Floor Statements

Now, on Republican cuts, this week, Senate Republicans are set to push through the Senate a bill that betrays rural communities, harms global health, weakens America's standing abroad, and, worst of all, sets the stage for even more harmful cuts down the line.

The so-called rescissions package continues a destructive Republican pattern: Cut now and ask questions later. The same thing that is happening with FEMA and the National Weather Service is happening right here. Again, use that chain saw; cut, cut, cut--whether it is waste or whether it is sinew and bone--and then later, say: Oh, maybe we shouldn't have done that.

And do you know what? Our Republican Senators, most of them, know this is wrong, but they are so afraid of Donald Trump.

Yesterday, he threatened that any of them who voted against the full rescissions package that we have before us would face his wrath. What is going on here? Does anyone stand up to these horrible, horrible cuts that hurt the American people?

Republicans, in realtime, are cutting healthcare. They are cutting education. They are cutting aid for our veterans.

Veterans are not getting--ask them. The veterans know they are not getting the healthcare they used to.

And making things even worse, Donald Trump's tariffs are coming in at the worst possible time, and in a few short months, they are going to raise the cost of groceries. They are going to hurt small businesses and do untold damage to our economy.

And, now, this package suffocates public broadcast. Well, did they even know when they said they wanted to cut it--you know, Donald Trump doesn't seem to like it--how much it helps our rural communities? It is the only place they can rely on for local news, for weather reports. And farmers across rural America depend on public broadcast to get weather reports because there is no other way. Did they know that it guts international aid that ensures America's national security? Did they even think of the consequences, just because Donald Trump says he wants it cut? And everyone knows he doesn't know the details of any of this stuff.

The rescissions package is certainly troubling, but the pattern behind it is even worse. It sets the stage for even more party line devastating cuts in the future to healthcare, to education, anything Republicans decide they don't like, all on a party-line vote, all because of obeisance and fear of Donald Trump, not a conviction that he is doing the right thing. This is a dark omen moving forward.

Our Republican friends say they fight for the middle class. They say they fight for working people. Then they turn around and take investments away from middle class and rural America.

I urge them--urge them--not to proceed with this bill as written.

Mr. President, now on healthcare costs, Republicans' ``Big Ugly Betrayal'' will devastate American healthcare this year. Not many years down the line, not a few years down the line. It is going to hurt now.

There is a growing idea among Republican Members of Congress and then the lobbyists who talk to the press all the time that hospitals don't need to worry about the ``Big Ugly Bill'' because there is time to stave off or change the horrible Medicaid cuts Republicans passed and are now running away from. That is garbage.

Donald Trump and Republican leaders forced their Members to walk the plank and cut Medicaid to the bone. So now they are in damage-control mode. They know how bad it is. They want to make their ``Big Ugly Bill'' seem less destructive and seem more palpable when, in reality, it is, quite literally, a death sentence for rural hospitals and vulnerable Americans. And that death sentence for so many of them is not 2 years away; it is now.

Here are the facts that show Republicans' ``Big Ugly Betrayal'' is having an impact right now, not later: At least 300 rural hospitals are at immediate risk of closing because of this bill already--already. Not 2 years from now. Now, this week, 2 weeks after the bill passed. Hospitals in Iowa, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Maine have announced they are closing or are in serious danger of closing. Not in 2027, not in 2028. Now. Now.

Governors in at least eight States--eight States--have called special sessions this summer. Not in 2028, not in 2027. They have called special sessions this summer or are pushing stopgap subsidies to shield doctors and hospitals from the immediate harm. States don't see the ``Big Ugly Bill'' as a problem for years from now. To them, to the workers, and, most of all, to the people who get healthcare in a lot of these rural hospitals, it is a problem right now.

And this fall, more problems. Not in 2028, folks. This fall, people will get notices that their insurance premiums for the Affordable Care Act will go up 75 percent on average because Republicans chose not to extend tax credits for the ACA.

This will also impact people on private insurance. If you don't have ACA, Medicaid, Medicare, you are still going to get increases in your insurance. Everyone is affected by these cuts--just about everyone-- unless you are one of those billionaires who self-insures. You don't have to have insurance because you have got all the money in the world to pay any medical bill. That is not true of the vast majority of Americans.

And what they are doing is just the start. Republicans have made it clear they want even deeper cuts to Medicaid. Many in the House Freedom Caucus--those rightwingers--have said they weren't satisfied with their ``Big Ugly Bill.'' So who is to say that Donald Trump and Russell Vought won't use rescissions or another reconciliation bill to cut healthcare even deeper? And what are our Republican colleagues going to do when the handful of rightwing Freedom Caucus people in this body and the other body say they demand cuts or they won't vote for any bill? Are they going to cave once again? Say: OK?

Let me say it again: All this talk from Republicans that many of their own cuts won't materialize is utter nonsense. Hospitals are closing now. States are reacting now. Insurance companies are adjusting now. And the harm to the American people will happen now, not later.

Mr. President, on judicial confirmation, the first judge confirmation, later today, Senate Republicans will confirm Donald Trump's first judicial nominee of his second term, Whitney Hermandorfer, to be a circuit judge on the Sixth Circuit.

We all know when it comes to judges Donald Trump cares only about one thing: total unyielding fealty to Donald Trump--not experience, not judicial independence, not knowledge or desire to pursue the law, but brazen, uncomplicated fealty to Donald Trump. That is how he chooses judges. That is how the people under him choose judges.

We have never seen this in America. You could have been a conservative like Ronald Reagan, someone like George Bush or H.W. Bush or Clinton or Obama. They all looked. You know, they wanted someone to have some philosophical kinship with them. But they said: Will they follow the law? Do they know this law?

Not this administration. It is so different than all the others in a very bad way. Donald Trump doesn't care about the law or what the Constitution says. He says that himself. He only wants his foot soldiers in black robes defending him when he tries to do whatever he wants.

Ms. Hermandorfer has failed to show that she can be an independent jurist committed to upholding the law. She has less than 10 years of legal experience. She has never served as the sole or chief counsel on a single case. She has made a career out of going after people's reproductive rights, transgender rights, and antidiscrimination policies.

When nominees like Ms. Hermandorfer are the standard, our courts are weakened; the judiciary runs amok; the American people are worse off.

I strongly--strongly--oppose her nomination.

Mr. President, and finally, a very good day. I just got in from Albany in New York State. It was a very good day for Upstate New York. This morning, I was up in Albany to make a very exciting announcement years in the making. America's first ever national semiconductor technology center is now officially open for business in Albany, NY, in Upstate New York.

Today is the day I have been dreaming about since the time I wrote the Chips and Science law and when I was writing the NSTC program into the bill. I had always been thinking of Albany and of Upstate New York.

This center will be a leading hub for semiconductor innovation, not just in America but the whole world. This is a

great message for all Americans. Whether you live in Albany, New York State, or any other part of this great country, there is a bold, vital message that comes from Albany: The future of chips and the most advanced semiconductor chips is here in America--not overseas, not China.

These chips are vital to so many parts of our lives--our phones and computers and our cars and our national security and even to the AI systems that are already changing the world. Albany NanoTech will specifically focus on what is called EUV, extreme ultraviolet lithography research. It will be one of only two public facilities on Earth to be home to this EUV tool and the only one in America.

So what does this announcement mean? It is not just an abstract thing. It means major chip companies from around the world will have the ability to collaborate in New York in R&D for new chips. It means startups and other innovators will have access to the most advanced machinery to experiment and discover new innovations in semiconducting. It will even mean more good paying jobs--J-O-B-S--at Albany NanoTech and the local economy.

We all worried that China would gain the lead on this chip production. Well, now we have the answer, and that is the Albany NanoTech Center. No. 1 place in the United States and in the world for the new high-end research into semiconductor chips.

At the end of the day, this announcement, which I have worked so long and hard for since 2017--at the end of the day, this announcement will help make chips and science a reality, boosting American innovation, creating American jobs, making the United States the world leader in chipmaking.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Madam President, later today, Senate Republicans will hold the first procedural vote on a judicial nominee in Donald Trump's second term, Whitney Hermandorfer, to be a circuit judge on the Sixth Circuit.

Everyone knows that for Donald Trump's judges, one thing has always mattered most: loyalty to him. Not experience, not independence, not knowledge of the law, not even following the rule of law. When it comes to judges, Donald Trump cares only about one thing: fealty. He doesn't care about the law, precedent, or even what the Constitution says. He only wants them to do whatever he wants, no matter how baseless or irrational it is.

A quick glance at Ms. Hermandorfer's background shows she is unqualified to serve on the bench. She has less than 10 years of legal experience. She has never served as the sole or chief counsel on a single case that was tried to verdict. Indeed, she has made a career out of going after people's reproductive rights, their transgender rights, and anti-discrimination policies.

At the Tennessee Attorney General's Office, she has tried to strike down protections for employees who need reproductive care. She supported Donald Trump's firing of more than a dozen inspectors general, even filing an amicus brief on behalf of Tennessee.

The list of reasons why Ms. Hermandorfer would make a terrible

judge goes on and on and on. If Ms. Hermandorfer is the standard for Donald Trump's judges in his second term, then it is clear Republicans learned nothing from the first time around.

The American people don't want Donald Trump's foot soldiers wearing black robes. They want experienced, fair, and independent jurists committed to upholding the law. Ms. Hermandorfer falls way short of the mark, and I oppose her nomination.

Again, when the only criteria for choosing a judge is fealty to Donald Trump, the judiciary runs amok; the judiciary is weakened; and the executive, as they are trying to take away power from the first branch of government, the Congress, is also trying to take away power from the third branch of government, the judiciary, in an effort to make Donald Trump a virtual King. That is what he wants. That is terrible for America and terrible for what this country has always stood for.

Madam President, on Hegseth, Secretary Hegseth continues to be an embarrassment and a liability, and Donald Trump should never have chosen him to lead the Pentagon.

For the second time this year, Secretary Hegseth haphazardly canceled the shipment of vital weapons that Ukraine needs in its war for survival against Vladimir Putin; and for the second time this year, his decision was eventually walked back by the President. The White House is apparently claiming that Secretary Hegseth acted without alerting a soul outside the Pentagon--not the U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine, not the Secretary of State, and not even the President of the United States.

It is good that the President now says he will reinstate the shipment of weapons to Ukraine, but the administration's handling of this situation has been unacceptable. When asked by reporters who ordered the pause, the President said:

I don't know. Why don't you tell me.

This is amateur hour. Amateur hour. What the heck is going on at the Pentagon?

When Hegseth was up for the nomination, we all talked on our side of the aisle--Democrats talked--about how bad he would be, how unqualified he is. And this is just another example. Being a host of a talk radio show does not qualify you to be Secretary of Defense, as this incident shows.

The pause of weapons to Ukraine is, at best, a dangerous breakdown in communications and, at worst, a sign that Secretary Hegseth is more interested in helping Putin than helping Ukraine.

And what are U.S. allies supposed to make of this weapons pause? Sure, it is good that Donald Trump reversed himself, but our allies will wonder: Will this happen again?

You know who benefits most from Secretary Hegseth's and Donald Trump's incompetence? Vladimir Putin. When Putin sees the disorganization and lack of strategy, he has no incentive to negotiate. So Donald Trump is actually undercutting himself--and Hegseth is undercutting Trump--in a desire to come to an agreement, a fair agreement, for Ukraine. When Putin sees America pause vital weapons shipments to Ukraine, even for a moment, it emboldens him.

Instead of saying ``I don't know; why don't you tell me,'' here is what Donald Trump should do. He should unequivocally state the United States stands with Ukraine and against Putin. He should state that he fully supports additional air defense for Ukraine and a strong bipartisan sanctions package moving through the Senate, one that will give more leverage against Putin.

And Donald Trump should pick someone else to serve as Secretary of Defense. All of the charges, all of the arguments we made against him-- that he was incompetent, inexperienced, and unreliable--seem to be coming true, unfortunately, for the defense of this country.

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

Mr. President, Donald Trump's ``Big Ugly Bill'' hasn't even been law for a week, and already the troubling headlines are pouring in.

This morning, let me start with a few headlines from around the country, crystallizing the devastating impact that the Republicans' signature bill has.

From News 9 in Oklahoma:

Oklahoma Healthcare Officials Warn Of Rural Hospital

Closures Amid Pending Medicaid Cuts.

From CBS 13 in Maine:

Medicaid cuts lead to rural Maine hospital closures and

service reductions.

From Nebraska:

Rural southwest Nebraska clinic closes, blaming expected

Medicaid cuts.

So we have proof: The ``Big Ugly Bill'' is, in fact, already shutting down hospitals. It is cutting off healthcare. Donald Trump and Senate Republicans promised their bill would not touch Medicaid, but these headlines show that that is a lie. Worst of all, people are going to die because of Donald Trump's ``Big Ugly Bill.''

According to a study done by Penn on the House bill, Republican cuts to Medicaid and healthcare will lead to 51,000--51,000--preventable deaths a year. Again, that is the House version. The Senate's Medicaid cuts will be even deeper, more harmful, worse. It translates to one preventable death every 10\1/2\ minutes, all so that the billionaires can pay less in taxes.

It is profane. It is morally bankrupt. It is sickening.

Mr. President, on the Bedford nomination, today the Senate will vote on the confirmation of Donald Trump's deeply flawed nominee to lead the FAA, Bryan Bedford. I will vote no on Mr. Bedford because he has failed to show he will put safety of airline passengers above protecting airlines' profits.

He is the wrong choice for anyone worried about aviation safety, particularly at a time like this.

Throughout his a career as an airline executive and during his confirmation hearing, Bedford has shown a callous disregard for the safety protocols like the 1,500-hour rule. I worked to establish this rule with the families of Flight 3407, the tragic commercial airline crash that occurred in Western New York on a cold wintry night in 2009.

Today, the 1,500-hour rule--because of the hard work of those Buffalo families--is the gold standard for pilot training. They pounded the hallways

here, talking to Members, Democrat and Republican, and we got the bill passed because of their good work.

Confirming Mr. Bedford would be an insult to the families of Flight 3407 and the memory of their loved ones. It would betray everything these families have sacrificed to make sure others don't suffer the same tragedy they did 15 years ago.

The Senate should not confirm someone who will prioritize profits over passenger safety like Mr. Bedford. I vote no on his nomination.

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

Mr. President, today, the Senate's thoughts and prayers are with all the victims' families and communities devastated by the flash floods in Texas.

The reports from Texas were both heartbreaking and terrifying at the same time--water rising over 25 feet in a matter of minutes, entire buildings and homes swept away, hundreds of people stranded.

As of this morning, 105 people have died during the floods--27 children. To see the pictures of those children, the little beautiful faces, which I saw published in one of our New York papers this morning, just breaks your heart and stays with you--and the agony, of

course, of those in their families who survived.

Of course, the search continues for many more, and we hope and pray more will be found alive. I thank all of the first responders on the ground. And we all hope for the best in the ongoing rescue and recovery efforts.

Now, when a tragedy as devastating as the one in Texas occurs, the American people deserve to know what happened, what more could have been done to minimize the tragedy, and what we can do better to prevent this from happening again. That means taking a close look what went wrong, if anything, at the Agency level. So, yesterday, I asked for an investigation into what role, if any, the administration's staff cuts to local National Weather Service stations played in preparedness and response to the Texas tragedy.

We also must look forward as communities rebuild, as families mourn. We must ensure the Federal Government has all the resources in place to aid those in need, and that means holding off against devastating cuts to Agencies like FEMA.

As recently as last month, Donald Trump talked about ``wean[ing] off'' FEMA and has toyed with eliminating the Agency entirely as soon as this year. That would be a mistake at any time, but in light of these horrible floods, it is unthinkable that Donald Trump would do something like put FEMA's future in doubt.

As communities rebuild, today would be a good day for Donald Trump to back away from his threats to dismantle FEMA. Any one of us who has visited these terrible hurricanes and floods and so much other in terms of natural destruction sees the job FEMA does. They are dedicated, they are hard-working, and they are there for people at the exact time people desperately need them. To eliminate this Agency? It speaks to someone who doesn't know anything about what they do.

We all know that nothing can bring back the lives of those who perished, but the administration can and must ensure it takes every step, including funding FEMA--not eliminating it, not cutting it in two-thirds, but funding it fully--the administration must do that to ensure that it takes every step possible to prevent a tragedy like this from happening again.

Mr. President, the July work period and rescissions-- this July 4, Donald Trump and Republicans wreaked havoc on our country. On a day when Americans are supposed to celebrate our independence and our blessings as citizens of this great Nation, Donald Trump signed one of the most destructive pieces of legislation in modern history--the biggest giveaway to billionaires ever, the biggest cuts to Medicaid, devastation to our healthcare economy and America's clean energy economy, with millions of projected job losses--so many job losses that it could well cause us to fall into recession. When it is harder to find jobs, more people get fired, and prices go up.

This vote will haunt our Republican colleagues. It will haunt them every time a rural hospital closes. It will haunt them every time seniors are unable to get home care. It will haunt them as premiums go up, as the uninsured rates spike, as kids go hungry, as jobs disappear, and as our adversaries grow stronger while America grows weaker.

Frankly, many Republicans knew perfectly well their own bill would hurt people back at home. Yet they voted yes anyway. Why? It is simple to answer that. Why did they vote yes anyway when they knew it was wrong? Because they are afraid of Donald Trump.

Now we return to session at the start of a new work period. Very soon, Senate Republicans are expected to bring to the floor at Donald Trump's behest a so-called rescissions package that will gut critical investments in public broadcasting and weaken America's standing abroad, on a simple majority vote--not the 60 votes required traditionally as appropriations bills move forward. Will Senate Republicans bow down to Donald Trump yet again or will they actually show backbone and stand up for their constituents?

These investments were negotiated on a bipartisan basis between Democrats and Republicans as part of the government funding process, and with a simple majority vote, Republicans could take away the investments they all voted for--many of them voted for and renege on their word and spoil--spoil--the bipartisan appropriations process. That is a road Senate Republicans would be wise not to go down.

If Republicans cave to Donald Trump and gut these investments agreed to by both parties, that would be an affront--a huge affront--to the bipartisan appropriations process. It is absurd to expect Democrats to play along with funding the government if Republicans are just going to renege on a bipartisan agreement by concocting rescissions packages behind closed doors that can pass with only their votes--not the customary 60 votes required in the appropriations process. The 60-vote process almost always ensures bipartisanship.

Worse, there are alarming reports that Donald Trump plans to bring additional rescissions packages down the line to codify the DOGE. These rescissions may be small compared to the rescissions they will put on the floor later. Look at the new budget that Trump has proposed.

There have also been reports that OMB Director Russell Vought--and perhaps the President himself--promised hard-right Republicans in the House additional cuts on programs they detest as a way to secure the votes for their big, ugly bill. These cuts may be unlawful if the reports prove true.

This is not a bait and switch; it is a bait and poison to kill. It is not a bait and switch; it is a bait and poison to kill. This is deeply troubling and will threaten to further poison bipartisanship--a crucial ingredient for this institution to function.

I urge Senate Republicans to press ``pause'' on their partisan rescission package and instead work with Democrats on a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government. That bipartisan process has begun in the Appropriations Committee, and I am hopeful more progress will be made later this week as the committee begins their markups on the first three bills.

So, again, Senate Republicans have a choice to make. They can keep bowing to Donald Trump. They can continue walking on eggshells, trying not to upset him, giving him what he wants even at the cost of breaking the law and hurting the people back home. Or they can do their jobs. They can stand up to Donald Trump and reject this rescission package that would gut funding for critical programs with a simple majority vote. They can work with Democrats on a bipartisan, good-faith negotiation to fund the government later this year.

This is not just about one rescission package. This is not just about one appropriations process, as important as those are. This is about the role of Congress as a coequal branch with the Executive, as the Founding Fathers proposed. Most importantly, this is about protecting the well-being of Americans back home.

Mr. President, the VA workforce--Donald Trump and Secretary Collins are manufacturing a cynical staffing crisis at the Veterans' Administration.

Earlier this year, we learned that Secretary Collins announced plans for a wide-scale, 80,000-plus employee reduction of the workforce at the VA, putting the well-being of our veterans at immediate risk. There was never any transparency for these plans, and many of the decisions were clearly done haphazardly, without thinking through the consequences.

Yesterday, the VA released another alarming announcement, saying they are on pace to lose 30,000 staffers without having to resort to a reduction in force--as if that made things better. They proposed 80,000, and because of huge pressure--mainly from our veterans and our veterans groups--they backed off. But make no mistake about it, a cut of 30,000 will decimate the ability of the VA to provide good healthcare to our veterans, who have risked their lives for us.

Secretary Collins is making the VA so toxic that workers are leaving on their own. The workers--I have talked

to so many of them--are dedicated to helping our veterans, and when they see the administration just slashing and burning the VA without any concern for the consequences or why people were fired--the bottom line is still this: Thanks to Donald Trump and Secretary Collins, tens of thousands of highly skilled workers are exiting the VA, and our veterans are the ones that suffer.

I have heard this from veterans over and over again. One story sticks out in my mind. A woman who served in Afghanistan got PTSD and was treated at the VA hospital near Buffalo, and then, because she saw the dedication of those VA workers, she became an employee. She worked really hard. She was dedicated to the veterans. She knew she could probably make more money in another job. But she got home one Friday night and saw on her computer ``You are RIF'd''--which means you are fired--with no reason why and not even a chance to come back into the office to pick up her mementos she had there--pictures of her loved ones.

Donald Trump likes to pretend that he cares about our armed services members and veterans, but actions speak louder than words, and Donald Trump's actions when it comes to sabotaging the VA are disgusting. And the worst part about what is happening at the VA is the timing. While Donald Trump creates a staffing crisis at the VA, his big, ugly bill will jeopardize Medicaid coverage for veterans as well as shut down hospitals that serve veterans and thereby put even more strain on the VA. It is a vicious cycle, a cynical double whammy where veterans pay the ultimate price for Donald Trump's cruelty.

The administration should immediately reverse course and refill these positions and make sure the VA operates at full capacity.

Mr. President, finally, on the nomination of Bedford to the FAA, later this evening, Senate Republicans will vote to advance Donald Trump's nominee to lead the FAA, Bryan Bedford.

To say that Mr. Bedford is a deeply flawed nominee would be putting it mildly. Throughout his career as an airline executive and during his hearing, Mr. Bedford has shown a callous disregard for the 1,500-hour rule and even refused to commit to protecting the rule if confirmed.

I worked long and hard with the families of Flight 3407, years ago, to establish the 1,500-hour rule after they lost all their loved ones on a tragic plane crash that occurred on a winter's night in Western New York. They have worked so hard, and they are so proud of their accomplishments. In the face of unspeakable loss, they worked relentlessly to change America's aviation laws to prevent a tragedy like that that happened to their families.

Today, the 1,500-hour rule is the gold standard for pilot training. So affirming the 1,500-hour rule should be the easiest thing in the world for someone nominated to oversee the FAA, but Mr. Bedford failed again and again to do so.

Weakening the 1,500-hour rule is dangerous and could cost lives. With aviation safety top of mind, Americans don't want pilots with less training, which would happen if the 1,500-hour rule were not extended, were repealed or not enforced.

Americans don't want the FAA weakening safety standards, but I fear that is precisely what Mr. Bedford will do: weaken the 1,500-hour rule, weaken safety standards, and prioritize profits over passenger safety.

The American people deserve far better than an FAA Administrator who isn't fully committed to their safety. The Senate should reject Mr. Bedford's nomination.

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.