Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. Mr. President, later today, the Senate will take a procedural vote on the MILCON-VA funding bill. The Senate version of this legislation took some…
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
Mr. President, later today, the Senate will take a procedural vote on the MILCON-VA funding bill. The Senate version of this legislation took some important steps to reverse a number of the awful cuts posed by DOGE and Russell Vought, particularly cuts against our Nation's veterans--people who served us, who risked their lives for us--and they want to cut their healthcare and cut what the VA does for them. That is a bad thing, and I am glad this bill undoes a lot of that.
It is also, for now, a positive thing that the Senate version's funding number is significantly higher than the House's. That is thanks to the push Democrats made in committee, and I thank my colleagues for their work to date.
But we will see how the floor process evolves here on the floor. Given Republicans' recent actions undermining bipartisan appropriations, nothing is guaranteed. Senate Democrats will meet today at our weekly caucus lunch to discuss today's vote.
As recently as yesterday, though, I heard my friend the Republican leader come to the floor and talk about the need for bipartisanship in appropriations, and I heard him take issue with Democratic criticisms against the approach Republicans have taken over the last few months.
Look, we all would like to see bipartisanship. It has been a tradition in this Senate until that evaporated over the last decade. But Leader Thune is sort of talking out of both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, Thune says he wants bipartisanship. On the other, he is pushing rescissions packages here on the floor. He is allowing party- line votes to reverse bipartisan funding agreements.
Well, you can't have it both ways. What he is doing with rescissions is the opposite of bipartisanship because rescissions packages totally renege on agreements both sides reached on funding.
When Donald Trump and Russell Vought insist on rescissions, and an obeisant Republican Congress goes along, even though many of them knows it is wrong, it makes the spending process totally partisan.
So the leader's words and his actions are a complete contradiction. He can't have it both ways.
If Leader Thune hopes to see bipartisanship, he should tend to his own garden first and convince his Republican colleagues and the White House that bipartisanship is the way to go to do what is best for the American people.
Republicans sold their rescissions package as cutting wasteful spending, but we all know that it is not that at all; that it was about giving Donald Trump what he wanted and using partisan means to get it all done.
Meanwhile, we know that Russell Vought and Donald Trump want Congress to green-light yet another rescissions package for the near future. Russell Vought even says--openly--that the appropriation process should be ``less bipartisan.''
Frankly, right now, the biggest obstacle to a good-faith, bipartisan funding process is coming from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue and from Republicans all too eager to give Donald Trump and Russell Vought whatever they want.
And, of course, Republicans, not even a month ago, pushed Trump's ``Big Ugly Betrayal'' on a completely partisan vote, passing devastating cuts to Medicaid, to healthcare, to good-paying jobs, especially in rural communities, all to fund tax breaks for billionaires. And they did it by breaking the norms of the Senate, by inventing fake math, by defying the concerns of even their own Members to get it done. That kind of legislative stunt only makes it harder-- harder--for bipartisanship to take root.
We will see how our Republican colleagues choose to proceed this week. They can either keep doing Donald Trump and Russell Vought's bidding or work with Democrats on funding priorities that will serve the American people well. They can't do both. They can't have it both ways.
Nomination of Emil J. Bove III
Mr. President, now, on Mr. Bove, we all know that Donald Trump has a history of pushing shockingly unqualified and politically motivated nominees to the Federal bench. But, today, Leader Thune will seek to file cloture on perhaps Donald Trump's worst--worst--judicial nominee to date, Emil Bove.
One look at Mr. Bove and you know he is bad, bad news. He is someone hostile to the rule of law, hostile to democratic norms, but religiously obedient to Donald Trump.
And Republicans aren't applying so much as a whisper of scrutiny. The Republican chair of the Judiciary Committee, in fact, cut off debate on Mr. Bove and refused to let Democrats speak or ask questions during Mr. Bove's hearing.
Let me take a moment to explain why this nominee is uniquely unfit, which the American people must hear, even though the Republican Judiciary Committee didn't want them to.
Mr. Bove's entire career has been built on one thing--one thing: fealty to Donald Trump. He made his name handling Donald Trump's dirty laundry. He handled Donald Trump's dirty laundry, first, as his personal attorney and,
then, as his hit man at the Justice Department. He defended Donald Trump when he was charged with inciting an insurrection on January 6, on mishandling classified documents and on falsifying business records, and more.
That got him a promotion to a senior role at DOJ. There, Mr. Bove weaponized the Department to carry out political retributions against people Donald Trump considered his enemies, with a complete disregard for free speech and due process. He punished FBI agents investigating the January 6 insurrection and fired prosecutors working on criminal charges for the January 6 rioters. He reportedly told DOJ lawyers to ignore court orders and even deliberately mislead judges.
Let me say that again. Bove, a man seeking to become a circuit court judge, himself, has reportedly told DOJ lawyers to deliberately mislead judges. That, if true, is disqualifying--end of story. Nobody who is ever suspected of misleading judges should even be considered for judgeships themselves, without first getting to the facts. Yet Republicans are trying to rush him through the process.
It is no wonder that over 75 former State and Federal judges, nominated by Democratic and Republican Presidents, joined together-- joined together, Democrats and Republicans--to oppose Mr. Bove's nomination.
If Senate Republicans allow Mr. Bove to pass through this Chamber without a thorough examination, they will cause profound damage to this institution as a check on the executive.
Our judges should always be held to the highest ethical standards and should be individuals that can be trusted to apply the law impartially, even if we may not all agree on every one of their opinions.
Mr. Bove, however, is the extreme of the extreme of the extreme. He is not a jurist but, rather, a Trumpian henchman. His past shows he seeks not to be impartial but rather to settle scores. All of the accusations against him suggest he holds deep hostility against the very bench he will soon be considered for. To even consider someone like this for the circuit court is a dark, disturbing proposition.
I very strongly oppose his nomination.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.