Floor Statements

Mr. President, I rise today to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC) Division, Keyport's Hawthorne Operating Site.

For 50 years, the dedicated men and women of the Hawthorne Operating Site have supported the U.S. Navy from right here in the Nevada desert. Though they are hundreds of miles from the ocean, their work has had an important impact on the readiness of our Navy and the security of our Nation and its allies. The Hawthorne Operating Site's early work included helping with mine storage and maintenance, and today, it supports logistics and supply, demilitarization, and depot-level repairs for the Navy's mine force.

This 50th anniversary is an opportunity to celebrate the long history of the installation and the community that has grown alongside it. Originally established as the Naval Ammunition Depot Hawthorne in 1930, the site has been an important part of Mineral County and Nevada for nearly a century. During World War II, it served as a primary staging ground for munitions supporting our forces in the Pacific, highlighting Nevada's important contribution to our Nation's defense.

The history of this installation is inseparable from the history of the people who have called Hawthorne home. The nearby community of Babbitt grew alongside the depot, with its own

schools, businesses, homes, and a strong sense of community. Generations of Hawthorne families have dedicated their careers to supporting the installation, building a proud tradition of hard work, resilience, and service.

Today, the Hawthorne Operating Site continues that tradition as part of the Hawthorne Army Depot. Its close partnership with the Army is an example of the importance of cooperation across our Armed Forces. This partnership strengthens our Nation's defense while supporting the local economy and community.

As we celebrate 50 years of the NUWC Division, Keyport's Operating Site in Hawthorne, I want to recognize the employees who have carried out this mission over the past five decades. Their work often happens far from the public eye, but it is essential to supporting our sailors and maintaining the strength and readiness of our Navy.

I am proud to join the people of Mineral County and Nevadans across our State in celebrating this important anniversary. To the current and former employees of the NUWC Division, Keyport's Operating Site in Hawthorne, thank you for your tireless service, your commitment to our Navy, and your dedication to defending our Nation and promoting peace and security around the world. Congratulations on 50 years of exceptional service, and happy anniversary to the Guardians Beneath the Waves.

Madam President, today I rise to honor the memory of my friend James Thomas Spencer. Jim, as he was known amongst friends, served the great State of Nevada for nearly 35 years. Anyone who was lucky enough to encounter Jim would tell you the same thing: Jim was a loyal friend and a diligent professional who took extraordinary care in everything he did.

Jim was born on October 23, 1948, in Redlands, CA. Following his service in the Army and his legal education, Jim moved to Nevada. In 1982, Jim began working in the Nevada Attorney General's Office. Jim ultimately served under four State attorneys general. Jim's work in the office was marked by his extremely capable representation of the Governor, other State officials, and different departments and agencies of the State. He drafted numerous significant opinions issued by the office and rose through the ranks in office, retiring as chief of staff to the attorney general.

During my tenure as Nevada's attorney general, Jim served as my chief of staff and as special assistant attorney general. Jim always displayed a strong sense of humility about himself and a deep empathy for others. These admirable qualities coupled with his commonsense, diligent, and straightforward practice of law resulted in Jim being one of the most respected lawyers in Nevada. He was a highly rated attorney and an expert on all things pertaining to Nevada government and our State laws.

Outside of work, Jim was an avid athlete and outdoorsman. He ran marathons and competitively dived. Despite a couple of joint replacements, he would often organize adventures with his friends and coworkers that involved hikes up Jobs Peak, Mount Rose, and C-Hill in Carson City. Even after his retirement in 2014, Jim retained his passion for adventure. Jim successfully completed a tandem skydive, did gunsmith work for his friends, and was always with his rescue dogs, whom he loved dearly.

Along with his distinguished career and busy personal life, Jim was committed to helping everyone around him. Jim would give a stranger the shirt off his back. He organized an annual Thanksgiving fundraiser in the attorney general's office to donate turkeys to families in need. He was a mentor for all who came through his office door and made it a point to befriend all the staff members and their families. To brighten everyone's day, Jim made it a point to share humorous articles of news with his colleagues, a practice he continued into retirement. These news breaks were timely, unannounced, and always appreciated.

On July 21, 2026, Jim passed away at the age of 77 due to esophageal cancer. He faced his illness with courage, resilience, and heart. Jim is survived by his family members, including David, Karen, and Katherine. I know his family will miss him dearly.

I am deeply grateful for Jim's dedicated service and his years of friendship. The loss of Jim is felt by his friends, family, and colleagues. Jim leaves behind a remarkable legacy of kindness, generosity, professionalism, and loyalty.

Mr. President, I rise today to bring transparency to the American people.

S. Res. 616 requires the Trump administration to produce a report detailing the human rights violations in Honduras under its former President, Juan Orlando Hernandez.

Let me just stress this--and I am going to be talking about this quite often--Juan Orlando Hernandez--most people don't know--was convicted here in the United States. He is a notorious drug trafficker. And President Trump pardoned him last year.

The American people deserve to know the consequences of pardoning such an infamous criminal and, quite honestly, how that conflicts with President Trump's focus, as he talks about, on law and order and combating drug trafficking.

Mr. Hernandez was serving a 45-year sentence for drug trafficking when President Trump pardoned him. He had been convicted by a U.S. jury in 2024 for conspiring to import hundreds of tons of cocaine to the United States and for related firearms offenses. He also had been accused of taking bribes from the infamous Mexican cartel leader El Chapo and raking in millions of dollars in drug money himself.

This is the man who is responsible for illegal drugs entering our country, for harming families, and for endangering our communities. Yet President Trump pardoned him.

This is the man who prosecutors said had partnered with some of the world's most prolific narcotics traffickers to build a corrupt and brutally violent empire. The prosecutors who were later able to get a conviction against him said that. Yet President Trump deemed him worthy of a pardon.

The President's action here is the opposite of law and order. In fact, it contradicts efforts to combat drug trafficking, and it undermines law enforcement. Why do I know that? Because as a former attorney general, these are areas in which I worked with law enforcement in my State--our law enforcement agents, our investigators, our prosecutors in the State of Nevada--to combat drug trafficking that comes into the State of Nevada.

Let me clarify this because most people don't realize that Nevada is not on the border with Mexico, but what happens on that border bleeds into Nevada. So the drug trafficking that crosses that border comes into Nevada, where we were seeing opioid abuse, where we were seeing methamphetamine abuse, where we were seeing fentanyl abuse--the very drugs the President now is talking about wanting to combat and stop from coming into our country. Yet--yet--he pardons a big drug trafficker who was convicted in this country for doing that very thing.

You know, quite frankly, it is an insult to the professional men and women--nonpartisan, let me just say, men and women--who work year after year to address this issue and who actually worked hard to put Hernandez behind bars.

It also sends the wrong message. Here is why: Since he was pardoned, Mr. Hernandez has been giving interviews to the BBC, and he is saying that President Trump's pardon proves he was innocent.

I will tell you what: The American people deserve better than that, and they deserve transparency.

Quite honestly, our law enforcement, who works so hard to address-- really address--the drug trafficking that is coming into this country, deserves to know why President Trump pardoned this man. They deserve to fully understand the connections between Hernandez' government, drug trafficking organizations, and Honduras' human rights record. That is why I am calling up this resolution today.

This resolution would require the Trump administration to provide information about Honduras' domestic human rights practices. Specifically, the administration would have to assess human rights violations during the time that President Juan Orlando Hernandez was President. That includes analyzing the connections between high-level government officials and drug trafficking organizations, and it means looking at the corruption of Honduras' Government officials as it relates to drug trafficking, money laundering, and bribery.

In this report, they would also have to evaluate the links between the drug cartels in Honduras and torture, rape, illegal detention, witness tampering, and murder.

Finally, it would include understanding efforts in Honduras to undermine police reforms and drug crime investigations.

The resolution also requires an assessment from the Secretary of State of any ongoing ties between Hernandez and--whether he has maintained those with drug cartels.

Now, I have heard some of my colleagues talking out against this in that somehow this is some ``gotcha'' moment or this is some sort of lefty, liberal effort to make the President look bad.

Well, let me just say this: Everybody is responsible for their actions. I don't know, in working in law enforcement, that there is a left or a right to it. We want to stop drug trafficking. We want to hold those drug traffickers accountable, and they shouldn't be pardoned after they have been convicted in the United States. If we are truly going to combat the War on Drugs in this country, everybody needs to be held accountable--everyone.

This resolution is important because if the administration fails to give us this report, the resolution would pause U.S. security assistance to Honduras. There is no good reason for the administration not to author this report.

Again, some colleagues have voiced concerns about the potential pausing of assistance to Honduras. Well, let me be very clear. Trump has already threatened to pause aid to Honduras multiple times. In fact, since the start of his second term, his administration has slashed the amount of funding we are sending to the country. There is no promise that the Trump administration won't threaten support for Honduras again with or without this resolution, right?

So if President Trump is really concerned about preventing drug trafficking and supporting Honduras, he can start by not pardoning drug kingpins.

At the end of the day, this vote is about giving the American people the answers they deserve. We need the truth. We need the facts. We need to understand what is going on here. The President is going to use his pardon power to pardon a drug kingpin who has been convicted in this country. People deserve the right to know why. They deserve the right to know why.

So I hope my colleagues will work with me to pass this resolution. I thank Senators Kaine and Welch for standing with me and joining me in this resolution and talking on the floor today as to how important this is.

Again, I cannot stress this enough: This is not a lefty or a right issue. This is not a Republican or a Democrat issue. This is a nonpartisan issue. This is about drug trafficking, who is responsible, and accountability for them. And if we have a President who decides he is going to use his pardon power to pardon them, we have every right to question that and understand the extent to which an individual is being

pardoned in this country and what he did. That is what this resolution is all about--transparency for the American people. It is about time.

With that, Mr. President, pursuant to section 502B(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign Relations from further consideration of S. Res. 616.

I know of no further debate.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. President, I am joining my colleagues on the Senate floor because today marks the 14th anniversary of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program that we all commonly know as

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 5463 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, this amendment would take the excessive money Republican leadership is throwing at ICE and redirect it to local law enforcement instead.

Now, Republicans already gave ICE and CBP $150 billion in their Big Beautiful Bill. Federal immigration enforcement has billions of dollars to operate for years to come. ICE doesn't need another $31 billion from this bill on top of that.

We have seen the so-called policing that President Trump's ICE agents are doing, and it is not making our neighborhoods any safer. Americans don't need thousands of Federal agents terrorizing their streets. They need local police they can trust to follow the law they are enforcing. That is why this amendment would take this excessive funding for ICE and redirect it toward the COPS Hiring Program so that we can put over 200,000 local police officers in our States nationwide.

The Republicans today have said that Democrats are trying to defund law enforcement. This couldn't be further from the truth. How my colleagues vote on this amendment will prove that.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

There appears to be a sufficient second.

The clerk will call the roll.

The senior assistant bill clerk called the roll.

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

Mr. President, I am here on the floor of the Senate today because I want to talk about what is happening this week with the reconciliation package that Republicans are attempting to move this week.

For many that might be watching--or maybe it is just my family who is watching. Who knows? But for many that are out there, let me just say that what is happening right now is that our Republican leaders in Congress in essence are trying to give billions of dollars more in funding to out-of-control Federal immigration enforcement Agencies that are brutalizing our communities.

I want to be clear about something. We all agree that we need strong border security and that criminals need to face justice. I am going to say that again. We need strong border security. Criminals must face justice.

President Trump said his administration would be going after the worst of the worst, but what really is happening is that masked and unidentifiable agents are roaming around, arresting and even killing American citizens, racially profiling people, including Latinos, and deporting Dreamers.

I am here to tell my colleagues that if you are not paying attention to the American public when you are listening to them--because if you are, you are hearing that they are saying: Enough. They want safe communities but not lawlessness and fearmongering.

That is why my Democratic colleagues and I have been clear since February: You will not get our votes on new funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol unless it includes commonsense guardrails to rein in these Agencies' abuses. But over the last several months, unfortunately, President Trump and Republican leadership have showed us, time and time again, that they are simply not interested in doing the right thing here, even the popular thing.

Now, I want people to keep in mind that Republicans have already given these two Agencies $150 billion in their so-called Big Beautiful Bill. They did that with another reconciliation package. They have plenty of money. ICE and CPB have plenty of money to operate for years to come--because their annual budget is only around $8 to $10 billion. They have $150 billion.

But now, what is happening this week is that, at the request of Donald Trump, Republicans now want to add another $70 billion to these Agencies, on top of the $150 billion they have. That multibillion- dollar check isn't for lowering the price of groceries for Americans. It is not lowering the cost of energy for Americans or healthcare or even helping them put more gas in their tanks at a lower cost. That is not what this is. It is not bringing back the manufacturing jobs this administration has lost us. And it definitely is not making our communities any safer.

We know that because we are seeing what Federal immigration enforcement has been doing with the $150 billion they already got for their mass deportation efforts. Let me tell you, they are not spending it on going after the worst of the worst. They are not doing

that. I have seen that in Nevada, and we have seen that across the country.

In March of this year, I stood right here, and I told 10 stories of Dreamers who have been detained or deported by Federal immigration enforcement. Dreamers and DACA recipients--they are our neighbors, they are our friends, they are community leaders, they are teachers, they are doctors, they are small business owners in my State and other States, and they are not criminals. In fact, they have had to follow the law to the letter in order to maintain their DACA status. And yet I have heard story after story of DACA recipients being detained or deported by ICE and Border Patrol. And I want to tell you some of those stories about how Federal immigration enforcement under Donald Trump is choosing to spend the taxpayers' dollars.

I heard directly from Maria, who had active DACA status but was detained by Federal immigration enforcement anyway. She said it was one of the most traumatic experiences of her life, and I believe it. Now, because of this administration's delays in DACA renewals, Maria is afraid her renewal--her renewal--won't come in time for her to heal and rebuild her life.

I also heard from Stephanie, a U.S. citizen who spoke to me on behalf of her husband Juan, who is a DACA recipient. Juan did everything he was supposed to do. He got an education, started a family, and always followed the law. Just days after Stephanie gave birth to their youngest daughter, Juan was on his way to the NICU unit to deliver milk for his new baby and for his wife when he was approached by ICE agents. And even though he had active DACA status and work authorization, the ICE agents told him it didn't matter, and they arrested and detained him.

Juan applied for the DACA renewal 5 months before the deadline, and it still wasn't enough. His DACA status expired while he was sitting in detention.

Stephanie told me:

Trump said DACA recipients would be safe, but that's not

true.

Thankfully, just a few days ago, after 3 months in detention, Juan was finally, finally released back to his family and his newborn daughter.

I also heard from Brenda, whose husband Jahasiel is another DACA recipient detained for no reason whatsoever. He had just dropped his kids off at school when ICE detained him, even though he had done nothing wrong. A judge finally ordered ICE to release him because there was no basis to hold him in the first place.

Maria, Juan, and Jahasiel are the kinds of people that President Trump and Republican leadership want to spend billions of dollars going after. These, to them, somehow, are the worst of the worst, when they have not committed a crime and they have followed the rules that we have set. They have followed the rules that Congress has passed, that the President signed, and they are following those rules.

How does that make sense?

Even the men and women who serve in our Armed Forces, those who have sacrificed so much for our country, are having their lives torn apart by Federal immigration enforcement.

I recently saw the story of SFC Jose Serrano, whose wife Deisy was arrested by ICE during a routine immigration appointment. She showed up for her appointment like she was required to do. Deisy has lived in this country over 10 years, and she was granted legal protection in 2019. But on April 14, despite being the wife of a soldier, she was arrested during a routine appointment with immigration services. Over a month later, Deisy was finally released from custody, thanks in part to public pressure, as well as advocacy from my colleague Senator Duckworth.

I also saw the story of SSG Matthew Blank and his wife Annie Ramos. Annie is a Dreamer who has called the United States home since she was 2 years old. They were newlyweds checking in on base to get Annie her military ID and activate her military spouse benefits. Instead, Annie was detained and threatened with deportation. Again, after advocacy from my Senate colleagues, she has been released, but ICE is still trying to deport her.

Now, think about this. You know about this because these stories have been public, but there are many others. There are many others that are not public. There are many others who have done nothing wrong, who are sitting in detention right now, and the public has no idea. And it is time--it is time--that, as Americans, we understand this and we stand up to an administration that thinks it is OK to deport people who have done nothing but lived in this country, tried to abide by the laws, tried to pay taxes, tried to have a good job.

I do not think it is controversial to say this is not what immigration enforcement should be spending their time on and this is not what we should be funding. That is why my Democratic colleagues and I have been blocking funding for ICE. It is because of the abuses of power that we are seeing, and it has to stop.

We are asking for reforms that are easy to implement, and we have said: Listen, if you want more funding, if you think that you need more funding--which is just so abusive as it is--then you have to comply with commonsense requirements that local law enforcement in my State and across the country comply with, that our State law enforcement in my State and across the country comply with.

And this is what Democrats were asking of this administration and our Republican leadership--common sense: Reform ICE.

And here are some of the reforms: Immigration enforcement can't detain and deport U.S. citizens, especially not based on the way they look. Federal agents can't go into someone's home without a judicial warrant. Federal agents can't wear masks. And they must clearly show their badge numbers, and they must wear body cameras.

By the way, Nevada law enforcement have been wearing body cameras, I want to say, since 2016, 2017.

Federal agents must also undergo deescalation training, just like State and local law enforcement, who patrol our communities every single day, do.

Nevadans in my State are asking for this. Americans across the country, in all States, are asking for this. Local and State law enforcement already abide by these guidelines, and they are the ones who are keeping our neighborhoods safe every day. Federal law enforcement should be held to the same standards. It is not controversial.

This is an issue my Republican colleagues could have solved months ago. We shouldn't even be here today. It has been 4 months of Democrats asking for commonsense, popular reforms to rein in the President's clearly out-of-control Federal immigration enforcement.

And, all the while, Senate Republican leadership has done nothing to help families. This administration has done nothing to address Americans' prices that are skyrocketing. And it is time that we actually listen to the people and listen to Americans and solve their problems, not create the problems that we think need to be solved.

I would say to my colleagues and to this administration: The American people, they deserve better.

With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as we all know, this week is National Police Week. This is the time when we honor the brave men and women who put their lives on the line every single day to keep our families safe.

This week is especially meaningful because, here in DC, we honored North Las Vegas police officer Jason Roscow, who died in the line of duty last year, and he will be memorialized on the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial wall.

Officer Roscow was an Air Force veteran who helped keep the North Las Vegas community safe for 17 years. He was described as a friend and a mentor to other members of the department. We will forever be grateful for his sacrifice, and he will be dearly missed.

Law enforcement officers like Jason Roscow risk their lives every day to protect our communities, and while we recognize that service throughout the year, National Police Week is an opportunity to express our gratitude.

For me, supporting law enforcement is personal. My husband is a retired law enforcement officer, and I have seen firsthand the sacrifices that our officers and their families make so our families feel safe at home. That is why I have worked with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to champion legislation to support police officers across the country.

In December, my bipartisan law enforcement bill with Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky was signed into law. This legislation will ensure the families of retired law enforcement officers who were killed as a result of their service are not denied benefits. The law is called the Chief Herbert D. Proffitt Act, named after a retired police officer in Kentucky who was tragically shot and killed by a man he had arrested a decade earlier. Chief Proffitt's family was denied the benefits they deserved because he had already retired. That is unacceptable, and that is why I am so proud that this bill to correct that mistake was signed into law.

I have also advanced some important law enforcement legislation just this week. On Tuesday, my bipartisan bill to fight retail theft passed the House of Representatives. As of 2024, organized retail crime cost retailers $720,000 for every billion dollars in sales. That is up 50 percent since 2015. We are seeing criminals become more aggressive and violent while they are stealing from our stores. They are putting both customers and employees at risk as well. It is dangerous, it is damaging the trust between retailers and shoppers, and it has to stop.

That is why I was thrilled to see momentum on the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act, which I introduced with Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who has been a great partner. This legislation would create an office within the Department of Homeland Security where Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies can coordinate with retail and supply chain industry representatives to curb this organized theft. It would also help create new tools to help investigators and prosecutors crack down on these criminals. This is a critical bill that will not only create a safer environment for shoppers but will actually help lower costs for consumers. Now that it has passed the House, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to take it up for a vote.

I was also proud to see my Tribal Warrant Fairness Act pass out of the Judiciary Committee this week. I have spent my career in the Senate working to end the epidemic of missing and murdered indigenous women and children. Tribal communities experience some of the highest rates of violence in the United States, especially against women and children, and yet Tribal law enforcement agencies just don't have access to the same resources other police departments have.

A glaring example of this is that the U.S. Marshals Service is not authorized to help Tribal police departments in locating dangerous criminals or finding missing children. It is a cruel and unnecessary injustice that both Democrats and Republicans agree needs to change. That is what the Tribal Warrant Fairness Act does. It grants the U.S. Marshals Service the same authority to assist Tribal law enforcement, when they request it, as it has to assist any other law enforcement agency.

Now that this legislation has passed out of the Judiciary Committee, it is one step closer to becoming law. I am going to keep pushing to get it to the President's desk for signature.

And then finally, earlier this week, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that Senator Lindsey Graham and I worked on and introduced, which is the Medal of Sacrifice Act. This bill creates a new Presidential award to posthumously honor law enforcement officers and other first responders who were killed in the line of duty.

Our officers work hard every single day to service our communities, to keep them safe, and their sacrifices deserve the highest possible recognition. The House has also passed this bill, and I look forward to the President signing it into law.

Our work here is never done when it comes to making sure our law enforcement agencies and officers have the resources that they need, but during this National Police Week, we made a lot of important progress. The legislation we passed this week will make a difference not just to our police officers but to communities and families across the country. And let me just say, when we made progress, that was bipartisan progress in this body.

I will always proudly stand with the men and women who serve as law enforcement officers, and I thank them for their service.

Mr. President, I also rise today to honor the life of Ruby Duncan, who was a powerhouse in anti-poverty, welfare, and justice advocacy in Nevada for several decades. Ruby, sadly, passed away on April 6, 2026.

After her own experiences as a single mother of seven, Ruby dedicated her life to uplifting women, children, and families; and she transformed Las Vegas' welfare system for generations to come.

After spending her formative years in Louisiana, Ruby moved to Las Vegas in 1952, where she worked in the city's booming hotel and casino industries. Ruby was injured while working as a cook and found herself relying on social welfare programs to support her growing family. Ruby was met with a disjointed State welfare system.

At that time, race, gender, and public attitudes determined an individual's access to the resources that they needed to thrive. For Ruby, this inspired a lifetime devoted to breaking down those barriers for others.

Recognizing that Black women were especially vulnerable to inequities in the welfare system, Ruby mobilized with other Black mothers to create the Clark County Welfare Rights Organization and, eventually, the Nevada Welfare Rights Organization.

Under Ruby's leadership, the groups engaged with State legislators, organized sit-ins, eat-ins, and marched down the Las Vegas Strip to protest for better treatment for Nevada's families in need. Those efforts did not go unnoticed, prompting Nevada to reverse a 75-percent cut to welfare for women with children and participate in Federal nutrition assistance programs.

Ruby's work also sparked community developments that continue to provide support and resources to families in West Las Vegas to this day. In 1972, she founded Operation Life, an organization tasked with bringing robust childcare, education, career, healthcare, and prevention services to a historically underserved neighborhood.

Operation Life brought the first library, a medical clinic for children, a childcare center, low-income housing, drug and violence prevention programs, and job training to the Westside. Today, these initiatives fuel a community made stronger because of Ruby and her relentless drive.

I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating Ruby Duncan's life and the lasting impact of her dedication and sacrifice.

Ruby loved Nevada and made life better for everyone who lives there. As she once said, ``If you want your life to get better, you got to fight for it.''

And through her tireless fight, the community supports that Ruby built will endure for the women, children, and families of the future.

And as a friend of mine, as someone whom I got to know as a young girl and then later was able to work with, I extend my deep condolences to Ruby's children, her family, her friends, and the countless lives that she touched. She will be dearly missed.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 384, S.J. Res. 128.

Mr. President, I am asking my colleagues to support S.J. Res. 128, which is my amendment to restore commonsense protection from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to stop companies from putting illegal terms in their contracts.

Since it opened its doors in 2011, the Consumer Protection Bureau has returned over $21 billion to more than 200 million American consumers after finding that companies violated the law and took advantage of them. That is why we have the Consumer Bureau to go after those bad actors. When companies use the fine print in their contracts to work in illegal provisions that exploit hard-working Americans, the Consumer Bureau is empowered to prosecute them.

But the restitution the Consumer Bureau has won for consumers is by nature a response. It comes after Americans have lost precious time and money or sometimes after they have signed away their rights.

There needs to be more efforts to proactively discourage companies from abusing the fine print and taking advantage of consumers in the first place. That is what the Consumer Bureau did under the Biden administration. They issued guidance warning companies that creating contracts with unlawful or unenforceable terms is illegal. It doesn't get more common sense than that.

No one should be coerced into signing away their rights, like the right to counsel or the right to pursue your claim in court, just to be able to open a bank account, open a credit card, or get a loan. These predatory practices are exactly what the Consumer Bureau was created to stop.

Unfortunately, this administration has withdrawn this guidance. They are intentionally allowing bad actors to break the law and put illegal provisions in contracts that will hurt Americans. It is just wrong.

That is why I am encouraging my colleagues to support S.J. Res. 128, to restore this protection against fine-print traps. Deception is not a business model, and Americans across the country are paying the price for the Trump administration's anti-consumer policies.

I yield the floor.

Vote on Motion to Proceed

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 385, S.J. Res. 129.

Mr. President, I am encouraging my colleagues to support S.J. Res. 129, which is my amendment to restore the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's rule that gives States more power to protect their consumers.

In 2022, the Consumer Bureau issued an interpretive rule declaring that the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which is the Federal law that regulates the collection, dissemination, and use of consumer credit information, can mostly be overridden by State law. That means States are allowed to regulate credit reporting without the Federal Government stepping in to say that they can't.

For example, 15 States have laws on the books banning medical debt from counting toward credit reports, and several States have limits on which eviction records are included in credit reports, easing the burden on tenants who are having trouble renting.

Under the Consumer Bureau's 2022 rule, these laws would stand, but now, the Trump administration is trying to replace the Consumer Bureau's rule with one that does the exact opposite. This new rule would make Federal law preempt State law, so States can no longer take action to ensure that consumers get a fair shake when trying to buy a house or get a loan. That is rich coming from an administration that supports States' rights.

So as a former attorney general, I believe strongly that States need the ability to protect Americans from financial exploitation. The Trump administration is working to gut the CFPB Bureau, and that leaves consumers in every State open to abuse. It is just unacceptable.

In the absence of a Federal Government that wants to protect Americans, individual States are stepping up and passing their own laws to support their residents.

If the Trump administration isn't going to support a strong Bureau, then they should let the States do what they refuse to do, but instead, this administration is trying to stop States from stepping in entirely. That is why I filed this joint resolution of disapproval, and I would ask my colleagues to support it.

Vote on Motion to Proceed

Mr. President, today, I recognize my friend and mentor Sue Wagner, who passed away in Reno, NV, on March 17, 2026.

Sue blazed a path for women in government in the great State of Nevada and is an inspiration not just to me but so many others. She will be remembered not just as the first woman elected Lieutenant Governor of Nevada or as one of the incredible leaders who secured a woman's right to choose in our State but also as someone who you could always count on to stand up for what is right.

She was born in Maine, and she grew up in Arizona. Since childhood, Sue had an appreciation for public service and engagement. Her father was actively involved in Maine politics, and his activism sparked Sue's interest in public service. From a young age, she was inspired by female political leaders, and she was also inspired by Senator Margaret Chase Smith, one of her childhood role models.

Sue moved to Reno in 1969 with her husband Peter and their two kids Kirk and Kristina. It is there where her political career began. In 1975, she was elected to the Nevada State Assembly, and she served in the assembly until 1980, when she successfully ran for the Nevada State Senate, where she stayed for another 9 years. In 1990, Sue made history as the first woman to be elected Lieutenant Governor in the Silver State.

During her political career, Sue supported many causes, including safe houses for abused women, prison system reform, and governmental accountability. She was also a driving force behind the creation of the Nevada Commission on Ethics and the marriage license fee to fund shelters and strengthen safety services for domestic violence survivors.

She was especially a champion of women's rights. She fought for a woman's right to serve in public office. She worked to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, and, most notably, she was instrumental in the success of a 1990 referendum in the State of Nevada that helped codify abortion rights into law.

She was one of the strongest women I knew. She overcame and survived several personal tragedies. Just months before her election to the Nevada State Senate, her husband Peter died in a plane crash, leaving her a single mother of two kids.

And during her 1990 campaign for Lieutenant Governor, she herself was in a plane crash, leaving her with severe injuries to her back and neck. Despite her misfortune, Sue was resilient and continued to serve Nevadans and lead with grit and integrity.

Sue's contributions to Nevada weren't limited to her political career. In 1981, she established a memorial endowment at the Desert Research Institute in Reno, where her husband had been an atmospheric physicist. Through that endowment and her own work as a member of the DRI staff for nearly a decade, Sue created opportunities for women in science and fought for funding for environmental studies.

She was appointed to the Nevada Gaming Commission in 1997, where she served for 12 years. She also served as the associate director of the Great Basin Policy Research Center at the University of Nevada, Reno.

Throughout her career and lifetime, Sue was an advocate for women's rights and for domestic violence survivors. She increased public and higher education funding, environmental conservation, protections for at-risk children, and, yes, increased governmental accountability.

Sue had a career to be proud of. She blazed trails that will be her legacy and was beloved by all who knew her.

I am honored to have learned from her and to be able to call her as a friend and mentor. She empowered me and so many others to become champions for Nevada. I will always be grateful for her friendship, her inspiration, and the decades of service that she gave to Nevada. Her life and legacy have not only left a lasting impression on me but the entire State.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Sue Wagner and her remarkable legacy.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I don't have to stand here and tell Nevadans that energy prices are high. They see it every day at the gas pump and on their electricity bill statements.

In the United States, the average residential energy bill in 2025 was about 30 percent higher than it was in 2021, but the Trump administration seems insistent on making it even harder for working families to afford their energy bills.

Overseas, President Trump's war with Iran is causing oil prices to shoot through the roof, resulting in high costs for Americans at the gas pump.

Add to that this administration's war on clean energy. Specifically, President Trump's IRS recently submitted a rule that makes it harder for wind and solar energy companies to claim a vital tax credit. This rule makes it more expensive to build America's clean energy future, makes it harder for the United States to meet the increased demand for electricity in this country, and will lead to higher energy prices for working families.

But the Senate has the power to do something about this misguided tax policy. That is why today I am leading an effort with my colleagues to pass this Congressional Review Act to overturn this IRS damaging rule.

The clean energy industry is producing some of the fastest growing and most cost-effective new power across the world. We need industries like solar and wind that will help us meet growing demand. It will create jobs--good-paying union jobs--and it will bring down energy costs for American families. It is obvious we should be embracing clean energy and investing in it, but instead, we have seen President Trump do just the opposite by passing regulations that are killing clean energy jobs in the United States.

We know the President's tax law--the so-called Big Beautiful Bill-- gives tax breaks to the President's wealthiest friends at the expense of hard-working Americans. It is actually blowing up our national debt by $4 trillion. It is cutting $1 trillion from Medicaid and kicking an estimated 16 million Americans off of their healthcare. What people may not know is that it also decreased incentives for solar and wind companies that are helping keep energy prices down for hard-working American families.

While the Democrats' Inflation Reduction Act that we passed expanded tax credits for clean energy projects, created jobs, and put us on a future of lowering energy costs for families, President Trump gutted them. That alone is estimated--what he has done is estimated to increase electricity prices by up to 18 percent.

The President's tax bill shortened the timeline for when solar and wind companies can claim these tax credits. He did it because he wants to phase them out. He wants to phase them out in favor of fossil fuel. He wants to pick winners and losers.

You know, the only losers in this country because of the picking and choosing of this administration of winners and losers is the American public and these companies.

If these companies want to claim these clean energy production and clean electricity investment tax credits now, they must begin construction on the projects by July 4, 2026--this year. This year, they have to begin construction. If they begin construction after that date, they don't get this tax credit. That was in the Big Beautiful Bill.

Here is where the problem gets worse. To pass his Big Beautiful Bill out of the House, President Trump made a deal with the far-right Republicans in the House to use the IRS to further diminish the solar and wind projects because he just hates them.

Last August, the IRS proposed a new rule to completely change an established standard for what it means to begin construction under the IRS Code on these solar and wind projects.

Now, remember, since 2013, the standard for what was considered beginning of construction included two of the following: You either had continuous physical work on or off the job site as beginning construction or you had a project in which 5 percent of the total costs had been spent, and they called this kind of a safe harbor.

What the new IRS guidance rule does is revoke that second prong. It revokes the longstanding 5 percent safe harbor. What does this mean?

This rule, keep in mind now, is only for solar and wind. Again, this President is picking winners and losers. He doesn't like solar or wind. So this IRS guidance only applies to solar and wind, not for other energy projects.

It is going to have a huge impact in Nevada, where we have solar year-round, and it is going to have a huge impact across the country. Solar and wind projects were already scrambling to stay eligible for the tax credits they rely on after Trump passed his bill, but with the new IRS rule, companies will have to delay their projects or halt them altogether.

This harmful new rule will potentially eliminate thousands of jobs, it will drive up electricity bills for American families, and it will risk power for millions of homes in Nevada and across the country.

It is clear that this action is yet another attempt by this administration to strangle the types of energy that the President personally does not like.

Demand for electricity is higher now more than ever, and we need to prepare for an electrification future that is going to bring us emerging technologies like AI, and we need solar and wind as part of that generation.

That is why I stand before you today and ask my colleagues to join me to revoke this IRS rule. I can't stress this enough. If we as a Congress want to prepare for the future and have the energy needs that we demand as a country, we have to include solar and wind, we have to include clean energy. What this IRS rule does is just the opposite.

So I hope my colleagues will join me in passing this resolution.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 363, S.J. Res. 107.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. President, I rise to join my Democratic colleagues today in opposition to the SAVE America Act, which is really just President Trump's and Republican leadership's shameful and disingenuous attempt to interfere with our elections and make it harder for American citizens to vote.

Republican leadership has given two reasons why they want to pass this bill. I have been listening to the floor debates. I have been talking to some of my colleagues, and I want to address some of the arguments on the other side that I have heard because they are just not true.

The first is that illegal immigrants are voting in our elections, and that is why we need the SAVE America Act. The second is that it is just common sense that this is just a voter ID bill, and that is all we need. Now, I am going to break down these two things.

I want to make it very clear from the outset, this bill is not just a voter ID bill. This is not a voter ID bill. This is voter suppression at its worst. I want people to keep that in mind.

Let me jump to the first argument.

I want to make something very clear: The United States of America has the most safe and secure elections in the world. It has been proven over and over again, including in my State in Nevada.

I know. I served as Nevada's attorney general for two terms. That is 8 years. And I helped prosecute voter fraud. In fact, I was part of an election fraud task force in my State, with the secretary of state and our Federal law enforcement, the FBI, every election season.

In those 8 years, I can count on two hands how many cases of voter fraud we found, and they were all prosecuted.

Now, Democrats don't oppose this bill because it would stop noncitizens from voting. In fact, we completely agree that noncitizens should not be voting. That is why it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote and why every State has a process to ensure people who register to vote are citizens.

The bill that we are talking about today is a solution in search of a problem that does not exist. As you have heard my colleagues say, the conservative Heritage Foundation has a database of noncitizens voting that shows there have only been 77 cases between the years 1999 and 2023--77 cases in 25 years of noncitizens voting.

And why do we know that? Because they were caught and prosecuted. And for each one of those individuals, they were held accountable by the authorities.

In Nevada--in Nevada--a local news investigation found that out of the more than 7 million votes cast in our elections in Nevada since 2008, the number of votes cast by noncitizens was exactly 2--not 2,000, not 200, 2.

So if you want more proof that this is a massively overblown problem, last year President Trump's own Justice Department opened an investigation over alleged voter fraud in Nevada during the 2020 Presidential election. President Trump lost the State of Nevada in that election by more than 33,000 votes that year. But what did President Trump's Department of Justice find?

Well, the investigation closed this January without a single charge of voter fraud. Now, I personally find it curious that there was no investigation in my State into fraud during the 2024 Presidential election, where President Trump won--only the election that he lost-- but so be it.

I am here to tell you we have the most safe and secure elections in the world, and noncitizens are not voting wholesale in them and out there running rampant. We know the data. And not only do we know the data, but we have it because they have been successfully investigated and prosecuted when, in the extremely rare cases, they are caught.

So that is the first argument that my colleagues are saying: There are so many noncitizens voting, and we need to solve it.

That is not true.

Here is the second argument. Republican leadership is saying that we need to pass the SAVE America Act because it is just a voter ID bill. It is just a voter ID bill, and everybody shows ID no matter what they do. You have to show ID to drive. This is the same thing.

Well, let me just tell you, this could not be further from the truth. The reason this bill is so outrageous is because it goes far beyond showing just a driver's license or voter ID when you vote. It is about voter suppression.

Here is how the SAVE America Act hurts our elections. One, it mandates that the Department of Homeland Security, a Federal Department, collect voters' personal information and store it in a Federal database that has a history of deleting eligible voters from the voter rolls for no reason. Two, this legislation makes U.S. citizens jump through unnecessary, burdensome, and sometimes impossible hoops when registering to vote. And three, it effectively ends widely popular methods of registering to vote to discourage Americans from making their voices heard in our elections, which is a constitutional right.

So let me break those down for you. First, the SAVE America Act would force States to turn over all their voter data to the Department of Homeland Security SAVE Program. This is a notoriously unreliable program designed to identify problem voters and then kick them off the voter rolls.

This program is not accurate. It is not effective, and it has already disenfranchised hundreds of perfectly eligible voters.

What does that mean? It means that Americans who have already been determined by their States to be citizens and who have potentially been voting in their States for years or even decades without an issue-- without an issue--could be removed by the Department of Homeland Security, flagged by the Department of Homeland Security for removal from their State's list of eligible voters. And when they show up to vote, on the day, where they have voted for so many years, at the same location where they have always gone, they will be turned away for no reason.

We are already seeing this happen. There are States that have entered into agreements with the Department of Homeland Security to give them access to their voters' private information. Nevada is not one. And we have evidence of American citizen voters being misidentified as noncitizens in those States.

If this bill goes into effect, who knows how many Americans are going to be kicked off the list of eligible voters of their State, only to show up on election day and be told they need to reregister and produce numerous documents proving they are citizens.

Let me take it one step further. The SAVE America Act mandates that States need to remove eligible voters off their list if they have not presented the documents mandated under the bill, under this legislation, to prove they are U.S. citizens.

Now, keep this in mind. I am going to walk you through this. You have been voting in your State for the last 30 years, 25 years, same location, your library, wherever you go, you are voting. All of a sudden you are being told by your State: Sorry, you were flagged by the Department of Homeland Security. You can't vote on the day of an election.

And now you say to yourself: OK. I don't understand this, but how do I reregister? What do I have to do? You now have to either have a passport or a birth certificate--a passport or a birth certificate--and you have to go in person now to reregister to vote.

Literally--literally--anybody because of the Department of Homeland Security having this data can be kicked off the voter rolls. It is a problem, and that is the first step for inhibiting and putting a barrier in front of people for their right to vote.

I am here to tell you this is the challenge of this bill and why Donald Trump and the Republicans are here. They are putting barriers in front of people to make it harder for them to vote. Why? Why?

It shouldn't be that way. This bill requires Americans registering or reregistering to vote to provide documents to prove you are a citizen, documents that thousands of Americans just don't have access to. If you are a victim of DHS's erroneous voter roll purge and need to reregister to vote or if you simply want to register to vote for the first time, this bill would require a document that confirms that you were born in the United States or that you are a naturalized citizen.

Does a driver's license alone do that? No. Neither does the REAL ID from my State and most States. That is not enough. Even presenting your birth certificate wouldn't be enough to prove citizenship. Americans would be required to present their birth certificate and a valid government-issued photo ID card, like a driver's license.

Now, a passport would be enough to prove citizenship, but half of Americans don't have a passport--half--and that is true in Nevada too. Roughly, 56 percent of Nevadans--56 percent of Nevadans--have a passport. That means nearly half of the people in my State would have to have their birth certificate or other documentary proof of citizenship on hand.

And if they wanted to get a passport, it would cost $165. That is not an amount most Nevadans can shell out, especially with prices so high these days.

I hope, if you are one of the 146 million Americans who doesn't have an up-to-date passport, that you have your birth certificate and another government-issued photo ID readily available.

But if you are among the 21 million Americans who don't, maybe because they don't drive or they simply don't have a birth certificate, then Republicans who support this bill want to tell you that you can't register to vote.

Now, let's dive into this part of the bill a little bit more. The documentary proof of citizenship required under this bill is just simply nonsensical. For example, let's say you are a Native American; you show up to an election office ready to register to vote. They have their Tribal ID in tow. That wouldn't be enough for them. That Tribal ID would have to be an enhanced version issued by the Department of Homeland Security, which most Tribal members don't have or, if their Tribal ID was issued by their Tribe, it would have to display that they were born in the United States, which many don't.

Let me give you another example. Say you are a servicemember in our military and you take your military identification card to register to vote, but under this bill, unless you have also presented your U.S. military record of service showing you were born in the United States or your birth certificate, you don't have the proper documentation. These restrictive portions of the bill would create barriers for all kinds of eligible Americans looking to follow the rules and just to register to vote so they can exercise their constitutional right.

Keep in mind, this is not just for new voters registering for the first time. If you have to update your registration and your name doesn't match the documents that you present, this bill would make you take additional steps to prove your citizenship.

For example, if you are 1 of the 69 million married women who has changed your last name, but you don't have an up-to-date passport and you are updating your registration to vote because you moved, you might have to go through this onerous process just to prove who you are. If your name doesn't match in all of the documentation you provided, you would have to provide more documents or sign an affidavit just to vote.

If you can't get all that done, sorry, you don't get to vote. That is what President Trump and Republican leadership want. Americans' right to vote is guaranteed by the Constitution. We should not be making it harder for Americans to participate in our elections. It is bad enough that this bill has an unnecessary documentary proof of citizenship requirement, what is even worse is that if you want to register to vote, you have to present that proof of citizenship in person.

That means nobody would be able to register to vote online or by mail. Think about the implications of this. Voter registration drives that encourage Americans to participate in our elections would grind to a halt. That would impact Black and Latino voters the most as well as those who didn't graduate from high school. Those groups are most likely to rely on third-party voter registration.

Many citizens in Nevada register to vote at our DMV. If you think the lines are long at the DMV now, just think of the chaos and confusion that this legislation would require.

And if you live in a rural area, like many Nevadans, and your nearest county clerk's office is hours away, you have to figure out how to get there in order to register to vote.

Nevada only has two urban counties, Clark, where Las Vegas is, and Washoe County, where Reno is. There are 15 counties in Nevada that are entirely rural, and they have about 240,000 active registered voters in them.

If you are a rural Nevadan and you have to register to vote or update your registration, Republicans who support this bill want you to spend a day off of work trying to do it. It is just cruel.

Let me give you an example. In Nye County, NV, someone who lives on or near Duckwater Reservation would have to travel roughly 270 miles round trip to show an election official at the Nye County clerk's office their proof of citizenship.

Now, that is one of the longest roundtrip journeys across the country to register to vote, and this is in one State. It is no wonder that in 2022, only 5.9 percent of Americans registered to vote in person.

Why? Because it is inconvenient. It is unnecessary when we have already proven, effective safeguards in place to ensure you are who you are, when you say you are, when you get there to register to vote.

But this bill would force all Americans to take that burden on if they want to exercise their constitutional right to vote, and it is just absurd. Not to mention, if it were to pass, this legislation, the bill, would go into effect immediately--immediately--without giving States any additional resources to implement these complex provisions.

Most bills that significantly alter our systems give plenty of time to ensure smooth transition into the new system but not this bill. President Trump and the Republican leadership want to make sure it is done in time for the upcoming midterms because they are afraid of what American voters, using their voices to speak out against them, would say and how they would vote.

We all know why Republican leadership wants to pass this bill. They want to pass it badly because they think that they will lose this election in this midterm because their current policies are extremely unpopular with Americans.

Raising costs in this country instead of lowering them, kicking millions of Americans off their healthcare, and starting an unauthorized war with no exit strategy, that is an awful record for Donald Trump's Republican Party. And through our elections, Americans have a chance to make their opposition to his policies heard at the ballot box. Trump's Republican Party is trying to prevent them from voting, trying to choke off American votes in a desperate bid to stay in power.

This bill goes beyond bad faith; it is just vile. Instead of trying to make Americans' lives better and passing legislation people actually want, instead of supporting our democracy, our Constitution, President Trump's Republican Party and followers now want to pass this bill and make it extremely difficult for millions of Americans to exercise their right to vote.

Why? Because President Trump is afraid of being held accountable by the American people.

The SAVE America Act would require States to turn over voter information to the Department of Homeland Security. It would kick millions of eligible voters off the rolls. It would make it infinitely harder for Americans to register to vote, and it would cause chaos in our States.

It wouldn't solve a single problem, especially not the ones President Trump and the Republican leaders pretend exist, just the opposite. It would create huge problems for our elections in every State across the country, resulting in voter suppression.

Nevadans and all Americans deserve better than this cowardly bill from Republicans trying to run from the issues they created for themselves.

That is why my Democratic colleagues and I will not let it pass.