A joint resolution terminating the national emergency declared to impose duties on articles imported from Canada.

Mr. President, what has always separated America from other nations around the world is the right to vote. It is a right that everybody in this body cherishes, as do the American people. Every person who approaches the ballot box generally has confidence that their votes are going to be counted and their voice will be heard.

But, as we stand here, this cherished right is coming under attack because, in 2026, we can expect a continuation of what is happening in these last 9 months: that the Trump administration is doing everything it can to undermine the confidence in elections and sow distrust in the election process.

It is like a spider weaving a web. The Trump administration has crafted multiple strands that, when combined together, attack and change the voting landscape in a way that America will not recognize.

Trump is attempting to strip power from the States, consolidate it for himself, and subvert the will of the people. It is systematic, it is strategic, and it is deeply and urgently serious.

Today, I am beginning an extended effort to elevate this issue and sound the alarm--because voters will go to the polls this Tuesday, and my fear is that it could be the last free and fair election, unless we rise up and we act. And this fear is not mine alone. I have heard it all around Connecticut and from my colleagues all around the country, and it is well founded.

President Trump's crusade of voter suppression and election subversion started on day one of the administration, when he pardoned the individuals who participated in the violent attack on the Capitol on January 6. That January 6 attack was not a protest or even just a riot. It was an assault on the very heart of our democracy. In attempting to stop Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 election,

the January 6 insurrectionists sought to nullify the votes and shatter the peaceful transfer of power that has characterized our democracy for nearly 250 years.

President Trump provided a blanket pardon to the January 6 attackers and thereby endorsed and placed the Presidential seal of approval on their actions and their direction and goal of seeking to overturn the will of the people. So it was no accident that these pardons were one of President Trump's very first acts in office. It was an unmistakable signal that his administration would be obsessed with suppressing votes and undermining free and fair elections.

And since that very first day in office, President Trump and his administration have been praising and hiring into leadership positions the very people who attempted to subvert our democracy. In fact, just this past month, the White House reportedly hired Kurt Olsen, a lawyer who attempted to overturn the 2020 election results, and he is working officially as a ``special government employee'' tasked with looking into the 2020 election and current voting machines.

But rewriting the history of January 6 was only the beginning of a relentless, purposeful campaign to stoke fear among voters and sow seeds of distrust in American elections. They have employed Federal Agencies to help do some of the dirty work. In fact, President Trump has weaponized several Federal Agencies against you, the voters. He is using these Agencies as instruments to suppress your vote.

The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice have both taken alarming actions in recent months targeting the vote. At DHS, a senior Department leader, Heather Honey, an election denier and conspiracy theorist in her own right, reportedly told State and local election officials that the administration could declare a ``national emergency'' based on the claim that the 2020 election was stolen to obtain ``additional powers that don't exist right now'' and act ``without Congress'' to ``mandate that States'' adopt her preferred, radical election rules.

In addition, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, known as CISA, a critical Agency within DHS that works with State and local officials to protect the security of our elections, has been gutted. CISA has been instrumental in protecting our elections from cyber attacks and threats by foreign and domestic actors. These attacks are growing, not diminishing.

I don't have to reveal any classified information for the American people to know that attacks by our adversaries on our election system are an increasing threat, but instead of bolstering CISA, President Trump has placed on administrative leave or reassigned nearly all of its election experts. In their place, President Trump has installed inexperienced political activists who sought to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

Marci McCarthy, named director of public affairs at CISA, was responsible for spreading false claims about faulty voting machines in Georgia.

This past July, Sean Plankey, the nominee to head CISA, refused to answer me when I asked him in a hearing if he believed that the 2020 election was stolen.

President Trump has also chosen to attack CISA officials. In April, President Trump issued an Executive order directing the Department of Justice and DHS to investigate Chris Krebs, the former head of CISA, calling him a ``bad-faith actor'' who ``weaponized and abused'' his authority--all because Krebs refused to lie and say Trump's 2020 election was rigged. And because Krebs said there was no evidence in 2020 that ``any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised,'' he was attacked, and that Executive order asked DHS to target him.

At the same time, President Trump has dismantled CISA's election security programs, including by terminating initiatives that monitor foreign disinformation and cutting the funding of systems that detect, deter, and alert States and localities about cyber and physical attacks on election infrastructure.

This dismantling of CISA is fundamental and deeply alarming, but at the Department of Justice, things are no better. President Trump took an ax to the Department of Justice's Voting Section within the Civil Rights Division, that historic section established to protect and uplift the vote.

First, he decimated the Voting Section staff. In January, it was estimated that the section had 30 attorneys on staff to enforce voting rights laws. Today, it is three. Then he decimated its mission, transforming the section from a bulwark against voting suppression into its opposite: a mechanism to suppress voters and stoke fears of voter fraud.

So instead of lifting up the work of voting rights and serving as a staunch defender of voters in the courts, the section has withdrawn its engagement in seven active voting cases. Where it does remain involved, in redistricting cases such as Louisiana v. Callais, it has taken a sudden and staunch anti-voter stance.

The Department of Justice has decided to make a mockery of poll monitoring as well. The Trump DOJ will now use poll monitoring--which began as an effort to secure minorities' votes when they were denied it following passage of the Voting Rights Act--to potentially intimidate and surveil voters and officials alike at polling sites in California and New Jersey. He is doing it at the request of the Republican Party officials in those States, ahead of the November 4 election.

Those anti-voter campaigns are coupled with efforts to distort the electoral maps. Since President Trump took office, he has pressured Republican State legislators to ignore the will of their voters and effectively elect representatives through extreme and unabashedly partisan gerrymandering. This flagrantly abusive redistricting occurred in States like Texas, representing a top-down campaign directed by President Trump to eradicate as many congressional districts as possible that could conceivably elect a Democrat.

For example, the new Texas redistricting seeks to gift Republicans 80 percent of its House seats in a State where Democrats routinely receive between 40 and 50 percent of the vote in congressional districts. It is plainly a move designed to target minority voters.

The same playbook follows in Missouri and North Carolina. These are the actions of desperate politicians--desperate because they know how deeply unpopular their policies are with voters, policies of stripping people of their healthcare, cutting taxes for the rich, and sending the military into American streets. Instead of changing those policies to win over voters, the Trump administration is seeking to disenfranchise the voters, suppress votes, and rig these elections by shamelessly moving voters to new districts.

President Trump and Republicans have started a tit-for-tat redistricting arms race where Democrats are forced to fight fire with fire and play catchup to undo Republicans' damage and restore balanced representation. And the ones who suffer are the voters. Their voices are ignored and often silenced by frightened partisan politicians.

But it isn't just the voters who are undermined; it is our States as well. Under the Constitution, it is the States that have the power to oversee the time, place, and manner of their elections, subject only to legislation enacted by Congress. The President is given no role--zero-- in that process. States are not agents for the Federal Government, hamstrung to Presidential orders when it comes to elections. In this space of elections, they have their own independent, sovereign authority. Yet President Trump believes he can dictate the rules over our elections and seize power from the States for himself, and he has sought to do it in a number of important ways that ought to concern this body, especially because we represent our States.

Foremost among his tactics, he wants to supplant States in determining the means, methods, and mechanisms for placing our votes. Those mechanisms vary. For example, some States use more mail-in voting than others, and States don't always have the same approach to early voting. Rather than the States making those calls, he wants to be Big Brother himself, watching how elections must be run, dictating how it is done.

The DOJ has already unsuccessfully sought access to voting machines in

Missouri, sending a request to ``access, physically inspect and perhaps take physical custody of election equipment used in the 2020 November general election.''

In March 2025, President Trump issued an Executive order--another Executive order--that attempted to mandate that the independent, bipartisan Election Assistance Commission rescind all previous certifications of voting equipment and recertify systems under amended guidelines. That order is currently being challenged in court. It is plainly unlawful, it is reckless, it is unfair to the States, and it is a false solution in search of a problem that doesn't exist.

President Trump has called voting machines ``highly inaccurate, very expensive, and seriously controversial.'' There is zero evidence-- zero--to support these claims. It is all just a pretext to insert Federal control over States' rights. States do have rights, and President Trump is trying to override them roughshod.

His tactics are similar with mail-in ballots. In the 2024 election, nearly one-third of Americans voted by mail. Mail-in voting is instrumental in helping our troops and making sure that every voice is heard, even when they are overseas.

President Trump has stated that he wants to ``lead a movement'' to get rid of mail-in voting, and he posted this past week on social media: ``No mail-in or `Early' Voting.'' He has assigned lawyers to craft another Executive order to stop it.

The irony is not lost on anyone that President Trump himself voted by mail in the 2020 election when he cast his ballot in Florida.

In some States, such as Oregon and Washington, mail-in ballots are the primary mechanism used by voters. Attempting to illegally strip States of this right will decimate the way our citizens are heard and the foundational principle of States' rights.

By law, by tradition, by history, and sound public policy, States make this call, not the President, and attempting to strip States of these rights is flagrantly illegal and unconstitutional.

President Trump's lackeys have attempted to bully States into handing over sensitive and personal information contained within State voter rolls. DOJ has requested information or meetings about election administration from States and has demanded 40 States--40 States-- provide their full voter registration lists. In a private meeting, Michael Gates, a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, disclosed that all 50 States will eventually receive these requests. The eight States that so far have refused to turn over that data are now being sued by the Department of Justice.

Trump is attempting to compile the largest list of voter roll data ever in our history in order to bolster unsubstantiated and false claims of illegal voting by noncitizens, despite the fact that noncitizen voting is essentially nonexistent.

This type of national voter roll collection is totally unprecedented in our history. Nothing like it has ever been done before. Nothing like this invasion of privacy and promises to voters would have been imaginable before January of this year.

The information he is requesting includes your driver's license number, your Social Security number, your name, your address, your political party, and your voting history. He wants to know who you are and potentially use that information however he pleases. He wants to use that information against States as well--more broadly, to be the judge and jury of whether States are effectively running their own elections, despite the fact that States--and I apologize for repeating it--States are tasked with administering elections under the Constitution.

In case Trump's DOJ can't dismantle elections using all of these maligned tactics, the administration is also targeting election officials who seek to run efficient, fair, honest elections and to calculate and certify election results in a nonpartisan way. They are at work in every election. Everybody in this body knows what they do and knows how important they are to free and fair elections.

President Trump's DOJ has a new weaponization working group with a focus on targeting election officials as a result of supposedly widespread voter fraud. It is the product of fever imagination.

The Department of Justice is also exploring whether they can bring criminal charges against State and local officials if they believe that those officials have not adequately safeguarded their computer systems from harm, despite gutting CISA--the very Agency tasked with assisting them in safeguarding their computers and software.

To instill fear in election workers, the administration is doing everything it can to signal that it will punish anyone who doesn't bow to them.

Since 2020, Trump has been posting on social media and publicly calling for prosecution against election officials he accuses of working against him. Prosecuting election officials won't make elections any safer or fairer; it is simply about creating fear and anxiety. It will lead to an exodus of individuals--it already has begun--that we need to rely on to run our elections.

The fearmongering seems to be having its effect ever since Trump began espousing false claims of stolen elections in 2020 and putting this kind of pressure on the dedicated men and women who show up for elections to help run them. Election officials have reported harassment, threats, and abuse locally.

Election officials with institutional knowledge of how local systems run and who are imperative to registering voters and maintaining voter processes are leaving their roles at an alarming rate. The turnover was especially pronounced in large jurisdictions where the Trump campaign focused its misinformation campaign around 2020 elections.

Now, each of these individual actions of anti-election assault is serious and significant, but each action needs to be seen together as something deeper and broader. It is the sum and substance of totalitarianism--not at some distant point in the future, not a vague storm cloud on the horizon, but the destruction of democracy here and now.

As we approach our democracy's 250th anniversary, we can't afford the luxury of defeatism or despair or complacency. We need to join together and sound the alarm across differences of political party, geography, financial interests, personal background, and all the rest. Join in this body--come together because we have a common interest in making sure that elections are free and fair.

More than words, we need action--your action as voters registering to vote and enabling others to do so, volunteering to work at the polls and supporting election officials and administrators, contributing to organizations that defend voting rights in court, demanding that public officials unite against the sabotage of our democracy, and uniting at rallies, townhalls, and every other forum available to make your voice known.

I will be reaching out to colleagues on both sides of the aisle and coming to the floor and reaching out to the American people. Just as we threw off the yoke of monarchy 2\1/2\ centuries ago, the American people still have the power to determine their own future. They still have the courage to make ``good trouble,'' as John Lewis, the historic voting champion, famously said. Most of all, the American people have the will and fortitude to stand up to this assault.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of our bipartisan resolution, which Senator Kaine and I lead, along with our colleagues Rand Paul, Mark Warner, and Leader Schumer.

Our resolution terminates the President's so-called emergency declaration related to the Canadian border and restores stability and common sense to our trade with our close ally and neighbor to the north, Canada.

The administration has used that declaration as a pretext to impose sweeping tariffs on a friend, on a neighbor, on an ally--which are taxes, paid by American consumers and businesses, on Canadian imports.

Back in April, this same resolution passed the Senate with bipartisan support. Under the National Emergencies Act, Congress must review and, if necessary, vote again every 6 months. Because the administration has refused to lift this so-called emergency and instead doubled down by raising tariffs on Canada to 35 percent as of August 1, with a threat of more, we are back on the floor today, and we will be back on the floor until this passes.

Just this past week, the President announced, as I noted, yet another 10 percent tariff hike on Canada--this time in retaliation for an Ontario ad--Ontario, one province. This would be as if the Governor of Texas put out an ad or if the Governor of California put out an ad. But President Trump used this as a pretext for another threat. And that ad accurately used President Ronald Reagan's 1987 remarks criticizing tariffs.

So that is a good way to begin: with President Reagan's remarks. He said, in 1987, though there are economic and national security circumstances during which tariffs are necessary, that, generally, ``high tariffs inevitably lead to retaliation by foreign countries and the triggering of fierce trade wars. Then the worst happens: Markets shrink and collapse; businesses and industries shut down; and millions of people lose their jobs.''

This new tariff hike isn't about security. It isn't even about our economy. It is just about the President's personal grievances, and Americans are the ones paying the price.

Since these chaotic, on-again, off-again tariffs began in March, cross-border travel and trade have both fallen precipitously. In Minnesota, we say we can see Canada from our porch. Our people go back and forth all the time--sometimes for jobs, sometimes to visit relatives and friends, and sometimes, of course, for vacations. We welcome Canadians all the time.

I was, in fact, at the Minnesota Frost game in which they played the Charge, a Canadian team, a women's professional hockey team. It was a joyous event with our Canadian neighbors.

You see, we know now, the World Series, one of the most exciting World Series between the Toronto Blue Jays and the Los Angeles Dodgers.

This isn't just some faraway place to us. These are our friends and neighbors. But yet, despite all of this incredible history of friendship and booming economic gains because of all the back-and-forth and travel, trips from Canada to the United States are down roughly 20 percent from last year. Towns in the United States are having to put up signs that say ``We love you, Canadians'' because they feel so dissed by this administration.

They are saying: What is happening? We were the first ones on the ground after 9/11 from another country.

The Canadians were there.

We were the ones that stood by your side in so many foreign wars. We are the one that, for so many of our States, is the No. 1 trading partner. How can this be happening?

And, frankly, it pisses them off, and so individual families are making decisions--are deciding: Well, we are not going to go to America. Maybe we will go to Mexico. Maybe we will go to another country. Maybe we will stay in Canada. But we are not going to travel there.

The average foreign visitor spends about $4,000 when they come to America.

We are not going to eat their food. We are not going to go to their restaurants. We are not going to stay at their hotels. We are not going to fish in their lakes.

You name it, that is what the people in my State are seeing. And everything from manufactured parts to whiskey have dropped sharply. And small businesses, farmers, and manufacturers are losing business.

This is not how our economy was supposed to work, if you believe in capitalism, if you believe in trade, if you believe you just can't put your head in the sand and think, ``Well, we are just going to be on our own,'' when 95 percent of our potential customers, particularly in the agriculture area, are outside of our borders. We should be exporting more goods, and we should be encouraging more trade.

The President shouldn't be able to just wake up one day and see an ad he

doesn't like on TV featuring a Republican President by a province in Canada and decide, ``I am just going to hike up another 10 percent''-- or something happened in Brazil--and I congratulate Senator Kaine and Senator Paul on their recent overturning from this body--finally, enough is enough; we are asserting our power. You are not going to be able to just put a 40-percent tariff on Brazil, a country with which we have a trade surplus, simply because the guy is facing a trial there, and the President doesn't like it. No, this is not how this works. It is not how it works under the Constitution. It is not how it works under the law.

This resolution is about drawing a line in the sand and saying you cannot abuse your emergency powers to start an unjustified trade war; you cannot abuse your emergency powers to hurt one of the finest relationships in the world; and you cannot drive up prices, eliminate jobs, and put in place a national sales tax that experts now predict will altogether--the tariff tax--cost the average family nearly $2,000 per year.

And they are seeing it every day in their grocery bills. They are seeing it when they want to go out and buy tools. They see it when they are going out to buy audio equipment.

Minnesota's No. 1 trading partner, one of our country's top 2 trading partners, and one of our most trusted allies--that is Canada. We export more goods to Canada than we do--in Minnesota--to our second, third, and fourth largest markets combined. In 2024, Minnesota's goods trade with Canada, including ag products, machinery, and medical devices, amounted to roughly $22 billion--$22 billion. That is more than a quarter of all the goods that we export, a major hit for our State.

I chair the Canadian-American Interparliamentary Group. I frequently meet with our partners in Canada. A number of Senators, including Senator Kaine and Senator Shaheen and Senator Welch and Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, a Republican--we went up there together to Ottawa a few months back, met with Prime Minister Carney. And as the Prime Minister said recently, the U.S.-Canada relationship has become ``mostly transactional.''

That is not the story of our friendship with Canada. Canada, as I mentioned, fought alongside us in two World Wars. They are our partners in NORAD and NATO. They helped us get our supply chain back in order after the pandemic--and, yes, we helped them. Canada is setting historic new goals to contribute to our collective defense, planning to triple defense spending over the next decade--new equipment, new infrastructure, new technology--to strengthen our NATO alliance, which means strengthening our own national security.

But rather than supporting a thriving Canadian economy that would enable the government to fulfill those goals, the tariffs that the President keeps slapping on this great ally will hinder our potential and Canada's. These tariffs also undercut the very trade deal the President himself once called the most ``modern and balanced agreement in history''--that is, the USMCA, the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

I supported that agreement. I was one of the first Democrats--in fact, the first one during that election, the 2020 election--that actually came out and said I supported that trade agreement on the debate stage because I felt it was so important.

So why would the President take this jewel of a trade agreement--that albeit needs to be changed as we go forward and reviewed, which is mandatory this coming year, for things like dairy and other things-- that has been acknowledged. We would like to see some changes to it. But why would he take this incredibly important agreement and just say it doesn't matter?

The kind of uncertainty that we are seeing with these tariffs shakes business confidence across North America. These tariffs are paid by families: groceries, clothes, housing. Homebuilders say higher material costs from tariffs are adding as much as $10,000 to the cost of a new home. Americans looking for a new car are paying more than $3,000 more for an American-made vehicle. And of course it is increasing the cost of cars made in America because parts come from Canada.

And this is an important point: The tariffs are not just about raising the prices on the goods that we import; they are also driving up prices across the board on all types of goods and services-- electricity costs. If we continue down this path, as I noted, the average family will likely see a $2,000 increase per year.

This might not mean a lot to some of the President's friends and family members, billionaires on his Cabinet. They are not going to care about this $2,000 a year. That is true. They are not going to care. But people right now, that are already faced with all these problems with healthcare, which is a fight that is raging right now, about this budget, they can't handle it.

Tariffs, as I noted, can be an important tool for countering other countries' unfair trade practices. I supported some of the steel tariffs that were more narrow from the former Trump administration and the Obama administration and the Biden administration in order to make sure that our iron ore--very key to my past and our future--mined in northern Minnesota--my grandpa was an iron ore miner--that that continue.

But that is not what we are talking about with the President's action here. The broad emergency power statute enacted from 1977 that the President has used to justify these across-the-board tariffs didn't even mention the word ``tariff.''

My colleagues and I have filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court. That case is going to be heard next week. But it is not the only answer. The answer should be that Congress asserts its power, even though I believe that the use of the statute is clearly illegal and I believe, as the underlying court--which was made up of the initial trade court: a Trump judge, an Obama judge, and a Reagan judge--yes, they still exist. They unanimously, the three of them, said that this was an illegal use of the statute.

But this, today, is about something else. It is about us asserting our own power, stopping the chaos with changes over 100 times in these tariffs: small brewers paying for aluminum cans that can't afford them, furniture makers paying more for lumber, and family-owned tourism businesses in my State suffering.

If the Trump administration wants to address trade disputes with Canada--and the Prime Minister is clearly open to that--it should work in good faith with our neighbors to strengthen the USMCA trade agreement that the President himself originally negotiated.

Our bipartisan group of cosponsors understands this. This isn't about politics. It is about jobs, economic stability, and respect for the successful agreement that we committed to in the past. It is why this resolution has support from the United Steelworkers, the International Association of Machinists, North America's Building Trades Unions, and the AFL-CIO. The Chamber of Commerce, the National Taxpayers Union, and the National Retail Federation have all endorsed this resolution.

These are voices from every corner of the political spectrum, every part of our economy. Maybe we should be listening to them and not be a rubberstamp, I say to my colleagues. It is time to stand up. Otherwise, why are you here?

I yield the floor, and I see that my friend from Virginia, who has been such a leader on this, is here.

Mr. President, in conclusion, I want to say this: One, thank you to Senator Kaine and Senator Warner, the two Senators from Virginia, for their leadership on this important resolution; Senator Wyden for all of his work; Senator Rand Paul and others who have stood with us, who have stood with capitalism, who have stood with this idea that trade matters and that our country is stronger when we do business and sell our goods across the seas and to our friendly neighbors like Canada.

Let me start with Canada. As the head of the Inter-Parliamentary Group with Canada, I spent a lot of time working with the Canadians. It was one Embassy, years ago, when America was disliked by a lot of countries, that displayed on their Embassy huge banners that said: ``Friend, Ally, Partner.''

For so many of our States, they are our biggest trading partner. They fought alongside us in two World Wars. They are our partners in NORAD and in NATO. They worked with us together on supply chains and getting them back working after the pandemic. They are setting new historic goals, Canada is, to contribute to our collective defense, planning to triple defense spending over the next decade.

So what does this administration do? Slap them with a 35-percent tariff. And then, just because the President woke up in the morning and didn't like an ad that quoted a beloved Republican President, Ronald Reagan, didn't like it, he said: Well, I am going to give them 10 percent more.

Yet this is a country with which we share a trade agreement that this President negotiated with Mexico and Canada. If you want to make changes, like for dairy or other things, do it in the review of that agreement. Don't do it like this to a neighbor and friend.

Secondly, what do these tariffs mean to America? mean to the people in our country? Combined, they have been changed over 100 times--total chaos. Inflation is up. Manufacturing jobs are down. Small farm bankruptcies are at their highest levels in 5 years, and every Senator in this Chamber has heard from their beef producers or heard from their soybean farmers. What is happening right now, as one of my farmers called it, is a ``perfect storm of ugly.''

For an individual family right now, these tariffs mean a $2,000 tax per family. Tools are up. Audio equipment costs more. This is the effect of this tariff policy on individual families in America.

So we can have high-ended debates here, but at home, they are looking at their grocery prices. They are looking at their markets, their family farms--that they spent a century there, they are next in line to take it over--drying up. That is what these tariffs are about.

Then, finally, this President cannot keep abusing his power like this. There is a reason, when you look at the numbers, who supports this resolution: United Steelworkers, International Association of Machinists, North America's Building Trades Unions, the AFL-CIO, the Chamber of Commerce, the National Taxpayers Union, the National Retail Federation have all endorsed this resolution.

But, unfortunately, with a few exceptions, our friends on the other side of the aisle are just rubberstamping what this President wants.

Well, it is time for us to stand up. This vote is about reasserting Congress's constitutional role, article I, section 8, of the Constitution gives Congress--not the President--the power to impose tariffs and regulate commerce with foreign nations. We must stand up for American workers, businesses, and consumers and remind our allies and ourselves that America keeps its word.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate execute the order of October 7 in relationship to S.J. Res. 77.

Mr. President, I want to speak on two topics, one after the other, healthcare and then tariffs.

Healthcare

Mr. President, open enrollment will begin across the country on Saturday. Many have already received notice of new sky-high premiums, including, by the way, notices that went out to my fellow Vermonters. Many across the country will log on to the Marketplace on Saturday. It is a scary day for them because they will be checking to see what it will cost them next year to purchase the same healthcare that they have this year. Twenty-four million Americans are going to be doing that this Saturday.

Folks across the country are going to get some bad news; that without the tax credits that are in place now and are set to expire by the end of the year, their healthcare premiums are going to double, triple, and, in some cases, quadruple and even worse.

What Vermonters are finding--our website went up on October 15--is truly a shocking increase in premiums, and it is not affordable. By the way, these are folks, some of whom voted for Trump, some of whom didn't, but all of whom deeply care about their families and their small businesses and their farmers. I will give you an example.

A family of four making $130,000 a year--a very good income in Vermont--would have paid $1,200 a month in 2025. Next year, they are going to have to pay $3,035. That is a $22,000 increase. A family of four making about $64,000 a year is going to pay 920 percent more for healthcare premiums. Obviously, that is going to mean they have to decide whether they are going to go without or somehow, some way, try to find a way to pay that, which they really won't be able to do.

Let me give some starters to make it very concrete about Vermonters. A woman named Sarah is going to see her premium go from $217 a month to $1,200 a month. This is a person who is 63, self-employed, and might have to go without healthcare for the first time in her life.

Cara, also self-employed, has had the same income for 20 years, really scraping by. She pays about $100 a month for healthcare through the Marketplace. Her premium goes up to $1,200.

Erica is paying $1,166 for her family. The deductible for her family of three is $15,000. This is barely insurance. Erica and her family make this premium work somehow, but I am sure it is not easy. Without the tax credits, her monthly premium goes to $2,650.

Maria and her husband run a small food business in Vermont. He spends half the year fishing in Alaska. They pay just under $240 a month, but they are looking at $1,740 per month unless the Senate acts. That is for bronze plan, which you know is the lowest level plan. They will be paying about $21,000 per year with a deductible of $7,700 per person.

The examples I gave of Vermonters are going to be true in Indiana; they are going to be true in Louisiana; they are going to be true all across the country. We have been having this debate about a shutdown, but what we haven't been having is a negotiation about how to protect families from a rate shot that they can't afford that means they are really going to lose healthcare.

I do urge us and I urge the President to act aggressively to resolve this. It will help folks. Whether they are in a red State or a blue State, whether they identify as a Republican or Democrat or Independent, it just doesn't matter. We have a healthcare system that is too, too expensive--beyond reach--and it is crippling to our small businesses, our farmers, and our families.

Tariffs

Mr. President, I want to address another topic, and that is the topic of tariffs. They are doing incredible harm to our economy in Vermont. In my view, they are doing long-term damage to our economy here in the United States.

I want to commend my colleagues Senator Paul, Senator Kaine, and others, Senator Shaheen, Ranking Member Wyden, and Leader Schumer for sponsoring the bipartisan legislation we voted on yesterday suspending the emergency authority on which the President was acting to impose a tariff on Brazil, a country, by the way, with whom we have a trade surplus.

We are 9 months into this trade war with tariffs at the forefront. It is a war with Canada. It sort of started with them. That is a big deal for Vermont. We are a border State. But it is a big deal for all of our States because Vermont is 1 of 34 States whose major trading partner is Canada.

For Vermont, Canada has been our largest export market and the largest source of imports. Trade with Canada accounted for 35 percent of our State exports and 67 percent of Vermont's imports and 56 percent of its total trade.

We have small businesses now that are really struggling to keep their lights on. We have farmers across the country but also farmers in Vermont who are incredibly worried about whether they are going to be able to make it into the next harvest. We had a drought. We had early floods. And now we have these tariffs that are increasing the input costs. I know, Mr. President, as a Senator from Indiana, you are very sensitive to the challenges that our agriculture economy and our farmers face.

Things were bumping along, and then President Trump just recently announced an additional 10-percent tariff on Canada, which already had a 35-percent effective rate. We don't even know what that applies to. Is that 10 percent on top of 35 percent or on specific products? Of course, all of that was done because the President was irritated about an ad that was run, apparently, by the Province of Ontario that was quoting a speech that President Reagan made some years ago about how destructive tariffs are. Maybe that does irritate the President. But the constant changing of what a tariff is from day to day creates havoc for our businesses that are trying to plan and control their expenses and deal with all the other uncertainties that they face.

These tariffs are hurting our farmers. Just think about this. Fertilizers--those costs are up 16 percent and in some cases, 39 percent. The effective rate on tractors and other farming machinery is 16 percent and 13 percent, respectively.

We have also had, as a result of the tariffs that are seen by our trading partner in Canada that was the participant in the U.S.-Mexico- Canada Trade Agreement--negotiated, by the way, by President Trump, an agreement he bragged about as being really effective and the best trade agreement--that is getting ripped up in many ways. And then when you add to it the insults that were hurled at Canada--the ``51st State,'' the ``Governor of Canada''--it has had a catastrophic impact on the tourism Vermont has depended on from our Canadian neighbors with whom we have enormous respect.

That is not just true for Vermont. New Hampshire, Maine, Montana are seeing an incredible drop in tourism that is related to this tariff battle and the rhetoric associated with it.

Also, in Vermont, just as in Indiana, our small businesses are really a big deal. I have been hearing from them. I am hearing from bed and breakfasts, hotels, brewers, distillers--any industry. I will give a few stories, a few quotes.

Simon Perkins at Orvis in Manchester:

The reality is that, in a rapidly changing tariff

environment, one that's forced on companies too quickly, it's

really hard for a business to respond quick enough to make it

work.

Orvis, which was founded in 1856, announced the closure of 31 stores and five outlet locations by 2026. Orvis had to lay off 50 employees, citing tariffs.

Another business, Peter Case of Burrows Sports in Brattleboro:

We love what we do and it's under attack! For 90 years,

Burrows Sports has proudly served Brattleboro, growing with

our community through good times and hard ones. Today's

economic pressures, rising costs, and shrinking margins are

testing small local businesses like never before.

Jim Hall from Vermont Country Store:

This is the lull before the storm. . . . Do they realize

this is a tax on Christmas?

These tariffs are a tax. They are paid for by our businesses. They disrupt our businesses. They are passed on to consumers, and there is nothing but a downside, especially when you add the fact that these tariffs are a tax. They are imposed and implemented in a totally arbitrary way, wherein a person who is running a business has to contend with all the uncertainties of a

volatile marketplace and has to deal with the constant uncertainties that are the result of an ever-changing tariff policy.

I urge all of us in the Senate to reassert our own authority under article I, which gives to the Congress the power to tax, the power to impose tariffs or not, and to not have us continue to relinquish the authority and responsibility to the Executive that we have as the U.S. Senate.

This is our responsibility, and part of the reason is that we are close to people who are affected by these policies. It is a shirking of our responsibility for the U.S. Senate to essentially cede that authority to a President, particularly when we are seeing in every single State the harmful impacts on folks in our States--on the businesses in our States, on the farmers and ranchers in our States-- who are working hard to try to pull things together and keep their businesses going, our economy going, and contributing to the well-being of our country.

I call on the President to reconsider what these tariffs are doing.

I call on our U.S. Senate to reassert its authority and be the decider of what the tariff policy shall be in this country.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Kaine for his leadership on this issue, highlighting it, meeting on it, bringing it to the attention of the American public. The same thing is true for Senator Wyden and Senator Klobuchar.

Thank you so much for your leadership.

And I rise to join them in highlighting the devastating impact President Trump's economic policies are having on small businesses across our country. Small business owners are struggling in President Trump's economy.

Let me just say this: 97 percent of all the companies in America that engage in trade are small businesses, and those small businesses represent one-third of all trade that our country engages in.

They are not big companies. They can't buy a year or 2 years' inventory in advance. They live week to week. They live month to month. And that is pretty much where they have been since April. They have been trying to survive. They have been trying just to make it through this hectic, unpredictable, roller coaster of tariffs, which the President has been imposing.

And these small businesses, they are unbelievably struggling in this economy right now. Thanks to President Trump, just this year, electricity costs are up 11 percent. Food prices are up. The cost of coffee is up 19 percent this year. Bananas are up 7 percent. Beef is up 13 percent. The cost of healthcare for millions of small business owners will increase by an average of 114 percent.

This is going to be a massive hit on small businesses and small business workers if the Affordable Care Act tax premiums expire. It is going to be 10 million small businesses and small business employees in our country that are going to see a spike that is going to be dramatic for their healthcare.

And 42,000 jobs we have lost in manufacturing this year--42,000 down, not up--not as promised. And that is supposed to be at the center of his tariff policy? We are losing manufacturing jobs at an accelerated rate after Joe Biden increased manufacturing jobs.

And I would like to, again, really point out what a great job you have been doing, Senator Kaine, on this in putting a great big spotlight on all of this, because this is absolutely central to the economic well-being of our country.

So back in May, I introduced and tried to pass my Small Business Liberation Act, a bill that would have protected small businesses from Trump's tariff chaos, just saying: Get those 97 percent of all the businesses engaged in trade--the small businesses--get them out of this war. They can't survive that war. Big businesses, maybe, but not little businesses. They just can't do it. But the Senate Republicans blocked that proposal.

Then I did it again. Republicans blocked my proposal just to spare the small businesses, and, unfortunately, Republicans have not shown the courage yet on Trump's tariffs, just capitulation, as they do on so many other issues.

By opposing my bill and preventing those sensible resolutions from moving forward in the House, Republicans are allowing Trump to tax any good from any country for any reason--no rules. And the only reason is Trump doesn't have the legal authority to do that. He doesn't have the legal authority to do what he is doing right now.

Trump claims to have authority under a 1977 law signed by Jimmy Carter, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. This law was so uncontroversial in 1977 that it was passed on a voice vote.

Now, can you imagine? Jimmy Carter is President. There is a bill that is going to allow Jimmy Carter to become a dictator, to impose tariffs on any country in the world, to jack up the price anywhere they want on any product, at any time; anything that ticks him off, including some little commercial about Ronald Reagan, and all of a sudden, boom, we are smashing you, Canada.

Does anyone here really think the Republicans and the Congress, in 1977, at the height of Jimmy Carterism, were giving him unlimited authority to be able to impose tariffs?

You know that did not happen. He doesn't have the legal authority to do this, and I can tell you because I was there on the floor of Congress when it happened in 1977. I know there was no debate on this.

And so that is what we are talking about right now. The Congress did not give Jimmy Carter King-like powers--I can guarantee you that--on a voice vote. But Trump, he thinks he can exercise these emergency powers and tax any import for any reason. Our latest emergency? It is a television ad, a Canadian-produced and featured audio of former President Ronald Reagan denouncing the tariffs. And, in retaliation, President Trump decided everyday Americans and small businesses should pay 10 percent more on imports from Canada.

It is very clear, Trump is just making all of this up. He is making it up as he goes along.

And, for Massachusetts, it is very important. Every fifth grader-- when I was in the fifth grade and all fifth graders in Massachusetts-- in the geography book there is one chapter entitled: ``Our Friends the Canadians.'' And why is that? Because they are our leading trading partner. It is only like a 3- or 4-hour ride to get up to Canada. It is who we are. We trade with them every single day. We do $10 billion of trade with Canada. That is whom we do business with.

And this 10 percent additional tariff, you know who it cascades down onto? The small businesses of Massachusetts. Ordinary citizens, they are going to be further crushed. That is whom we partner with.

And he knows he doesn't have this trade authority. Small businesses have had enough of Trump's illegal actions and have successfully challenged the tariff authority twice already. He lost in the district court. He lost in the circuit court. And next week, this case is going to be heard in the Supreme Court. So small businesses have already won twice, and now they are going for the final round in the Supreme Court, hoping that they won't engage in creative legislative history reinterpretation of that Republican unanimous vote in 1977 that allowed Jimmy Carter to become a King on tariffs.

So the President says it is ``enemies of the country'' who are suing him. If that is how you view Main Street in America--Kiwanians, Rotarians, small business, chambers of commerce all across the country--they are the ones bringing the suit and have already won twice and are now heading for the showdown on the Supreme Court.

For small businesses, this isn't about politics; it is about survival. And right now, Trump's tariffs are taxes for them. So far, it is $30 billion coming from small businesses that Trump then transfers into tax breaks for the wealthiest people in our country or for the Argentine Government, but it is not staying on Main Street. They are not getting the rewards for the work which they have done.

A small business in Massachusetts that designs and manufactures and sells outdoor recreation equipment told me that they have paid an extra $500,000 this year because of Trump's tariff taxes. Earlier this week, they received a $40,000 bill from imports from Taiwan. It is just a small business.

And, meanwhile, big businesses have CEOs meeting directly with the President and receiving generous exemptions.

It is Robin Hood in reverse. Trump is taking from hard-working, regular people, and he is transferring the wealth to the millionaires and billionaires in our country. It is absolutely economic craziness that the President is engaging in. He is punishing Main Street. He is turning Main Street into ``Pain Street'' in every single State in our country.

And that extra increase in the tariffs from Canada puts a special burden on Massachusetts and our small businesses, our workers.

So it is very clear this tax is not being paid by other countries. American small businesses pay the tax. Main Street is paying this tax. And President Trump is taxing food and clothing and toys and even tea. And as a small business owner reminded me, the last time there was a tax on tea, there was a revolution in our country that began in Boston.

Small businesses have no lobbyists, no Mar-a-Lago, no golden gifts for President Trump, no margin for error. There will be no invitations to the new ballroom, but I am not going to back down. I am going to continue to stand up for small businesses across the country, across Massachusetts, from red States to blue States, who are bearing the burden of these tariffs, and I hope that our Republican colleagues will join us today by voting to pass this resolution.

And, again, I thank you, Senator Kaine, for your leadership, and the same to you, Senator Wyden and to Senator Klobuchar. This is a very important moment in the economic history of our country.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the government has been shut down for nearly a month--the longest full government shutdown in American history. It all began with the Democratic leader's desire to play politics with people's lives and paychecks.

Americans, including those in Louisiana, are paying the price. Nationwide, 1.4 million Federal employees--many of whom, of course, are living paycheck to paycheck--are furloughed or working without pay, and 13,000 air traffic controllers have already missed 1 paycheck and will miss another soon.

SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and food stamps--these benefits run out November 1 in many States, like mine, and that is just 2 days away. In Louisiana alone, that is 804,000 individuals, including 312,000 children, who rely on SNAP.

Now, this is not an abstract ideological issue; we are literally talking about food on the table. SNAP can be the difference between a child having a full belly, going to sleep, waking up the next morning, and going to school happy and that same child asking their mom when is the next time they will eat a meal, going to bed hungry, and doing poorly the next day.

Republicans are working to extend the program. I want a bill to fund SNAP, but it looks like we will not have Democratic support to pass.

There are a lot of empty dinner tables and a lot of children going to bed hungry. Democrats have voted against reopening our government 13 times. Thirteen times they have voted to deny children food, sending families to food banks instead.

I am told that food banks will not be able to keep up. Federal workers, single parents with young children, walking into empty food banks. That is coming from a party that regularly claims that they are the party of children, families, and vulnerable communities.

Republicans and the Trump administration are working hard to mitigate the worst parts of the shutdown. President Trump found the money to pay our troops through the generosity of a patriotic American. Senate Republicans voted for a bill to pay all Federal employees, including air traffic controllers who are working without pay now. Democrats blocked it.

They are the party of ``no.'' And the bizarre part is no one is quite sure why, until one of their leaders said the quiet part out loud. The House Democratic whip acknowledged that Democrats are allowing people to suffer because of the shutdown but said:

There will be families that are going to suffer . . . but

it is one of the few leverage times that we have.

This is the second highest ranking House Democrat openly confirming that working families are being used as political leverage.

This is all about politics, not what is best for the people of our country. Now, they will tell you it is about healthcare, but their position crumbles under scrutiny. If it were about healthcare costs, why would they make people suffer more in order to change healthcare policy rather than reopen the government and negotiate with Republicans on solutions which actually lower healthcare costs?

Republicans have repeatedly said we will negotiate to lower healthcare costs, just not while Americans suffer. Our position is clear: End the shutdown, and then let's talk about healthcare. It seems reasonable.

You might ask why they are still voting against reopening the government. It is because they know that their proposals on healthcare won't actually lower healthcare costs.

Under Democrats' current plan, premiums still go up next year, not to mention their proposed solution is just aimed at papering over the mess that ObamaCare created because the facts are clear: The Affordable Care Act did not make care affordable.

All of this seems like one elaborate attempt to save face. Well, it is not working, and, more importantly, Americans are suffering. I repeat: Reopen the government, then let's have a conversation about the areas in healthcare we can address to actually lower premium costs and out-of-pocket costs for middle-income Americans.

By the way, the Democrats' current plan will only affect 7 percent of the people on ObamaCare. Their plan ignores 93 percent of Americans who will also see costs go up. We need to help all Americans by fixing our healthcare system, not just paper over the failures of ObamaCare to help a few.

I will add, for as much as they talk about healthcare, the Democrat shutdown is defunding important healthcare programs.

As chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, I led a bipartisan effort to protect Americans' access to affordable over-the-counter drugs. The members of my committees worked together to remodify the Over-the-counter Monograph Drug User Fee Program, sometimes referred to as OMUFA. This funds the review process to bring over-the-counter drugs to market.

Because of the shutdown, because of my Democratic colleagues refusing to vote to open the government, for the first time in history, a user fee program has expired, meaning patient access to new over-the-counter treatments for common ailments is in jeopardy.

I am a doctor. I want to tackle the numerous issues facing our healthcare system. I spent my whole career fighting for patients. Let's have a conversation about lowering costs for all Americans like those on Medicare, those with employer-sponsored insurance, and small business owners who provide insurance to their workers.

If Democrats are interested in lowering healthcare costs, as they say they are, reopen the government, pay our troops, and stop taking food from children. I am tired of hearing people say there is no off-ramp or way out of the shutdown. Here it is, the way forward: Open the government.

National Flood Insurance Program

Mr. President, I spoke on this floor a month ago about the consequences of a government shutdown on our country and upon Louisiana, particularly the half million Louisianans enrolled in the National Flood Insurance Program or the NFIP.

I called on Senate Democrats to join me and Republican colleagues in keeping the government open and Congress working. Unfortunately, the Senate minority leader shut the government down nearly a month ago to appease a radical base. That is nearly a month that many people in Louisiana on the NFIP that have gone without the trust, certainty, and stability that the program is designed to provide.

Families are unable to close on a new house because they can't purchase a new flood insurance policy. Homeowners are vulnerable during hurricane season because they cannot renew existing policies, and that raises a question the American people are asking every day: How can they trust a government that isn't even open?

Now, by the way, NFIP is not perfect. It faces financial challenges. Some reforms are needed. But shutting it down makes the problem worse, not better.

The Democratic leader said that every day the shutdown gets better for them. Well, I can tell you every day the government is shut down, it gets worse for the Americans in my State who are worried about flooding and losing everything.

The American people want solutions. They want a government that works. They want flood insurance that protects their homes, families, and livelihoods. That is why I am working on legislation that would automatically reauthorize the NFIP if there is any lapse in government funding; in other words, prevent any future shutdown from interrupting the NFIP.

It fixes the damage caused by the Schumer shutdown and ensures stability going forward. My colleague John Kennedy from Louisiana and I have introduced two bills, one to extend NFIP in the short term, another to provide a full year of coverage.

We are also working toward broader reforms that keep premiums affordable and the program sustainable for generations to come.

We must reopen the government immediately. Democrats have voted against doing so 13 times. Thirteen opportunities they have been given to end their shutdown, and they have thrown it back in the face of all Americans.

Government services might be on pause, but hurricane season is not. Reopen the government, restore certainty to the American people, protect homes, protect families, protect livelihoods. Republicans are working to prevent the worst effects of the Schumer shutdown from taking place, but Democrats keep blocking our efforts.

We want to pay the troops. We want to fund SNAP. We want to extend NFIP. The American people deserve better. They deserve more than the Democratic Party is willing to give.

I yield the floor.