Floor Statements

I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I ask that further reading be dispensed with.

Mr. President, I am introducing a motion to recommit stating that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting rescission cannot advance if it impacts public safety.

For years, public broadcasting has been essential to keeping Americans informed during severe weather and environment threats and broader public safety situations. Let me give you an example from my home State. As the Davis wildfire raged in Northern Nevada last summer, the local CBS affiliate lost their transmitter in the fire. But thanks to public broadcasting services, CBS was able to air their local newscast and keep Nevadans informed about evacuations, the path of the fire, and safety measures.

Public broadcasting stations also work with law enforcement to get information out related to abducted children, missing seniors, and major acts of violence.

Now is not the time to claw back funding that this body has already approved for public broadcasting's emergency alert system. I urge my colleagues who care about keeping America safe to support this motion.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

Madam President, the World Series of Poker is currently underway in my hometown of Las Vegas, NV, where tens of thousands of Americans have converged around one of the largest and most prestigious gaming events across the globe.

This world-renowned tournament and the visitors who flock to Nevada to witness it help drive my State's economy. Anyone who has ever heard of Las Vegas knows that our gaming industry is a massive contributor to our State's GDP. Unfortunately, tucked into the Republicans' tax bill was a provision that puts the industry at risk not just in Nevada but across the country.

Until last week, the law of the land was that gamblers could deduct 100 percent of their losses from their annual taxes. For example, if a gambler won $500,000 and lost $500,000 in a year, that gambler would be able to deduct $500,000 from their taxes and break even. But under the new law that was recently passed by the Republicans and signed into law by the President, gamblers will only be able to deduct 90 percent of their losses on their annual taxes; so that same taxpayer would now have $50,000 in taxable income even though they lost everything they won that year. They would literally be paying taxes on money they don't have.

This makes no sense, and it will do irreparable harm to our country's gaming industry if it takes effect, especially in Nevada. It will disincentivize professional gamblers, like players at the World Series of Poker, from doing what they do best and contributing to our economy. It will move major events that drive our economy offshore and push wagering into illegal markets, and it could punish tourists who come to Vegas to win big.

Let me be clear: The Republican tax bill is full of provisions that are bad for

Nevada and this country. That is why I didn't vote for it. And while it will take years to undo the damage that bill will cause, this ridiculous gaming tax is something we can fix today. That is largely because this provision being included in that tax bill was as a result of Republicans haphazardly inventing new budget rules to ram their debt-busting bill through Congress. These new rules they made up forced them to make changes to existing policy even if it made that policy worse for Americans. And that is what happened here.

Nobody thinks this is a good idea, and I am not sure many of my Republican colleagues even knew this was in the bill that they passed. So I am proposing a simple solution, which is a return to the previous policy. My legislation would allow taxpayers to once again deduct 100 percent of their losses from their yearly taxes. We must make this fix. Nevadans take pride in our gaming industry, and the current law could cause serious damage to my State and to our country as a whole.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII and as if in legislative session, the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of S. 2230 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration. I further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Madam President, I have to say, it is a shame that we cannot pass this commonsense fix, S. 2230, because the Republicans want to weigh it down with unrelated measures that they voted to support.

I appreciate my colleague from Indiana, and I hope we can work together, because I know he supports S. 2230, to try to get this passed and fix this. This is something that--my understanding is--many Republicans, along with Democrats, did not even know was part of that process. And now I hope we can. But I hope it doesn't get caught in this constant churn now that Republicans, when they vote for a bill, they are trying to undo some of those votes because of things they didn't like in the bill. If they didn't like it, they should have voted against the bill.

It really is doing a disservice to so many across the country. It is not just a unique thing for Nevada. This is gaming. Gaming exists across the country, almost in every State. There are so many people who are going to be impacted by this, and it just does not make sense. This is a Republican piece of legislation that is actually causing people to pay taxes on money they lost. It makes no sense.

That is all this is. It is trying to fix it and put us back to the status quo.

I will say this--and, again, I really appreciate my colleague from Indiana, but the Byrd process is not partisan. It is a Senate process we have. It is a bipartisan process. Democrats have used it in the past. Republicans have used it in the past. It is a Senate process that is part of the procedure that we have here.

If--if--my colleagues wanted to protect qualified religious institutions' exemption, they shouldn't have put it in the bill they passed or they should have introduced an amendment to knock it out. They should have done something to show that they were there.

I am hopeful this legislation that I am trying to pass on behalf of so many--so many--across this country, Americans, that it does not now get caught up in a Republican loop of trying to protect the very provisions that they voted to support in that Republican ``Big Betrayal Bill.''

I am disappointed, but I am not done. And I can promise you this: We will continue to work to try to get S. 2230 passed. It is just common sense, and it has bipartisan support here in the Senate.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, right now, this administration is causing so much chaos and confusion that it is sometimes hard to take stock of the damage being done.

But the anniversary of the day today, for Roe v. Wade when it was overturned, is a reminder that we can't let all of that chaos distract us from the work being done to roll back women's reproductive rights right under our noses.

I have to thank my colleague from Delaware Lisa Blunt Rochester and all of my colleagues today for really bringing attention and focus to the important work we do as Senators but really highlighting the impact that decisions made by some of our colleagues, including those in the White House, are having a devastating impact across this country on women and women's healthcare rights.

One of the things that is happening right now is this Republican tax bill that they are trying to force through Congress right now. This tax bill essentially guts reproductive healthcare in this country. The Republicans' billionaire tax giveaway bill, as we know it, is a bill that will cut $800 billion in Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. But the legislation that passed the House would also decimate women's healthcare. Not only would it force cuts to critical services in this country, but it also cuts off Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood.

That Medicaid funding wouldn't be going toward abortions. Planned Parenthood providers distribute birth control, conduct wellness exams, test for and treat STIs, and provide lifesaving cancer screenings.

For many Americans with Medicaid, especially in underserved areas, Planned Parenthood is the only accessible source of this care. Defunding it, which is what the Republicans want to do in this reconciliation bill, jeopardizes basic healthcare services that more than 1 million men and women rely on.

It is already outrageous that so many Planned Parenthood health centers in anti-choice States around the country have been forced to close over the last several years, but if they are prohibited from treating patients with Medicaid nationwide, many clinics--even in States where abortion remains legal, like my State in Nevada--may be forced to close their doors.

In States like mine, where women have access to essential reproductive care, Republicans are working to strip that access away, ignoring the will of States like Nevada that have chosen to protect these rights.

Republican legislators in States across the country are also quietly working to gut access to reproductive care. Last November, voters in seven different States approved ballot measures to protect or expand reproductive rights. But in the months since, extremist politicians in more than half of those States have tried to ignore the will of their voters and push new restrictions on abortion access.

And in several other States, anti-choice politicians are working to block similar ballot initiatives in the future. They are trying to ignore what people have clearly voted for, and then they are trying to make it so people can't actually vote on those issues at all--because let's be clear, for anti-choice politicians, this is about controlling women.

Let me give you an example. In Arizona, voters went to the polls last November and overwhelmingly chose to enshrine abortion protections in their State constitution. But since then, Republican politicians, in their State legislature, have been trying to pass bills that would limit the use of medication abortion and ban doctors from even informing women about abortion as a potential treatment option.

Or how about Missouri, where anti-choice politicians are trying to get a measure on the ballot that would overturn the abortion rights protections Missouri voters just approved last November?

These plots to subvert the will of voters and roll back women's rights in the States may not be capturing everyone's attention right now, but it is happening. We need to shed light on it because it is just as dangerous as some of the harmful policies coming out of this administration.

We can't forget that this administration is also taking steps to take away women's reproductive rights without any input from legislators at all.

The Food and Drug Administration has appointed commissioners who want to reexamine the safety of the abortion pill, mifepristone. And, no surprise, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is encouraging it. He has already asked the FDA to ``review the latest data on mifepristone.''

Secretary Kennedy is raising questions and injecting doubt about this medication that has already been proven to be safe and effective over the years. This is a man who, at one time, said he believed it was ``always the woman's right to choose.''

Mifepristone accounts for over 60 percent of abortions nationwide. Any attempts to restrict access to this medication would jeopardize the health and autonomy of women in Nevada and across the country. This is an overt tactic by the administration to continue to take away access to the abortion pill nationwide.

In fact, the Trump administration made it more clear than ever that they are not concerned about women's safety when they eliminated guidance that hospitals have to provide abortions in emergency situations.

We have a law in this country that hospitals that receive Federal funding are required to provide medical care to stabilize a health emergency, including for pregnant patients. In cases where an abortion is necessary to stabilize a patient, hospitals are obligated to provide that care. It is called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act--or EMTALA, as many people know it.

I want to stress that EMTALA is the law of the land, and emergency abortion care is protected under EMTALA. But the problem is that this administration is telling women they are unwilling to enforce these protections. That is incredibly dangerous, and it ignores the laws.

It might not be front-page news every day, but when you take all of these actions together, it is clear that this administration and Republicans at every level of government are taking the steps they need to implement a nationwide abortion ban.

We have to remain vigilant and demand changes when these harmful policies emerge because we know that anti-choice politicians all across the country, including here in Washington, will continue to push them and take away women's access to healthcare.

It is happening at the Supreme Court, too, where the Justices who struck down Roe v. Wade are taking up multiple abortion rights cases.

So as we mark the anniversary of the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which took the constitutional right to an abortion away from every woman in this country, I want to thank my colleagues who are standing strong and standing with me today and every day in this fight.

We will never stop pushing back against this administration's--and any other anti-choice politician's--attempts to make women second-class citizens in America.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be discharged from further consideration of the following bills en bloc: S. 154; S. 282; S. 356; S. 1112; and H.R. 2215; further, that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of the following bills en bloc: S. 154; S. 282; S. 356; S. 1112; H.R. 42, which was received from the House and is at the desk; H.R. 43, which was received from the House and is at the desk; H.R. 618, which was received from the House and is at the desk; and H.R. 2215.

I ask unanimous consent that the bills be considered read a third time en bloc.

I know of no further debate on the bills en bloc.

Finally, I ask unanimous consent that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, all en bloc.

Mr. President, we just passed a bipartisan package of bills. Some of them were passed by the Senate in the last Congress, and recently some of them were passed by the House.

The package includes one of my pieces of legislation which was needed in Nevada, which was H.R. 618, the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act. This bill will cut through redtape at the Apex Industrial Park in North Las Vegas and speed up the cumbersome and unnecessary permitting process for businesses looking to build or expand there. Here is how:

All Nevada developers know that the Federal Government owns more than 80 percent of the land in our State. That requires us to have this Federal partnership. Every time a company wants to develop a project on public land, they need a permit from the Bureau of Land Management. That process, as we all know, can take years, and in that time, we are losing out on economic growth and on new job creation. That is what is currently happening at the Apex Industrial Park in North Las Vegas.

APEX has over 7,000 acres of developable land where various companies are building new sites. That includes Air Liquide's largest hydrogen plant in the world, an 885,000 square foot distribution center for the grocery chain Smith's, and a 1 million square foot distribution center for the footwear company Crocs. The Smith's center is projected to add 250 jobs for Nevadans, while the Crocs center could create up to 1,200 jobs.

Unfortunately, because of an outdated permitting law, too many businesses that want to set up shop at APEX are bogged down by burdensome obstacles.

When the Apex Industrial site was created in 1989, Congress passed legislation to transfer Federal land to private ownership, but the Bureau of Land Management maintained control over large utility corridors that crisscrossed throughout the whole development. That means every business that wants to start constructing or even expand at APEX has to go through the complicated Federal permitting process if they want to access necessities like gas, power, sewage, access roads, and broadband lines across those BLM-controlled corridors.

In the initial law passed in 1989, Congress gave Clark County, NV, the authorization to speed up the permitting process, but since then, APEX's primary management has changed to the city of North Las Vegas and the Apex Industrial Park Owners Association as well. Unfortunately, these two entities don't have the authority to permit new pipelines, power connections, or roads for businesses and their facilities. That has caused delays that could last years.

That is why I am fighting to pass the Apex Area Technical Corrections Act. This bill will give the city of North Las Vegas and the Apex Industrial Park Owners Association the authority they need to issue permits and get new and existing businesses the utilities they need to operate.

This legislation cuts through unnecessary government obstacles and allows our businesses to grow at a sustainable pace. It is essential to ensure businesses can efficiently continue to build and expand in Nevada, including at the Apex Industrial Park, bring new jobs to North Las Vegas, and continue to strengthen our economy.

This bill has already passed through the House of Representatives, and I look forward to the President signing it into law soon.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, as I travel from Washington, DC, to participate in a congressional delegation focused on U.S. national security while debate on the GENIUS Act, S. 1582, continues, I rise today to expound on my support for this critical bill. This bill represents what the U.S. Senate can achieve when Republicans and Democrats collaborate in earnest. As lawmakers, we have the responsibility to build and improve upon laws that are no longer applicable to 21st century innovation. The GENIUS Act is an important first step that helps solidify the United States as a leader in shaping payments modernization. We must maintain this ongoing effort to ensure digital assets grow and evolve in a safe and sound manner that not only protects national security but also the people engaging these technologies.

The current iteration of the GENIUS Act is distinctly different from the text that was originally introduced because of bipartisan negotiations. The version being considered includes a change in section 7(B) that I introduced during the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs legislative hearing on March 13, 2025. This change ensures payment stablecoin issuers can only issue, redeem, and manage reserves to back their stablecoins and prevents issuers from engaging in speculative and high-risk ventures that could increase the likelihood of a failure.

Furthermore, while the GENIUS Act provides a roadmap for more robust Federal consumer protections, I support the preservation of State consumer protection laws in the bill. As the former Attorney General of Nevada, I have always been a strong advocate for preserving a State's authority to act in the best interest of its residents. This goal is accomplished through the negotiated savings clause in section 7(f)(4) which solidifies congressional intent to preserve State consumer protection law through the bill.

The GENIUS Act is not the end of Congress's work to bolster national security, encourage innovation, and protect consumers in the emerging digital assets ecosystem. We must continue our work to further our ideals that have made the U.S. financial system the envy of the world.

Mr. President, first of all, let me thank the Democratic whip from Illinois. He has been steadfast and persistent in his fight for Dreamers in this country and has not given up and has been a critical and crucial voice not only for Dreamers but for the fight for passage of comprehensive immigration reform that puts Dreamers on a pathway to citizenship, and their families, and I thank him for that.

In 5 days, we will celebrate 13 years since President Obama created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, Program, which so many have been referring to. DACA has proven to be an overwhelming success, allowing Dreamers who have only ever known the United States as their home to continue contributing to our economy and our communities.

DACA protects immigrants who came to the United States as children from deportation, and it authorizes them to legally work.

Nevada and every State in the country has benefited from DACA. We are a better, stronger country because of this program.

In my State, in Nevada, nearly 136,000 U.S. citizens live with at least 1 family member who is undocumented. In Nevada, 10,730 people are DACA recipients. And we know, no matter what President Trump and others say, that our immigrant communities are a critical part of what makes our country great. I know that.

My grandfather is from Chihuahua, across the border, served in our military, and became a U.S. citizen.

The Dreamers I know in my community have gone to college, they have become a part of our workforce, they pay millions of dollars in taxes, and they are woven into the fabric of every community in Nevada and, I will say, across this country. Dreamers contribute $810 million each year to our economy in Nevada alone.

They love this country, and it is their home.

As we celebrate the 13th anniversary of DACA, we must remember that the young people who became the first DACA recipients are now in their thirties and forties. They have the responsibilities that all American adults have: maintaining their careers, caring for elderly relatives, paying bills and mortgages, and, yes, putting food on the table for their families. But their ability to remain in the only home they have ever known is in jeopardy thanks to this administration's threats to end DACA.

President Trump tried to terminate DACA entirely in his first term, but he

was stopped by the courts. Now immigrant families across the country are once again bracing for their lives to be turned upside down on any given day because of the threats of mass deportation and further attacks on the program.

I can't even imagine how exhausting it must be to spend so many years in fear and limbo--especially for Dreamers who have done everything right, who know this country as their only home, who want to be the future leaders, who want to be part of our communities, who want to be our doctors and our teachers, and to know that they are always concerned about that opportunity for their future.

They have, for the last 13 years, been met with endless delays and politics and people playing with their lives for some sort of political gain. Not only that, but immigrant communities, as you have heard the minority whip say, are being demonized, and they are facing threats because of politicians stoking hate and division in our communities. People who have lived here their whole lives and contribute to our country are now being told by those politicians that they do not belong.

Here is the other thing: I know that in my State, they are being demonized and called out by these politicians as criminals and drug traffickers and rapists. Well, I invite any of those politicians to come into my State and meet with my Dreamers.

I challenge anyone in this country who knows these families and knows these Dreamers to stand by them because right now, they are under attack. And it is something that is not happening out of sight or behind closed doors; it is happening in our neighborhoods every single day.

These Dreamers have families who are a crucial part of our communities. You know them. We know them. They have families. Many of them have spouses and children who are U.S. citizens. They just want to be able to live normal lives and contribute and continue to pay taxes and be a part of our jobs and our economy and expanding this economy and this country.

I will tell you, over the years, my office has received stacks of letters from Nevadans who have been impacted by DACA about the importance of the program for them and their families. I want to share just a couple of those stories and those letters with you.

I received a letter from a 10-year-old girl who was born in North Las Vegas. Her father is a Dreamer who has lived in the United States since he was 7 years old.

Her father always dreamed of becoming a doctor, but for much of his career, he was denied opportunity after opportunity. But that changed when he became a recipient of DACA. He was able to get a good job, buy a home for his family, and give his kids a better life.

But every day, his daughter lives in fear that her father, who has worked hard in America all his life, could get deported back to Mexico and that she and her siblings would have to live in a country whose language they don't even speak.

She said:

I would love for the government to see that my daddy and

all Dreamers like him only want to be good citizens and have

a better future.

She hopes to be a pediatrician one day and serve her community just like her dad always dreamed.

The second letter I want to share with you I received from a young woman whose parents brought her to Nevada when she was just 2 years old. When she turned 18, she was excited to start working so that she could earn a living for herself, but as an undocumented Dreamer without a Social Security number, she couldn't apply for the jobs her peers were getting.

She said:

I am as much a citizen as them. I can do all that they are

able to do. I have witnessed several individuals around my

age waste their potential. They have everything they could

possibly receive and choose not to take advantage [of it].

I will tell you Dreamers jump at every opportunity to create a better life for themselves than their parents had. I will tell you these Dreamers do not run afoul of the law. I will tell you these Dreamers do everything they possibly can to prove why they want to live here and be a crucial part of our communities, but all the while, they live in fear that their families could be torn apart by our broken immigration system that we have an obligation to fix.

DACA has been an essential way to provide stability for the Dreamers and their families, but right now in my State and across the country, Dreamers haven't been able to apply for new DACA protections. Nearly half of Nevada's Dreamers are eligible for DACA, but unfortunately thousands of Dreamers in my State are currently vulnerable because this administration is refusing to accept their DACA applications.

Now it is in direct defiance of a court order. As of March of this year, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Trump administration must start accepting new DACA applications because that is the law, but months have gone by, and we have not seen any progress.

Yesterday--yesterday--my staff learned for the first time that one single new application had been processed and accepted--just one. Well, while one is better than zero, I will say this administration has a lot of work to do to follow the law and accept more applicants into the DACA Program.

I am so pleased my colleagues and I are here today to keep the pressure on, to make sure this administration follows the law but also to appeal to our Republican colleagues. It is time we come together and work together to put Dreamers and their families on a pathway to citizenship. These Dreamers are as American in their hearts as you and I. Our country is better with them in it. As we celebrate the 13th anniversary of DACA, I remain committed to working with anyone-- anyone--who is willing to protect them and do the same.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I am joining my colleagues today to speak in opposition to the Republicans' catastrophic budget bill that will end healthcare coverage for millions of American families so that President Trump can orchestrate the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and the working class to the ultrarich that we have ever seen in this country.

This bill has nearly $1 trillion in healthcare cuts, including over $800 billion in Medicaid cuts. In total, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that this bill would not only add $2.4 trillion to our national deficit, but it also kicks 16 million Americans off of their health insurance in the next 10 years. In Nevada, that means about 95,271 people will lose their healthcare and 66,571 will be kicked off of Medicaid.

These numbers alone should at least give my Republican colleagues pause, make them think about how devastating this bill would be for our working families, and maybe even reconsider moving forward with trying to ram it through Congress.

But there is more to this than just these big numbers, and it needs to be brought to light. I was just home in Nevada meeting with Nevadans, hospitals, and providers. With the Medicaid cuts they are anticipating from this billionaire tax giveaway, hospitals are bracing themselves not just for coverage losses but for the downstream impact on care and costs. This is going to affect our most vulnerable populations in Nevada--seniors, children, veterans, parents of children with rare diseases, pregnant women, and our elderly in nursing homes.

When people lose coverage, they delay their care. A single mom who is living paycheck to paycheck and is worried about putting food on the table for her kids is not going to go to the doctor if she has a persistent cough; she will wait. But that means that when her cough turns serious, making it harder for her to breathe, she will have to go to the emergency room for treatment. By then, it is more dangerous for her and more expensive for everyone involved. The hospital she goes to has to treat her regardless of whether or not she has health insurance. If she can't pay, the hospital is on the hook for the cost of her care.

Now, if you are in a rural or underserved area, of which we have many in Nevada and across the country, and the one hospital for miles can't afford to keep those doors open, it may scale back or close altogether. The hospital staff has to choose which services to cut. Labor and delivery? Mental health care? Trauma units? These are services entire communities rely on. Or will they be forced to close entirely if they can't make up the cost?

In rural Nevada, people sometimes have to drive 2, 3, 4 hours to see their doctor. A hospital closure would be devastating for rural families trying to access even basic care. That is the danger we are facing with this bill.

This isn't just about Medicaid patients. As providers look to cover the cost of treating more uninsured patients, those expenses will shift to everyone, to working families and to employers, and premiums and out-of-pocket costs will soar--all so that this President and Republicans can pay for tax cuts for billionaires.

You know, this is also going to impact Nevadans who rely on the Affordable Care Act for their medical insurance. Republicans, in their bill, cut almost $300 billion from the ACA marketplace plans, and that would kick

about 29,000 Nevada small business owners, middle-class families, and legal immigrants, like Dreamers, off their healthcare. It would also increase Medicare premiums for over 1 million seniors, and it could end healthcare coverage for 1.5 million children. These are real people who are going to lose their coverage as a result of this bill.

This impact would be lasting. This bill is so expensive that it would force Congress to make even more Medicare cuts in the future. For those who don't immediately get kicked off their health insurance as a result of cuts to Medicaid, my Republican colleagues want to implement burdensome work reporting requirements so they can take away coverage from even more Americans to pay for those billionaire tax cuts.

In Nevada, over 67 percent of Medicaid recipients are already working, but if this bill passes, those working families will have to jump through even more government reporting hoops to prove they work. We know from States that have tried this--like Arkansas--that people lost Medicaid not because they didn't meet the requirements but because they couldn't keep up with the redtape.

Think about this: People working who already have access to Medicaid--they are making it harder for them to get it, which means that if you lose your Medicaid, your insurance, there is a possibility that if your health gets worse, you are going to lose your job. We are going backwards.

This bill has complex paperwork, frequent deadlines, and little flexibility to the everyday lives of hard-working mothers, veterans, and families across the country. And why again? Because the Republicans' goal is to take Medicaid away from as many people as possible so that they can find revenue to pay for the tax cuts for billionaires.

Think about what I said at the beginning: It is the biggest shift-- shift--in our country of wealth from the poor and the working class to the billionaire class. Instead of making the billionaires pay for this, they are taking it off the backs of the very people that are working in this country in the middle class, and they are preventing the poor from getting into the middle class, and they are making it harder for the middle class.

This is absolutely absurd, it is un-American, and we cannot--we cannot--accept this as our new normal. So my Democratic colleagues and I are going to continue to stand against this outrageous and dangerous bill because we know that the American public deserves better. Americans deserve a Congress that is helping to lift the poor into the middle class and helping the middle class have their lives be a little bit easier.

If we are talking about who should pay their fair share, well, I can guarantee you, if we polled Americans, they would say it is the billionaire class. The billionaire class should pay their fair share and not make it harder--not make it harder--for the poor and the working class just to get by and just to get through the day.

I yield the floor.

I ask for the yeas and nays.

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

Mr. President, this week is National Police Week. During this week, we rightfully honor the brave men and women who put their lives on the line every single day to keep our families safe.

For me, supporting law enforcement is personal. My husband is a retired law enforcement officer. I worked for years as a prosecutor, side by side with law enforcement in the State of Nevada and, quite honestly, here in Washington, DC.

I have seen firsthand the sacrifices our officers and their families make to keep our communities across the country safe. I also know how thinly stretched our police departments are across the country. Police departments are understaffed, and our officers are quite often overworked.

Compounding the staffing shortages, it is becoming more and more difficult for our police departments to recruit and retain qualified officers. Once those officers are recruited, police departments often struggle to find the resources to train them. When they suffer traumatic experiences in the line of duty, which also happens quite often, officers routinely don't get the mental health care they need. Police officers risk serious injury every day. Members of the communities working with them see the worst of the worst, and that is why the mental health and stress of the job takes its toll amongst even the strongest of our men and women in law enforcement.

I also know that small local police departments are the backbone of public safety for our rural, suburban, and our Tribal communities across the country. And they often face the greatest hurdles to accessing resources. There are Federal grant programs available for law enforcement agencies, many of which I personally fought to support, but they often require long and confusing applications to secure.

Let's face it, the thousands of police departments in small towns across the country that have fewer than 10 full-time officers simply do not have the capacity to keep their community safe and spend hours filling out burdensome grant paperwork.

Along with my colleague during National Police Week, Senator Grassley from Iowa and I have been working on legislation to support our law enforcement officers. It is called the Invest to Protect Act.

This bipartisan legislation would provide $250 million in funding through the community-oriented policing services or the COPS Grant Program that specifically is out to help law enforcement. This particular program would identify those law enforcement agencies with under 175 officers.

This funding could be used to support critical training, mental health recruitment, and retention measures. This training and grant funding would be essential in our rural, our Tribal, and our suburban communities.

That is why this legislation is so important and why it is bipartisan. This should never be a bipartisan issue. This particular piece of legislation that Chuck Grassley and I introduced--Senator Grassley--passed 5 years ago by unanimous consent--same piece of legislation. I am hopeful, working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, that we will pass this again--the sooner the better so that we can move this out of the Congress, get it to the President's desk for signature, and show our support for all law enforcement across this Nation, particularly at a time during National Police Week, when we are here to remember the ultimate sacrifice so many law enforcement officers have made across this country to keep our communities safe.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to recognize Elaine P. Wynn, who passed away on April 14, 2025.

Elaine was the driving force behind Wynn Resorts and a champion for Nevada. She will be greatly missed and will always be remembered for her influential business and philanthropic work that actually shaped the Southern Nevada community we know today.

Elaine was born in New York and grew up in Miami Beach, but it was Las Vegas where she found her longtime home, and it is Las Vegas that will carry on her legacy.

In 1967, Elaine moved to Las Vegas to be at the center of the gaming and entertainment industry and immediately jumped into the casino business. She cofounded both Mirage Resorts and Wynn Resorts and was instrumental in developing and designing the Mirage, Bellagio, Wynn, Encore, and other world-renowned resorts. She also wove the art, culture, and celebration of the human spirit into all the resorts she helped develop.

Elaine understood that Las Vegas was not just a destination; it was an experience and still is. Her influence on these resorts helped transform the city into the world's premier entertainment and hospitality destination. Let me just say that it was not lost on somebody who was born and raised there and watched as she transformed the Las Vegas Strip.

You know, while building her resort business, Elaine was committed to the Las Vegas community, particularly through her advocacy for education, arts, and employee well-being. She was always giving back to her city.

Elaine's work to improve children's lives through education included leadership roles at the local, State, and national levels. Elaine chaired the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Foundation from 1985 to 1991. She cochaired Nevada's Blue Ribbon Education Reform Task Force in 2011, and she served on the Nevada State Board of Education from 2012 to 2020, including as president in 2015 and 2017. She also served on the national board of Communities in Schools--an organization dedicated to encouraging children to stay in school--and was the founding chairman of Communities in Schools of Nevada.

Now, let me just say, as somebody who grew up in that community and just so respected Elaine Wynn, I was working in local government at the time and got a call from Elaine Wynn.

Now, when you get a call from Elaine Wynn, it is: Oh, my gosh, it is Ms. Wynn on the phone. I have to take this call.

I got this call to show up--well, not even show up, just be invited-- would I be willing to be invited to come to talk to her about Communities in Schools, about education in Nevada. This is how passionate she felt about education.

Oh, my gosh. I am excited. I am honored. I am willing to go there and talk to her.

So I walk in a room with other people. Elaine Wynn is there. But here is the thing: Not only was she--she has always been gracious and warm and welcoming, but she talked about Communities in Schools and introduced us to the staff who were running Communities in Schools in Southern Nevada.

I am bringing this up because the woman who ran Communities in Schools for Elaine Wynn is now one of our Congress Members, Susie Lee. She represents now a Las Vegas district in Congress. This is how far- reaching Elaine's networking connections are to Nevada and the people she impacted in such a positive way.

Elaine Wynn Elementary School is located in Las Vegas. It was named in dedication to her in 1991 because of her commitment to education in the State.

She also was a patron of the arts and just truly believed in arts' culture, humanity, and what it can be bring to community. President Obama named her a trustee of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in 2010, and she served as cochair of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from 2015 until her passing. She was one of the visionaries for arts in the community and helped establish and build the Las Vegas Museum of Art.

The ripples of her philanthropy extend further through the Elaine P. Wynn & Family Foundation, where Elaine was personally and actively involved. She will be remembered for her philanthropic spirit as well as her business ventures.

I am honored to have known her and to have seen her passion and her work firsthand in my hometown. She cared so deeply for our community. Whether it was education or the arts, she never missed an opportunity to lend a helping hand.

I also know, after talking with so many who worked with her, that Elaine also believed in doing the work now but recognizing succession, that once she is done for the day or once she is done with the work she started, others will follow.

She had a way of ending the day with her staff, and if you are from Las Vegas, you will appreciate this. She would go like this: ``Now it is your shift.''

The reason why she did that is because--if you have ever played the tables in Las Vegas, at a 21 table, every dealer, at the end of their shift, that is what they do, passing that shift on to the next one. Because she loved Las Vegas and believed in it, that was her way of telling her staff, people she worked with: I am done for now, but now it is your shift. Now it is your time to carry forward all the work we have done.

I can tell you, Nevada has lost a giant, and we are all going to miss her.

I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Elaine Wynn and her remarkable journey. Out of respect for her, I leave all of you with ``Now it is your shift.''

I yield the floor.

Madam President, listening to my colleagues, I am reflecting on last year, when President Trump was campaigning in--I want to say it was Bozeman, MT--and I remember he said: ``Starting on day one,'' in his administration, he said, ``we will end inflation and make America affordable again, to bring down the prices of all goods.'' That is what he said.

Well, it has been 100 days since he entered the White House, and here is what he has given us so far. His tariffs are increasing costs for the average family by more than $4,000 a year. He has slashed billions from programs that everyday Americans rely on, including $1 billion for mental health care services. He has directed Elon Musk and his unqualified, loyalist DOGE team to fire more than 121,000 Federal employees who deliver essential services, including everyone from firefighters who should be fighting the fires that happened in the West to scientists researching cures to deadly diseases.

Donald Trump is pushing House and Senate Republicans to rubberstamp a plan to cut nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid in order to give tax cuts to billionaires, and, on top of all of that, he has created endless chaos and uncertainty.

I can go on and on. That is just how much damage President Trump has caused to our country in his first 100 days in office. But I want to take some time to focus on the impact that his economic agenda is having on our small businesses.

I am from Nevada, where there are almost 300,000 small businesses. These are our mom-and-pop shops. They are entrepreneurs. They are the lifeblood of our economy and are part of the fabric of every community across this country. And it is these small businesses that are bearing the brunt of President Trump's destructive tariffs.

Now, don't get me wrong. I believe that targeted tariffs on our adversaries can be a useful tool to protect American jobs and our national security. But these blanket tariffs are just the opposite.

These last 2 weeks, while back home in Nevada, I got a firsthand account of what small businesses are dealing with because of these tariffs. I have heard concerns and visited with three small business owners in Las Vegas: Juanny, Santy, and Kristen--separate business owners. All three of these are women-owned shops that serve specialty drinks and incredible foods to Nevadans, from coffee and boba to tacos.

In Vegas, as you may know, travel and tourism are the backbone of our economy. When people come to Las Vegas, they don't just visit the Strip. They go to Chinatown. They go to the Arts District and all over the valley to patronize our small businesses. For many businessowners like Juanny, like Santy, and like Kristen, their margins are already razor-thin, and tourism is key to meeting their bottom line. But because of President Trump's blanket tariffs, we are already seeing a decline in visitors coming to Las Vegas.

Whether people are staying home because they don't have the room in their budgets for a vacation or international tourists are choosing other destinations, Trump's economic agenda is threatening to crater our $2 trillion tourism economy. That hurts small businesses.

And when they can't keep up because costs are rising because they have fewer patrons or because of the higher cost of importing their supplies, these small businesses are forced to raise their prices. They don't want to have to, but they are forced to raise prices and pass the burden on to customers, everyday Americans. It is just unsustainable.

The same sentiment is echoed in the northern part of our State. In Reno, I spoke to Mark. He is a small coffee shop owner who is already asking himself how he can continue to navigate everyday operations amid this uncertainty. He doesn't want to have to pass higher costs onto his customers. But if Trump's erratic tariff agenda continues, he may have no choice.

Trump says Americans must accept short-term pain for long-term gain. But what is there to be gained if hard-working Nevadans have to close the doors of their businesses?

I think to myself: If it has only been 100 days, how much damage is he going to potentially cause in the next 100 days, in the 1,361 days left in his term?

It has been 100 days, and small businesses across the country may soon be faced with having to close up shop. I think about what is going to happen to my small business owners, the ones I just talked about: Juanny, Mark, Santy, Kristen, and the others. Will they make it through the rest of Trump's term? I don't have the answer.

But I hope, and I ask my Republican colleagues to join me in protecting these small businesses and families from these harmful tariffs.

If I am hearing it in my State, I know, my colleagues, you are all hearing it in your States as well. So if there is an opportunity to work together, please don't rubberstamp Donald Trump's harmful agenda. Let's work together so we are actually working on behalf of American families and ensuring that these small businesses can keep their doors open.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise to talk about President Trump's tariffs and how they are ruining confidence in our economy. They are raising prices on all of our families, and they are hitting our allies for no reason.

We all know that tariffs can be a useful tool to protect critical American manufacturing and combat our enemies. Targeted tariffs on adversaries like communist China or Iran can actually work to our advantage. And it is natural for us to have trade deficits with countries that have smaller economies because they just can't afford to pay for quality American goods. We are always going to buy more cheap goods from less wealthy countries than they are going to be able to buy from us. Even my Republican colleagues have acknowledged this.

This is why President Trump's blanket tariffs just make no sense. They have no legitimate economic basis. And the formula that he used to impose these blanket tariffs is nonsensical. We know this because President Trump has imposed tariffs on islands uninhabited by humans and on one of the United States' own military bases.

Probably the most egregious error in President Trump's tariff plan was punishing our allies, Israel and Ukraine. Both these countries are currently under attack. They need the United States to be standing with them, not hitting them with nonsensical tariffs that could cause them even more harm.

Meanwhile, our adversary and the initiator of the war in Ukraine-- Russia--is getting no tariffs. Our adversary North Korea is getting no tariffs. And while our ally Israel got slapped initially with a 17- percent tariff, even though we maintain a free-trade agreement with them, their adversary Iran got tariffed at a mere 10 percent.

I will admit, as I am sitting here right now, I just saw that Donald Trump changed his mind again and is telling countries around the world they now have to have a 10-percent tariff. He just made a major trade decision action via a tweet as I was sitting here to provide a stand with Israel and Ukraine.

Let me just say, those actions by this administration are just bad for our economy. It is outrageous, and it is bad for U.S. credibility. It is just clear there was very little thought put into President Trump's major, potentially catastrophic, gamble with the global economy. He did this without any advice and consent from Congress, and that was a mistake. It was a mistake that our allies in need of aid are paying the price for.

We have an opportunity to rectify a small part of this error right now and exempt Israel and Ukraine from these oppressive tariffs that could do significant damage to their already hurting economies.

Really, this shouldn't be a partisan issue. It is a national security issue. Let's come together and protect our allies who rely on our help from these harmful tariffs. I hope my Republican colleagues can join me.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 1364; that the bill be considered read three times and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

I appreciate my colleague being here to object. I don't think he actually read the resolution. The real focus was on how we address tariffs against Israel and Ukraine.

I appreciate his partisan argument, but I think he also neglected to represent that there are Democrats that opposed Bernie Sanders' bill, and I was one of them. I think it is important we work in a bipartisan way to move this country forward.

I am also a Democrat that supports bringing manufacturing back to my State. You are welcome to come to Nevada anytime and see what we have done around the work that is essential.

I think what I am looking for in this time is common sense, working across the aisle where we see it to show the American public that, yes, we can still function and work together on moving forward. I think it is important we stand with Israel at all levels, including ensuring that they are not tariffed, there is no tariff against them.

It is very, very simple here. And I think targeted tariffs make sense. I don't quite understand the continued partisan conversation here. But at the end of the day, I am hopeful that many of my colleagues still want to work in a bipartisan way on issues that reflect not only who we are as a country but will still be working to address protection for our allies and, at the same time, protecting our economy. I am disappointed in the objection today.

I yield the floor.

Thank you. I have to stand up here and call my colleague out. He is trying to paint all the Democrats together. If he would look at my record in standing independent from some of my party's votes and the fact that I think it is important and know it is important that we work in a bipartisan way and have done just that in committee in my votes in a bipartisan way with my colleagues, I would

hope that he would be open to working with me in the future on some bipartisan legislation.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 1690 and ask that it be reported by number.

Mr. President, amendment No. 1690 ensures that, if Republicans want to lower taxes on the ultrawealthy, they can't pay for it by raising drug prices on seniors and people with disabilities.

Seniors have been demanding lower drug costs, and Democrats delivered with the Inflation Reduction Act. By empowering Medicare to negotiate drug prices, the law cuts Medicare prescription costs and saves taxpayers billions. It also, for the first time, caps annual out-of- pocket costs for seniors with a Medicare drug plan, limits insulin to $35 a month, and expands access to free vaccines.

You would think that President Trump, who promised to lower prices for Americans, would want to protect the work we have done in the IRA to do just that. But Big Pharma, right now, is pushing to weaken the Democrats' prescription drug law in this reconciliation bill, and Republicans and President Trump are helping them do it.

Making American seniors and people with disabilities foot the bill for bigger tax breaks for billionaires like Elon Musk is just wrong, and it is cruel. I hope my colleagues will agree and support this amendment.

Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act, I move to waive, and I ask for the yeas and nays.