Floor Statements

Mr. President, here we are, 34 days before election day--or as I like to suggest, 34 days before the final day to vote, because we are encouraging people to cast their ballot early, if they can, or vote by mail, if and where they can.

But instead of talking about the issues that are most on the minds of American families, Republicans are here again trying to distract from those issues and to, frankly, create confusion amongst voters in order to protect the President and the party from their failed policies.

Now, Senate Democrats agree that something real needs to happen to rein in the ability of elected officials, especially Members of Congress, from making decisions that impact the companies that are in their stock portfolios. That is true. The American people deserve to have confidence that their elected representatives are making decisions in the best interests of the American people and not in your bank account or your stock investments.

But that is not what this bill will do. This bill does not ban Members of Congress from holding stocks or trading stocks, and it exempts the most powerful elected official of all--the President of the United States--from a stock trading ban.

Now, let's be clear, colleagues, because we have seen this time and again. When the President makes announcements or posts on Truth Social, he has the potential to move markets, shift the economy. That is truly an awesome power, one that nobody should be able to exploit for their own profit. But that is exactly what Donald Trump has done and has done over and over again.

That is why, since returning to office last year, his net worth has grown some $4 to $5 billion--billion with a ``b.''

Now, ABC News service said, just last year, that he made over 21,000 stock trades across 8 accounts in a matter of--the average was about 85 trades per day--85 trades per day.

Does that sound like something that is singularly focused on improving the quality of life of the American people? I don't think so.

Bloomberg News found that President Trump has traded stocks more than every Member of Congress combined.

Think about that for a minute. One person, Donald Trump, the President of the United States, the ``Trader in Chief,'' made more stock trades in 1 year than all 535 Members of Congress.

Now, NBC News found that 327 of these trades were made exactly 1 day before he rolled back his ``Liberation Day'' tariffs. Was that a coincidence? I think not.

How much grift from his own decision making? The American people deserve to know.

But the President's corruption goes even further. His social media company is literally selling access to hedge funds and Wall Street brokers--early access--to his major market-shaping announcements.

Let that sink in for a moment.

Trump has been making more stock trades than all of Congress combined while backing a ban that excludes him. That is what the bill before us does. Is anyone surprised the President would support a bill that does nothing to rein him in? How can we possibly go home and tell the American people with a straight face that we are stopping the corruption in Washington when the biggest exploiter is the President and he is immune from this bill? The author of this bill refused to put any guardrails on the biggest, most corrupt stock trader of them all.

Now, don't take that to mean that Democrats don't want to do anything in this space. We do. In fact, the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, last year, put out a bipartisan bill that would actually address this issue.

But folks watching at home should recognize that that bipartisan bill with teeth is not what Republicans have chosen to put on the floor today, 34 days before election. Instead, it is a sham bill that doesn't have the teeth and doesn't rein in the ``Trader in Chief.''

I have tried to bring up that bill, by the way, repeatedly in the Senate, and Senate Republicans have blocked it on multiple occasions.

So today is not a serious attempt to address the kind of corruption here in Washington that the American people may care about.

And to add further proof to that point, this isn't just a sham attempt to ban Members of Congress who trade in stocks, because it includes a voter ID poison pill in it. This so-called voter ID bill would impose a far stricter and more burdensome Federal standard in all 50 States.

Now, some States have voter ID; some States don't. Those that do have laws, at the State level, that require an ID allow Tribal IDs or student IDs issued by the State government or State entity to count. But the Federal provisions in this bill do not.

And it goes even worse for the one-third of American voters that prefer to vote by mail, if they have that option in their State--and 80 percent of Californians, by the way. This requirement that you have to have a copy of your ID in the envelope with your ballot for it to count eviscerates the secret ballot that we value so much.

Here is what the Republican Lieutenant Governor of Utah had to say-- and in Utah the Lieutenant Governor is also the State election official--when it was included in the SAVE Act. And now it is in the measure before us.

The SAVE America Act requires a vote[r] to include a

photocopy of their ID . . . violating our Constitutional

right to a secret ballot.

So don't just take my word for it. This is the Republican Lieutenant Governor of Utah. And she is not the only Republican opposed to this kind of legislation.

The Republican Governor of Ohio, with a similar State bill, said:

[The measure] would not discourage fraud, would not add any

real security, and would create an additional and significant

burden for Ohioans who vote by mail.

All for what? In pursuit of the Big Lie that the President has been claiming for, what, a decade now about massive voter fraud? While every expert and every study have found the same thing. Despite the conspiracy theories, voter fraud is already illegal. Let's establish that. It is already on the books as illegal. But it is also extremely, extremely rare.

So what is this bill truly about anyway? It is not about cracking down on corruption, as Republicans claim it is. It is not going to, you know, address the massive voter fraud that does not exist. Again, it is misdirection. It is a distraction, and it threatens to suppress the vote 34 days before the election.

And all Senate Republicans realize that the only thing they have to show for their control of government for the last 2 years--right?--you are the majority in the Senate. You are the majority in the House. Your party occupies the White House. When families are struggling with rising inflation, the rising cost of healthcare and housing, groceries, mortgages, gas prices, an unauthorized war in Iran, instead of actually addressing those issues with real proposals, they are seeking to distract and confuse.

The American people deserve better than this, and I urge all of my colleagues to vote no on this cynical measure.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Supporting Providers of English Language Learning, SPELL, Act, which I introduced today.

English learners are one of the fastest growing student populations in the country. Across the United States, about 10 percent of all publc school students are English learners. In California alone, nearly 19 percent of all public school students identify as English learners. Yet we are facing a devastating shortage of teachers with the skills needed to support these students. If we do not address this shortage, the achievement gap for this vulnerable group of students will continue to grow.

Educating students learning English requires specialized instruction and unique teacher strategies. If we are going to meet the needs of these students, we need to facilitate the training and retention of high-quality teachers for our English learners.

The SPELL Act, would amend the Higher Education Act to provide up to $17,500 in Federal student loan forgiveness for teachers of English learners, bilingual students, or dual immersion students in high-need schools. This would match the level of loan forgiveness offered to teachers of other in-demand subjects such as math, science, and special education.

By lessening the financial burden on prospective English learner teachers, we can help incentivize a greater number of passionate and highly qualified teachers to enter and stay in the classroom.

As a Senator representing one of the most diverse States in the country with the most English learners and as an English learner myself, I am proud to work with my colleagues to push forward legislation to support our teachers. I want to thank Representative Espaillat for introducing this bill in the House, and I hope our colleagues will join us in supporting our English learner teachers and students.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Supporting Providers of English Language Learning, SPELL, Act, which I introduced today.

English learners are one of the fastest growing student populations in the country. Across the United States, about 10 percent of all publc school students are English learners. In California alone, nearly 19 percent of all public school students identify as English learners. Yet we are facing a devastating shortage of teachers with the skills needed to support these students. If we do not address this shortage, the achievement gap for this vulnerable group of students will continue to grow.

Educating students learning English requires specialized instruction and unique teacher strategies. If we are going to meet the needs of these students, we need to facilitate the training and retention of high-quality teachers for our English learners.

The SPELL Act, would amend the Higher Education Act to provide up to $17,500 in Federal student loan forgiveness for teachers of English learners, bilingual students, or dual immersion students in high-need schools. This would match the level of loan forgiveness offered to teachers of other in-demand subjects such as math, science, and special education.

By lessening the financial burden on prospective English learner teachers, we can help incentivize a greater number of passionate and highly qualified teachers to enter and stay in the classroom.

As a Senator representing one of the most diverse States in the country with the most English learners and as an English learner myself, I am proud to work with my colleagues to push forward legislation to support our teachers. I want to thank Representative Espaillat for introducing this bill in the House, and I hope our colleagues will join us in supporting our English learner teachers and students.

Mr. President, colleagues, I am proud to join our colleagues from Utah and Oregon in bringing up this bill. I can't overstate both the importance and the urgency of the Wildfire Emissions Prevention Act, which is a result of more than a year of bipartisan negotiations and a measure that recently passed unanimously out of the Environment and Public Works Committee.

As my colleague from Oregon has begun to paint the picture, Western States--including Oregon, California, and others--are confronting a crisis of wildfires that aren't just growing larger and larger every year but more destructive every year and emitting massive amounts of toxic smoke.

Now, there is no silver bullet for solving the wildfire crisis, but we know that prescribed fires--experience tells us and the data tells us that prescribed fires are the most effective tools in reducing hazardous fuels and preventing catastrophic wildfires.

Will they continue to happen--fires? Yes, but if we can prevent them, that is ideal or at least let's mitigate their size, their scope, and the damage that they cause however we can.

But the problem that brings us to this measure is that while the EPA regulations have allowed prescribed fires to qualify as exceptional events since 2016, the Agency has never actually approved one, leaving States worried that using this critical tool--this provenly effective tool--to protect communities could jeopardize their air quality goals. By trying to do good and prevent fires or mitigate fires from a public safety standpoint, you are penalized on the air quality side of things.

So this bill creates a narrow, targeted pathway specifically for prescribed fires while preserving existing air quality standards for other exceptional events.

I want to thank my colleagues from Utah and Oregon for their partnership in this important bill, and kudos to Chairwoman Capito and Ranking Member Whitehouse on the committee who helped craft this measure as well.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Building Readiness and Integration for Dependents Going to Civilian Environments Act of 2026 or the BRIDGE Act of 2026. This legislation seeks to ensure that servicemembers and military families have the support they need to successfully transition from military service to civilian life.

Each year, thousands of servicemembers leave the Armed Forces and face significant challenges navigating employment, healthcare, education, benefits, and community reintegration. While the Department of Defense's Transition Assistance Program provides important preseparation services, many military families still struggle to access personalized and coordinated support during this major life transistion.

The BRIDGE Act of 2026 would establish a 3-year pilot program at four geographically diverse military installations to provide nonclinical, community-based transition support for servicemembers and their families. This legislation recognizes that transition is not just an individual experience but a whole-family process that requires tailored support and long-term stability.

Under this act, eligible servicemembers within 1 year of separation and their families would receive individualized transition assistance, including peer-led support groups, resilience workshops, spouse employment assistance, skills training and credentialing, benefits navigation, and reintegration support. Participants would also be paired with dedicated transition coordinators to help develop personalized transition plans and connect families with existing Federal, State, nonprofit, and community resources.

This bill would further prioritize servicemembers facing accelerated or involuntary separations and require participating organizations to track outcomes related to employment, financial stability, resilience, and family well-being. In addition, the legislation would direct the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs to coordinate services to ensure a seamless postseparation transition for servicemembers and their families.

The BRIDGE Act of 2026 is an important step toward strengthening military family readiness and improving long-term outcomes for veterans and their loved ones. Servicemembers and military families sacrifice greatly in service to our Nation, and they deserve support that reflects the full scope of the transition challenges they face.

I would like to thank Senator Scott of South Carolina for coleading this bill with me. I hope our colleagues will join us in supporting this effort to strengthen transition support for servicemembers and military families.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the BRIDGE Act of 2026 as swiftly as possible.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Building Readiness and Integration for Dependents Going to Civilian Environments Act of 2026 or the BRIDGE Act of 2026. This legislation seeks to ensure that servicemembers and military families have the support they need to successfully transition from military service to civilian life.

Each year, thousands of servicemembers leave the Armed Forces and face significant challenges navigating employment, healthcare, education, benefits, and community reintegration. While the Department of Defense's Transition Assistance Program provides important preseparation services, many military families still struggle to access personalized and coordinated support during this major life transistion.

The BRIDGE Act of 2026 would establish a 3-year pilot program at four geographically diverse military installations to provide nonclinical, community-based transition support for servicemembers and their families. This legislation recognizes that transition is not just an individual experience but a whole-family process that requires tailored support and long-term stability.

Under this act, eligible servicemembers within 1 year of separation and their families would receive individualized transition assistance, including peer-led support groups, resilience workshops, spouse employment assistance, skills training and credentialing, benefits navigation, and reintegration support. Participants would also be paired with dedicated transition coordinators to help develop personalized transition plans and connect families with existing Federal, State, nonprofit, and community resources.

This bill would further prioritize servicemembers facing accelerated or involuntary separations and require participating organizations to track outcomes related to employment, financial stability, resilience, and family well-being. In addition, the legislation would direct the Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs to coordinate services to ensure a seamless postseparation transition for servicemembers and their families.

The BRIDGE Act of 2026 is an important step toward strengthening military family readiness and improving long-term outcomes for veterans and their loved ones. Servicemembers and military families sacrifice greatly in service to our Nation, and they deserve support that reflects the full scope of the transition challenges they face.

I would like to thank Senator Scott of South Carolina for coleading this bill with me. I hope our colleagues will join us in supporting this effort to strengthen transition support for servicemembers and military families.

I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass the BRIDGE Act of 2026 as swiftly as possible.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the bipartisan Barriers to Suicide Act. This legislation would establish competitive grants to help State and local governments fund nets and barriers that have been shown to reduce suicide on bridges and other high-risk infrastructure.

This bipartisan bill would establish a grant program for States and localities to apply for Federal funding under the National Highway Performance Program to install nets, barriers, and other evidence-based suicide deterrents on bridges, buildings, parking garages, highway-rail grade crossings, and at rail stations.

This bill would also authorize a study to identify the types of structures most commonly used for suicide attempts, types of barriers that are most effective in prevention, and additional strategies to reduce jumping deaths.

The CDC estimated that about 12.8 million people seriously thought about suicide, 3.7 million made a plan, and 1.5 million attempted suicide in 2023. There were over 49,000 deaths from suicide in 2023 and between 2010 and 2020, 11,154 Americans lost their lives through suicide-by-jumping.

Research shows that physical barriers on bridges and high structures can reduce suicide deaths at those sites by up to 90 percent.

States and localities should have access to a grant program that allows them to proactively prevent suicide-by-jumping by building safety nets and barriers on bridges, buildings, parking garages, and at rail stations and highway-rail grade rail crossings, with the goal of preventing suicides.

I would like to thank Senator Tillis for introducing this important legislation with me, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact the Barriers to Suicide Act as soon as possible.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Basic Assistance for Students in College Act or the BASIC Act, which I introduced today.

I know how important it is to help students cover the full cost of attending college, including tuition and fees, housing, food, transportation, books, childcare, healthcare, supplies, and more.

According to the Hope Center for Student Basic Needs, three in five college students experience food and housing insecurity. We also know that rates of basic needs insecurity are much higher for historically marginalized students, including Black, Latino, and indigenous students; parenting students; LGBTQIA+ students; first-generation students; Pell Grant recipients; former foster youth; and justice- involved students.

Our Nation's college students shouldn't have to worry about going hungry or having a roof over their heads. Yet far too many do, and basic needs will be out of reach for millions more students due to the One Big Beautiful Act, which cut food assistance, healthcare coverage, and access to financial aid.

The evidence is clear that addressing students' basic needs prevents students from having to sacrifice their health and well-being in order to succeed in higher education.

That is why I am proud to introduce this bill to authorize $1 billion for a new grant program to help institutions of higher education meet students' basic needs. This funding represents an essential aspect of building more equitable paths to higher education, and it represents an investment in our students, our institutions, and our future. The legislation also helps coordinate assistance across Federal Agency lines.

I want to thank Senator Warren and Representative Torres for introducing this bill with me, and I hope our colleagues will join us in support of this bill that ensures no student is forced to choose between their education and their basic needs.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Ocean Protection and DDT Reduction Act. This bill would direct NOAA, in consultation with EPA and DOD, to study and address the impacts of historical toxic waste dumping, especially dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, DDT, and other industrial and military wastes, in the San Pedro Basin off the coast of California.

Dumping of industrial, chemical, and military waste off the Southern California coast occurred from the 1930s until it was banned in 1972 by the Ocean Dumping Act. This included the dumping of DDT, radioactive materials, alkaline and oil waste, and unexploded ordinance and munitions across 14 sites along the coastline from San Diego to Santa Monica.

In addition to the dumping of chemical waste barrels, millions of pounds of DDT and PCBs were discharged through sewer outfall pipes. Roughly 110 tons of DDT ended up in the sediments of the Palos Verdes Shelf, and in 1996, EPA added this 17 square-mile underwater site as a Superfund site.

Recent studies have found tens of thousands of degrading and leaking barrels of DDT and hazardous waste on the ocean floor at a depth of 3,000 ft deep and 8 to 24 miles from the coast of Southern California, posing potential risks to marine life, fisheries, and public health.

New images from 2020 that showed corroded metal barrels with mysterious

``halos'' in the deep ocean off Los Angeles prompted a Scripps study supported by NOAA, which found that these barrels were leaking caustic alkaline waste.

This bill would support important research and coordination on the scope and impacts of the dumped covered waste in the San Pedro Basin and the potential of bioremediation, as well as require a report to Congress after 3 years. The bill would also establish a grant program for academic and research institutions to study the mapping, movement, breakdown, and bioaccumulation of contaminants.

Due to slow degradation, DDT is an ongoing hazard to humans and wildlife, with bioaccumulation found in sea lions, dolphins, bottom- feeding fish, and condors. Supporting further research is crucial to addressing the impacts of the toxic waste dumping.

Mr. President, I rise to introduce the bipartisan Barriers to Suicide Act. This legislation would establish competitive grants to help State and local governments fund nets and barriers that have been shown to reduce suicide on bridges and other high-risk infrastructure.

This bipartisan bill would establish a grant program for States and localities to apply for Federal funding under the National Highway Performance Program to install nets, barriers, and other evidence-based suicide deterrents on bridges, buildings, parking garages, highway-rail grade crossings, and at rail stations.

This bill would also authorize a study to identify the types of structures most commonly used for suicide attempts, types of barriers that are most effective in prevention, and additional strategies to reduce jumping deaths.

The CDC estimated that about 12.8 million people seriously thought about suicide, 3.7 million made a plan, and 1.5 million attempted suicide in 2023. There were over 49,000 deaths from suicide in 2023 and between 2010 and 2020, 11,154 Americans lost their lives through suicide-by-jumping.

Research shows that physical barriers on bridges and high structures can reduce suicide deaths at those sites by up to 90 percent.

States and localities should have access to a grant program that allows them to proactively prevent suicide-by-jumping by building safety nets and barriers on bridges, buildings, parking garages, and at rail stations and highway-rail grade rail crossings, with the goal of preventing suicides.

I would like to thank Senator Tillis for introducing this important legislation with me, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact the Barriers to Suicide Act as soon as possible.

Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of the Basic Assistance for Students in College Act or the BASIC Act, which I introduced today.

I know how important it is to help students cover the full cost of attending college, including tuition and fees, housing, food, transportation, books, childcare, healthcare, supplies, and more.

According to the Hope Center for Student Basic Needs, three in five college students experience food and housing insecurity. We also know that rates of basic needs insecurity are much higher for historically marginalized students, including Black, Latino, and indigenous students; parenting students; LGBTQIA+ students; first-generation students; Pell Grant recipients; former foster youth; and justice- involved students.

Our Nation's college students shouldn't have to worry about going hungry or having a roof over their heads. Yet far too many do, and basic needs will be out of reach for millions more students due to the One Big Beautiful Act, which cut food assistance, healthcare coverage, and access to financial aid.

The evidence is clear that addressing students' basic needs prevents students from having to sacrifice their health and well-being in order to succeed in higher education.

That is why I am proud to introduce this bill to authorize $1 billion for a new grant program to help institutions of higher education meet students' basic needs. This funding represents an essential aspect of building more equitable paths to higher education, and it represents an investment in our students, our institutions, and our future. The legislation also helps coordinate assistance across Federal Agency lines.

I want to thank Senator Warren and Representative Torres for introducing this bill with me, and I hope our colleagues will join us in support of this bill that ensures no student is forced to choose between their education and their basic needs.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Ocean Protection and DDT Reduction Act. This bill would direct NOAA, in consultation with EPA and DOD, to study and address the impacts of historical toxic waste dumping, especially dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, DDT, and other industrial and military wastes, in the San Pedro Basin off the coast of California.

Dumping of industrial, chemical, and military waste off the Southern California coast occurred from the 1930s until it was banned in 1972 by the Ocean Dumping Act. This included the dumping of DDT, radioactive materials, alkaline and oil waste, and unexploded ordinance and munitions across 14 sites along the coastline from San Diego to Santa Monica.

In addition to the dumping of chemical waste barrels, millions of pounds of DDT and PCBs were discharged through sewer outfall pipes. Roughly 110 tons of DDT ended up in the sediments of the Palos Verdes Shelf, and in 1996, EPA added this 17 square-mile underwater site as a Superfund site.

Recent studies have found tens of thousands of degrading and leaking barrels of DDT and hazardous waste on the ocean floor at a depth of 3,000 ft deep and 8 to 24 miles from the coast of Southern California, posing potential risks to marine life, fisheries, and public health.

New images from 2020 that showed corroded metal barrels with mysterious

``halos'' in the deep ocean off Los Angeles prompted a Scripps study supported by NOAA, which found that these barrels were leaking caustic alkaline waste.

This bill would support important research and coordination on the scope and impacts of the dumped covered waste in the San Pedro Basin and the potential of bioremediation, as well as require a report to Congress after 3 years. The bill would also establish a grant program for academic and research institutions to study the mapping, movement, breakdown, and bioaccumulation of contaminants.

Due to slow degradation, DDT is an ongoing hazard to humans and wildlife, with bioaccumulation found in sea lions, dolphins, bottom- feeding fish, and condors. Supporting further research is crucial to addressing the impacts of the toxic waste dumping.

Mr. President, reserving the right to object, let me remind us all, colleagues, that we, as of today, are 41 days from the midterm elections; or, as I like to refer to it, it is simply the last day to vote, because a lot of people in States across the country take advantage of their right and opportunity to vote early, in person, like people in Virginia did beginning this last weekend. Many people in States across the country, including in my home State of California, exercised their right and option to vote by mail. I will get back to that in a minute.

The point is, in a growing number of States, the midterm election is already underway. People in North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Alabama are already receiving their ballots in the mail. In Virginia, South Dakota, Minnesota, Vermont, and Illinois, voters are already going to the polls to vote in person early. In the next couple of weeks, additional States will begin. Nine more States will have begun their early voting. In my home State of California, ballots will be mailed to every registered voter in the State.

So, again, the bottom line here is the 2026 midterm election has already begun; it is in full swing. So let's not be fooled about this attempt to pass a piece of the SAVE Act.

No. 1, the substance. It is not just a voter ID bill. It is a bill-- and the timing is curious--that seeks to create chaos and confusion over vote-by-mail and absentee voting.

The other part is, indeed, the timing and its implications, trying to change the rules--because this bill, if signed into law, would go immediately into effect, creating chaos in the middle of an election that is already underway.

But don't just take my word for it. Let me quote the Republican Lieutenant Governor of Utah, who says that this is ``violating our constitutional right to a secret ballot.''

Why? Because the requirement to include a copy of your driver's license when you are voting by mail undermines the notion of a secret ballot in America.

Let me quote the Republican Governor of Ohio, who says that a very similar bill that reached his desk in the State of Ohio represented ``a significant burden.''

And, again, it is not just a potential or theoretical significant burden for some election sometime in the future. It would go into effect immediately, causing chaos and confusion and a burden for election administrators, who wouldn't even know how to begin to comply with this for an election that is already underway.

Let me go even further and reference the Supreme Court's recent actions when they blocked President Trump's Executive order on vote-by- mail and what he was trying to do, giving authority and direction to the U.S. Postal Service to determine which voters get their ballots and which don't.

Even Justice Kavanaugh, with whom I disagree on much--but even Justice Kavanaugh--said it was in part because changing the rules so close to an election ``would be arbitrary and capricious.'' That was a couple of weeks ago that this ruling came out. If at that time the Supreme Court deemed it too close to an election, we are even closer now. And so, again, there is not nearly the time to properly, responsibly implement it, even if you agreed with this bad policy.

Let me make a case for what is really going on here, all this talk about changing the rules around elections. This administration, including the President himself, has been trying nonstop to interfere and change the rules on the elections for a long time now, and those efforts have been successfully pushed back. I expect him to continue these threats and attempts--not just between now and election day-- probably on election day and postelection day, if history is any indicator.

Why? First of all, it is a desperate attempt to hold onto power because the writing is on the wall. In poll after poll, approval ratings, et cetera, show that Donald Trump is going to be in for a rough night this November.

But it is also an attempt to distract. You would think that he--or we--could be spending more time on trying to bring down costs for working families. But, no, for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the unauthorized war in Iran, the price on everything is not just not going down; it keeps going up--the price of gas that people put into their passenger cars to get to and from work or wherever they need to go. The cost of diesel is also at record levels and being passed on to consumers in terms of increased costs on everything else-- groceries, clothing, consumer electronics, and more.

The threat to the economy is so bad that the Federal Reserve has not only not lowered interest rates as Donald Trump has practically demanded; they have taken a recent step to increase interest rates for the first time in 3 years to try to rein in inflation.

So nothing is getting cheaper, nothing is getting easier, and a recent report showed that the administration's tariffs--again, the war in Iran; the trade wars that are unnecessary; and bad economic decisions--are taking a toll on American families: $4,200 per household in increased costs because of higher prices.

And now the President has, once again, threatened our Canadian neighbors with endless tariffs.

Look at healthcare. The average cost of employer-provided healthcare is expected to increase by at least 11 percent. What happened to the so-called ``Liberation Day'' of last April?

President Trump promised that these tariffs would bring back manufacturing, make Americans more wealthy, pay down the Nation's debt, create jobs, and lower prices for consumers. That sure sounded good, but it couldn't be further from the truth. None of that has happened. Actually, the exact opposite has come to bear.

But, again, instead of focusing on those issues, we are once again taking precious time on the Senate floor and talking about unnecessary changes to how people should be able to vote or not vote--maybe that is their ultimate objective--for an election that is already underway.

Just because your team is losing at halftime doesn't mean you can call a timeout and change the rules or change the referees, trying to change the outcome.

So let's dispense with this measure and get back to the real work at hand.

Mr. President, I would therefore ask the Senator to modify his request so that instead of S. 5271 and notwithstanding rule XXII, the Committee on Finance be discharged from further

consideration of S. 5390, the End Trump's Tariff Tax Act and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. President, I object.

Mr. President, I object.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the bipartisan Wildland Firefighter Health and Safety Act. This bill would address some of the serious health risks Federal wildland firefighters face when on the job.

We have all seen the devastation, destruction, and loss that has occurred in communities across the country as wildfires grow in frequency and intensity. Last year, we saw the Eaton and Palisades fires destroy thousands of structures and take 31 lives, making them 2 of the worst fires in history.

As a result of climate change, Californians have become all too familiar with wildfires. Containing them has proven to be a large undertaking that has required close local, State, and Federal coordination.

Communities are able to make it through these horrific disasters thanks to the bravery and hard work of fire crews on the ground. During the LA fires, firefighters from across the State, country, and even abroad answered our call for support, and it is thanks to their hard work and bravery that more structures and, most importantly, more lives were not lost.

We owe it to these heroes to ensure they have the support they need, given the dangerous nature of their work. In the 1970s, structural firefighters began using respiratory protection, yet we are still sending wildland firefighters into dangerous conditions without adequate protection.

This bill would establish an interagency task force and an advisory panel of outside stakeholders to coordinate exposure reduction, pilot respiratory technologies, and develop an updated wildland firefighter health strategy every 3 years.

I want to thank my colleague Senator Sheehy for coleading this effort with me in the Senate. Finally, I want to thank our brave Federal firefighters for risking their lives to protect our communities when they need it the most. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance the Wildland Firefighter Health and Safety Act as quickly as possible.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the bipartisan Wildland Firefighter Health and Safety Act. This bill would address some of the serious health risks Federal wildland firefighters face when on the job.

We have all seen the devastation, destruction, and loss that has occurred in communities across the country as wildfires grow in frequency and intensity. Last year, we saw the Eaton and Palisades fires destroy thousands of structures and take 31 lives, making them 2 of the worst fires in history.

As a result of climate change, Californians have become all too familiar with wildfires. Containing them has proven to be a large undertaking that has required close local, State, and Federal coordination.

Communities are able to make it through these horrific disasters thanks to the bravery and hard work of fire crews on the ground. During the LA fires, firefighters from across the State, country, and even abroad answered our call for support, and it is thanks to their hard work and bravery that more structures and, most importantly, more lives were not lost.

We owe it to these heroes to ensure they have the support they need, given the dangerous nature of their work. In the 1970s, structural firefighters began using respiratory protection, yet we are still sending wildland firefighters into dangerous conditions without adequate protection.

This bill would establish an interagency task force and an advisory panel of outside stakeholders to coordinate exposure reduction, pilot respiratory technologies, and develop an updated wildland firefighter health strategy every 3 years.

I want to thank my colleague Senator Sheehy for coleading this effort with me in the Senate. Finally, I want to thank our brave Federal firefighters for risking their lives to protect our communities when they need it the most. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance the Wildland Firefighter Health and Safety Act as quickly as possible.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, as our colleagues know, I serve as ranking member of the Rules Committee, which oversees Federal elections. I also serve on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration. And

I reference this because last week, I received a protected disclosure from an anonymous Federal whistleblower.

At a time when many Americans feel discouraged by the Trump administration's unprecedented chaos and corruption, it is heartening to see a Federal Government employee with the integrity and the courage to expose potential illegal activity and abuse of power.

Today, Leader Schumer and I made the full disclosure public, and I am going to go over some of these highlights, which are incredibly disturbing. They are disturbing to me, and I think they should be disturbing to every Member of this Chamber.

First, leadership at the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has ordered hundreds of employees in USCIS's Fraud Detection and National Security Division to stop doing the jobs they were hired and trained to do and instead watch a short training video and immediately turn their time and attention to something called the Unlawful Voter Initiative. They were directed to stop their anti-fraud work. This administration makes a lot of claims about going after fraud. They were directed to stop their national security screenings. They were directed to stop all the things that this administration claims it cares about and instead go on a wild goose chase to find or manufacture evidence for the President's conspiracy theories of widespread voter fraud.

This, without question, is a terrible waste and misuse of Agency resources, but colleagues, it is actually so much more worse than that. The whistleblower disclosure also includes compelling claims that USCIS officers are being directed to lie and to misrepresent themselves in order to search voters' sensitive personal information on State election officials' websites. Let me say that again. Federal officers are being told by headquarters to lie or to misrepresent themselves in order to access State voter data. It is a clear violation of State laws, and these violations have likely occurred thousands and thousands of times.

On some State websites, officers are being told to attest under penalty of law that they are the voter or the voter's representative.

On other websites, like the one of my home State of California, officers are being told to misrepresent themselves and enter voters' sensitive information like Social Security or driver's license numbers.

When USCIS officers expressed concerns with these practices, they have been told by Agency leadership to just go ahead, that they won't be ``personally liable.'' Think about that for a second. If what the Department is doing and if what these officers are being told to do was legal, it begs the question of, why would they need to be reassured by Agency lawyers that they won't be held personally liable?

The whistleblower disclosure also reveals that DHS is using their own unreliable data to target people for investigation. That is right--data that the Department and Agencies already acknowledge is unreliable. Agency leadership is then forcing USCIS officers to create Federal law enforcement records against people, many of them U.S. citizens, even though they have doubts about the accuracy of the data.

So let's take a step back. Why are they doing this? Well, the Trump administration has tried and failed to force States to hand over these voter rolls. President Trump tried it in his first term through a sham Commission which failed and then weaponized the Federal Government to try to accomplish it here in his second term. But guess what. They have been taken to court, and they have lost in court over 30 times. States represented by Democrats and Republicans have said no, so the proverbial front door is locked.

As much as Trump wants access to voter data, the front door is locked, and now they are trying to break in a back door. They are using something called supplemental magic. That is right--in the materials that have been uncovered, they are using this supplemental magic to create a list of people that they think are not eligible to vote. Remember, the Agency has already said they know the data is unreliable.

So, frankly, this disclosure raises a lot of questions. Why is this initiative happening now? Who are the potentially hundreds of thousands of people being investigated? Who are they? And what the heck is supplemental magic? We need answers. This Senate--Congress--deserves answers. The American people deserve answers.

Agency training materials for this initiative say that ``raw data includes a lot of U.S. citizens.'' Let me repeat that. The training materials acknowledge that the data includes ``a lot of U.S. citizens.'' So why would you target them when you are looking for noncitizen voters?

DHS and USCIS also admit that their data is unreliable, complex, and will have multiple ID numbers for various individuals. Nevertheless, officers are told to generate Federal law enforcement records against them, even if they suspect that they are relying on inaccurate or incomplete information.

It is already clear that this Unlawful Voter Initiative is inaccurate, not to mention likely illegal, but to make matters worse, it has also been rushed, and it is reckless because rank-and-file USCIS officers are given reckless quotas to review 40 people per day. Do the math. That is five people per hour or 12 minutes per individual.

Colleagues, you know as well as I that 12 minutes to review unreliable data and complex immigration history is not an adequate amount of time to conduct a thorough investigation--because these aren't that; these are sham investigations.

We all know that voting by a noncitizen is illegal. That is already the law. You know that. I know that. We also know that based on study after study, report after report, audit after audit, it is extremely, extremely rare. Our current safeguards are working.

This Unlawful Voter Initiative does not appear to be a legitimate effort, and we should not take anything that comes out of it at face value.

Just 12 minutes for an investigation, a lot of U.S. citizens, the unreliable magic data, and potentially thousands of violations of State and Federal privacy laws--saying that this is dangerous for our democracy is a huge understatement.

This is more than a reckless attempt to prove Donald Trump's election-denial talking points, like the ones he used in the White House speech this past July. Diversion of Federal law enforcement to break laws for political purposes is a clear abuse of power, and there is a very real danger that thousands of naturalized U.S. citizens and legal residents will potentially face negative consequences because of this sham investigation.

This isn't just about voting; this could lead to unwarranted secondary screening at airports, consequences for immigration benefits, referrals to HSI or the FBI for criminal investigation, and no clear recourse to undo the consequences of an erroneous Federal law enforcement record being created after a quick 12-minute review.

There is also the danger that Donald Trump will use false numbers of supposed votes cast by noncitizens to threaten to prosecute State and elections officials that he doesn't like. The President and his allies could even try using the unreliable results of this Unlawful Voter Initiative to undermine and challenge election results themselves.

That is right--January 6 was not the end of this.

So, today, Senator Schumer and I sent this whistleblower's disclosure regarding the so-called Unlawful Voter Initiative to Secretary Mullin and USCIS Director Edlow. We are demanding an immediate halt to these activities. We are demanding transparency from DHS. We are demanding the removal of unreliable law enforcement records, many of which are against U.S. citizens.

We will have more to say about this in the coming days.

I would remind the Department and USCIS that whistleblowers to Congress are protected by Federal law. Let me repeat: Whistleblowers to Congress are protected by Federal law.

This individual will remain anonymous, and any attempt at retaliation is illegal and wrong.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.