Tribute to Sergeant Eric Levasseur
Mr. President, I rise today to honor a true hero with the Florida's Finest Award. It is so important that we as Members of Congress recognize those who bravely step up to serve and in their own way, whether personally or professionally, preserve our democracy and preserve this Nation's commitment to the rule of law. Certainly, as the wife of a law enforcement officer, I have always been so proud to do this and recognize some of our bravest among our Florida heroes-- Florida law enforcement.
Back in December, Port St. Lucie police sergeant Eric Levasseur--a 27-year veteran of the force--was brutally shot twice in the face when responding to a residence where a suspect emerged, armed with a rifle, and opened fired on him. This happened back on December 6. It was a routine response to a call for help, a call for service. That call stemmed from a neighbor dispute, and it involved a mental health issue.
Certainly, as police officers are called upon every day to show up in neighborhoods and answer these calls for service, he had no idea what awaited him. When Sergeant Levasseur and other officers arrived at the scene, they encountered an armed male suspect. The police report shows that when they arrived on scene, this person emerged from the garage, hoisting a gun and firing shots immediately. He attempted to run at and flank them--covering them with bullets.
Sergeant Levasseur was struck twice--one bullet near his nose and another just beneath it. They are one-in-a-million injuries that narrowly avoided major arteries and brain trauma.
Other officers on scene subdued the suspect, but Sergeant Levasseur's journey to recovery was just beginning. He underwent five surgeries-- two on his eyes to remove shrapnel and three others on his face. From the beginning of those recovery efforts, he repeatedly said--again, this is someone who is a 27-year veteran on the force. He said repeatedly that he was looking forward to getting back to work to continue to serve his community, to show up for others when they call for help.
In March, he was surrounded by family, friends, and fellow officers when he received a law enforcement Purple Heart from the Port St. Lucie Police Department for his service.
Since that tragic day, Sergeant Levasseur's courage and sacrifice have been repeatedly recognized by people throughout his community and even across our Nation.
Earlier this year, he was honored with a Valor Award from the First Responders Foundation, which was a fitting tribute to an officer who demonstrated extraordinary bravery in the face of danger.
Another really meaningful gesture and recognition came from a fellow American who understood sacrifice in a deeply personal way. A local veteran in Florida, SSgt Thomas Mateo, chose to present Sergeant Levasseur with one of his own Purple Heart medals--a distinction that he earned through his service to our Nation. Mateo had also served in law enforcement and had earned six Purple Hearts over two deployments to Vietnam in the 1960s. Two weeks after Sergeant Levasseur was shot in action, Mateo placed one of his own Purple Hearts in a box and presented it to St. Lucie police chief Leo Niemczyk to give to Sergeant Levasseur.
The Purple Heart, as the Presiding Officer knows, is one of our Nation's most revered symbols of courage and sacrifice. For a veteran to entrust and present his own medal to Sergeant Levasseur was a profound recognition of the selflessness he displayed while protecting his fellow officers and the community he serves.
It takes a very special person to become a law enforcement officer. I can tell you that, having served as a prosecutor, as a judge, and as the wife of a law enforcement officer, I have watched those who sign up and say they will put their safety behind the safety of others. It takes someone willing to face uncertainty, as was realized here, and not knowing what ultimately a shift may bring. It takes someone with a family who will back them to do that. Not everyone is cut out for it.
For those who swear the oath and wear the badge to protect and serve, we are so grateful for their service and sacrifice.
Sergeant Levasseur's 27 years of service, his courage under fire, and his determination throughout recovery show that he is truly cut from a different cloth.
It is my privilege to recognize Sergeant Levasseur today on the Senate floor with the Florida's Finest Award in recognition by this Congress and to share my gratitude and appreciation for his dedicated service to not only his community but to our great, free State of Florida. It is people like him who truly make Florida the envy of the Nation and a stronger and safer State.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. President, look at this card. Whoa, talk about something of convenience. I can go down right now and buy some coffee and put a chip. Boom, I have got my coffee. The money just goes out like that.
I can go online to Amazon and order something, click in my number. Boom, I get that good delivered. It is so easy and so seamless.
Now, this which makes our lives so much better--so much better--can be perceived as a lifeline for a family struggling to pay their bills because they can swipe and pay the bill when they don't have the money in the account to cover with a check.
Now, the problem is, that lifeline can become a noose around the neck and drag them to the bottom of the ocean--an ocean of debt. This is not a theoretical.
We know that debt is a major driver of marital problems. They can't agree on money; the young couple breaks up. They have a child; the child grows up in a broken home. Money debt can just drive a wedge into a marriage with generational effects upon how future generations do.
Now, it is convenient, and it is a weight. So let's talk about whether this is theoretical or not. The typical middle-income family in our Nation has an average of almost--somewhere around--$10,000 of credit card debt.
Now, if we are speaking about a family making $80,000 a year, which is kind of an average income, and they have got $10,000 of credit card debt, they are not paying off that debt every month. They are sitting on that, paying 18 to 22 percent in interest. They are the ones who are suffering with that noose that gets tighter and tighter and tighter.
So where does the debt come from? Some of it is groceries. Some of it is gasoline. A lot of it is medical expenses.
Somebody who has a health insurance policy with a $6,000 deductible, they would have to pay 6k. They don't have 6k, and they use their credit card, and that credit card debt mounts up.
Mr. President, 60 percent of personal bankruptcies have to do with medical
Now, we have got to do something, and Congress can't do it by itself. The executive branch can't do it by itself. It is something that we must do together.
Whenever I see the executive branch put out another Executive order, I kind of smile. Executive orders will be repealed by the next President of a different party, who will do a word search and, boom, every one is redone. And the family who thought they were getting relief gets no relief whatsoever.
It has got to be something that we in Congress do, but we can only get something done if the executive branch engages.
Now, Mr. President, I am not speaking to you just a second. I am speaking to President Trump.
Mr. President--Mr. President Trump--get engaged. Mr. President, too many people have this debt--$10,000 on their credit card, related to paying, in part, for things such as medical expenses, and they are going down. That is something that we, Mr. President--you, the President, and we, as Congress--must engage upon.
And, by the way, Mr. President, I just so much want to work with you on that. If you invite me to the White House to bring a plan, which I am about to describe, to work with you to have your impression upon it, let's do it.
We may have differences. I have no difference with anyone who wants to truly help the American people and who truly acknowledges that they are putting expenses on this because they don't have the money in their banking account, and then they are paying 22 percent in interest.
Mr. President, let's do it together.
Mr. President--Mr. President Trump--your instincts were correct as we were debating the extension of the enhanced premium tax credits. You said we should not send money to insurance companies; we should send them to the patient. I am all with you on that, Mr. President. Right now, I am all with you because, right now, we are sending taxpayer money to the insurance companies, and premiums are going up.
The employer is paying more to provide employer-sponsored insurance for the employee, who is paying higher premiums but the deductibles are higher.
Hospitals are doing well. Insurance companies are doing really well. Mr. President Trump, it is the consumer, the patient, the employee at the firm who is doing poorly. And it is the employer who can't afford to hire more workers because the employer is putting more and more money into benefits--not into salary, not into raising wages--into paying higher premiums to the insurance company.
We can do better than that.
So the idea I have, I call it the MVP Plan--the Money and Value for Patients Plan. And just like that, Mr. President Trump, you argued in the debate over the enhanced premium tax cut renewal: Let's give money to the individual, not to the insurance company, because if you give money to the insurance company, they take at least 20 percent of it for profit and overhead.
If you give it to the patient, 100 percent goes to the care they know they need. It takes power from the bureaucrats and middlemen, and you give it to the patient.
I am a physician. I learned long ago: You give power to the patient, and the patient does better. Let's give the power of the purse to the patient.
And we call it the V because you can have price transparency. And there are people in the private sector right now coming up with apps, and you scan your phone: urgent care center near me. It will tell you where that urgent care center is that is the best value for your dollar, because they have been able to figure out how much these urgent care centers charge.
By the way, we are working in the Health Committee, the committee that I chair, to improve the power of price transparency so the patient will have even more information.
So money in the pocket with value to the patient--that is the MVP Plan.
What is happening now? Well, we send money to the insurance company. As we said earlier, the employer is paying more, the patient is paying more, and insurance companies are making more money. Indeed, at some point, it seems like the patient is the excuse for profit for those providing the care, not the reason for the care in the first place. We have got to do better by the patient.
Now, in this part, giving money to the patient, we acknowledge that, right now, the Federal Government heavily subsidizes insurance premiums. What both the employer pays on behalf of the employee and what the employee pays toward his or her policy is heavily subsidized by the Federal Government. We change that subsidy so that money goes into a health savings account.
And for those who are not familiar with a health savings account, it is like money in your wallet. You may have a card, but the card pulls away from your bank account.
And when you go to your phone and say, ``Give me the best place to take my daughter with an earache,'' and they tell you this place is $50 and that place is $150, you go to the place that charges you $50, you swipe your card, and it is paid for. It doesn't go on a credit card. It comes out of your account, but your account has been prefunded by this mechanism.
This, Mr. President, is a way to give immediate relief to a family who is currently struggling with the cost of living. We can do this in this Congress and get it ready for next year. That is what we must do.
And, one more time, instead of putting more money toward an insurance company, which takes 20 percent for profit and overhead, we are giving money to the patient so that she can use 100 percent for the care she needs.
By the way, when we give somebody a policy with a $6,000 deductible or a $3,000 deductible, families don't have $3,000. That is why they are putting it on their credit card.
No, this gives them money up front to pay for that upfront expense, and that is the value in the MVP Plan. We give the power to her, to the mom, who is taking care of her family. We give her the power of price. We give her the power of knowing where the most value is.
And, one more time, this echoes what President Trump advocated in the debate about enhanced premium tax credits.
Mr. Presiding President and President Trump, we can help people from using this credit card as a financial lifeline, which ultimately drags them down to death in an ocean of debt into bankruptcy. We can give them the power.
Mr. President, I stand ready to meet with you or your administration. Mr. President, let's do it together. If we don't do it together, it won't be done. If it is not the President and the Congress working together, we will not save the American people with $10,000 of credit card debt, on average, going into medical bankruptcy.
Mr. President, show that you care about the people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Secure America Act
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 5453 and ask that it be reported by number.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Mr. Thune. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of Amendments.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Mr. President, 75 years ago, the voice of rural Nebraska made its debate on air. Broadcasting from Lexington, NE, farm families officially had a voice--KRVN.
KRVN doesn't just cover rural Nebraska, though; it belongs to rural Nebraska. The station started out of necessity. Blizzards in the winters of 1948 and 1949 killed farmers and ranchers. Livestock and crops were lost, causing economic hardships. Women and children were left worrying about their husbands and dads. Farming and ranching families were also struggling to get relevant news and government updates. Our agriculture communities were facing a bleak reality: Timely, lifesaving information was nearly impossible to come by.
In an industry that moves at the speed of information, this was unacceptable. Agricultural economist and cooperative leader Max Brown had an idea. Max believed he could organize rural Nebraskans to fill the need. He envisioned a farmer- and rancher-owned public service platform for agriculture, weather, markets, and rural education.
This idea was untested and widely doubted. Despite this, 4,719 farmers and ranchers each bought a 10-dollar share to become owners of KRVN. On February 1, 1951, KRVN had its first broadcast. From this humble beginning, the station grew. Max hired well, mentored his staff, and made sure everyone knew KRVN's vision. Max's vision continued through the stewardship of his son Eric, whom I knew when he worked at KRVN, and folks like Otto Geiger. Otto served for more than 30 years on the Nebraska Rural Radio Association board. They both guided the station through agricultural and media change while preserving its farmer-owned identity.
Since its beginning, rural Nebraskans have received the info they need when they need it. Our rural communities are safer and better informed.
Today, KRVN is the flagship of the Rural Radio Network. It is the only farmer- and rancher-owned news network in the country. The founding charter doesn't allow any of the joint owners to profit. Revenues are reinvested into the station and into agricultural education. KRVN's unique ownership model and community commitment remain strong.
We now have Nebraskans from multiple generations who can say they grew up with the voices of KRVN from dawn to dusk. The voices of radio legends like Dave Thorell kept Nebraskans company on long drives, and Jayson Jorgensen brings play-by-play coverage of local high school sports into our homes.
Even amid unprecedented disaster, Nebraskans know we can rely on KRVN for lifesaving updates. Their coverage has included special wildlife broadcasts to help ranchers recover and find resources for rebuilding. They kept us informed on State politics and ag markets, and they kept us prepared during disasters.
Over the last 75 years, KRVN has kept public service at the core of its work. Over the last 75 years, KRVN has been there for Nebraskans, and the need for KRVN still remains. AM radio stations in Nebraska and around the country are still the lifeblood of rural communities.
In the Senate, I am working to preserve this important service. Every vehicle sold in the United States should be equipped with AM broadcast radio at no charge. In Nebraska, we know this is common sense. My AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act would do that.
KRVN was a necessity at its origin, and it remains a necessity today. Thank you to our farmers and ranchers who have made KRVN possible. I look forward to KRVN's next 75 years.
Mr. President, I have another matter I am going to talk about--the work that needs to be done on the Senate floor today. To protect Americans and our national security, we must fund Border Patrol and ICE.
Senate Republicans have a narrow bill to do this. Our bill only funds Border Patrol and ICE. Senate Democrats refuse to vote for it, putting every American at risk. They are falling back on the typical ``defund the police'' agenda and lack of support for law enforcement. Their refusal is a clear threat to our national security.
Democrats stood by while President Biden and his open border policies allowed every State to become a border State, putting communities across America, including Nebraska, at risk.
They released at least 99 illegal aliens on the Terrorist Watchlist into American communities, including 3 with potential ISIS ties.
They have prioritized the care of illegal immigrants over Americans. Let me give you two examples: When Laken Riley a 22-year-old college student was murdered by an illegal immigrant, Republicans introduced legislation to make sure no other families have to live through the same tragedy as Laken's family had to live through. The legislation was common sense. If an illegal immigrant breaks the law, they have to be held accountable, and ICE has to do their job of picking that person up.
A majority of Democrats refused to support this commonsense solution. When our brave troops successfully captured the Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, Democrats were more concerned about the operation than national security. Maduro is a narcoterrorist responsible for the deaths of countless Americans. He was a puppet of our adversaries, like Communist China, Russia, and Iran. Simply put, he was a threat to our national security. Capturing him was a win for Americans and our national security.
Democrats didn't see it that way. The reality, though, is that President Trump campaigned on securing the border. He won an overwhelming majority of votes from Americans. The American people voted for stronger national security. Republicans have worked with this administration to secure their border and deliver for the American people.
To maintain this strong national security, we need to fund ICE and Border Patrol. I am ready to vote with my Senate Republican colleagues today. Democrats cannot delay this vote any longer. We want to get this done for the American people. Everything else is a distraction.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. President, I ask time used by Democratic speakers during today's session count towards the bill S. 2.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. President, ever since the capture of Nicolas Maduro, the Trump administration has been ratcheting up pressure on Cuba in the hope that Cuba's leaders will either capitulate or the Cuban people will rise up and overthrow them.
Three months ago President Trump said:
Like so many of the President's apocalyptic predictions, there is no sign the administration wants to negotiate a deal, and Cuba has not fallen. Instead, the United States oil blockade, which if the tables were turned every one of us would denounce as an illegal act of war, has absolutely paralyzed Cuba's economy. It has plunged the Cuban people into darkness and to misery.
Then on May 20, the Department of Justice announced that it had indicted former Cuban President Raul Castro who is 95. Another U.S. aircraft carrier group has been sent to the Caribbean. The writing on the wall is unmistakable. President Trump is tiptoeing up to leading us into another reckless war, this time with Cuba.
Cuba is a bankrupt country. It is smaller than Virginia. It has neither the capacity nor intention to threaten the United States. And even before the Trump administration cut off the oil, Cuba's economy was barely functioning. Today, electricity is unavailable for most hours of the day and night across the entire island.
So this means that hospitals, schools, factories, food production have ground to a halt. Havana's streets are overflowing with garbage. The country is facing economic collapse literally, and the United States is complicit in that. In fact, that is the point of the U.S. actions.
By causing Cuba's economy to collapse and leaving millions of innocent Cubans without enough food or access to medical care, the White House hopes to create a ``national security emergency.''
It seeks to justify regime change, including, if necessary, using military force. President Trump has repeatedly threatened to use force against Cuba. Without any legal justification he has said:
You know, the reason Cuba is ``down to fumes'' is due to its own government's repressive failed policies and because of the United States oil blockade. But no American President under any circumstances, friendly or unfriendly, should threaten to take over another sovereign nation that poses no imminent or credible threat to our country. And no U.S. Congress should condone such flagrant misuse of military power.
You know, there is plenty of blame to go around for how we got to this point. Cuba's leaders whose priority is holding on to power systematically violate the rights of the Cuban people and align themselves ideologically with some of the world's worst regimes.
The Cuban military's corrupt grip on the economy has practically ruined the economy, and that is on Cuban leadership. But for our part, the United States has tried to overthrow the Cuban government by armed invasion, by assassination, financing Cuban dissidents, and imposing a web of punitive sanctions with extraterritorial reach. Yet after 65 years, the U.S. embargo has not achieved any of its goals. Instead, it has contributed to the daily suffering of the innocent Cuban people.
There is no doubt that political and economic changes in Cuba are long overdue. Neither is sufficient by itself. The Cuban people, 90 percent of whom were born after the 1959 revolution, want leaders who accept the need for fundamental changes in how to govern, with greater participation of the people, greater transparency, greater freedom, and real accountability.
But attacking Cuba would be another reckless and illegal use of United States military power. And no matter what hyperbolic or false accusations are used as a pretext for attacking Cuba, Cuba poses no credible threat to the United States.
Instead of starting another unnecessary war, the United States and Cuba can and must negotiate a deal that puts United States national interests and the needs and aspirations of the Cuban people first.
And, you know, the elements of the deal are pretty obvious. On the United States side, President Trump needs to end restrictions on travel by Americans to Cuba--many Vermonters, when that was allowed, went to Cuba, many Americans did--and should support Cuba's struggling private sector. We should support that.
The President should remove Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. That has no credible legal or factual basis, and no other country agrees with us on that designation. And it should also, the administration, call on Congress to repeal the failed embargo so that reconstruction can begin.
On the Cuban side, Cuba's leaders' only choice is to make a deal. They are staring, literally, at the barrel of a gun. They need to end the military's control of the economy. They need to take steps for American companies to invest in Cuba and help rebuild the country's broken infrastructure. Cuba's leaders must release all political dissidents and accept the right of the Cuban people to express themselves freely and without fear of persecution.
If President Trump and Cuba's leaders take these steps, they could finally put the last vestige of the Cold War in this hemisphere behind us.
But that, regrettably, is not where President Trump is leading us. And like Maduro, Cuba's leaders have always cared more about their own privileges and power than the welfare of the Cuban people.
Nobody here or in Cuba should be under any illusions. An unauthorized, unjustified, reckless war with Cuba is where we are headed. The United States has one playbook that fits all, and that is its approach to dealing with regimes that it doesn't like: pile on the economic sanctions, threaten to wipe them off the face of the Earth, and when that fails, attack.
There is no plan B if things don't go as predicted, no plan for what comes next, and no plan for how to pay for it. A United States invasion of Cuba with warplanes and missiles and Special Forces would pose real risks for the United States, for our troops, and for the Cuban people.
It almost certainly would not be a repeat of the swift capture of Maduro. More likely, Cuba's leaders, sworn and determined to defend their failed revolution, would not give up easily. The fighting could go on for weeks or months.
And assuming they would all eventually flee or be captured or killed, who would govern Cuba? Who would prevent the country from descending into lawlessness and becoming a haven for transnational criminals? Who would be responsible for public services? There is no Cuban Delcy Rodriguez, nor any organized political opposition.
The American people would be saddled with the immense cost of providing security and rebuilding Cuba from the ground up, while millions of Cubans would likely abandon the island to seek refuge in the United States.
The American people overwhelmingly do not want a war with Cuba, especially not after the costly, ill-conceived debacle in Iran, which has defied all the administration's rosy predictions. Rather than causing more suffering and more chaos in Cuba and triggering yet another refugee crisis 90 miles from Florida, President Trump could make history through effective--effective--deal making, not by a violent takeover financed by American taxpayers.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. President, on Monday, Tina Peters walked out of prison. The convicted felon and former county clerk is free after serving less than a quarter of her sentence, a sentence she earned when she violated her oath and tried to undermine Colorado's free and fair elections.
That doesn't just make her a conspiracy theorist; it makes her a criminal. Tina Peters had her day in court. She was prosecuted by a Republican district attorney and convicted by a jury of her peers in a Republican stronghold. The verdict was unanimous. Tina Peters was guilty as sin. But if you ask the Trump administration, they believe she needs and deserves a payday.
Last month, the Department of Justice announced the creation of a $1.8 billion fund, a slush fund--can't call it anything else--for criminals just like Tina Peters.
President Trump plans to hand out nearly $2 billion of your tax money, taxpayer dollars, to January 6 rioters, to wealthy business partners, and people who have attacked democracy.
We are going to do everything we can to make sure that doesn't happen. The Acting Attorney General says they will no longer pursue this slush fund. I am not sure I believe that for 1 second.
The only promises this administration has seemed to keep are to billionaires and President Trump's cronies. The President calls it the ``Art of the Deal.'' Well, what is the deal? The taxpayers pay in; his allies get payouts?
This administration isn't just trying to give your tax dollars to criminals. They are spending literally trillions of dollars, when you add it up, trillions of dollars on bombs and tax breaks for billionaires. And what do Americans get in return? Higher bills, benefits that have been gutted, and a tab that they never agreed to pick up.
While the Trump administration is busy cashing in, people working-- the so-called working people of America--are facing a cost-of-living emergency. The President's war in Iran--his war of choice--is sending costs through the roof. The costs are already adding up. On energy alone, Americans have spent an average of $450 per person more since the start of this war. Gas in Colorado is now roughly $4.50 a gallon. Before the year is out, Americans will spend hundreds of dollars more than they would have before just on groceries.
Here is how bad it has gotten. Americans now carry a record $1.25 trillion in credit card debt. That is the highest level since the stock market crashed in 2008. That is the equivalent of every single American owing $3,600. That is not a working class that is thriving. That is one that is barely surviving.
And here is the cruel reality: People are working harder than ever. Coloradans are doing everything they can to hold up their end of the bargain--long days, multiple jobs, paying taxes. But the more they contribute, the less they get back, the less they get in return.
And there is a clear explanation for this: The President doled out roughly $4 trillion in tax breaks--so that is over 10 years--but roughly $4 trillion in tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans so that the largest corporations, so the wealthiest individuals like him, can skip their taxes. And to pay for it, they slashed--over 10 years, they slashed $1 trillion from the healthcare of Americans. That is astounding.
Trump's tariffs generated $133 billion. Nearly every dollar came right out of the pocket of American consumers' pockets--an average of more than $1,000 a person.
Now, the Supreme Court ruled that these tariffs were illegal, and a Federal court ordered the administration to repay American businesses. Has the government responded? Have they complied? No, of course not. They are using every excuse they can to resist. They have failed to pay back the $166 billion that they owe. Even worse, just yesterday, President Trump announced new tariffs on 59 countries, in addition to the European Union.
When they are not busy taxing Americans, the Trump administration is pouring hundreds of millions into this new ballroom. Meanwhile, 9,000 families in Colorado just lost their SNAP benefits. That is their food stamps, their nutrition. Our economy is leaving too many Americans behind.
Just talk to Leah, a young woman I met recently at a healthcare roundtable in Colorado Springs. She is the full-time medical caregiver for her daughter Victoria, who was diagnosed as a baby with spina bifida. Victoria is a paraplegic, fed through a tube, and requires a ventilator.
Leah works around the clock to keep her child alive. That hard work is about to get even harder. This year, Leah's income will be cut by 40 percent as a direct result of this administration's Medicaid cuts. That cut puts her daughter's life at risk.
The Trump administration claims these Medicaid cuts were about preventing graft and fraud, but there is clearly no fraud whatsoever in a mother doing everything she can, trying to keep her child alive.
Leah doesn't even know if they will be able to keep their house, whether they will have enough money to make their payments. That house had been specifically fitted to take care of Victoria's needs.
Without Leah's around-the-clock care, Victoria would have to be institutionalized in an acute care facility at a dramatically higher cost. Now, that is waste. It might not be fraud, but that is waste.
Leah is living every parent's worst nightmare. She works as hard as she possibly can every day to try and keep her child alive, and now it is still not enough. So many Americans are living with these kinds of fears.
At a local nonprofit in Boulder--I take that back. At a local nonprofit in Denver, I met a woman named Brittany, who told me that healthcare is one of her biggest stressors, one of the major things that causes her emotional stress.
Brittany's daughter recently had a severe asthma attack. Brittany watched her daughter gasp for breath and begin to turn blue. In that split second, she faced a second fear. Should she rush her daughter to the hospital herself and risk the drive with no one to care for her daughter or call an ambulance, which she knew she wouldn't be able to afford?
That is a fear no parent should have to live with. The Trump administration made it a reality because they chose these tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country, many of whom--if not most of whom--don't even want the tax breaks. But they chose tax breaks for these billionaires over healthcare for working people.
At another event in Denver, I met Luisa, who spends $90 a week on gas as she drives 28 miles to work and home every day. She had moved farther from Denver because the housing was more affordable. Now she wonders if she made the right choice.
Luisa is watching costs increase while she takes home less every week. She does everything she can to insulate her kids from fear--from her fear. On weekends, she tries to take her kids to the park right about lunchtime. She hopes they are too busy playing to remember how hungry they are. As she says, ``It's one less meal to buy.''
Our country is measured in these moments: the way we care for the most vulnerable, the life-or-death journey between the house and the hospital, the cost to fill an empty refrigerator.
By every measure, our President--President Trump--is failing. He has run up costs; he has paid himself and his friends; and he has stuck Americans with the tab, waiting for Americans to pay the bill.
This is the moment where we decide whether that is acceptable-- whether the people who work the hardest, already pay the most, and ask for the least finally get a country that works for them. It is a question that echoes throughout our entire history, one that built the Civil Rights Movement, women's suffrage, and the long fight for workers to have a seat at the table.
At its core, it is the American question: Whom does this country actually work for? This administration has given their answer to Coloradans. Leah from Colorado Springs will lose close to $80,000 in support. Brittany calculates the cost of an ambulance while her daughter is turning blue and can't breathe. Luisa hopes her kids will not remember that they are hungry.
Americans fund the system. Trump takes billions for himself, and Americans--Americans--get the shaft.
We know there is a better way. Americans have held up their end of the bargain long enough, with long days and multiple jobs and taxes paid over long periods of time. They have earned more than a slush fund for felons, more than a government that builds ballrooms while 9,000 Coloradans lose their groceries. And these are families that are struggling to put food on
And we have introduced an amendment to stop elected criminals like Tina Peters from getting a dime of your taxpayer dollars. Soon, Republicans are going to be forced to vote on it. So while hard-working Americans struggle with rising costs, those who undermine our elections are the last people our government should subsidize, the last people that should ever get your hard-earned tax dollars.
We need to put an end to the slush fund. We need to put that end in writing so the Trump administration can't change their mind later on. Working Americans have paid in too long to keep getting played, and we will fight tooth and nail to make sure they get what they are owed.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. President, before I begin my remarks that I wanted to speak on today about law and order, I do have a couple of comments I wanted to make that came to mind as my colleague was speaking.
You know, I think that they are suffering not only from Trump derangement syndrome but a little bit of Democrat amnesia. I think they have forgotten that under Joe Biden, inflation hit 9 percent. It was the highest it had been in over four decades. They didn't seem to be concerned about costs or affordability, and every single day, Republicans work to get down the cost of gas and groceries. Every single day, we work on affordability.
Even a year ago, we had not one single colleague from the other side of the aisle--not one--vote for the Working Families Tax Cut, the Big Beautiful Bill. They all voted against it because they wanted a $4 trillion tax hike.
Now, why did my colleagues on the other side of the aisle vote in lockstep--every single Democrat? They want more money, more of your money that they can spend. They want to control it. They want you to give them the power so they can micromanage your life.
Inflation? They are all for it. When you talk about prices going up, they are all for it. Even Barack Obama said: Oh, your electric bills are necessarily going to go up because I am pushing the Green New Deal. And, boy, did they ever.
So I think that it is interesting. I wish that they would actually focus on the issue of affordability. I wish they would actually work with us when it comes to getting costs down, but they don't because they want more of your money.
Isn't it so interesting? They never get enough of the taxpayers' money. It is a gimme, gimme, gimme every single day. Money and power-- they are all about it.
Mr. President, I do want to talk this afternoon about a core responsibility of any representative government, and that is the responsibility to enforce the rule of law.
Now, questions that responsible governments will ask themselves is, Can we protect law-abiding citizens? Can we make certain that our citizens are protected from criminals? How do we get our crime rate down in our communities? How do we maintain law and order? Can we make certain that we are enacting justice, and we are punishing lawbreakers?
This is something that we as Republicans believe is a basic responsibility, but it has become painfully clear--and I think it should be regrettable--that our colleagues across the aisle do not see this as a basic responsibility. They are for sanctuary cities. They are for trying to make ``illegal'' legal. They put the interests and the needs of illegal aliens in front of the needs of law-abiding citizens.
Every single Federal immigration law that we have on the books--every single one of them--was passed by Congress, and that law was signed into law by a sitting U.S. President. Now, some of those were Republican, and some were Democrat. It is important to note that these laws actually reflect the will of the American people, and these immigration laws are just as legitimate as any other law that is on the books. Every one of them is legitimate.
But what we have come to know over the last few years is that our Democrat colleagues, many of them, see these laws as optional. They-- many of them--do not think we should have a border. They think we should have an open border. We saw what that did under President Biden when he laid out the welcome mat and you had millions of illegal aliens flooding our country and overwhelming our communities. When we went to the southern border to visit, we realized they were covered up with illegal aliens. Crime rates were soaring. Indeed, we saw across this country every State become a border State and every town become a border town.
We are seeing, once again, that our colleagues across the aisle are doubling down on putting illegal aliens and their interests in front of American citizens'. I don't think you see this in any other country on the face of the Earth, but for some reason, they have gotten it in their minds that they need to take care of those who are illegally in the country and that they should put the welcome mat out for them. Of course, what we have learned, as you look at the drug traffickers, the sex traffickers, and the human traffickers is that this is one of the most uncompassionate policies ever. The horror stories of what has been done to women and girls and children are absolutely horrific.
But that wasn't enough for our friends across the aisle. So, for 76 days, the Democrats kept the Department of Homeland Security shut down. They left the Secret Service, the Coast Guard, FEMA, the TSA, and other critical Agencies unfunded because they wanted to score political points with the radical left. They just tossed them aside. Can you imagine being told: We are going to use you as a pawn; you are not going to get a paycheck? It is absolutely astounding.
In Tennessee, I have done so many meetings in communities across the State, and I have done a lot of telephone townhalls. I did one last night. What you hear from people in these townhalls is: What do the Democrats think they are doing? Why? Why? At a time when there are so many threats, why would they jeopardize our Nation's security?
Well, as I said last night on the telephone townhall: The Democrats have a goal. They have been committed to this for years. They have not been able to pull it off, so they have got a new way of doing it, and it is called: Let's just shut down Homeland Security. Their goal is to defund law enforcement and to abolish ICE.
I have got a chart that shows some of the statements that have come from people on the left, from the Democrats.
Here, you have got Representative Omar:
Representative Mark Pocan:
Isn't that radical? Imagine that. Doing away with law enforcement is not radical?
You have got another one, Ramirez, and she is saying:
Representative Ocasio-Cortez:
Jim McGovern:
See, the list goes on and on.
You have some of our Senate colleagues:
This is what they are trying to do.
ICE is Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and when you hear all of these statements--``not one more dollar for ICE,'' they say, or ``ICE is beyond reform,'' they say, or they even say ``Abolishing ICE isn't radical''--they continue to push to abolish ICE.
Now, the sad thing, in my opinion, is that this isn't a fringe position in today's Democrat Party. It has become a mainstay of their political agenda.
Can you even imagine the chaos that would ensue if we wiped this Agency, which is responsible for protecting Americans from cross-border crime and illegal immigration--if we wiped that Agency off the map? There would be more crime, more sex trafficking, more drug trafficking, more human trafficking, more terrorism, and more lives lost.
Since President Trump returned to office, we have seen the consequences of this rhetoric on full display. You can
The New Jersey State attorney general even admitted that most of the arrested rioters were--guess what--from outside New Jersey--like I said, paid political protesters. Some of these paid political protesters have thrown rocks at officers. Others have pushed barricades at the police.
One rioter screamed at an ICE agent:
Imagine if that were being shouted at you as you did your job. Imagine if somebody were screaming at you that they were going to kill your kids and that they were going to kill your wife and that they were going to kill you. They had your face. They knew who you were.
This is what these agents are facing. Nothing compassionate about that, is there?
Of course not. Absolutely not.
The death threats to ICE agents are up 8,000 percent. The assaults on ICE agents are up 1,300 percent.
As I said at the beginning of my remarks, what they are doing is enforcing the rule of law. They are enforcing laws that this body has passed and that a sitting U.S. President has affixed his signature to and signed into law--but no. We have colleagues across the aisle who are saying: We don't like that one, so let's just not enforce it.
I think that is sick because, instead of condemning the violence, you have got the State's--New Jersey's--Governor, who is a Democrat, who has stood shoulder to shoulder with the rioters. After days of clashes, she sent the State police to secure the area, not to ensure the safety of Federal law enforcement but--and I am quoting her in her words--``to avoid escalation from ICE.''
See what she is doing there? She is blaming the ICE officers, who were abiding by the rule of law. She is not blaming the paid political protesters, who are not peacefully protesting; they are there shouting. They have got their hard hats. They have got their signs. They have thrown rocks. She is citing the unrest to call for the closure of Delaney Hall. This is how radical Democrats have become. They will allow organized mobs to assault our Federal law enforcement. Then they will cite violence as a reason to stop law enforcement from doing their jobs.
While the Democrats try to abolish ICE, Republicans are doing everything possible to uphold the rule of law. It is why we are moving forward with a public security reconciliation bill that will provide the funding necessary for ICE and CBP for years to come. As I said, we are doing this through reconciliation. That is the same process we used to pass the Working Families Tax Cut.
I will remind you again: Not one single Democrat voted for the tax cuts. They wanted the $4 trillion tax hike so that they could have more of your money.
What we are saying is: Come on. Join us. Vote for this reconciliation bill. Let's fund these vital Agencies by a simple majority vote. There are plenty of bills that I and others have put into place that we should pass to make certain that we deal with this issue of illegal immigration and so that we support our men and women who are working with DHS.
This bill is going to come before us today and tomorrow. I encourage swift passage.
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, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. President, we are back. We are back to finish the job now, to make sure that ICE and CBP have the funding they need to carry out the mission we have set out in Federal immigration law.
There was a time when this wasn't controversial. There was a time when Democrat Presidents actually gave speeches about our border and making sure that we deported people who were here illegally. But that is a long time ago now. The Democrats have made their central plank of everything that they hold onto in this town about open borders, mass migration, and anti-law enforcement.
We saw this iteration with the ``defund the police'' movement. It simply gravitated to the ``defund ICE'' movement. They don't actually think, as a sovereign country, we should be able to tell people who can come in, how long they can stay, and when they have to leave.
This is a fundamental issue for a sovereign nation, and so we are back now on reconciliation, once again, to make sure that their operations are indeed funded.
I won't even get into the idea of what a departure from the norms this has been, for a policy reason, to hold up an appropriation, but that is what happened.
But now, through the process of reconciliation, Republicans are going to right that wrong, get this right. And the Democrats, they can talk all day long about how they don't want to deport criminal illegal aliens, because that is really what this is about.
I also want to tell the truth about something else very plainly. Mass migration drove up the cost of living for the American people. More deportations will bring that down.
For years, Washington treated immigration as a border issue alone. It is that, but it is also a pocketbook issue. It shows up in rent, wages, downpayments, crowded schools, strained hospitals, and city budgets buckling under the policies their citizens never voted for.
Illegal aliens do not stay at the border. They went to New York City, Chicago, Denver, towns and suburbs all across this country, into the same labor markets, housing markets, classrooms, emergency rooms, and public benefit systems already under strain.
Americans are forced into a bidding war with the entire world. Teenagers looking for a summer job, young couples trying to buy their first home, families trying to make rent, workers trying to get a raise--all of them are told to compete with millions of new arrivals, many here in violation of our laws.
This was a policy of choice. Washington flooded the labor market with workers and the housing market with renters at the same time. The result was exactly what any honest economist would predict: lower wages, higher rents, higher home prices, higher taxes, a weaker American middle class.
From 2021 to 2024, more than 20 million people came into the United States, the largest short-term surge in American history. During that same period, rents skyrocketed, housing prices surged, and communities were priced out of their own neighborhoods.
The United States is short roughly 10 million homes. Washington imported millions and millions and millions of people into that shortage and then acted surprised when prices went up.
There is nothing mysterious about this. Add millions of renters to a tight housing market, and rents rise. Add millions of buyers, and home prices rise. Make housing unaffordable, and family formation gets delayed.
Since 2010, the median age of the first-time home buyer in this country has gone from 30 years old to 40 years old. The median downpayment for a first-home buyer now is more than $40,000. That is way more than the median net worth of Americans under 35.
A young American couple can work hard, save money, follow the rules, and try to start a family. Washington's answer is to make them compete against a migration wave their own government invited, subsidized, and refused to remove. That is a betrayal.
HUD's own report admits that immigration drove as much as 100 percent of
The same thing is happening in the labor market. Over the last 25 years, immigrants accounted for nearly three-quarters of all growth in the prime-age civilian labor force. Since 2019, the American-born workforce has not grown at all--not at all. And since February 2020, roughly 90 percent--90 percent--of new jobs have gone to foreign-born workers.
That is a labor market that Washington built: more workers for corporate America, more competition for American workers, more pressure on wages, and less bargaining power for citizens.
The fiscal costs are staggering. A recent congressional study estimated the lifetime net fiscal cost to government at about $68,000 per illegal alien. But best estimates show deportation costs roughly $13,000 per removal. Deporting 10 million illegal aliens would save American taxpayers at least a half a trillion dollars.
That money could be used and should be used to strengthen American households, schools, hospitals, police departments, and our neighborhoods. Instead, Americans are being taxed to subsidize lawbreaking.
A country that does that has broken the faith of its own citizens. Look at New York City, Chicago, and Denver. Sanctuary politicians attacked immigration enforcement, declared themselves morally superior, and watched their budgets buckle. Services are strained. Citizens are told to accept less.
When the bill came due, the same politicians demanded more money from taxpayers. That is the sanctuary city model: benefits for illegal aliens, fiscal strain for citizens, and moral vanity masquerading as compassion.
It is not compassion to make citizens finance their own dispossession. They call it compassion. They call it growth. Strip away the language, and look at what the system does to real people. It lowers wages. It raises housing costs. It strains public services. It rewards lawbreaking. It transfers wealth away from citizens. It turns the American dream into a luxury good.
So let's be clear about the alternative. If mass migration raises the cost of living, more deportations will lower it. Remove illegal workers from the labor market, and wages will rise. Remove illegal renters from the housing market, and rent pressure falls. Stop subsidizing lawbreaking, and taxpayers save money. Enforce the law, and citizenship starts to mean something again.
The economy exists to serve the people of the Nation. The people of the Nation do not exist to serve the economy.
For far too long, Washington inverted that principle. It built an economy for global capital, instead of American citizens. It opened the border in the name of an ideology that treats America like a labor market with a flag attached to it. That experiment, ladies and gentlemen, has failed. It failed the people we represent.
But this decline was chosen. What was chosen, though, can be reversed. We can secure the border. We can end mass migration. We can carry out more deportations. We can restore an economy that serves American citizens again.
This fight is about whether Americans can afford to live in the country their ancestors built. It is about whether citizenship still carries a promise. It is about whether this Nation remains a home for its very own people and whether we are going to fight to make sure America remains a home for Americans.
Now, for the first time in a generation, we have a chance to choose something different--to secure the border, to carry out these deportations, to restore sanity to the labor market, to bring down housing demand, to put American taxpayers first, and to rebuild an economy that serves the American people once again.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. President, I rise today to talk about Minnesota because the fight that is about to happen here on the Senate floor started far away from this place on the streets of my home State.
Tomorrow, Republicans in the Senate are going to force through a partisan bill to give ICE and Customs and Border Protection almost $70 billion, all because they have refused to do anything to rein in the abuses of ICE--abuses that destroyed trust, killed American citizens, and ripped Minnesota families apart. So I want to take a moment to remind my colleagues of how we got to this moment.
What happened was that a masked and lawless Federal police force occupied my State, kidnapping people in the street, tearing families apart, and committing terrible acts of violence. The entire country watched in horror. Your constituents watched. We watched Renee Good killed in her car after dropping her child off at school. We watched Alex Pretti swarmed by masked agents and then shot in the back and killed. We watched 5-year-old Liam Ramos, in his bunny hat and his Spiderman backpack, separated from his father. We bore witness to countless acts of violence captured on camera and many, many more that were hidden from public view. Across the country, it was impossible to look away as we watched our government terrorize people.
But we also saw something exceptional, of course. We saw Minnesotans showing what resistance and what courage look like. In subzero temperatures, Minnesotans met guns with whistles and came out to protect people they didn't even know. Churches and neighbors organized mutual aid and delivered prescriptions to folks who couldn't leave their own homes. They drove kids to school and back again, and they coordinated food deliveries for people who were afraid to go to the grocery store.
We marched--thousands and thousands strong--to demand that ICE get out of our State. And it worked, colleagues. History will remember that Minnesota won the battle of Operation Metro Surge, just as we got through the long, long, cold Minnesota winters, by showing up for our neighbors no matter what our differences might be, by helping people we don't even know, and by peacefully demanding justice and accountability.
But that victory was not without a cost. The great damage done by this rogue, dangerous, secret police force is still felt in Minneapolis and in St. Paul. It is felt in Chicago, in Los Angeles, in Portland, and in countless communities across the country. It is felt in Newark. Lives lost. Injuries sustained. Parents separated from their children. Kids traumatized by these tactics and still not back in school. Businesses that are shuttered.
Colleagues, we still have not had a fair and unbiased investigation with State investigators into the killings of Renee and Alex. People who have done nothing wrong are still waiting for accountability in crowded courtrooms. Legal residents of this country are still being held illegally in detention camps hundreds of miles away from their families. Rent payments missed. Businesses closed. Cities and counties spent their entire annual police overtime budgets to protect their communities.
So I know that it is uncomfortable for my colleagues to hear all of this and that everybody wants to turn the page on this, but on behalf of Minnesota, I need to say out loud and to be clear that it is unacceptable that this legislative battle is happening tomorrow because of the complete failure to agree to even the most basic guardrails on ICE, the same kind of guardrails that your local police department agrees to live by every single day.
I have to say I was hopeful because in the days and the weeks that Operation Metro Surge was unfolding, so many of my colleagues came up to me to offer their support. Many of you both publicly and privately said that what we are seeing in these videos is unacceptable and that we need to do something.
When the former Secretary of Homeland Security declared that the Minnesotans shot and killed by Federal agents were ``domestic terrorists,'' many of you came out and said that we need a full and fair investigation of what happened.
Who said that? Not me but Senator Curtis.
Here is another one:
Who said that? Senator Crapo said that.
My colleague Senator McCormick said that.
So what happened?
Today, we have a partisan bill to send another $70 billion to ICE and Customs and Border Protection. There has not been a full and impartial investigation. There have been no reforms to stop ICE from kicking down the doors of your home without a warrant. There is nothing to stop masked, secret agents from pulling people out of their cars, following people home, grabbing parents away from their kids--nothing to stop that from happening. There is nothing to help small businesses that were forced to close or school districts trying to help traumatized students. There is nothing to help teachers or parents or police departments that have the millions of dollars in overtime costs.
Now, I will be filing an amendment to make sure that an investigation into Alex and Renee's death is done by the books, that it is fair and that it is unbiased and that it is conducted jointly with State and Federal investigators so that it has credibility in order to restore the public trust. And this is how these investigations have always been done in the past. But there won't be votes for that. My colleagues won't vote for that.
So I want to be clear. I want to thank all of my colleagues who worked with determination and heart to negotiate commonsense reforms to stop the worst of these abuses from happening ever again. Our asks weren't complicated. They weren't radical. We just wanted clarity that Federal agents should follow the same standards as local police departments: No random arrests or breaking down doors without a warrant or probable cause. Wear proper identification and body cameras. No masks.
ICE needs oversight and accountability when they violate the rights of individuals, as guaranteed in our Constitution. Basically, we were just looking for reforms that say ICE has to abide by the laws equally, as they apply to every person in this country.
It is a shame that all of that hard work came to nothing because Donald Trump and Stephen Miller don't want accountability under the law; they want impunity.
And let's be clear. This is really out of step with where Americans are. After months of this lawless behavior, Americans are strongly opposed. They have seen it. Americans are opposed to this. They are strongly opposed to this administration's domestic interior enforcement policy. Fifty-six percent of Americans disapprove.
Meanwhile--let's be honest about this--these abuses are continuing, though maybe without all of the public attention--not all of the public attention. Raids are happening in California, in Oklahoma, in Ohio, and elsewhere. We have seen what has been happening in Newark this past week. ICE pepper-sprayed a U.S. Senator outside a detention center in New Jersey just this past week--my colleague Senator Andy Kim.
Mr. President, 100,000 children are separated from their parents right now, today. Three-quarters of them are estimated to be U.S. citizens--100,000 kids. At least 33 people died in ICE custody in 2025. Already in 2026, over 18 people have died. This is the best data we have, though it is very difficult to get this information. That is one person who has lost their life every 6 days, and many of these losses of life were under deeply concerning circumstances. We are denying lifesaving care, lifesaving medical treatment for transplant and for cancer patients--people that are detained by this Federal Government. Just today, I was working to try to get a humanitarian release for a woman who is suffering from an extreme health condition, who could lose her life if she does not get the care she needs.
The Federal Government is taking people hundreds of miles away from home and then turning them out on the street with nothing--no ID, no money, no papers, no way to get home.
The truth is, this administration is still doing what it did in Minneapolis; they are just doing a better job of keeping it out of the news.
So here we are today at a partisan impasse that Americans just don't understand because, for them, this isn't about politics; this is about common decency. Democrats stand strong, and we are demanding strong but basic commonsense guardrails and accountability. We want our communities to be safe. We want our children to be able to walk to school without fear of being scooped up by a Federal agent. We want people to be able to go to their jobs without fear that an agent is going to break their car window and drag them out of their car and onto the street. But my Republican colleagues are saying no to this. In the face of a crushing cost-of-living crisis in this country, where millions of Americans are struggling to afford their lives, Republicans' answer to this is to send $70 billion to ICE and Customs and Border Protection for massive, privately owned, for-profit detention centers and a Federal immigration police force with a budget that is several times larger than the FBI's.
You know, I don't know about your home State, but in Minnesota, $70 billion is a lot of money, and people are just not getting this. This is the priority we have in this body today? This is what we are choosing to do?
We could take this money and lower health insurance premiums by extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits for 2 whole years. But no, we can't do that. We are told by our Republican colleagues that that is too expensive. But we can send $70 billion, on top of everything we have already sent, to ICE and Customs and Border Protection.
We could pay for Head Start preschool for 5 years. But no, we don't have money for that; we just have money for this.
Why not update and repair or replace every drinking water or wastewater system in Minnesota, and then we would still have more than $7 billion left over. That is a choice we could make, but today and tomorrow, this body is making a different choice.
No. Republicans are choosing to send billions of your tax dollars to ICE for a Federal police force and for-profit detention centers with no reforms or guardrails.
Not only that, but rather than address any of the challenges facing ordinary, middle-class Americans, Republicans want to load up this bill with extra giveaways for billionaires and convicted felons, sometimes the same category.
They want an extra billion of taxpayer dollars to pay for a ballroom. They wanted almost $2 billion in a slush fund. That has, thankfully, fallen out of this bill so far, but I want to know for sure that that is not going happen.
If you are watching this and you are feeling confused about what is going on in this body, colleagues, I mean you should feel--Americans, my constituents in Minnesota--you should feel confused because this is outrageous. This is not how our democracy is supposed to work.
I mean, here is the thing, I actually believe that a lot of my colleagues on the Republican side are actually kind of embarrassed by this. They know it. They know that this isn't right, and they for sure know that it is bad politics.
But that is not enough. We also need everybody in this body to not just say what they say behind closed doors but to say it out loud in public. That is what our country needs right now.
But here we are. And while Democrats may not be in power in the Senate, we are not powerless. So we will keep fighting, and we will keep preserving the Minnesota way just as we did fighting Operation Metro Surge.
We will double down on our love for our neighbors and unity in the face of this injustice. We will keep fighting for a better country. We will not forget our neighbors Alex and Renee and Liam and all of the others that were so hurt by what happened in my home State, and we will keep up the fight. And we will vote no on this bill.
Colleagues, today is your chance. This is the chance that we have to speak out with the eyes of history upon us. So I urge you to say no to this bill and to stand on the side of justice, justice for Minnesota, justice for this whole country.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
Mr. President, like the reconciliation bill before us, the past few weeks have been really eye-opening for the American public to see in plain view the clear priorities of President Trump and his allies here in Congress.
It is increasingly clear that their top priority is not addressing the affordability crisis that is hurting so many families across the country, families who are struggling just to get by.
The proposals, the actions of the Republican majority and the White House isn't trying to tackle the cost of healthcare; it is not trying to tackle the cost of housing; it is not reducing the price of gas-- that is for sure--or addressing the increasing costs of groceries.
The end result of the proposals before us continue to be personal gain for the President and those around him, plain and simple.
But I don't think we should really be surprised by that. Don't take my word for it. We are talking about a political party whose President--the leader of that party, who has said publicly, his own words: I do not care about Americans' financial situation.
Let me repeat that. A President, leader of the Republican Party who says: I do not care about Americans' financial situation.
It doesn't get any clearer than that, folks, because whether it is a late-night social media post or what he says in front of the cameras for everybody to hear, this President has no problem telling us exactly what his priorities are.
And his priorities are clearly not Americans' financial situations. His priorities include an abomination of a ballroom that he wanted the American people to pay for to the tune of $1 billion after repeatedly saying that it wouldn't cost a single taxpayer dollar, that it would be privately funded.
Another one of his priorities is ensuring immunity for himself and for his family, and shoring up support from his MAGA loyalists, including the January 6 insurrectionists who were prosecuted for violently attacking the Capitol, violently attacking Capitol Police.
He was trying to advance a self-serving corrupt slush fund to pay off his supporters. That is his priority.
Here is another one just from yesterday: selecting an unqualified person Bill Pulte into an extremely sensitive position within our government as head of the Director of National Intelligence whose track record leads us to see plainly their goal of interfering in our elections or politically pursuing anyone the President perceives as being an enemy.
These are the President's priorities, colleagues, not helping working families. And as clear as day, as he has outlined these priorities, there is no pushback by the Republican majority. They continue to enable every single one of these efforts.
The ballroom, which is nothing other than a vanity project, that never should have happened in the first place. It is a tragedy that the East Wing was torn down without a discussion, without the consultation with Congress that is clearly required.
Yet for weeks, we heard Republican Members of Congress parroting the lame excuse of: For security reasons, this was a necessary project. But they have nothing to say about a UFC ring being built on the lawn of the White House. Really?
And by the way, what happened to the private donations that were supposed to be paying for the ballroom project? The President bragged about the $400 million--probably more--that he secured. So where is it? Where is that money?
We have to remain vigilant that the ballroom project funding does not appear in this new reconciliation bill or doesn't work its way back in.
Now while Acting Attorney General Blanche publicly stated yesterday that the so-called weaponization fund was not moving forward, it is really hard to take this administration at its word when they are constantly saying one thing and doing another--lies over and over to the American people.
When we first learned about their plans to create this fund, I actually came to the floor and asked that this floor pass by unanimous consent my No Rewards for January 6 Rioters Act which I introduced back in January to stop this proposal in its tracks. Trump already gave pardons to January 6 insurrectionists. Let's not give them payouts as well.
So we must act to ensure that no one who attacked the Capitol and especially those who assaulted law enforcement officers that day can ever qualify for any kind of payout like this.
And again, a few words on Bill Pulte, Donald Trump's pick to serve as Acting Director of National Intelligence. It is clear that his only qualification--only qualification that matters to President Trump--is blind loyalty to President Trump, a willingness to do whatever Trump asks.
Now time and again, we have seen Pulte use sensitive information in his role at the Federal Housing Finance Agency to target Trump's political opponents. Don't just imagine what he might do, imagine what he will do with the sensitive information at his fingertips in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, whether it is attacking opponents or finding new dangerous ways to advance Donald Trump's election corruption and efforts to take over--the President's words again--to take over elections.
Each of these is a misplaced and dangerous priority that Donald Trump puts over the needs of the American people. All these priorities do nothing to advance our national interest or improve the lives of working families across the country.
So let's not allow ourselves to be distracted from the biggest of the misplaced priorities at the heart of this reconciliation bill. When I hear some of our Republican colleagues say: OK. No ballroom here, no slush fund here--they don't commit to not coming back to it in other efforts.
They say: Let's come back to the intent and core of what this reconciliation bill was at the outset--billions and billions and billions of dollars more for ICE and CBP for immigration enforcement, the same Agencies that are still sitting on more than a $100 billion of previously approved and appropriated funds that they can't even spend.
What happened to fiscal responsibility? Instead of ensuring that money flows as Agencies can spend it, they are trying to ram more money to these Agencies while shielding them from oversight and accountability.
Let me remind us all of the deaths of Americans like Renee Good, Alex Pretti, and Ruben Ray Martinez. Let me remind us of how this administration is using children like 5-year-old Liam Ramos as bait. Let me remind our colleagues about the price gouging that is happening, mothers and children at Dilley detention center having to pay so much just to access clean water and letting thousands of children languish in detention, jailing more than 6,200 children since the beginning of this administration.
That is a shame.
And now they want to shield them from more than 425 judges appointed by both Democrat and Republican Presidents, including some appointed by Donald Trump himself who have issued more than 10,000 rulings finding that ICE has violated the Constitution of the United States.
That is not an exaggeration: more than 10,000 findings of ICE violating the Constitution of the United States, violating due process, and violating Federal laws since the start of this Trump administration--10,000 rulings.
That is more than a 90-percent loss rate in court by this administration. This administration's immigration enforcement efforts have clearly not just been extreme and cruel, they have been unlawful and indefensible.
What we should be doing, colleagues, is discussing and debating ideas on how to help American families better afford their groceries, how to better afford the gas they put in their car because they have to get to work, help American families afford their mortgage or the rent, how to pay for childcare, how to pay for healthcare.
So many Americans are reeling from the ``Anything But Beautiful Bill,'' from the expiration of the ACA tax credits, and so many Americans are suffering from the experience of witnessing or having their children ripped from their arms, with loved ones, family members, friends, neighbors, coworkers disappearing into detention,
They are suffering through all of that while still wondering how they are going to make ends meet at the end of the month. Those are the priorities for countless families across the country who are hurting and struggling right now that we should be focusing on. But instead, no, we are focusing on what this reconciliation bill offers in front of us.
I have said it before. I think most folks, at some point in this Chamber, have used the reference that budgets are a reflection of our values. A reconciliation bill is a budget bill. It, too, is a reflection of values and priorities. They reveal what we prioritize. They reveal what we stand for, what we fight for, and it serves as a guide to see if it truly reflects the needs and priorities of the American people or not.
If you look at this language, if you look at the concept of the reconciliation bill in front of us, it is clear that Donald Trump and our Republican colleagues have no interest in addressing the urgent needs of the American people.
So I ask, colleagues, let's reject this bill full of misplaced priorities. Let's actually regroup and put a bill together that will lower costs for American families, expand their opportunities, and help Americans get ahead.
And I guarantee you, if we were to do that in good faith, you wouldn't have to resort to this party-line, strictly partisan process of budget reconciliation. That would be something that would garner bipartisan support and be in the best interest of our country, our economy, and the needs of the American people.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
