Floor Statements

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, as we go forward in this new session of Congress, I would hope very much that there will be a serious focus on the crises facing the working families of our country. We are the wealthiest nation on Earth. In fact, we are the wealthiest Nation in the history of the world. Yet, today, we have more income and wealth inequality than we have ever had. Sixty percent of our people live paycheck to paycheck. The life expectancy of working people is far below that in other wealthy countries. Eighty-five million Americans are uninsured or underinsured. Some 800,000 Americans are homeless. Twenty-five percent of seniors are trying to survive on $15,000 a year or less. We have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major nation on Earth. Further, we remain, shamefully, the only wealthy country not to guarantee healthcare to all people as a human right.

Meanwhile, while working families struggle to put food on the table and pay their bills, the wealthiest people in our country have never, ever had it so good. We are now in the absurd situation, the grossly unjust situation, where the 3 wealthiest people on top own more wealth than the bottom half of American society, some 170 million people. The 3 people on top have more wealth than 170 million on the bottom. That is not what America is supposed to be about.

In truth, there are a number of reasons why we are living in a nation today where the wealth of the billionaire class is exploding while the working class of our country struggles to keep their heads above water. There are many causes as to why, despite a huge increase in worker productivity, real weekly wages for the average American worker are less today than they were 50 years ago--real weekly wages are less than they were 50 years ago--and why, during that period, there was a $50 trillion transfer of wealth from the bottom 90 percent to the top 1 percent.

Now, a lot of the reasons as to why the very rich are becoming richer and working-class families are struggling have to do with disastrous trade policies which have resulted in the loss of millions of good- paying jobs. The failure of Congress to raise the minimum wage to a living wage is another reason why millions and millions of workers today are forced to try to survive on starvation wages. Furthermore, we are seeing and have seen aggressive and often illegal union-busting activities on the part of major employers. All of those reasons, and more, are issues that we have to deal with.

Today, I want to focus on one more reason as to why the working class of this country is struggling, and that has to do with the H-1B guest worker program.

Elon Musk, the wealthiest man in the world, with a net worth of nearly $430 billion, and other multibillionaires in the high-tech industry claim that the H-1B Federal guest worker program is vital to our economy because of the scarcity of highly skilled engineers and other technology workers in the United States. In other words, what they say is that they are trying desperately to find highly skilled American workers to do their jobs; just can't find them; just not there.

In my view, Musk and the other billionaires who are strongly supporting the H-1B Program are dead wrong. American workers are there; they are just not looking for them.

In my view, the main function of the H-1B Program is not to hire the best and the brightest. That is the theory--we have to bring in the best and the brightest to help our companies function and grow wealth in America. That is the theory, but in truth, the reality of what the H-1B Program is, is to replace good-paying American jobs with hundreds of thousands of lower paid guest workers from abroad who are often treated as indentured servants. The cheaper it is to hire guest workers, the more money the multibillionaire owners of large corporations make. In other words, this program is not only grossly unfair to American workers; in many ways, it is unfair to foreign workers as well.

According to the Economic Policy Institute, between 2022 and 2023, the top 30 companies using the H-1B Program laid off 85,000 American workers while simultaneously bringing in over 34,000 guest workers from abroad.

In 2019 and 2020, 85 percent of H-1B visas were awarded to entry level and junior guest workers, who are paid between 20 to 40 percent less than American workers in similar occupations.

So, No. 1, it is simply not true that the H-1B Program focuses on the very rare and highly skilled workers that American companies cannot find. Eighty-five percent, to repeat, of H-1B visas were awarded to entry level and junior guest workers, and they are paid 20 to 40 percent less than American workers in similar occupations.

Let me just give you a few examples as to how unfair the H-1B Program is. In Dallas, TX, H-1B software developers are making $44,000 less than American workers doing the exact same job. This is information from the U.S. Department of Labor.

In Houston, TX, H-1B accountants--I did not know, to be honest with you, that we had a scarcity in accountants, but be that as it may, H-1B accountants are paid nearly $40,000 less than American accountants doing the exact same work.

In Santa Barbara, CA, H-1B workers who are hired as computer system engineers make just $45,000 a year. Does that sound like the kind of salary that would bring forth some extremely, highly skilled people for jobs that American workers cannot fill? Madam President, you tell me. Why would a corporation hire an American computer systems engineer at a salary of $110,000 a year when it is $65,000 cheaper to hire an H-1B worker for that same exact position?

That is basically what this whole debate is about, and that is that large corporations are paying foreign workers substantially lower salaries than they are paying American workers. Madam President, if you want to know why multibillionaire owners of high-tech companies love the H-1B Program so much, that is the reason why. They are using this program to substantially undercut the wages of American workers.

Moreover, there are estimates that as many as 33 percent of all new information technology jobs in America are being filled by guest workers. According to the Census Bureau data, there are millions of Americans with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, and math who are not currently employed in those professions. In other words, we tell kids ``Go out and get involved in STEM work. Become a scientist. Become an engineer. Become a mathematician,'' whatever, and then we bring in people from abroad to fill the jobs they were educated to do.

Adding insult to injury, half of the top 30 H-1B employers are companies whose major function in life is to outsource jobs, known in the industry as body shops. In other words, the same companies that are involved with supplying American companies with cheap foreign labor at home are the same exact companies that provide even cheaper labor to corporations when they move abroad. They are two sides of the same coin.

Madam President, if there is truly a major shortage of skilled tech workers in this country, as Elon Musk and others have argued, why did Tesla lay off over 7,500 American workers last year, including many software developers and engineers at its factory in Austin, TX, while, at the same time, applying to hire thousands of H-1B guest workers? If these jobs are only going to the ``best and the brightest,'' why has Tesla employed H-1B guest workers as associate accountants for as little as $58,000 a year, associate mechanical engineers for as little as $70,000 a year, and associate material planners for as little as $80,000 a year?

I will admit, I am not a rocket scientist. But, to my mind, those occupations don't sound like highly specialized jobs that are primarily for the top 0.1 percent, as Mr. Musk claimed last month.

If this program is really supposed to be about importing workers with highly advanced degrees in science and technology, why are H-1B guest workers being employed as fashion models, lawyers, dog trainers, massage therapists, cooks, and English teachers? One might think that, in the United States of America, we could find English teachers and not need to bring in people from abroad. Further, does anyone really believe that in America we do not have enough lawyers and need to bring in more attorneys from abroad?

At a time of massive income and wealth inequality, we need fundamental changes in our economic policies. We need an economy that works for all, not just the few. And one small but very important way forward in that direction is to bring about major reforms to the H-1B Program in order to benefit American workers.

That is why I have filed an amendment to the Laken Riley bill that we are debating this week that will do just that. I hope very much that the leaders agree on allowing that amendment to be debated and voted upon. Let me very briefly describe what this amendment does in terms of reforming the H-1B Program.

First, this amendment would double the major H-1B fee that corporations pay before they can hire guest workers from abroad. This provision would generate over $370 million in revenue each year. And what would we use that revenue for? Well, it would be used to provide nearly 20,000 scholarships each and every year for American students pursuing advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, math, and other fields vital to the competitiveness of our Nation.

If the Members of this body truly believe we need H-1B visas in order to compensate for a shortage of skilled American professionals, this amendment will attract tens of thousands of America's best and brightest young people into those fields.

Second, this amendment requires corporations to substantially increase wages for the jobs they need before they would be allowed to hire H-1B guest workers. Specifically, this amendment would raise the prevailing wage for the H-1B Program to at least the median local wage. In other words, if the H-1B Program is truly meant for ``the best and the brightest,'' it should not be used as a tool to undercut the wages of highly skilled American workers. And that is what this amendment would prevent.

Third, this amendment would prohibit corporations from replacing laid-off American workers with H-1B guest workers from overseas. Corporations that are engaged in mass layoffs should not be allowed to replace American workers with guest workers.

Finally, this amendment would prevent corporations from treating H-1B guest workers, for all intents and purposes, as indentured servants.

Under current law, H-1B guest workers are often locked into lower paying jobs and can have their visas taken away from them by their corporate bosses if they complain about dangerous, unfair, or illegal working conditions. That is unacceptable, and that has got to change. This amendment would make H-1B visas portable and give guest workers the ability to easily change jobs.

Mr. Musk and Mr. Ramaswamy and others have argued that we need a highly skilled and well-educated workforce. I agree. But the answer is not to bring in cheap labor from abroad through the H-1B Program. The answer is to hire qualified American workers first and to make certain that we have an education system that produces the kind of workforce that our country needs for the jobs of the future.

The bottom line: It must never be cheaper for a corporation to hire a guest worker from overseas than an American worker at home. And that is what this amendment is all about.

Let's be clear. Thirty years ago, the leaders of corporate America, the political establishment in both major parties, and the editorial boards of the most influential papers in our country told us not to worry about the loss of millions of blue-collar manufacturing jobs that would come as a result of unfettered free-trade agreements like NAFTA and permanent normal trade relations with China: Don't worry about the loss of those jobs.

And the reason they told us not to worry is that that job loss would be more than offset by the many good-paying, white-collar information technology jobs that would be created in the United States.

Yes, they said, you lose blue-collar manufacturing jobs, but not to worry. We will create zillions of good-paying, white-collar information technology jobs.

I, personally, was a Member of Congress at that time and never believed that. And I helped lead the effort against NAFTA and PNTR with China. Unfortunately, I and the many others who opposed those trade agreements were proven correct. NAFTA and PNTR cost us millions of good-paying manufacturing jobs as large corporations shut down here in America and fled to China, Mexico, and other low-wage countries in search of cheap labor.

And what about all of those great high-tech jobs that supposedly were going to be created? Well, that didn't quite happen either.

As a result of the H-1B guest worker program and other guest worker programs, major corporations are now importing hundreds of thousands of lower paid guest workers from abroad to fill the white-collar technology jobs that are currently available.

In other words, heads, billionaires wins; tails, American workers lose.

In my view, we can and must change that reality. A good place to start

would be to pass this amendment and put American workers first. Multibillionaires and Big Tech should not be allowed to hire guest workers to fill entry-level and mid-level information technology jobs. Those jobs should be going to American workers who have, among other things, the constitutional right to form unions and collectively bargain for better wages, benefits, and working conditions.

Madam President, I will be asking for a rollcall vote on this amendment, and I hope very much we can get it to the floor. In my view, the time has come for the American people to know which side their Senators stand on this issue.

In order to accomplish that goal, I very much appreciated the statement Majority Leader Thune gave on the floor of the Senate last November about the need for more amendment votes in the Senate. Here is what the majority leader said on November 14 with respect to the amendment process:

[A]ll Members of the Senate--and not just the Members of a

particular committee--should have a voice in final

legislation through amendments on the floor. Members should

assume that amendment votes will be the norm. That will mean

taking tough votes at times, but that is part of our jobs.

I would very much agree with Majority Leader Thune. The truth is that, in the past, whether it has been Republican leaders or Democratic leaders, no one debates that the amendment process has been thwarted. I hope we will see a new opening here where people will be allowed to offer amendments and take up votes. That is what we were elected to do.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to honor Hugh Espey of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement--a friend, fellow champion of the working class, and person who has never been afraid to speak truth to power and challenge the wealthy elite and special interests.

I met Hugh in 2014 when I travelled to Iowa to hear from folks in the Midwest about the challenges they were facing and what they wanted to be done about it. And almost immediately, I met a man who had been doing just that for most of his life. You see, Hugh had been with Iowa CCI since 1979 and served as its executive director since 2003. And he has left a mark that deserves recognition.

In the heart of our country is a man and a grassroots organization that has been engaging everyday people to stand up to corporate power and right the injustices faced by the working class for 50 years. That is no small feat. When farmers were told to ``get big or get out,'' and tens of thousands across the country, particularly the Midwest, faced foreclosure and immense undue hardship, Hugh Espey and Iowa CCI were there. Working together, they saved numerous family farmers from foreclosure, in part by using a tool passed by this body in the seventies called the Community Reinvestment Act. Hugh and the members of Iowa CCI showed everyday people that government can and should--and needs--to work for everyday people, not the billionaires, banks, and special interests that want to divide us.

And he kept that up through the Great Recession and the challenges facing our country right now. While massive income inequality continues to grow, Hugh Espey and Iowa CCI are there in the heart of the Midwest listening and talking to the people who break their backs to help make this country great--and after hearing their stories, telling them that together we will make an economy that works for us all. Hugh and members of Iowa CCI know that it isn't the wealthy elite who built and who will maintain this country--it is the people who clock in and out every day, tend to the farm, and hold those in power accountable who will be the ones who shepherd us into the next phase of American greatness.

Throughout 45 years at Iowa CCI, Hugh has understood the plight of working Americans--because he listens, asks questions, and makes no assumptions about the pain they are feeling. It is a lesson we could all learn from. Hugh has taught, mentored, advised, and more countless community organizers who are out there making this world a better place for those of us living in it and those who will live in it.

This isn't easy work, but Hugh doesn't do things that are easy. He does the hard things that need to be done--for the worker, the farmer, the immigrant, the stranger--because he knows we are all in this together and that we all do better when we all do better.

I thank Hugh for the important work he has done over the past 45 years and for all that he will accomplish in the years to come--because even though he has retired from CCI, I know that he cannot and will not stop fighting to put people first and put our communities before corporations.

Madam President, the time is long overdue for Congress to get its priorities right.

And we can begin moving in that direction by rejecting and voting no on a $900 billion defense bill which is full of waste and fraud and cost overruns.

I find it amusing that anytime we come to the floor and Members point out that we have a housing crisis, that we have some 600 million Americans who are homeless, that we have millions and millions of people in this country spending 40, 50, 60 percent of their limited incomes on housing, and that we need to invest in low-income and affordable housing, what I hear is we don't have the money. We don't have the money to build affordable housing.

When we have 85 million Americans who are uninsured or underinsured-- 60,000 die each year because they don't get to a doctor on time--well, we don't have the money to invest in primary healthcare. When all over this country, working parents are searching desperately to find quality and affordable childcare, we don't have the money to invest in childcare. Madam President, 25 percent of senior citizens in this country are trying to survive on $15,000 a year or less. I don't know anybody in America who could survive on $15,000 or less.

But when we talk about increasing Social Security benefits, well, we just can't afford to do that. We just can't afford to expand Medicare to cover dental, hearing, or vision.

We just cannot afford to make higher education in America affordable. That is what I hear every single day. When there is an effort to improve life for the working class in this country, I hear no, no, no, we can't afford it. But when it comes to the military industrial complex and their needs, what we hear is yes, yes, yes, with almost no debate.

There is nobody who has studied the Pentagon who does not believe there is massive waste and fraud and cost overruns in that industry. Defense contractors routinely overcharge the Pentagon by 40 percent, and just in October, a few months ago, RTX, formerly Raytheon, was fined $950 million for inflating bills to the Department of Defense. They lied about labor costs and about material costs, and they were busy paying bribes to secure foreign business. But it is not just Raytheon.

In June, Lockheed Martin was fined $70 million for overcharging the Navy for aircraft parts, the latest in a long line of similar abuses. Fraud is rampant within the military industrial complex.

The F-35, the most expensive weapons system in history, has run up hundreds of billions of dollars in cost overruns. GAO now estimates it will cost more than $2 trillion to develop, maintain, and operate that fighter jet through its lifetime.

The simple point that I am making is that when it comes to the needs of the military industrial complex and their lobbyists, and that industry which makes millions in campaign contributions, we give them what they want, despite the overwhelming evidence of waste and fraud and the fact that they have not been able to go through an independent audit for the last 7 years.

They can't account, literally, for trillions of dollars in property and stuff that they own. They have no idea where the money is going, but we give them more and more money.

So my request is simple. I think this week we are going to be voting on a $900 billion defense budget. I think it is time to tell the military industrial complex that they cannot get everything they want. It is time to pay attention to the needs of working families.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as the holiday season approaches, it is an appropriate time to talk about our national priorities, where we are as a nation, and where we should be going into the future.

Right now, tonight, as we assemble here in Washington, DC, there are thousands of people in this city and in the surrounding areas who are sleeping out on the streets. And that is not just Washington, DC, it is almost every major city in the country.

When we talk about the housing crisis, it is not just homelessness, it is a reality that millions of people in Vermont and throughout this country are paying 40, 50, 60 percent of their limited incomes for housing. We have a major housing crisis. We need to invest in low- income and affordable housing.

Today, in the United States, in the richest country in the history of the world, which today has more income and wealth inequality than it has ever had, while the very rich become much richer, 60 percent of our people are living paycheck to paycheck and millions of workers are earning starvation wages, barely enough to stay alive.

The time is long overdue, when we talk about our national priorities, that this Congress pass a livable minimum wage. Raise that minimum wage to a livable level so that no worker in this country who works 40 hours a week lives in poverty--not a radical idea.

In the United States today, we have a broken and dysfunctional healthcare system whose major function is not to provide quality, affordable care to our people but to make billions in profits for the insurance companies and the drug companies.

The truth is that while 85 million Americans are uninsured or underinsured, while 60,000 die each year because they don't get to a doctor in time, the insurance companies and the drug companies make tens of billions of dollars a year in profit.

The time is long overdue for the United States to do what every other major country on Earth does, and that is to guarantee healthcare to all people as a human right. In my view, the most efficient way to do that is to pass a Medicare for all single payer program.

Unbelievably, in this wealthy Nation in which three people on top own more wealth than the bottom half of our society, we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any developed country on Earth, and on top of that, millions of parents, working-class parents, cannot find affordable or quality childcare. We need to make quality childcare available for all.

In America today, unbelievably, in my view, 25 percent of senior citizens in our country are trying to survive on $15,000 a year or less--$15,000 a year. I don't know how anybody in America, no matter where you live--let alone if you are a senior citizen with additional healthcare and other needs--I don't know how anybody survives on $15,000. We need to expand Social Security benefits by lifting the cap on taxable income so that every senior in this country can retire with dignity and security.

Those are just a few of the things that, in my view, we should be doing in Congress if we are representing the needs of all Americans and not just wealthy campaign contributors in the top 1 percent.

But tonight I want to say a few words about something that we should not be doing, and that is, in the coming days, with almost no debate, we should not be passing the National Defense Authorization Act, which provides some $900 billion for the Department of Defense--a little bit less than that--$895.2 billion. When spending on nuclear weapons and emergency defense funding is included, the United States will spend this year close to $1 trillion on the military--$1 trillion on the military, and a few blocks away from here, people are sleeping out on the streets.

While middle-class and working-class families are struggling to survive, we supposedly just don't have the financial resources to help them. We just cannot afford to build more housing. We just cannot afford to provide quality childcare to our kids or to support public education or to provide healthcare to all. We just can't afford to do that. But when the military-industrial complex and all of their well- paid lobbyists come marching into Capitol Hill, somehow or other, there is more than enough money for Congress to provide them with virtually everything they need. The military-industrial complex speaks, and Congress responds.

Of that nearly $1 trillion that will be voted on in the next few days, about half will go to a handful of hugely profitable defense contractors. The Pentagon accounts for about two-thirds of all Federal contracting, obligating more money every year than all civilian Federal Agencies combined--combined. Yet the Pentagon remains the only major Federal Agency that cannot pass an independent audit.

The Department of Defense still cannot accurately account for their finances more than 30 years after Congress made it a requirement under Federal law. In the most recent failed audit attempt, the Department of Defense still could not fully account for huge portions of its more than $4 trillion in assets. The GAO--the Government Accountability Office--reports that the Defense Department cannot accurately post transactions to the correct accounts each year. Auditors find billions of dollars the Pentagon didn't even know it had. In fiscal year 2022, Navy auditors found $4.4 billion in untracked inventory. They just lost it. Hey, what is $4 billion among friends when you have $1 trillion to play with?

I don't often agree with Elon Musk. I agree with him very, very rarely. But he is right when he says the Pentagon ``has little idea how its annual budget of more than $800 billion is spent.'' That is Musk.

The inability to track taxpayer dollars has allowed, within the Defense Department, massive fraud, massive amounts of waste, and unbelievable amounts of cost overruns. Defense contractors routinely overcharge the Pentagon by 40 percent and sometimes much higher than that.

For example, just one example, in October, a few months ago, RTX-- formerly Raytheon--was fined $950 million for inflating bills to the Department of Defense as they lied about labor and material costs and as they paid bribes to secure foreign business. They were fined $950 million.

In June, Lockheed Martin was fined $70 million for overcharging the Navy for aircraft parts--the latest in a long line of similar abuses.

The F-35--the most expensive weapon system in history--has run up hundreds of billions of dollars in cost overruns. GAO now estimates that it will cost more than $2 trillion to develop, maintain, and operate this fighter jet through its lifetime.

Today, as a result of massive consolidation in the defense industry, a large portion of the Pentagon budget now goes to just a handful of huge defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, RTX--formerly Raytheon-- General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman. That consolidation has been extremely profitable for the industry.

Since 2022, these four contractors have brought in over 600 billion in revenues, including 353 billion in U.S. taxpayer funds and recorded 57 billion in profits. During that same period, they have spent 61 billion on dividends and stock buybacks to make their wealthy shareholders even wealthier. That is just four companies, over less than 3 years, taking 353 billion in taxpayer money and handing 61 billion back to wealthy shareholders.

It is worthwhile listening to what Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro said earlier this year to a defense industry convention. This is the Secretary of the Navy speaking to defense contractors:

Many of you are making record profits, as evidenced by your

quarterly financial statements. . . . You can't be asking for

the American taxpayer to make greater public investments

while you continue to goose your stock prices through stock

buybacks . . . and other accounting maneuvers.

That is the U.S. Secretary of the Navy, and he is quite right.

It is not only fraud and cost overruns that drive up military spending. The major defense contractors also provide their CEOs with exorbitant compensation packages. In the last 3 years for which information is available, the top four defense companies paid their CEOs more than 257 million combined. These companies are all significantly reliant on the U.S. taxpayer. Yet they pay their CEOs about 100 times more than the Secretary of Defense receives. CEOs, defense industry, receive more than 100 times greater compensation than the U.S. Secretary of Defense and 500 times more than the average newly enlisted servicemember.

Now, how does that happen? How does it happen that the Defense Department can't pass an audit? How does it happen that every one of the major defense contractors ends up paying fines for fraud? How does it happen that we have massive cost overruns, and yet we give the military industrial complex pretty much what they want. And, by the way, there will be virtually no debate on that issue here on the floor. It is only a trillion dollars. Hey, what is a trillion dollars among friends?

People sleeping out on the street; people can't afford healthcare; children going hungry; elderly people can't afford to heat their homes. Got a trillion bucks, no questions asked, for the military industrial complex.

So how does all of this happen? And I think most Americans now know the answer. It ain't complicated. These companies--just like the drug companies, just like the insurance companies, just like Wall Street and the big banks, just like the fossil fuel industry--they spend millions and millions of dollars on campaign contributions and lobbying. In the recent election cycle, the one we just came through, defense contractors spent nearly $251 million on lobbying and contributed almost 37 million to political candidates.

And surprise, surprise, aren't we all shocked that they end up getting what they want with almost no debate?

The waste and fraud in the defense industry is not just, interestingly enough, costing American taxpayers huge amounts of money, it is also costing lives. So let me tell you what I mean by that. Take a look at the war in Ukraine. The United States is providing tens and tens of billions of dollars to help defend Ukraine from Putin's horrific invasion of that country.

Despite their recordbreaking profits, many defense contractors said that they couldn't ramp up production of key weapons without more taxpayer support. So the U.S. Government wanted to support, with my vote, Ukraine against Putin's invasion. Ukraine needs weapons. And the defense contractors said: Hey, if you want us to help Ukraine, get them weapons, we need to ramp up production. We need more Federal aid.

And so, as part of that process, Congress repeatedly appropriated emergency funding with roughly 78.5 billion going to buy equipment and services from the major defense contractors for Ukraine.

And how did, with all of that money, these patriotic defense contractors respond? Did they say: ``Well, thank you. We are going to do everything we can, get all of the weapons we can at a reasonable price to Ukraine, which is fighting for its life''? Not quite.

What the defense contractors did is jack up the prices they were charging us in order to help Ukraine. RTX increased prices for Stinger missiles from $25,000 in the 1990s to $400,000 in 2023. Even accounting for inflation and improvements in technology, that is an outrageous price increase.

But it wasn't enough for RTX. A recent NATO contract reveals RTX is now charging approximately $745,000 per Stinger. Lockheed Martin and RTX raised the price of the Javelin missile system from about 263,000 per unit just before the war to 350,000 this year.

The United States has provided more than 10,000 Javelins to Ukraine. Similar price hikes took place for Patriot missiles and other weapons systems.

And make no mistake, every time a contractor pads its profit margins, fewer weapons reach the frontlines. The greed of these defense contractors is not just costing American taxpayers huge amounts of money, it is killing Ukrainians. They are getting less weapons than they should, given the amount of money that we are spending.

And there is a name for all of this. It is called war profiteering, and this is not a new problem. During World War II, then-U.S. Senator from Missouri Harry Truman was shocked by the profits made by military contractors while American boys were getting killed in Europe and in the east. And he appointed a special commission--it is called the Truman Commission--to investigate war profiteering, and they found massive amounts of fraud.

In my view, that is exactly what we should be doing now. We should be instituting a Truman Commission, or call it whatever you want, to take a hard look at the prices that the defense industry is charging us for the weapons they provide.

We should also consider other ideas to reduce waste and fraud in the military industrial complex, such as wider use of the Defense Production Act, significant penalties for audit failures, and a windfall profit tax on hugely profitable defense companies.

Most Americans would agree that we need a strong military, and I agree that we need a strong military. But we do not need a defense system that is designed to make huge profits for a handful of giant defense contractors while providing less of what the military needs. We do not need to spend almost a trillion dollars on the military while half a million Americans are homeless, while children go hungry, and while elderly people have difficulty heating their homes.

Let me conclude by saying something, which I think is one of the more profound statements ever made by a President, and that is that Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was a former five-star general and a Republican President from 1952 to 1960--he warned us about everything that I am talking about in his farewell address in 1961, and it would be very wise for us to remember what President Eisenhower said, and this is the quote. I quote President Eisenhower:

In the councils of government, we must guard against the

acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or

unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential

for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will

persist.

What Eisenhower said was true in 1961. It is even more true today.

I intend to vote against this inflated military budget.

I yield the floor.

Madam President, pursuant to section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S.J. Res. 111, relating to the disapproval of the proposed foreign military sale to the Government of Israel of certain defense articles and services.

I would ask unanimous consent to dispense with further reading of the resolution.

Madam President, thank you very much, and let me thank the leadership for their cooperation in setting up this debate.

Today, we will be voting on three joint resolutions of disapproval, or JRDs, to block the sale of certain offensive weapons to Israel. These resolutions are S.J. Res. 111, to block the sale of 120- millimeter tank rounds; S.J. Res. 113, to block the sale of 120- millimeter high-explosive mortar rounds; and S.J. Res. 115, to block the sale of JDMs, the guidance kits attached to many of the bombs dropped in Gaza.

I would note to my colleagues that these resolutions are strongly supported by more than 100 civil society groups, including pro-Israel groups, like J Street; some of the largest labor unions in this country, including the SEIU, the United Auto Workers, and the United Electrical Workers; humanitarian groups, like Amnesty International and Doctors of the World; and religious groups, like the United Methodist Church and the Friends Committee; and many, many other organizations.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the list of these supporting organizations.

Madam President, I would also point out that poll after poll shows that a strong majority of the American people oppose sending more weapons and military aid to fund Netanyahu's war machine. I would also mention, interestingly enough, that according to a poll commissioned by J Street--this is a pro-Israel organization--62 percent of Jewish Americans support withholding weapon shipments to Israel until Netanyahu agrees to an immediate cease-fire.

These resolutions are aimed at offensive weapons that have been used to devastating effect against civilians in Gaza and Lebanon. They would not affect any of the systems Israel uses to defend itself from incoming attacks.

From a legal perspective, these resolutions are simple, straightforward, and not complicated. Bottom line: the U.S. Government must obey the law--not a very radical idea--but unfortunately that is not the case now.

Every Member of the Senate who believes in the rule of law, that our government should obey the law, should vote for these resolutions.

The Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act are very clear. The United States cannot provide weapons to countries that violate internationally recognized human rights or block U.S. humanitarian aid.

Let me repeat that because that is the essence of this entire debate. Not complicated. The U.S. Government cannot provide weapons to countries that violate internationally recognized human rights or block U.S. humanitarian aid. That is not my opinion; that is what the law says.

According to the United Nations, according to much of the international community, according to virtually every humanitarian organization on the ground in Gaza, Israel is clearly in violation of these laws.

Under these circumstances, it is illegal for the U.S. Government to provide Israel with more offensive weapons. These joint resolutions of disapproval are Congress's tool to enforce the law, and that is exactly what we must do.

It has been more than 13 months since the October 7 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel, an attack which killed 1,200 innocent people and took 250 hostages, including Americans.

As I have said many, many times, Israel had the absolute right to respond to that horrific Hamas attack, as any other country would. I don't think anybody here in the U.S. Senate disagrees with that. But Prime Minister Netanyahu's extremist government has not simply waged war against Hamas; it has waged an all-out war against the Palestinian people.

Within Gaza's population of just 2.2 million people--and I want people to conceptualize that that is about the size of New Mexico, 2.2 million people--more than 43,000 Palestinians have been killed and more than 103,000 injured, a population of about the size of New Mexico. And 60 percent of those who have been killed and injured are women, children, or elderly people.

According to satellite imagery, two-thirds of all structures in Gaza have been damaged or destroyed--two-thirds of all structures. Think about that. Two-thirds of all structures have been damaged or destroyed. That includes 87 percent of the housing, 84 percent of health facilities--84 percent of health facilities--and 70 percent of sanitation plants. Right now, there is raw sewage running through the streets of Gaza, and it is very difficult for the people there to obtain clean drinking water.

Every one of Gaza's 12 universities has been bombed. They have got 12 universities; every single one of them has been bombed, as have many hundreds of schools. For 13 months, there has been no electricity in Gaza.

During the last year, millions of desperately poor people in Gaza have been repeatedly driven from their homes and forced to evacuate time and time again with nothing more than the clothes on their backs. So let's imagine millions of people driven from their homes, told to go here, told to go there, and going from one place to another. Families in Gaza have been herded into so-called safe zones, only to face continued bombardment. They are told to go to this area, and the bombs start falling, and the children start dying.

The children of Gaza have suffered a level of physical and emotional abuse that is almost beyond comprehension, abuse that will stay with them for the rest of their lives. These children today--as we speak, right now--are hungry, they are thirsty, they cannot access healthcare. And all around them, they have witnessed death and destruction. That is what the children of Gaza have experienced, and Gaza is a very young population.

And as horrific as that situation is, what has happened over the last year, what is taking place today, right now, this moment as we discuss this issue, it is even worse, if that is imaginable. As a result of Israel blocking desperately needed humanitarian aid, the volume of aid getting into Gaza in recent weeks is lower than at any point since the war began. More aid is needed; less aid is getting through. The result? Many thousands of children are facing malnutrition and starvation. Let me repeat that: Many thousands of children today are facing malnutrition and starvation. This is not my observation; this is what the leaders of the 19 most important humanitarian organizations on the ground in Gaza, including the American head of UNICEF, Cathy Russell, and the American head of the World Food Programme, Cindy McCain, wife of our former colleague John McCain--that is what they say, according to their recent report:

The situation unfolding in North Gaza is apocalyptic . . .

Basic, life-saving goods are not available. Humanitarians are

not safe to do their work and are blocked by Israeli forces

and by insecurity from reaching people in need.

And they continue:

[As a result,] the entire [Palestinian] population in North

Gaza is at imminent risk of dying from disease, famine, and

violence.

These are the 19 major humanitarian organizations operating in Gaza right now, including several of the major ones led by Americans. And Israel's recent decision to ban UNWRA, the backbone of the humanitarian response in Gaza, will only make a horrific situation even worse.

Madam President, I have met with doctors who have served in Gaza treating hundreds of patients a day without electricity, without anesthesia, without clean water, including dozens of children arriving with gunshot wounds in the head. I have seen the photographs and the videos. And we have some of them here. I have seen--I have heard from UNICEF who estimates that 10 children lose a leg in Gaza every single day. There are now more than 17,000 orphans in Gaza.

Let me quote from a New York Times opinion piece of October 9, 2024-- a little more than a month ago--where American doctors and nurses in Gaza--these are Americans working in Gaza--describe what they saw on the ground.

Merril Tydings is a nurse from New Mexico, and she said, ``These people were starving.'' She is talking about healthcare workers, her colleagues.

These people were starving. I learned very quickly to not

drink my water or eat the food I had brought in front of the

health care workers because they had gone so many days

without.

Without food. Without water.

Dr. Ndal Farah from Ohio said:

Malnutrition was widespread. It was common to see patients

reminiscent of Nazi concentration camps with skeletal

features.

Abeerah Muhammad, a nurse from Dallas, TX, said:

Everyone we met showed us pictures of themselves before

October. They had all lost 20 to 60 pounds of weight. Most

patients and staff looked emaciated and dehydrated.

Dr. Nahreen Ahmed from Philadelphia said:

Every patient I treated had evidence of malnutrition. For

example, poor wound healing and rapidly developing

infections.

Dr. Aman Odeh from Texas said:

Mothers on the maternity ward delivered prematurely because

of malnutrition, stress and infection. Milk production was

poor due to lack of hydration and adequate food supply.

Dr. Mike Mallah from Charleston said:

All of my patients were suffering from malnutrition, 100

percent.

What is important to understand--and I am not sure that many of my colleagues do--is that the Israel of today that we are dealing with is not the Israel of Golda Meir or Yitzhak Rabin. This is a government now controlled not only by rightwing extremists but by religious zealots. National Security Minister Ben-Gvir, who oversees the police, has been convicted in Israeli courts on terrorism charges. He is the head of the police. Finance Minister Smotrich, in charge of the occupied West Bank, is also an extreme racist and has called for the expulsion of Palestinians from the land. That is the current Israeli Finance Minister.

In January, Prime Minister Netanyahu said of Gaza: We provide minimal humanitarian aid if we want to achieve our war goals.

At the start of the war, the Israeli Defense Minister said--and I hope people hear this. The Israeli defense minister--ex-minister:

We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly . . .

there will be no electricity, no food . . . no fuel.

Everything [is] closed.

Former Israeli Defense Minister. That is what he said and, in fact, by and large, that is exactly how this war has been waged.

What this extremist government has done in Gaza is unspeakable, but what makes it even more painful is that much of this has been done with U.S. weapons and American taxpayer dollars. In the last year alone, the United States has provided $18 billion in military aid to Israel--$18 billion dollars. And, by the way, a few blocks from here, people are sleeping out on the street. And we have also delivered more than 50,000 tons of military equipment to Israel--50,000 tons.

In other words, the United States of America is complicit in all of these atrocities. We are funding these atrocities. That complicity must end, and that is what these resolutions are about. It is time to tell the Netanyahu government that they cannot use U.S. taxpayer dollars and American weapons in violation of United States and international law and our moral values.

Despite receiving 18 billion from U.S. taxpayers in the last year and being the largest historical recipient of U.S. foreign aid, the Netanyahu government has completely ignored--completely ignored--the repeated requests of President Biden and the U.S. Government.

It is time to make clear to Netanyahu that he cannot take American money, take American arms, and continue to blind U.S. foreign policy goals.

The U.S. Government wants a cease-fire for a hostage deal. Netanyahu has prevented a deal to preserve his coalition.

The U.S. Government wants more humanitarian aid to reach the desperate people in Gaza. Netanyahu is blocking that aid.

The U.S. Government wants to contain regional escalation. Netanyahu has refused diplomatic off-ramps and launched several reckless attacks without consulting the United States.

The U.S. Government wants to stop settlement expansion and settle the violence in the West Bank. Netanyahu and his Ministers have driven record settlement expansion and armed extremists settlers.

The U.S. Government wants a plan for postwar governance in Gaza. Netanyahu will not engage.

And by the way, blocking these sales would also be in keeping with actions taken by some of our closest allies. The United Kingdom suspended 30 arms export licenses after concluding there was an acceptable risk they could be used in violation of international law. Germany, Italy, Spain, Canada, Belgium, and the Netherlands have taken similar steps. U.N. bodies have called for an end to the armed shipments fueling the conflict.

Time and time again, I have heard Members of the U.S. Senate come to this floor to denounce human rights violations taking place around the world. I have heard well-founded concerns about China's brutal reception of the Uighur ethnic minority. I have heard rightful outrage about Putin's brutal attacks against Ukraine and bombing of civilian installations. I have heard genuine concern about Iran's outrageous crackdown on peaceful protestors. I have heard repeated condemnations of Saudi Arabia's terrible treatment of women and political dissidents.

And on and on it goes. A lot of folks come to the floor to talk about human rights and what is going on throughout the world. But what I want to say to all those folks: Nobody is going to take anything you say with a grain of seriousness. You cannot condemn human rights around the world and then turn a blind eye to what the U.S. Government is now funding in Israel. People will laugh in your face. They will say to you: Are you concerned about China? Are you concerned about Russia? Are you concerned about Iran? Well, why are you funding the starvation of children in Gaza right now?

We must pass these resolutions from a legal perspective. The U.S. Government must obey the law. We must pass these resolutions from a moral perspective. The United States must not provide support to a government which has created one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern history.

We must pass these resolutions for our own best foreign policy interests. If we do not demand that the countries we provide military assistance to obey international law, we will lose our creditability on the world stage.

With that, I would like to yield to Senator Merkley of Oregon.

I ask unanimous consent for 10 additional minutes for either side.

Mr. President, let me begin by pointing out--although it may not be obvious here in the Senate--that poll after poll shows that a strong majority of the American people oppose sending more weapons and military aid to fuel Netanyahu's vicious and destructive war machine. I would also add, because some of this has come up, that according to a poll commissioned by J Street, a pro-Israel Jewish organization, 62 percent of Jewish Americans support withholding weapons shipments to Israel until Netanyahu agrees to an immediate cease-fire.

Let me just mention a few of the organizations that think the time is now to stop giving money to Netanyahu, who ignores America's laws and our values--some of the major trade unions in America: the SEIU, the United Auto Workers, United Electrical Workers; Amnesty International; the Arab American Institute; the Association of U.S. Catholic Priests; the Friends Committee on National Legislation; Oxfam America; the Episcopal Church; the United Church of Christ; the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society; the American Baptist Churches USA; the Global Ministries of the Christian Church.

These resolutions have strong support all across this country by people who understand that we cannot continue to fund the horrific war machine and the atrocities Netanyahu is committing.

These resolutions come down to a few basic points. First of all, should the U.S. Government obey the law? And the law is very clear that we as a government cannot fund other countries that are in violation of international human rights or that are blocking humanitarian aid.

Now, somebody here wants to come down and say: I don't like that law. The U.S. Government should give money to any government it wants no matter what they do, no matter how atrocious their behavior is.

Come down and change the law, but that ain't the law now. The law is based on moral principles that say: When the United States provides military arms, those countries that receive those weapons cannot violate international human rights and cannot block humanitarian aid. And that is precisely what Israel is doing. That is not me who says that; that is what virtually every humanitarian organization working in Gaza right now says.

So if you believe we should obey the law, you have to vote for these resolutions.

No. 2, from a moral perspective, we cannot turn a blind eye to one of the worst humanitarian disasters in the modern history of this world--a humanitarian disaster we are significantly funding.

My colleagues, as we speak, thousands and thousands of children in Gaza are starving to death.

In an area of 2.2 million people, 43,000 are dead. Over 100,000 have been injured. We cannot turn a blind eye to that humanitarian disaster, caused in part by U.S. financial support to Netanyahu.

Thirdly, I heard about the U.S. role in the world. Well, I will tell you that our role is significantly diminished if we continue to support Netanyahu and this humanitarian disaster that is currently taking place.

What is the moral standard that we have to critique other countries? How do you critique Iran for their terrible human rights record? How do you critique China or Russia for their terrible human rights records? Because you get here on the floor of the Senate and you make that critique, and people around the world will laugh at you, and they will say: Don't give us advice. Don't criticize us when you have supported the mass starvation of children with your taxpayer dollars.

This is a very important vote. It is an important vote because it tells the world that we will not continue supporting a government which violates American law, which violates international law, and which violates the humanitarian standards that I would hope every Member of this Senate upholds.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all remaining time be yielded back.

I would ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, pursuant to section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S.J. Res. 113, relating to the disapproval of the proposed foreign military sale to the Government of Israel of certain defense articles and services.

I ask unanimous consent to dispense with further reading of the resolution.

Mr. President, the law is very clear. This is not a complicated issue.

U.S. weapons cannot be provided to countries who violate internationally recognized human rights or block U.S. humanitarian aid. It goes without saying that Israel had a right to defend itself from the horrific Hamas terrorist attack of October 7. But Israel did not have the right to kill 43,000 Palestinians and injure over 100,000--60 percent of whom are women, children, and the elderly. It did not have the right to destroy Gaza's infrastructure, healthcare system, schools, and university. And it certainly does not have the right to starve thousands and thousands of children in Gaza.

The United States cannot be complicit in these atrocities. We cannot give billions of dollars to the Netanyahu government and have them defy U.S. law while they take U.S. money.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on this resolution.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, pursuant to section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S.J. Res. 115, relating to the disapproval of the proposed license amendment for the export of certain defense articles, defense services, and technical data to Israel.

Madam President, two basic points: The first one is the same point that has to be made over and over again. What we are doing is in violation of the law. U.S. weapons cannot be provided to countries that violate internationally recognized human rights or block U.S. humanitarian aid.

According to all of the international and humanitarian organizations on the ground in Gaza right now, that is exactly what Israel is doing. So a ``no'' vote is to allow us to continue breaking the law.

As to the second point, this one deals with JDAMs, which are systems that make bombs more precise. And, on the surface, it sounds like, well, that is a good thing. You would rather use ``smart'' bombs than ``dumb'' bombs, and when you do that, you save civilian lives. The problem is that what Israel has been doing is using JDAMs to target U.N. schools packed with displaced people and to target refugee centers and kill large numbers of innocent people. So a ``smart'' bomb does not save civilian lives when it is directly targeting civilians.

I would ask for a ``yes'' vote on this resolution.

Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, over 4 months ago, Steward Health Care and the more than 30 hospitals it owns in 8 States declared bankruptcy, with some $9 billion in debt. This bankruptcy has caused devastating harm to patients, healthcare workers, and entire communities from Massachusetts to Arizona.

In July, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, which I chair, voted to authorize a bipartisan investigation into the financial mismanagement of Steward Health Care. On that same day, the HELP Committee also voted to subpoena Dr. Ralph de la Torre, the CEO of Steward Health Care, to testify at a hearing on this very important issue on September 12.

Sadly, Dr. de la Torre made the unfortunate and unacceptable decision not to show up at this hearing in defiance of a congressional subpoena. So last week, the HELP Committee voted 20 to 0 on two resolutions to hold Dr. de la Torre accountable for his failure to appear at this hearing.

The first resolution instructs Senate legal counsel to bring a civil suit in the District Court for the District of Columbia to require Dr. de la Torre's compliance with the subpoena and his testimony before the HELP Committee.

The second resolution would refer this matter to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia to criminally prosecute Dr. de la Torre for failing to comply with the subpoena.

In a few moments, I will be asking unanimous consent to pass the second resolution, which seeks to hold Dr. de la Torre in criminal contempt for failing to comply with the congressional subpoena.

But before I do that, let me take a moment to briefly explain why the HELP Committee believed it was so important for Dr. de la Torre to testify before Congress.

First, we wanted Dr. de la Torre to explain to us how it could happen that at least 15 patients at hospitals owned by his company died-- died--as a result of a lack of medical equipment or staffing shortages, and why at least 2,000 other patients were put in immediate peril, according to Federal regulators.

That is something that the American people deserve to know. But perhaps most importantly, we wanted to know how it could happen that while thousands of patients and healthcare workers suffered and communities around the country have been devastated as a result of Steward Health Care's financial mismanagement, Dr. de la Torre and the companies he owned were able to receive at least $250 million in total compensation over the past 4 years.

For months, Senator Cassidy, the ranking member of the HELP Committee; Senator Markey, the chair of our healthcare subcommittee; and I have asked Dr. de la Torre to testify before our committee to answer these questions. And time after time, he has arrogantly refused, and that is simply not acceptable.

So, today, I will ask the Senate to unanimously adopt this resolution seeking to hold Dr. de la Torre in contempt of Congress.

Let me take this opportunity to thank Ranking Member Cassidy and his staff for working with me and my staff on this very important issue. The passage of this resolution by the full Senate will make clear that, even though Dr. de la Torre may be worth hundreds of millions of dollars, even though he may be able to buy fancy yachts and private jets and luxurious accommodations throughout the world, even though he may be able to afford some of the most expensive lawyers in America, no, Dr. de la Torre is not above the law. If you defy a congressional subpoena, you will be held accountable no matter who you are or how well connected you may be.

The goal of the HELP Committee throughout this entire process has been to make sure not only that we have a complete understanding of the financial chicanery surrounding Steward Health Care but to do everything that we can to make sure that such a travesty never occurs again.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that two letters be printed in the Congressional Record, one from Dr. de la Torre's attorneys to the committee and, secondly, a response letter from Ranking Member Cassidy and myself.

With that, Madam President, I would be happy to yield to the ranking member of the committee who has done an excellent job on this issue, Senator Cassidy.

Senator Markey has played a leadership role in the investigation of this whole process. I would like to yield to Senator Markey.

Senator Markey, thank you for your leadership on this.

Madam President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 522, S. Res. 837.

I know of no further debate on the resolution.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Madam President, I am here for another reason this evening, but I wanted to concur with Senator Welch. Obviously, we need more Federal disaster relief, we need reforms in FEMA, and we certainly need a permanent post office in Montpelier, VT. So I want to thank Senator Welch for his work in that area.

Madam President, the administration's report pursuant to National Security Memorandum 20 concluded that ``it is reasonable to assess that defense articles . . . have been used by Israeli security forces since October 7 in instances inconsistent with its . . . [international humanitarian law] obligations or with established best practices for mitigating civilian harm.'' That is the administration.

The report stated that ``high levels of civilian casualties, raise substantial questions as to whether the IDF is using [effective civilian harm mitigation] effectively in all cases.'' That is the administration.

It is not just the civilian casualties and the violations of international human rights. Other provisions of U.S. law are also applicable. Section 6201 of the Foreign Assistance Act also states that ``No assistance shall be furnished . . . to any country when it is made known to the President that the government of such country prohibits or otherwise restricts, directly or indirectly, the transport or delivery of United States humanitarian assistance.''

The whole world has witnessed Israel's restriction of humanitarian aid. The U.N. and virtually every humanitarian group says that Israel's restrictive policies are the primary cause of the humanitarian catastrophe now taking place in Gaza. The administration says as much, admitting that ``Israel did not fully cooperate with United States government efforts and the United States government-supported international efforts to maximize humanitarian assistance flow to and distribution within Gaza.'' In fact, frankly, that severely understates the reality.

No matter how people here in Washington may try to spin it, the simple fact is that we must end our complicity in Israel's illegal and indiscriminate military campaign, which has caused mass civilian death and suffering.

The law also says that arms sales must advance U.S. foreign policy interests. If we are going to sell arms, they must advance U.S. foreign policy interests.

These transfers, again, fall far short. These sales would reward Netanyahu's extremist government even as it flouts--openly flouts--U.S. policy goals at every turn and, in fact, drags the United States closer to a regional war.

For months, the Biden administration has been trying to reach a cease-fire deal that would secure the release of the hostages and allow massive amounts of humanitarian aid to flow into Gaza. Every time a deal appears close, Netanyahu moves the goalposts, introducing new demands and torpedoing the deal. It is clear to me that Netanyahu is prolonging the war in order to cling to power and avoid prosecution at home for corruption. That is why hundreds of thousands of Israelis routinely take to the streets to protest his policies.

But it is not just his sabotage of a cease-fire for hostage deal. Netanyahu has also overseen record settlement expansion in the West Bank and unleashed a wave of violence there that has killed nearly 700 Palestinians, including 150 children killed over the last 11 months. Because so much focus is on Gaza, we are not paying attention to the disaster taking place in the West Bank.

Americans have also been caught up in this bloodshed. On September 6, Israeli security forces shot a 26-year-old American recent college graduate in the head near an illegal settlement in the West Bank. In January, they shot and killed a 17-year-old American high school senior from Louisiana. In February, they shot and killed another 17-year old American from Florida. And in October of last year, they nearly killed a constituent of mine from Vermont, Dylan Collins, a journalist for Agence France-Press, with two tank rounds. Six journalists were wounded in that attack, which killed a Reuters journalist. The group was clearly marked as ``press.'' These are the same tank rounds the administration would provide to Israel in this sale.

Needless to say, there has been no--zero--accountability for these deaths.

And, of course, there has been no accountability for the repeated Israeli settler attacks, enabled by security forces, on Palestinian towns and villages; no meaningful response to the burning of Palestinian homes and businesses--nothing but silence in the face of a concerted rightwing Israeli effort to illegally annex the West Bank.

Yet those are the Netanyahu extremist government policies that these sales would reward. I say that to my colleagues. All of this is going on; and should our response to Mr. Netanyahu say: Keep it up, here are more arms; here are more money?

A government that has caused mass civilian deaths, flouted U.S. and international law, and that is actively undermining key U.S. policy goals in the region should not be receiving more financial aid from America and should not be receiving military weaponry from the United States.

Passing a joint resolution to block these sales will make clear to the Netanyahu government that they cannot continue to ignore the U.S. Government's demands for an immediate cease-fire and the release of the hostages. It will put pressure on its extremist government to change Israel's military approach and avert a regional war. And it may--just may--begin to restore a shred of U.S. credibility abroad.

Passing a joint resolution of disapproval is not only the right thing to do, it is not only the legal and appropriate thing to do, it is also what the American people want us to do. According to a June 5 poll from CBS News, 61 percent of Americans oppose sending weapons and supplies to Israel, including 77 percent of Democrats, 62 percent of Independents, and many Republicans as well. And that poll is consistent with earlier polls.

This is not a new or radical idea. The United States routinely conditions military aid, arms sales, and security cooperation with every other country. This ain't new. We have done it over and over again. And we have done it many times before with Israel. It is not a new idea. It is only in recent years that the idea of leveraging aid to Israel to secure policy changes has become controversial.

President Ronald Reagan, I say to my Republican colleagues, suspended the delivery of F-16 fighter jets to Israel over its raid on the Osirak reactor in Iraq; threatened to suspend military aid to end Israel's bombardment of Beirut; and again threatened to stop military aid to force an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 1982. That was President Ronald Reagan. President Jimmy Carter similarly leveraged aid to change Israeli policies in Lebanon. In 1991, then-Secretary of State James Baker threatened to withhold $10 billion in loan guarantees unless Israel stopped settlement expansion.

In other words, using arms sales and military aid as leverage is not a new idea. It has been done under Republican Presidents and Democratic Presidents.

There is also recent precedent of Congress's acting to stop the indiscriminate bombing of civilians. In 2019, Congress passed a series of JRDs to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia over its bombing campaign in Yemen. At that point, the Saudi coalition was directly responsible for, roughly, 8,000 civilian deaths over 4 years, mostly from airstrikes. Israel has killed 41,000 in less than a year.

Blocking these sales would also be in keeping with actions taken by the international community and some of our closest allies. So what I am suggesting here is not unique in the world. It has taken place all over the world, including with some of our closest allies. There has been widespread condemnation of Israel's conduct during this war from governments around the world, international institutions, and humanitarian organizations.

The United Kingdom recently suspended 30 export licenses for a range of armaments after concluding there was an unacceptable risk they could be used in violation of international humanitarian law. Germany has not approved an offensive weapons transfer since March. Italy, Spain, Canada, Belgium, and the Netherlands have taken similar steps. United Nations bodies have called for an end to the arms shipments fueling the conflict.

We cannot continue to ignore what the extremist Netanyahu government is doing in Gaza. We cannot continue to be complicit in this humanitarian disaster. The time is long overdue for the U.S. Senate to act, and we must act. I hope my colleagues will support this effort on the floor, and my office is ready to answer any questions that Senators may have.

I yield the floor.

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

Madam President, I am proud and excited to say a few words to urge my colleagues to support Mary Kay Lanthier as the next district court judge for the District of Vermont.

Ms. Lanthier is a native Vermonter who has spent her entire career in her home State, including working as a public defender in Rutland for 15 years. She grew up in a hard-working Vermont family, where the parents emphasized the importance of serving her community.

Ms. Lanthier learned that lesson well and has dedicated her career to being a public defender. In that role, she has fought for her clients to have a fair chance at justice in her courtroom. And if she is confirmed, I am confident that she will make sure that all of the people who appear in front of her are treated fairly and get the justice that they are due.

Ms. Lanthier began her legal career as a judicial law clerk for the trial courts in Chittenden and Addison Counties, where she developed a deep love and dedication for the work taking place in Vermont courtrooms.

Early in her career, Ms. Lanthier worked in private practice and public defense, working on family law, workers' compensation, and criminal cases. Since 2007, she has served as the supervising attorney at the Rutland County Public Defender's Office.

In that role and throughout her career, she has developed a reputation as a respectful and skilled attorney. Judges have praised her preparation, and opposing lawyers have written letters in support of her nomination. As one of those letters says, ``Ms. Lanthier's compassion is a virtue that improved the administration of justice.''

Last November, I was pleased to be joined by Senator Welch, with input from Congresswoman Balint, in forming a nonpartisan judicial nomination advisory panel to fill this vacancy on the Federal bench in Vermont. The panel was impressed by Mary Kay's career in public defense, her stellar reputation in the legal community, and her warmth and empathy.

I was also impressed after interviewing her. One thing that struck me was not only her deep love of the law but her deep love of Rutland, VT, where this judgeship is based.

For Mary Kay, I know that there is particular pride in doing this very important work in her hometown and for being a role model for the young people growing up there today about what is possible.

Along with Senator Welch, I was pleased to recommend that President Biden nominate her for this position. She will be an excellent district court judge for Rutland and for the State of Vermont. I am confident that she will treat everyone in her courtroom with the compassion, respect, and dignity that they deserve. I urge my colleagues to support her confirmation.

Mr. President, when I turn on the TV or read the papers, I read a lot about politics, and I read about this candidate attacking that candidate and the other candidate attacking another candidate, and on and on it goes.

But somehow or another, as a nation, here in Congress and on the campaign trail and in the corporate media, we, as a nation, have a habit of forgetting to talk about some of the most important issues that affect ordinary Americans. We talk about a lot of stuff, but, somehow, we will neglect to talk about the most important issues facing our country.

And at the top of my list is the reality that in America we are rapidly becoming an oligarchic form of society. What does that mean? It means that today we have more income and wealth inequality than at any time in the history of the United States of America.

It means that there are three people--one, two, three multibillionaires--who own more wealth than the bottom half of American society. Three people here, 160 million people there--that sounds like an issue we might want to be talking about.

We might just want to be asking about how well the economy is doing for ordinary people as opposed to the people on top. And when we ask that question, the answer is pretty clear. The top 1 percent have never, ever in American history had it so good. They are making money head over heels.

What we are seeing at the same time is a working class in this country that is struggling--struggling to pay the bills, struggling to put food on the table, struggling to see that their kids get ahead.

According to the Rand Corporation, not exactly a progressive entity, over the last 50 years, we have seen a massive transfer of wealth from ordinary Americans to the top 1 percent. In fact, there has been a shift of $50 trillion going from the bottom 90 percent to the top 1 percent. What does that say about American economic policy?

And, at the same exact time, over the last 50 years, we have seen something else that is rather extraordinary. Despite the huge increase that we have all observed as a result of technology and increased worker productivity, it turns out that real inflation-accounted-for wages for the average American worker is lower today than it was 50 years ago.

Every worker in America is producing a lot more than was the case 50 years ago because of this new technology, and yet real inflation- accounted-for wages are lower today than they were 50 years ago. People on top are making out fantastically well; working class people are falling further and further behind.

And let us not forget that, today in America, 60 percent of our people are living paycheck to paycheck. I grew up in a family that lived paycheck to paycheck. We lived in a rent-controlled apartment for my whole childhood. I know something about it.

And what it means that people from California to Vermont--they are struggling, living under great stress, trying to figure out how they are going to be able to take care of their families, at the same time as the people on top never had it so good.

But when we talk about oligarchy, it is not just massive income and wealth inequality. It is not just the fact that the working class in this country is going nowhere in a hurry. It is also the growing concentration of ownership in America. In sector after sector, whether it is media, whether it is financial services, whether it is transportation, whether it is healthcare, you have fewer and fewer large corporations that control what goes on in those sectors.

And when you have concentration of ownership, you have price-fixing, you have corporate greed, and that is one of the reasons why inflation has had the impact that it has had and why we have seen that much inflation.

Unbelievably, there are three Wall Street investment firms today-- BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street--that combined control assets of $20 trillion and combined are the major stockholders in 95 percent of the Standard & Poor corporations. That is what power is about--three entities, three private Wall Street investment firms being able to be combined as the major stockholders in 95 percent of our corporations.

So oligarchy is about massive income and wealth inequality. Oligarchy is about the rich becoming much richer--CEOs of large corporations now making

350 times what their workers make. Oligarchy is about 60 percent of our people living paycheck to paycheck, despite huge increases in worker productivity.

But I will tell you what oligarchy is also about: The billionaire class is not just satisfied to control the economic life of this country. They are moving aggressively to control the political life of this country.

So while ordinary Americans get the right to vote--they have one vote--the billionaire class, as a result of this disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision, they have the right not just to cast one vote as a citizen but to contribute hundreds of millions of dollars into super-PACs that will elect their friends and defeat their political opponents.

Now, if anyone in America thinks that is what American democracy is supposed to be about, well, I have a strong disagreement with you. Democracy is one person, one vote; not billionaires buying elections through their super-PACs. And I would hope that, here in Congress and on the campaign trail, leaders of this country make it clear that we have got to overturn this disastrous Supreme Court decision on Citizens United, which allows billionaires to buy elections, and move to public funding of elections. And that is where we should be going if we believe in democracy.

When we talk about the issues facing working families, when I go around the country--and I was just up in Maine the other day, as a matter of fact--you ask people about our healthcare system. You ask them a simple question. You say: Is this healthcare system working for you?

And almost without exception, what the American people say is: Our healthcare system today is broken. It is dysfunctional, and it is way, way, way too expensive.

And when people say that, they are right. And I hope everybody knows that, in America today, we spend twice as much per person on healthcare as do the people of any other country--twice as much. And yet despite spending over $13,000 for every man, woman, and child--18 percent of our GDP on healthcare--our outcomes are worse than other countries that spend half as much per capita.

Our life expectancy is way down, behind many other countries, and, really obscenely, the life expectancy in the United States between the people on top and working-class people is 10, 12 years. In other words, if you are rich, you will live as long as people in other developed countries, but if you are working class or poor, the odds are you are going to live 10 or 15 years less.

Now, I don't know how much we talk about that, but I think maybe it is time that we do. And maybe we talk about the reality that we remain today the only country in the industrialized world that does not guarantee healthcare for all people as a human right, and that 85 million of our people are uninsured or underinsured.

And it is not just healthcare. It is prescription drugs, and we are working hard on this. As chairman of the HELP Committee, that is what we are doing, trying to drive down the costs of prescription drugs.

But today, because of the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and the inactivity of the Congress, in many cases we are paying 10 times more for the same exact prescription drugs as do the people in other countries. And on and on it goes.

We have, as a nation, the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on Earth. This is the richest nation on Earth, and we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on Earth.

In terms of our seniors, 50 percent of senior citizens in this country are living on $30,000 a year or less, and 25 percent are living on $15,000 a year or less. And I do not know how anybody, let alone a senior citizen, lives on $15,000 a year or less.

So what do we do? Well, maybe for a change--I know it is a radical idea--we might want to hear on the floor of the Senate and maybe in the House, actually discuss issues of relevance to working people. I know that is kind of an extremist, a far-left idea, that we talk about the real issues facing working families, but, you know, that is what I think. And maybe we come up with some serious proposals and ideas that address some of these crises.

And there may be differences of opinions, but let's at least discuss these issues. It seems to me that when so many of our elderly people are struggling, when half of older workers have nothing in the bank as they face retirement, you know, we might want to pay attention to that issue.

Now, over in the House, some 90 percent of the Republicans think that what we want to do is cut Social Security benefits. Well, I don't think that that is a particularly good idea. I think that is a dumb idea.

And I think we should do exactly the opposite. Instead of cutting Social Security benefits, we should expand Social Security benefits and extend the life and the solvency of Social Security.

Well, how do you do that? It ain't hard to do. Right now, somebody that makes $16 million a year contributes the same amount into the Social Security trust fund as somebody who makes $160,000 a year. Does that make sense to anybody? Not to me.

If you lift the cap and ask the wealthy--the top 2, 3 percent--to start paying into the Social Security trust fund that same 6 percent that the working people pay, do you know what you could do? You can do two things: You can expand Social Security benefits by $2,200 a year. That is pretty good. It may not sound like a lot of money to somebody that is wealthy, but if you are trying to get by on $20,000 a year, do you know what? That $2,200 can help a lot.

And when you lift that cap, the other thing you do is you can make Social Security solvent for the next 75 years so we end this discussion about Social Security going broke.

We had a hearing recently on the HELP Committee on medical debt, and what we learned, unbelievably, is that in our broken, dysfunctional healthcare system, half of people in this country who are dealing with cancer, because of the high cost of cancer treatment--half of these people--either go bankrupt or they deplete all of their financial resources.

I mean, does anybody who has a heart, anybody who has a soul, anybody who has a sense of morality think that it makes sense that when people come down with a terrible illness and are worried about living or dying that they have to also worry about whether or not their family is going to go bankrupt?

And I think we should learn here at the Federal level, here in the Senate, a lesson that a lot of States and cities and counties are doing, and that is ending medical debt. We should not punish people, force bankruptcy on people, who are struggling with serious illnesses.

Wherever I go in my home State of Vermont, my city of Burlington, all over the country, people are worried about the high cost of healthcare in America. It is no great secret that rents are soaring. It is no great secret that, shamefully as a nation, we have some 600,000 Americans sleeping out on the streets today. It is clear to me that instead of giving tax breaks to billionaires and to large corporations, maybe--just maybe--we may want to invest in building low-income, affordable, and senior citizen housing, and we may want to put a cap on the kinds of rent increases--as President Biden suggested--that these large Wall Street firms are now raising the rents that they are raising for people who live in their homes.

I don't know how to describe this except to say that I am personally embarrassed and I think the American people are embarrassed that right now in this country, we have a Federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. All over this country, we have workers--if they are not making 7 and a quarter, they are making 10, they are making 12, 13 bucks an hour. People can't make it. I don't care where you are. If you are in rural Kentucky, in Burlington, VT, or New York City, nobody makes it on $12, $13 an hour.

We have not raised the Federal minimum wage in decades. I brought a bill up here a few years ago. We got all of 46 votes. We didn't get one Republican vote; we lost six Democratic votes.

Well, the American people do not think that folks in this country should be forced to work at starvation wages, and I hope we can bring forth legislation to raise the minimum wage to a

living wage. In my view, that living wage should be at least $17 an hour.

When we talk about workers' rights, I can tell you from personal experience, having been involved in a number of strikes and union organizing campaigns, corporations spend hundreds of millions of dollars--illegally--trying to prevent workers from forming unions. That is why we must pass the PRO Act that will provide severe penalties against any corporation, any employer that uses illegal tactics to deny workers the right to form a union.

Mr. President, when we talk about childhood poverty, as I am sure you will recall, a few years ago, as a result of the American Rescue Plan, we provided $300 a month per child for the vast majority of working parents in this country. That tax credit had the impact, incredibly, of lowering the childhood poverty level in this country by over 40 percent. One provision in one large bill lowered the childhood poverty level by over 40 percent. For minority communities, it was even greater than that. Maybe--just maybe--as a nation, we might want to end the disgrace of having the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on Earth and make permanent a strong child tax credit similar to what we had in the American Rescue Plan.

These are just some of the issues that are out there, and there are many others.

I talk to elderly people often who say: All right. We are not going to pass--you don't have the political support to pass Medicare for All. The drug companies and the insurance companies are too powerful. You can't take them on right now. But at least--at least--can we expand Medicare to cover dental, hearing, and vision?

Millions of elderly people in America can't afford to go to a dentist. People have no teeth in their mouths. Yes, we can do that, and we should do that.

So all that I wanted to say is that at a time when many, many Americans are giving up on democracy--they are hurting. They look to the government, they vote, and nothing happens. The rich get richer; they get poorer. They are saying, ``Hey, all of this democracy and all this election stuff--it is all a crock. It doesn't matter,'' and they are willing to look at authoritarianism as a substitute for the democracy we have.

So, to my mind, not only is it the right thing and the moral thing to start paying attention to the needs of a long-neglected working class-- long neglected by the Democratic Party; long neglected by the Republican Party--not only is it time to pay attention to those needs, if you are interested in preserving democracy, you might want to do that as well.

So the thrust of my message today is that the time is long overdue for this Congress, this Senate, to have a serious discussion on the serious issues facing the working families of this country.

With that, I yield the floor.

Madam President, I want to commend my fellow Vermonter for his remarks. I wanted to say a few words on the same subject.

Madam President, tomorrow, Wednesday, will be a unique moment in congressional history. Throughout the many years of our country, leaders from dozens of countries with all kinds of political backgrounds and persuasions have been invited to address a joint session of Congress. To the best of my knowledge, however, tomorrow will be unique. In bringing Prime Minister Netanyahu to address a joint meeting of Congress, it will be the first time in American history that a war criminal has been given that honor.

Frankly, this invitation to Netanyahu is a disgrace and something that we will look back on with regret. With this invitation, it will be impossible, with a straight face, for the United States to lecture any country on Earth about human rights and human dignity.

As you well know, along with the Hamas leader, Yahya Sinwar, and several others, Prime Minister Netanyahu has been credibly accused of war crimes by the International Criminal Court, the ICC. That Court may soon issue arrest warrants for Sinwar and Netanyahu.

The case against Sinwar and his Hamas accomplices is clear. They were organizers of the horrific October 7 terrorist attack on Israel that began this war and involved the mass murder of 1,200 innocent men, women, and children, the taking of hostages, and sexual violence. These war crimes are well documented, and very few people would dispute the merits of these charges.

The ICC's prosecutors' charges against Netanyahu are also well founded. The charges focus on the starvation of civilians as a method of war, as well as intentional attacks against the civilian population. Specifically, the prosecutor says that Netanyahu is responsible for ``depriving [civilians] of objects indispensable to their survival, including willfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions.''

A separate U.N. independent Commission of Inquiry likewise found that both Hamas and the Israeli military have committed war crimes since October 7, leading to widespread civilian deaths. The Commission said the Israeli military's ``intentional use of heavy weapons with large destructive capacity in densely populated areas constitutes an intentional and direct attack on the civilian population, particularly affecting women and children.''

I think we all agree that Israel had the right to defend itself against the horrific Hamas attack on October 7, but Netanyahu's extreme, rightwing government has, since that attack, waged what amounts to a total war--a total war--against the entire Palestinian people, making life unlivable in Gaza and killing tens of thousands. These actions have trampled on international law, on American law, and on basic human values.

I understand that the mass media and many of us in Congress have been preoccupied in recent weeks with the awful assassination attempt against former President Trump and the changes at the top of the Democratic Presidential ticket. But while all that is going on, it is absolutely irresponsible for us to turn our backs on one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern history, especially when that disaster has been aided and abetted by U.S. taxpayer dollars and weapons. In other words, it is not just the Israeli Government; it is us and our money and our weaponry as well.

Let us be clear. Let us be very clear as to what is going on in Gaza right now. Since this war began, among a population of 2.2 million people, at least 39,000 Palestinians have been killed and 89,000 injured--60 percent of whom are women, children, or elderly people. Most observers believe that the death toll is much higher because thousands of people remain buried under the mountains of rubble; their bodies have not yet been recovered.

Some 1.9 million people, out of a population of 2.2 million, have been driven from their homes, 90 percent of the population. Take a deep breath--90 percent of the population driven from their homes. The vast majority of these desperate and poor people have now been displaced not once, not twice, but, in some cases, four or five times, herded around like cattle. Just yesterday--yesterday--Israel announced another evacuation order for Khan Yunis, and 150,000 people were forced to flee on a moment's notice just yesterday.

When we talk about housing in Gaza, it is not just that people have been displaced time and time again. More than 60 percent of Gaza's housing has been damaged or destroyed, including 221,000 housing units that have been completely destroyed. Where are these people going to go to if and when this war ever ends? And with that housing destruction, more than a million people remain permanently homeless. Entire neighborhoods have been wiped out. Today, more than a million Palestinians--almost half of the population of Gaza--are living in tents trying to find shelter, trying to find protection from the intense summer heat in that area.

But it is not just the housing that has been destroyed. Gaza's civilian infrastructure has also been devastated. Water and sewer systems have been made inoperable--and the result: Raw sewage is running through the streets of Gaza, spreading disease, and there is very little clean water. Many roads are impassable, and there is virtually no electricity now in Gaza.

But it is not just the housing that has been destroyed, not just the infrastructure that has been destroyed. Gaza had 12 universities, schools of higher learning. Every single one of those universities has been bombed, and 88 percent of all school buildings have been damaged. In other words, under Mr. Netanyahu's leadership, the entire educational system in Gaza has been annihilated. In fact, 540 people have been killed while sheltering--sheltering--in U.N. schools.

But it is not just the housing that has been destroyed, not just the infrastructure of Gaza that has been destroyed, not just the educational system which has been destroyed. At a time when almost 90,000 people are dealing with war-related injuries in Gaza--including many, many children who have lost their arms and their legs or are suffering all kinds of diseases--the healthcare system in Gaza has been systemically obliterated. Madam President, 21 of Gaza's 36 hospitals are completely out of service, and the remainder can only partially function. The World Health Organization has recorded more than 1,000 attacks on healthcare facilities since October 7. As a result, disease is spreading due to shortages of clean water, sanitation, and hygiene. Cases of hepatitis, dysentery, and other infections are on the rise. And cases of polio have now been detected.

Malnourished women struggle to breastfeed their newborns. Formula is inaccessible and even when available cannot be used without reliable sources of clean water. So the tiniest children and their mothers suffer as well, as a result.

But it is not just displacement of 1.9 million people. It is not just the mass

destruction of housing. It is not just the obliteration of the infrastructure. It is not just the destruction of the educational system. It is not just the annihilation of the healthcare system in Gaza that we are seeing. It is even worse than that.

And I hope that my colleagues who attend Mr. Netanyahu's remarks on Wednesday remember this as they rise time and time again to give him standing ovations. As a result of Israeli restrictions on humanitarian aid, people in Gaza are now starving to death. So remember when people stand up and applaud, children, women, innocent people in Gaza are now starving to death. According to the best available research, drawing on leading experts from the U.N. and other aid organizations around the world, some 495,000 Palestinians face starvation. These groups estimate that more than 50,000 children require treatment for acute malnutrition and are at risk of starving to death. At least 30 documented--I suspect it is a lot higher number than that--have already starved to death. So when you stand up and applaud that guy, remember the starving children that he has created.

But even those who get the lifesaving care they need, the children will carry the scars of this disaster for the rest of their lives. As every psychologist will tell you, a child's brain develops fastest in the first 2 years of life, and childhood malnutrition does lifelong cognitive and physical damage. That is what Netanyahu is doing to the children of Gaza.

And I would ask my colleagues to stop for a moment and also think about the psychological damage this war has done to the children there. Imagine being a child living with the constant buzzing of drones above your head, wondering whether those drones are going to rain fire and bullets onto your home, wondering if they might strike you at any moment.

Imagine being a little 5-year-old witnessing your relatives killed, your neighborhood destroyed. Think about being a 10-year-old going hungry night after night and searching around for water and for food to survive. Think about being pushed from one place to another not knowing where you will be tomorrow, carrying your little water, your few belongings through streets running with sewage and amid piles of rubble and trash.

That is what Mr. Netanyahu, the man Congress is honoring tomorrow, has done to the children of Gaza. According to the U.N. and virtually every humanitarian organization functioning in Gaza, Israel has intentionally blocked humanitarian aid--including food, water, and medical supplies--from reaching the desperate people of Gaza.

And let us be clear: There is no--no--excuse for this. Blocking humanitarian aid, killing aid workers, and creating the conditions for starvation--these are not only acts of extreme cruelty, but they are clear violations of both U.S. and international law. They are war crimes. They are war crimes. And Netanyahu heads the government that has enacted these policies.

So, tomorrow, when Netanyahu comes before Congress, I hope that, for one second, the Members who attend will focus--just for a second--on the starving children in Gaza. I hope, while they applaud, that they will think about the hundreds of aid workers killed, the dozens of hospitals bombed, the housing destroyed, and the universities obliterated.

When Mr. Netanyahu rises to speak tomorrow, I also hope that my colleagues remember that all this death and destruction is not just the unfortunate byproduct of a brutal war. Revenge and destruction are the explicit policy of Netanyahu's extremist rightwing government.

Two days into the war--2 days--after October 7, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said:

I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There

will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is

closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting

accordingly.

And that is exactly how they have pursued this war. They define the Palestinian people as human animals, and, tragically, they have acted consistent with that view.

Let us remember and understand that the Israel of today is not the Israel of the past. It is now run by a rightwing extremist government.

National Security Minister Ben-Gvir, the man who oversees the police, has long advocated for the forcible expulsion of Palestinians from the region.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, the man responsible for the occupied West Bank, is also an extreme racist and has called for the expulsion of Palestinians from the land. He has called for segregated hospital wards for Jews and Arabs because ``Arabs are my enemies.'' And that is the man who is in charge of the occupied West Bank. And that is the current Israeli Finance Minister as well.

It should come as no surprise that this extremist government, in addition to destroying Gaza, has overseen record Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank, in violation of international law and commitments to the United States. Israeli forces and vigilante settlers have killed more than 500 Palestinians in the West Bank since October 7, including 131 children.

Just last week, the International Court of Justice issued a ruling on the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. A panel of 15 accomplished judges from around the world confirmed what most of the world has long known: that occupation is illegal and must end.

I know that there are some here in Congress--not many, but some--who have condemned Netanyahu and his extremist government. But condemning Netanyahu is not enough. We cannot condemn a Prime Minister, who the ICC considers to be a war criminal, while at the same time continuing to provide his government with tens of billions of dollars in military aid. That is hypocrisy at its worst.

Just today, I am happy to say, seven major trade unions here in the United States, including the Association of Flight Attendants, the American Postal Workers Union, the International Union of Painters, the National Education Association, the Service Employees International Union, the United Auto Workers, and the United Electrical Workers--some of the largest unions in America, representing some 6 million workers-- sent a letter to President Biden calling on him to immediately halt all military aid to Israel.

And they are absolutely right. Netanyahu is a rightwing extremist and a war criminal who has devoted his career to killing the prospects of a two-state solution and lasting peace in the region. He should not be welcome to the U.S. Congress.

On the contrary, his policies in Gaza and the West Bank should be roundly condemned and his rightwing extremist government should not receive another nickel from U.S. taxpayers.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, let me be as clear as I can be. That is, the American people--whether they are Democrats, Republicans, or Independents--are sick and tired of paying, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. The American people are sick and tired of being ripped off by giant pharmaceutical companies who make huge profits every year while charging us outrageous prices that the American people cannot afford.

A few months ago, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee--the HELP Committee--that I chair held a hearing on the extraordinarily high prices of prescription drugs in the United States, and this is what we learned.

We learned that Merck, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, made $14.5 billion in profits last year charging Americans struggling with diabetes $6,900 for Januvia, when the same exact product can be purchased in Canada for $900 and in France for $200.

Here you go: $6,900 in the United States, $900 in Canada, $200 in France. This is not a generic. This is the exact same product.

We found that this same company--which, by the way, could afford to

spend $7 billion last year on dividends and a $52 million compensation package for its CEO--$52 million for its CEO--charges Americans struggling with cancer $191,000 for Keytruda, while the same exact drug can be purchased in Canada for $112,000, $91,000 in France, and $89,000 in Germany.

Keytruda: $191,000 in the United States, $112,000 in Canada, and $91,000 in France.

And it is not just Merck. This is Merck, but it is not just Merck. Our committee also discovered that Bristol Myers Squibb, a company that made over $6 billion in profits last year, charges patients in America $7,100 for Eliquis, the popular blood thinner, when that same exact product can be purchased for just $900 in Canada and just $650 in France.

Eliquis: $7,100 in the United States; $900 in Canada; and $650 in France--same exact product.

That same company, Bristol Myers Squibb--which, by the way, could afford to spend some $14 billion on stock buybacks and dividends and hand out $41 million in compensation to its CEO last year--charges Americans with cancer $192,000 for Opdivo, while that same exact drug can be purchased for just $89,000 in Canada and $68,000 in France.

Opdivo, cancer drug: $192,000 in America, $89,000 in Canada, $68,000 in France--same product, same company.

What else did our committee learn from its investigation? Well, we found out that Johnson & Johnson, which made over $18 billion in profits last year, charges cancer patients $204,000 for Imbruvica, which can be purchased for just $46,000 in the UK and $43,000 in France.

And that same company, which recently spent over $17 billion on stock buybacks and dividends and gave its CEO a $27 million compensation package last year, charges Americans with arthritis $79,000 for Stelara when it can be purchased for just $30,000 in Germany and $16,000 in the UK. Stelara, Johnson & Johnson: $79,000 in the United States, $16,000 in the UK, $30,000 in Germany.

Let us be clear. It is not just Bristol Myers Squibb. It is not just Merck. It is not just Johnson & Johnson. Incredibly--and this is quite incredible and unbelievable and talks to our broken and dysfunctional healthcare system--while one out of four Americans cannot afford the medicine their doctors prescribe, 10 top pharmaceutical companies in our country made over $110 billion in profits last year and spent tens of billions on stock buybacks and dividends. In other words, you have the insane situation where people get sick. They go to the doctor. The doctor writes out a prescription. They cannot afford to fill that prescription. Well, if you are sick and you can't afford to fill the prescription, what happens to you? Likely, you even get sicker. You may end up in the hospital at an additional cost to the system, not to mention human suffering.

As the chair of the Senate HELP Committee, one of the top priorities for me is to try to substantially reduce the price of prescription drugs in the United States. And one of the ways to do that, in my view, is to hold the executives of some of the largest pharmaceutical companies in our country accountable for their actions; let them know that we understand what is going on and that the American people will not accept what is going on.

That brings us to another major pharmaceutical company, and that is Novo Nordisk, the manufacturer of the blockbuster drugs Ozempic and Wegovy. On April 24, the HELP Committee launched an investigation into the unbelievably high prices Novo Nordisk charges for Ozempic and Wegovy in the United States for millions of our people who are struggling with diabetes and obesity. We have an epidemic in this country of diabetes and obesity. People need these very, very important drugs.

Today, our investigation has found that Novo Nordisk charges Americans with type 2 diabetes $969 a month for Ozempic, while the same exact drug can be purchased for just $59 in Germany, $122 in Denmark, and $155 in Canada. Here we got it. Ozempic, blockbuster drug, important drug dealing with diabetes and obesity: United States, $969, Canada $155, Denmark, $122, Germany, $59. The same exact drug made by the same company is almost 10 times higher--more than 10 times higher. My arithmetic is not that good. It looks to be almost 20 times higher between the United States and Germany.

Novo Nordisk charges Americans with obesity--that was for diabetes-- $1,349 a month for Wegovy, while the same exact product can be purchased for just $92 in the UK, $186 in Denmark, and $265 in Canada. Further, if half of the adults in our country--this is not an unreasonable projection. If half of the adults in our country with obesity took Wegovy, which is apparently a very successful drug, and the other new weight loss drugs, it could cost--and this is quite incredible, and every Member of Congress should be listening to this-- it would cost us, as a nation, $411 billion every year for weight-loss drugs dealing with diabetes and obesity. That is $5 billion more than what Americans spent on all--A-L-L--all prescription drugs at the pharmacy counter in 2022.

Let me repeat it. If we do not change, fundamentally change, this scenario, Americans could be spending more at these incredibly absurd prices on weight-loss drugs than on all prescription drugs at the pharmacy counter for cancer, for whatever--more for weight-loss drugs than all the other drugs in the country. Clearly, it doesn't take an economist to understand that this is unsustainable. It can't happen.

The HELP Committee also found that if half of all Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries who are obese--not talking about diabetes, talking about obesity--took Wegovy and other weight-loss drugs, Medicare and Medicaid could spend $166 billion every year, roughly what these two major healthcare programs spent on all retail prescription drugs in 2022. That would also be unsustainable.

The scientists at Novo Nordisk and the other drug companies deserve a lot of credit and thanks for developing these important lifesaving drugs. But these drugs mean nothing for the millions of people who cannot afford them. And if we do not substantially lower the prices these companies are charging, they will have a disastrous impact on the Federal deficit and the future of Medicare and Medicaid.

So all of those people worried about the Federal deficit, worried about the future of Medicare and Medicaid, listen up because just these drugs, Ozempic and Wegovy, can bankrupt those programs. We have, in my view, a moral responsibility to make sure that every American with diabetes and obesity who receives a prescription for Ozempic or Wegovy can afford to purchase those drugs. It would be a horrible thing for somebody who was in need of those drugs, who could be helped by those drugs, to not to be able to get them because they can't afford these outrageous prices.

Further, as Members of the Congress, we have a fiscal responsibility to make sure that Ozempic and Wegovy do not bankrupt Medicare, Medicaid, and, in fact, our entire healthcare system, which already spends twice as much per capita on healthcare as the people of any other country.

That is why the HELP Committee has, time and time again, invited the leadership of Novo Nordisk to voluntarily testify about the unconscionably high prices they are charging for these drugs in the United States. The reason why we invited the executives at Novo Nordisk to testify before Congress is not complicated. It is a very, very simple question that we want answered. And that question is, Why do they think it is acceptable for Novo Nordisk to charge Americans $969 for Ozempic when that same exact drug can be purchased for just $59 in Germany and $155 in Canada? We want to ask them why they think it is acceptable to charge Americans $1,349 for Wegovy when that same drug can be purchased for just $92 in the United Kingdom.

After all is said and done, what are we trying to accomplish? The answer is obvious, and the answer is simple. We want Novo Nordisk to stop ripping off the American people, and we want them to stop charging us prices that are far, far higher than they charge the people of other countries. That is what I want to see, and that is what the overwhelming majority of American people want to see.

Unfortunately, despite the many, many discussions that I and my staff have had with Novo Nordisk over the past several months, I must confess

that we have made virtually no progress in getting them to lower their prices. We have asked the leadership of the company to come before the committee to explain why their prices are so much higher in the United States than in other countries. Unfortunately, they have not agreed to do that.

Therefore, the HELP Committee has no choice but to subpoena the leadership of Novo Nordisk to testify and explain their actions. I look forward to the presence of the leadership of Novo Nordisk at a HELP Committee hearing on July 10.

Let me be very clear. The HELP Committee that I chair will continue to ask the tough questions that the pharmaceutical industry would prefer us to ignore: Why is it that the median price of new prescription drugs in America is now over $300,000, including for many new cancer drugs? Why has the pharmaceutical industry spent over the past 25 years some $8.5 billion on lobbying and over $700 million on campaign contributions?

Right now, as we speak, there are some 1,800 well-paid lobbyists of the pharmaceutical industry all over Washington, former leaders of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, doing everything they can to make sure we do not ask those questions and that we are not successful in getting them to lower their prices.

Mr. President, let me conclude the way I began. This is an issue that is not a Democratic issue. It is not a Republican issue. It is not an Independent issue. The American people are sick and tired of being ripped off by the pharmaceutical industry, sick and tired of paying by far the highest prices in the world.

And the time is now for the Congress to have the courage to stand up to the 1,800 paid lobbyists here in Washington, DC, all the campaign contributions that come in, and tell the industry enough is enough. Lower the prices you are charging the American people.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, yesterday, in an interview with FOX News, Speaker Mike Johnson said that I ``was parroting the talking points of Hamas'' and that I and others ``stand with Hamas and the Ayatollah.''

Well, that, of course, is an absolute lie. As I have said many times, I believe that Hamas is a terrorist organization that committed an atrocious act when it began this war by attacking Israel on October 7, killing 1,200 innocent men, women, and children, and taking more than 200 hostages, many of whom are still being held in captivity today.

Further, as I have said on numerous occasions, I think that the Hamas leader, Yahya Sinwar, is a war criminal and should be arrested.

Now, I am not quite sure those are the talking points that Hamas uses. But what the FOX interview did get right is that I believe it is a very sad day for our country that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has been invited by leaders from both political parties to address a joint session of the U.S. Congress.

Israel, of course, had the right to defend itself against the horrific Hamas terrorist attack of October 7, but it did not--and it does not--have the right to go to war against the entire Palestinian people.

Two days after the war began, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said:

I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There

will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is

closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting

accordingly.

``We are fighting human animals''--that is his definition of the Palestinian people--``and we are acting accordingly.'' That is what the Israeli Defense Minister said, and, tragically, that is exactly what the rightwing, extremist Netanyahu government has done.

Now, let me put some detail into exactly what that means and whether anyone really believes that Prime Minister Netanyahu should be a guest of honor of the U.S. Congress and the American people.

Over the last 8 months--almost 8 months--Netanyahu and his extremist government have killed more than 36,000 Palestinians and wounded over 82,000. That is 5 percent of the population of Gaza. Sixty percent of those who have been killed or wounded are women, children, and elderly people.

Netanyahu's war machine has driven 1.7 million people from their homes--75 percent of the population of Gaza. I would like the American people to think about that. Think about your community. Think about your State. Think about what it would mean if 75 percent--three- quarters--of your population was driven from their homes, and most of these people are poor, and they leave their homes not knowing where they are going, with nothing but what they could carry in their hands. Think about that incredible level of desperation--three-quarters of the population driven from their homes, carrying a few bundles of clothing or food or whatever it may be.

Further, Netanyahu's government has damaged or destroyed over 60 percent of the housing in Gaza, leaving more than 1 million people permanently homeless.

You know, there is a lot of talk in the media and among the pundits about the day after the war ends, but let's be clear: For over 1 million people, there is no day after in which they can return to their homes because their homes, their housing units, have been destroyed.

It is not just the housing stock of Gaza that has been destroyed. Netanyahu and his extremist government have destroyed the civilian infrastructure of Gaza, obliterated water and sewer systems and denied electricity to the people who live there.

Defense Minister Gallant, in his statement that I read a moment ago, said:

I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There

will be no electricity.

Well, they have kept their word. Imagine living month after month with no electricity or clean water and seeing sewage run out onto the streets. That is life for the people of Gaza right now.

Mr. Netanyahu--the gentleman invited by Mr. Johnson and the Democratic leadership here--Mr. Netanyahu and his government have annihilated Gaza's healthcare system. I have talked to doctors, American doctors, who have been there who talk about the systematic destruction of their healthcare system. Mr. President, 26 hospitals have been knocked out of service, and more than 400 healthcare workers have been killed--400 healthcare workers killed.

In other words, there are some 80,000 wounded people in Gaza and hundreds of thousands of people who are sick. According to the World Health Organization, as of May 5, there were hundreds of thousands of cases of acute respiratory illness and diarrhea, including 110,000 children. Yet, despite all of the injuries caused by the bombings, despite all of the sickness caused by the lack of clean water, there is virtually no healthcare available to these people because the healthcare system in Gaza has been almost totally destroyed.

You know, there are 12 universities in Gaza where kids are able to get an education. In fact, the people of Gaza and the Palestinian area take education very seriously. Every single one of these 12 universities has been bombed, as have 56 schools. Today, 625,000 children in Gaza have no access to education.

I would ask the American people just to think about what is going on psychologically to the children of Gaza. Imagine being in a place where drones are flying all over the place, maybe there with weapons, maybe not. Buildings have been destroyed. Your relatives have been killed. You don't have any water. You don't have any food. You are driven from one place to another. What kind of permanent damage will occur to virtually every one of these children? What a horrible experience it is.

Maybe--maybe most importantly--when we think about the wisdom of Mr. Netanyahu being invited to address both Houses of Congress--an honor to address both Houses of Congress and the American people--we should remember that his government, according to virtually every humanitarian organization functioning in Gaza, has intentionally blocked humanitarian aid--that is, food, water, medical supplies--from reaching the desperate people of Gaza, which has created, on top of everything else, the conditions for starvation and famine.

I would tell you, as you probably already know, that blocking humanitarian aid and creating the conditions for famine is not only an act of extreme cruelty--using starvation as an act of war--but it is a violation of both American and international law. It is a war crime. That is what it is.

Let me say a word about what is going on in Gaza right now in terms of malnutrition. According to the United Nations, since mid-January, at least 30 children--30 children--have starved to death. More than 93,000 children under 5 have been screened for malnutrition, and 7,280 were found to have acute malnutrition, including 5,600 with moderate acute malnutrition and 1,676 with severe acute malnutrition. But, importantly, that is just what we know. The full reality is likely much, much worse. But Israel has prevented journalists and the media from getting into the most desperate areas in Gaza.

Mr. President, you know we, as we all know, are in campaign season, and I would say to Speaker Johnson that when you attend your fundraising dinners with your billionaire friends and you eat your fine steaks and your lobsters and your other wonderful food, please remember these pictures from Gaza.

This is a photograph of a child in Gaza taken by Getty.

This is a photograph of a child and his or her mother taken by Reuters, and one doubts very much whether that child is alive today.

This is a photograph taken by Al Jazeera.

This is another photograph taken by Getty of a child who I can't imagine is alive today.

These children and thousands more are the direct result of Netanyahu's policies, Netanyahu's demands. Speaker Johnson has invited him to address Congress.

No, Mr. President, I will not be in attendance for that speech.

I yield the floor.