. Apparently, that is how business goes in Minnesota with the Democrats who are running that State.
This organized, systemic theft has gone on for years under Democrat leadership, and it really exploded under Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.
The Democrats have permitted schemes stacked upon schemes to drain money meant for those in need. Republicans are not going to allow this massive theft of taxpayer dollars to be ignored. Democrats want us to just look the other way. We are talking about a comprehensive approach to root out the fraud in Minnesota and across the country.
Now, our Working Families Tax Cuts law fights fraud. We strengthened eligibility requirements for Medicaid. We ensured that illegal immigrants don't receive taxpayer-funded healthcare. We put in place work requirements for Medicaid and for food stamps. These policies will protect taxpayers and will increase accountability.
Additionally, Republicans are conducting aggressive congressional oversight. On Friday, the entire Senate Republican conference demanded Governor Walz explain his actions. We asked nine specific, detailed questions--questions such as why Minnesota failed to adopt key fraud prevention measures. Why aren't they trying to prevent the fraud? Why do they keep looking the other way?
These are measures that the Department of Health and Human Services recommended to Minnesota back in May. Nope. Governor Walz wants nothing to do with it. He knew about this widespread fraud. He refused to do anything about it.
Senate Republicans are ready to give the Trump administration the manpower it needs to tackle this fraud in Minnesota and wherever else it appears and occurs.
The Trump administration has asked the Senate to confirm a new Assistant Attorney General position--a position that will be focused on the fraud--and the Senate will get that person in place and on the job quickly.
The Trump administration has taken other bold and decisive actions to stop fraud. To further strengthen enforcement efforts, the Department of Justice has doubled the number of attorneys handling these fraud cases. The Treasury Department is cracking down on businesses in Minnesota for alleged money laundering because that is what is happening. The Department of Health and Human Services under President Trump froze Federal funding for fraud-prone programs in Minnesota.
If Senate Democrats care about stopping fraud, why are they preparing to vote today to loosen eligibility and income verifications for ObamaCare subsidies? They ought to want to be tightening these things up. But that is what the Congressional Review Act resolution from Senator Mark Warner of Virginia does, and we are going to vote on it today. Eliminating these vital protections invites more fraud. It means subsidies go to individuals who don't qualify for them.
Congress shouldn't make it easier to defraud the American taxpayers. This is the wrong direction to take after the biggest fraud scandal in Minnesota history. Protecting taxpayer dollars should not be a partisan issue. The fraud scandal in Minnesota should be a wake-up call for every American taxpayer.
Our Federal Government spends nearly $1.5 trillion each and every year to try to help feed and house and treat and care for vulnerable families and children. Those programs are there for a reason, but Democrats seem to think they are there to be a piggy bank for people who want to steal from the government.
Medicaid, food stamps, and other social programs have been called a lifeline. Years of waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption have pushed those who truly need the help away from the lifeline and to the back of the line. That is what Democrats have been enabling and continue to enable.
Republicans aren't going to stop until the depth of this fraud is uncovered and prosecuted, and Republicans are committed to preventing it from happening again.
Mr. President, it has been my good fortune and honor to serve in this Chamber for many years and to represent my home State of Illinois. I can reflect for a moment about the changes in the Senate Chamber in the time that I have been here. I am afraid it would take me too long to express my thoughts on that at the expense of the regular business of this Chamber. But we have reached a point where there are few and far between moments where we come together and agree on something the American people think is important.
A year ago, I was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee--for 4 years. We considered many judicial nominees and many pieces of legislation in that committee. We were evenly divided or closely divided during the entire period of time. I think we achieved quite a few things despite those divisions.
We approved more judicial nominees for Federal judgeships in that 4- year period of time than any 4-year period in the history of the U.S. Senate. It took 80 percent of the votes to be bipartisan for that to happen. So I tried as chairman to always find something we just might agree on, Democrats and Republicans would agree. The issue which I am going to address very briefly this morning is one of those issues.
There was a time when the Senate Judiciary Committee was so equally and evenly divided that people thought we would accomplish nothing, but
Have you seen your kids or grandkids lately? Have you noticed what they are doing? They are looking at this virtually all day long if you let them.
It is a concern for many conscientious parents that what is being broadcast on those cell phones could be life-altering and -changing for young people, and that is one of the issues I will address this morning.
You see, during the period of time when I chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, we considered the negative impact that these cell phones and laptops have on children. It is frightening.
Parents came and testified before us that their kids--normal, happy, productive, good students--in a short period of time were captivated by laptops and cell phones into changes in attitude, changes in conduct. Sadly, some of the children took their own lives because of their exposure to what happened on these devices. It is heartbreaking.
I recall one in particular: a young, African-American, high school student--a track star at his school--who got swept into some sort of broadcast on social media and in the span of 19 hours became so despondent and excited and emotional, he harmed himself and took his own life. The parents couldn't understand it. They didn't see it coming. And when they reflected on what was being done, it was an outrage.
There is another thing going on which everyone should be aware of, and if you look closely on television, you might just spot warnings. It is this whole issue of deepfakes, AI, taking what looks to be real and broadcasting it as reality when, in fact, it is not.
Last Congress, we considered a measure which I introduced and would like to ask for passage today. There will be a unanimous consent request made at the end of my statement. If that unanimous consent request passes, and I hope it does with bipartisan support, it will go to the House of Representatives for their consideration. It will be miraculous. We just might pass a bill. We just might create a law. Stay tuned.
Let me tell you what it is all about. I rise today to ask the Senate to pass the DEFIANCE Act--bipartisan legislation that gives victims of nonconsensual, sexually explicit deepfakes the tools to fight back against those who would exploit them.
I want to thank the Senate sponsors of this legislation, including my Republican colleague Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. I told you it was bipartisan; it is.
I have been proud to partner with a person I don't know well on a personal basis, but I certainly have seen her work. Her name is Representative Ocasio-Cortez. She represents the city of New York. She introduced legislation in the House with seven Republicans and six Democratic cosponsors. So her measure was bipartisan as it passed the House of Representatives.
Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez herself is a publicly confessed and admitted victim of explicit deepfakes. I commend her for working to create tools for victims in the fight against this despicable crime. She has been an innocent victim, and she has spoken out to spare others what she has been through.
In 2025, the TAKE IT DOWN Act was signed into law. This bipartisan legislation makes it a Federal crime to knowingly publish or threaten to publish nonconsensual intimate images on social media. The DEFIANCE Act, which provides victims with a civil remedy--a remedy in court-- builds on the progress of the TAKE IT DOWN Act.
The vast majority of American people support prohibiting nonconsensual, sexually explicit, deepfake images, with one survey finding that 85 percent of Republicans and Democrats support this measure. That is why I am hopeful it will pass today and be considered favorably by the House, and that is why, last Congress, the Senate unanimously passed this measure. We didn't get it done then, and we are returning to it now.
The Senate should pass this bill again, and the House should take it up quickly as the problem of nonconsensual, sexually explicit, deepfake images continues to spread. With the push of a button, generative AI can swap someone's face onto another person's body, remove that person's clothing so they appear nude, or undress someone to show them in lingerie or other exposed positions.
Recent reporting details how users of X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, can ask its AI chatbot Grok to undress women and underage girls in photos. Grok will comply with requests to show subjects in various states of undress with images which I won't repeat for the record, but they are horrible.
Even after these reports, X still has not prevented Grok from creating these exploitative images. Let me make sure you understand what I just said. Even after these terrible, deepfake, harming images are pointed out to Grok and to X, formerly Twitter, they do not respond. They don't take the images off the internet. They don't come to the rescue of people who are victims. That is why this legislation is critical, because this legislation says that if they are guilty of such reckless misconduct, they can be sued for it and held civilly liable for the damages.
Imagine losing control of your own likeness and identity. Imagine that happening to you when you are in high school. Imagine how powerless victims feel when they cannot remove illicit conduct, cannot prevent it from being reproduced repeatedly, and cannot prevent new images from being created. The consequences can be profound.
Victims may endure threats to their employment, education, or reputation or suffer additional criminal activity, such as extortion and stalking. Many experience depression, anxiety, and fear of being in public, and in the worst cases, victims have been driven to suicide.
Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez described her own reaction being depicted this way without her consent. She said:
While prominent women are often the target for nonconsensual, sexual deepfakes, sadly, the victims can be virtually anyone.
There are distressing reports of high school students struggling to respond to this crisis. In March 2024, at least 22 students at a high school in McHenry County, in my home State of Illinois, learned they were depicted in deepfakes circulating online. One was a doctored version of two female students taken at the school prom. I will not describe in detail what that deepfake did, but it had to be crushing for these young women and their families.
Sadly, we are seeing an explosion of these images. One researcher found that the number of nonconsensual pornographic deepfake videos available online has increased 900 percent--900 percent--since 2019. Such videos have been viewed almost 4 billion times--4 billion. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the number of AI-generated child sexual abuse images increased from 5,000 in 2023 to over 485,000 in the first 6 months of 2025.
Tragically, currently, victims have no civil legal remedy to pursue justice. The DEFIANCE Act changes that and gives victims their day in court. The bill would permit victims to bring civil cases against those who produce, disclose, solicit, or possess with intent to disclose sexually explicit deepfakes, while knowingly or recklessly disregarding that the person depicted did not consent to the content.
I am proud to have collaborated with survivor advocates on this bill. Their lived experience and leadership have shaped this legislation. Congress needs to act. It is past time to give victims of nonconsensual, sexually explicit deepfakes the tools they need to fight back.
I am going to make a unanimous consent request on this bipartisan legislation. Senator Graham could not join me on the floor today, but he is a cosponsor and supporter of this bipartisan bill.
I make the following unanimous consent: Notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 1837 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
There being no objection, the committee was discharged, and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (S. 1837) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed as follows:
Mr. President, it feels good. It feels good to see the Senate actually passing legislation. It is rare. It doesn't happen a lot. With a measure of this importance, it is critically important that we come together, both political parties.
I want to thank Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez for her leadership on this issue and her bravery on this issue throughout this debate.
Now, let's pass this in the House and make it the law of the land. Give to the victims their day in court to hold those responsible and continue to publish these images at their expense.
The Senate voted to unanimously pass this important legislation. The victims of this horrible crime deserve their day in court and, today, we are one step closer to making that a reality.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. President, sometimes, in Washington, you feel like there is nothing anyone can agree on. But one thing we can all agree on, no matter what your party, healthcare is too expensive.
I am a doctor who worked at a hospital in the public hospital system for the working uninsured and poorly insured. And it is not just the poor but middle-income Americans who have a really hard time right now affording their healthcare.
There is a little bit of irony here. ObamaCare came into existence, and it was supposed to decrease premiums by $2,400 a year. Since then, premiums have probably risen an aggregate of 100 percent since that law was passed. Part of this--part of this--is waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars. So we pay higher premiums, and the taxpayer is getting ripped off as well.
Here are just some recent examples. In November, a Federal jury in West Palm Beach convicted two individuals in a $233 million ObamaCare fraudulent enrollment scheme. Earlier this year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services identified 2.8 million duplicate enrollments across Medicaid and ObamaCare, which wastes an estimated $14 billion annually.
Just a few weeks ago, the Government Accountability Office released a report highlighting likely significant fraud in the ObamaCare Marketplace due to lack of proper verification. In this report, by the way, the GAO put up shoddy data on purpose to see if it would be accepted, and it was accepted across the board, even though they came nowhere close to providing the information they were supposed to provide.
The American people want lower healthcare costs. They also want us to protect their taxpayer dollars from fraud and abuse. So we need a healthcare system that protects patients and families but doesn't reward a ``get rich quick by any means'' fraudster looking to get an extra buck from the Federal taxpayer.
That is why Republicans have focused on a way forward on healthcare that actually lowers costs, fights fraud, and gives power to the patient, not profit to the insurance company, not ill-gotten gains to the criminal.
My Democratic colleagues are about to put up a resolution that would do a Congressional Review Act on a recent rule put out by the administration to fight waste, fraud, and abuse. For whatever reason, this resolution wants to fight fighting waste, fraud, and abuse. And if the CRA passes, it will eliminate commonsense measures for waste, fraud, and abuse--to eliminate them, to at least address them--as well as safeguards ensuring that subsidies go to patients who qualify, those who need it to afford coverage.
By the way, the resolution being offered by my Democratic colleagues will raise insurance premiums by 5 percent. They are offering a CRA that raises premiums, the effect of, by 5 percent. That is money that a family could use to pay their car note, their flood insurance note, their grocery bill--you name it--rent for their apartment, and, instead, it is going to insurance companies.
I don't quite know why my Democratic colleagues are so entrenched in protecting a broken system. They are willing to raise premiums by 5 percent to protect the status quo.
All that said, I am a doctor who worked in the public hospital system for over 20 years, trying to bring healthcare to people who otherwise couldn't afford it. Let's work together. Let's find a solution that actually lowers costs, doesn't increase premiums. Let's find a solution that squeezes out waste, eliminates and prosecutes fraud, not a system in which they are rewarded.
As a doctor, as a conservative, as an American, as a steward of the Federal taxpayer--when I say Federal taxpayer, I mean you and me and everybody watching and everyone in the Gallery--let's steward that money correctly. I urge my colleagues to reject this resolution and continue with bipartisan, important work to make healthcare more affordable.
Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, of the Rule Submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Relating to "Patient Protection And...
Mr. President, I rise today because I think it is painfully clear that we need to do something to address the growing healthcare crisis in this country.
Let me be clear at the outset that when we talk about the CRA that the clerk just reported, it is not directly related--it is not the tax credit issue that has been the subject of an enormous amount of other debate and, frankly, action in the House but a CRA that will be voted on later today that will overturn a rule that the Trump administration has put forward that will result in 1.8 million Americans being thrown off their health insurance.
It is beyond the tax credit issue. It is beyond the Medicaid changes. This is a rule that the administration set forward last year that adds enormous amounts of regulatory burden for any American who chooses to access the so-called ObamaCare Marketplace.
The truth is, this administration's attack on the Marketplace, ObamaCare, the Affordable Care Act didn't start with this rule. As we all know in this Chamber, this is just another step in a now close to 15-year crusade by many of my Republican colleagues to undermine the ACA, which, at the end of the day, is just going to--as we have seen already--is going to increase healthcare costs for everybody.
We know that at the end of last year, as the expiration of the ACA enhanced premium tax credits approached, Democrats in Congress worked hard to try to extend them. We put forward a strong, compromised proposal to extend the credits and keep health insurance affordable for the close to 24 million Americans who access their healthcare through the Marketplace.
Unfortunately, time and again, Republicans voted against it, ensuring that when the clock struck midnight on January 1, millions of Americans were priced out of that coverage. Families across the country have now been hit with premium increases of $800, $900, and even over $1,000 per month.
Somebody in my State of Virginia--Kathleen, a mother of two and a small business owner living in Newport News, saw her premium for her family of four increase from 544 bucks a month to over $1,500 a month. That is a yearly increase of about $11,500 a year--a pricetag that her family just can't afford. She told me she came up to the Hill before New Year's hit and that she hoped and prayed for a solution.
Frankly, I wish all of my Republican colleagues who helped block that solution could have explained to her why blocking that solution, which we offered as a straightforward extension of the ACA premium tax credits--why they blocked that, because Kathleen and so many other families desperately needed it.
I will have to say I have to give some rare congratulations to at least 17 Members of the House, Republican Members of the House, which had actually taken action recently to address this crisis. Seventeen House Republicans finally said enough is enough and voted with Democrats in the House to extend the credits, which will again lower the costs for millions.
I hope that we can get a similar type of compromise through in the Senate. I know there are colleagues on both sides of the aisle working hard on that issue right now.
While the credits have taken up most of the space around the debate, what I rise today on--the CRA that will be voted on this afternoon-- will provide an even more immediate solution to at least take away another barrier to healthcare accessibility and affordability.
I am asking my colleagues--and I will be joined by other colleagues to talk about this over the next hour or so--I am asking my colleagues to join me in disapproving a harmful rule that the Trump administration finalized last year that was set to kick in at the end of 2025. As I mentioned, that would take about 1.8 to 2 million people off their healthcare because of the enormous administrative burdens that are put in place by this administrative rule to try to get access to the Marketplace.
This is at least a chance today--not at some future date--to come together to do the bare minimum and address at least a small part of the emergency straining our healthcare system.
Now, I will acknowledge that because this administrative burden is so burdensome, the courts have paused its enactment, but at any moment, that pause could be taken away.
So let's just use the CRA, which has been used by both sides of the aisle repeatedly, to get rid of this additional burden because, simply put, this harmful Trump rule makes it harder to enroll in a Marketplace plan, harder to stay on a Marketplace plan, and harder and more expensive for States to run a Marketplace.
The rule requires increased paperwork for families, reduces open and special enrollment periods, and allows insurers to push more healthcare costs on Americans by allowing plans to cover less care. That also adds a ton more paperwork and burdens on the marketplaces all across the country.
Again, according to the Trump administration's own document, these added barriers and higher premiums will lead to that estimate of at least 1.8 million people losing coverage if this rule--which is, again, scheduled to go into effect but has only not gone into effect in 2026 because of a current pause by the courts.
But I think we ought to avoid this cliff and just act today as a Senate and say: Let's not have this rule take effect.
I think most of us would agree that 2025 was not a great year for healthcare in this country. Medicaid cuts, which are going to be enormous, which, frankly, were not scheduled to kick in until after the 2026 elections, interestingly enough--although I can tell you we have already seen rural healthcare clinics close in Virginia because of that expectation--and my colleagues' refusal to extend the enhanced premium tax credits are all weighing down on our healthcare system, and we are seeing rural hospitals and rural healthcare centers really bear the brunt of this.
The truth is, the Trump administration and congressional Republicans have jammed through healthcare policies that, combined with the rule and the tax premiums--minimum, looks like about 15 million Americans will get kicked off their health insurance.
So let's go back. My Republican colleagues and the President won in 2024 because they said they are going to lower costs. We can actually take action on lowering costs today. So let's join together, use the CRA tool, and end this policy. All you have to do is vote for the Congressional Review Act resolution making sure the number--not my number; the Trump administration's number--the 1.8 million Americans will actually get to keep their healthcare. All you have to do is vote for this CRA resolution so that folks don't have to deal with enormously burdensome paperwork and the higher costs that result.
Now, I think we can get this done. We have seen my Republican colleagues stand up to the President on the Epstein files, on war powers, and just in the last day or so, the attack on
Before I yield the floor, I want to also acknowledge--this is something a lot of us have been working on. Senator Klobuchar does such a great job on so many issues. Senator Wyden, the leader on the Finance Committee--they and others will come today to speak on this issue as well.
I hope my colleagues are listening, and I hope they will actually acknowledge that we have to bring healthcare costs down today. This isn't a full solution, but at least it is an action that we can take today.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Warner for his tremendous leadership on this important issue that is just really tormenting so many Americans right now--as well as Senator Wyden.
This involves tens of millions of Americans who are facing a healthcare crisis. Their premiums are doubling or tripling, and it is completely in our hands to do something about it.
Open enrollment is ending in 2 days. Americans across the country are looking at their budgets and facing this difficult choice of whether to pay double or triple for coverage or go uninsured.
Why are tens of millions of Americans facing this reality? Well, because congressional Republicans failed to act, to come to the table to negotiate an extension of the enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits before the end of last year.
Last Thursday, the House passed legislation to extend these healthcare tax credits for 3 years. Seventeen Republicans joined Democrats. You think about it, they could have done that months ago-- months ago. We were willing to negotiate with them 3 years, 2 years, 1 year at the time. They wouldn't do anything. And now they have realized--I guess they didn't understand what was happening to their constituents when 20-some percent of farmers and ranchers are on these kinds of policies and 75 percent of them are in red States.
The legislation that Senator Warner and Senator Wyden proposed is simple and reasonable. We are simply saying: Let's make sure the same tax credits that made care more accessible for tens of millions of Americans yesterday and last year and the year before that continue to be there for families this year. Americans are looking for us to act, and the time to act is now.
I have heard from people across my State in what is a very, very difficult time right now in the State of Minnesota. With the arrival of ICE on our streets, with people terrified, with the chaos that has ensued, we are still hearing from people about healthcare all the time.
Nicci from Waseca wrote to me that the healthcare premium for her and her husband almost tripled from $862 a month to $2,344, which, over the course of the year, is more than her annual salary. She called the increase ``insufferable.''
Nadine from Sartell, a 53-year-old single mom, shared that she has a master's degree in social work but lives nearly paycheck to paycheck now because her housing and utility costs eat up over half of her monthly income, and unless Congress renews the healthcare tax credits, she is not going to be able to purchase healthcare because there are only 2 days left. And here is the kicker: Just 4 months ago, she was diagnosed with breast cancer. She has already used up nearly all she has in savings for the copays and coinsurance to get a diagnosis and receive treatment.
Another constituent, a schoolbus driver named David, saw his premiums double. He is now spending 12 percent of his total pretax income on health insurance. David wrote:
That is a busdriver in Minnesota begging our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to stand and sit in his shoes, because if Congress can't fix this, David shared with me that even though he works full time, he will have to give up his health insurance entirely.
The rules that Senator Warner and Senator Wyden and others of us have suggested do away with the caps that limit how much of their income people like David must spend on health insurance, and so as we work to extend the healthcare tax credits, it is critical that we stop the administration from further undermining the Affordable Care Act and raising costs.
And this just isn't happening in my State. As I know, three-quarters of the people who get their health coverage on this ACA Marketplace live in States that President Trump won. We know the stakes, and we must come together to solve this affordability crisis. And I will note that the amount of money given to Argentina was approximately the same amount it would take to fix this for 1 year.
There is a lot more work to be done to lower healthcare costs: Medicare drug price negotiations that I have led for years and making sure that is really happening under this administration, reforming prior authorization, making improvements, public option. We can go on and on and on.
But, right now, we have one crisis that is hitting so many Americans, and we have a way to fix it. So I urge my Republican colleagues to join us to stop Americans' healthcare premiums from skyrocketing, and simply bring to the Senate floor and pass the bipartisan House-passed bill to extend the healthcare tax credits that Americans rely on, and, of course, to vote for S.J. Res. 84, which is in front of us today. And we thank Senator Warner and Senator Wyden for leading the effort.
Mr. President, before she leaves the floor, I just want to say that the Senator from Minnesota has been relentless in terms of standing up for folks who are just trying to get a fair shake on their premiums. I have been doing this since my days with the Gray Panthers, and I know what it means to be persistent. That defines Senator Klobuchar, and I thank her.
I am pleased to be working with Senator Warner and Senator Ossoff-- and I see Senator Kaine here--because all of us want to make sure we lower healthcare costs for American families.
Today, the Senate is going to vote to repeal a host of damaging policies that Donald Trump, Robert Kennedy, and Dr. Oz have unleashed on Americans who are unsuspecting. People are just trying to get by in tough times and are going to get hammered, and from the day Donald Trump was sworn in, this administration made attacking Americans' healthcare their top priority.
Last summer, Republicans in Congress rammed through a massive bill to give tax breaks to billionaires and giant corporations, while making the largest healthcare cuts in American history.
At the same time, the Trump administration used the Byzantine Federal rulemaking process to double down on these efforts by finalizing the rule that all of us on this side of the aisle are working to repeal today. The harmful changes made by the Trump administration come down to one proposition: It is OK to have more redtape, and it is just fine to increase healthcare costs.
That is the exact opposite of our agenda, which is to focus on affordability and making the American healthcare system simpler.
I am going to just tick through a couple of the worst examples to illustrate why these rules need to be junked.
First, the Trump rules will increase what American families have to pay out of pocket each year by nearly $1,000. So the question becomes: What is the purpose behind that change, other than to take money from Americans who are already struggling?
The rule adds new fees, such as a new reenrollment fee that applies to low-income workers. To be clear, that means, if you want to keep your health insurance, you have got to pay a fee to the government just for the right to keep what you have got. Even by Washington, DC, standards--I say to my friend from Montana--that just defies common sense.
They also create mandatory minimum premiums that are going to cause millions to lose their coverage.
Now, Republicans say that these fees are aimed at reducing fraud. There is just no evidence to back it up. My view has been, ever since my days with the Gray Panthers, and my friend from Virginia knows about this--I say any fraud--any fraud--is too much. But the numbers are clear. The vast majority of fraud in healthcare is conducted by shady insurance brokers who are looking to make a fast buck through commissions from phony enrollments, not working Americans looking to buy healthcare.
So I have introduced legislation to create tough, criminal penalties for these insurance brokers. So make no mistake about it, Senator Kaine, there is something we ought to be doing to root out fraud. Let's go after these insurance brokers with tough criminal penalties.
I have been talking to Republicans to ask them to join as cosponsors, and they haven't been willing, really, to give us the time of day. Instead of going after fraud where it exists, Donald Trump and Republicans create barriers that are going to trip up Americans trying to navigate a healthcare system that is just too complicated.
Beyond fees and higher premiums, the Trump rule also adds new verification checks and enrollment rules that amount to an enormous heap of redtape. These redtape measures, according to authorities who have analyzed them, are going to create 15 million hours of paperwork, and 1.8 million people are going to lose their coverage as they try to navigate this never-never land of a maze of healthcare rules.
These types of changes are right out of the playbook of Big Insurance because they create barriers and bureaucratic hurdles so they can keep more of your money while denying working families basic healthcare.
It is no secret that Americans are fed up with a healthcare system that gets in their way at every turn. It is time for Republicans to do the right thing and join with Democrats to lower Americans' healthcare costs, instead of creating new cost barriers and redtape restrictions. They can help those families by voting with us today.
I urge my colleagues to support Senator Warner, Senator Ossoff, Senator Klobuchar, and Senator Kaine. We are all here for one purpose: less bureaucracy, less redtape, lowering premiums for families.
Mr. President, I am glad to join my colleagues to talk about the upcoming vote on S.J. Res. 84, the use of the Congressional Review Act to strike down a recent regulatory attack on the Affordable Care Act launched by the Trump administration.
I think my colleagues have done a pretty good job of explaining what is at stake. Even the Trump administration's own experts at CMS, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, say that implementation of this rule could lead up to 1.8 million people to lose health insurance just this year, 2026. That would be devastating.
On top of the premium increases that people have seen because the Affordable Care Act extended tax credits were not extended when tax cuts for the wealthiest were extended, this additional burden on this 1.8 million-person population is unacceptable, and the vote we will cast today gives us all an opportunity to sort of shore up the healthcare network for those nearly 2 million people.
I wanted to focus, in particular, on the kind of person who is really going to be affected by the Trump rule if we do not affirmatively embrace this Congressional Review Act resolution, and that is self- employed entrepreneurs and gig workers.
You know, one of the challenges about the American healthcare system before the Affordable Care Act was it was very, very difficult to buy health insurance if you were an individual entrepreneur, if you had a very small business.
Without exchanges and the offering of policies on the exchanges with premium support for those who were lower or middle income, you had a lot of people who were self-employed entrepreneurs who couldn't buy insurance at all, and then you also had a huge group of people working with companies that had insurance that had this great American dream of an idea to start their own business, but they couldn't do it because if they were to leave their large employer to go off and follow their dream, they couldn't get health insurance.
And one of the very salutary effects of the ACA, through the creation of exchanges with premium support, has been to enable people to pursue their dream and become innovators or entrepreneurs or gig workers and work in the way and in the flexible circumstance they choose. And I speak from experience because two of my three kids fit into this category.
The rule that has been put in place by the Trump administration isn't going to make it particularly hard for large group plans to just re-up insurance, but it will make it very hard for those individuals that don't have an HR department fighting for them, that have to figure it out all on their own. It will make it very hard for them to negotiate the marketplace and buy insurance.
And, sometimes, their income is up, and, sometimes, their income is down. And, sometimes, they want to enroll, and, at other times, they don't. It is precisely this kind of person that is going to be hit the hardest by the Trump rule and why I am so strongly in support of my colleagues' efforts to repeal it.
You know, we often say--and I will conclude--that small businesses and startups are the backbones of the American economy, and they are. I grew up in a house with a dad who worked for a huge company, and it was his dream to start his own business. And he bought a little iron working shop that, at the time that he bought it, had like four employees. And during the entire growing-up period when I worked in my Dad's shop, in a good year, it would be seven employees, and in a bad year, it would be four, plus my mom and my two brothers and me.
So many American businesses are just like this. They are one or two employees. They are somebody who even has another gig, maybe as an artist, and they are moonlighting in some area where they can make just enough to afford to buy health insurance on the exchange, if we don't crush them with high premiums and if we don't make the paperwork burdens so substantial.
The CRA that my colleagues are offering will be directly responsive to the needs of this very, very important group of American innovators and entrepreneurs. And that is why I so strongly support it and urge my colleagues to do the same.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
Mr. President, my Republican colleagues and I spent a great deal of time this Congress focused on securing justice for victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens.
Unfortunately, during the last administration, the Biden administration was completely what I would call willfully blind to the threat posed by people coming unvetted across our borders.
From Laken Riley, to Kayla Hamilton, to Jocelyn Nungaray, the victims of illegal aliens are numerous and must not be forgotten. What makes these tragedies so heartbreaking is the knowledge that many of these victims could have lived but for the Biden administration's open border policies and its failure to act responsibly and enforce the law. These good Americans died at the hands of criminal aliens who should never have set foot in our country.
But there is another category of illegal alien criminals who perhaps are not so widely known, largely because the mainstream media outlets refuse to report on the many heinous crimes committed by illegal aliens each year. These are individuals who have endangered Americans by drunk driving.
Every 42 minutes, someone dies in a crash involving alcohol. As we have seen in the news, many of these crashes
Last January, two college students in Illinois named Katie Abraham and Chloe Polzin were killed in a hit-and-run crash involving an illegal alien who was drunk driving. Their killer, an illegal alien from Guatemala, was charged with leaving the scene of a crash resulting in death, aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol, and reckless homicide.
Last October, Secretary Noem highlighted more than 140 illegal alien truckdrivers who were arrested in Northwest Indiana during Operation Midway Blitz. These aliens were found guilty of numerous crimes, including driving under the influence, drug trafficking, theft, burglary, assault, child abuse, domestic battery, prostitution, and fraud. More than 40 of them had been issued a commercial driver's license by States like California, Illinois, and New York. It is clear that these States are not conducting due diligence if they are issuing commercial driver's licenses to illegal aliens who threaten the safety of American citizens on our roads and highways.
Of course, Texans have not been spared the harm committed by such aliens, as we saw in the case of Arturo Cruz-Badillo. Cruz-Badillo is a Mexican national who had seven--seven--DWI convictions, a conviction for battery, and was removed from the United States three separate times. But despite all of these criminal convictions and removal for illegal entry in the United States, he was once again found reentering illegally last August, hiding in a commercial cargo trailer. He was sentenced to jail earlier this year for his crimes.
On top of the revolving door of removals because of how different States treat DUI and DWI offenses, some aliens are convicted multiple times but never removed from the United States.
As recently as last month, ICE arrested 118 illegal aliens in California, including pedophiles, burglars, domestic abusers, and serial drunk drivers. One of these offenders had four separate DUI convictions, including one that caused bodily injury. He was also convicted of driving with a suspended driver's license. Another was convicted of a DUI, a hit-and-run, and driving without a license. Yet another was convicted of causing injury to a child, a hit-and-run causing property damage, and two DUIs, driving under the influence. Finally, one of these criminals was convicted of DUI causing great bodily injury, a hit-and-run causing property damage, and a separate DUI.
Consider how devastating a car accident can be even if there are no physical injuries. These accidents cause not only bodily injury but property damage to a person's car, and it must either be repaired or replaced, often costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars.
In the case of a hit-and-run, the situation is even more difficult because the victim cannot get the insurance information, if it exists, from the driver at fault in order to have the damage paid for.
For the one in four American households who lives paycheck to paycheck, an unexpected car accident might mean having to choose between repairing their car or paying their rent.
Of course, if the driver at fault is an illegal alien, it is more likely to be a hit-and-run because they don't want to be detained or deported. And even if they are caught, they are not likely to have insurance.
As a father of two daughters, I believe the danger illegal aliens pose to the safety of Americans is simply unacceptable. It ought to be unacceptable to all of us and not tolerated. For this reason, I am introducing the Stop Illegal Aliens Drunk Driving Act to address this discrepancy in Federal law where these DUIs--repetitive driving under the influence, driving while intoxicated--are simply winked at or ignored.
This bill would make DUI and DWI offenses that result in death or bodily injury an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Aggravated felons are subject to mandatory detention. They are also ineligible for most immigration benefits.
Furthermore, this bill would ensure that any illegal alien removed from the United States as an aggravated felon due to a DUI or DWI who attempts to reenter illegally is subject to a penalty of up to 20 years in prison.
Americans deserve to be safe while driving on our roads. Parents should not have to worry, when they give their 16-year-old the keys to the car--who has learned how to drive or is just getting their first driver's license--they shouldn't have to worry whether an illegal alien driving under the influence of alcohol is going to cause them bodily harm or kill them outright.
We simply cannot continue the status quo of allowing aliens who entered our country illegally or were allowed by the Biden administration's open border policies and who decide to drive drunk or under the influence--we can't allow them to continue to endanger the American public in this way. For this reason, I hope all of my colleagues will join me and support the Stop Illegal Aliens Drunk Driving Act.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
Mr. President, I rise today because this President is poised to strip away healthcare from American families again. If Congress doesn't act to pass this measure, Americans will be forced to jump through more hoops just to get health insurance, and 1.8 million Americans will lose their coverage.
This is just more of the same from Republicans and the President. Donald Trump and Republicans have spent over a decade trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act entirely, with no plan to replace it. When they haven't been able to repeal it wholesale, Republicans have looked for ways to attack and weaken the Affordable Care Act from the inside out.
And this is just what the administration did with this rule. They are chipping away at the Affordable Care Act and taking away healthcare from Wisconsin families.
While President Trump works out his concept of a plan, Republicans still have no real proposal on healthcare. Even if they could repeal the Affordable Care Act, they have nothing to protect the 24 million Americans who got coverage on healthcare.gov from being simply kicked off their insurance.
``Concepts of a plan'' simply are not good enough for the people that I represent. They deserve better. In fact, they need some breathing room and lower costs.
Instead of meeting families where they are and lowering costs, Republicans are taking us in the wrong direction. At the start of this year, 22 million Americans saw their premiums go up in 2026 because Republicans refused to extend tax breaks to help families afford their healthcare.
Behind every 1 of those 22 million Americans is a story--a family forced to make impossible choices about finances, their health, and their future. I am talking about folks like Nancy and John from Park Falls, WI, whose premiums were set to increase by over $2,000 each month in 2026.
Nancy wrote to me:
Another constituent from Barron County, WI, wrote to me sharing that without the tax breaks, he would have to spend over 40 percent--get that: 40 percent--of his income on health insurance alone just to ensure his wife could continue to get her treatment for her breast cancer.
I also heard from Eric and his wife in Menomonie, WI. They both retired from teaching after 30 years and are still not yet eligible for Medicare. He
Republicans ran out the clock on helping families like these, and the final window to get coverage for this year ends in just 2 days on January 15. How many Americans like Eric or Nancy are being forced to give up their health insurance this year? How many more will consider selling their houses or their cars just to make sure that they can afford sometimes lifesaving care?
Now, on top of this, the Trump administration is pushing a rule to kick even more families off of their healthcare. The rule we are talking about today would shorten the open enrollment periods and introduce much more redtape, locking eligible families out of getting their health insurance.
We should be making it easier, not harder, for Americans to see a doctor. We should be making healthcare more affordable, not more expensive.
Over the past year, I have talked to countless constituents who are sick and tired of Republicans' constant attacks on their healthcare.
Instead of spending time coming up with new ways to kick Americans off Affordable Care Act plans, I urge my Republican colleagues to help us reverse this disastrous rule and actually start working with us to fix our broken healthcare system.
Mr. President, for months, I have been raising the alarm over radical Islam infiltrating the greatest country on the face of the Earth, the United States of America.
Some Americans see what is happening in Europe, and they think, would that ever happen in our country? The reality is, yes. It is happening right now, right before our very eyes. The enemy is now inside the gates.
There are plenty of Muslims that come here, love this country, assimilate into American culture, and they have a duty to join in the fight and speak out against the mainstream media and elected officials who are empowering radical Islam to take a foothold in the United States of America.
Governor Kathy Hochul of New York welcomed in the new year by declaring January as Muslim American Heritage Month. To red-blooded American patriots' dismay, Hochul directed State landmarks, including the iconic skyline of New York City, to be lit in the color Islamic green.
What makes the situation even worse is that One World Trade Center was also lit up in Islamic green, as you see here--the exact location where Islamic terrorists flew planes into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001, killing thousands of innocent Americans. You know, this was a slap in the face of the families of the nearly 3,000 victims who were murdered and the thousands injured on that very, very tragic day.
I never thought I would see something like this in my lifetime. But for years, the radical left, the globalists, and the deep state have colluded to destroy this country and have found a way to flood our communities with third-world Muslims whose only goal is not to assimilate but to destroy the West and create a worldwide caliphate. If you don't understand what that looks like, just take a look at Europe.
Under Barack Obama and Joe Biden, our Federal Government imported millions of foreigners who hate America, enabling them to live on welfare and forcing American taxpayers to pay the bills.
New York City's recent mayoral election reveals how easily a Muslim communist can come to power in our Nation's most iconic city. You know, foreign-born, communist mayor Zohran Mamdani polled 62 percent of support from foreign-born voters in New York. They weren't born in the State of New York. They weren't born in our country. Sixty-two percent of them supported him. Only 30 percent of American-born voters voted for him.
Under Joe Biden, millions of illegal aliens, including terrorists, murders, and rapists, were planted there to completely destroy the freedom-loving voter base, all on purpose. As a result, a foreign-born, Muslim communist who hates the greatest Nation on Earth and wants to change it is now in power.
During his inaugural ceremony, commie Mamdani used two Qurans for his swearing-in ceremony, not the Bible. He used a book that advocates for the killing of all who don't believe in Islam or refuse to follow Islamic teachings. He was also sworn in at an abandoned subway--a subway station symbolizing what New York City will soon look like when freedom-loving Americans flee for their lives and Sharia law becomes the rule of law in the five boroughs in New York City.
New York City, the symbol of liberty and freedom in the new world, is now turning into the same oppressive hellhole freedom-loving immigrants have fled from for centuries. They have been running from it. But now we are changing into that same situation.
The deep state hasn't wasted any time in 2026 to accelerate its globalist agenda to destroy this country. And if we don't do something to stop this Islamic takeover of our country, we will soon be called the United Caliphate of America. That means Christians, Jews, and anyone else who doesn't convert to Islam will be prosecuted and persecuted. It will be acceptable for young girls and women to be raped, and Islamic terrorism and violence will become the norm.
Thankfully, President Trump and his administration are working day and night to save this country through mass deportation, revoking immigrant visas, and implementing travel bans on majority-Muslim countries that support the radical Islam crowds who chant ``Death to America.''
We continue to see more evidence come out of Muslim third world foreigners defrauding American people of their hard-earned tax dollars. Thanks to independent journalist Nick Shirley, more and more fraud from Somali immigrants in Minnesota who are pretending to use the money to feed children or help people with autism is being exposed every day now.
In a recent hearing in the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, testimony from a Minnesota State representative claimed that U.S. attorney Joe Thompson estimates that the total amount of criminal fraud to this point, after 5 years, has reached $9 billion. That is billion with a ``b.''
Minnesota's attorney general said this weekend on CNN in an interview that, you know, the fraud estimation is not a serious thing and that is just political theater.
That is expensive political theater.
A statement like that is not only an insult to many, many Minnesotans, but it is also a slap in the face to the hard-working taxpayers of this country. What is taking place in Minnesota is pure evil, and it is straight from the pit of Hell.
It is impressive to me that a 23-year-old independent journalist did more to serve the American people with investigative reporting than the so-called experts in the legacy media. Where are they?
The fake news is complicit with the radical Islamic takeover of the United States, and they are in on the scam on the American taxpayers.
Thanks to Nick Shirley's efforts, more fraud is being exposed in other States.
FOX News recently reported that Somalia's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, now serving as President of the U.N. Security Council, is linked to an Ohio home healthcare agency that has previously been punished for its ties to massive fraud.
There are other reports surfacing about Somalia's Minister of Foreign Affairs running a healthcare company in Toledo, OH, who has a business partner that works for a Somali money transfer service which has been accused of financing Islamic terrorism.
You can't make this up. It goes on and on. So here is more. For months, a new publication in the State of Maine known as the Maine Wire reported on a similar event taking place in Lewiston, ME, also known today as Little Mogadishu. Gateway Community Services, founded by a Somalian refugee, received $28.8 million in MaineCare payments between 2019 and 2024--$28 million. Last year, a whistleblower came forward alleging that the organization systematically defrauded the
As more of this comes to light, a couple facts are becoming more and more apparent. No. 1, third world foreigners from predominantly Muslim countries are coming here and stealing American tax dollars while they spew anti-American rhetoric. No. 2, Democratic elected officials seem to be complicit in helping foreigners who hate this country steal from their own constituents, their own people who vote for them.
The enemies of our country are robbing American citizens in broad daylight, while the cost-of-living standards in our country skyrocket higher than they should be, and healthcare premiums go up year after year. That should make every single American's blood boil.
But Democrats have invited terrorists from countries that hate us. They steal our benefits. They enjoy our schools, overrun our hospitals, vote in our elections, and then steal our tax dollars and send them back to the country they came from, where they can fund terrorism.
Thankfully, we have a President who loves this country and is going to change it. President Trump and his administration are working around the clock to halt immigration and to stop fraudulent schemes that were allowed to take place under Joe Biden.
Patriotic Americans are thankful for the work of DHS and ICE and what they are doing to clean up our streets--at a cost. DHS and ICE agents have been targeted by radicals because they are enforcing the law--what a thought. And I will continue to support law enforcement until every single illegal is out of this country and comes here the right way.
If you are going to interfere in law enforcement's ability to do their jobs, folks, in any way, don't be surprised if you are arrested and thrown into jail--and you should be.
Thanks to investigative reporters like Nick Shirley and folks at the Maine Wire, we are slowly turning the tide on fraud and corruption. Deep state and the fake news media and third-world Islamists are eroding our country from within.
We need to wake up. American citizens need to recognize what is going on and say: Enough is enough.
As long as I am alive, I will fight to ensure that my granddaughter Rosie Grace can grow up in the same country that I and a lot of people had the chance to grow up in--the greatest country on the face of the Earth. And what I am telling people across this country and what should have happened in Europe years ago: Folks, wake up. They are here. The enemy is inside the gate. We are in bad trouble. And if we don't stop it, we will lose this country that has been built for 250 years.
Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, of the Rule Submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Relating to "Patient Protection And...
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question occurs on the motion to proceed.
Mr. President, I rise today to pay my respects and to honor the memory of an incredible Delawarean and a genuine hero.
``I am anxious,'' he wrote, ``to begin a life of service and commitment to making Delaware a safer place''--a safer place ``to live, [to] work, [to] visit, and raise a family.''
Delaware State Police Corporal Ty Snook wrote those words before he left the police academy, and it laid out his hope, his vision for service.
Delaware State Police Corporal Grade One Ty Snook wrote those words as a cadet late in his time in the police academy, and it laid out his vision for the life he lived committed to protecting and serving the people of my home State.
Two days before Christmas, Corporal Snook volunteered to work an extra shift at the DMV. He was working to make some extra money for his wife and young daughter, and he was volunteering to protect people so that they could make it home to their families in the rush before Christmas. He never made it home to his. A gunman walked into the DMV and, from a blind angle, shot and killed Corporal Snook--his last act, pushing a DMV employee behind him, shielding their life with his own.
What makes a hero? Someone whose instinct is protection. Someone whose service is about loving others, even when faced with mortal pain and fear. Corporal Snook's family and friends knew a hero, but his last actions were not all that he was. He was a father to Letty, a husband to Lauren, a big brother to his brother Josh, a big brother to his sister Kassi, a son to Matthew and Karen, a friend to so many.
He was a person with a big heart and a big personality who was always the center of attention and fun but who dedicated his time to celebrating the successes of others and mentoring others. A standout athlete, he was a Delaware wrestling champion. At Saint Mark's, he improved and improved and improved in his wrestling and then went to the University of Maryland on a wrestling scholarship, a D1 school, a great program.
He knew how to make everyone feel at ease and to laugh, how to help others by showing them the way. He stood out for his mentorship of others, celebrating his teammates' victories and successes and improvement as much as his own.
His sister Kassi said: Ty always did the right thing.
And his brother Josh said: All I ever wanted was to be more like him.
His brother Josh also serves in the Delaware State Police.
Corporal Snook is from a remarkable family, a family driven by service and
Corporal Snook also saw and built strength in his second families: brothers and sisters in the Delaware State Police. He was an FTO. He was a field training officer for 20 State troopers, a remarkable number. Because he was such a good mentor, he was committed to the next generation of our State's troopers.
In our State of neighbors, a loss of one is a loss to all. But at his funeral service, his memorial at the University of Delaware, there must have been a thousand people present--law enforcement officers from every State in our country, hundreds and hundreds from all of our major agencies, in our State, in our region, and hundreds of us honored just to be in the room from our community.
In what was a powerful and moving service, nothing struck home as much as the powerful words of Lauren, his widow. Lauren said:
And she had one ask of all of us who heard her words:
Lauren's words were incredible and powerful. Anyone seeking to hear the strength and the heart and the conviction of the law enforcement community--and in particular spouses--should go and watch Lauren's words. They were incredible.
Lauren, your words found a home in my heart and in the hearts of all who heard them, and I wanted to just bring Ty's memory--Corporal Snook's memory--to this floor of this Senate and to reference your incredible service and sacrifice and remarks today so that your love, your determination to support and remember and celebrate your hero could travel further, could touch the lives of more who need and deserve to hear about you, about Ty, about your family.
Senator Blunt Rochester and I have introduced a resolution in the Senate honoring Corporal Snook's life and bravery so that we can do our small part to ensure his legacy remains and travels further.
To Corporal Snook: I want to come back to those words you wrote so many years ago as a cadet, and I hope you know that you succeeded, that you fulfilled your mission and your dream, that you made Delaware safer, that you served with honor, that our State was blessed to have you for the time we did. Better to live your life as a hero, better to live your life honorably, better to live your life loving and being loved by others than to live a long and peaceful life that amounts to little.
I want to leave you with some words from the Gospel according to John, the 14th Chapter, 27th verse:
I am so grateful for the service and sacrifice of Corporal Ty Snook of the Delaware State Police--a peacemaker, a hero, someone who deserves to be a legend in our national law enforcement community.
May the God of love welcome you into His arms.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. President, I want to speak first for a moment about the Energy and Water Development bill that the Senate will shortly be considering.
As the Presiding Officer knows, our budget is so large that we divide our appropriations bill into 12 separate bills--many bills, if you will--and Members in some cases are assigned and in some cases choose to serve on these subcommittees to draft a portion of the appropriations bill. I have the privilege of serving as the chair of the Energy and Water Development portion of the larger appropriations bill. My ranking member--in other words, the ranking Democrat--is my friend Senator Patty Murray from Washington State.
We have conferenced that bill. What does that mean? Well, that means that all the Democratic members and all the Republican members of the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee have worked out our differences. It doesn't mean we are all happy, but we have worked them all out. We also worked out our differences with the House--the Republicans and the Democrats in the House who sit on what we call Energy and Water. I am not saying everybody is happy, but they have accepted the bill. We have reached an agreement, and, in fact, the House has already passed it. We are going to be considering that bill, the Energy and Water bill, here in a couple of days. I just wanted to quickly--I will speak more later, perhaps--I just wanted to quickly highlight what we are going to be voting on here in the next couple days.
The bill is $58 billion. That is less than the current budget. I am very proud of that. I said at the very beginning of this process that I was not going to approve a budget that did anything but spend less. We have done that. Nominally, it is a $27 million reduction. Non- nominally, which means if you factor in inflation, it is a 2.8-percent reduction over the current Energy and Water bill. So in the new fiscal year, fiscal year 2026, we will be spending 2.8 percent less than we are spending on the Energy and Water bill right now. I am very proud of that.
We increased defense spending. As the Presiding Officer knows, the Energy and Water bill is divided into a defense portion and a nondefense portion. We increased spending dramatically for defense. In fact, we are spending $912 million extra on defense in the Energy and Water bill over the current budget--a 2.7-percent increase even though overall the bill is 2.8 percent less.
Well, obviously, we had to cut something. We did. We are cutting nondefense spending, the nondefense portion of the bill, by 3.8 percent. We took a meat ax to the Green New Deal provisions in the current Energy and Water budget. Now, not everybody is happy about it. I get it. But we have already spent a lot--a lot--of money on the Green New Deal--too much, in my judgment--so we reduced it in the new Energy and Water bill.
Moving back just for a second on defense spending, what are we spending that extra money on in defense? Well, I am not going to read everything to you, but suffice it to say we plussed up or increased nuclear weapons development, nuclear weapons sustainment. We are strengthening our nuclear weapons stockpile testing. We are strengthening its certification. We are continuing to provide money for a new nuclear warhead, for a sea-launched cruise missile. We are going to spend more money on plutonium pits and special explosive nuclear materials.
The final two points I will make about our bill: We have substantially increased spending for the Corps of Engineers-- substantially. In the new Energy and Water bill, we are spending $1.7 billion more on Corps of Engineers projects. That is a 19-percent increase. And we are also doubling our spending on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
So to sum up, the Energy and Water bill vis-a-vis the current budget cuts spending by 2.8 percent. We increased defense spending by 2.7 percent. We paid for that increase and accommodated the decrease in overall spending by cutting nondefense, mostly green energy, 3.8 percent. We have increased spending for the Corps of Engineers dramatically--$1.7 billion. That is a 19-percent increase. And we have doubled the amount of money for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
I will be happy, when the time comes when we take up the bill, to answer questions.
Mr. President, let me talk about another subject: housing. You can't talk about housing if you don't start with supply and demand and the cost of housing. What determines prices in America? In a free enterprise system, what determines the price of housing? A lot of things, but basically it is supply and demand. In a free enterprise system, supply and demand determines price.
Now, no free enterprise system is perfect. Ours is about as perfect as you
How else can prices be affected besides supply and demand? Well, you can have antitrust violations. If all the makers of microwave ovens get together in a back room over cigars and a sip of whiskey and say they are going to fix prices at a certain price, they can run the price of microwave ovens up. That is a crime too. It is illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act. You can go to the pokey for that.
So it is supply and demand. Well, what causes prices--specifically, the cost of housing--to go up? Well, it is when demand for housing is greater than the supply of housing. Duh. It is not complicated.
Remember when we had 9 percent inflation under President Biden--not just in housing but in everything else? I will tell you how that happened. President Biden used the pandemic as an excuse, but we were past the pandemic. He and my Democratic friends appropriated billions and billions and billions of dollars, in many cases directly to the American people, and people got that money and said ``Thank you very much,'' and they went out and spent it. They spent it on goods, and they spent it on services. The problem was the people who produced the services and made the goods were not prepared. Many of them had had supply lines during the pandemic that were affected.
So you had this huge amount of demand with the American people having a huge amount of money, and they wanted to buy, but the supply wasn't there. So what happened? Prices went up. At one point, prices went up to--inflation reached 9 percent.
Now, the good news is that it has come down. So we are better, but we are not well. Inflation--I think new numbers came out today. They are at about 2.7 percent. That means prices are still going up. Many of them have come down. Prices are still going up; they are just not going up as quickly as they were going up under President Biden, thanks to the new economic policies adopted by the Trump administration and the Republican Congress.
One of the things, though, that hasn't come down in price is housing. I don't need to tell the American people. It is just breathtaking. The average first-time home buyer in America today--let's just think about this. To buy a home, you have to save up a downpayment, and you have got to have enough income so they will loan you the money, so you can comfortably pay the mortgage. The average person today, first-time home buyer, doesn't reach those parameters until they are 40 years old--40 years old.
Owning a home is the American dream, and housing has gone up everywhere. It has gone up in my State. It has gone up in the Northeast, the Southwest. It has certainly gone up in California. Hell, a refrigerator box behind an Outback costs $500,000 in California.
Nobody can afford homes anymore; they just can't. Why is that? Well, you can hear a lot of experts talk about it. Some of them will say: Well, it is interest rates; interest rates went up. They did go up. And some will say it is this, and some will say it is that. But I will tell you the main reason housing has gone up so much and hasn't come down: because the demand for a house is greater than the supply. We don't have enough houses; we just don't.
You are probably thinking to yourself, boy, then why doesn't somebody build some? Well, the private sector is trying, but in many States--not all, but in many States and many cities, they are being stopped by local government.
And you say: Whoa. Why? Why would a councilwoman or a councilman in a city of 100,000 people in Colorado not want to see more houses built?
I will tell you why: because that city councilperson--man or woman-- controls the zoning laws and controls, for rules and regulations, housing starts.
A lot of the people--I am not just picking on Colorado; this is true in every State--a lot of the people don't want more houses built. Why? Because they already own a house, and it is worth a lot of money, and it is a big part of their nest egg. They know that if, in their area, more houses start being built, then the price of their home is going to go down and they are going to lose money.
Now, again, I am not picking on Colorado. That is true in Colorado. It is true in every State in our wonderful Union. It is called NIMBY-- not in my backyard. It is especially true in California, the most liberal State God ever put breath in. That is why we are not building more residential housing. That is why housing starts are not going up.
Now, what is Congress's usual reaction to that? Well, we start passing bills telling the folks in local government how to do their job. You won't find housing starts in the U.S. Constitution. You won't find the subject of housing in the U.S. Constitution. It is a State but it is really more of a local issue.
Zoning laws are local. Some States may have a statewide zoning law, but most zoning laws, which determine housing starts--who can build houses and who can't and what size they have to be and how big the lot is and what the streets look like--that is up to the local governments, OK?
Usually, what happens is Congress lectures our friends in local government and says: You have got to do this. You have got to do that. We are going to mandate this. We are going to mandate that.
The truth is, we are not housing experts. We are not there in the community. That is why God created members of city councils and mayors. They are closest to the people. They should be in charge of housing. They should be in charge of zoning. They should be in charge of deciding what size the streets and the lots are.
But it is undeniable--and some are trying, but it is undeniable that a lot of them are saying, under political pressure from their constituents: We don't want new houses because it might affect the price of the existing houses, and the people whose houses go down in price won't vote for me.
That is the way a lot of local folks think--not all of them but a lot of them.
So what can we do about that? Short of us getting in the middle of the business of our cities and telling them what zoning laws should look like, here is what we can do. We could use a carrot and a stick.
Every year, we send between $2 and $3 billion to cities across America. Every city gets a little bit of it. Some get a lot of it. But every year, just like clockwork, we appropriate--it is really more like $3 to $4 billion. We send that money through the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and based on the population in a city, they determine who gets what portion.
The local governments love what we call community development block grant money, CDBG funds. You say ``CDBG'' to a person in local government, and they will start salivating. They love this money like the Devil loves sin. Why is that? Because it is free money, and they have a lot of discretion--``they'' meaning our friends in local government--they have a lot of discretion in how they spend it. They can rehab public housing. They can build streets. They can use it for code enforcement without the Federal Government staring them down.
So I came up with this idea, convinced Senator Elizabeth Warren to join me, and we drafted and indeed passed--I will talk about that in a second--a bill called the Build Now Act. It is really very simple. It says that we are not going to tell local governments how to increase housing starts; we are just going to tell them that if they do increase housing starts, we are going to reward them with more CDBG money. If they don't increase housing starts, we are going to take some of their money away. Carrot; stick.
Here is how it would work. Every year, we look at all of our cities-- I
So that is our starting point--the median. Let's call it 4 percent. If our bill were in effect and next year the median--you can call it average if you want--the median is 4 percent, if you are a local government and you meet 4 percent, you get all of your CDBG money. Good for you. You get a gold star. Maybe, if the median is 4 percent, you did even better. Not only did you reach the median level--4 percent increase on housing starts--you got 6 percent. Guess what. You are going to get extra CDBG money. You get extra money. That is the carrot.
Now, if you are thinking to yourself: ``There is a catch here somewhere,'' OK; there is no free lunch. Anytime someone tells you something is free, uh-uh. Anything that is free, somebody had to pay for.
Here is the catch: We are going to take that extra money to reward the cities that increased housing starts above the median--we are going to take it from the cities that don't, up to 10 percent.
Now, what does that mean? That means we are not going to tell our friends in local government whether to increase housing starts or decrease, and we are sure not going to tell them how to do it. They don't have to do a damn thing if they don't want to. But if they do increase housing starts, they are going to get extra money from the Federal Government, and if they don't, they are going to get less.
It will work. Others agree with me. Senator Warren and I passed the Build Now Act unanimously out of the Banking Committee. Every Democrat and every Republican voted for it.
Then it came to the Senate floor. Every Member of the Senate--every Democrat, every Republican--said: We like it. We will take a dozen of these.
They liked it so much--my colleagues liked it so much that they made it a part of the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act, which, as you know, is a bill we have to pass every year. And housing is not directly relevant to the NDAA. But under the rules, my colleagues liked Elizabeth's and my bill so much they said: Let's put it on the NDAA. And we did; flew out of here.
Then it went over to the House, and we started negotiating the NDAA because the House passed its version of the NDAA, and we had passed our version of the NDAA, and they weren't the same. So the people in charge of the NDAA from the Senate sat down with the people in charge of the NDAA in the House and started negotiating the final product.
I will use my words carefully here. There were a couple of folks on the House side who for whatever reason decided to take our Build Now Act out, and they did, despite the fact that every Member of the Senate was for it and a lot of House Members.
I am not going to kid you, I was upset. I called that person and those handful of people every--well, I called them an epithet that ends with the word ``hole.'' I did. I swallowed it. I took it. I just said: That is the legislative process. I took it full in the face, went home, had a beer, petted my dog, tried to get over it, and lived to fight another day. It was stupid, but they did it. But we live to fight another day.
Now, when moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't in America today, I can tell you one of the things they are worried about is the cost of living, and part of the cost of living is the cost of housing.
This bill will work, and it would have worked, and it would be law right now. But that was then. You have to look to the future.
Mr. President, if you are listening, please endorse this bill.
To my friends in the House, please bring this bill up and vote for it. It will work. We have been jawboning and talking about ``Oh, you know, the cost of living is''--some say it is fake. Some say it is not. Some say we are doing better than we are. Well, things are better, but they are still not well. This bill will lower the cost of housing in America, and it will do it under the basic principles of free enterprise. You can write this down and take it home to Momma: All things being equal, if you increase supply and demand stays the same, the price is going to go down.
It will work. So I hope my friends in the House will take these comments in the spirit in which they were meant and that they will pass Senator Warren's and my Build Now Act.
I hope that the President is listening and that he will endorse it because--I am going to repeat it again--this is America. Owning a home is the American dream. A satisfactory home is not a refrigerator box behind Outback. The American people deserve better.
Mr. President, what would you like me to do next? I think I will ask for a quorum.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, I come to the floor this afternoon to speak in strong support of the appropriations package that will soon be pending on the Senate floor. We overwhelmingly voted to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed last night, and so we are in a good place with these appropriations bills. As we were talking yesterday on the floor, we are appropriating again. This will be the second package of bills. As colleagues have noted in their statements before me, this package includes three bills for the rest of fiscal year 2026.
This is for Commerce, Justice, and Science; for Energy and Water Development; and for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. And as chairman of the Interior and Environment Subcommittee, I am really pleased to be able to share with colleagues the good work that our subcommittee has produced. I am proud of the bill that we have in this package.
Ours is not an easy one to write. Within the Interior bill, we not only have management of our public lands, but we have oversight of the EPA, we have the arts, and we have the Indian health and Tribal programs. It is a challenge. It is complex. There are a lot of matters that reside under the Department of the Interior and the EPA. And, oftentimes, we don't always see eye to eye on the issues that are within this jurisdiction, and that certainly would extend to funding.
There are some years that the Interior bill has proven absolutely elusive, where we simply could not overcome our differences, and we couldn't complete our work. But, fortunately, that is not the case this year.
I worked closely with our full committee leadership, Chairman Collins and Ranking Member Murray, and I want to thank them for their leadership. They have kept us all to task, and their leadership--and I particularly commend my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, for her just constant effort to keep us to task and really working so well with members of the committee.
I also want to recognize and thank my ranking member, Senator Merkley. He has been a partner to work with on this committee. Again, we don't always see eye to eye on the issues, and one wouldn't expect us to. But we are able to work through those areas.
And I also want to acknowledge and thank the other colleagues on the committee, as well as our counterparts in the House. I think we built a good bipartisan bill, and I think that the support that we have seen by way of the votes is proof positive of that.
We had a 26-to-2 vote in committee last summer, and then, after weeks of bicameral negotiation, our colleagues in the House passed this minibus last week by a resounding vote of 397 to 28--so pretty strong; actually pretty powerful. And then, to have received the endorsement from the President with his statement of position endorsing this three- package bill was also very much appreciated.
And, as I say, I absolutely appreciate the work that went into the CJS and the Energy and Water bills. I certainly support them.
But, this afternoon, I want to direct my comments to the Interior bill, as we begin the debate.
Overall, we prioritized fiscal responsibility, cutting a total of $1.9 billion. This is about 4.7 percent of our bill. That is substantive. And while we met that goal to cut our spending, we also met the needs and met Members' requests across its many accounts.
We also reformatted. As we updated our priorities for this fiscal year, reflecting a new administration and the majorities here in Congress, I think that we restored balance in some of the key areas of our bill. And the result is we have a measure that will strengthen our energy security, our mineral security, and our national security.
It will continue to facilitate clean and safe drinking water. This is a priority that so many of our colleagues have emphasized.
It will protect our public lands, and it will ensure that we are as ready as we can be for the upcoming fire season.
For example, we provide funding so that Agencies like the Bureau of Land Management, BLM, have greater capacity to issue permits for energy projects. We have included robust funding from mapping and minerals- related work at the USGS.
We have also provided funds to bolster development and staffing out in our U.S. Territories. They are a long way away, most in the Pacific. They are very crucial, very key, but, oftentimes, they are overlooked or are possibly ignored. And so making sure that we have got the critical staffing that we need out there and the folks to make sure that we are poised in our quest to counter China.
But I mentioned the cuts that we had made to this bill. Even as we cut back, we were able to do some important work when it comes to the priorities, like fully funding wildland fire management.
We prioritized the removal of hazardous fuels. We took care of the firefighters who risk their lives to protect their communities, property, and the environment. As we have seen, year over year, that threat of fire from one end of the country to another is very real. So the effort here is a very important one.
We continued to address the threats that are posed by natural hazards, like volcanoes--we just saw another eruption in Hawaii-- earthquakes, landslides, and tsunamis. My State has been particularly hard hit in recent years with deadly landslides.
But there are other natural hazards that threaten lives and landscapes, and we worked to address them in this bill.
When it comes to the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Program, or PILT, we fully funded it. This accounts for the Federal lands that reduce the tax base of counties and boroughs across the country.
We also included substantial resources for our Agencies to manage and maintain our national parks. We hear from so many who love and embrace our national parks. We all love them. Sometimes, we love them so much that we forget that their care and their upkeep is also important. So we made sure we addressed the resources for our national parks, our wildlife refuges, and, really, all of our Federal lands.
One area of the bill that perhaps gets a little more parochial--but, obviously, an issue of very real concern--is a focus on invasive species.
We don't happen to have Asian carp in Alaska. We want to keep it that way. I know that, in many parts of the South, Asian carp is a threat, an invasive species that needs to be dealt with.
Up on the west coast, in Washington State and, now, unfortunately, in Alaska, we are seeing growing threats from this European green crab. We want to be able to knock those out.
There is the spruce budworm that threatens landscapes everywhere, from Florida to Maine, to Washington, to Alaska.
Whether it is green crab, Asian carp, or budworms, the reality is we are impacted in different ways. So being able to direct resources to push back on these invasive species is important.
We also upheld our commitment to Native peoples. We have provided robust funding for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, for the Indian Health Service, and for similar Agencies.
I think we did really good work within the bill to advance some of the public safety and justice initiatives. We strengthened Tribal colleges and universities. We addressed the scourge of missing and murdered indigenous women and children. A focus on ensuring the safety of our Native peoples was a priority--but, really, not just the justice and safety, but so many of the other aspects of the well-being of Native people around the country.
As it relates to the EPA, I think, again, we have a good story to tell here. We did scale back the overall budget, but we kept the priorities in the right place. We fully funded the Clean Water and the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Funds. That is a priority across the country.
We provided robust funding for EPA's efforts in science and technology, in environmental programs and management, with Superfund issues, and, especially, for State and Tribal assistance grant programs.
Overall, we addressed the priorities of dozens of Members of the Senate, whether it was programmatic requests for more parochial matters, like stream gages on the Ohio River, to the distribution of revenues from development off the gulf coast.
We did instruct Agencies not to undertake certain activities that would waste taxpayer dollars and impose burdens, like the regulation of lead tackle and greenhouse gas reporting requirements for farmers and livestock producers.
We also provided funds for America250. I mentioned that the Interior Subcommittee has oversight of the arts, whether it is the national humanities or an element of the arts. In our account, we also provided funds for America250. We recognize the importance of the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the founding of our Nation. We want this to be an anniversary that really brings us together, that celebrates the best of our Nation and reminds us that we are just so blessed to be Americans.
I have spoken about so many of the broad national impacts of this bill, but for folks back home that may be listening: OK, what about Alaska? No surprise, Alaska is always first and foremost for me, and we paid attention to Alaska within this bill. In addition to the many things I have mentioned, from wildfire to natural hazards, to PILT, we were able to provide for the restoration of vital fish habitat. We were able to scrounge up some funding for my colleague from Alaska's Save Our Seas Act. This is very important legislation for us.
We also added funds for the cleanup of contaminated lands, for airshed grants that will improve air quality in places like Fairbanks, for healthcare facilities and staffing in Native communities, and to begin to address the impending crisis of leaking above-ground fuel storage tanks. This is a matter for so many of our communities that rely for their power generation from just fuel that is brought upriver by barge. You have to have a place to store it. These storage tanks have been there for decades and need to be attended to.
We also recognize that there is a staggering backlog in BIA's probate courts. This needs to be addressed, and we were able to make some incremental gains in that area as well.
So there are many good provisions in the bill that add up to what I think is a good bill. It is certainly not everything that I wanted. They never are. I wish--I wish--we could have reached bicameral agreement to include some of the naming conventions that we were batting back and forth. We were not able to, in this bill, call Denali by its rightful name. This is North America's largest peak. ``Denali,'' in the Koyukon-Athabascan language, means ``the great one,'' and that is absolutely, positively, 100-percent fitting for this magnificent mountain. We are going to live to fight another day on that because nobody is going to take that mountain from us. I am certainly not standing down here.
For today, I would urge the Senate to recognize the important bipartisan work that we have done with balance, with common sense, and with fiscal restraint as really our guiding principles here. I don't take for granted anything in this Interior bill. But we would not
I want to thank the members of my team, led by Daniel Mencher, Sarah Jorgenson, and Anna Smith; and their counterparts on the minority side, Melissa Zimmerman, Ryan Hunt, Rishi Sahgal, and Anthony Sedillo. These folks worked day and night, around the clock, through Christmas, through New Year's, and they have produced a very, very strong bill.
We overcame some long odds--again, some really long nights--to move this forward and to fund the Department of the Interior, the Forest Service, EPA, and related Agencies. But what we agreed to is going to help our people, our communities, our economy, our security, and our lands and our wildlife. It is something we should all be proud to support.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act requires that Congress receive prior notification of certain proposed arms sales as defined by that statute. Upon such notification, the Congress has 30 calendar days during which the sale may be reviewed. The provision stipulates that, in the Senate, the notification of proposed sales shall be sent to the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
In keeping with the committee's intention to see that relevant information is still available to the full Senate, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the notifications that have been received. If the cover letter references a classified annex, then such an annex is available to all Senators in the office of the Foreign Relations Committee, room SD-423.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate the recent 250th anniversary of the U.S. Postal Service, USPS, and the 120th anniversary of the American Postal Workers Union, APWU, Chicago Local 0001.
Our Nation's Postal Service, first established by the Second Continental Congress on July 26, 1775, and later modernized by Congress to become the U.S. Postal Service on July 1, 1971, was created to connect individuals and communities across the country.
Today, USPS continues to serve communities and is relied on for its ability to conduct last-mile deliveries that have rapidly increased in the era of e-commerce. As USPS passes this incredible milestone, we must ensure that USPS continues to grow by improving its on-time performance, seeking new business to grow mail volumes, and investing in the Postal Service's most valuable asset, its dedicated workforce.
In my home State of Illinois, APWU Chicago Local 0001 and other unions began organizing to strengthen worker rights and protections over 100 years ago, when labor protections barely existed. The leadership, dedication, and great sacrifices made by APWU Chicago Local 0001 empowered postal workers to negotiate fairer wages, establish safer workplaces, and secure far better health benefits. Simply put, APWU Chicago Local 0001 has been instrumental in advancing postal workers' rights, safety and dignity.
I ask my colleagues in the Senate to join me in commemorating the USPS's 250th Anniversary and commending and thanking the dedicated postal workers--past and present--of APWU Chicago Local 0001, who have served their fellow APWU sisters and brothers over the past 120 years, and helped connect communities throughout Illinois and across our great Nation.
Mr. President, today I rise to honor the life of Corporal Grade One Matthew ``Ty'' Snook.
Corporal Grade One Snook was killed in the line of duty on December 23,
Corporal Grade One Snook's final act was one of bravery. In the words of his wife Lauren, ``He chose duty, he chose responsibility, and he chose to stand where others could be protected.''
Corporal Grade One Snook was a dedicated law enforcement officer. He loved to serve as a mentor and field trainer, and he was committed to ensuring the next generation of troopers were equipped with the knowledge and skillset to keep our community safe. But most importantly, Ty was a father, a husband, a son, a brother, an uncle, and a friend.
Born and raised in Delaware, Ty was a loyal neighbor, an authentic friend, and a courageous member of the First State community. Last week, he should have been on a vacation with his family. Instead, his family and friends were joined by hundreds of law enforcement officers, local, State, and Federal officials and broader community members to mourn his life.
His is a legacy of love and putting others before self, a legacy that will live on in the officers he trained, in his wife Lauren, in his daughter Letty, in his friends and family, in every life he touched.
To the Snook family, know we all grieve with you over this tremendous loss and that we will join you in remembering Ty for the compassionate and courageous man he was.
Mr. President, I have two requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate.
Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:
The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet in closed session during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, January 13, 2026, at 9:30 a.m.
The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, January 13, 2026, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a closed briefing.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, January 14; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed, and the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 6938.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of my colleagues.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
Mr. President, the world is undeniably round; water undeniably freezes at 32 degrees Fahrenheit; and equally undeniably, the climate is changing, and the changes in the climate are human- caused by fossil fuel emissions. Fossil fuel emissions are the primary cause.
These are facts, and they are demonstrated by sound science. Not only is climate change a demonstrated fact recognized by all sound science on the topic, but human beings have been aware of this scientific fact for over a century. The fossil fuel industry has worked to suppress that fact for nearly 60 years, but it is still a fact.
One hundred thirty years ago, in 1896, Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius concluded that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities contributed to a global ``greenhouse effect'' driving global warming. That was 1896.
In 1968, at a celebration of the hundred-year anniversary of the fossil fuel industry, the physicist Edward Teller warned that greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels cause a greenhouse effect and that increased use of fossil fuels would cause global warming and severe sea level rise. His audience, obviously, was fossil fuel executives at that event commemorating the 100 years of the fossil fuel industry.
This chart is of the famous Keeling Curve, which shows the dramatic acceleration in CO2 in the atmosphere beginning around 1950. You can see it start up in 1850, but it really kicked off after 1950.
This data, actually, from back here comes from scientists who collect core samples in glaciers, date the core samples, and can test the bubbles that are preserved in those ice core samples from ancient glaciers. I have actually been to the lab at Ohio State where a married couple of scientists had this immense freezer in which they had core after core after core of samples from glaciers, and very often, the glacier is now gone.
This chart shows the rise in global average temperatures from 1860 to now. While it jumps up and down a lot seasonally, the red line shows the average. As you see the CO2 curve accelerating, you see the global average temperature also accelerating.
Between 1968 and 2003, fossil fuel interests, including American Petroleum Institute, Exxon, and Shell, commissioned scientific reports on climate change to look into this, all of which--all of which-- concluded that climate change was happening, that greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion were the primary cause of climate change, and that the impacts of this change in our climate would be severe.
The fossil fuel industry suppressed their own scientists' findings for decades, but in 2015, investigative journalists found and leaked the suppressed internal memos. These companies knew what their business was doing all along, and they chose to hide the evidence of their own scientists and do nothing.
Not only did they know, but their own scientists' work was stunningly accurate.
This is a chart from Exxon pulled from a 1982 Exxon memo. This line in black is the predicted rise, back when this was prepared, before 1982, in CO2 concentrations. They start at 1960 and work their way to 2100. This is what Exxon predicted for CO2 concentration increase, and this lower line is what Exxon predicted for temperature increase driven by the CO2 concentration increase. The blue line is what actually happened with respect to CO2 concentration. The red line is what actually happened with respect to temperature.
Those Exxon scientists pretty well nailed it. I mean, that is very, very close, to have actual results track the Exxon predictions. But that didn't get out even though Exxon knew because the fossil fuel industry suppressed all of this.
Today, NASA maintains that ``there is unequivocal evidence''-- unequivocal evidence--``that Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate'' and that ``[h]uman activity is the principal cause'' of this warming. That is what NASA scientists say.
NASA scientists are pretty good. We are driving remotely controlled vehicles around the surface of Mars that got sent there by NASA, driving around collecting data and sending images back to Earth from Mars. When you can pull that off, you are a pretty good scientist.
This is what NASA said: ``unequivocal evidence that Earth is warming'' and that ``[h]uman activity is the principal cause.''
The United States has its own National Climate Assessments, which Congress actually mandated by law. They are the most comprehensive source for data on climate impacts in the United States. Five have been published since they were required by Congress--2000, 2009, 2014, 2018, and 2023. A sixth National Climate Assessment was due for 2028, but in 2025, the Trump administration fired all the scientists and researchers working on that project. They even shut down the website.
Why, you may ask, is the Trump administration suppressing science, firing scientists and researchers? Why won't the Trump administration protect the American people from greenhouse gas emissions? Why are they even trying to repeal the finding that these greenhouse gases are pollutants? It is pretty simple: fossil fuel industry pressure from fossil fuel industry front groups.
This is a graph I have used repeatedly on the floor before. It is put together by a scientist, Robert Brulle, who studies the science denial operation as a social and economic phenomenon. Each of these dots represents a group that propagates the fossil fuel industry's climate denial fraud campaign. As you can see, there are a lot of them. This is a big cloud of groups
By the way, voters are paying attention. A December poll found that 65 percent of American voters understand that climate change is increasing their cost of living. And we know that to be true. As chairman of the Budget Committee, I had hearing after hearing that demonstrated that.
What we see across the country is climate change driving extreme weather, sea level rise, heat waves, catastrophic wildfires, and toxic pollution. That not only drives illness and death, but it is right now as we speak undermining the insurance, mortgage, and real estate markets in places like Florida. Those parts are already in disarray. And when you can't get insurance on your home because the climate risk is uninsurable, nobody can get a mortgage on your home either, which means that when you try to sell that home, unless you are a millionaire swapping McMansions--if you are a regular person who needs a buyer who can get a mortgage on your property to sell it, it means your property becomes hard to sell. It means its value decreases.
And, in fact, in Florida you are seeing an insurance market that is in complete collapse, propped up by taxpayers to try to hold it together. You are seeing a mortgage market that is in disarray as people find they are unable to sell their properties. And Florida led the country last year in the decline in property values. It was the top State in property value decline.
This is coming at us, and it is coming at us hard. In other speeches, I have given surveys of the multiple, multiple warnings--not from green groups, not from environmentalists, but from people who understand the financial system and see this threat that is bearing down on us.
So fossil fuel's climate denial fraud is coming at American families' finances. It is real, and it is costing them.
So I have a resolution, and the punch line is very simple: One, climate change caused by fossil fuel combustion is not a hoax. I hope we can go with NASA on that. I hope we can go with Exxon on that. I hope we can go with real, measured observation of weather on that.
Second, the reality of human-caused, greenhouse-gas-driven climate change is sound science. That is essentially undisputed in the scientific community. There is a microscopic stable of people whose science usually means they show up here to testify for the fossil fuel industry to sow doubt. But once you get beyond that tiny stable of paid climate deniers, it is 99.9 percent. I mean, science is--that is as close to unanimous as science gets on this, and I urge that this body should reflect that.
And, finally, the third, Congress should protect legislatively mandated climate research programs. Science is the headlights for society. Science predicts and tells us what is coming at us. You would be a fool to turn the headlights out on your car driving onto a dark road. We are fools if we turn off the science headlights of our government as we move into increasing climate danger.
So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 550; further, that the resolution be agreed to, that the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I just want to say that I am optimistic that the Senator from Rhode Island and I agree on our goals here: that we both think the environment is important, that we both want to leave this world cleaner, healthier, and safer than we found it. I think those are great goals. And having children and grandchildren that love the great outdoors, I want to leave this world better than I found it.
But I guess where we disagree is, How are we going to get there? As a family, we have done projects like we planted over 20,000 trees on our land. We have done several water projects where we preserved wetlands. We have eliminated invasive species. We have worked with and invested in Ducks Unlimited, which does some incredible things for the environment.
What is interesting, as we think about what are the biggest impacts on the environment and what the future holds, actually, the No. 1 predictor is the world economy--that if we have a strong world economy, the carbon footprint is going to be less. So we think about: Well, why is that? And we should answer the question: Why is that so? If there is a strong world economy, then the infrastructure can be built for energy production with a smaller carbon footprint.
I think of building pipelines for natural gas, for instance, as opposed to all these countries that are still burning coal, that are burning wood and diesel fuel, heating fuel. I can't even believe that still, in America, we are burning heating fuel because we won't let natural gas pipelines go across certain areas. So a strong world economy is one of the biggest impacts on our environment's future.
And so what impacts the world economy? I think one of the things is energy. The world needs energy that is not only affordable, but it needs to be reliable and clean. It has to be all those things. And we can do that. But if you have energy production that is not affordable, that is not reliable, then people aren't going to use it, and countries aren't going to use it.
So we need this bridge. We need this bridge, and I think the solution long term is probably some form of nuclear energy. I think it is probably small modular reactors, which have zero carbon footprint. They are walkaway safe. They are not quite ready for prime time, but we are getting closer every year. And I think, within 5 to 10 years, we will have these small modular reactors powering communities and powering data centers and all those great things.
I think we have to keep in mind that it is so expensive to transport electricity. If you transport natural gas to make energy, it is a tenth of the cost that it is to transport electricity. So, again, we have to think about the equation as well as clean, but we also need to think about affordable and reliable.
I think the challenge for those of us who are actually scientists is to go back and think about all the predictions that have never, never come true from the climate alarmists. In 2013, Peter Wadhams said we would be ice free by 2015. In 2007, the IPCC said the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035; it was later retracted. In 2019, everyone's climate alarmist favorite, AOC, said the world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address the climate change. We are not quite to 2031, but we are getting there.
It doesn't do any good to be an alarmist. We need a practical approach to our environment--a practical, pragmatic, economical approach--and I look forward to the day when my friends across the aisle want to sit down with Republicans and have a real conversation about how we get there.
And, again, I am just committed to leaving this world cleaner, healthier, and safer. I don't believe that we can go along with my colleague from Rhode Island's resolution here, and for that reason I object.
Mr. President, let me just remind everyone who is listening what this resolution resolved--three simple points: One, climate change is not a hoax. Two, climate science is actually sound science. And, three, we shouldn't turn off our research headlights that tell us what is coming at us.
That was all. All we had to agree on was basic facts. So when my friends on the other side can't agree on facts that are so basic as climate change is real, the science is sound, and we should keep our headlights on as we drive into this unprecedented new hazard, it is hard to see how we move on from there.
I agree very much with my friend from Kansas that energy that is affordable, reliable, and clean is our common
In fact, Iowa, which has the biggest wind component of its electric grid, has actually treated wind as reliable baseload energy because where one turbine might not be spinning, there are plenty of others that are. So the people who plan for making sure that the lights don't go out--technical people--actually treat wind as reliable baseload energy through formulas that that ISO has developed.
And clean? Yes, it is clean. It burns no fossil fuel.
And yet the Trump administration twice has tried to shut down that project--twice. Just yesterday, they got blown up in Federal court for the second time when they tried for the second time to shut down that project. After $5 billion had been invested in it, they wanted to shut it down.
So we have the way to go forward, but the administration doesn't want to go forward. They want to sabotage a wind project that will bring power onto the grid at about half the current grid cost.
Our attorney general in those proceedings proposed an affidavit and, in his pleadings, said that Revolution Wind would save hundreds of millions of dollars for New England customers.
The Trump Cabinet is running around pretending that that is not true. They pretend that it is expensive. They lie.
They had a chance to come into court, where it is a little harder to lie, and say: Oh, no, you are wrong. Your affidavit asserting hundreds of millions of dollars in savings when this comes online is wrong, and here is our case for why 9 cents is bigger than 18 cents or 9 cents isn't real--or whatever it is that they wanted to say.
They didn't. They didn't pipe up at all because they couldn't, because it is not true, and every grid operator proves that by calling up clean energy first because it is less expensive.
Again, these are technical people. They don't have a point to make. Their system calls the least expensive energy up first, and once you get through nukes and hydro, you are into solar, wind, and battery. And it is only once you are through all of that that you then get into the fossil fuel plants, because they are more expensive, and every grid operator can prove that to you in the way they actually operate our electric grids. They call up clean energy first because it is less expensive, period.
So it is unfortunate that here we are with this web of denial controlling so much of what happens in this building--fossil fuel industry dark money slashing through this building--and we can't get agreement that climate change is not a hoax, that climate science is sound science, and that we shouldn't turn off our research headlights as we go into the future.
Before I yield, let me just point out that the University of Kansas teaches climate science. The University of Kansas teaches climate science. It even teaches about this stuff. It has a course called ``Anti-Environmentalism and Climate Change Denial in America,'' in addition to a ``Climate and Climate Change'' course, a ``Climate Change and Hazards Planning'' course, and a ``Climate Science'' course.
When your home State university is teaching the science of climate change, you ought to be able to agree that climate science is real and that climate change is not a hoax.
Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Rhode Island for his leadership and his clarity, and I want to underscore one of the most basic points that has to be made. And this is how times have changed.
We have changed what we are talking about because energy systems change, prices change, needs change, and the load changes. Right? But hearing the Senator from Kansas, it could have been 1998 or 2008 or 2018. It is the same talking points, and it is literally not true anymore.
There was a time when you could actually credibly say: Look, I understand there is a planetary emergency. But coal is so cheap. People are struggling. We have to balance the planetary emergency with the need for people to be able to cool and heat their homes and keep their lights on and all the rest of it.
All of that is out the window. Why? Because clean is cheap and cheap is clean. Clean energy is now the cheapest kind of electricity that we can get on the grid in any kind of reasonable timeframe.
There was a time where it was coal. That is definitely more expensive now. There was a time where it was gas, but the cost of gas keeps going up and up and up, for a couple of reasons--because we are exporting a lot of our gas but also because the turbines needed to convert natural gas into electrons--there is a huge backlog of them.
So we have an industrial renaissance happening in certain States, and we have all of this AI data center load coming up, and we have your normal American economy stuff happening. There are not enough electrons on the grid.
What happens when there is not enough of something? The people selling that thing raise the price. And that is exactly what is happening.
That is not a rhetorical flourish. Like, they have overnight prices. They have people whose job it is to find how we are going to meet everybody's needs, so when you flick that switch, everything just works. There are technicians in front of probably three or four screens figuring out ``OK. I am going to buy this. This is the overnight price. This is the backup,'' all that.
What has changed over the last couple of years is that solar energy is it. Even if you don't care at all about the climate, you should still love solar energy. Why? Because nobody should be enthused about paying more for electricity.
What Donald Trump has done is very unique in American history, maybe even in world history--I am not too sure. It is normal for a President of the United States to try to alleviate economic pain for the citizens of the United States, and this is certainly the first President that I have experienced in the U.S. Senate but honestly the first President that I have even been aware of who is intentionally raising the price of something that we all need.
It is Secretary Burgum's order, and it is the way Secretary Wright is behaving, and it is the way Lee Zeldin is behaving, and it is the way people in the White House are behaving. They want to create a shortage of electricity. Why? First, they have ideology against solar and wind. Trump has a particular idea about wind and golf courses and birds or whatever. But they viewed, 10 years ago, solar as a kind of ideological project, as like a nice to have, United Nations, utopian view of the world.
Well, listen, solar is the most pragmatic thing we can put on the grid. Solar is really the only thing that is ready quickly. Why? Because nuclear energy has tremendous potential but is at least an 8- to 12-year timeframe, so we are talking about the 2030s. Geothermal also has tremendous potential, but they have not worked out all of the technical issues. And again, that is really a 2030 to 2040 play.
In the short run, we have a shortage. In the short run, we have a shortage, and Donald Trump is making it worse. Now, why would you make it worse? Well, when there are shortages of something, the people selling the thing get to charge more, and they are charging more.
So you, as the consumer--and again, I care deeply about this planetary crisis. It is actually the main reason I am in the U.S. Senate. I care deeply about this. But even if you don't, nobody wants to pay more than necessary on their electricity bills, and this national solar ban is making everybody pay more.
One in four Americans struggles to pay their electricity bills--one in four Americans. So what is Trump doing about it? Well, it is definitely worse than nothing.
The criticism about Biden during the inflation crisis was that he wasn't doing enough about inflation, but this is a different criticism. This is deliberate policy choices to drive up the cost of something that everybody needs.
By the way, that is also true for food and health insurance and electricity. All the stuff you need, he is creating a shortage of. Why? Because when there are shortages, people have to petition the King for mercy, and that is what is going on right now.
If you are close to him, if you can get dinner with him at Mar-a- Lago, you can get relief. There is enough money in the system for lots of people to get wealthy, but there is not enough money for a regular person living in Kaimuki, Honolulu, already paying three or four times the average electricity rate, paying more and more and more because there is a national policy driven by the President of the United States to create a shortage of electrons because he has decided that climate action is against his interests.
I think, if we are going to move forward on permitting reform but if we are going to move forward more generally on the question of affordability, we have to say that shortages are bad for prices. When there is not enough of something, people charge too much, and right now, we need as many electrons on the grid as we can possibly get, which means we need interstate transmission, and we need to not just permit new projects but at a minimum let the projects that have been almost totally built be plugged into the grid.
So this is not a climate speech; this is a ``people can't afford their electricity bills'' speech. And I just hope some of my Republican colleagues understand they have to abandon their old talking points because they don't apply anymore.
In Rhode Island, we have a grid. ISO New England it is called. It is through that grid that electrons get from powerplant to the grid and from the grid to people's homes, and it is run as a basically common utility.
I assume Hawaii, which is geographically quite distinct, has its own grid.
So on our grid, this Revolution Wind project, as I said, is going to come on at 9 cents per kilowatt hour into a market where the prevailing rate is 18 cents. So if President Trump and his minions at Interior and EPW and Energy can stop that plant, they are making Rhode Islanders, New Englanders, buy 18-cent power instead of 9-cent power. So that raises the price for everybody.
By the way, for those of you who are listening, the ISO grid, like almost all the others--the price at any given minute on the grid for electricity is set by the highest cost plant that has to operate to meet that level of demand. So if you can get that 9-cent cost to be the highest cost, that is it for everybody, but if you got to go back to 18, that is also it for everybody. That plant just doesn't raise costs to pay itself back; it raises grid costs for every electron that is running at that same time.
So what that produces is, sticking with the 9- and 18-cent example, the 18-cent cost comes out of ratepayers' pockets. They have to pay their electric bill at 18 cents. They could have paid only 9 cents; instead, they are going to pay 18. The difference is going to go to the fossil fuel industry, to the big donors of Trump.
I call this a scam that Trump and his minions, for their big fossil fuel donors, are deliberately holding clean energy off the grid, which is cheaper, so that the grid can't go to it, has to go to higher and higher cost fossil fuel plants, so consumer costs go up. But that additional money that consumers have to pay goes to the fossil fuel industry, which gave him hundreds of millions of dollars to be elected, and this is payback for them.
Only Trump is no fool. Why pay it back himself or ask his political supporters to pay it back when he can go to electric consumers and bury it in their bill and make consumers pay to send hundreds of millions of dollars to these big donors.
Well, our grid is different, obviously, because we have a series of islands, and they are kind of self-contained grids. But our challenge is, to meet the load, we need electrons. And we do the dirtiest and most expensive thing, which is to light low-sulfur fuel oil on fire to create electrons. That is just north of like, you know, wood-burning stoves in terms of its efficiency. It is not a good way to do it economically, and it is not a good way to do it in terms of climate impact.
So the Hawaiian Electric Company has a bunch of clean-energy projects on the grid because we have--the net capacity factors for our wind project on land are comparable to offshore wind. That is how much the wind blows in parts of essentially Maui and Hawaii Island. The southern part of Hawaii Island is incredible. People don't believe the numbers until they go down there and measure them. It is as if it is an offshore wind platform, but it is land-based. So we have ample resources to power our grid.
When I was a kid in the Hawaii Legislature, I still remember the Hawaiian Electric Company would come and testify and say: The maximum penetration of renewables onto the grid is 15 percent. After that, you get power quality problems.
By the way, that was true when that person studied electrical engineering in the seventies. That was actually true. The person wasn't lying. It is just that we have figured out a lot of this. It is not that we don't continue to need dispatchable power or baseload power; it is that grids are getting really, really smart and capable of handling high penetration of intermittent renewable energy. And when you layer them on top of each other, they are no longer functionally intermittent.
So I kind of was like--I am sort of like from the future, right, because 10 years ago, 15 years ago, it was cheaper for us to move in the direction of clean energy in Hawaii, but you couldn't say that on the continental United States side. And we moved in that direction as fast as we possibly could and tried to provide some measure of relief for ratepayers.
But now what is going to happen is we are going to have to buy a bunch of electrons in the most expensive fashion. We are the most isolated majorly populated place on the planet, and everybody pays more for everything, and now electricity bills are going to go up because of the OBBA.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
