Floor Statements

Mr. President, thank you to my good friend and colleague Senator Schmitt. The grift is real, and the grift is great. I rise today to urge my colleagues to pass this vital legislation to stop the rampant fraud that we are seeing around this country.

Through my previous work as Florida's attorney general, certainly my colleague and his work as attorney general, we know how important it is to safeguard our citizens and the American taxpayer.

I was a founding member of the new Senate Anti-fraud Task Force, and I know every time we uncover another case of fraudsters benefiting off our public tax dollars, it is a slap in the face to hard-working Americans.

We are so grateful to this administration and Vice President Vance for stepping up and taking the lead. We know that fraud being uncovered across the Nation sets up a challenge to Congress to address our laws to make sure it is not easy to accomplish; that the criminals don't have their work laid out for them; that they don't keep getting away with this. Congress should be embarrassed if we don't take action.

I was as shocked as everyone here when reports came out that criminals in Minnesota stole an estimated $9 billion in taxpayer funds.

In addition, the administration has uncovered more than $260 billion in fraud nationwide. Americans should be hopping mad.

That is why, when the House of Representatives recently voted overwhelmingly in a bipartisan fashion to advance commonsense policies holding fraudsters accountable, I worked directly with the House sponsors to file the Senate companion the very next day. That is why my colleague and I are standing here on the floor today to try to get something done immediately. We have to stop the bleeding.

The National Fraud Enforcement Division Act of 2026 would institute a permanent force for taxpayers within the Department of Justice.

To Senator Schmitt, to the House sponsors, and every other Member of this noble institution that has vowed to clean up this mess and actually do something, thank you. It couldn't come at a more important time.

However, while I stand here and talk about the importance of this issue, the common sense of this issue, and the support of the American people for this issue, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle block every effort we have made to address rampant fraud in this country.

We were sent here to be stewards of taxpayer dollars, to ensure we are spending the finite resources of this country responsibly. And yet every significant attempt taken by this body,

by the government, by me, by a colleague, by Senator Schmitt, by anyone on the Republican side of the aisle to do something, it gets blocked or stalled.

Dismantling the fraud economy and going after those who defraud the American taxpayer should be a 100-to-0 issue.

When Senator Ernst tried to pass her antifraud legislative package-- with many of the provisions being bipartisan--earlier today, Senate Democrats blocked the bill.

Just last week, I tried to pass a No Aid For Ghost Students Act in committee, making sure we weren't outlaying money for students that didn't even exist, and that got stalled by the Democrats.

Every new idea or proposal that we put forth is panned or outright rejected, even if the idea saves taxpayer dollars for more crucial needs or would lead to refunds to the American taxpayer. It is irresponsible to not do something. We should be embarrassed.

And think about what is happening. I am talking about the Dems not allowing us to push forward legislation to fix laws that are allowing this to happen. Right now, we are just trying to put forward a permanent division to enforce existing laws, and we can't seem to get that through, even though it passed the House bipartisan.

When we are told actions speak louder than words, I can only draw one conclusion; that certain Members or parts of this institution prioritize fraud recipients and grifting the apparatus over the fiscal health of the country or our fiscal stewardship responsibilities.

I hope I am wrong. I hope that we, as the Senate, as the legislators we are, will come together to support this cause and permanently enact and set up a Fraud Enforcement Division. There could be nothing simpler. And if we pass the National Fraud Enforcement Division Act today, we guarantee that more fraudsters and bad actors are held accountable for stealing taxpayer dollars. I say: Let's get this done.

I yield back to my colleague from Missouri.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 6831 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, I would like to begin by thanking the sponsor of this bill, Senator Cruz, Senator Schmitt who had such a large hand in getting this to the floor for their support on this amendment. I think everyone can agree that college sports has become broken and is headed in a bad direction. Fans across the Nation are seeing it. I am hearing about it from Floridians, and that is why I appreciate the efforts of my colleagues and the Trump administration to address these issues.

But there is an area in this bill that would not best serve all of our universities, especially all the universities in the State of Florida, and that is why I am here with this amendment.

We have a unique situation in Florida. We have a lot of schools that have successful football programs. In fact, 25 percent of the national football championship teams, since 1983, have come from the State of Florida. It is because of those successful programs. And they have been successful because the universities have had the opportunity to make decisions based on students and the success of their program.

So we need more flexibility in the conference caps in this bill, and that is why I am moving to amend this bill simply by expanding the conference cap by 1, from 19 to 20 in those conferences.

This would go a long way to helping schools like USF, which is in its 30th year, and they are at a 4 to 0 start to the season. The strict conference cap will limit them.

It also helps our historic programs like the University of Miami, who is also 4 to 0 already this year, and Florida State University that wants to continue to build on their storied century-old successes in football.

So thank you for the opportunity to speak on this amendment. Again, I would like to thank the bill's sponsor that supports this amendment, and I would like to yield my time to Senator Blumenthal from Connecticut who also is sponsoring this amendment.

Mr. President, today is Constitution Day. Two hundred thirty nine years ago, our Founders signed the Constitution of this United States. Every Senator in this room has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And every one of us swore that oath. I did it at the same time as Senator Husted, who is on the floor today.

Our Founders understood the danger of concentrated power; they had just fought a revolution against it. And they understood something about human nature: Power will always want more power.

So they put limits on it. They divided power among three branches. They built in checks and balances. They preserved the authority of the States. And with the Bill of Rights, they made one thing unmistakably clear: There are some places government simply cannot go. Government cannot silence you because it doesn't like what you say. Government cannot take away your right to keep and bear arms. It cannot search your home whenever it pleases. It cannot take away your liberty without due process. These aren't suggestions. They are hard limits on government power.

Yet today there is a growing movement on the left that treats safeguards within our Constitution as obstacles to overcome. You don't like a decision from the Supreme Court? Pack the Court, add Justices until you get the decisions you want. You don't like the laws of the people that are enacted through their representatives? Just have an Executive, a rogue prosecutor, refuse to enforce the people's laws. Don't like what Americans are saying? Pressure private companies to silence them and call it fighting misinformation.

Again and again, we will see the same pattern when constitutional guardrails stand between you and what you want: Simply move the guardrails. And that is dangerous. It is the greatest threat to a constitutional republic.

The greatest threat to a constitutional republic is not disagreement. It is the belief that your cause is so important that the Constitution should get out of your way.

And today we are seeing something even more fundamental: this movement that I referenced to dismantle the institution the Constitution created. Right now, democratic socialists are calling for a far-reaching change to the very foundation of American Government, our Constitution. They want to abolish the Supreme Court, replace the Presidency, abolish the electoral college.

And at some point, we have to admit this stops being an argument about policy. It becomes an argument about the very foundation of this country, the United States of America. It becomes an attack on the Constitution that we all swore an oath to protect and defend because when you start dismantling institutions designed to keep power in check, the next question has to be: Who keeps power in check then?

I have had the rare opportunity to see the balance of power, the separation of power, from all three branches now. I have served as a Federal prosecutor; I have served as an attorney general in the great ``Free State of Florida''; I have served as a judge for over a decade; and now I serve on behalf of the people, making their laws in the legislative branch.

I have seen firsthand why the Founders drew those lines and why we must protect them. And that brings me back to our oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

We know what a foreign enemy looks like. But a threat to our constitutional system doesn't have to come from beyond our shores. It can come from within the very institutions the Constitution created. And what happens when those that have sworn the oath to protect and defend the Constitution, what happens when they themselves start advocating to dismantle it?

Right now, we have Members of Congress that have sworn to protect the Constitution, but they are coming out and supporting organizations and policies and advocacies that would attack and dismantle the things that protect people's rights.

An oath means the most when keeping it becomes inconvenient. Just ask the officers, the deputies in my home county of Hillsborough County, who took the oath to protect and serve and went into live fire in order to do their jobs and uphold their oath.

Justice Clarence Thomas recently described the challenge this way:

It is that devotion that we are missing today and that we

must find in our hearts if this Nation is to endure.

This year, America celebrates 250 years since declaring our independence. The Declaration of Independence announced the promise of America. The Constitution gave us the system to protect it.

Our job is not to move its guardrails when they become inconvenient. Our job is to defend them because our enemies do not have to defeat America on a battlefield if we are willing to tear down from within the institution and principles that have sustained this Nation for 250 years.

So, today, on Constitution Day, let us remember the oath that each one of us took to support the Constitution, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Let's remember our duty and carry it out faithfully.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to urge this esteemed body into action.

I know that we are on the verge of a planned, long State work period and that many of my colleagues are looking forward to being back in our homes to meet with our constituents. But here is the thing: I know many of us agree that our business is far from done. The work the American people entrusted to us has not concluded. We have not done what we need to do. We cannot leave Washington until we act

upon the most vital aspect of protecting our democracy, and that is securing our elections so that we remain a government of Americans-- free Americans--by Americans, for Americans. I am here today to make sure that happens.

Our great American experiment hinges on the sanctity and integrity of our elections, and it is our responsibility--every single one of us no matter what side of the aisle we sit on--to protect the United States of America and everything that it was built on. To do that, we have to ensure that only Americans and legitimate voters participate in American elections.

Two hundred fifty years ago, this Nation began as a bold experiment in self-representative government, and we are still guided by those enduring words that followed ``We the People.'' And while the challenges we face today may seem more modern, certainly more complex, and more immediate than those confronting the Founders, the principles they laid out remain steadfast--the guarantees to our people. ``We the people'' agreed we would live among one another, create, enforce, and uphold our laws. To do that, we created a strong Republic that depended on ``we the people'' being engaged in our elections to select our Representatives--the Representatives of the people--to serve our interests.

The SAVE America Act--indeed, election integrity efforts--are grounded in a simple, commonsense--indeed, foundational--principle that only American citizens should vote in American elections.

I really am dumbfounded that I still have to come to the floor and have this debate with anybody in this Chamber. I am one of the newest Senators. I just got to Washington last year on behalf of the great, free State of Florida. I fought like heck to protect that State during challenges this Nation had never faced before, and we did it. We are now one of the most successful States, and we are one of the States with the most secure elections. You had better be darned sure I am going to do that here as a U.S. Senator on behalf of all Americans. It shouldn't be controversial. It is not complicated. It is a basic safeguard of our Republic that ensures our government remains truly of, by, and for the American people.

From the beginning, the Founders understood the importance of fiercely protecting our elections. Framers like Alexander Hamilton knew that our laws and our system should reflect the will of the American people and no one else. Americans must be able to trust that their elections are not corrupted or skewed or nullified by noncitizens voting or ineligible persons voting.

Questions about election integrity are not new. They were recognized and debated by the Founders themselves. During the Constitutional Convention, one member expressed concern that States may make false returns of their elections. States, today, give licenses to those here illegally and then register them to vote. A lot of that paperwork happens at the same time.

It is the responsibility of Congress to uphold the election integrity of this country. It is our responsibility to do that on behalf of our constituents back home. In fact, I think it is the responsibility of this Chamber to put it up for a vote so they can see who is standing up for them back home. That is the only way we can ensure the people have confidence in the system and in the legitimacy of our results of elections.

This is about more than one bill. Look at any of the election integrity measures that are coming up. I am proud to have been an original sponsor of the SAVE America Act, but voter ID and voter integrity bills--all of these are important. I have also sponsored a bill called Ballots by Election Day to make sure we can get prompt results so people trust these elections. It is about preserving the integrity of our Republic. It is about ensuring that our government remains accountable to the people. It is about protecting a system--a government--that has endured for 250 years.

How do we ensure only citizens vote? The answer is so simple: voter

Madam President, if the motion for the Senate to adjourn with pro forma sessions scheduled until September 14 were to have been a rollcall vote, I would have voted no.

Madam President, today, I have the honor of rising in recognition of a true Florida hero.

I know we hear a lot these days about entire political parties adopting platforms that want to defund and abolish the police, but in Florida, we do it a different way--an entirely different way. In fact, we watch what other crazy places are doing, and we just do the opposite, and it has worked out quite well.

One of my favorite parts of my job as a U.S. Senator now, after having been the Florida attorney general and having worked with law enforcement for many, many years, is to spotlight Florida's brave law enforcement heroes when they do something uniquely heroic. It shows why a free society operating under the rule of law has to have brave men and women to answer a call and stand on a line to bravely serve us. Today, it is an honor to recognize Lee County Sheriff's Office Deputy Raymond Tellez Ferriol with the Florida's Finest Award.

Earlier this year, Deputy Tellez Ferriol saved the lives of three young girls.

Many people know Florida is a peninsula. We are surrounded by the ocean. On this particular day, there was a rip current that was very close to shore. If you have lived in Florida for any time or even if you have traveled to Florida, you know that rip currents can be incredibly deadly, pulling even expert swimmers out to sea very quickly.

On this day, it was supposed to be a time of fun in the Sun, but it almost turned deadly when three young girls got caught in a very strong rip current and were struggling to stay above water and get back to shore.

Deputy Tellez Ferriol was on patrol in full uniform, just going about his day protecting Floridians. He heard bystanders screaming for help. He immediately ran over, and without hesitation, he went into the water to rescue these three young girls. He grabbed flotation devices and started swimming. Thankfully, he was able to get them back to shore safely, as in this area, the strong rip current was really pushing all of them out. It was because of his bravery and his quick thinking that these girls are still alive.

While this instance had a happy ending, it is worth reminding Floridians and everyone heading to Florida--and we know there are many moving to Florida. It doesn't matter where I go in the Nation; someone I talked to just had a family member move to my home State and is one of my new constituents. But it is always important to remind everyone who lives in Florida or who visits our State's beaches of the hidden dangers of rip currents. There have already been eight confirmed deaths due to rip currents since the start of this year in Florida. So we always advise folks to swim with a partner, to consider swimming when there is a lifeguard on duty, and to identify and know what each beach warning flag means.

But today is about recognizing Deputy Tellez Ferriol. He was there that day because he was serving his community as a guardian, as someone who signed up to put his safety behind the safety of others.

I, for one, am incredibly honored and incredibly thankful that there are people like Deputy Tellez Ferriol and others who answer the call so bravely to serve others as their profession. Law enforcement officers do so much every day to keep us safe, and it is always such a joy to highlight those who show exceptional bravery and save lives.

Today, I recognize one of Florida's finest, Lee County Sheriff's Office Deputy Raymond Tellez Ferriol.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 434, S. 3266.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 198, S. 434.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported substitute amendment be withdrawn; that the Peters substitute amendment at the desk be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I understand that there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading en bloc.

Madam President, in order to place the bills on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I would object to further proceeding en bloc.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume executive session.

Mr. President, I have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, I have four requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority Leaders.

Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. President, I appreciate the words of my colleague Senator Husted, who was sworn in on the same day as I was, and we both hold very dear our responsibilities that our constituents have entrusted us with here in Washington. They did not send us up here to just listen to concerns. They didn't send us up here to just debate. They want action. And that is why I am so proud to stand here today.

In a moment, I am going to ask unanimous consent for two very clear, very specific pieces of legislation that have already been voted on in the House in a bipartisan way: voter ID and keeping Members of Congress from purchasing stocks while in office. Very simple. It should pass here, and I dare someone to object because the people of this country are tired of us talking about it. It is time for us to do something. These are two issues that I care very deeply about. The voter ID portion of this, I was an original cosponsor of the SAVE America Act, and I have introduced similar legislation to ban Members from stock trading through my Restore Trust in Congress Act, which is bipartisan.

These truly should be nondebatable, bipartisan issues that we can all agree on. The fact is, 83 percent of Americans support voter ID laws. The very people that the Democrats claim will be harmed by voter ID-- the very people--are the ones that support this.

Mr. President, 76 percent of Black Americans, 82 percent of Hispanic Americans support voter ID, an overwhelming majority of Americans support voter ID--of all parties.

Eighty-eight percent of Democrats, 81 percent of Independents support us banning Members of Congress from trading stocks.

So I wanted to be very clear tonight, very obvious for anyone that is watching, not only here within the Senate but at home, which party is asking their colleagues to require voter ID and banning the purchasing of stocks while in office.

I want to go back to voter ID for just a moment because I know, Senator Husted, this has been very important to you. Our great American experiment hinges on the sanctity and integrity of our elections, and I think we need to ask ourselves why is it that so many Democratic States refuse to comply with the law now and are objecting to us requiring voter ID. Why? What could be the reason?

We have to fiercely safeguard our democracy, ensuring that only Americans are allowed to participate in American elections. The SAVE America Act upholds the rule of law, makes sure there are stronger protections in place across the country to ensure that only citizens can participate in one of the privileges of being a citizen, and that is voting in our election.

Everyone should be outraged by what we just uncovered in New Jersey, where thousands of noncitizens were registered to vote through the State's motor vehicle system. So after telling us time and time and time and time again that that could never happen and does not happen-- oh my goodness, it is happening. Surprise, surprise.

And they will still come here to the floor and object to voter ID after blaming thousands of individuals on the voter rolls as a software error.

We also have to make sure that we are mindful of the fact that the Democratic Socialists of America have just said in their platform, they want noncitizens voting. They put it right out there in their platform.

So people ask why now? Why do we need voter ID now? Maybe because we are uncovering thousands of people on voter rolls that shouldn't be on voter rolls, and maybe it is because you have an entire segment of the Democratic Party pushing for noncitizen voting. That is why now.

Secure elections strengthen democracy. They increase participation. Ben Franklin famously replied to a bystander after the Constitutional Convention that we have a Republic if we can keep it. This is how we keep it.

The House passed this in a bipartisan way. There is absolutely no reason that we should not pass this by unanimous consent in the Senate.

I am going to keep fighting to bring in more accountability to our bosses, the people who are demanding this. And if somebody objects to this, I wonder whose interests they are fighting for. We cannot go back to our States without getting this done for them.

We have to restore accountability in Washington. We have to show the people back home we are working in their interests.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 7008, which was received from the House; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume legislative session and be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.