Floor Statements

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

I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, September 12, be waived.

Mr. President, from the moment the MAGA Supreme Court reversed Roe, as Donald Trump promised they would, many of us warned that the hard right would not stop there in eliminating reproductive freedoms. Over the past few months, we have seen how IVF has become the hard right's next target.

A few months ago, the Alabama Supreme Court jeopardized access to IVF within their State, causing millions of women and couples to fear that even their freedom to start a family was now in danger.

So, in June, Democrats brought forward legislation to ensure IVF access would never be at risk and expand insurance coverage for this treatment, but almost every single Senate Republican voted against this vital legislation to have access to IVF.

Republicans can't claim to be pro-family only to block protections for IVF. The American people deserve another chance to see if Republicans are for access to IVF or against it; it is that simple. So next week, Mr. President, the Senate will vote once again to take up the very same bill we voted on earlier this summer, establishing a nationwide right to IVF and making it easier for people to access this critical treatment. Our bill should have passed in June, and it is more than good enough to pass now.

So let me say it again: Republicans can't claim to be pro-family on one hand only to block pro-family policies like Federal protections for IVF and the child tax credit. But that is what they did this summer, and I hope we get a different outcome when we vote for a second time.

The American people will be watching.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I come to the floor today to congratulate Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs on its 100th anniversary.

One Hundred Years. A remarkable milestone. A remarkable legacy. A remarkable school.

The Maxwell School is the oldest school of its kind in America and was once again ranked the No. 1 school for public affairs in 2024 by U.S. News & World Report.

Success and excellence is the norm for the Maxwell School: It has held the No. 1 spot every year save one since these rankings began more than 30 years ago.

Founded in 1924, thanks to the investment and vision of Syracuse University alumnus and entrepreneur George H. Maxwell, the Maxwell School is dedicated to supporting impactful research and preparing students to become leaders who seek evidence-based solutions, encourage civil discourse, and commit to leaving the world better than they found it.

You can get a sense of what the Maxwell School stands for by pondering the words of the Athenian Oath, which is inscribed on its foyer wall. It encourages us to ever strive to ``transmit this city not only not less, but greater, better and more beautiful than it was transmitted to us.''

And the Maxwell School does live up to those ideals.

The school's more than 38,500 graduates are living and working across the globe, helping to inform public policy, including key legislation that has come before us here, helping to forge compromise amid divide, bringing aid to those in need and defending democracy.

Its alumni include foreign ambassadors, legislators, journalists, economists, and numerous familiar names such as former Congresswoman and HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, New York State Governor Kathy Hochul, Syracuse Mayor Ben Walsh, and former Detroit Mayor Dave Bing.

The school is home to 15 interdisciplinary research centers and institutes focused on pressing societal issues. One especially dear to me is named for the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan; the Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs serves as a critical hub for collaboration, research, and examination of complex global issues.

The Maxwell School offers a rich mix of undergraduate, graduate professional, and scholarly M.A. and Ph.D. programs across the social sciences.

Though it is based in Syracuse, it has a strong presence here in the Nation's Capital, offering programs and internship opportunities and world class instruction through a partnership with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Thanks to a unique relationship with the Council of Europe and Syracuse

University's five study abroad centers, the Maxwell School also offers students and scholars increasing opportunities for global engagement.

The Maxwell School's work supports the foundations and institutions of democracy itself, here and across the globe. This is vital at this time in our world's history.

I congratulate Syracuse University, the Maxwell School, Chancellor Kent Syverud, Maxwell Dean David Van Slyke, and the school's faculty, students, staff, and alumni for everything they do to leave the world better than they found it.

Madam President, this morning, I stood at Ground Zero in New York, joining President Biden, Vice President Harris, New York leaders, and thousands of New Yorkers to mark the 23rd anniversary of 9/11. So many of those who lost loved ones were there remembering. It has been 23 years.

Every day, I wear this flag pin in my lapel as a reminder of our sacred promise to never forget. Today, the pin is a little heavier. I called the day after 9/11--9/12--I called on Americans to wear the flag, to display it out their windows or wear it on their clothing as a show of solidarity and a show of our anguish over so many who were lost and, at that time, missing. I have worn the flag every day since--every day since--because I never forget.

I knew people who were lost: a guy I played basketball with in high school; a businessman who helped me on the way up; a firefighter I went around the city with, urging people to donate blood. And so it is a tough day.

It has been 23 years since 9/11, but I remember it like yesterday-- the smell of the pile, the images of destruction that New Yorkers had never seen before. I remember the chilling and other-worldly images of people lining up on the sidewalks, hundreds of them with pictures because no one knew who was dead or who wasn't. Unfortunately, very few survived.

But the pictures: ``Have you seen my daughter Mary?'' ``Have you seen my brother John?'' I will never forget them. And I had some of those pictures donated to the 9/11 museum.

I remember people I knew, as I said, who died in the attack. But I also remember the heroism: first responders disregarding their own safety and running toward danger to save others. I remember New Yorkers going out of their way to help each other; complete strangers joining to pray together, grieve together, and work together to rebuild and heal.

Many had run down those stairs to escape the conflagration in the towers and left their shoes behind. And right a block away was a guy with a shoestore just handing out shoes to people. That is the kind of people New Yorkers are and Americans are.

Twenty-three years later, our sacred obligation to care for the survivors and their families continues. In the last 2 years, I secured nearly $1.7 billion in funding for the World Trade Center Health Program, which helps first responders and survivors treat cancers and respiratory sicknesses and mental health and more. I thank Senator Gillibrand, who has been a great partner on this, and the New York delegation in the House--bipartisan.

Earlier this year, we introduced legislation to make funding for this program permanent so that our 9/11 heroes and families don't have to keep coming down to Washington to ask and advocate for the care they deserve.

In the last Congress, I was proud to work with my colleagues to pass the Fairness for 9/11 Families Act, which finally compensated those who were wrongly left out of the Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund.

That is what ``never forget'' means. It is not a passive promise. It is an active commitment to work every day to ensure that survivors of those terrible days are provided for. It is a prayer that America may find the strength and grace to always endure; to always weather the storm; to always come back from adversity stronger, more united than before, and never turn on each other but to be unified in our strength and our camaraderie.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, well, House Republican colleagues are struggling with a bad case of Groundhog Day: The government faces a critical funding deadline in a few weeks. If that deadline isn't met, the government will shut down. Only bipartisanship will help us meet that deadline. But instead of pursuing bipartisanship, Speaker Johnson is yet again--yet again--wasting time caving to the hard right, despite his razor-thin majority.

Hasn't he learned? This is what got the Republicans in trouble the last few times that we had to fund the government. An appeal to the rightwing--the rightwing, in their sort of strict, narrow partisan ideology, thinks they can force everybody--even dissident Republicans, let alone Democrats and the President--to go along with them. But, of course, it doesn't happen, and then we come to a bipartisan agreement.

Oh, yes, it is certainly Groundhog Day once again as the Republicans repeat the same mistake they have made over and over again; and that is the House Republicans led, unfortunately, by Speaker Johnson.

As I have said, we have seen this play out time and time again. Is it any surprise that the Speaker's purely partisan CR seems to be running into trouble? The answer is very simple: The House should stop wasting time on a CR proposal that cannot become law. The House should stop wasting its time gathering together among themselves--not even all of them--putting together a bill without consulting Hakeem Jeffries, myself, or the President. But that is what they do. And it doesn't work. It just doesn't work.

Instead, Republicans should work with Democrats on a bipartisan package--one that has input from both sides, one that avoids harmful cuts, one that is free of poison pills. We are ready to sit down and work with them immediately.

Now, to be fair, the Speaker's proposal was not entirely bad news. I was heartened to see that Speaker Johnson's proposal held on to the bipartisan top-line spending agreement that I reached with the Speaker earlier this year. It is a good sign that Speaker

Johnson seems to accept reality that any CR we produce in the coming weeks will have to include that funding level.

But sadly--sadly--the good news ends there, because, on the whole, the House Republicans' CR is an unserious and uncooked product. It is not serious for Republicans to say they want to kick the can down the road for 6 months on funding the government.

Funding the government is the most basic responsibility we have in Congress. So to say ``let's hold off for half a year'' should be a nonstarter. It is also not serious for Republicans to release a proposal that endangers troop readiness, risks troop pay, hamstrings our efforts to outcompete the Chinese Government. You cannot run an Army on a 6-month CR. You cannot put everything on hold for 6 months, have the defense contracts put on ice for 6 months, and allow for Russia and the Chinese Government to gain on us. It is that simple. And the head of the Joint Chiefs sent a letter that said just that.

It is not serious for Republicans to say they want to pass a CR that fails to properly extend E-Verify, H-2B visas, and other border security programs that stop drugs like fentanyl. They talk a lot about the border, but then the fundamental ways that we toughen up enforcement on the border and interior of the country with E-Verify, they ignore.

It shows how political this document is. It is particularly egregious that the Speaker's own proposal disbands a critical law enforcement effort to stop drug smuggling, drug cartels, money laundering. But the parade of horribles keeps going. It just doesn't end there.

It is not serious for Republicans to say that they want to pass a CR that forgets to fund critical health programs. Under the Republican proposal, telehealth would be harmed. We know how important telehealth is, particularly for rural Americans. It has made healthcare much better, cheaper, and more effective in rural areas. But they don't fund it. Wait for 6 months to tell someone in a rural area who needs medical help?

People with diabetes would struggle to get the aid they need. And community health centers, often the only resource for millions of working-class Americans to get their healthcare if they don't have insurance but fall above the Medicare and Medicaid lines to get their healthcare--that is where they get it. That funding, again, would be in danger.

And if all that weren't enough, Republicans have no plan for extending farm bill funding. One of the consequences of failing to pass the farm bill is going over the so-called dairy cliff, which is what happens when the dairy margin coverage program dries up. For this to happen would decimate farmers across the country and, I know, in my own State. Farmers have told me. Some of them would go out of business if we want over that dairy cliff. Monthly payments that help farmers cover the gap between the price of milk and feed would halt.

And it would not only affect our farmers, it would affect our consumers. The cost of milk needed for our babies and for healthy kids and all of us--I like milk; I look forward to drinking it a lot--but the cost of milk could potentially double if we went over that dairy cliff. It would create seismic disruptions in our supply chains and cause market panic.

So these are just some of the terrible consequences of proceeding with Speaker Johnson's 6-month, unserious CR proposal. It is a little surprise that the White House has already issued a veto threat.

Now, as far as their timeline, let's be very clear about what Republicans are trying to do with this 6-month CR. They are trying to lay the groundwork for Project 2025 in hopes they get a favorable result in the election. That is why the rightwing is pushing this. It is not just, you know, that they don't like government funding. They have this horrible document, Project 2025, which would turn America inside-out.

I believe it would create huge economic, social--all kinds of problems--problems of protecting freedom. But that is what they want to do. That is their goal. Why Speaker Johnson goes along with it is beyond me. But by trying to set up a funding fight in March, rightwing Republicans hope for the chance to hold government funding hostage in exchange for some of the nastiest, most harmful policies that Donald Trump promises in his Project 2025.

Let there be no mistake: Project 2025 is the Trump agenda. Some of his top advisers helped put it together. Some of the lead people on this have talked about their high-up positions in a Trump administration should, God forbid, it occur.

Over 140 people who have worked in the Trump administration contributed to it. To call the ideas in Trump's Project 2025 radical would be an understatement. Project 2025 would pave the way for the hard right's national abortion ban by restricting access to FDA- approved medication.

Project 2025 would abolish the Department of Education, decimate our public education system by wiping out school meal programs.

Hungry kids? We want to send people to school with an empty belly? They can't learn. Oh, we have to spend little money to provide a nutritious breakfast, which, incidentally, helps our farmers? Isn't that horrible? says the rightwing. They would rather--the billionaires who helped fund all of this stuff--pay even less money to the government.

It would defund public schools. They would end student loan forgiveness. All the young people who have this burden of student loans on their back--you and I and others are trying to reduce or eliminate that burden--forget it if this rightwing budget goes into effect.

Project 2025 would make healthcare less affordable for tens of millions of Americans. It would rip away benefits from our veterans. It would attack small farmers and small businesses and so much more. The list goes on and on and on, unfortunately.

These ideas aren't theoretical. No, no. They are not abstract ideas up in the clouds; they are real proposals that the hard right intends to push if they come into power. They are so narrow and so focused on their own agenda, as I said, in large part over the years funded by billionaires--greedy. Not all wealthy people are greedy; many of them understand their obligation to help the country that has been so good to them. But they are a narrow group, very greedy. They don't want to pay any taxes, some of them. ``Let's have a national sales tax,'' some of them say. That would create huge inflation on the average middle class so they don't have to pay an income tax. Lord help us.

And Republicans right now are hoping that a funding fight early next year would turn into a hostage negotiation between keeping the government open and passing Project 2025's terrible policies.

But let me assure the American people, we Democrats are not fooled. And let me assure our mainstream Republicans, who quietly grit their teeth when they hear about this, that the American people are not fooled. Surprisingly, a large number of American people have already heard of Project 2025 and don't like it.

The more people learn about Project 2025, the more they realize how devastating it is and how horrible it would be for our economy, how disastrous it would be for public safety, and how catastrophic-- catastrophic--it would be for our country.

Mr. President, I come to the floor to note that the Senate, today, will vote on the confirmation of a terrific judicial nominee and terrific New Yorker, Jeannette Vargas, nominated to serve as district judge for the Southern District of New York.

Jeannette Vargas will make an excellent addition to the bench. She was a clerk to then-Judge, now-Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, is a career prosecutor, and served as the top lawyer in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District as Deputy Chief in the Civil Division.

She is truly a New Yorker to her core, being a native of the great borough of Queens and of both Puerto Rican and Irish ancestry. With Ms. Vargas, the Senate continues to add a list of excellent and qualified diverse nominees to the Federal bench.

I want to thank my Senate colleague Senator Gillibrand for advocating this great nominee and all my colleagues for voting to confirm.

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

Mr. President, I move to proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 649.

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

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum call for the cloture motion filed today, September 10, be waived.

Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 807, submitted earlier today.

I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

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