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.
16Senate Resolution 819: Condemning the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for Its Ongoing Human Rights Abuses, Including Its Use of Politically Motivated Espionage Claims to Justify...
23Senate Resolution 826: Honoring the Contributions of Small Manufacturers of Firearms to the Economy, Culture, and Recreational Heritage of the United States and Recognizing the Month of August 2026...
24Senate Resolution 827: Recognizing the 100th Anniversary of the Creation of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, Inc. (Saami) and Commending Its Work Establishing Industry...
Thirty-four bills and nine resolutions were introduced, as follows: S. 5173-5206, and S. Res. 819-827.
Pages S4369-70
Measures Passed
En Bloc Nominations: By 50 yeas to 47 nays (Vote No. EX. 217), Senate agreed to S. Res. 817, authorizing the en bloc consideration in Executive Session of certain nominations on the Executive Calendar.
Pages S4353-55, S4360
National Whistleblower Appreciation Day
Senate agreed to S. Res. 821, designating July 30, 2026, as ``National Whistleblower Appreciation Day''.
Page S4365
American Grown Flower and Foliage Month
Senate agreed to S. Res. 822, designating July 2026 as ``American Grown Flower and Foliage Month''.
Page S4365
National Farmers Market Week
Senate agreed to S. Res. 823, designating the week of August 2 through August 8, 2026, as ``National Farmers Market Week''.
Page S4365
Gold Star Children's Day
Senate agreed to S. Res. 824, designating August 1, 2026, as ``Gold Star Children's Day''.
Page S4365
Commending Mississippi Christian University
Senate agreed to S. Res. 825, commending Mississippi Christian University for 200 years of service to the State of Mississippi and the United States.
Page S4365
Measures Considered
Restoring Flexibility in the Child Care and Development Fund: By 47 yeas to 52 nays (Vote No. 215), Senate did not agree to the motion to proceed to consideration of S.J. Res. 199, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Health and Human Services relating to ``Restoring Flexibility in the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF)''.
Page S4356
Hostilities Within or Against the Islamic Republic of Iran
By 49 yeas to 50 nays (Vote No. 216), Senate did not agree to the motion to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S.J. Res. 181, to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against the Islamic Republic of Iran that have not been authorized by Congress, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1546a and in accordance with section 601(b) of the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act.
Pages S4356-57
AGOA Extension Act: Cloture
Senate began consideration of the motion to proceed to consideration of H.R. 6500, to extend duty-free treatment provided with respect to imports from certain countries in Africa under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, to extend customs user fees.
Pages S4360-65
A motion was entered to close further debate on the motion to proceed to consideration of the bill, and, in accordance with the provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, and pursuant to the unanimous-consent agreement of Thursday, July 30, 2026, a vote on cloture will occur at 5:30 p.m., on Monday, August 3, 2026.
Page S4398
Nominations Confirmed
Senate confirmed the following nominations: 39 Air Force nominations in the rank of general. 8 Army nominations in the rank of general. 16 Navy nominations in the rank of admiral. 3 Space Force nominations in the rank of general. Routine lists in the Air Force, Army, Foreign Service, Navy, and Space Force.
Pages S4399-S4400
Nominations Received
Senate received the following nominations: 1 Air Force nomination in the rank of general. 4 Army nominations in the rank of general. 1 Navy nomination in the rank of admiral. 2 Space Force nominations in the rank of general. Routine lists in the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, and Navy.
Pages S4398-99
Statements on Introduced Bills/Resolutions:
Pages S4371-93
Record Votes
Three record votes were taken today. (Total--217)
Pages S4356-57, S4360
Adjournment
Senate convened at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 3:50 p.m., until 3 p.m. on Monday, August 3, 2026. (For Senate's program, see the remarks of the Majority Leader in today's Record on page S4398.)
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: 38 of 94 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Executive Resolution (Executive Session)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following resolution.
The clerk will report the executive resolution.
The senior assistant executive clerk read as follows:
Mr. President, in a bipartisan approach, about 5 years ago, we passed legislation to correct the wrongs in our organ transplant program.
So, in my two decades spent fighting for U.S. organ donation reforms, I have heard far too many stories of patients who have lost their lives due to the negligence and abuse of that transplant system.
Recently, I requested the Government Accountability Office--GAO for short--to study and to report back to me about the challenges and the opportunities to improve pediatric organ allocation and transplantation, and that is a particularly difficult operation for the people that are involved in distributing organs.
We have about 2,000 kids on a waiting list for organ transplants, and 25 percent of that 2,000 are under the age of 5.
Pediatric patients have limited time and opportunity to receive an organ transplant, as organ size is critical to successful transplantation.
And this is especially true for kids waiting for liver transplants. Sadly, 1 in 10 infants listed for liver transplants never get a second chance at life.
The organ procurement and transplantation system could do a better job of serving kids. We know that if a child can get an organ transplant in a timely manner, their chances of living a healthy, longer life increase.
I am hopeful that GAO's findings will inform better oversight of the current organ system, and I am also hopeful that these same GAO findings will inform data-driven policymaking to improve the system for children and their families.
Mr. President, next week, our top priority will be funding the government until the November election.
The American people have faced two--two--recordbreaking government shutdowns in the past 10 months. We need to ensure that they do not face a third. We owe the American people some certainty here. They should not have to be hoping and praying that on September 30, the government will get funded and that government services will continue.
I don't think I need to tell anybody in this body that government shutdowns serve no one--not Members of either party and, most of all, not the
Shutdowns hit our country--they hit the American people--hard, and we owe it to the American people to ensure that they do not face another shutdown this fall. That is why Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Collins has been hard at work drafting a clean, bipartisan continuing resolution to fund the government through the November elections. I appreciate everything she has done to make this happen--engaging with Members of both parties and working through the necessary anomalies from the Office of Management and Budget--and I intend to bring the CR to the floor for a vote next week.
Again, I would emphasize that the appropriators are working in good faith to produce a clean, bipartisan product that is free of poison pills, and I hope that will ensure a robust bipartisan vote next week so that the American people don't have to spend the next 2 months wondering if the Senate is going to do its job, because that is what this is--our job. Funding the government is our most basic responsibility as Members of Congress, and we owe it to the American people to get that job done and done now.
I urge all of my colleagues to support the clean, bipartisan continuing resolution and get our government funded.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant executive clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. President, today's Democrat Party is being driven by extremists, and there is actually an extreme group that is driving the party further and further to the left. It is called the Democratic Socialists of America. Its membership is growing, its radical candidates are winning, and its far-left vision is spreading. You may see it happening in Michigan this coming Tuesday with their primary election.
This organization has issued a manifesto. That is right--a manifesto. In a recent interview with FOX News, the cochair of the Democratic Socialists of America admitted that this manifesto is filled with policies and politics that are extreme. She admitted it. Let me say it again. The cochair of the Democratic Socialists of America admitted on national television that their manifesto is filled with extreme policies. She has now become the face of today's Democrat Party all across the country.
She was asked whether her organization wants to abolish the U.S. Senate.
She said, ``True.''
She was asked whether they want to replace the Presidency and the Supreme Court.
She said, ``Yep.''
She was asked whether they want to abolish ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
She said, ``Absolutely.''
She was asked whether they want to abolish borders and give amnesty to every illegal immigrant in America, including illegal immigrant criminals.
She said, ``As a long-term plan, yep.''
She was asked whether they want to defund our military.
She replied, ``Absolutely.''
She was asked whether they want to abolish prisons.
She said, ``Yeah.''
She was asked whether they want government control of private companies.
She said, ``Yeah. Absolutely.''
There you have it. Those are some of the policies of the liberal left.
Today's Democrat Party is being driven by its activist wing. These are people who are radical, extreme, dangerous, and scary. They have put it in writing--they include it in their manifesto--and they are admitting it out loud on television.
Here in the U.S. Senate, Democrat Senators are embracing these radical policies. They are campaigning and will be campaigning this weekend for extremists in their parties. One sitting Democrat Senator, whose desk is right over there, said, clearly, we are seeing ``the future of the Democrat Party.''
Their manifesto is being reflected in the votes of the Democrats on this floor of the U.S. Senate.
For 65 years, the National Defense Authorization Act has passed with bipartisan support in the Senate. This month, every single Democrat in this body voted to block funding for our military. Our servicemembers are paying the price, and they are paying the price because the Democrats have turned to the radical left. Even the New York Times admits Democrats have crossed a red line by blocking defense funding.
The same radical agenda that targets America also targets our closest ally, Israel. One of the leaders of this anti-Israel campaign is the current mayor of New York City. He has called for the arrest of Israel's Prime Minister. This is exactly what their radical manifesto demands. The liberal, extreme mayor of New York City wants to hand over the Prime Minister of Israel to an unaccountable group called the International Criminal Court. It is not a real court. It lacks legitimacy. It lacks credibility. In its 24 years of existence, it has never charged a single leader of Iran for Iran's atrocities against the world. Yet this group claims the right to arrest and punish America's men and women in uniform.
The United States is not a member of the so-called International Criminal Court nor is Israel.
The mayor of New York City is a loyalist of the United Nations, not the United States.
From the campaign trail to the cloakroom of Congress, the far left has revealed its radical beliefs. Democrats are determined to tear down our country and tear up the Constitution. They want to open the borders and control the economy. They want to weaken our military and abandon Israel.
These policies would be disastrous for our Nation. There is no part of America that they do not want to destroy.
The American people reject Democrats' radical policies. The American people demand and deserve better.
Republicans are going to continue to fight for freedom, for liberty, and for continued American greatness.
As long as there is a Constitution, Republicans will not abolish the Senate. No State will lose its equal voice without its consent, and we will not silence the voice of the people who we represent.
Republicans will not end immigration enforcement. Our priority is safety for law-abiding citizens, not illegal immigrant criminals. Republicans will never allow America to become a sanctuary country. Republicans will not abolish prisons. Republicans will not release criminals back into our communities.
Democrats' pro-crime policies are dangerous, and they are dangerous all across the country.
We have a Constitution, and that Constitution and secure borders and law and order and military strength and economic freedom--they are not optional. They are the foundation of a free society, one that Democrats want to tear down.
Without these fundamental foundations of a free society, there really is no safety, no security, no prosperity, and no self-government. Republicans and most Americans know that. Without them, there is no United States of America.
Let me end where I began. Today's Democrat Party is being driven by the radical left. They have a movement. They have a manifesto. And they mean to do great harm to our country. We cannot allow it to happen.
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, today, the disastrous Trump economy delivered another one-two gut punch to the American people: Growth is down. Costs are up.
The American people don't need government reports and economists to tell
Trump, on the other hand, has no clue just how deep in the dumps his economy is. He keeps calling higher costs a ``hoax'' and affordability a ``made-up word.''
In the meantime, Trump has done nothing but make matters worse with his reckless and irresponsible war, with his chaotic tariffs, and with his crusade against American energy and assault on healthcare.
And every day, while Trump's failed Presidency makes life harder for American families, where does he spend his time and energy? Enriching himself.
Democrats aren't going to let this one-two economic punch turn into a knockout blow. We are going to keep fighting to bring down Americans' costs and bring an end to Trump's failed agenda that is driving those costs up and up and up.
(The remarks of Mr. Schumer pertaining to the introduction of S. 5183 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
Finally, on the Iran WPR, as Trump plays keyboard warrior on Truth Social in his war with Iran, our men and women in uniform are risking their lives on the frontlines.
This aimless war has been one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in American history, and Trump's mess only gets worse with every passing hour.
Trump said the war would last a week, but American servicemembers are still getting killed 5 months later, and the war seems to be expanding with Iran's latest attack in Egypt's territory.
Senate Republicans cannot sit on the sidelines as Trump's war escalates out of control. Later today, Democrats will advance another War Powers Resolution so we can get our troops out of danger and end this war once and for all.
Will Senate Republicans keep helping Trump dig himself into a deeper and deeper hole in Iran or will they finally show some backbone, grab a shovel, and help Trump get out of this hole?
Republicans, do your duty to our servicemembers, to the American people, and to your own conscience. Vote for our War Powers Resolution to end this disaster.
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.
Providing for Congressional Disapproval Under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, of the Rule Submitted by the Department of Health and Human Services Relating to "Restoring Flexibility In...
Mr. President, while President Trump's top priorities are $1.5 trillion in war spending and a golden ballroom, those are not the priorities that American families are focused on. Everywhere I go, I hear from families about the crushing cost of childcare, so it is no surprise to me that 80 percent of voters say the high cost of childcare is a major problem. This is at the beating heart of our economy. If Mom and Dad don't have affordable, high-quality childcare, Mom and Dad can't go to work.
But while Trump has plunged us into an affordability crisis, a war that no one asked for, all while families are struggling to get by, he is hell-bent on making our country's childcare crisis even worse. Right now, Trump's HHS ended a 7-percent copayment cap on childcare costs for the very low-income families who already receive Federal childcare support. This is already a very modest Federal program that needs to be supersized in order to meet the needs of every child who needs it. Even with this program, many households are paying more than 20 percent of their household income on childcare costs.
When Democrats put forward this policy, we said no family who qualifies for this subsidy should pay more than 7 percent of their income for childcare. Trump tore that up.
We should be having a debate about how we increase childcare funding. How about, instead of a $1.5 trillion war budget, we make sure every working family in America can afford childcare. Well, Trump's tariffs already tax diapers, formula, and the car seat. Now he is coming for commonsense childcare policies, taking us in the wrong direction at a time when families need affordable childcare more than ever. If Trump had simply done nothing and left the 7-percent cap in place, some of these families would have ended up saving as much as $15,000 a year for their family.
This is really a slap in the face to moms and dads all over the country--and to childcare providers, who are already stretched thin to make their budgets work and keep their doors open and keep qualified employees in a field that has very high turnover.
The good news: Congress can now force Trump to reverse course on this--today, right now. Very soon, we are going to be voting on my resolution to overturn Trump's anti-childcare rule and bring back that 7 percent income cap. This shouldn't be controversial. You are either voting to lower childcare costs or to increase them.
Not too long ago, President Trump said openly that he believes--and I am going to quote him--we can't afford daycare; we have to pay for war.
We can afford childcare. Trump just wants to use our taxpayer dollars to fund war and tax cuts for billionaires. Trump says we can't afford childcare, but he is wrong.
The truth is, we can't afford to ignore childcare. I know that investment in childcare is an investment in our families and an investment in a stronger economy.
To my colleagues: If you vote to let this rule stand, own it. Go home and tell the parents in your State you voted to raise their childcare bill. You cannot call yourself pro-family while voting to make it more expensive to raise one. You just can't.
That is why I am calling on my colleagues to join me today and pass this resolution.
Every Senator is going to cast a vote today on a simple question: Should working parents pay more for childcare or less? Donald Trump wants them to pay more--more at the pump, more at the grocery store, and now more to drop the child off at daycare. Now the Senate will give its answers, and I promise you this: Parents are watching and parents remember.
To my colleagues: Vote for the moms. Vote for the dads. Vote for the kid in the back seat at the 7 a.m. dropoff. When childcare costs as much as the mortgage, whose side are you on?
So, again, I urge my colleagues to vote yes to lower childcare costs.
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.
Directing the Removal of United States Armed Forces from Hostilities Within or Against the Islamic Republic of Iran That Have Not Been Authorized by Congress: Motion to Discharge
Mr. President, pursuant to 50 U.S.C. 1546(a) and in accordance with section 601(b) of the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S.J. Res. 181.
Mr. President, I rise in support of my legislation to end President Trump's unauthorized, illegal war with Iran. This war will go down in history as one of the greatest strategic failures in modern American history.
It was launched without a clear plan, executed without a coherent strategy, and has become a costly, self-inflicted disaster for the American people. Every justification that we were given for this conflict has proven hollow.
We were told that Iran's nuclear program would be eliminated. Instead, Iran still holds nuclear material, and its leaders may be more determined than ever to build a weapon.
We were told that the Iranian regime would crumble; instead, it now holds new leverage of the world's energy supply in the Strait of Hormuz.
We were told this President would bring peace and lower prices; instead, he has given us war, pain, and higher prices.
New York families are struggling to afford groceries and keep up with the rent, and what is President Trump doing? Pouring billions of tax dollars into an open-ended war in Iran. This reckless war is driving up monthly bills and making everyday life harder for working families.
This administration demands billions for wars abroad, then claims we can't afford to improve our schools or repair our roads or lower the cost of healthcare for millions of Americans.
President Trump has made it clear that he doesn't factor in how Americans are doing financially, but the families I represent feel it every single day. Every time they fill the gas tank and watch the numbers climb, New Yorkers are being forced to pay a premium for this President's instability.
According to data from the Joint Economic Committee, the average family has to pay an additional $432 on gas alone since this war began. Statewide, that is an extra $2 billion at the pump. Let me repeat that. That is an extra $2 billion at the pump.
Nationwide, Americans have paid $60 billion more on gas. Every time I go home, I hear from constituents about their concerns: the cost of healthcare, the cost of gas, the cost to keep lights on, and put food on the table.
Those are the conversations happening in kitchens across America. That is what we should be focused on here in Washington, not dropping bombs around the world. And let us not forget there is a human cost to this war that no dollar figure could ever capture.
Our servicemembers did not volunteer to be pawns in a chaotic, unauthorized war with no plan and no end in sight. Eighteen American heroes have already paid the ultimate sacrifice. Eighteen families have been shattered.
Just last week, New York lost one of our own: SGT Angel Rampersad of Queens.
Sergeant Rampersad was a true patriot who begged her mother to let her enlist the moment she was old enough. She served this country courageously and honorably for more than 6 years before she was killed in an Iranian attack in Jordan.
Our servicemembers take one of the most dangerous jobs there is. In return, we owe them a sacred obligation. We do not send them into harm's way without a clear mission, defined objectives, and the support of the American people. The President's war with Iran is a betrayal of that obligation. New Yorkers and all Americans deserve more. They deserve better.
So I ask my colleagues: How many more servicemembers will we lose? How many more billions of dollars must families pay at the pump? How many more empty promises must be made from an out-of-control administration before this body finally acts?
Under the Constitution, we have the power to end this war today. Let's use it. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this resolution.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
Nearly half a year into Trump's ruinous war with Iran, the conflict is widening instead of winding down. More countries get dragged into the mix, more fronts open up, and more Americans get killed and injured.
The American people have made it clear: No one wants this war to go on.
A new poll, this morning, found only a fifth--a fifth--of the American people, including less than half of the Republicans, want the war to continue.
Are our Senate Republicans listening?
The country is clamoring for you to end this war and to bring our troops home--something you can do right now by voting for Senator Gillibrand's War Powers Resolution.
Is Trump so intimidating, so untouchable that Republicans will keep siding with him instead of the 80 percent of Americans calling for the fighting to end?
The biggest thing standing between our troops and home is a Republican Party that is too afraid to cross the President.
Congress can break this vicious cycle of escalation Trump started in Iran, and this War Powers Resolution is how we do it.
I urge--I plead--with my Republican colleagues to listen to the American people. Vote to end this war. We are going to keep forcing Republicans to vote until you do.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on agreeing to the motion to discharge S.J. Res. 181.
The yeas and nays have been previously ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. President, I rise today to ask unanimous consent to pass the SAFE KIDS Act. I want to thank my colleagues who have joined me in this effort as cosponsors: Senators Lee, Blackburn, Banks, Sullivan, Ricketts, Lummis, Budd, Rounds, Kennedy, Moody, and Sheehy.
This bill is real simple. It is about protecting the integrity of American citizenship. It is also about our protecting children from exploitation and trafficking, and it is about closing a dangerous loophole that our foreign adversaries are using to undermine our national security right now.
To be an American citizen is one of the greatest privileges in the world. It is a sacred covenant between an individual and our Nation. It comes with rights, privileges, and immunities that people around the world would do anything to have. It also comes with the responsibility to protect and defend those liberties for future generations.
Right now, our Nation is vulnerable because foreign adversaries have found a backdoor around our immigration laws. Right now, citizens of foreign adversarial nations can have children born on American soil and as citizens through surrogacy. They actually never have to come into our country. Think about how insane this is.
Under the current system, a foreign adversary could arrange a surrogacy contract to have a child born in America and be given all the privileges of being counted as one of us. Then they can take that child back to their home country and raise that child under the influence of a regime that hates America. It is getting all the perks of American citizenship without any responsibility. It is taking a future voter and raising them in a country that wants to destroy our way of life. We can't let that happen.
Think about the Ayatollah in Iran. He could arrange a contract with an American surrogate. The child could get American citizenship at birth, be taken back to Iran, and be raised by a regime that chants ``Death to America.'' Then, years later, that child could come back to the United States as an American citizen.
That is not some farfetched, science fiction scenario; it is exactly the kind of vulnerability our foreign adversaries look for. The Chinese Communist Party has already demonstrated that it will exploit every weakness in our laws and institutions to advance its interest. Recent reporting has exposed disturbing examples of wealthy Chinese nationals exploiting American surrogacy arrangements to father more than 100 children born in the United States.
We should be asking: What happens to these children? Who raises them? What are they taught. What country are they taught to love? And what happens when they are old enough to return to the United States? Could they attend our universities? Could they serve in our military? Could they receive security clearances? Could they run for President? These are real questions and a real vulnerability we face if we don't act today.
We should not be creating a pipeline through which foreign adversaries can exploit American citizenship, raise American citizens under hostile, foreign influence, and potentially bring them back into our country as Americans.
But this is about more than national security; it is about children. We have already seen the heartbreaking consequences when an international surrogacy arrangement goes wrong. I have seen it right here in my own State.
A recent dispute in St. Augustine, FL--it is hard to believe-- involving a surrogate mother fighting for paternal rights demonstrates the devastating legal and emotional consequences when kids are treated like this. Kyla Simpson had triplets almost 2 years ago. Now she is fighting her way through court for custody of them because the Chinese national on the surrogacy contract didn't show up.
Let me make sure I tell you how this bill works, what it does and doesn't do. It doesn't ban surrogacy. It doesn't ban IVF. It doesn't take away women's rights. It doesn't interfere with Americans who use surrogacy or IVF to build their families. These are all separate debates. This bill is very narrow. It is focused on commercial surrogacy arrangements involving our country's most dangerous foreign enemies. This is about preventing hostile foreign regimes from exploiting legal loopholes to obtain American-born children.
My SAFE KIDS Act would do two simple things: It would invalidate commercial surrogacy contracts involving designated foreign adversaries, including China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea. Second, it would create a misdemeanor penalty for any broker who knowingly facilitates one of these prohibited arrangements. The way surrogacy works, there are groups that organize surrogacy contracts.
I cannot imagine why any Senator would oppose closing this loophole. Every Senator in this Chamber should be alarmed that this is currently possible under our laws. We should not wait for communist China, Iran, Russia, or North Korea to further exploit the vulnerability before we close it.
American citizenship cannot be bought. American children are not commodities. You do not need to be born here to be an American, but you do have to love what we have built. And we should never allow our foreign adversaries to turn our laws into weapons against the American people.
I urge my colleagues to support the SAFE KIDS Act.
Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 3101 and the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration. Further, I ask that the bill be read a third time and passed
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I have been in the House and the Senate for quite a while. I have written a lot of bills and amendments. I have read even more.
I am absolutely confounded by the language of this proposal, S. 3101, by my friend and colleague from Florida. There are so many issues bouncing around in this proposal of a serious nature that we would be foolish to do this by voice vote here immediately in the Senate. This deserves a real hearing, a real investigation, because it involves a lot of elements that affect many people personally, many families personally. We are talking about reproductive rights. We are talking about personal freedom.
I don't have a medical license. Some of my colleagues like to practice medicine on the floor of the Senate. I tend to listen to the experts on the subject. But I want to put this in perspective, if I can, for a moment.
At issue here is the issue of surrogacy. How do I explain that in a few words as a layman? It is basically a person who says: This may not be a fertilized fetus that I have been responsible for creating, but I am willing to allow my body to have this fetus during the gestational period until its birth.
That is the surrogacy involved in it.
Let's put this into perspective for a moment, if we can. How many live births are there in the United States each year? There are 3.6 million.
First, let's go in vitro fertilization because that is part of this conversation too. How many in vitro fertilization births are there out of the 3.6 million births in this country? There were 100,000--2.6 percent--in 2023 that were in vitro fertilization
Surrogacy. How many gestational surrogacy births in the United States are there each year? I would ask the Senator from Florida. He may know, but I will tell him. It is somewhere between 5- and 6,000. It is a fraction of a percentage.
Now, involved in this debate is the belief by some that we should allow no surrogacy. I am not one of those people.
Let me tell you a story of a family I know. Husband--father and mother decided they wanted to have a family. They went to great lengths through IVF so that she could become pregnant. It was a tragedy to them personally when they lost the baby late in the pregnancy. She was crushed.
Her sister, who is a medical doctor, said: It appears you have some problems with delivering a child. Let me suggest to you that if you go through IVF, I will be the surrogate mother and carry the baby for you and your husband.
They agreed. She went forward with it. And wouldn't you know, shortly afterward, the IVF worked for the original mother, and she became pregnant as well. So sisters were pregnant by the same father and mother in this situation. It was an act of kindness and courage on the part of her sister to help them out. If you saw them in the park today with their little boy and little girl, you wouldn't pick them out of a crowd, but through IVF and through surrogacy, they have a family that they dreamed of.
I think that is the right thing to do--legally and morally the right thing to do. Surrogacy has its place. It is an exceptional procedure. When there are 5- or 6,000 a year in America, it is certainly not one that really can be argued is part of any large conspiracy.
But there are actually--we have had hearings in the Judiciary Committee--there are actually Republicans who believe--listen to this; it sounds preposterous--they believe there is some kind of effort in a nation like China to have babies born in the United States and then bring them back to China and prepare them to come back to the United States someday to undermine our government or something. We have had hearings on that. When you ask them ``How can you prove what you just said?'' they have no evidence. But it is a conspiracy theory, and it is part of the calculation behind this amendment.
This bill is purportedly about protecting our national security from foreign adversaries and protecting children from exploitation and trafficking. If you want to introduce a bill to deal with trafficking or exploitation of children or others, count me in, but this bill goes so much further.
The Senator from Florida pointed out at one point a horrifying story of more than 20 children birthed by surrogate mothers. In one case, they were found abused and neglected in a home outside of Los Angeles.
I am not in favor of those abuses. I join him in stopping human trafficking. But this bill would not stop child abuse or trafficking. It would not prevent espionage by foreign adversaries. This bill will do nothing to prevent the situation that I just described in Los Angeles.
Instead of targeting bad actors, this bill would restrict who can access or enter into surrogacy contracts based solely on the nationality of the parties involved. This bill is not only grounded in an objection to birthright citizenship but in some sort of a weird, unusual, national security theory that goes behind this.
For the record, the Supreme Court has decided on birthright citizenship. And for the record, the 14th Amendment is as clear as can be: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States. The Supreme Court did not take long to agree with that, and I think that is part of the objection that is behind this amendment--the objection to that Supreme Court decision.
Instead of targeting bad actors, this bill would restrict who can access or enter into surrogacy contracts based solely on the nationality of the parties involved.
This bill voids all surrogacy agreements between a surrogate parent who is inside the United States at the time of the birth or who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident and a prospective parent who is a national or resident of certain countries.
The bill criminalizes assisting with making or executing such a surrogacy agreement in any way.
The bill's plan would impact all surrogacy agreements with nationals from Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea. It does not allow for consideration of how long these parties have been in the United States or the nature of the surrogacy agreement. For example, it would prevent an Iranian asylum seeker and her spouse from starting a family.
After the U.S. Supreme Court decision holding birthright citizenship as the law of the land, this bill reads like the latest MAGA conspiracy attempt to achieve what they were unable to achieve in the Supreme Court--ending birthright citizenship.
State lawmakers from Florida and Texas are using similar legislation to chip away at access to reproductive rights. There was a controversy, and you may remember it, as to whether or not in vitro fertilization is consistent with MAGA principles. They ultimately announced that it was, that IVF was fine, but that just shows you that they have run into a number of cases already where the principles do not bear out the reality of life in America.
Some are pushing to ban surrogacy altogether. The case I gave you is a good illustration in my mind of why we shouldn't do that.
They argue that the surrogacy agreement amounts to slavery and violated the 13th Amendment, a preposterous argument. Voiding and criminalizing surrogacy agreements with nationals from certain countries looks like the first step in a broader troubling plan to restrict surrogacy.
Countless couples, families, and individuals facing fertility challenges rely on access to surrogacy and other reproductive services to have children.
Most people seeking surrogacy in the United States are Americans. Some are foreign nationals who reside in the United States; others are foreigners who are turning to surrogacy in the United States because of limited access in their home countries.
I support thoughtful efforts to ensure that access to surrogacy in the United States is not exploited by those seeking to abuse our laws. This bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee on which I serve and am ranking member.
I would be happy to work with the Senator from Florida on the complex issues that he raises with the amendment. We won't agree on everything,
This bill does nothing to address those two issues, which are a major concern for me as well as the sponsor.
I hope we can work together to come up with something meaningful in the weeks ahead, and for that reason, I object.
Mr. President, so first off, I appreciate the comments from my colleague from Illinois. I look forward to working with him to try to solve this.
Let's remember what this is about. This is not about IVF. IVF has been a very positive experience for my family. It doesn't impact a surrogacy for an American citizen.
Actually, surrogacy has impacted my family and friends, so those are important opportunities for Americans to have children.
What this bill says, though, is if you are a national from people that want to destroy our way of life, you could be Xi in China, you could be Putin in Russia, you could be Kim Jong Un in North Korea, you could be the Ayatollah, you will not have the right to have a child in this country by surrogacy. They don't even have to show up in this country, and they could have a child. Why would they do that when they could do it in their own country? It doesn't make any sense to me.
So this is a problem. We need to resolve it. It has been a problem in this country. It has been a problem in my home State, and I look forward to working with my colleague from Illinois to solve it.
Mr. President, June 27 was one of the worst days in recent Colorado history. As the Knowles fire rolled along the Colorado- Utah border, the Rifle Helitack team put on their uniforms and rushed toward danger. While battling the blaze, one firefighter was badly injured and four others--Nick Hutcherson, Emily Barker, Sydney Watson, and Nathan Matthews--ultimately lost their lives.
There is bravery--and then there is wildland firefighting. The word ``hero'' gets used a lot. Nick, Emily, Sydney, and Nathan embodied that word.
They came from across the country to Colorado to form a unit united by one common mission: protecting lives, protecting property, and the landscapes we all cherish.
Their commitment to our public lands wasn't a hobby; it was their life's work. Together, they collectively spent decades fighting fires. And as dedicated as they were to their vocation, they were equally devoted to their friends and to their families, making this loss even more devastating.
Our hearts break for these firefighters and their families and all who loved them. These families deserve answers, and we need to understand what went wrong so we can prevent future tragedies.
That is why I am calling on the Department of the Interior to conduct a swift and thorough investigation into what happened, including whether the administration's recent shift to the Wildland Fire Service played any role in this event.
This isn't about playing politics or gotcha, trying to find blame. With wildfires still raging across Colorado, we can't afford to wait months and months to learn lessons that could save lives right now.
Colorado's firefighting community is close-knit. They are almost like an athletic team. The loss of one firefighter is felt by everyone. The loss of four is quite simply unimaginable. So we have to get to the bottom of what happened and do everything we can to make sure that we prevent a repeat tragedy.
As we do that, we are also mourning the loss of Nicholas Dale of British Columbia. Nicholas was a helicopter pilot who was tragically killed while battling a fire near Ouray in southwest Colorado. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family as well.
Last month, I traveled to the Snyder fire command post, and there I met with some of Nick, Emily, Sydney, and Nate's fellow firefighters and heard some of their stories. It brought me back to my time as Governor, standing with crews after a terrible tragedy. The heartbreak never gets easier; it only gets worse over time.
And Colorado's wildfires keep getting worse too. In the 1990s, Colorado averaged 13 wildfires a year. By the 2020s, that number has climbed from 13 to 70 a year. And that is why I am here today--because we have a responsibility, all of us, regardless of politics, to prevent wildfires, to protect our communities, and to help people recover from disasters.
We know we are not going to stop every wildfire, but we also know that many of the worst wildfires could have been less destructive if we had taken certain commonsense steps sooner, both from a shorter and a longer term perspective.
First, we need to treat climate change like the emergency it is, and that is a long-term horizon but an important one. On a visit outside of Leadville earlier this year, one individual told our office that the annual snowpack averaged 240 inches. That is 20 feet. The thinnest snowpack in that equal period, that last 100 years--and, again, these are data collected every March for 100 years--the smallest, thinnest snowpack was 182 inches--not 240, which was the average--but 182 inches, roughly 15 feet. Two-hundred forty inches is 20 feet.
This winter, it was about 60 inches. That is 5 feet. So the average was 20 feet, the alltime low in 100 years was 15 feet, and suddenly this year it is 5 feet.
And this isn't an isolated incident. Colorado is facing its worst drought in 1,200 years, according to sediments from the Grand Canyon. Let me say that again because it is hard to believe. Colorado is facing its worst drought in 1,200 years. That means you have to go back to the 9th century to find drought conditions this bad in Colorado.
Lake Mead and Lake Powell, two of our biggest reservoirs in the West, have now fallen to their lowest levels on record. If the water in Lake Powell falls just another 33 feet, we will hit what they call the power pool, meaning that point where there won't be enough water to generate hydroelectric power.
Not every wildfire is caused by climate change, but scientists widely agree that climate change is making the problem far worse. Heat, drought, a moisture-starved atmosphere all increase wildfire risk, and each of these factors can be connected back to climate change.
Since joining the Senate, tackling wildfires and drought has been among my top priorities. That is why we passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which included the largest climate investment in American history. We won $4 billion for the Colorado River Basin and $8 billion for western water infrastructure.
We have brought Senators from seven States together to form the Colorado River Caucus, a bipartisan caucus, to build consensus on how to use our shared resources, and we have introduced legislation that would help manage our forests better as well.
Overgrown woodlands are tinderboxes that let wildfires spread faster and farther, but too often government bureaucracy blocks the projects that we most need in order to reduce that risk before disaster strikes.
Together with Senators Alex Padilla, John Curtis, and Tim Sheehy, we introduced the bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act. The idea is simple: streamline forest management and speed up new technologies for wildfire prevention, detection, and response.
Our bill has passed through committee, and it is waiting for a full vote on the Senate floor. It shouldn't take another tragedy for the Senate to act. We need to pass Fix Our Forests now.
Solving our drought and our wildfire challenges requires cooperation across every level of government, but recently, that cooperation has been strained. Last year, the Trump administration froze over $150 million in already-obligated funding for 17 Colorado water and drought resiliency projects. At a time of unprecedented drought, that is quite simply unconscionable.
We refused to accept it, and we pushed the administration to release that money. So far, we have gotten roughly two-thirds of the funds released. We will not stop pushing until Colorado communities get every dollar they are entitled to.
Colorado is also home to one of the world's great scientific resources, the National Center for Atmosphere Research, which is in Boulder, CO. For years, NCAR has given weather, climate, and wildfire forecasts that firefighters and emergency managers rely on to fight disasters. And we are going to keep fighting for NCAR and for science.
And, finally, solving our wildfire problem and responding to disasters requires all of us to work together.
So I want to, for a moment, just speak directly to our President. Last summer, one of the largest wildfires in Colorado history tore through Rio Blanco County. President Trump should know this county well. Can't expect him to know every county, but this is a special county. They love him. They voted overwhelmingly to support him in 2024, but there are now a lot less campaign signs there than there were in 2024.
When Colorado filed a disaster declaration to help these same people rebuild and prevent future tragedies, the White House denied their request. These are people who did everything right their entire lives, only to lose it all in a natural disaster. They paid their taxes, believing that if the worst ever did happen, their government would be there for them.
I think President Trump broke that promise. Disasters should never be political, but this administration has politicized it. And if you are a Republican living in a blue State, you had better hope that disaster doesn't strike your community or, if you live in a red State and our next President happens to be a Democrat, you better hope this new Democratic President doesn't stick to these new rules created by President Trump.
The President has approved 80 percent of disaster requests from Republican Governors but only about 60 percent from Democratic Governors. That is not normal. To my knowledge, that has never happened before at that scale.
Under prior administrations, the approval rate was roughly the same no matter which way a State had voted. And that is the way it should be. That is the way it has to be in a democracy. Politics should never decide whether you can rebuild your house after a fire.
The Aspen Acres fire in south-central Colorado has already destroyed over 300 houses. Colorado is slowly getting that fire under control, thanks to the brave firefighters who are working day and night, addressing it.
It is the seventh-largest wildfire in State history, and we are grateful FEMA has authorized fire management assistance grants for that fire, as well as for the Gold Mountain fire and the Willow fire.
The Aspen Acres fire will likely require a major disaster declaration. If it does, we will push this administration with everything we have to make sure Colorado gets the resources it needs and deserves.
We are also fighting to take politics out of disaster relief. Congress needs to pass our bipartisan Disaster Declaration Transparency Act. It gives Congress the power to review disaster relief denials driven--or at least apparently driven--by politics because disaster relief should never be political.
In the meantime, it is important that every single Coloradan do their part to help reduce wildfire risks. They have got to follow local restrictions, practice campfire safety, and create defensible space around their property.
On a recent trip to Beulah--which was engulfed by the Aspen Acres fire--I saw firsthand the devastation that wildfires leave behind.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator wrap up his comments, please.
Mr. President, block after block, all that remained was heavy smoke and heartbreak, charred chimneys, and maybe a hearth here and there.
Drought and wildfires aren't going away. Unless we act, they will only become more frequent, more destructive, and more expensive. That is why we need to work together on commonsense solutions to make everything we do safer.
That is why we are fighting here. That is what we are fighting for here in Washington, and I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort.
The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. McConnell), and the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Tillis).
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 47, as follows:
The executive resolution (S. Res. 817) was agreed to.
(The executive resolution is printed in the Record of July 23, 2026, under ``Submitted Resolutions.'')
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table.
Madam President, I come to the floor today to congratulate my friend and former colleague in the Alaska State Legislature. This is an individual for whom I have great respect, Senator Lyman Hoffman.
Senator Hoffman is retiring after nearly four decades of service to Alaska. Few legislators leave behind legacies that are measured not only by their years of service but by the generations of lives they have improved. Senator Hoffman--the alltime longest serving member of the Alaska State Legislature--is one of those rare public servants.
Throughout his nearly 40 years in office, Lyman has dedicated himself to improving the lives of Alaskans, particularly those in our State's most remote and underserved communities. It has truly made a difference for them.
Everyone who has spent time in the capital city of Juneau knows exactly where the center of gravity has been. It has been with Lyman.
We have all come to appreciate and value his experience, his knowledge, and, really, the wisdom the man has. At first, you wouldn't expect it, as he comes across as kind of a quiet guy with a gruff, deep voice. It is true to
There have been many a legislator who have found themselves in some pretty tense budget negotiations in the senate finance committee. Senator Hoffman holds the gavel there. And in those settings, he can unnerve the most senior lawmaker just by sitting very quietly through an entire committee meeting before offering just a few choice words.
When Lyman does speak, everybody listens because, again, he has this remarkable--almost uncanny--ability to cut through the politics and just focus on what really matters. And that is Lyman. You aren't going to win a staring contest with him, but he can steer an entire negotiation with just a few carefully chosen words.
As the longtime cochair of the senate finance committee, Senator Hoffman has become one of our State's most influential leaders. Through administrations and periods of economic uncertainty, he has earned bipartisan respect for his careful stewardship of public resources, deep institutional knowledge, and the ability to build practical consensus.
And perhaps the accomplishment for which Senator Hoffman will be best remembered is Alaska's Power Cost Equalization Endowment. He worked, actually alongside, my father Gov. Frank Murkowski, and Lyman secured the long-term future of a program that helps make electricity more affordable in rural Alaska. Out in these regions, costs can be astonishingly high and can take up to half of a household's budget. But, today, PCE is a major success. Its endowment exceeds over a billion dollars, and it continues to serve families and schools and health clinics and businesses across rural Alaska.
Lyman is a little bit predictable, and I say that because I could always--always--count on Lyman Hoffman to ask me the hard questions. And I would give my annual address to the legislature, and Lyman would be sitting in the back of the chamber there. He would raise his hand, and he would say ``What are you doing to make energy cheaper?'' or ``What are you doing to help rural Alaskans?''
And I always knew it was coming. I always knew it was coming because Lyman was consistent that way. He was practical and he was purposeful and his clear focus--``What are you doing to help rural Alaskans?'' ``What are you doing to help lower energy costs?''--that helped guide me here on my own in the Senate.
Because what Senator Hoffman understands is that energy policy is not just kilowatts and price per barrel; it is about whether families can afford to heat their homes, whether elders can stay warm in the wintertime, and whether communities have the opportunity to grow. And, again, this is where Lyman made his mark.
As a leading advocate for Alaska's statewide weatherization program, he helped secure more than $600 million to make homes more efficient for Alaskans. And, again, his work reflected a very simple belief: that every Alaskan, no matter where you live, deserves a safe, warm home.
From the days that we served in the State legislature to the present, Lyman Hoffman has represented not only his district--which covers Southwest Alaska and out in the Aleutians--but really he helped all rural Alaska with genuine distinction and giving them voice, giving them hope, and delivering real results.
And just as important as those results is the example Lyman has set as a public servant. He has demonstrated that lasting public policy is built through collaboration, rather than division. His influence extended far beyond the bills that he passed, shaping both the great State that he loves, the individuals who have served alongside him, and those that will follow him.
And as I speak to Senator Hoffman's impressive legacy, I also want to acknowledge that no public servant achieves these things alone. Behind every legislative session, every late-night budget negotiation, and every year devoted to serving Alaska, stood some key people--certainly his staff over the years, but always--always--Senator Hoffman's family. His wife Lillian was always there. His children Trina and Douglas--I know that the family made countless quiet, meaningful sacrifices to make all this work possible. So you too deserve to be recognized.
Alaska is stronger because Senator Lyman Hoffman chose to dedicate his life to others, and his work will continue to benefit our State for generations to come.
So congratulations, Lyman Hoffman--my friend Lyman. Thank you. At some point--at some point--the special legislative sessions will end, and you will be able to conclude this incredible chapter of service to our State. And when that day arrives and long into the future, Alaskans will remember you. We will celebrate you, and we will remain grateful for all that you have done.
I yield the floor.
And I thank the Senator from Wyoming for the opportunity to speak.
I thank the Senator from Alaska for visiting about a local legislator. They are tremendously important to all of us.
Madam President, yesterday I addressed this Chamber because we are wasting time we do not have to get the digital asset market structure bill passed, the bill called the Clarity Act. It is a strong bipartisan path forward that we have, and it is the best way for us to give digital assets, especially in this country, the certainty they need and ensure the United States leads on digital asset innovation.
The way to do it is through bipartisan support of this bill. And, again, this is a very good bill, a bill created out of necessity because the status quo does not work.
My friend Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and I released the Lummis- Gillibrand Responsible Financial Innovation Act together in 2022 to give the U.S. industry the regulatory clarity it needs to thrive on U.S. soil, to give consumers the confidence they need to participate in our digital economy, and give law enforcement the tools they need to crack down on illicit finance and hold bad actors accountable.
That 168-page bill would become the foundation for the Clarity Act. A year later, in 2023, we added 100 pages with stronger consumer protection provisions. Yet, we got feedback from colleagues that they wanted more. So, again, we listened.
Today, this bill that was under 300 pages is more than 600 pages. That is hundreds of pages built over 11 months of daily bipartisan negotiations in windowless rooms where colleagues from both parties shared their priorities, and we worked diligently to incorporate them.
Title I alone has 33 separate Democrat-driven edits. We added 23 new sections on illicit finance at Democrats' request. Democrats secured another 30 wins in the CFTC portion of the bill. Plus, we created the three entirely new titles they wanted. And that is all before we even get to ethics, where the President bent over backwards to get my Democrat colleagues to a ``yes.''
We have 100 clear examples of compromise, and yet for some this still isn't enough. Holding out for a perfect bill stopped being principled months ago. It has become an excuse not to legislate at all, and the people who pay for that excuse aren't in this room. They are the people we are about to talk about: the digital asset industry and the consumers who wish to participate with confidence in this digital economy, not to mention the future generations who will miss out because too many in this Chamber said: Not yet. I am not ready. I have got an election in November. Don't want to do it.
The status quo in this industry doesn't work. It is not working for the digital asset industry or law enforcement or consumers.
We have already watched exchanges collapse with no functioning bankruptcy framework built for this asset class. And we have already watched ordinary people stand in line for years waiting on bankruptcy courts to claw back pennies on the dollar of what they lost.
When Celsius and Voyager went bankrupt, customer deposits didn't stay customer deposits. They became assets in a bankruptcy pool, fought over by creditors who had never even heard of the people who actually owned those assets. More than 4 million
That is what no regulation looks like. That is not a hypothetical or a talking point. That is real people suffering real losses, real years spent in bankruptcy court fighting for money that should never have been up for grabs in the first place.
Customers will, once again, be put in a nasty fight with Wall Street law firms that they have no hope to win.
If you believe in consumer protection, we must pass this bill to give consumers the protection in bankruptcy they deserve.
Not passing this bill means everyone in this Chamber will have to deservedly hang their heads the next time a crypto exchange collapses-- because there will be a next time, absent regulation. No one in this Chamber gets to act surprised by that.
It already happened. And if we don't get our acts together, it is going to happen again to our constituents under the exact same broken rules while we all sit here debating whether a bill with over 100 Democratic wins is still somehow not good enough.
Another FTX is not a hypothetical we are guarding against; it is a guaranteed outcome of leaving this industry with no custody rules, no consumer protections, and no consequences when a platform fails people.
And, by the way, foreign adversaries aren't just waiting around for us to finish deliberating. They are moving money through the exact gaps this bill closes--right now, today--while we hold out for something more perfect than what is already sitting on the table.
To those who have already said they are a ``no'' vote, let me be clear: A ``no'' vote isn't a statement against President Trump because he has already given you what you asked for. It is a vote to keep American consumers inside a system we already know to be flawed on a theory that the fix wasn't good enough. It is a vote to drive American innovation, American jobs, and American oversight of this jurisdiction to Singapore or the UAE or whichever jurisdiction is happy to take what we are too foolish to accept.
That is the actual choice that faces us, not Republicans versus Democrats. It is fixed or flawed. It is America leading or America sidelined.
We have served up this win for you and set it in front of you--over 100 wins in the base bill, an ethics agreement no other President in American history has volunteered. And by someone who didn't even have to give an inch but did it because he believes that much in American innovation and what this asset class can bring for generations is worth protecting.
Take it. Take it. Stop finding reasons not to.
I know that if we fail here, this doesn't come back next year or the year after that. The realistic next change at market structure legislation is likely 2030, at the earliest. In the meantime, we will lose businesses to other countries. We lose investment and jobs and tax revenue to jurisdictions moving faster than we are. We inhibit law enforcement's ability to hold bad actors accountable, and we lose our seat at the table to shape how this industry grows. At the exact same moment, we have a chance to guide it responsibly.
We didn't get here by ceding the internet to Europe, and we cannot afford to cede digital assets the same way, especially now that we have already done the hard work--5\1/2\ years--putting this bill together.
The window to lead right now is wide open. The end zone is inches away. But that window will not stay open for a body that continues to respond to opportunity with: Not yet. I have got an election. I don't want to take a stand.
Opportunity waits for no one.
Let's cinch up. Let's punch the ball into the end zone and pass the CLARITY Act now.
Madam President, I am going to take us back 100 years to August 5, 1926. It was in the midst of the Roaring Twenties. Calvin Coolidge was the President. Babe Ruth was ruling professional baseball. There was no television. Horses and cars shared the streets together. Life expectancy was 57 years. The Great Depression was still off in the future.
On August 5, 1926, a remarkable person was born, and I want to recognize him today. He is a World War II veteran and a loving husband, father, and grandfather. His name is SGT Wayne Franklin Phillips, and he is approaching an extraordinary milestone--his 100th birthday. Pretty amazing. We rise today to honor him, to reflect on his service and sacrifice as part of a generation that secured the freedoms that we enjoy today.
I grew up in rural Northwest Ohio, nearly in the same neighborhood as SGT Wayne Franklin Phillips, and I am always proud of the people of rural Northwest Ohio. SGT Wayne Phillips is from Henry County, where he was born and raised on a farm and became a farmer in an area outside a small town--Hamler, OH--alongside his three brothers and three sisters.
If you are ever in Hamler, OH, it is one of those places that are the heart of agriculture in Ohio. You can see to the horizon in all four directions, and I know the Presiding Officer from Iowa understands what I mean by that. It is just farmland as far as you can see.
He graduated from Hamler High School at the age of 17, and he joined the Army's 81st Readiness Division just months after receiving his high school diploma. Of course he did. That is what a lot of people his age did during that period of time.
During his military service, Sergeant Phillips was briefly involved in the Battle of the Bulge. I think all of us who study our history know that was one of the largest and bloodiest battles fought by the American forces in World War II and really was the final battle to defeat Hitler's Nazis.
Over the course of 41 days, hundreds of thousands of Allied troops fought to halt that Nazi offensive in Western Europe, and they were successful in winning the final battle that led to the end of World War II.
His service took him to Germany, the Philippines, and Japan. Following Japan's surrender, Sergeant Phillips quickly rose through the ranks and earned the rank of technician fourth grade, becoming the youngest man in charge of a motor pool servicing trucks and military equipment. As you might expect, farm boys from Ohio knew how to fix things, and SGT Wayne Phillips was one of those.
Like so many members of the ``greatest generation,'' Sergeant Phillips helped defeat tyranny, liberate Europe, and preserve freedom for future generations. Because of the service and sacrifice of many Americans like him, our Nation and much of the world have enjoyed liberty and peace and prosperity for most of his life since then.
We owe an enduring debt of gratitude to our veterans and more than 400,000 Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice during World War II.
After being honorably discharged in 1946, Sergeant Phillips married his wife Eileen. Together, they raised three children: Wayne, Paul, and Martha. Today, he is also a proud grandfather, great-grandfather, as well as a devoted uncle.
His commitment to service did not end when he returned home. When service is in your DNA, you serve your country, you serve your family, and you move home and you serve your community, and that is exactly what he did. As a respected civic leader in Henry County, he served 16 years as a Henry County commissioner and 4 years on the Deshler Village Council.
Even as he approaches here in just a few days his 100th birthday-- this may be the most amazing thing when I think about it--SGT Wayne Phillips continues to drive to work each day, at age 100, to the Phillips Oil Company, the family business that he founded and continues to operate alongside and with many members of his family. Pretty amazing. He is also a devout man of faith. He is an active member of the Deshler United Methodist Church and also a part of Deshler American Legion and the Maumee Valley Sportsman's Club.
Sadly, the number of our surviving World War II veterans grows smaller each year. I have celebrated 100th birthdays of several of them. I always
I say this often: We should honor what we value. We should honor what we value. And I hope that every time any of us--and I give remarks about veterans and World War II and the sacrifices that many generations of Americans have made--that we honor that so that our children hear that service and sacrifice are valued, are important.
So on August 5, SGT Wayne Franklin Phillips will celebrate his 100th birthday. It is an honor for me to share his story with my colleagues today--a life defined by service, family, faith, community, and in support of our freedom. SGT Wayne Phillips is richly deserving of recognition as he reaches this remarkable milestone.
I thank my colleagues for allowing me to honor this extraordinary Ohioan, and I extend my heartfelt congratulations to SGT Wayne Phillips on his 100th birthday.
Congratulations. We celebrate you and your service. God bless you, and may God continue to bless America.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
Madam President, before I begin my formal remarks, I just want to stand here and give a formal apology to John Merlino. I have for years maligned him. I have disrespected, disregarded him. You know how I operate sometimes. And I just want to say he is a man of honor. I have taken him off my list, and now he is on the good list.
So just for anyone who wants to know, the U.S. senior Senator from New Jersey has praised John Merlino--perhaps for his first time because he is not a man that really generates a lot of praise usually.
So I just want you to know, before I go into my formal remarks for the day, that John Merlino--you the man.
Now, I would like for the record to separate a little bit so I can start some of my formal remarks after I have tried to redeem the soul of a friend and colleague.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Madam President, I really believe there is a reason why some of my Republican colleagues themselves have delayed the Blanche nomination, because this is actually no ordinary nomination. We haven't had a moment like this under Donald Trump where Republicans themselves have stopped the vote. Because this is not simply a vote about one man; it is a vote about whether the Department of Justice will remain independent of the President of the United States.
The Attorney General of the United States of America has one client-- not a political party, not a President, not a wealthy donor, not a political movement. The Attorney General's client is the Constitution of the United States and the American people. That is the sacred obligation of that office. When they are sworn in, they do not swear an oath to the President, to Donald Trump; they swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Unfortunately, Todd Blanche has spent months in office demonstrating his allegiance not to our Constitution but to the President. Time and time again, he has shown that he is only capable of serving the interests of one client--Donald Trump. That is why this nomination should not simply be delayed; it should be rejected. The evidence is overwhelming.
Congress came together in a bipartisan way to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act because survivors deserved answers, they deserved justice, and the American people deserved transparency. Todd Blanche was responsible for carrying out that law. Instead, he delayed and delayed. He was stalling. And there was a release after the date and deadline prescribed by Congress that was so careless that sensitive information belonging to Epstein's survivors was exposed by the very Department that was supposed to protect them--their phone numbers, addresses, images, personal details.
Think about that. The survivors entrusted the Department of Justice with some of the most painful chapters of their lives. They deserved care. They deserved competence. They deserved honesty. They deserved an adherence to the law. Instead, they received delays, excuses, and a terrible, tragic breach of their privacy.
Then came the request of meeting with the survivors. For weeks, Mr. Blanche insisted he could not meet with them unless their attorneys were present. This was not true. A first-year law student knows that this is not true. His own Department's policies and Federal law make that clear.
When he finally did meet with them--the survivors--because a Republican Senator demanded that he do it, the survivors described the meeting as disappointing. They said they felt gaslit. They said they were skipped over. They said Mr. Blanche was condescending to the survivors of sexual assault.
Even then, when the survivors pleaded for continued investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein coconspirators, Mr. Blanche once again hid behind claims that the law prevented him from answering.
So we simply have to ask the question: Who is Todd Blanche serving here? Is he serving the survivors? No. Is he serving the interests of the Department of Justice? No. Is he serving the American people? No. But we know that he rushed to the Situation Room for high-level members of the Trump administration to strategize on how to protect the President.
It is another clear example that the person he is there to protect is Donald Trump.
(Mr. BUDD assumed the Chair.)
Last week, my Democratic colleagues held a Spotlight Forum to examine Mr. Blanche's record. We heard from a courageous Epstein survivor. We heard from ethics experts. We heard from one of Mr. Blanche's own former colleagues from the Southern District of New York. We heard from a former Justice official appointed under a Republican President--who served a Republican Senator, Senator Hatch, here in this body--who was then fired simply because he had done his job on investigations involving Robert Mueller and Jack Smith.
Different witnesses, different backgrounds, still one conclusion from every one of them: that Todd Blanche is unfit to lead the Department of Justice. And if there were any doubt, the events of recent days erased those doubts.
Mr. Blanche, in his tenure, helped negotiate a corrupt, extraordinary settlement between Donald Trump's Department of Justice and Donald Trump. We have heard from the Federal bench already that there was no controversy. Donald Trump can't be on both sides of a negotiation. That corrupt structure was exploiting the judiciary to create an environment in which there would be a settlement, and out of that settlement, we saw an unjust and untoward creation that outraged Americans all across the political spectrum. They created a slush fund.
Think about what this means: The lawyer who represented Donald Trump now oversees the Department of Justice and negotiates an agreement between Donald Trump and Donald Trump that is not merely an appearance of conflict, that is the definition of a conflict. It is precisely why the Department of Justice must be independent.
If you look at this slush fund agreement, within it, there are immunity provisions that, according to that agreement, are, to the former senior Federal prosecutor--he said that this agreement and the immunity provisions are ``mind-boggling in scope.'' Donald Trump got a tax liability immunity that is extraordinary--mind-boggling in scope. The immunity provisions alone cover broad categories with no meaningful legal definition.
When asked about those undefined terms during his confirmation hearing, Mr. Blanche effectively acknowledged that they could encompass almost anything--anything. According to Blanche, he negotiated a deal that gave Donald Trump immunity that could cover almost any kind of tax fraud that
For Donald Trump, with his former lawyer at the head of the Justice Department, it seems like, for the President, justice has no rules, justice has no standards, justice has no limits.
When one man receives special rules unavailable to every other American, this is not justice; it is privilege. It is unjust privilege.
During his confirmation hearing, Mr. Blanche repeatedly promised that he would act independently. But independence is not something you promise; it is something you demonstrate. He has been in this position for months and has had the chance to show us not promises but actions, and at every important decision he has made, the same story comes out. Who was he serving? The Constitution or Donald Trump? The answer is unmistakable.
This vote we have in the Senate on this nominee--every Senator is going to have to eventually cast a vote, but history is going to record something much larger. It will record whether in this moment, the U.S. Senate defended the independence of American justice, the independence of the Justice Department, or did we surrender it.
Long after today's headlines are forgotten, long after today's politics have faded, one question will remain: When the independence of the Department of Justice was tested, where did we stand?
I know where I stand. I stand for a Department of Justice whose only client is the American people; a Department that follows the evidence, not politics; a Department that defends the Constitution, not a President.
No one--not even the President of the United States--is above the law. That principle has guided this great Republic for nearly 250 years. It is our responsibility to preserve it today. It is the oath that we took, the commitment that we made that we will serve the people and the ideals.
To vote for Blanche is to surrender those ideals upon the altar of someone who wants to be a false god, where his interests are superior over everyone else's. That is wrong.
History is watching. We should reject this nominee.
Mr. President, somewhere in America today, a father kissed his children goodbye before leaving to work, a mother boarded an airplane to attend her father's funeral, a husband drove to his construction job, a woman walked into an airport believing that they were following the law of our land. None of them expected to disappear into our immigration detention system. Yet this is happening all over our country.
Over the last several months, immigration enforcement has accelerated dramatically. In June alone, ICE arrested more than 43,000 people--the highest monthly total in years. People are being arrested outside of their homes, at airports, at workplaces, near schools, near our churches, across communities throughout our Nation. And many of them-- most of them--are nonviolent, with no criminal record. Many of them have lived here for years--many, for decades. Many of them are raising American children. Some have American grandchildren, American spouses, and are an integral part of the community. Many of these folks are working jobs, paying taxes, following the legal process toward citizenship.
A woman traveling home to Texas for her father's funeral was detained at an airport while she was pursuing her asylum claim. Two other women, despite being married to American citizens and already in the legal process of obtaining permanent residency, were detained.
These are not people that are hiding from the law; these are people trying to follow it. Yet, instead of helping them complete that process, our government took them, locked them away from their families, from the Americans that love them, the communities that cherish them, the businesses and jobs that sustained those families.
Right now, today in America, roughly 70 percent of the people in immigration detention--often for-profit private companies--have never been convicted of a criminal offense--70 percent. This is not what Donald Trump promised--that he would go after the ``worst of the worst.'' This is a dragnet.
These, unfortunately, are indiscriminate arrests, not the result of focused law enforcement. They are the consequence of arbitrary arrest quotas and no guiding principles of decency and support of a legal immigration system. It is taking people who are seeking to abide by our laws and throwing them in prisons for the profits of private companies, which also are big supporters and contributors to this President.
When numbers become more important than justice, innocent people become collateral damage. And this doesn't just harm immigrants in our country or violate our values of decency; it harms all Americans.
Too often, this debate is framed as though immigrants are taking from our country, that they are takers. Well, the facts tell a different story. According to the conservative Cato Institute, for more than two decades, immigrants have contributed more in taxes--way more in taxes-- than they have received in any kind of government benefit, many of which they are ineligible for. Together, immigrants have generated a fiscal surplus measured in the trillions of dollars. Undocumented immigrants alone paid nearly $100 billion in Federal, State, and local taxes in a single year. They work. They build. They start businesses. They strengthen our economy. They contribute to Social Security and Medicare. They help build prosperity for all of America.
Yet this administration wants to punish many of the very people that are helping to strengthen it, violating the commitment to go after the dangerous people, to focus our taxpayer resources on getting criminals off of our street. But no, they are using our taxpayer money to go after people that have been in our country for years and decades, who are contributing to it and are working hard to abide by our immigration laws.
Nowhere is this contradiction more painful than what we are seeing right now with Haitian immigrants in our country. Earlier this year, the United Nations described Haiti as ``one of the most complex crises in . . . recent history.'' Armed gangs control large sections of the country. Kidnappings are widespread. Sexual violence is used as a weapon. Thousands upon thousands have been killed. Natural disasters continue to deepen an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis.
Trump's own State Department gives Haiti its highest travel warning, level 4; in other words, do not travel to Haiti. Think about that. We tell American citizens ``It is far too dangerous for you to go to Haiti,'' and then we tell Haitian families ``We are sending you there.'' How can both possibly be true? How could a nation of decency take people with temporary protected status and send them to the very country our Nation warns us not to go to because of the violence and destitution? Have we no decency in our policies? If a country is far too dangerous for an American to step into, how can it be safe enough for families that are now being forced to go back there?
Temporary protected status exists for precisely this kind of moment. Congress created it. A Republican President signed it into law. It recognizes a simple yet profound moral truth: When extraordinary danger exists, Americans should not force human beings into it.
The values of our country, the values of our collective faiths, the values of the best of humanity are being violated here. We are a moral nation, but forcing people here on temporary protected status back into countries where there is such violence and destitution violates our morals, our values. It cheapens us all. It is wrong. Yet this administration has canceled temporary protected status for more than 330,000 Haitians.
Many have lived here for years and years. Many of them already have had American children in our country. Many of them have married Americans themselves. They have worked here. They have paid billions in taxes here. They built businesses here, served communities in some of the most humble jobs in our hospitals as assistants, helping the ill and the elderly.
There are thousands that I have come to know are in New Jersey, many whom I know personally. They are woven into the fabric of our communities, but now from a callous President they face deportation into one of the most dangerous places on Earth.
I ask my colleagues: Can we look these families in the eye and honestly
Most of us here in this body are Christians. Would Jesus send someone from our Nation into danger, rip them away from their communities? Is that what our faiths dictate? Is that what our ideals dictate?
Even some Republicans have been raising alarms. Members of the House voted to extend protections. The Republican Governor of Ohio called those deportations ``a mistake'' because this is not simply an immigration debate; it is a moral test.
America has always been strongest when our laws reflected both security and humanity. These are not conflicting ideals. In fact, they are interwoven.
When we violate our humanity, we violate our security. We can secure our borders, and we should. We can enforce our laws, and we must. But we can also distinguish between those who threaten America and those who have spent years here in our country strengthening it.
This is not weakness. The Haitians in our community--keeping them here amidst the crisis in Haiti--it is not weakness; it is wisdom. It is justice. It is morally right.
It is long past time that we, in Congress, modernize an immigration system that virtually everyone agrees is broken. I can't tell you the conversations I have had with Republican colleagues of mine.
The late Lindsey Graham is a great example about how our immigration laws are so broken, it makes it hard for anyone who wants to follow the rules to be able to, in any timely way, become a citizen of our country.
The Cato Institute calls it more likely to win the lottery than it is to come into our country. This is one of the reasons why our population is declining.
We need laws that reflect our values, laws that are orderly, laws that keep us safe and secure, laws that protect the border, laws that affirm our values.
We can have all of that. Do not listen to the false choice of a President, who wants to send people back to a human version of hell, rip people from our communities all in the name of safety and security. That is a lie.
We must create laws that offer a realistic pathway for people who have lived, worked, contributed, paid taxes, invested their lives in this country for decades, especially those with American families and American children.
The question before us is so much larger than immigration; it is about whom we are becoming as a society when we turn our back on our neighbors being thrown in private detention facilities that are profiting off of their pain, who we are as a nation when we want to rip people away from their families and their children and send them to modern-day's hell, who we are as a nation when we take those people that are good enough to work in our hospitals to take care of our elderly, but then we want to turn our back on them and let them be dragged out of our country even though they have been here for years, followed our laws, and are working toward a pathway to citizenship.
Who are we if we continue down this road that creates false fears, that spreads lies about immigrants, that turns its very back on the fundamental precept to love your neighbor?
Well, I still believe in America. I still believe we are strong enough to create safety and security and to embrace those who love our Nation and serve her faithfully even though they are not citizens. I still believe in an America that is big enough and bold enough to protect its borders and love the stranger.
I still believe in a nation whose immigration laws can affirm our dignity and decency and not be an assault on it. I still believe in a nation that honors its faith traditions and knows that we have to love our neighbor and welcome the stranger, especially when they are fleeing persecution and hate and violence.
I believe in the highest ideals of our Nation. That is why we have laws like temporary protected status in the first place. It reflected the best of us. But I fear this administration is showing the worst of who we are. I honor Republican think tanks, the Republican Governors who all have the courage to stand up and say: This is wrong.
We need that kind of chorus of conviction here in the U.S. Senate. I ask my colleagues to not let this President so violate our collective values. This is not a right or left issue; it is a right or wrong issue.
I pray for our Nation. I pray that we live our ideals and don't just talk about them. I pray that we teach our children whom we are not by what we say but by what we do.
I pray that in this crisis, we do not allow a President to undermine decency and grace and send innocent people back to environments where they will face nightmares and violence.
We can be the America we say we are, but this Chamber must stand up.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the en bloc consideration of the following resolutions, which are at the desk: S. Res. 821, S. Res. 822, S. Res. 823, S. Res. 824, and S. Res. 825.
There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolutions en bloc.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolutions be agreed to, the preambles be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The resolutions were agreed to.
The preambles were agreed to.
(The resolutions, with their preambles, are printed in today's Record under ``Submitted Resolutions.'')
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations en bloc: Calendar Nos. 878 through 880, Calendar Nos. 882 through 892, Calendar Nos. 894 through 898, Calendar No. 881, with the exception of Stephen P. Snelson; and all nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Air Force, with the exception of PN970-2 and PN1151, Omar Vargas; Army, with the exception of PN1015-2, Mark R. Berube and Mandi A. Samples; PN1017-2, Joel A. Arends and Michael D. Thompson; PN1061-2, Theresa M. Long; PN1065-2, Samuel A. Smith; PN1072-2, Philip T. Buckler; PN1104, Austin D. Roberts and John A. Goodwin; PN1105, Justin M. Smith; Navy, with the exception of PN835-2, PN925, PN990-2, Robert J. Moreno and Joshua Q. McCright; PN1029-2, Kelly Cruz; and Space Force; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The nominations considered and confirmed are as follows:
On page S4366, July 30, 2026, third column, the following appears: Record of June 23, 2026, with the exception of Austin P. Roberts and John A. Goodwin PN1104 ARMY nominations (363)
The online Record has been corrected to read: Record of June 23, 2026, with the exception of Austin D. Roberts and John A. Goodwin PN1104 ARMY nominations (363)
On page S4366, July 30, 2026, third column, the following appears: PN1104 ARMY nominations (363) beginning JAMIE E. ABEL, and ending
The online Record has been corrected to read: PN1105 ARMY nominations (363) beginning JAMIE E. ABEL, and ending
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the following nominations en bloc: All nominations on the Secretary's desk in the Foreign Service; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action and the Senate then resume legislative session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The nominations considered and confirmed are as follows:
Mr. President, today I recognize Jayden Bender, an intern in my Aberdeen, SD, office, for all of the hard work she has done for me, my staff, and the State of South Dakota over the past several months.
Jayden is a graduate of Britton-Hecla High School in Britton, SD. Currently, she is attending the University of South Dakota in Vermillion, SD, where she is majoring in legal studies with a minor in policial science. She is a hard worker who has been dedicated to getting the most out of her internship experience.
I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Jayden for all of the fine work she has done and wish her continued success in the years to come.
Mr. President, I rise today to recognize a distinguished American, RDML Eric H. Ver Hage, U.S. Navy, a native of Mechanicsburg, PA, upon the occasion of his retirement after more than 42 years of distinguished service to our Nation. On June 13, 1984, he reported from his home in Upper Allen Township to the Harrisburg Military Entrance Processing Station, beginning a career that took him from enlisted electronics technician to Naval Academy midshipman to surface warfare officer, and ultimately the Military Deputy and Deputy Assistant Secretary of War.
Over his career, Rear Admiral Ver Hage commanded USS CARR (FFG 52) and the Naval Surface Warfare Center Divisions at Corona and Port Hueneme, led the multi-billion-dollar Aegis Ashore program to completion in Romania, and served as commander of the NAVSEA Surface and Undersea Warfare Centers and of the Navy Regional Maintenance Centers, where he directed a global workforce of roughly 10,000 and a $5 billion annual budget. He most recently served as Military Deputy and Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of War for International and Industry Engagement, strengthening our defense industrial base and international armaments cooperation.
Rear Admiral Ver Hage's retirement ceremony will be held tomorrow on July 31, 2026. He will officially be released from Active Duty on September 30, 2026, closing 42 years, 3 months, and 17 days of service to our Navy and our Nation. His four decades of service stand as a model of the dedication, integrity, and leadership our Nation depends upon, and he leaves the Navy stronger for having served. In recognition of his service, and in this milestone year of America's 250th anniversary, a U.S. flag was flown over the U.S. Capitol on July 4, 2026, in Rear Admiral Ver Hage's honor.
Mr. President, now, today, on anti-corruption and the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act--today, I am introducing the Anti- Corruption Bureau Creation Act, the biggest, boldest, and broadest proposal ever put forward to revitalize our anti-corruption institutions.
The scope and scale of Donald Trump's corruption dwarf anything we have ever seen in American history, which is why Congress has to respond more strongly than ever before. In just 18 months, the Trump family has cashed in on the influence of the Presidency to the tune of more than $4 billion--billion.
The same corrupt practices that Trump is using to rake in billions are also causing Americans to pay an extra $3,100 in higher costs each year. Trump profits; Americans pay. Our ``Grifter in
The bill I am introducing today with my colleagues Senators Padilla, Merkley, and Kim is designed to stop Trump's ``Art of the Steal.''
The first goal of our bill is to get the American people their money back. The bill will create, for the first time, a private right of action that allows Americans, including State attorneys general representing the public, to sue to recover the money Trump and his family have taken from them.
Now, the False Claims Act already allows citizens to file lawsuits against people who defraud the government and share part of the civil penalty if they win. So it only makes sense that we are expanding that ability so citizens can sue people who use government influence to defraud the public. If Donald Trump or one of his lackeys, sons, cronies uses government influence to steal from you, you deserve your day in court.
The second goal of our bill is to stop this corruption from happening again. Instead of draining the swamp, Trump blew our anti-corruption institutions to smithereens. He installed MAGA loyalists at the Office of Government Ethics and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, watchdogs whose whole mission is to stop the same type of corruption Trump is now committing. Trump also neutered the Federal Elections Commission, which Congress created to stop the corruption Watergate exposed.
My bill would establish a new, independent Anti-Corruption Bureau that brings all the guardrails Trump has weakened under one roof. The Anti-Corruption Bureau is a sum greater than its parts. The Bureau would have subpoena power to give it real investigative strength, meaningful enforcement authority, and the ability to disgorge ill- gotten gains. We want to create a one-stop shop to catch the corruption and make them pay up, an Agency with real teeth and real independence.
It will be led by seven Senate-confirmed Commissioners--three Republicans, three Democrats, and one Independent.
Trump won't be able to commandeer the Bureau because our bill explicitly outlaws trying to weaponize it, with fines and jail time for people who try.
Congress can't defund the Bureau because our bill establishes a self- sustaining funding source for the Agency, much like the Fed.
And the President can't dismantle the Bureau by purging its members, since our bill requires a panel of judges to appoint temporary replacements so the Bureau always has a quorum.
The bill is just common sense--a basic, straightforward way to make sure all facets of government serve the people and no one else.
Americans are demanding we go back to a government they can actually trust. This legislation tells them that we hear them and that we are going to fight for them with the strongest measures we have ever proposed.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
TITLE IV--APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY MEMBERS TO THE ANTI-CORRUPTION
TITLE IV--APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY MEMBERS TO THE ANTI-CORRUPTION
S. 5194. A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, to improve the maintenance, alteration, and construction of United States courthouses, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 5204. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exempt individual account plans from certain prohibited transaction rules; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. President, now, today, on anti-corruption and the Anti-Corruption Bureau Creation Act--today, I am introducing the Anti- Corruption Bureau Creation Act, the biggest, boldest, and broadest proposal ever put forward to revitalize our anti-corruption institutions.
The scope and scale of Donald Trump's corruption dwarf anything we have ever seen in American history, which is why Congress has to respond more strongly than ever before. In just 18 months, the Trump family has cashed in on the influence of the Presidency to the tune of more than $4 billion--billion.
The same corrupt practices that Trump is using to rake in billions are also causing Americans to pay an extra $3,100 in higher costs each year. Trump profits; Americans pay. Our ``Grifter in
The bill I am introducing today with my colleagues Senators Padilla, Merkley, and Kim is designed to stop Trump's ``Art of the Steal.''
The first goal of our bill is to get the American people their money back. The bill will create, for the first time, a private right of action that allows Americans, including State attorneys general representing the public, to sue to recover the money Trump and his family have taken from them.
Now, the False Claims Act already allows citizens to file lawsuits against people who defraud the government and share part of the civil penalty if they win. So it only makes sense that we are expanding that ability so citizens can sue people who use government influence to defraud the public. If Donald Trump or one of his lackeys, sons, cronies uses government influence to steal from you, you deserve your day in court.
The second goal of our bill is to stop this corruption from happening again. Instead of draining the swamp, Trump blew our anti-corruption institutions to smithereens. He installed MAGA loyalists at the Office of Government Ethics and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, watchdogs whose whole mission is to stop the same type of corruption Trump is now committing. Trump also neutered the Federal Elections Commission, which Congress created to stop the corruption Watergate exposed.
My bill would establish a new, independent Anti-Corruption Bureau that brings all the guardrails Trump has weakened under one roof. The Anti-Corruption Bureau is a sum greater than its parts. The Bureau would have subpoena power to give it real investigative strength, meaningful enforcement authority, and the ability to disgorge ill- gotten gains. We want to create a one-stop shop to catch the corruption and make them pay up, an Agency with real teeth and real independence.
It will be led by seven Senate-confirmed Commissioners--three Republicans, three Democrats, and one Independent.
Trump won't be able to commandeer the Bureau because our bill explicitly outlaws trying to weaponize it, with fines and jail time for people who try.
Congress can't defund the Bureau because our bill establishes a self- sustaining funding source for the Agency, much like the Fed.
And the President can't dismantle the Bureau by purging its members, since our bill requires a panel of judges to appoint temporary replacements so the Bureau always has a quorum.
The bill is just common sense--a basic, straightforward way to make sure all facets of government serve the people and no one else.
Americans are demanding we go back to a government they can actually trust. This legislation tells them that we hear them and that we are going to fight for them with the strongest measures we have ever proposed.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
TITLE IV--APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY MEMBERS TO THE ANTI-CORRUPTION
TITLE IV--APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY MEMBERS TO THE ANTI-CORRUPTION
Mr. President, I have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 30, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a subcommittee hearing.
The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 30, 2026, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.
The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 30, 2026, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations.
The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 30, 2026, at 9:45 a.m.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, August 3; 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, and the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each; further, that notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture motion with respect to the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 320, H.R. 6500, ripen at 5:30 p.m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
