Floor Statements

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 550.

Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to legislative session.

Mr. President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 457,

I send a cloture motion to the desk.

I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum calls for the cloture motions filed today, September 19, be waived.

I return the floor to the Senator from Maryland for his outstanding, excellent, perspicacious remarks.

Mr. President, now on the SALT cap, in the long 8 years that Donald Trump has been in politics, one thing is beyond doubt: What Donald Trump says and what Donald Trump does are two very different things.

Donald Trump says he fights for working people and then ushers in perhaps the most anti-worker administration in modern times as President.

Donald Trump claims he is a ``leader on fertilization, IVF''-- whatever that means--but his MAGA Justices overturned Roe and cast women's reproductive care into chaos.

Yesterday Donald Trump did it again, totally reversing himself, claiming that he will reverse the cap on State and local deductions. But Donald Trump must be suffering from selective amnesia because he was the one who took away people's SALT deductions in the first place. His tax bill did it--a dagger aimed at blue States that want to spend a little more to help people with housing and healthcare and education and transportation.

All of a sudden, now that he is on Long Island, Donald Trump's selective amnesia kicks in, and he totally reverses himself on SALT. But we know Donald Trump. We know what his MO is. He is going to do nothing. He is simply trying to escape the anger of many families he upset when he placed those caps, which affect so many middle-class people, particularly in higher cost areas like Long Island.

So he shows up in Long Island. Oh, he says he has changed his mind. And we know he will do nothing about it. Then, when some of his more rightwing people go to him and say ``You can't do it,'' he will say ``OK.''

So this is not only an empty promise, but it shows the hypocrisy of Donald Trump. For Donald Trump to pretend he has found religion on eliminating the SALT caps 2 months before an election, speaking in Long Island, is comical, is unserious, and it shows the lack of integrity that this man has. His promises carry about as much weight as Monopoly money.

Remember, the SALT cap was one of the key parts of Donald Trump's own tax law. Congressional Republicans pushed the cap; he signed it. Donald Trump's own Treasury Secretary, Steve Mnuchin, called SALT a subsidy for States like New York, even though for decades New York paid tens of billions more in taxes than we received from the Federal Government. To this day, SALT caps remain in place because extreme Republicans have blocked any attempt to fix this defective policy.

I have been a loud proponent of eliminating the SALT cap from the start. As long as I am leader, I will do everything in my power so that when these caps expire at the end of next year, they will not come back.

Double taxing hard-working owners on Long Island, in the Hudson Valley, and across New York and many other States as well--largely blue States--is plainly unfair, and it could not have come up at a worse time than the last few years, with so much chaos caused by COVID and the economic turmoil it unleashed.

So for families frustrated by the SALT cap, so many on Long Island-- firefighters, police officers, construction workers, who make good salaries--they have Donald Trump and congressional Republicans to thank for their pain.

Mr. President, yesterday was a sad day in the Senate, as Republicans for the second time this year blocked legislation to protect families' access to IVF. By voting against IVF, Republicans confirmed many Americans' worst fear: Project 2025 is alive and well when it comes to reproductive rights.

Senate Republicans have spent months tying themselves into knots, claiming that of course they are in favor of protecting IVF, but when it mattered most, when it actually came time to vote, Republicans showed their true colors and voted no.

What made yesterday's vote even worse was that was the second time they blocked IVF protections even though it is increasingly clear many Americans are worried about access. Both times, without hesitation, Senate Republicans caved to the extremists on their right flank.

Look, blocking IVF could have horrible consequences. The hard right has been transparent that now that they have overturned Roe, they are moving on to other targets, like IVF. Just look at what happened earlier this year in Alabama.

Senate Republicans who like to pretend that IVF is not under threat should have a word with the likes of the Heritage Foundation and Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. These organizations are some of the most influential conservative groups, and they are clear about their hostility about any Federal protections for IVF. SBA called our bill ``irredeemable'' a few months ago and called IVF a ``free-for-all.'' These groups use language very similar to that of their opposition to abortion. So no matter how much Republicans claim IVF is not in danger, extremists on their side say otherwise, and Republicans seem to listen.

By voting against protections for IVF, Senate Republicans confirmed yet again that 2025 is increasingly steering the GOP.

Mr. President, now on the shutdown, we have less than 2 weeks now before September 30. If the House and Senate do not act by then to extend government funding, the government will shut down, and there will be no ambiguity that will be a Republican shutdown.

My friend the Republican leader said yesterday that if Republicans shut the government down, ``It would be politically beyond stupid for us to do that, because we'd''--meaning Republicans--``get the blame.''

Leader McConnell is absolutely correct. A Republican shutdown would be beyond stupid for Republicans, and they would get the blame because it is only Speaker Johnson who is headed in that direction to assuage his hard right, the Freedom Caucus people, who hold his speakership in, shall we say--who say it is questionable whether he should be Speaker if this happens.

Nevertheless, Republicans are no closer to preventing a shutdown today than they were at the beginning of September. For the last 2 weeks, Speaker Johnson and House Republican leaders have wasted precious time on a proposal that everyone knows can't become law. His own Republican conference cannot unite around his proposal.

Today, the House is expected to vote on the Speaker's CR, and it is expected to fail. I hope that once the Speaker's CR fails, he moves on to a strategy that will actually work: bipartisan cooperation. It is the only thing that has kept the government open every time we have faced a funding deadline. It is the only thing that works this time too. Bipartisan, bicameral cooperation--that is what works. That is what we are willing and happy to do. And the clock is ticking.

If Republicans keep squabbling and careen us into a shutdown, the consequences will reverberate across the country. A shutdown harms the economy. A shutdown causes costs to spike as supply chains buckle and lending slows down. Federal safety programs could come to a halt, making our people and our communities less safe.

If the Republicans shut the government down, tens of thousands of children across the country could immediately lose access to Head Start. Nearly 7 million women and infants and children could lose nutrition program benefits. Food safety inspections would be jeopardized. Some members of the military could be asked to work without pay. Border security--something very important that our Republican colleagues talk a lot about--could be thrown into chaos, increasing wait times at ports of entry. Frontline border personnel would have to do their jobs without pay.

America does not want another Republican shutdown. America cannot afford another Republican shutdown. And make no mistake, if Republicans don't work with Democrats in a bipartisan way, if the four leaders can't come together because the House Republicans are so adamant, Americans will blame Republicans--particularly those in the House--for shutting the government down.

Mr. President, now on the VBA shortfall, last night, the House passed legislation through a voice vote that would ensure that veterans get their well-deserved benefits for October. Passed by voice vote in the House--that doesn't happen too often on significant and important legislation.

Well, we want to pass it through the Senate quickly. The need for action is urgent. Without this mandatory funding for veterans' benefits before September 20, the VA will be unable to issue compensation and pension benefit payments to as many as 7 million veterans and their survivors. We can't let that happen, so we must act, and we will.

Mr. President, there is perhaps no more personal a decision one can make than the decision of whether or not to start a family. For many people, starting a family is the greatest joy there is. It makes everything else secondary.

Yet for millions and millions of people, infertility can be a nightmare and a source of pain. Thankfully, we live in a time when, thanks to treatments like IVF, infertility is not the end of the story.

Sadly, accesses to IVF can no longer be taken for granted. From the moment the MAGA Supreme Court eliminated Roe, the hard right made clear that they would keep going. As we saw earlier this year in Alabama, IVF has become the next target of ultraconservatives, and access to this incredible treatment is more vulnerable than ever.

Today, the Senate will hold a simple and pivotal vote on whether or not to take up, once again, the Right to IVF Act. I thank Senator Duckworth, as well as Senators Murray and Booker and all the others, who have championed this bill for months. They are great leaders on this issue.

If the Senate votes no today and strikes IVF protections down yet again, it will be further proof that Project 2025 is alive and well.

Remember: Donald Trump's Project 2025 is tied to the Heritage Foundation, one of the most important and extreme conservative think tanks in the country. And, earlier this year, they came out fiercely against today's bill protecting IVF. They were even against the fig- leaf fake IVF bill pushed by Senators Cruz and Britt. That is how extreme they are.

If people want to see how strong Project 2025's grip is on the GOP, the outcome of today's IVF vote will be very, very revealing.

And yet, by all accounts, there is every reason in the world for Senators to vote yes today. Today's vote is simply a motion to reconsider. We are merely asking whether or not this bill is worth debating. Democrats certainly think it is. We certainly think that if any issue is worth discussing in this Chamber, it is protecting Americans' reproductive freedoms. And we Democrats extend an open invitation to our Republican colleagues to join us.

Republicans regularly claim that they are the party that stands up for

families. Well, today's bill is about as pro-family as it gets. It helps create families--IVF does. It says that access to IVF should be a basic right for all. And it will make sure insurance companies cover IVF treatments in their plans.

The last point is key. Expanding insurance coverage for IVF is something the vast majority of Americans support. A survey from Pew Research from last month showed that even a majority of Republicans surveyed support it--even a majority of Republicans.

Nevertheless, 3 months ago, nearly every Senate Republican voted against protecting IVF in this Chamber. It was astounding to watch them. With a straight face, our Republican colleagues claimed that, of course, they cared about supporting families; of course, they supported IVF--just not enough to actually vote to protect it.

That makes no sense--no sense. Republicans can't just talk their way past an issue as personal as IVF. What ultimately matters is how they vote on the issue.

So to my Republican colleagues today, you get a second chance: Either stand with families struggling with infertility or stand with Project 2025, which aims to make reproductive freedoms extinct.

If the Republicans truly care about helping families, they should vote yes to protect IVF. If the Republicans truly reject the insanity and cruelty--cruelty--of Project 2025 and its extreme conservative agenda, they should vote yes to protect IVF.

On the other hand, if Senate Republicans vote no today and strike IVF protections down again, it is further proof that Project 2025 is alive and well.

So, again, we hope Republicans join us to do the right thing. We ask Republicans to join us because women's reproductive freedoms are in a time of crisis, and we need to push back.

It has been 2 years since the MAGA Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Today, 22 States have passed abortion restrictions--14 of them essentially full bans. Over one in three American women have lost access to reproductive care. Many of them have to drive hundreds of miles out of State to get the care they need, and that still often comes with long wait times. Doctors fear they will be jailed if they offer treatments. Women in need are at risk of being turned down at hospitals, and it can become a matter of life and death.

This week, America tragically learned of the first confirmed case of a woman dying because abortion bans prevented her from getting the care she needed. She was a young woman from Georgia, a 28-year-old and the mother of a 6-year-old. She had to travel out of State to get reproductive care, and when she needed emergency surgery after a rare complication, doctors in Georgia delayed giving her the care she needed because of the new restrictions on the books. By the time she went into surgery, unfortunately, it was too late. She tragically passed away. The State declared that her death was preventable had she only gotten care sooner.

Worst of all, there are, undoubtedly, more cases like hers. These are the terrible and deadly consequences of restricting reproductive freedom. The tragedy that happened in Georgia, of a preventable death because of abortion bans, is why Project 2025 is so dangerous: deadly restrictions to reproductive care; monitoring women's pregnancies; banning mifepristone; laying the groundwork for a national abortion ban; putting IVF at risk.

To my Republican colleagues, the choice is yours. Americans are watching; families back home are watching; and couples who want to become parents are watching too. Republicans cannot say they are pro- family but vote against protecting IVF. They cannot say they reject Project 2025 but vote against protecting IVF. That is what is at stake today. I urge everyone to vote yes.

Mr. President, by all accounts, a vote to protect something as basic and as popular as IVF shouldn't be necessary, but sadly it is very necessary thanks to attacks against reproductive care by Donald Trump and his Project 2025.

From the moment Donald Trump's MAGA Supreme Court reversed Roe, the hard right made clear that they would keep going. As we saw earlier this year in Alabama, IVF has become one of the hard right's next targets.

Today, Senate Republicans must answer a simple question: Do they support American families' access to IVF or not?

If they support it, the only option is to vote yes on the Right to IVF Act, but if Senate Republicans vote no today and block IVF protections yet again, it will be further proof they stand against the well-being of families. If Senate Republicans vote no today, it will be further proof that Project 2025 is alive and well when it comes to women's rights and reproductive rights as well.

Republicans cannot claim to care about supporting families while voting against IVF protections, but that is

precisely what they did 3 months ago. Today, Republicans get a second chance: Either stand with families struggling with infertility or stand against families and with Project 2025.

Kudos and great thanks to Senators Duckworth and Murray and Booker and to everyone who has championed this bill. Thank you to all of my colleagues who have raised their voices on this most personal of issues. I urge everyone to vote yes.

Motion to Proceed to the Motion to Reconsider

Mr. President, I move to proceed to the motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture failed on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445.

Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to Calendar No. 413, S. 4445.

Madam President, I understand that there is a bill at the desk that is due for a second reading.

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

Madam President, yesterday afternoon, I spoke with Secret Service Acting Director Rowe after an armed suspect was arrested after fleeing from former President Trump's golf course in West Palm Beach, FL.

I will say what I have said many times before: There is no place in America for political violence of any kind.

I am glad the former President is safe, and I applaud the Secret Service and all first responders for acting quickly before anyone got hurt.

As for the perpetrator, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

We all must do our part to ensure an incident like this does not happen again. This means that Congress has a responsibility to ensure the Secret Service and all law enforcement have the resources they need to do their jobs. So as we continue the appropriations process, if the Secret Service is in need of more resources, we are prepared to provide it for them, possibly in the upcoming funding agreement.

Madam President, now on IVF, 2 years ago, Donald Trump and the MAGA Supreme Court succeeded in overturning Roe and ripping away the right to choose from millions of Americans. This year, as we have seen in States like Alabama, the hard right has its sights on a new target, IVF.

So, tomorrow, the Senate will take up Senator Duckworth's--your bill, Madam President--Senator Duckworth's bill, the Right to IVF Act, to establish a nationwide right to IVF and make it easier for people to access this vital treatment.

This is the very same legislation that almost every single Senate Republican voted against earlier this summer. This

past weekend, in New York, I stood with some amazing families--some amazing parents and their beautiful baby, a miracle of IVF--to say that we Democrats will do everything we can to protect access to IVF, and I hope that in this Chamber we will be joined by our Republican colleagues when we vote tomorrow, because tomorrow we will take up Senator Duckworth's Right to IVF Act.

The vast majority of Americans support requiring insurance plans to cover IVF treatments, and I bet every one of us knows someone who has struggled with infertility at one point or another. In my own family, IVF was the answer to our prayers. I have a beautiful grandchild thanks to the miracle of IVF, and I could not bear to imagine the pain we would feel if we were told: Sorry, you are out of luck.

If Republicans truly stand on the side of families, as they regularly claim, then they should leap at the opportunity to protect people's right to access IVF. They should stand ready to pass a bill that makes this treatment available on insurance plans. They should vote yes tomorrow. Of course, we are already beginning to hear the same tired, predictable, and unconvincing excuses from our Republican colleagues looking for a way to vote against IVF protections.

To my Republican colleagues: If you truly support IVF, then vote for a bill that actually protects IVF through the letter of the law.

Republicans cannot claim to be pro-family on the one hand, while then voting against IVF protection bills on the other. Americans are much smarter than that.

Republicans had a chance to back up their rhetoric with action when we voted earlier this year, and nearly all of them failed. I hope tomorrow will bring a different result. The American people will be watching.

Madam President, now on the CR, legislators now have roughly 2 weeks to reach an agreement to keep the government open beyond the September 30 deadline. It is not really much time at all. In order to avoid a shutdown, the worst thing our colleagues in the House can do right now is waste time on proposals that don't have broad, bipartisan support. But that is what the Speaker and his Republican colleagues have been doing all month long, and it is already September 16.

Mr. Speaker Johnson, you know as well as everyone else that your plan is a no-go as currently written. A 6-month CR with poison pills is not going to fly in a narrowly divided government.

CRs are always meant to be a short-term extension funding to give appropriators more time to do their work. They are not meant to be a substitute for Congress doing its job.

And if the hard right thinks that we will willingly give them leverage to ram Project 2025 down the American people's throats early next year by agreeing to a 6-month CR, they are dreaming. MAGA radicals are hoping they can use the threat of a shutdown next spring to pass the very worst of Project 2025. They want to cut the Department of Education. They want to eliminate Head Start. They want to privatize Fannie and Freddie, raising mortgage rates, making it harder to buy a home. They want to monitor women's pregnancies--monitor them--and potentially cut VA funding and more. We cannot--we will not--let that happen.

But even before we get to all of that, pushing for a CR that lasts 6 months, as the Speaker wants, would also mean that a slew of critical programs would still be shortchanged. It would be awful for our military. You simply cannot run the military with a 6-month stopgap-- little surprise that even many House Republicans recognize the Speaker's current approach is the wrong one.

The answer to the Speaker's problem is not very complicated. The Speaker should drop his current proposal and work with both parties on an extension that prioritizes keeping the government open--open without pushing poison pills. We are happy to work with him.

Now, despite all its flaws, there are some bits of good news in the Speaker's proposal that I hope we can build on. I am very heartened that the Speaker's current proposal preserves the essence of the Schumer-Johnson agreement from early this year, the one that set top- line funding levels for fiscal year 2024.

This is a good sign because, last September, Speaker McCarthy wasted precious time trying to pass a CR that curried favor with the hard right through very deep, brutal funding cuts. In the end, that approach didn't work, and Speaker McCarthy was removed from the speakership anyway because of the radicals on his right flank.

For now, Speaker Johnson seems to be taking a different approach, and it is not pushing for across-the-board cuts as part of his CR. That is good news. It is a sign Speaker Johnson may be accepting the reality that any deal we reach will have to include the spending levels we agreed to earlier this year.

To be clear, there are still far too many omissions in his current proposal, and a 6-month timeline is not acceptable, but I hope we have a foundation on which to build upon. Make no mistake about it--the clock is ticking. We have until September 30 before the government shuts down.

If the government shuts down, it will be average Americans who suffer most. A government shutdown means seniors who rely on Social Security could be thrown into chaos as the Social Security Administration limits certain services, like benefit verifications or fixing errors in payments. Our veterans could see regional VA offices shut down and support services put on halt. Some of our military servicemembers could be forced to work without pay. Families who benefit from WIC and other nutrition programs could see benefits halted. And a shutdown would shake the confidence of our economic recovery--something we can't possibly afford at a time like this.

If a shutdown happens because of Republican poison pills, the American people are going to hold them responsible.

We don't need to go down this road. We still have a little time to reach a bipartisan agreement. So I hope the Speaker drops his current plan.